58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart, but surely
anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a journalist he
was.

Truly a tragedy :(

On Jun 13, 1:55 pm, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart, but surely
> anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a journalist he
> was.
>
> Truly a tragedy :(

Though he was a liberal and I'm a conservative libertarian, he was one
of the journalists I truly enjoyed. He used to dig and dig and dig
until the question was answered, and he didn't wear his opinion on his
sleeve.

Salud Tim, we're worse off without you.

Rizzo

Thanks Riz, I know I'm about as overtly liberal as you are overtly
conservative-libertarian, but I agree that Russert transcended the
boundaries. As one of his obituarists commented, he was often harsher on
Democrats than on Republicans. People of both sides would do well to learn
a lesson from the man on bipartisan politics.


"Frank Rizzo" <champ91917@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:be249422-fabb-4175-915b-0d4dc911bd4b@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 13, 1:55 pm, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart, but
>> surely
>> anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a journalist
>> he
>> was.
>>
>> Truly a tragedy :(
>
> Though he was a liberal and I'm a conservative libertarian, he was one
> of the journalists I truly enjoyed. He used to dig and dig and dig
> until the question was answered, and he didn't wear his opinion on his
> sleeve.
>
> Salud Tim, we're worse off without you.
>
> Rizzo

On Jul 6, 8:32 am, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Riz, I know I'm about as overtly liberal as you are overtly
> conservative-libertarian, but I agree that Russert transcended the
> boundaries. As one of his obituarists commented, he was often harsher on
> Democrats than on Republicans. People of both sides would do well to learn
> a lesson from the man on bipartisan politics.
>
> "Frank Rizzo" <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:be249422-fabb-4175-915b-0d4dc911bd4b@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 1:55 pm, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart, but
> >> surely
> >> anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a journalist
> >> he
> >> was.
>
> >> Truly a tragedy :(
>
> > Though he was a liberal and I'm a conservative libertarian, he was one
> > of the journalists I truly enjoyed.  He used to dig and dig and dig
> > until the question was answered, and he didn't wear his opinion on his
> > sleeve.
>
> > Salud Tim, we're worse off without you.
>

Yes, and Yes. I actually never really viewed Russert as Liberal -
while I knew that he was, as you say, he didn't let it cloud his work.
He was about as balanced a journalist as I can think of and I truly
enjoyed his work. That's worth saying again: I ENJOYED his work.
Anyone who can make political discourse enjoyable is worth his/her
weight in gold. He will be greatly missed.

kenzaburo wrote:
> On Jul 6, 8:32 am, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks Riz, I know I'm about as overtly liberal as you are overtly
>> conservative-libertarian, but I agree that Russert transcended the
>> boundaries. As one of his obituarists commented, he was often harsher on
>> Democrats than on Republicans. People of both sides would do well to learn
>> a lesson from the man on bipartisan politics.
>>
>> "Frank Rizzo" <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:be249422-fabb-4175-915b-0d4dc911bd4b@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 13, 1:55 pm, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart, but
>>>> surely
>>>> anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a journalist
>>>> he
>>>> was.
>>>> Truly a tragedy :(
>>> Though he was a liberal and I'm a conservative libertarian, he was one
>>> of the journalists I truly enjoyed. He used to dig and dig and dig
>>> until the question was answered, and he didn't wear his opinion on his
>>> sleeve.
>>> Salud Tim, we're worse off without you.
>
> Yes, and Yes. I actually never really viewed Russert as Liberal -
> while I knew that he was, as you say, he didn't let it cloud his work.
> He was about as balanced a journalist as I can think of and I truly
> enjoyed his work. That's worth saying again: I ENJOYED his work.
> Anyone who can make political discourse enjoyable is worth his/her
> weight in gold. He will be greatly missed.

For an opposing viewpoint, you can read an article at the
following link:

http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinion/x1816437770/Lyons-Tim-Russert-leaves-problematic-legacy

I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the author, but I figured
I'd point out that there are other opinions out there.

