Joe Scarborough

A Morning with Joe Scarborough in Hypocrisy Hell

Joe Scarborough

QUIET MIKE POLITICS

Nothing more signals the heating up of another election cycle than the bleary-eyed, half-dressed, faux-cool Joe Scarborough actually showing up – on set or at all – for work on the MSNBC show that touts his first name if not his regular presence: “Morning Joe.”

Another clear signal is that his hypocrisy about and hyperbolic characterizations of both President Obama and his policies begin to approach that of such right-wing luminaries as Bill Kristol, Dick Cheney, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, John McCain, Allen West and others in the increasingly unhinged Republican Clown Car.

Election cycles also mean that Scarborough’s show begins to feature such low-lights as Hugh Hewitt, who has one foot hanging over the far-right edge of the Republican/Conservative flat earth, as if they were credible commentators on any issue other than putting new sewer lines in their neighborhoods.

And, one of the surest signs of an approaching election is that, not wanting to miss even a moment when he can trash either the president or Hillary Clinton, MSNBC’s token conservative propagandist is no longer willing to make time for Mika Brzezinsky to mention at least five times per day that her daughter is now beginning her second year at Johns Hopkins University!

After all, that is time that could be spent showing a clip from Jebbers’ Tuesday night speech during which he blamed Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for destabilizing the middle east by “snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.”

No mention, of course, that his brother, George W., and his vice-president lied us into the Iraq War that put the entire Near and Middle East on the road to its present chaos. No mention, of course, that his brother negotiated and signed the Status of Forces agreement that forced President Obama to withdraw our troops from Iraq.

No mention, of course, that his brother purged from power Sadaam’s Baathist Party members, who could have been useful in rebuilding and restabilizing the country he destroyed and destabilized, but have now become part of the ISIS leadership. Not to mention that it ended any possibility of Iraq having a credible military to secure the country when the U.S. pulled out.

This Monday morning past, after the usual round of non-factual, often baseless innuendo and misleading statements that usually set the stage for the daily segment of Hillary-bashing, Joe Scarborough and his table of losers took on what history eventually might consider President Obama’s single foreign policy achievement; the agreement per Iranian nuclear research forged in the crucible of down-and-dirty negotiations in Geneva between Iran and the P5+1 (the United States, France, Germany, Britain, Russia and China.)

[Excursus:  It does bear mention that the reasonable and usually well-reasoned Steve Rattner was at the table, even though he could not get a reasonable, well-reasoned word in because the ever-annoying Nicole Wallace, who thinks the set of “Morning Joe” is nothing more than a Republican spin room, could not stop interrupting him with unreasonable, poorly-reasoned talking-points.]

Scarborough began with typical Republican hyperbole, professing “shock” and “dismay” that the president would “vilify” and “demonize” opponents of the agreement by “equating congressional hardliners with hardliners in Tehran.” Using what has, during the Obama years, become almost the go-to Republican modifier, Joe found it, uh, “chilling.”

Though old, I still have all of my original teeth. Had I not been in possession of them, any dentures carefully installed and glued into place earlier that morning would have fallen to the floor. No one has ever accused Joe Scarborough of being self-aware. But this little moment of straight-faced, hyperbolic hypocrisy answers the question of why that charge has never been leveled at him.

The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama is not in the habit of “vilifying” or “demonizing” anyone.  To his credit, it has just not been his style. And, in this instance, he remained true to his usual manner. He reasonably laid out his case and, quite frankly, it has no problem passing the smell test per the equivalency he draws.

Nothing more than a cursory glance at the record verifies that both Iranian and Republican “hardliners” have been“implacably opposed” to this deal before it was ever made, “before they even read it, before it was even posted.” For God’s sake, Republican presidential candidates admitted as much.  And it is equally verifiable that the opposition of hardliners in both Tehran and Washington “is reflective of an ideological commitment not to get a deal done.” Feel free to factually refute that if you can.

But, by accusing him of “vilifying” and “demonizing,” Scarborough didn’t just mean the president was dealing in false equivalencies. He was also accusing him of name-calling. And of making non-factual, hyperbolic characterizations of opponents. Projection much, Joe?

Though he would have been more than justified in doing so, President Obama, as mentioned earlier, has simply never made a practice of doing to his political opponents what they have habitually and almost daily done to him for nearly seven years; i.e.,  name-calling (general or racist), demonizing (“Nazi,” “Communist,” “the anti-Christ” et al), demagoguing, or calling into question his general character (“lawless,” “appeaser,” “liar,” et al), his religion (if he was Muslim, which he isn’t, what difference would it make?), his birthplace (Kenya, of course), and, their favorite, his patriotism (“He was placed here as a child to become part of a radical Islamic sleeper cell”).

