Arizona Shooting: Coverage notes…

All day long cable news has been covering the shooting spree in Arizona and that coverage will continue on through the evening. According to TVNewser Shepard Smith, who was brought in earlier to anchor FNC’s coverage, will be back at 7pm ET for two hours followed by Bill Hemmer and Megyn Kelly from 9-11pm ET. Geraldo Rivera will follow at 11pm.

MSNBC had Alex Witt and Melissa Rehberger covering the tragedy and now Chris Jansing has taken over for Witt. Keith Olbermann just tweeted that there will be a live edition of Countdown at 8pm ET.

No word yet on what CNN’s plans tonight will be…

Update: A little after 5pm Thomas Roberts joined Jansing Rehberger on MSNBC…

Update 2: Wolf Blitzer will be anchoring CNN tonight from 7-12am ET…

Advertisements

125 Responses to “Arizona Shooting: Coverage notes…”

  1. The Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf. Well then.

  2. McCain’s statement. Wow. No ‘thoughts, prayers, shocked, saddened’ pap. Very strong.

  3. What did McCain say?

  4. Beats me. Shep read it, and it had strong overtones of God and Heaven and repose. I wish I’d been listening better. These statements often sound as though they came off a template. This didn’t.

  5. Some idiot asked Jan Brewer if she’s concerned about how this makes AZ look. What? The Hell?

  6. Laura, I’m with you on the question to Governor Brewer.
    Thomas is now on MSNBC. Calm and deliberate discipling is settleing down the conversation, though, I do wish that they would stop asking other public figures about how they are concerned about their own security. Those issues should be pushed off to Monday.
    The media should stay with the facts and we should stay in prayer for the injured, killed and their families.

  7. The media should stay with the facts and we should stay in prayer for the injured, killed and their families.

    There’s no new info now, and since the A-teams have been brought in, they have to fill up air time with something new.

  8. BW, Maybe they need to bring back the B-teams or even the C-teams. They can always break in when something new is confirmed. Actually, since MSNBC has “nowhere” to go, I guess that covering this is totally more significant than the Saturday evening norm.

  9. mlong5000 Says:

    Here going to be the way the MSM will cover this story this week out..it’s the Tea Party.Sara Palin,Glenn Beck and FOX news fault,…already heard someone on MSNBC try to tie the shooting to Palin and that campaign map of hers from last year that had targets (FOR DEFEATING AT THE POLLS NOTHING ELSE) on Dem candidates in the Nov election.

    KO doing a live Countdown?…let me guess he’ll do a “Special Comment” where he’ll take the Right to task for whipping up the flames that lead to the shooting.

    Rally wish people could just face the fact that nuts are nuts and will do something like this no matter what Glenn Beck or Keith Olbermann says and trying to use it to gain cheap political points is really sad.

  10. This woman claims to have been an old friend of the alleged shooter: http://twitter.com/caitieparker

  11. Not going to comment on his supposed political inclinations (you can see what his friend says at the twitter link), but she claims he’s been obsessed with that whole 2012 prophecy lunacy.

  12. Yuck. The blame game has officially begun – at least in Canada. They keep mentioning how Ms. Gifford received threats after the healthcare vote and one analyst from DC tried to link the Tea Party and Palin with this incident. People who do this are as disgusting as the gunman. They slip this garbage in a time where most people believe people can be on the same side. No wonder why people don’t like getting involved with politics.

  13. How can this shooting be tied to the tea party? The gunman is 22 and, at least according to the MSM, the tea party is a bunch of old white folks.

  14. MSNBC has Ed Schultz taking over the hour at 7:00Eastern.
    Do hope that there is some semblence of discipline for the next couple of hours. No need to go off target.
    Ed starts very well. Good.

  15. I’ve heard Ed do breaking news before. Wouldn’t be surprised if he handles it well.

  16. Whats the scoop on the second gunman? I read or heard the following:

    1) Second gunman was arrested
    2) Other gunman was shooting at Loughner
    3) Lone gunman, no other shooters

    Ya gotta love the misinformation flying on this one.

  17. Have to say I don’t like the idea of Ed doing breaking news – he blames Republicans for what seems like everything.

    Fredorth: where is your calm, fabulous Chris Jansing when MSNBC needs her?

  18. The fact that they’d even put Ed Schultz in to anchor breaking news is laughable.

  19. Just saw an interview with Rep. Giffords from March that she did on the Daily Rundown – boy Savannah & Chuck sure wanted to push her to blame Republicans for all the “violence” that was happening over the h4ealthcare bill. She handled that push very well and did not fall into the trap of blaming only one group of people. She said there were people on both sides of the aisle that contributed to the “violence” around healthcare. Also, said “all leaders” need to speak to their constituents about how to deal with strong disagreement. She presented her self very well.

  20. Mlong, your predictions about Olby weren’t far off. He’s already tweeting about the shooter’s right-wing positions (while ignoring stuff like his fondness for the Communist Manifesto). And tonight he has a parade of leftish and blue blog “experts”, because it’s never too early to turn a shooting into partisan talking point. To cap it off, a Special Comment about “invocations of violence”.

