When did David Schuster become a prick?

His entire panel is basically calling him crazy, but he wouldn't drop the whole "Obama's not being forthcoming".

I was starting to like Schuster during the election. He took Pfotenhauer on a few times in a delicious manner. I hate her though, so that was an easy sell. :/

Maybe being a prick is a requirement for the host. :shrug:

Here's what I posted in the other thread about this....I usually like him a lot, but Christ did he sound paranoid.

"I usually really like David Shuster, but I had to turn him off on 1600 Pa Ave just now, he was getting just a bit too Nancy Drew and paranoid for me. He had a "David's notebook", with all these different scenarios and possibilities. Michael Isikoff, John Harwood, Lawrence O'Donnell, and Joan Walsh ALL told him that certain things he was saying weren't making sense, and he got really defensive and said "What's wrong with us trying to figure this out while the questions remain unanswered!" But some of the scenarios were just not possibilities, like Jarrett being referred to as candidate one but being referred to as a "Washington advisor" on a conference call with Bago (in the same document). And did Bago and Obama actually meet on November 5th (Shuster said again they did)? I thought the place that reported it had to take it back the other day, not sure."

I noticed the same lousy attitude and I think he's an idiot for questioning Obama, given how forthcoming Obama was during his
news conference and for ignoring the fact that Blago called him a motherfucker for offering him nothing but "appreciation."
Funny, I never saw him question how un-forthcoming BushCo was with the same vigor...

that much news.. He's rather drama-less.. so, they have to go the complete opposite and they sound like they are trying to hand him his head.. They have nothing. They have an entire hour devoted to nothing.. Now, if they wanted a real show.. they should cover policy.. learn about what's going on out there in America and why the country is really crashing.. Schuster doesn't have anything else to talk about.. like everyone else. We're stuck waiting for the other one to leave.. But he could cover the occupant squatter that's f-ing things up right now.

I hardly watch either any more. Without the unifying backdrop of the election, they don't seem to have an hour's worth of stuff to talk about. So they talk about fluff and nonsense instead. You know it's bad when even the guests object.

"investigative reporting" out of NOTHING. He looks foolish trying to make a "play by play" case out of what REALLY happened (filling in the holes of Obama's statements today).

I wonder if he was embarassed that the rest of the panel was like "Uh, I don't think so, David." And when he was like "the CNN report came out....a few hours later!", Michael was like "I really don't think that means anything"...and David said ".....but it came out a few hours later!" LOL.


Oddly enough, 1600 PA Ave the other day (after Tweety had done a "What is OBAMA HIDING?" type show, on the day the Bago thing broke) was pretty benign compared to the other media frenetics, with David Shuster just saying that it is clear that Obama did not want to go along with any Blago shenanigans, so he'll probably be ok. And it's the same exact evidence now as it was two days ago, but he sounded very frenzied tonight over "questions unanswered".

I especially liked how O'Donnell and Walsh were saying they thought he was making wayyy too much out of this, and that it makes SENSE that it would take this long for Obama to make sure that he's not missing anyone when he puts out the list of people who even SPOKE to Blagojevich.

...say one thing you disagree with. Why don't you know the standard for DU media criticism already?

but he just sounded really over the top tonight with his scenarios. I think I read that the "investigative" stuff is what he's really in to, but it's hard to investigate selective information by the feds I guess, especially when the info is the same that's been raked over by the media for the last two days.

Even though he DOES sound like he's trying way too hard on this, he's still a good reporter IMO.

Still a major improvement over Gregory, and I get the sense that he would be kind of dramatic like this if it was a Republican thing too (he seemed to actually care about Troopergate this election, and they usually make him work a lot of hours)....can't say the same for Stretch. He (Gregory) was on earlier giving "reaction" to the news conference, and I really get the sense that he is going to be as just as bad as we think this Sunday on his first MTP.

I think he's just over-zealous at times but he's NOT a partisan hack like some are calling him.

And WTH HAPPENED to Stretch? He used to be GREAT when questioning McClellan and Bush. Did dancing with Rove change him?

:D

on MSRNC. He's just doing what it takes to move up the ranks.

..... will she get shut out?

Or will Brack continue to be "Obama-like" and make a point of NOT hanging her out to dry.

:shrug: