Mike Wallace has become a very old man, and Brian Williams is a pretty face.

The world is a different place without a TV. I recommend it.

The good thing is that the news folks’s absurdity is not getting the tread that it used to.

Brian Williams comments were a shameful insult to service personnel in this country who try to do good by putting their lives on the line in an effort to save others. That clueless dolt got my 2 cents worth today!

I feel bad for Brian Williams. I think he is more inarticulate than insulting. You can interpret what he said as insulting and on the face of it, it certainly is. But what he meant to say, I think, is that we have guys who are just as tough and want to win as much as their bombers. They’re not morally equivalent, but our guys will not be outdone by those creeps. We’re every bit as tough. We can win. Just because they’re willing to kill themselves doesn’t mean that they want victory more than we do. We can win without killing ourselves--but we do have people willing to fight and die if necessary. Maybe I’m not saying it well either, but giving him the benefit of the doubt, it’s at least possible that he was trying to DEFEND our soldiers and not insult them. But, to say the least, he did it very badly. Probably because he’s just a pretty face--a too pretty face. But if that’s what he meant, I feel bad for him.

Julie’s right about Brian Williams. I heard what he said and took it in the (I thought obvious) benign way: we’ve got guys who are willing to risk life and limb, as well. That was the moral equivalence he pointed out, not the moral equivalence of aims or causes!
He was interviewed by Brian Lamb shortly before taking over anchor duties and said that, among other things, he reads the Claremont Review. And he’s obviously well-disposed to middle America, including religious-America. He’s added a good deal more coverage of religion-in-America - and it’s positive, not "Lord, what fools these belivers be." And the night of the British terror-plot arrests, he gave a stirring end-of-broadcast speech, saying that we have enemies and they are evil.

I should add that Mike Wallace was utterly pathetic during his interview with the Iranian president.

As a Associate Provost I expect better from you. First off, Mike was quoting the Iranian President on the topic of where the "Zionist entity" should exist. Mike only said that it is "an argument". You are free to disagree with the argument but it is "an argument". An argument that makes logical sense.

Secondly, Brian Williams comment about Rangers and SEALs was specifically about persons willing to die in the service of thier country or cause. It was not a comment on the nature of causes or whether they were morally equivalent.

It is pretty shocking that an associate provost would get something which requires minimal reading comprehension so wrong. Similarly sad is the fact that none of the other commentators pointed it out.

Sometimes you could just weep. How do these idiots rise so high? Or is there a metamorphosis created from success?