I just watched "Meet the Press" for the first time since David Gregory took over the hot seat, and I was very disappointed. For the first time I wrote in to NBC and expressed my opinion about their choice for the anchor, David Gregory:
'This week on Meet the Press, I thought David Gregory did what Tim Russert would never have done on this show, and that is, show his true political colors. I had a great skepticism when NBC chose Gregory as Russert's replacement and now I think that I have been proved correct. He kept asking the same question of Romer, sometimes three or more times in a row, as if expecting a different answer or a "gotcha" moment. Russert has done things of this nature before, but there was one "fundamental" difference, and that is Russert would use the literal meaning of what someone said and asked them to account for it. In this case Gregory was twisting Obama's words and asking Romer to account for them. Romer even pointed this out saying that he was misinterpreting what the President was saying.
And when it came to Cantor, it was just plain soft ball.
I know that Cantor is not President, and the President should be held to a higher standard, but it has only been a few months since Obama came into office, and Gregory does not even point out that Cantor has lead the opposition to Obama's stimulus package, making it harder to fix the problems at hand.
And when Cantor twisted the words of Romer earlier on the show, Gregory did nothing to correct him.
And when Cantor said that the deficit spending was all right during the Bush administration because it was "getting money to the troops," when the war in Iraq was never on the budget in the first place, and this never accounted for the deficit spending at the time. And the reason that Obama's budget is so big now is because, for the first time, the expenses in Iraq are now included in the budget.
Cantor also said that Obama said he was going to "stop" pork barrel spending, and again Gregory did nothing to correct this statement, because Obama said he wanted to fix the process not stop it because he realizes that pork barrel spending is essential to get funding for crucial local projects.
Since Tim Russert died I have stopped watching the show regularly because I feel that the replacements that have been chosen, Brokaw for the first few months and now Gregory, have been highly ineffective as "unbiased" journalists and are very effective right wing mouth pieces. It greatly saddens me to see Tim Russert's legacy tainted with such a mockery, and I wonder, is this really the best you can deliver on what is supposed to be the most prestigious, unbiased news show on television?'
Let me know what you think. I would like to get a response back from them, but I fear that that would be to optimistic in this case.