General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsandrea mitchell seemed enormously partisan today
More than usual. Attacking Hillary. At least she ran Carville. Has she always been so against the liberals? Perhaps I had never listened to her before enough to know. She is a mean lady. Something is fueling her for some reason.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)That Andrea could even be more partisan than usual strains the imagination...
Ms Greenspan has always been a hack.
blm
(113,071 posts)Last edited Mon Mar 9, 2015, 03:50 PM - Edit history (1)
.
karynnj
(59,504 posts)She did accurate reporting - even when calling into Morning Joe - after Netanyahu's speech.
https://grabien.com/story.php?id=23549
She explained the complete distortion of Kerry's comment that Netanyahu intentionally used. In response to a question of whether the speech would make it harder to get an agreement and Congressional approval, she accurately spoke of how Obama and Kerry were working hard on an agreement, that they did not need Congressional approval and then addressed the possibility of legislation.
There is nothing here that suggests she wants Obama/Kerry to fail or that she wants a war. This is pretty straight reporting -- and a nice explanation of what Kerry actually did say in the hearing.
Spazito
(50,393 posts)She has a nasty trait of inserting ugly innuendo all too often. On the rare occasion when she is challenged on it, she pathetically tries to say it's not what she meant.
dogindia
(1,345 posts)I guess I never noticed her partisan behavior. I was shocked today when I listened to her broadcast. It is too bad the Clintons have so many against them. As Carville reinforced today it has been always...twenty years...attacks. Might be an internal fear of theirs as it has happened so often and for so long.
Spazito
(50,393 posts)on them. Nothing Mitchell or the other right wing talking heads will change that much as the yakety-yaks will continue to try.
karynnj
(59,504 posts)Mitchell often accompanied her on various trips. I always saw a lot of respect for her, both as SoS and a proponent of feminist issues that Mitchell shares.
She is an intelligent, interesting person. I have seen times when she is HATED here and referred to as Mrs Greenspan (her husband is Alan Greenspan, who was behind some of the worst ideas on banking!) However, she was also one of the pioneer women reporters in an age when that was not easy. It is that (to me) made her very supportive of Clinton, a peer ( as an advocate, lawyer not a reporter) in that struggle.
She asks tough questions of everyone. I suspect that you might be too sensitive - and understand that as I have seen her really push John Kerry, who I admire, very hard on some issues - even though overall, she has been very positive at other times.
One way to look at this is that her known position of calling it as she sees it, makes the praise when it does come more meaningful.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)She's furious about the fact he will not send ground troops back into Iraq to fight ISIS.
She's also very angry that he's negotiating with Iran and she's even more pissed that Obama snubbed Bibi when he was in Washington.
She's an extreme hawk when it comes to foreign policy and she's craving a Republican in the White House.
That's why she's going after Hillary.
karynnj
(59,504 posts)She has had many good interviews with him. There are issues that she pushes him hard on, but I have not seen her as antagonistic or unprofessional.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Poor woman.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)monmouth4
(9,708 posts)Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)of the Libertarian Ayn Rand many years ago. Learned years ago to question any thing she spews. One of America's front line propagandist.