"Frank Sereno" <fserenonospam@nospamsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:BDrck.14526$mh5.2250@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
> kenzaburo wrote:
>> On Jul 6, 8:32 am, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks Riz, I know I'm about as overtly liberal as you are overtly
>>> conservative-libertarian, but I agree that Russert transcended the
>>> boundaries. As one of his obituarists commented, he was often harsher on
>>> Democrats than on Republicans. People of both sides would do well to
>>> learn
>>> a lesson from the man on bipartisan politics.
>>>
>>> "Frank Rizzo" <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:be249422-fabb-4175-915b-0d4dc911bd4b@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Jun 13, 1:55 pm, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart, but
>>>>> surely
>>>>> anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a
>>>>> journalist
>>>>> he
>>>>> was.
>>>>> Truly a tragedy :(
>>>> Though he was a liberal and I'm a conservative libertarian, he was one
>>>> of the journalists I truly enjoyed. He used to dig and dig and dig
>>>> until the question was answered, and he didn't wear his opinion on his
>>>> sleeve.
>>>> Salud Tim, we're worse off without you.
>>
>> Yes, and Yes. I actually never really viewed Russert as Liberal -
>> while I knew that he was, as you say, he didn't let it cloud his work.
>> He was about as balanced a journalist as I can think of and I truly
>> enjoyed his work. That's worth saying again: I ENJOYED his work.
>> Anyone who can make political discourse enjoyable is worth his/her
>> weight in gold. He will be greatly missed.
>
> For an opposing viewpoint, you can read an article at the following link:
>
> http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinion/x1816437770/Lyons-Tim-Russert-leaves-problematic-legacy
>
> I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the author, but I figured I'd
> point out that there are other opinions out there.


I'm glad to see this posted, because I think there's hardly anything worse
than relentlessly sycophantic obituaries - the world has enough of them
already - but there's no substance to that article.

The contention, that MTP was no good because Russert, posing good questions
or not, allowed for a kind of performative truth (i.e. "reward[ing] people
willing to lie", according to the piece), is unfortunate because the point
of Russert's show - and Russert himself - was steeped in a respect for his
audience.

Even beyond that, the contention isn't even raised until the final
paragraph. Before that the author basically describes the (supposedly
subjective) good stuff about Russert, and a variety of very, very spurious
claims about R's integrity (i.e. the Irish Catholic stuff which, to me,
smacks of bigotry... is there a real point buried in there that I've somehow
missed??).

The final point is that, supposedly, Russert was complicit in his
interviewees lies because he allowed them to make them; questioning only
their "facts" - not their opinions. Well, hell, what's he supposed to do?
The second he crosses that line, IMO, he becomes a) a shock jock, and b) is
unable to interview those he wants to. When you know you're going to be set
up, are you really going on that show? Russert got interviews because he had
the respect that goes to any journo who's honest, articulate, intelligent,
and forthright.

Russert asked the tough questions, and he assumed his audience intelligent
enough to see through the lies, or at least be sceptical of the answers. He
was never a contrarian, just, I guess, a sceptic and a truth-seeker.

Like I said Frank, I'm glad you posted this link, but I think the article's
pretty baseless.

Brad wrote:
> "Frank Sereno" <fserenonospam@nospamsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:BDrck.14526$mh5.2250@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> kenzaburo wrote:
>>> On Jul 6, 8:32 am, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Thanks Riz, I know I'm about as overtly liberal as you are overtly
>>>> conservative-libertarian, but I agree that Russert transcended the
>>>> boundaries. As one of his obituarists commented, he was often harsher on
>>>> Democrats than on Republicans. People of both sides would do well to
>>>> learn
>>>> a lesson from the man on bipartisan politics.
>>>>
>>>> "Frank Rizzo" <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:be249422-fabb-4175-915b-0d4dc911bd4b@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 13, 1:55 pm, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart, but
>>>>>> surely
>>>>>> anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a
>>>>>> journalist
>>>>>> he
>>>>>> was.
>>>>>> Truly a tragedy :(
>>>>> Though he was a liberal and I'm a conservative libertarian, he was one
>>>>> of the journalists I truly enjoyed. He used to dig and dig and dig
>>>>> until the question was answered, and he didn't wear his opinion on his
>>>>> sleeve.
>>>>> Salud Tim, we're worse off without you.
>>> Yes, and Yes. I actually never really viewed Russert as Liberal -
>>> while I knew that he was, as you say, he didn't let it cloud his work.
>>> He was about as balanced a journalist as I can think of and I truly
>>> enjoyed his work. That's worth saying again: I ENJOYED his work.
>>> Anyone who can make political discourse enjoyable is worth his/her
>>> weight in gold. He will be greatly missed.
>> For an opposing viewpoint, you can read an article at the following link:
>>
>> http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinion/x1816437770/Lyons-Tim-Russert-leaves-problematic-legacy
>>
>> I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the author, but I figured I'd
>> point out that there are other opinions out there.
>
>
> I'm glad to see this posted, because I think there's hardly anything worse
> than relentlessly sycophantic obituaries - the world has enough of them
> already - but there's no substance to that article.
>
> The contention, that MTP was no good because Russert, posing good questions
> or not, allowed for a kind of performative truth (i.e. "reward[ing] people
> willing to lie", according to the piece), is unfortunate because the point
> of Russert's show - and Russert himself - was steeped in a respect for his
> audience.
>
> Even beyond that, the contention isn't even raised until the final
> paragraph. Before that the author basically describes the (supposedly
> subjective) good stuff about Russert, and a variety of very, very spurious
> claims about R's integrity (i.e. the Irish Catholic stuff which, to me,
> smacks of bigotry... is there a real point buried in there that I've somehow
> missed??).
>
> The final point is that, supposedly, Russert was complicit in his
> interviewees lies because he allowed them to make them; questioning only
> their "facts" - not their opinions. Well, hell, what's he supposed to do?
> The second he crosses that line, IMO, he becomes a) a shock jock, and b) is
> unable to interview those he wants to. When you know you're going to be set
> up, are you really going on that show? Russert got interviews because he had
> the respect that goes to any journo who's honest, articulate, intelligent,
> and forthright.
>
> Russert asked the tough questions, and he assumed his audience intelligent
> enough to see through the lies, or at least be sceptical of the answers. He
> was never a contrarian, just, I guess, a sceptic and a truth-seeker.
>
> Like I said Frank, I'm glad you posted this link, but I think the article's
> pretty baseless.
>
>