Nonetheless, Scarborough summoned up a facial expression that, in a really creepy way, combined preternatural innocence with faux-indignation and pronounced himself “staggered” that President Obama would resort to “personal attacks” that represented a “new low” for a country that values and prides itself on “decency” and “respectfulness” in its public discourse.

The Editorial Board of the New York Times, along with many of us, disagreed with the Panhandle Panhandler’s take on who was and who wasn’t engaged in civil public discourse: “What should be a thoughtful debate has been turned into a vicious battle against Mr. Obama.”

To wit…

Mike Huckabee dropped in from the other side of the Looking Glass to offensively accuse the president of marching Jews “to the door of the oven” per the Iran agreement.

Tom Cotton, who apparently slept through U.S. Constitution 101 during his college and law school years, inexplicably equated John Kerry – whose military record and record as a public servant will, I promise, never be matched by the rookie senator from Arkansas – with Pontius Pilate.

Jeb Bush took the silver spoon out of his mouth long enough to access the usual Republican fallback position that the president is an appeaser. “Appeasement,” he said, is the “bad result you get when you enable people or regimes who don’t embrace democratic values.” And, with no one apparently willing to take the shovel out of his hands as he dug his own hole deeper, he said that “History is full of examples.” One supposes Jebbers forgot that the history of his brother’s administration was full of those examples. Hypocrisy much, Jeb!?

John “Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran” McCain, whose every foreign policy prescription seems to involve “American boots on-the-ground and American bodies in-the-ground,” continued Jeb’s “appeaser” meme with his usual tripe about the president “carrying on in the finest traditions of Neville Chamberlain.”

Which raises the question of why the national media continuously searches out John McCain for his perspective on foreign policy issues. His remedy never changes: Bomb them into the Stone Age and then send in American troops. He could just copy/paste and email it in.

Ted Cruz claimed the president was cementing Iran’s status as “the world’s leading financier of radical Islamic terrorism.” Again, one notes how little attention Cruz—or, any Republican—pays to the situation on the ground in the Islamic world.  Were he paying attention, he would know that “the world’s [actual]leading financier of radical Islamic terrorism” is the home of the Bush family’s BFF, Saudi Arabia.

There are more but, seriously, how many can you stand to read?

When I first heard Scarborough slam the president for “vilifying” and “demonizing” those who differed with him per the Iran agreement, I thought I had fallen down the Rabbit Hole, where white is black and black is white. But, as it turned out, spending a morning with Joe and listening to him talk about how Republicans pride themselves on “decency” and “respectfulness” in their public discourse had just momentarily transported me to a parallel universe known to its permanent residents as Hypocrisy Hell.

Scarborough has a home in a gated community there.

SCARBOROUGH’S SAD “APOLOGY”

MSNBC Screen Capture

SALON

Morning Joe’s namesake is a very busy and important man who can’t be bothered to get things right the first time

Last week, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough went on TV and said something false. Reacting to the inflammatory (and often dubious) allegations in Peter Schweizer’s new book, Clinton Cash, Scarborough posited that the government of Algeria made donations to the Clinton Foundation as a way to buy its way off the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism. “The Clinton Foundation takes the check, and then just, out of nowhere the State Department then decides, well, they are going to take Algeria off the list,” Scarborough said. As Politifact and (my former employer) Media Matters pointed out, such an arrangement would have been impossible, given that Algeria has never been on the State Department’s list of terrorism sponsors.

So Scarborough was wrong. And today on Morning Joe, he offered a sneering, sarcastic “apology” to Politifact for having the temerity to point out how wrong he was.

I’m struggling to recall an instance in which a pundit has so self-indulgently wallowed in his own arrogance and sense of entitlement. Everyone gets something wrong every now and then, and the proper thing to do when those things happen is to correct the record, apologize, and move on. For Scarborough, though, the act of correction is an assault on the misbegotten pride he feels in hosting a low-rated and unwatchable morning news program.

First things first: Joe Scarborough seems to believe that because he puts on an “ad-libbed” show that lasts many hours, he enjoys some leeway when it comes to just making shit up. “Last week, in the course of this three-hour, ad-libbed show, I suggested Algeria may have been giving unreported donations to the Clinton Foundation in an effort to change their status on the State Department’s terror list.” Here’s a thought: maybe put a little more planning into what you say on cable news every day. “I do a long show that I put little to no forethought into” is not a justification for getting things wrong: it’s an admission that your show’s format is bad and should be changed to minimize these sorts of errors.

