Tag Archives: mma

Leonardo DiCaprio Says Viking Movie Will Focus On ‘Barbaric People’

‘I don’t think there’s been a really fantastic Viking movie ever made,’ he tells MTV News of Mel Gibson-directed project. By Eric Ditzian, with reporting by Josh Horowitz Leonardo DiCaprio Photo: MTV News In one of last year’s stranger bits of Hollywood moviemaking news, word dropped in December that Mel Gibson and Leonardo DiCaprio were teaming up for a brutal period drama about Viking culture . Mel would direct, Leo would strap on the horn-bedecked Viking helmet, and the world would surely fork over cash to check out what that duo created. Yet projects come and go. One need only visit DiCaprio’s IMDb page to see how many films he reportedly has in the works. Is this Viking epic really going to happen? Most definitely, the actor told MTV News. “I always wanted to do a Viking movie,” he said. “I’m a big history buff, and I don’t think there’s been a really fantastic Viking movie ever made. Those were some of the most barbaric people ever in history.” Expect barbarism to be on full display in the movie, as it was during earlier Gibson films like “Braveheart,” “The Passion of the Christ” and “Apocalypto.” DiCaprio, for his part, has done the period-drama thing before — “The Quick and the Dead,” “Romeo + Juliet,” “Gangs of New York” — but never in something that promises to be as raw, and perhaps as bloody, as this Viking flick. But ask DiCaprio why he wants to make this movie with Gibson, and his answer will have nothing to do with amassing a gnarly body count. “I’d love to see Mel Gibson’s version of that, because certainly with ‘Apocalypto’ and some of the other films he’s made, he’s been able to transport me back in time unlike very many filmmakers have been able to,” he said. Are you looking forward to what Mel and Leo come up with? Let us know in the comments! For breaking news, celebrity columns, humor and more — updated around the clock — visit MTVMoviesBlog.com . Related Videos MTV Rough Cut: ‘Inception’ Related Photos Frame-By-Frame: “Inception”

See original here:
Leonardo DiCaprio Says Viking Movie Will Focus On ‘Barbaric People’

Rosie O’Donnell Getting New Show On NBC?

The rumor mill concerning Rosie O’Donnell landing a new daytime show heated up Monday when Gossip Cop reported the comedienne is in talks with NBC. Apparently, the stumbling block is that the broadcasting company wants an out clause in case Rosie has a blow up like she did on ABC’s “The View.” As NewsBusters reported on May 23, 2007, O’Donnell and Elisabeth Hasselbeck got into quite a fight about the war in Iraq that was so caustic it ended up being Rosie’s last day on the show. She and ABC agreed to terminate her contract days later. With this in mind, according to Gossip Cop, NBC isn’t taking any chances: The show, as we  previously reported , is looking to launch in the fall of 2011, and will be produced by  Robert F. Kennedy ‘s documentary filmmaking daughter,  Rory Kennedy , along with TV veterans  Dick Robertson   and  Scott Carlin . But there’s one sticking point, says our impeccable insider. According to our source, “NBC wants an out if she implodes like she did on ‘The View.'”  If this is correct, one certainly can’t blame NBC for wanting to hedge its bet. On the other hand, if you’re concerned about the behavior of someone you’re entering into a contract with, isn’t the wisest move to NOT put yourself in a position where said individual could end up embarrassing your organization? As such, why is NBC even considering this risk given O’Donnell’s background? Maybe the folks at NBC ought to watch this before they sign:

See more here:
Rosie O’Donnell Getting New Show On NBC?