I'm going to point out that Gene Lyons is an Irish Catholic
himself so it doesn't seem likely that he is bigoted against
Irish Catholics. Gene and Tim were born within a few years of
each other.

I'm neither Irish nor Catholic, so I can't write of this from my
own experience, but what Gene is trying to relate to the reader
is that the catechism of his and Tim Russert's youths were based
of rote memorization of what was taught by the priests and nuns.
Young Catholics weren't encouraged to question authority. And
Gene's assertion is that when it came time to question authority
leading up to the Iraq invasion, Tim Russert reverted back to
what he had learned in his youth and didn't question authority.
And it appears to me that Gene Lyons feels that Tim Russert's
legacy is that he didn't do more to get to the truth that might
have prevented an unnecessary war.

Lyons and a small number of other journalists feel that the DC
media deserves some blame for the Iraq war. They feel the
mainstream media did not report the hard facts, did not do the
necessary research. They feel the Washington media pretty much
rolled over and let Bush and his gang do and say whatever they
wanted without making the necessary effort to show contradictory
evidence. Take that for what it's worth.

On Jul 7, 12:40 pm, Frank Sereno <fserenonos...@nospamsbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> kenzaburo wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 8:32 am, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Thanks Riz, I know I'm about as overtly liberal as you are overtly
> >> conservative-libertarian, but I agree that Russert transcended the
> >> boundaries. As one of his obituarists commented, he was often harsher on
> >> Democrats than on Republicans. People of both sides would do well to learn
> >> a lesson from the man on bipartisan politics.
>
> >> "Frank Rizzo" <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:be249422-fabb-4175-915b-0d4dc911bd4b@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com....
>
> >>> On Jun 13, 1:55 pm, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> 58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart, but
> >>>> surely
> >>>> anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a journalist
> >>>> he
> >>>> was.
> >>>> Truly a tragedy :(
> >>> Though he was a liberal and I'm a conservative libertarian, he was one
> >>> of the journalists I truly enjoyed.  He used to dig and dig and dig
> >>> until the question was answered, and he didn't wear his opinion on his
> >>> sleeve.
> >>> Salud Tim, we're worse off without you.
>
> > Yes, and Yes. I actually never really viewed Russert as Liberal -
> > while I knew that he was, as you say, he didn't let it cloud his work.
> > He was about as balanced a journalist as I can think of and I truly
> > enjoyed his work. That's worth saying again: I ENJOYED his work.
> > Anyone who can make political discourse enjoyable is worth his/her
> > weight in gold. He will be greatly missed.
>
> For an opposing viewpoint, you can read an article at the
> following link:
>
> http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinion/x1816437770/Lyons-Tim-Russe...
>
> I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the author, but I figured
> I'd point out that there are other opinions out there.