Scarborough also faulted Politifact for not noting that before he launched into this made-up nonsense about Algeria, he offered a disclaimer that he didn’t know what he was talking about. “Now, never mind that I prefaced my statement by saying that all the specifics may not be perfectly lined up. These are the realities, after all, of all of us doing a three-hour rolling conversation without teleprompters or scripts, the very things that every other news show in America is chained to but we aren’t. But still I prefaced my remark, but that prefaced remark mattered little to the Clinton arm of Politifact.” Yes, how dare Politifact not do Joe Scarborough the courtesy of highlighting his admission that he was talking out his ass.

Having begged off any sort of responsibility for the things he says on his own program, Scarborough then lashed out at Politifact, claiming that they were just picking nits (which, of course, absolves Scarborough from any blame).

VIDEO

SCARBOROUGH: So Politifact, let me get this straight. The Clinton Foundation was taking the money, hold on, not to get off the terror list. They were throwing them money at the same time they wanted to the State Department to get them off a list for their gross human rights abuses towards women. I hope I’ve cleared that up. Because I’ve got more. Have I cleared that part up? Because I don’t want to get it wrong! And any time Politifact calls me out on a footnote, I promise I’m going to come out here and let you know that instead of talking about the Clinton Foundation getting money to possibly get Algeria off the terror list, it would possibly be to whitewash gross human rights violations against women. I’m glad I got that off my chest.

Politifact actually noted all of that in their correction of Scarborough – they had a whole section of the fact-check headlined “Human rights violations hamper relations.” But this isn’t a dispute over a “footnote,” as Scarborough’s weaselly, sarcastic rebuttal put it. Inclusion on the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terror is not a small thing. Once the U.S. government identifies a country as a sponsor of terrorism, they’re immediately subject to a whole host of economic sanctions. If, as Scarborough had posited, the Clinton Foundation had been part of a quid pro quo scheme to let Algeria buy its way off that list and out of those sanctions, that would have been a massive scandal.

But whatever, Scarborough was just “ad-libbing,” so it’s no big deal. It’s not Joe Scarborough’s responsibility to be right the first time; it’s Politifact’s responsibility to cut him as much slack as he needs because “Morning Joe” isn’t about facts, it’s about “conversation.”

And that leads to the most important question: why does “Morning Joe” still exist? Scarborough is clearly very proud of the ad-libbed, thrown-together format that permits him and his pundit pals to make stuff up in a consequence-free environment, but nobody actually watches the show. Its ratings are abysmal, and yet it soldiers on as a monument to Joe Scarborough’s insufferable arrogance.

– 

Abdul-Jabbar: ‘Islamic State’ Is As Islamic As The KKK Is Christian (VIDEO)

Rxwuod4o1ytywjjambhy

That is one analogy I can agree with.  Definitely spot-on…

TPM LiveWire

“You can make parallels to things that have happened here in America,” Abdul-Jabbar said of ISIL to co-host Joe Scarborough. “Like the Ku Klux Klan saying they are the Christian knights of the Ku Klux Klan.”

“They do not practice Christianity,” he added.

Abdul-Jabbar then brought up the Crusaders, specifically Christian warriors of the First Crusade in the eleventh century.

“The first people that they sacked were Jews living in Europe,” he said. “They devastated them, took all their wealth, and kept on their way to the Holy Land.”

Co-host Mika Brzezinski changed the subject to Abdul-Jabbar’s new book.

The President made similar remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast on Feb. 5,
saying that, “during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.”

“In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ,” Obama added.

Watch the video, courtesy of MSNBC…HERE.

Arrested Reporter Smacks Down Joe Scarborough’s Criticism

Spot on Wesley Lowery, WAPO reporter

The Huffington Post

This is how Joe Scarborough reacted to video of the Washington Post’s Wesley Lowery being arrested by police in Ferguson, MO:

“I will just say if I saw that video and my son was the one police arrested after that episode, I’d say, ‘Joey, heres a clue. When the cops tell you for the thirtieth time, let’s go, you know what that means, son? It means let’s go. I’m sorry…I don’t sit there and have a debate and film the police officer unless I want to get on TV and have people talk about me the next day.”