  21. Ed will do fine. The guy’s just a disturbed idiot. It’s not a political story.

  22. “Laughable” Ed was perfect. Very impressed.

  23. Hah! Tell that to Keith!

    It’s still inappropriate and low-class have radio talk show hosts masquerading as journalists covering hard news. I’d feel the same way if Fox were to put Hannity on to anchor this news. But that isn’t going to happen because Fox wouldn’t do anything so indefensible.

  24. I disagree with it, too, J$, but we’re a dying breed. Commentators report news, anchors commentate. That train has left the station, and FNC is guilty of it, too, albeit not as blatantly. Baier and Kelly anchored election coverage, and they both stray into commentary on their news shows. Especially Megyn.

    All we can hope for from MSNBC is that the commentators will be grownups. Ed was.

  25. The more we learn about this shooter the more he reminds me of a Klebold and Harris or the Va. Tech shooter.

    Young male, alienated, some intelligence but signs of being a psychopath or incapable of having feelings for others.

    Yeah, I’m playing amateur psychologist when I really shouldn’t. But the political angle really is absent here. I can’t see this guy joining up with any political cause except anarchism.

  26. The little coward shot a woman and killed a little girl. Nothing else to say about it..just saying it.

  27. Will someone please inform Mr. Keith Olbermann that the Republicans in Congress are also part of the government.

    And that when he calls them terrorists or compares them to the Nazis that that is also, whether intended or not, anti-government rhetoric?

    Anti-government language doesn’t solely consist of calling Democrats in Washington ugly names. It can also include calling Republicans in Washington ugly names too.

    Perhaps he will read this and the scales will fall from his eyes.

  28. Baier and Kelly anchored election coverage, and they both stray into commentary on their news shows. Especially Megyn.

    So does Shepard Smith. Didn’t catch the whole thing, but during his earlier stint this afternoon, he had on the phone a friend of Giffords who was blaming the Tea Party, and it seemed that he was egging her on with that. I could be wrong about how it turned out, but that was my impression as I walked out of the room in disgust.

    He did the same thing when the crazy old guy shot up the Holocaust Museum back in June 2009.

  29. KO called her Congresswoman Jeffords.

  30. The new guy the police are looking for is a 50 year old white guy. I guess the tea party link has been cemented!

    Of course I’m joking about that part.

    No wonder why I quit watching cable news years ago. These people can’t keep their story straight for S.

    Today in flip flops:

    1) She’s dead, next she’s alive..

    2) There was an exchange of gunfire.. Then it was scrubbed from reports and was since denied.

    3) The shooter was an Afgan vet and now was never in the armed forces.

    4) She was shot from 4 feet, point blank, 2 feet.

    All that’s left is hear the motive and to blame a group of people.

    In closing, this woman must’ve had a angel on her shoulder. Because I fail to see how a shot from a 9mm at 2/4ft/point blank can be in the TEMPLE and fail to do major damage. Unless of course she turned her head and it was just a graze. (Which makes no sense, since the initial reports had her dead at point blank range with a shot to the temple.)

  31. missy5537 Says:

    This idiot sheriff in Pima County, AZ (Clarence Dupnik) is already blaming “vitriolic talk radio and TV rhetoric” for the shooting.

    Really? Unless the kid has a letter from Rush or Glenn directing him to do the shooting, how can this be? If anything, the kid’s a leftist, with the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf reportedly listed as his favorite reading material.

    I looked the sheriff up, and he is some lib sheriff who refused to enforce AZ’s immigration law. I’m sure he’ll find out how to blame Bush and Palin for this tragedy as well, after he ties it in to the Tea Party.

  32. missy5537 Says:

    terance, another error was that the nine-year-old fatality was a boy. Now they’re reporting it was a girl.

  33. Hey Terance, why do you b!tch about cable news if you don’t watch it? Now I know why we get these Catholic diatribes out of thin air.

  34. Come on, Missy, give the sherrif a break. This is obviously a very emotional time for them, and AZ. has been rife with vitriol on both sides for quite a while.

  35. missy5537 Says:

    Joe, that’s why I checked him out. Sounds like he’s a political creature to begin with, and made this political statement as a result.

    A very wise and accurate comment was made earlier tonight:

    “The little coward shot a woman and killed a little girl. Nothing else to say about it..just saying it.”

  36. Remi, do you work for a cable news network?

    joeremi Says:
    January 8, 2011 at 2:20 pm

    Adding to my list of things to ignore today:
    Partisan comment sections
    Terance

    Four hours and 22 minutes later Remi shows us he’s nothing but a flip flopper. Piss off, dude.

  37. missy5537 Says:

    terance, in Joe’s defense, you did tell us, above, that you haven’t watched cable news in years. Yet you’re here commenting on cable news!

  38. My name is Joe, dude, and you started your day with an attack on the military and “Jew on Jew”. Flip this.

  39. My name is Joe, dude, and you started your day with an attack on the military and “Jew on Jew”. Flip this.

    Lies will get you nowhere. I actually started my day by posted in the HOT/NOT section basically saying the news channels were NOT HOT for getting the death story wrong.

    There was no attack on the military.

    Jew on Jew crime isn’t an attack. It was a response to the comment about the perp maybe being Catholic.

    Missy, today is the first day since 2006 that I’ve watched more than 5 minutes of cable news. Funny thing is, I know more about “real news” which doesn’t consist of partisan politics than most on this blog could dream of.

    Guess that goes to show ya watching cable news is just food for partisan hacks.

    Finally, don’t ya find it a wee bit odd that I admit to not watching but still am right on target regarding the goings on? What does that tell ya? The game hasn’t changed.

  40. Note to KO: Super Dramatic Tragedy Voice is pompous, self-serving, and stupid.

  41. Also, can we hear it one time for the “brave” soldiers? I mean, it takes a lot of courage to shoot a child, woman and others, eh?

    Military.

    Finally, don’t ya find it a wee bit odd that I admit to not watching but still am right on target regarding the goings on?

    I know plenty of what’s going on in cable news when I’m away from the television machine by checking this blog on my phone. But if I never actually watched, it would be kind of silly for me to comment on it. Might as well just attack the Catholic Church..

  42. Joe, YOUR news channels reported the guy was a vet. Its not my fault they retracted the story. Should I wait for a day after they say something to see if a flip flop is on the horizon?

    Who says I can’t get back into the cable game? I already know all the players. Perhaps after the Aussie Open I’ll grace you people with more frequent posts.

    Close your spout until tomorrow when I check back in.

  43. Here we go!!! Keith saying the “rise of threats of violence from the right”! Saying that Sarah Palin & Sharon Angle are the basis of the this violence beginning with the healthcare debate.

    You gotta watch!

  44. Poor Jeanine. It’s never a good thing when your debut show gets blown-out by an incident. Ask Connie Chung.

  45. mlong5000 Says:

    Called it..just knew KO and MSNBC was going to use this to go after Palin,talk radio and the Tea Party….it’s going to be a long week.

  46. There was no attack on the military.

    Yes, there was.

    Joe, YOUR news channels reported the guy was a vet.

    That justifies the attack on the military you claim didn’t happen? I’ll tell ya a secret, Terry. If you drink and comment, you might lose track of the things you say. Tootles.

  47. So according to Keith & the dude from Talking Points Memo the rhetoric from the right is what is creating the nuts to rise from the ground!

    Of course Keith talks about how Rep. Giffords office was targeted and vandalized during the healthcare debate. Of course, they never mention that ALL Rep. & Senators get death threats, offices get vandalized, get approached by wackos no matter what the issues are. But as long as we all know Keith is a left wing hack we can ignore him!

  48. Granted, Keith would have made a much stronger point if he had just left the “hate talk” issue to just that and not as a political statement. Otherwise, I thought that he gave a good, strong program that was worthy of my time and attention.

  49. Apparently the Congresswoman was one of the recipients of Olbermann’s much maligned political donations:

    http://www.thewrap.com/television/column-post/shot-congresswoman-received-olbermann-contribution-23750

  50. You’d think he could be bothered to know her name, six hours into the story.

  51. So now we have Palin, Angle, Kelly (Giffords oppenent in the last election)Allen West, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reillly and others as the impetus for what happened today.

    If watch his special comment the people he names by name are right leaning folks. I knew I should not have watched him before I was ready to have a glass of wine – I may need something stronger to drink now!

  52. if he had just left the “hate talk” issue to just that and not as a political statement.

    It was a irresponsible show for the most part where guests and the host were speculating on matters they know little to nothing about.

    All Mr. Olbermann had to do was wait a week, or at least 2-3 days, when we’ll know much more about the shooter and about what motivated him. It seems to me that he was driven more by inner demons than by outer forces. I could be wrong but let’s see.

    The fact that Olbermann wanted to use this tragedy as quickly as possible to score political points was grossly irresponsible.

    If if turns out that this shooter was indeed driven, in part, by the reckless language from the right – and no doubt that there is such language – then Olbermann can make the political observation.

    Until then he is simply using this tragedy for his own ugly reasons.

    It’s shameful but not surprising.

  53. I thought it was a good discussion. Keith isn’t claiming this nut was directly fanned by the ridiculous vitriol in today’s politics. He addressed an issue that’s been a problem for a while, and the unfortunate coincidence of Giffords being one of Palin’s “targets” was as good a place to start as any.

    This event – I think – has changed that dynamic. Enough so that Olbermann apologized for a reference he made to Hillary a couple years ago, and apologized again at the end for any violent talk he has participated in. He knows he’s part of the problem. It takes a bigger man than I thought he was to admit it.

  54. Snarky I know – up front – trying to be honest. How can anyone have a good discussion with Eugene Robinson? He should stick to writing.