Networks Defend ‘Consensus Builder’ Kagan; Downplay Military Recruiter Ban

The Monday morning shows on CBS, ABC, and NBC all worked to portray President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan as a moderate and open-minded legal scholar, downplaying her liberal views. All three network programs also minimized her controversial decision to ban military recruiters on campus while Dean of Harvard Law School. On CBS’s Early Show, legal correspondent Jan Crawford touted Kagan as “an intellectual heavyweight and consensus builder.” Crawford noted how Republicans had “several lines of attack” against Kagan and would “try to paint her as a liberal activist.” Crawford herself recently described Kagan as having “stood shoulder to shoulder with the liberal left.” On ABC’s Good Morning America, correspondent Claire Shipman did a fawning segment on Kagan in the 8AM ET hour, describing the former Dean as “intellectual” and “full of personal charm” during her tenure at Harvard. Shipman claimed that Kagan had “a determination to be open-minded,” despite banning military recruiters from the university’s campus over the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. On that issue, Shipman explained that despite Kagan’s decision being unpopular “among student military vets…. Iraq War veteran Kurt White says they were won over by Kagan’s persistent outreach , another example of her political skills.” Shipman failed to mention that White would be testifying on Kagan’s behalf during the confirmation hearings. Shipman went so far to portray Kagan as open-minded that she touted how “though her political views are quite different than his, she honored conservative justice Antonin Scalia at the law school a few years ago, calling him a great justice.” Shipman even argued: ” It’s an openness to all voices that worries some liberals, but colleagues argue Kagan’s style is just what the Court needs.” NBC’s Today did not provide quite as strong a defense of Kagan, but a report by legal correspondent Pete Williams did feature a soundbite from Kagan supporter and SCOTUS blog founder Tom Goldstein declaring: “Elena Kagan isn’t a political partisan.” Williams, like Shipman, attempted to downplay the military recruiter ban: “Republicans also accuse Kagan of treating the military unfairly when she was dean of Harvard Law….But student military veterans say she made them feel welcome at Harvard and praised them for their service, even though she strongly opposed the policy on gays in the military.”   Here is a full transcript of Shipman’s June 28 segment on Good Morning America: 8:15AM GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is preparing to take the stand for Senate confirmation hearings this afternoon, and they’re meant to tease out the nominee’s judicial philosophy. Well for some clues, Claire Shipman talked to some people who knew Kagan during the most substantial legal job of her career, the first woman dean of Harvard Law School. CLAIRE SHIPMAN, ABC correspondent: Good morning, George, well that’s right. We decided to look for clues at Harvard Law School where she had a very distinctive style. She was only there for six years, made a large number of changes. She was intellectual, yes, but also full of personal charm, say colleagues, and a determination to be open-minded. It’s an institution usually resistant to change, some might say an immovable object, until it was confronted with the irresistible force of Dean Elena Kagan. ELENA KAGAN: This is a wonderful time, and it’s so good to be with you. LAURENCE TRIBE, Harvard Law professor: I’ve watched Harvard Law School go through lots of transitions, but there has never been anything like Elena Kagan. MARTHA MINOW, Harvard Law dean: She was going to turn over every stone at this institution and figure out a way to make it better. SHIPMAN: She thinks big. MINOW: She thinks big. SHIPMAN: But she was savvy enough at times to start small, offering perks like free coffee for students. Then bigger battles, fighting to hire more conservative professors like John Manning.   JOHN MANNING, Harvard Law professor: She felt that her job as dean was to foster an atmosphere in which all sorts of ideas would be presented. SHIPMAN: And selling a total curriculum overhaul, the first in a hundred years. KAGAN: For the most part, a first year curriculum now looks like what it looks like back in 1880. SHIPMAN: Some say her meteoric rise is impressive, but also suggests a calculating careerism. Two of her best friends, roommates at law school, say she’s just always just reveled in the work. JOHN BARRETT, friend of Kagan: A visual that I have, a memory, is her sitting at her desk with a cigarette and a pen and a book and a little desk lamp, and she could kind of grind it out for a long time. UNIDENTIFIED FRIEND OF KAGAN: I think what was clear was that she really loved the law, and reading about it, and thinking about it, and talking about it. SHIPMAN: Her time as dean wasn’t without controversy. She decided to renew a ban keeping military recruiters from using the career services office because of opposition to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. Support was high on campus, but not among student military vets. KURT WHITE, Harvard Law student: It didn’t seem like banning military recruiters from the law school campus was going to be something that was likely to lead to a change in this law. SHIPMAN: Still, Iraq War veteran Kurt White says they were won over by Kagan’s persistent outreach, another example of her political skills. WHITE: It was really her showing her appreciation for the military and being very supportive of us. SHIPMAN: And though her political views are quite different than his, she honored conservative justice Antonin Scalia at the law school a few years ago, calling him a great justice. MANNING: She as dean was able to recognize his accomplishments and celebrate them without reservation. SHIPMAN: It’s an openness to all voices that worries some liberals, but colleagues argue Kagan’s style is just what the Court needs. TRIBE: I think that her ability to find common ground, bring people along, see long-term implications, will make a very large impact on the Court. SHIPMAN: It’s certainly a good place to start hearings as a potential liberal justice when you have the support of a conservative justice, like justice Scalia. George, but of course the hearings will still be heated, they’ll look at that military recruitment issue, and also try to pin her down specifically on how she might rule on some controversial issues. STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s right, and in an election year, likely to get a lot of no votes as well. Okay Claire Shipman, thanks very much.