That's a good read. The American psyche is so ready to jump on a
bandwagon. Whether it's the Iraq war, Hummers, or the hype about some
celebrity, we'll impulse buy anything.

I appreciate Russert for his skills as a moderator. I'm not sure we
should have expected more from his interviews of administration
figures, but we sure needed somebody to step up.

On Jul 8, 10:16 pm, cowznofsky <jhco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 7, 12:40 pm, Frank Sereno <fserenonos...@nospamsbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > kenzaburo wrote:
> > > On Jul 6, 8:32 am, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Thanks Riz, I know I'm about as overtly liberal as you are overtly
> > >> conservative-libertarian, but I agree that Russert transcended the
> > >> boundaries. As one of his obituarists commented, he was often harsher on
> > >> Democrats than on Republicans. People of both sides would do well tolearn
> > >> a lesson from the man on bipartisan politics.
>
> > >> "Frank Rizzo" <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> > >>news:be249422-fabb-4175-915b-0d4dc911bd4b@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> > >>> On Jun 13, 1:55 pm, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>> 58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart, but
> > >>>> surely
> > >>>> anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a journalist
> > >>>> he
> > >>>> was.
> > >>>> Truly a tragedy :(
> > >>> Though he was a liberal and I'm a conservative libertarian, he was one
> > >>> of the journalists I truly enjoyed.  He used to dig and dig and dig
> > >>> until the question was answered, and he didn't wear his opinion on his
> > >>> sleeve.
> > >>> Salud Tim, we're worse off without you.
>
> > > Yes, and Yes. I actually never really viewed Russert as Liberal -
> > > while I knew that he was, as you say, he didn't let it cloud his work..
> > > He was about as balanced a journalist as I can think of and I truly
> > > enjoyed his work. That's worth saying again: I ENJOYED his work.
> > > Anyone who can make political discourse enjoyable is worth his/her
> > > weight in gold. He will be greatly missed.
>
> > For an opposing viewpoint, you can read an article at the
> > following link:
>
> >http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinion/x1816437770/Lyons-Tim-Russe...
>
> > I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the author, but I figured
> > I'd point out that there are other opinions out there.
>
> That's a good read.  The American psyche is so ready to jump on a
> bandwagon.  Whether it's the Iraq war, Hummers, or the hype about some
> celebrity, we'll impulse buy anything.
>
> I appreciate Russert for his skills as a moderator.  I'm not sure we
> should have expected more from his interviews of administration
> figures, but we sure needed somebody to step up.- Hide quoted text -
>
>

The "impulse buy" thrust of your point sounds a bit like a backlash. I
take offence to the implication that expressing admiration for Tim
Russert is buying into some kind of twisted hype - I don't think
that's the case in TR's case; for the most part I believe people
genuinely saw a smart journalist not afraid to ask tough, challenging
questions to a panel of difficult interviewees.

kenzaburo wrote:
> On Jul 8, 10:16 pm, cowznofsky <jhco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 7, 12:40 pm, Frank Sereno <fserenonos...@nospamsbcglobal.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> kenzaburo wrote:
>>>> On Jul 6, 8:32 am, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Thanks Riz, I know I'm about as overtly liberal as you are overtly
>>>>> conservative-libertarian, but I agree that Russert transcended the
>>>>> boundaries. As one of his obituarists commented, he was often harsher on
>>>>> Democrats than on Republicans. People of both sides would do well to learn
>>>>> a lesson from the man on bipartisan politics.
>>>>> "Frank Rizzo" <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:be249422-fabb-4175-915b-0d4dc911bd4b@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>> On Jun 13, 1:55 pm, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart, but
>>>>>>> surely
>>>>>>> anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a journalist
>>>>>>> he
>>>>>>> was.
>>>>>>> Truly a tragedy :(
>>>>>> Though he was a liberal and I'm a conservative libertarian, he was one
>>>>>> of the journalists I truly enjoyed. He used to dig and dig and dig
>>>>>> until the question was answered, and he didn't wear his opinion on his
>>>>>> sleeve.
>>>>>> Salud Tim, we're worse off without you.
>>>> Yes, and Yes. I actually never really viewed Russert as Liberal -
>>>> while I knew that he was, as you say, he didn't let it cloud his work.
>>>> He was about as balanced a journalist as I can think of and I truly
>>>> enjoyed his work. That's worth saying again: I ENJOYED his work.
>>>> Anyone who can make political discourse enjoyable is worth his/her
>>>> weight in gold. He will be greatly missed.
>>> For an opposing viewpoint, you can read an article at the
>>> following link:
>>> http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinion/x1816437770/Lyons-Tim-Russe...
>>> I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the author, but I figured
>>> I'd point out that there are other opinions out there.
>> That's a good read. The American psyche is so ready to jump on a
>> bandwagon. Whether it's the Iraq war, Hummers, or the hype about some
>> celebrity, we'll impulse buy anything.
>>
>> I appreciate Russert for his skills as a moderator. I'm not sure we
>> should have expected more from his interviews of administration
>> figures, but we sure needed somebody to step up.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>
>
> The "impulse buy" thrust of your point sounds a bit like a backlash. I
> take offence to the implication that expressing admiration for Tim
> Russert is buying into some kind of twisted hype - I don't think
> that's the case in TR's case; for the most part I believe people
> genuinely saw a smart journalist not afraid to ask tough, challenging
> questions to a panel of difficult interviewees.