  55. I’ve watched a god deal of the coverage today and CNN seems to have more actual ‘news’ coverage than MSNBC & FNC. They have been interviewing witnesses who were feet away from the shooting or with the wounded in the hospitals.

    The other two nets seem to be more about experts, the usual suspects that appear after these events and speculation on the shooters motives; FNC, he’s a lone wolf with no right wing political ties and MSNBC, he’s a lone wolf inspired by right-wing politics.

    The story is still unfolding but if you want facts CNN seems to be doing the best job; at least up until this point; IMHO anyway.

  56. C’mon, Pam. You don’t have to share his views to know that Eugene is a thoughtful person.

  57. Joe, never said he wasn’t thoughtful – just wish he could share his ideas (which I freely admit I disagree with frequently) without his speech impediment. (as I said snarky – I know)

    Fritz3: just so you know the doctor CNN was interviewing with Wolf Blitzer that was there was on Fox with Shep first of all the cable channels (can’t speak to any of the broadcast channels). Shep also had the name of the little girl that died and got information from her uncle (don’t know if the uncle was on air or not) that said she had just been elected to her student council.

  58. fritz, It’s the weekend and CNN has the builtin advantage to begin with. I went back and forth (except, of course, when Ms Jansing was talking) and I do tend to feel that CNN was rather good and FOX and MSNBC were both reasonable.
    joe, yes, Eugene is an excellent communicator.

  59. missy5537 Says:

    “…and the unfortunate coincidence of Giffords being one of Palin’s “targets” was as good a place to start as any…”

    Hopefully it goes without saying that the “targeting” by Palin was of a political, not a physical, nature.

  60. This event – I think – has changed that dynamic.

    Olbermann could have waited 3-4 days until we found out more about the shooter and his motivations and our emotions are calmer. We’re all reacting out of anger and grief and bewilderment. Not a good situation to be in when making judgments.

    I see no need for instant sociological analysis especially when it’s based on such an ugly tragedy and on such little information.

    After all, isn’t it mostly true that political assassinations in America have usually involved assassins or would-be assassins who didn’t act out of a deliberate political plan but rather as the acting-out of a private madness?

    It sure looks like that here. Madness not ideology.

    If it wasn’t, we’ll find out and Olbermann can make the point.

  61. missy5537 Says:

    And another thing – FNC reported how Judge Roll had been targeted, as late as 2009, on an illegal immigration ruling! He AND his wife had to have 24/7 protection for several months, it seems, because he ruled in favor of allowing a prosecution of an illegal immigration case to proceed.

    He apparently got 200 death threats within hours of his ruling.

    Did Keith, Ed or Kos report on that? I’m guessing no.

  62. missy5537 Says:

    Steve, as my post of 6:48 p.m. (above) states, the sheriff of Pima County pretty much started the blame game with his irresponsible, political comments. He just opened the floodgates for Keith, Ed and anyone else who were only happy to go down that path.

  63. Pam: I didn’t see every minute of coverage on all three nets so I’m sure there was lots of facts discussed on all three channels. It just seemed that CNN was covering it as more of a news story and had less discussion of the political (or not) motivation of the shooter.

    As well CNN has talked about the politics of the story at times but not to the extent of the other two networks; in my opinion anyway.

  64. Hopefully it goes without saying that the “targeting” by Palin was of a political, not a physical, nature.

    It does, but I’ve long complained about the “lock and load” imagery in our politics. Of course a phrase like “targeted districts” is benign and common, but comments like “don’t retreat, reload”, coupled with maps with crosshairs on them, are not helpful. “Second Amendment remedies” from Sharron Angle wasn’t too swift, either.

    There’s a violent, revolutionary tone in our left/right discourse now that was just as bad when people were calling for Bush’s assassination. Regardless of this lunatic’s motives, this has to stop.

  65. I heard Shep’s interview with the doctor on the way home in my car. It was startling. Apparently it was a small group in a somewhat confined area, and the shooter was only a few feet away from everyone. Shep asked him if people ran, and he said there wasn’t any place to run, and that just about everyone there was hit. I pictured a much bigger scene.

  66. “the sheriff of Pima County pretty much started the blame game with his irresponsible, political comments. He just opened the floodgates for Keith, Ed and anyone else who were only happy to go down that path.”

    Whatever the motivation of the sheriff his comments are certainly news and worthy of discussion. Both CNN & MSNBC discussed them but I didn’t hear any mention of the statements on FNC.

    I assume they must have been mentioned on FOX News and I wonder what was the context of the Fox discussion? My assumption it was dismissive, but if I’m wrong, I’d like to know what was the FNC view of the comments?

  67. It really bugs me that these things inevitably and immediately degenerate into political p!ssing-matches. But it’s not arguable that the left never misses an opportunity to jump on these things, and tries to assign a political ideology to the actions of unbalanced individuals.
    I don’t ‘blame’ Keith Olbermann for the actions of others, no matter what kind of a headcase he presents himself to be. At the same time, has he ever in the past questioned the rhetoric of the left? Has he ever played-up the liberal leanings, real or imagined, of a clearly deranged killer? Does he recognize the self-defeating nature of being utterly and completely predictable?
    Ooh, half-a-decade down the road, he has some second thoughts about some of what he’s said over the course of…half-a-decade. But of course, nothing that the left says ever creates a ‘problem’, so it’s an easy admission, isn’t it?