Read more from the original source:
Networks Defend ‘Consensus Builder’ Kagan; Downplay Military Recruiter Ban

No sex please, we’re astronauts: NASA…

There is no room for romance on board the cosy confines of the International Space Station, a NASA space shuttle commander said, when asked what would happen if astronauts had sex in space. “We are a group of professionals,” said Space Shuttle Discovery commander Alan Poindexter during a visit to Tokyo on Monday, after a reporter asked about the consequences if astronauts boldly went where probably no others have been. “We treat each other with respect and we have a great working relationship. Personal relationships are not … an issue,” said a serious-faced Poindexter. “We don't have them and we won't.” Poindexter and his six crew members, including the first Japanese mother in space Naoko Yamazaki, were in Tokyo to talk about their two-week resupply mission to the International Space Station. The April voyage broke new ground by putting four women in orbit for the first time, with three female crew joining one woman already on the station. Sex in space may appear out of bounds but astronauts have been known to succumb to earthly passions. In 2007 former NASA astronaut Lisa Marie Nowak allegedly wore adult diapers when driving hundreds of miles across the United States without bathroom breaks to confront a suspected rival in a romance with a fellow astronaut. added by: eden49

"November Days" Filmed By Bike, Distributed By Bike

Photo still from Field Guide to November Days. “Field Guide to November Days” is a new film by Portland filmmakers Mary DeFreese and Nick Peterson that I really want to see. Not just because its two protagnists live a biking life (and the directors shot most of the film by bike). It’s also because DeFreese and Peterson are taking their 10-city film tour to show the movie at art film theaters, by bicycles. They started on June 10 from Vancouver, B.C. and will end in San Diego July 10. “There have been some scary things,” said DeFreese of the cycling film tour thus far. “In Tacoma, I thought someone … Read the full story on TreeHugger

See more here:
"November Days" Filmed By Bike, Distributed By Bike

WaPo Applauds Obama for Not Choosing ‘Outspoken Liberals’ for Supreme Court

On the day confirmation hearings begin for Obama Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, The Washington Post stresses on the front page that Kagan has been an “elusive GOP target.” The Post website summarized: “Republicans have struggled to find a compelling line of attack to take against the Supreme Court nominee. But their efforts have largely failed.” When Republicans nominate a Supreme Court justice, it’s the liberal media that aids their favorite activists in creating “compelling lines of attack.” But when Democrats do it, the journalists not only skip over the attacks, they also praise the Democrats for their political skills. Post reporters Anne Kornblut and Paul Kane suggested that the oil spill and the McChrystal hubbub have pushed Kagan out of attention, but also lauded the “skilled operatives” of Team Obama:   But it is also a measure of how skilled operatives have become at managing the process — and choosing nominees who are notable in part for their political blandness….  In part, the attention has been muted because Obama has not chosen outspoken liberals in either of his first two opportunities to influence the makeup of the court. Kagan, who would replace Justice John Paul Stevens, would not tilt the court’s ideological balance. So the stakes are lower than if she had been picked to replace a conservative, participants on both sides said. She is also an especially elusive target: a politically savvy operator who has no record of judicial rulings and has spent much of her career carefully positioning herself for the next step. Who else is elusive to the Post? Conservative activists, who are nowhere to be found in the Kornblut-Kane story — unlike a liberal lobbyist for People for the American Way. (Sen. Jeff Sessions is the only opposition figure quoted.) This claim, that Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor are baronesses of “blandness,” too “elusive” to be identified as liberals, is simply bizarre. To say that Sotomayor’s lobbying at left-wing Latino organizations or Kagan’s clerking for ultraliberal Justice Thurgood Marshall isn’t identifiably liberal is counter-factual. For contrast, please see The Washington Post’s front page story on Bush Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito on the first day of his confirmation hearings on January 9, 2006. He was a staunch Reaganite. The story relentlessly repeated how conservative he was. “Blandness” was not on the menu. Reporters Jo Becker and Dale Russakoff began:  The captains of the Reagan revolution at the Justice Department had two big concerns about a bookish new recruit named Samuel A. Alito Jr., who arrived in 1981: his blank slate as a conservative activist and his pedigree from a perceived bastion of legal liberalism. “I wouldn’t let most people from Yale Law School wash my car, let alone write my briefs,” said Michael A. Carvin, a political deputy at the department. Six years later, the revolutionaries saw Alito as one of them, tapping him to become U.S. attorney in New Jersey in 1987 and eventually, they hoped, a judge. Speaking on a New Jersey public affairs television program, the young prosecutor showcased the philosophy that had won the confidence of his Washington mentors. Asked his opinion of President Ronald Reagan’s nomination of Robert H. Bork to the Supreme Court, Alito gave a ringing defense of the conservative icon he said had been “unjustifiably rejected” by the Senate in one of the most ideologically polarizing nomination battles in decades. There weren’t any professional liberal activists in the piece — other than the Post reporters themselves.