This is how Lowery responded on CNN’s “New Day”:

“I would invite Joe Scarborough to come down to Ferguson and get out of 30 Rock where he’s sipping his Starbucks smugly…I have little patience for talking heads. This is too important. This is a community in the United States of America where things are on fire. This community is on edge. There is so much happening here and instead of putting reporters on the ground we have people like Joe Scarborough running their mouth who have no idea what they’re talking about.”

Watch video HERE…

Mitt Romney is tan, rested, and ready to lose again, so let’s do this thing

Mitt Romney in the hills by DonkeyHotey via Flickr

Mitt Romney in the hills by DonkeyHotey via Flickr

Looks like that bogus Quinnipiac poll may be forcing Romney to come out into the spotlight…

The Raw Story

In a move that can be seen as either desperation or ‘we’re all gonna die anyway, so what the hell?’ conservatives are casting their eyes westward to a man — a stoic man, an honest and true man of values, standing knee deep  in the Pacific Ocean watching the sun go down on America — as their savior in 2016.

That man is a man called Mitt. Family man, businessman, gentle and attentive lover, and owner of both a car elevator and a losing career in elections.

Surveying the 2016 GOP field and falling into a pit of existential dread and despair where there is no light, no hope, no exit, nothing but a  bleak meaningless abyss of wretchedness and desolation, Republicans see hope in the sparkle of Mitt Romney’s eyes and the Earth-mother joy in life his wife Ann brings to the party.

So the ‘Why not Mitt?’ crowd is going to throw some shit against the wall and see what sticks. After all, that is what fan-mag Politico does.

In an article subheaded, “I’m absolutely serious,” a former George W Bush White House person you have never heard of states his case.

Pointing to a recent poll stating 45 percent [or 3 percent less than voted for him in 2012] of voters polled said the United States would be better off today with Romney as president, Emil Henry says that Mitt Romney was very well received indeed at a rave he threw for a bunch of his pals in Utah:

That was also the question on not just the minds but the lips of many at a recent private gathering in Utah known as the E2 Summit, Romney’s now-annual retreat for high-profile politicians, policymakers, innovators, entrepreneurs, business leaders, top bundlers and, of course, a core group of long-time Romney loyalists.

Cancel the convention location search, nobody has to go to Cleveland, we have a winner!

Noting that the GOP field is “fractured” and filled with loons, untested loons, corrupt loons, and loser loons, Henry suggests that Romney is better than nothing and, besides, Morning  Caffeinated Anger Dad Joe Scarborough — who may or may not have had a hand in a rage-filled  explosion of lust and betrayal resulting  in a staffer’s death – says Romney is ‘da bomb,’ which is a phrase popular with middle-aged white men who consider themselves ‘hip to the kids lingo, yo.’

MSNBC host Joe Scarborough, who opened the conference in Utah, said it best: There is no Republican who can “fill the stage” better than Mitt Romney.

Again: YOU DON’T HAVE TO GO TO CLEVELAND IN THE SUMMER, REPUBLICANS. DO YOU WANT THIS GIFT-WRAPPED?

Lastly Henry notes that all the other Presidential failures (George McGovern, Michael Dukakis, Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry and John McCain) were “career politicians.”

Where Romney stands out versus every failed nominee of the last half century is that he, a lifelong businessman with just one successful four-year stint as governor of Massachusetts, is not a career politician.

This is true. Romney ran against Ted Kennedy for a Senate seat and lost in 1994. He then licked his wounds, saved the Olympics,  and came back and was elected governor of Massachusetts  in 2002.  Then he ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, only to lose to shouty Palin-annointer John McCain.  And most recently he ran against Barack Obama in 2012  and lost again giving him a career record of 1-3.

So while it is true that he is not a “career politician,” that might have something to do with the fact that people who vote cooperated and kept him that way by giving him a helping hand.

With one finger extended.

So, yeah, he’s your guy. His record speaks for itself and he’s totally due so you guys should do this thing.

After the last two elections, we expect nothing less.

Scarborough, Todd Erupt over Bergdahl’s Dad: ‘Don’t Criticize the Parents in Here’

Mediaite

Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough erupted Thursday morning during a discussion of the father of freed Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, arguing that Robert Bergdahl had given his son advice that had endangered other American soldiers, while NBC News chief White House correspondent Chuck Todd pleaded with him not to judge the parents whose son had been missing for five years.

“I keep holding up this image where Barack Obama has his arm around a man who is reaching out to pro-Taliban forces, talking about killing Americans,” Scarborough said.

