5: Hardball
6: Tucker
7: Abrams
8: Countdown
9: New Maddow show
10: docbloc

Would work a little better than repeats of HB…

Why they would can Tucker Carlson first and not address Morning Joe’s pathetic ratings or Live with Dan Abrams’ lack of building an audience after “Scarborough Country” ceased is beyond me. I enjoy Carlson’s show so I guess I’m biased, but still MSNBC has bigger ratings problems on its hands.
Also, they could cut out one of the Hardballs - I’ve always thought Tucker would do better at 7 (albeit modestly) and move Matthews to 6.

I think Rachel Maddow would make for a good show host…very smart and has a sense of humor. She is light years more qualified and would do a better job than Rosie O’Donnell would have.

There hasn’t been much talk about Hannity and Colmes’ softening ratings, particularly in the demo. If MSNBC went straight at them with a smarter, better balanced debate show, I think in time they could gain a “Countdown”-sized foothold.

However, I think they’d have to come up with a generic name for the show a la “Crossfire” because “Smerconish and Maddow” or vice versa resembles a sound that someone suffering from the flu makes.

The difference between much of the criticism directed at FNC versus directed at MSNBC/Olbermann is the content of the argument. FNC arguments frequently go: “They’re a tool of the right…” or “They cut off the mic of people who disagree…” all of which are provably false. MSNBC/Olbermann criticism, however, frequently goes along the lines of: “They do not offer equal (or in some cases any) time to differing viewpoints…” or “They don’t qualify their programming as ‘opinion’ rather they still call it ‘news’…” all of which are legitimate criticism.

IMO, there is no need to attack someone out for voicing their point-of-view provided their claim is legitimate, only debate as needed. However, someone who resorts to using make-believe information and/or dishonest sources, deserves to be called out at every opportunity.

As for what I posted in response to “chris,” I stand by it. I am amazed that the same people who for years have been nitpicking every little thing FNC does, are now angry that they’re receiving some of the spotlight. They were much happier calling out FNC, while claiming the ‘journalistic ethics’ high-ground… then they are now that some people have started calling them out. They can give the criticism, but they can’t take it.

The argument “chris” made… the “Change the channel” argument, to me, is the epitome of hypocrisy when debating the two news channels. If “Change the channel if you don’t like it…” is good enough for MSNBC now… why wasn’t it good enough for “FNC” then?

Sheesh… it’s consistently amazing to me the powers those blogs have to put out lies like “O’Reilly cut’s the mic off of his guests all the time” and toadies just slurp it up. Sure it’s not the truth… but it’s fun to pretend.

I also like it how all of MSNBC’s fans get all hot and bothered when their favorite network is criticized. They start hurling around insults… telling people if they don’t like it, to just change the channel… and of the completely-missing-the-point statement “Just because you don’t agree with it…”

My question… where are they when FOX gets slammed? Where are they on the anti-FOX websites? How come they don’t tell those people to, “Change the channel!” You people sure can give it out… but man, you can’t take it back… not even a little bit. So fragile, it’s wonder you don’t have to wear bright orange stickers.

why not do me a favoer and you and the rest of those fox news nutjobs (viewers) and go have a séance of bill o reily
and stay in your “No Spin, I Will Cut Your Mic Off Zone”