More here:
WaPo Applauds Obama for Not Choosing ‘Outspoken Liberals’ for Supreme Court

Geithner Miscasts the 1930s at the G-20 Summit; AP’s Aversa Lets Him Get Away With It

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is admonishing the leaders of other countries attending the G-20 summit in Toronto to keep spending like there’s no tomorrow, because if they spend like there’s no tomorrow, there will still be a tomorrow. But in the gospel according to Geithner, if they don’t spend like there’s no tomorrow, there really won’t be a tomorrow. With such blubbery logic, is it any wonder that America’s stature with the rest of the world is plummeting? Earlier this evening, Brent Baker at NewsBusters pointed to an ABC report warning that a second recession might be on the horizon if the G20 nations don’t follow the spend-spend-spend recommendations of the Obama administration. In his attempt to convince the rest of the world of the folly of being fiscally responsible, Geithner has invoked a supposed “lesson” from the 1930s. Back in mid-May, I happened to stumble on the fundamental untruth of his assertion, and will demonstrate it shortly. The Associated Press’s Jeannine Aversa let Geithner’s contention pass without challenge in her Saturday report on the summit. Here are the three relevant paragraphs from her report: Asked if the global economy could slip back into another “double dip” recession, Geithner said the answer to that question hinges on decisions made by world leaders. “It is within the capacity of the people who are going to be in those rooms together in the next few days to avoid that outcome,” he said. One of the mistakes made in the 1930s was that countries pulled back their recovery efforts too soon, prolonging the Great Depression, he said. Geithner said the United States doesn’t want to see that happen again. “What we want to do is continue to emphasize that we are going to avoid that mistake,” he said. “It’s only been a year since the world economy stopped collapsing … it will take some time to heal.” What follows is a chart showing U.S. spending and GDP from 1923 to 1940, with a partial list of unemployment rates from roughly the same time frame immediately to its right: Hoover began the federal spending ramp-up in 1931 and 1932, but Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his New Deal took spending as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) to the 9, well over double the level of the Coolidge years. He kept it there until 1940, after which pre-war and wartime spending kicked in. Despite all of what FDR did and tried, unemployment stayed persistently and unacceptably high. The gospel according to Geithner, as well as hard-core Keynesians like Paul Krugman at the New York Times, would tell us that FDR held up his end of the bargain by keeping the spending spigots open during the eight years that ended in 1940, and that it was the Europeans pulling back who prolonged the recession (Krugman even believes that FDR didn’t spend enough). One would therefore expect that folks living in countries that didn’t hold up their end of the spend-spend-spend bargain during that decade must have endured even more hardships than U.S. citizens did. The trouble is, as I discovered quite by accident on May 13, is that this isn’t at all what happened. In a Wall Street Journal column , Daniel Henninger quoted an eminent European economist who had passed away less than two years earlier. In the process of making a point that Henninger used about the mediocre performance of Europe during the 1990s, this historian also, when seen in the context of the graphics just presented, also made a huge point about the Europe of the 1930s: Angus Maddison, the eminent European historian of world economic development who died days before Europe’s debt crisis, wrote in 2001: “The most disturbing aspect of West European performance since 1973 has been the staggering rise in unemployment. In 1994-8 the average level was nearly 11% of the labor force. This is higher than the depressed years of the 1930s.” Whoa. Maddison’s assertion leads to these key factoids and points: Europe’s unemployment during the 1930s seldom if ever topped 11%. U.S. unemployment during the 1930s was always above Europe’s level by a few points; another source I found indicates that U.S. unemployment at one point dropped to about 12% in 1937 , but the point still stands. Europe’s “failure” to spend as Geithner thinks it should have during the 1930s doesn’t seem to have hurt it nearly as much as FDR’s insistence on continued spending hurt us. If there’s a lesson here, it’s that, absent contrary evidence, Tim Geithner is wrong and the Europeans of the 1930s were right. It would also seem that Europe’s renewed intent to rein in government spending is a wiser course than the spend-spend-spend strategy of the Obama administration (how serious the European countries are about restraining spending remains to be seen; if Europe tries to solve its problem primarily with tax increases, all bets are off). Jeannine Aversa’s relay of Geithner’s more than likely false assertion about the 1930s deserved much more skepticism that it received. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

More here:
Geithner Miscasts the 1930s at the G-20 Summit; AP’s Aversa Lets Him Get Away With It

Christopher Nolan Finds Meaning In ‘Superman’ Adaptation

‘Whether you’re doing a ‘Batman’ or ‘Superman’ film, it’s all about story first,’ ‘Inception’ director says. By Josh Wigler, with reporting by Josh Horowitz Christopher Nolan Photo: MTV News Of the many accomplishments that director Christopher Nolan achieved with “Batman Begins” in 2005, one of the greatest involved his ability to craft a compelling comic book adaptation while maintaining a surprising level of realism. Nolan’s down-to-earth, non-superhero approach to the Batman mythos owed much thanks to the character’s lack of superpowers — but when he puts his stamp on Warner Bros. and DC Entertainment’s forthcoming “Superman” reboot, he’ll likely have to try a different approach with the invulnerable Man of Steel. As the producer of the upcoming “Superman” film, Nolan is already hard at work on the story alongside his “Dark Knight” collaborators Jonah Nolan and David S. Goyer, but the project remains so early in development that casting hasn’t even been considered yet. “I haven’t even thought about it, to be honest,” Nolan told MTV News during a recent press junket for “Inception,” his forthcoming thriller starring Leonardo DiCaprio. “All of these things, whether you’re doing a ‘Batman’ or ‘Superman’ film, it’s all about story first. It’s all about figuring out exactly the tone and the meaning of the story and how you’re going to approach it. Casting comes later. All of those considerations come later.” Even if casting isn’t an immediate concern, Nolan already has plenty of history to look toward as he and his collaborators find the story for “Superman.” For Nolan himself, the filmmaker considers director Richard Donner’s first adaptation in 1978 as something to aspire to. “I was hugely struck by the Donner films in the ’70s when I was a kid,” he said. “In 1978, I saw [“Superman”] and it had such epic scope to it. It took on this incredible, iconic figure and gave that iconic figure an appropriate framing. It made quite an impression on me. It’s definitely one of my childhood touchstones of what epic cinema can be.” Check out everything we’ve got on “Inception.” For breaking news and previews of the latest comic book movies — updated around the clock — visit SplashPage.MTV.com . Related Videos MTV Rough Cut: ‘Inception’

Read more:
Christopher Nolan Finds Meaning In ‘Superman’ Adaptation

Slow Joe Biden’s Subpar Saturday: Part 2 — The Slippery Growth Assertion

As pathetic as Joe Biden’s thin-skinned “Why do you have to be such a smart-a**” comment to a Milwaukee-area custard shop manager was yesterday (covered at NewsBusters ; at BizzyBlog ), it wasn’t even the Vice President’s worst Wisconsin Saturday moment. A far worse moment, in terms of familiarity with the truth, occurred as Biden rewrote history and unilaterally revised economic growth upward in a speech to Democrats in support of Senator Russ Feingold’s reelection. In a CBS News online report by Stephanie Condon that I suspect will not make it to the airwaves Biden was dour and downbeat, while misstating economic reality: Biden: We Can’t Recover All the Jobs Lost Vice President Joe Biden gave a stark assessment of the economy today, telling an audience of supporters, “there’s no possibility to restore 8 million jobs lost in the Great Recession.” Appearing at a fundraiser with Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) in Milwaukee, the vice president remarked that by the time he and President Obama took office in 2008, the gross domestic product had shrunk and hundreds of thousands of jobs had been lost. “We inherited a godawful mess,” he said, adding there was “no way to regenerate $3 trillion that was lost. Not misplaced, lost.” … Biden said today the economy is improving and noted that in the past four quarters, there has been 4 percent growth in the economy. Over the last five months, more than 500,000 private sector jobs were created. I have no idea how Biden arrived at his $3 trillion figure; I’m guessing Ms. Condon doesn’t either. One very minor error: The Vice President’s claim that “more than 500,000 private sector jobs were created” is false, but barely. On a seasonally adjusted basis, it’s 495,000, per the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The big error: GDP growth has been nowhere near 4% during the past four quarters, no matter how you define “the past four quarters” (compounding was ignored for simplicity’s sake): The 2.5% estimate for 2Q10 is based on the assertion in this Friday Associated Press report that “Economists expect slower growth ahead” from 1Q10’s annualized 2.7%. Biden’s economic growth assertion is nowhere near true no matter how one interprets it. If 2Q10 growth comes in at an annualized 5.5% or higher, readers can come back and crow that Biden was really right. Good luck with that. Stephanie Condon should have known better than to blindly relay Biden’s false assertion. Does anyone else besides me think that she would have checked it out if Dick Cheney had said it instead? Photo at top right is at CBS link via AP. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

See more here:
Slow Joe Biden’s Subpar Saturday: Part 2 — The Slippery Growth Assertion

CNN’s Kurtz & CBS’s Logan Miss the Point of MRC/NewsBusters Clip of Media Touting Obama’s ‘Brilliant’ Choice of Petraeus

On Sunday’s Reliable Sources on CNN, host Howard Kurtz played a clip that was posted both on NewsBusters and on NB’s parent organization the Media Research Center’s Web site showing that correspondents on several broadcast and news networks lavished excessive praise on President Obama by calling his decision to replace General Stanley McChrystal with General David Petraeus a “brilliant” decision. The CNN host played a portion of the clip which was played on Thursday’s The O’Reilly Factor on FNC. But, as he brought up the clip with guest Lara Logan of CBS News, Kurtz missed the point as he suggested that the MRC/NewsBusters was somehow complaining that the “liberal media are in love with David Petraeus and they’re falling into line,” when, in reality, the point was that since Petraeus is so obviously well qualified for the position, it hardly takes genius or “brilliance” to name him to the post. Logan, accepting Kurtz’s flawed premise, responded: “Well, if they had said it was a bad decision, then it would be ‘the liberal media hate David Petraeus and they’re not falling into line.’” She later concluded that the decision was, in fact, “brilliant” on Obama’s part: “The only way he had to ensure, to silence the critics and really to move on, this reassured the troops, this reassured the commanders, this reassured people who were in favor of it – the Afghans, the allies. That’s why people are calling it brilliant, maybe because it ‘was’ brilliant.” Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the June 27 Reliable Sources on CNN: HOWARD KURTZ: Bill O’Reilly, on his Fox News show, played a clip – some clips had been put together by the conservative Media Research Center, the Newsbusters site. I want to show that to you now. CHIP REID, CBS NEWS : Sounds like a pretty brilliant decision really. JIM MIKLASZEWSKI. NBC NEWS : This is nothing less than a stunning development, Brian, and, quite frankly, at a quick glance, almost brilliant. CHUCK TODD, NBC NEWS : Politically, in this town, it’s going to be seen as a brilliant choice by the President- WOLF BLITZER, CNN: -a very brilliant move to tap General Petraeus- KURTZ: So the suggestion is that the liberal media are in love with David Petraeus and they’re falling into line. LARA LOGAN, CBS NEWS: Well, if they had said it was a bad decision, then it would be “the liberal media hate David Petraeus and they’re not falling into line.” The one line is it’s very hard to find something wrong with this decision by the President because there was only one general in the United States Army who has the political weight and influence in Washington to survive this. Anyone else going into that position who wasn’t tested, who wasn’t proven, who didn’t have political connections, would have been a lame duck. They would have been able to do nothing. President Obama faced a serious choice here. Was his strategy going to die with General McChrystal? Because there’s a lot of opposition from very powerful people in Washington who want to move to a very different model of counterterrorism and not counterinsurgency. The only way he had to ensure, to silence the critics and really to move on, this reassured the troops, this reassured the commanders, this reassured people who were in favor of it – the Afghans, the allies. That’s why people are calling it brilliant, maybe because it “was” brilliant.

The rest is here:
CNN’s Kurtz & CBS’s Logan Miss the Point of MRC/NewsBusters Clip of Media Touting Obama’s ‘Brilliant’ Choice of Petraeus