“Joe, Joe, don’t criticize the parents,” Todd replied. “Don’t criticize the parents in here, that are missing a child? Their son is missing for five years. You know what? It is not logical. You cannot handle it. You put yourself in his shoes –”

RELATED: Kilmeade to Bergdahl’s Dad: ‘Don’t Have to Look Like a Taliban Member’ Anymore

“I have a 26-year-old son, and if my son is out on the wire and he is out there with fellow troops and he is writes me up and says he hates America and he’s thinking about deserting and he’s thinking about leaving his post, I can tell you as a father of that 26-year-old or 23-year-old son, I’d say, ‘Joey, you stay the hell right there,’” Scarborough said. “I would call his commander, I would say ‘Get my son. He is not well. Get him to a military base in Germany.’ I would not say ‘Follow your conscience, son.’ I would not reach out to the voice of jihad.”

“I’m not backseat driving how someone parents,” Todd replied.

“That is not backseat driving,” Scarborough said. “I am a father. Any good father would not tell their son to follow their conscience and leave men and women on the line.”

“So he’s a bad father?” Todd challenged.

“Yes!” Scarborough said. “Yes, he is! Oh my god, Chuck.”

Watch the clip  via MSNBC

Bill Maher Rips Sarah Palin, Ted Cruz, and the Crazed Republican Moon Howlers

maher-palin-howl

PoliticusUSA

Bill Maher ripped Republicans like Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz who are more interested in howling at the moon, and making money than they are in governing.

Video:

Maher said:

Truth is there has never been a better time to quit government, and go into the lucrative business of b*tching about government. It worked for Joe Scarborough, Mike Huckabee, and most famously, of course, Sarah Palin. The one night stand of Alaska governors. When Sarah announced she was resigning as governor, she said, “It may be tempting to keep your head down and just plod along, but that’s a quitter’s way out.” Yes, only by quitting was she not quitting. You see, Sarah realized she could have a greater affect on influencing stupidity from outside of government, and pledged to work to elect people just like her, just not her.

The fact is today’s Republicans aren’t built to govern. They don’t want to go to the moon. They want to howl at it. That’s why just the fact of getting elected means you’re already damaged goods. Unless you go to Washington and act like the single biggest prick in the room every time, you’re suspect, which is why there’s really only one man current in government who the base completely trusts. I’m talking, of course, about Ted Cruz.

He’s the guy who best understands that high office is just a higher form of talk radio. Rick Perry told them that they should have a heart. Mitch McConnell holds a gun like a girl, and Marco Rubio is pretty soft on Mexicans for an Italian. John McCain is against torture, and he was tortured. Flip-flopper. Chris Christie actually touched Obama during Hurricane Sandy when he should have lured him to the Pine Barrens and hit him with a shovel, and Michele Bachmann compromised on gays by marrying her husband.

It used to be that the golden parachute for Republicans who left government was going directly into lobbying for some big bank or defense contractor, but now elected Republicans are leaving office in midterm to try to cash their golden ticket on Fox News and/or talk radio.

Congress has become the new Saturday Night Live for stardom seeking Republicans. Some of them are trying to use it as a platform to the White House (Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio). Others are using it to build national fame and fortune (Ted Cruz, Michele Bachmann), but they all have one thing in common. They aren’t in Congress to pass legislation, and do the country’s business.

Sarah Palin was a trailblazer for Republicans in this respect. Palin shows them that they can abandon the responsibility to the people who elect them, be famous for nothing, and make a ton of money in the process. If the government doesn’t work, it’s because Republicans have zero interest in governing.

They have their eyes on bigger prizes. There are only so many of those Fox News and talk radio jobs out there. The media environment doesn’t reward hard work and legislation. The real money is in being extreme, outrageous, and crazy.

Republicans don’t take governing seriously, which is why they shouldn’t be taken seriously by the American people.

 

Scarborough: Obama And Holder Should Stop Playing The Race Card (VIDEO)

Sea0rdlbjnflvfcskxmx

AP Photo

Sure, Joe…just as soon as the entire GOP stop being racists.

TPM LIVEWIRE

A day after Attorney General Eric Holder said in a speech that he and President Obama have dealt with unprecedented levels of criticism, MSNBC’s resident conservative mocked Holder for suggesting that racism is at play.

“Because of racism, I mean, Holder, that’s what Holder suggested, the attorney general suggested yesterday, right?” Scarborough asked Politico’s John Harris.

“There’s no question,” Harris said. “That’s what he’s trying to get at. I don’t see any other reading of it.”

