Their being in the tank for Obama and utterly shameless about Clinton was not a move to the left, since Clinton was further to the left than Obama on nearly everything. If they had bothered with policy, they'd have had to admit that.

Their entire demeanor was that of a frat party, not even a left-pundit presentation.

Would that they were to the left, but in a responsible way. They didn't have to act like teenage boyz getting drunk.

The primaries might have had an entirely different outcome had they been responsible in their presentation of the Dems policies.

While McCain was surely exerting a modicum of pressure, they were not the reason NBC yanked KO and Matthews off the anchorbeat.  That pressure came primarily from within on the NBC (as opposed to MSNBC) side: Brokaw, Williams, probably Gregory as well.  Additionally, I believe that a venerable news organization like NBC really does have a sense of professional pride, and thus embarrassment at the degradation of the "brand" played a role.  External pressure, if it was exerted at all, was coming not from the right but rather from the Clintonite left.  

To make a further point that hadn't occurred to me before but seems fairly obvious now, the McCain camp and the right probably wouldn't WANT KO and Matthews off the beat.  They're probably disappointed at this development.  Think about it: the ultra-partisanship of MSNBC wasn't costing them any votes (95% of those viewers are lost to them anyway) and in all likelihood was helping to GAIN them votes.  

But Olbermann and Matthews (and Joe Klein and all of Fox) aren't like that.  They actively involve themselves as advocates within the campaign.  They don't actually work for any campaign (although sometimes you'd be hard-pressed to know it) but then can't seriously claim to be providing analysis either.

They demoted him because the Right demanded that they do so, because they are petrified of angering the Right, while they couldn't care less about complaints from the Left.  You're so drowning in your hatred for Keith Olbermann that you can't see that point, and are just so happy to see him demoted that you don't care about the underlying reasons.  That's shallow and petty.

Double standards matter.  If the police in a city are giving speeding tickets only to black residents, but not white residents, I suppose you're going to defend that behavior ("hey, the ones being ticketed are speeding") and criticize those who object on the ground that they're "defending speeders."  It may be true that those who are being ticketed deserve it because they're speeding, but selective enforcement is still a huge problem.

And then, things got ugly.  Whether it was his DKos diaries and the absolute unquestioning fandom there, his Rolling Stone interview, or the Bill Moyers seal of approval, I'm not sure.  But KO was no longer the underdog, and his outrage was ratings gold.  There was no incentive to dial back his outrage: if anything, that outrage could be used to drive the outrage of every single viewer.  He could now feed, enflame, and direct fury.

I've used the word 'outrage' over and over again so it means nothing - because that illustrates the impact that KO's 'outrage' has on me now.  When you're outraged at everything, you reach a point of ridiculousness.  KO is ridiculous.  He became so the minute he used a Special Comment to attack Hillary Clinton on Geraldine Ferraro's statement.  He did it again when he implied that Clinton was calling for Obama's assassination.  Did these Special Comments really measure up to previous versions, which had to do with the high crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush Administration?  Since when do misstatements quoted out of context equate to the evils of Abu Ghraib and extraordinary rendition?!

Oh, but he's taking the left to task, people said in his defense.  Excuse me, but (unprintable at TL)!  He couldn't even face Clinton during an interview!  He was reduced to sniping at her with his sycophants and dissecting her laugh for evil molecules once she was safely off camera.  How is that taking her to task?!  

Christ on a cracker, people, this a return to what got us George Bush for eight years -- a supine press that accepts whatever any Republican talking head says.  And you're right on board when right-wing corporate management scuttles anybody who criticizes McCain, leaving only the yes-men (yes-people?) of the press.

Biased punditry-based masquerading as news coverage is bad.  Very bad.

But what about the rest of the stuff cable news covers?  It's all missing coeds, car chases, explosions, fires, and celebrities.  All featuring their own pundits.

"Our expert on missing coeds, after these messages."

All covered with a tone verging on hysteria.  If not downright reaching it.

You're lucky to see any international news.  Rare to see a documentary.  And so on.