There has been a lot of discussion on social networks about the need to replace David Gregory on Meet the Press. What got me interested was when the name Chuck Todd was raised, most liberals I follow went up in arms in anger. Since I watch his show Monday through Friday, I had no problem with it. But after getting lambasted, although I still think Chuck would be fine, I see their point. So let me say what I think is needed at Meet the Press.
Let me start by saying that anyone following Tim Russert would pale in comparison and would probably seen as a failure. What made Tim so good was his probing questions, and not the first one on a subject. His specialty was asking a question, and like a great lawyer, knowing what the answer would be. He then would either try to poke a hole in the statement or show where the person had flip-flopped. David Gregory has never shown the ability to follow up an obvious lie by a GOP and keep digging until it was seen as a lie. For this reason, I think he has to go.
Could Chuck do it? I think so, although he has stated his job is to give the American people both sides of the debate and let the country decide which side they agree with. In other words, host the debate, but don't be an attacking lawyer and try to find the flaws in the debate. That to me won't work either.
For either David or Chuck to be a good moderator, they have to show the flaws and lies of both sides of the debate. If they can't or won't do it, I know one reporter who can: Rachel Maddow. The right may howl, and she would have to learn to go after liberals just as hard as she goes after the GOP. But I have no doubt she would be like a great lawyer going after the other side. Give Rachel a try and see what happens. I can almost guarantee you, it wouldn't be boring.
No comments:
Post a Comment