  68. I turned to MSNBC for the last of Ed’s segment, then stayed ’til they inevitably bailed for a prison doc. Since being back on FNC, the sherrif hasn’t been mentioned.

  69. Laura, about that ‘half-a-decade’ thing. Men are slow. I’m actually not kidding. It takes a harda$$ a long time to catch on. He gets credit for doing it before retirement..

  70. “I assume they must have been mentioned on FOX News and I wonder what was the context of the Fox discussion? My assumption it was dismissive, but if I’m wrong, I’d like to know what was the FNC view of the comments?”

    What would the ‘FNC view’ be exactly? A statement from Roger Ailes? That sort of construction is so impenetrable, as if anything someone says automatically becomes the corporate opinion of the entire broadcasting network.

    Despite your assumptions, in all the reportage of the Sheriff’s statement I don’t recall Shep, Jon Scott, Bill Hemmer, or Megyn Kelly, or any of the reporters, being dismissive of it, or making any judgment one way or another. I didn’t expect them to. It’s not like they put Ed Schultz or Keith Olbermann on the air to play journalist.

  71. missy5537 Says:

    fritz, the sheriff himself made the comments at his 8 p.m. ET news conference.

    He made me mad enough that I actually turned off the TV for a while. So I don’t know what, take the Fox people had on his comments.

  72. Aah, Fox has saved the sheriff’s comments for the always illuminating Geraldo at Large. JD Hayworth and Al Sharpton will sort it all out for us. Yippee.

  73. Al Sharpton no doubt discussing the dangers of overheated political-rhetoric. Be still my heart.

  74. missy5537 Says:

    Sharpton, the voice of calm in the storm!

    Kinda tricky for him to play the race card, but I’m sure he’ll succeed!

  75. Fortunately, Sharpton’s voice is trashed.

  76. Yes, that sheriff from Pima county is a real asshat. It was Bigot, Bigot, Bigot all the time. He is a big time open border guy, but this shooting had nothing to do so far as anyone has found to do with such.

    The shooters youtube channel was mostly unintelligible dribble and his books had the media flummoxed. With the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kamph as reading material….where to go with that. Wolf and the gang at MSNBC were flustered, they couldnt assign it to the Tea Party.

    But give them enough time.

    But Im thinking it likely the fault of BusHitler.

  77. Way behind on comments but when folks say that CNN had a good discussion and that it was facts, etc. of course having Donna Brasil on was “not political”, right? My cynicism is showing!

  78. missy5537 Says:

    Just wondering how many times they will mention that the perp is a white guy? If he was black, Arab or Hispanic, that point would be left out without question!

  79. icemannyr Says:

    At 1am ET CNN and FNC are airing old taped coverage of the shooting.
    FNC is replaying the 9pm-11pm ET show.
    CNN’s coverage is from 10pm or 11pm ET.

    They would be better off going to regular taped programing like MSNBC instead of airing old outdated coverage.

  80. missy, I really don’t believe that race has anything to do with pictures on the screen. Maybe I am wrong, but, any race implication conclusion will require much more time to be considered valid.
    Meanwhile, MSM would have stated the race, if available, regardless of what race was involved.

  81. icemannyr Says:

    FNC is replaying the 9pm-11pm ET hours again at 3am ET after replaying them 1am-3am ET.

    It’s not as bad as CNN who keeps playing the same news hour over and over again with the “BREAKING NEWS” text on all the lower third graphics.

  82. Just scanned through the overnight comments and not one addresses the big question:

    Shep had a phoner with some woman that was an elected official. She said the gunman was an Afgan vet.

    If Shep was half the journalist you people seem to think he is.. Would he have this woman back on (at least another phoner) to find out WHERE she got this info?

    Right. It doesn’t matter. Now they say he wasn’t a vet and lets just forget it, eh?

  83. “Despite your assumptions, in all the reportage of the Sheriff’s statement I don’t recall Shep, Jon Scott, Bill Hemmer, or Megyn Kelly, or any of the reporters, being dismissive of it, or making any judgment one way or another.”

    ^ Not “making any judgement one way or the other” on a very incendiary comment at a news conference is dismissive! It was the elephant in the room at that event and should garner at least a comment unless they were trying to pretend the sheriff never said what he said.

    We should get a bit more on the shooter’s motive today as MSNBC; and maybe CNN & FNC too; has scheduled an interview with a friend of the shooter.

    I’m still seeing a range of numbers for those killed or wounded depending on the network. You’d think they’d have got those numbers correct by now.

  84. missy5537 Says:

    Apparently the fatality count is at 6. But all we know so far is that a Federal Judge was killed, and a nine year old girl. What about the other four – are their names not yet released, or are they just not “newsworthy enough” to be mentioned?