From there, Scarborough was off.

He argued that Holder, the first sitting attorney general to be held in contempt of Congress, has received the same treatment as Janet Reno, the attorney general under Bill Clinton.

Reno, he said, “was accused of murder by Republicans” after the Waco siege.

Scarborough went on to say that Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), the tea party congressman who’sdabbled in birtherism, would have been just as hard on Reno as he was on Holder. Moreover, Scarborough contended that Clinton dealt with just as much hostility as Obama.

“So when you’re going to say that Barack Obama and Eric Holder have been treated worse than anybody else in the history of American politics because of their race, well, you’re not even going back 20 years let alone 200,” Scarborough said.

Scarborough later said he’s not “disregarding” the prejudice against Obama, but he continued to insist that other public figures like Richard Nixon, Edwin Meese and Robert Bork faced the same level of scrutiny.

“Again, and this goes past just what Eric Holder said yesterday. We’ve been hearing this for six years, suggesting that there’s race behind everything — no, no,” Scarborough said. “There’s really not. This is what happens in Washington, D.C.”

“It happens to people that step up to the stage,” he added.

MSNBC Forbids Ed Schultz From Dem Fundraiser But Allows Joe Scarborough to Raise GOP Cash

scarborough-schultz

Looks like Joe Scarborough is the boss’ pet over at MSNBC.  MSNBC seems to “Lean Right” (behind the scenes)…not ‘Forward’

PoliticusUSA

The MSNBC double standard is on full display as the network made Ed Schultz cancel an appearance at a Democratic fundraiser, but is allowing Joe Scarborough to speak at a Republican cash grab.

In December of 2013, Ed Schultz was scheduled to be the keynote speaker at a fundraiser for the Broward Democratic Party’s big Unity Dinner in Florida, but he was forced by his bosses at MSNBC to cancel the appearance and claim that he didn’t know it was a fundraiser.

However, Republican Joe Scarborough is being allowed to deliver a keynote address for Cheshire County Republican Lincoln Day Dinner in New Hampshire in May. The fundraiser that Scarborough is appearing at costs $50 per person, and all of the money goes to the Republican Party.

MSNBC has turned down repeated requests for comment from media reporters who want to know why Scarborough is allowed to appear at a fundraiser, but Schultz was not.

It is this kind of a double standard and poor leadership that has led to many viewers distrusting MSNBC. There is a reason why MSNBC is losing viewers and has such a negative perception among cable news viewers.

The problems at MSNBC begin at the top. Viewers don’t trust the people who are running the network, and the people who are running the network tend to ignore what the viewers want. There are many talented people working at MSNBC. The network could be so much more than what it is, but it difficult to believe that they are leaning forward when management has different rules for their liberal and conservative employees.

Keith Olbermann was suspended for donating to Democrats in 2010, and that clash with management was part of the feud that led to his departure from the network. It is difficult to escape the suspicion that the execs at MSNBC are trying to push Ed Schultz out too. They have already tried to shuffle Schultz off to the weekends, but viewer outrage combined with the crashing and burning of Chris Hayes forced the network to bring him back to weekdays.

MSNBC’s behavior is not matching their public image, and it leaves viewers to wonder if the network’s liberal tilt is all a marketing scam.

Scarborough: Hillary Will Be ‘More of a Neocon’ Than the 2016 GOP Nominee

I’m inclined to take anything Joe Scarborough says with a grain of salt…but still, this one thing bothers me…a lot.

Mediaite

Morning Joe panel Wednesday morning roundly agreed that Hillary Clinton would be more hawkish on issues like Ukraine and Iran than President Barack Obama and even more hawkish than a potential 2016 Republican presidential nominee.

“Hillary is more hawkish than any of us!” former Mitt Romney foreign policy advisor Dan Senorsaid. “She just compared Putin and the Russians to Nazis.”

“Hillary is the neocon’s neocon” Scarborough said. “It’s going to be fascinating if she decides to run and gets the nomination. She will be more of a saber-rattler, more of a neocon, than probably the Republican nominee. I mean, there’s hardly been a military engagement that Hillary hasn’t been for in the past twenty years.”

“She is a traditional Democrat, who tends to be very tough on foreign policy,” Cokie Roberts said. “We’ve forgotten that in the post-Vietnam era. That was where the Democrat Party always was. And if you’ve got a Republican like Rand Paul, she’ll certainly be more out there on military might.”

“God help us,” Senor said under his breath about the potential of a Paul nomination.

Watch the clip via MSNBC