But did he really ask the tough questions that were needed prior
to the Iraq invasion? It doesn't seem as if anyone did, so
perhaps one shouldn't fault Russert either.

On Jul 9, 9:56 am, Frank Sereno <fserenonos...@nospamsbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> kenzaburo wrote:
> > On Jul 8, 10:16 pm, cowznofsky <jhco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Jul 7, 12:40 pm, Frank Sereno <fserenonos...@nospamsbcglobal.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> kenzaburo wrote:
> >>>> On Jul 6, 8:32 am, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Thanks Riz, I know I'm about as overtly liberal as you are overtly
> >>>>> conservative-libertarian, but I agree that Russert transcended the
> >>>>> boundaries. As one of his obituarists commented, he was often harsher on
> >>>>> Democrats than on Republicans. People of both sides would do well to learn
> >>>>> a lesson from the man on bipartisan politics.
> >>>>> "Frank Rizzo" <champ91...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>news:be249422-fabb-4175-915b-0d4dc911bd4b@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> >>>>>> On Jun 13, 1:55 pm, "Brad" <bradla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> 58 and shit. Maybe I love him 'cause he was a big bleeding heart,but
> >>>>>>> surely
> >>>>>>> anyone who digs politics would have realised how brilliant a journalist
> >>>>>>> he
> >>>>>>> was.
> >>>>>>> Truly a tragedy :(
> >>>>>> Though he was a liberal and I'm a conservative libertarian, he wasone
> >>>>>> of the journalists I truly enjoyed.  He used to dig and dig and dig
> >>>>>> until the question was answered, and he didn't wear his opinion onhis
> >>>>>> sleeve.
> >>>>>> Salud Tim, we're worse off without you.
> >>>> Yes, and Yes. I actually never really viewed Russert as Liberal -
> >>>> while I knew that he was, as you say, he didn't let it cloud his work.
> >>>> He was about as balanced a journalist as I can think of and I truly
> >>>> enjoyed his work. That's worth saying again: I ENJOYED his work.
> >>>> Anyone who can make political discourse enjoyable is worth his/her
> >>>> weight in gold. He will be greatly missed.
> >>> For an opposing viewpoint, you can read an article at the
> >>> following link:
> >>>http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinion/x1816437770/Lyons-Tim-Russe....
> >>> I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the author, but I figured
> >>> I'd point out that there are other opinions out there.
> >> That's a good read.  The American psyche is so ready to jump on a
> >> bandwagon.  Whether it's the Iraq war, Hummers, or the hype about some
> >> celebrity, we'll impulse buy anything.
>
> >> I appreciate Russert for his skills as a moderator.  I'm not sure we
> >> should have expected more from his interviews of administration
> >> figures, but we sure needed somebody to step up.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > The "impulse buy" thrust of your point sounds a bit like a backlash. I
> > take offence to the implication that expressing admiration for Tim
> > Russert is buying into some kind of twisted hype - I don't think
> > that's the case in TR's case; for the most part I believe people
> > genuinely saw a smart journalist not afraid to ask tough, challenging
> > questions to a panel of difficult interviewees.
>
> But did he really ask the tough questions that were needed prior
> to the Iraq invasion?  It doesn't seem as if anyone did, so
> perhaps one shouldn't fault Russert either.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I honestly can't remember. A quick google search proves inconclusive,
however it does reveal something else: The backlash is in full gear
and the blogoshphere is full of That Tim Russert Was A Lousy
Journalist Afterall stories. Which is sad, typical and unfortunate, in
my opinion.