    Their lives mattered, too. What about them?

  85. via wptv.com

    Dupnik said Giffords was among 13 people wounded in the melee that killed six people — including 9-year-old Christina Greene, 30-year-old Gifford aide Gabe Zimmerman, and U.S. District Judge John Roll.

    The 63-year-old judge had just stopped by to see his friend Giffords after attending Mass, friends say.

    Dupnik said the rampage ended only after two people tackled the gunman. Also killed were 76-year-old Dorothy Murray, 76-year-old Dorwin Stoddard, and 79-year-old Phyllis Schneck, investigators said.

  86. Missy, the names have been released and they were discussed this morning on MSNBC and I assume other locations as well.

    The names were withheld until the next of kin were notified, as is the practice. I heard a few names mentioned in interviews last night and wondered if the should not have been mentioned as they hadn’t been officially released.

    I don’t expect much news coverage on those victims that are not public figures or have a compelling human interest angle; such as the young girl killed. That’s just the nature of cable news coverage.

  87. fritz3: ^ Not “making any judgement one way or the other” on a very incendiary comment at a news conference is dismissive! It was the elephant in the room at that event and should garner at least a comment unless they were trying to pretend the sheriff never said what he said.

    So I guess you are saying they should be expressing an opinion about the comments by the sheriff and NOT do straight news? Isn’t that always a “hit” about Fox and especially about Megyn Kelly while she does her news cast? Fox can’t win for losing with some of you!

  88. — Their lives mattered, too. What about them? —

    What Fritz said. Cops, very old or young, or someone with a story. If their death would not otherwise have been noted, it probably won’t in this case. That’s life.

  89. “So I guess you are saying they should be expressing an opinion about the comments by the sheriff and NOT do straight news?”

    Pam: The sheriff’s comments are ‘straight news’. They are a part of the story even if it doesn’t fit into the political storyline FNC is promoting at the time. By not commenting on them Fox is making a statement that they want to dismiss them as not important. That’s OK but telling all the same.

  90. Fritz: maybe not clear yet this morning but if they play his words as part of the story, explain who he is, explain his statements from the past about immigration but DON”T express an opinion about him that IS NOT OK? I guess I look at it from the perspective “I” the consumer of Fox can then make up my own mind about whether or not I agree with him. I don’t need a news anchor tell me whether or not to agree with his feelings/opinions or not.

  91. Pam: my point is FNC is apparently not playing his comments at all and therefore avoiding having to comment one way or the other.

    This story may also provide a conflict for those strong law and order types who think mental illness should not be a defense for a crime.

    If you think the shooter should be executed or spend life in prison and not end up in a mental health institution then it may be difficult to also argue there was no political motivation to the shooters targeting a politician because he was insane.

    I’m just sayin’.

  92. It’s like this Pam…if someone on Fox expresses an opinion, it becomes the ‘FNC view’ and then everyone can pile on for ‘slanting’ the news. But if they don’t express an opinion (particularly one that Fritz wants them to push), then THAT becomes ‘telling’ and more proof that FNC is ‘slanting the news’.

    “Pam: my point is FNC is apparently not playing his comments at all and therefore avoiding having to comment one way or the other.”

    Where do you get that from? They’ve played his comments repeatedly since they aired them live, as anyone who watched would know. I know it’s easier to smear Fox when you don’t bother watching, that way you aren’t constrained by things like the truth. But it’s certainly the farthest thing from honest discussion.

  93. As J$ notes, FNC played the sheriff’s comments several times yesterday and have continued to do so today. The man was clearly and understandably under stress, so to the extent that his comments were inappropriate, we can give him some slack.

    “Insanity” is always a potential defence, as it should be, but being an incoherent “nutjob” is not necessarily an equivalent to “insanity”.

  94. Where do you get that from?

    J$; I got that from you when you sai:

    “Despite your assumptions, in all the reportage of the Sheriff’s statement I don’t recall Shep, Jon Scott, Bill Hemmer, or Megyn Kelly, or any of the reporters, being dismissive of it, or making any judgment one way or another.”

  95. sai > said

  96. The doctor seems to think the bullet went from the back to front on the left side.

    Funny, all the news nets said she was shot in the temple.

    Last time I checked, bullets (even magic ones) don’t do u-turns.

    So, back to front on the left side means it couldn’t have entered in the temple.

    Wait. I guess a second shooter would make sense, eh?

  97. “in all the reportage of the Sheriff’s statement…”

    You got from that there was NO reportage of the Sheriff’s statement? Unbelievable.

  98. The doctor seems to think the bullet went from the back to front on the left side

    Rewind and watch again. The doctor was careful to not be specific about entrance and exit locations. “Back-to-front” does not negate the possibility of an entrance along the side of the head, and anywhere in that region could be observed as the “temple” to an untrained observer. Most cable news viewers are sophisticated enough to realise that these reports didn’t come straight from the surgeon’s mouth. Some non-cable news viewers, apparently, are focused on criticising irrelevant details.

