David Sirota on HuffPo: "Et tu, Katie Couric?" A Must-Read!

David Sirota: Et tu, Katie Couric?

The Huffington Post Blog
March 26, 2206
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/et-tu-katie-couric_b_44256.html

I, like many people, find it nauseating that the professional political pontificators seem unable to contain their desire to apply horse-race analysis to Elizabeth Edwards' announcement that she has life-threatening cancer. From CNN, to Time Magazine to Rush Limbaugh, the national political chattering class has this week truly earned its well-deserved reputation as a group of people dominated by egomaniacal, self-absorbed freaks wholly and completely out of touch with even the most basic sense of decency.

Perhaps the most disturbing display of all, however, was 60 Minutes' Katie Couric. She spent most of her interview with the Edwardses behaving like a prosecutor, cross-examining them about why they are going forward with the presidential campaign. And when I say "interrogate" I mean interrogate. This was no ordinary interview - this was a televised guilt trip. She stated as fact to John Edwards that he is supposedly "putting your work first, and your family second." She also pulled the "some say" technique, claiming that an unnamed "some" say that in making this decision, Edwards is displaying "a case of insatiable ambition."

In pursuing this line of repeated questioning, of course, Couric ignored the pretty well-known psychological value of work during health care crises. She also ignored the fact that this is an immensely personal decision that does not require some multimillion-dollar journalist to perform a televised, Gitmo-style interrogation in order for viewers at home to glean the "news value." And most incredibly, she ignored her own behavior when her spouse was diagnosed with cancer.

That's right, Katie Couric's husband was diagnosed with cancer in 1997. I did a quick check of the transcripts for that year - and it's pretty clear that she kept working as the anchor for NBC's Today Show, if not full time, then pretty close to it.

I want to be extremely clear: That Couric continued to work while her husband was sick was entirely her and her family's personal decision. I'm not going to comment on the merits of that decision not because I think it was a bad one or a good one, but because it's AN ENTIRELY PERSONAL DECISION. Really, who the hell am I - and who the hell is anyone else - to question someone's decision to keep working during a family health crisis?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/et-tu-katie-couric_b_44256.html

crisis?

:applause:

Appear on CSPAN and Air America only.

.

Couric says gets what they deserve. What a waste of oxygen.

:evilgrin:

....that's authoritative in my book..:sarcasm:
Uh-huh, yeah.

should he be running..since he is the one who had cancer he would be the one to be more physically and mentality challenged. I haven't heard a word from all the republican right wing spewers about him...Scarbrough was having such a fit yesterday I haven't hear him mention rudi's cancer once.

And I don't remember, Gerald Ford, Nelson Rockefeller, or the Saint Ronald Reagan resigning from office when their wives had breast cancer. THEY WERE PRESIDENTS AND A VICE PRESIDENT AND SHOULDN'T IT HAVE EFFECTED THEY WAY "THEY" RAN THE COUNTY.

The audience who was watching "60 Minutes" last Sunday could be divided into at least 4 groups:
1) Those who hate the Edwards regardless of any consideration - very small %.

2) Those who are relatively neutral on the Edwards, but are sympathetic to Elizabeth's disease - large %.

3) Those who identify with any cancer sufferer and support them regardless of any other issue - relatively large %.

4) Those who love the Edwards and feel powerful, strong support for them - small %.

And nearly all of this audience is over 40 and at least feel the presence of cancer in life.

This was just a bad/bad scenario for Couric to do a slime/hit job on this very sympathetic couple. Her unrelenting grilling of the Edwards was ugly to see and difficult to understand. The only thing I can see as a negative for John is that if it had been me I would have told the little ass-sucker to fuck-off. I would have told her that condescension and judgmental superiority is exactly the things that disease sufferers do not need. People who find themselves in the Edwards' situation are not suddenly children, they aren't all-at-once people who must have their motives supervised and their actions directed. Sympathy, support, understanding is all that is needed and all that any decent human being would consider extending.

They should have gone with Charlie Gibson - well just about anyone would have been better than Couric.

that if they fling shit constantly for 18 months, enough will stick so that their candidate can steal the election next fall. It matters ot whether it's true. If you don't think it will work, just look at how we got stuck with the stupidest, most corrupt Resident in history. Smirk, a stupid, ignorant, elitist, unqualified coke-head, ran against one of the most qualified men ever to run for president. But the accumulation of lies, half-truths, rumors, and slander managed to confuse enough ignorant americans that somehow he got to live in the white house.

Get ready for 18 months of this stuff.