  99. Rewind and watch again. The doctor was careful to not be specific about entrance and exit locations. “Back-to-front” does not negate the possibility of an entrance along the side of the head, and anywhere in that region could be observed as the “temple” to an untrained observer. Most cable news viewers are sophisticated enough to realise that these reports didn’t come straight from the surgeon’s mouth. Some non-cable news viewers, apparently, are focused on criticising irrelevant details.

    Guess you missed the part when he said the bullet traversed the left side of the brain. And he said from back to front.

  100. Didn’t miss it, I simply paid better attention. He didn’t say precisely where it entered. The bullet may have entered anterior or posterior of the ear.

  101. missy5537 Says:

    Back to the four hardly mentioned victims:

    Three of them were senior citizens, extremely advanced in age! This is a huge story, I would think; seniors are as harmless and defenseless as children. I thought that was why they were making such a story about the little girl – that she was innocent, defenseless, of no danger, etc. So were the seniors! Plus they were likely people’s parents and grandparents.

    I’d think their stories would matter very much, and would even lead me to ask why a kid would shoot up people of that age. Did he hate his grandparents or something?

  102. Been reading alot and this is truly morphing into this is the right wings fault becaude of language folks subscribe to Angle, Kelly, Beck, O’Reilly and Palin. Just curious – Harry Reid just said late last week that Eric Cantor was “throwing bombs” when talking about what legislation was going to be presented in the House. Is he going to be blamed the next time a “bomb” goes off somewhere? You know after all language has consequences!

    Also, since there is such concern about language we should seriously consider asking both the Senate & the House to change the name of “The Sargent at Arms” because after all “Arms” connotes violence, right?

  103. Lemole explained that the bullet entered the back of Giffords’ skull on the left side and exited her skull on the front left side, and said the situation would have been much more grave had the bullet crossed through the critical center area of the brain. According to Lemole, the left side of the brain controls motor functions for the right side of the body, as well as speech and comprehension functions.

    via kgun.com

    Al said, “Rewind and watch again. The doctor was careful to not be specific about entrance and exit locations.”

    Now, lets pay extremely close attention to this passage, “Lemole explained that the bullet entered the back of Giffords’ skull on the left side and exited her skull on the front left side”

    Apparently, Al is the one that needs to pay better attention.

    So, fancy me this — if she was shot in the temple, how come thats the general area of the EXIT wound?

  104. missy5537 Says:

    Pam, I can’t even watch this stuff anymore at this point. The left/media (same thing) are desperate to demonize the right/Tea Party, and will make any connection they can possibly contrive to try to blame this on them.

    BTW, have they blamed Bush yet? Maybe they’re busy going after Palin and the Tea Party, but I’m sure they’ll tie it into our former POTUS somehow.

  105. The “misreport” you’re claiming by the media, terance, happened yesterday. From the statements made by the neuros during their presser, I’d guess she received significant trauma to the left hemisphere temporal lobe. The misreporting, if any, would be a technical detail of the kind that I wouldn’t expect a “breaking news” account to fully differentiate.

  106. WooHoo! Jenna Lee is in the house!

  107. “You got from that there was NO reportage of the Sheriff’s statement? Unbelievable.”

    I know you know this johnny but I was referring to the second part of your comment.

    “I don’t recall Shep, Jon Scott, Bill Hemmer, or Megyn Kelly, or any of the reporters, being dismissive of it, or making any judgment one way or another.”

    They reported the event. What I was interested in, of course, was the hosts reaction to the sheriff’s opinion comment. If they ignored the sheriff’s political statement then it was unlikely without instruction from above.
    Of course you have a different opinion but that doesn’t make mine untrue.

  108. Well get your story straight. You said you assumed they didn’t report on it at all. Now you’re saying OK they reported on it then ignored it because they didn’t offer an opinion about it? I guess it’s easy to keep changing what you say because, of course, you didn’t watch.

    ” If they ignored the sheriff’s political statement then it was unlikely without instruction from above.”

    Yes, the minute the Sheriff finished speaking Shep and everyone else received an urgent instant message from Roger Ailes not to comment. And they all obeyed. Of course, there’s that little matter of what happened when Geraldo came on, which kind of blows that theory out of the water, but maybe you’ll come up with a third position to take care of that.

    “Of course you have a different opinion but that doesn’t make mine untrue.”

    I don’t have an ‘opinion’. I saw the coverage. I have facts. You have an opinion based on a lack of facts, which is worth something around the square root of zero.

  109. One would think the initial report of a “gunshot to the temple” would be the most accurate. Seeing that it happened right at the beginning of the chaos.

    Now we have yet another discrepancy. The sheriff said the gun held 31 bullets. (And he was confronted by a woman and then tackled by men while reloading/gun jam.) Problem is, one of the witnesses said the amount fired was between 15-20.

    This whole story stinks to high heaven. So many different accounts of things that only have one explanation.

    I feel sorry for the Giffords and others that were injured or perished. Its a shame we’ll never know exactly what happened with this crock of news channels.

    All that’s left is to figure out who benefits. Or should I say, what “rights” we lose now!

    Finally, I’m a little embarrassed to admit it. But, I did happen to catch KO’s special comment last night.

    I thought he called Glen “gold” Beck out to the carpet along with BO and even himself.

    On a side note: People often say KO only has people on he agrees with. Well, that’s not entirely true. There was a guy on last night and when he didn’t completely agree, KO just ignored it.

  110. Yeah, you know they didn’t need 10,000 body-bags on 9/11 either. Maybe someone needs to question Giuliani about that.

  111. Initial reports from hysterical witnesses at a crime scene are notoriously unreliable. The commentor making a stink about it is a non-cable-news-viewing troll.

  112. Initial reports from hysterical witnesses at a crime scene are notoriously unreliable. The commentor making a stink about it is a non-cable-news-viewing troll.

    Would one not be an “active cable news viewer” if they’ve been watching yesterday and today? Who knew ya had to tune in once a month for your cable news card to be valid.

    And here I thought a “troll” was someone that posted off topic crap and attacked others.

  113. And here I thought a “troll” was someone that posted off topic crap and attacked others.

    See: Catholic Church.

  114. See: Free for All – What’s on your mind?

    Is it me or has Megyn Kelly’s voice gotten downright painful? She’s now on par with Rita Cosby is the annoyance department.

  115. “Well get your story straight. You said you assumed they didn’t report on it at all.

    ^I said I didn’t know what was said because I didn’t watch every minute of all three networks but assumed they didn’t discuss the sheriff’s opinions; correctly it seems.

    “I guess it’s easy to keep changing what you say because, of course, you didn’t watch.”

    ^That’s what I said and why I asked John.

    “Yes, the minute the Sheriff finished speaking Shep and everyone else received an urgent instant message from Roger Ailes not to comment. And they all obeyed.”

    ^That seems to be correct unless they all decided to not discuss the subject on there own which seems passing odd to say the least.

    Of course, there’s that little matter of what happened when Geraldo came on, which kind of blows that theory out of the water, but maybe you’ll come up with a third position to take care of that.

    ^Geraldo came on after I sent the email. He was dismissive.

    “I don’t have an ‘opinion’. I saw the coverage. I have facts.”

    The facts seem to be that neither Shep, Scott, Hemmer, Kelly or the reporters discussed the sheriffs political opinions. Whether they were told not discuss the subject or all thought it not worth discussing is still up in the air.

    Thanks for answering my question Johnny. 🙂

  116. ^ Forget it, Fritz. It’s all they’re talking about today.

  117. “I said I didn’t know what was said because I didn’t watch every minute of all three networks but assumed they didn’t discuss the sheriff’s opinions; correctly it seems.”

    No, you said they didn’t report or SHOW his comments at all:

    “FNC is apparently not playing his comments at all and therefore avoiding having to comment one way or the other.”

    Or are you going to retcon that too?

    “The facts seem to be that neither Shep, Scott, Hemmer, Kelly or the reporters discussed the sheriffs political opinions.”

    That’s right, they didn’t. They were functioning as reporters. Discussion is for pundits. I know that’s not how it works on MSNBC but then again they put pundits and talk-show hosts in the anchor chairs for hard news, so the usual journalistic standards don’t apply there.

  118. “That’s right, they didn’t. They were functioning as reporters. Discussion is for pundits. I know that’s not how it works on MSNBC but then again they put pundits and talk-show hosts in the anchor chairs for hard news, so the usual journalistic standards don’t apply there.”

    ^Johnny: that’s the lamest excuse for an answer you’ve posted here in long while. You made my day. 🙂

  119. “That’s right, they didn’t. They were functioning as reporters. Discussion is for pundits. I know that’s not how it works on MSNBC but then again they put pundits and talk-show hosts in the anchor chairs for hard news, so the usual journalistic standards don’t apply there.”

    Johnny: That’s the lamest excuse for an FNC defense you’ve posted here in quite awhile. You’ve made my day. 🙂

  120. ^ I liked the comment so much I posted it twice. 😉

  121. -Glock 9mm-

    Possibly explains the discrepancy between number of shots and sheriff’s claim that his gun could hold “31 bullets” (according to terence). I have a 17 and a 33 bullet magazine for my 9mm.

  122. Al; I’m just curious as to why you, or anyone for that matter, would need a 33 bullet magazine? Seventeen bullets would seem sufficient for any legal use of the gun.

  123. Convenience, Fritz. Twice as many shots at the range without changing, but the real value is half as many clips to have to reload before the next trip for target practice. That’s all. To your insinuation, though, with practice you can learn to reload your weapon so fast that it hardly matters.

  124. […] with Bitcoins Buy American Steroids Online with Bitcoins Buy American Steroids Online with Bitcoins Buy American Steroids Online with Bitcoins Buy American Steroids Online with Bitcoins Buy American Steroids Online with Bitcoins Buy American […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: