Hayes apologizes for “heroes” comments
posted at 2:41 pm on May 29, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
After an avalanche of criticism from his Sunday commentary, MSNBC weekend host and editor of The Nation Chris Hayes apologized for his comments on servicemembers who gave their lives in defense of the country:
On Sunday, in discussing the uses of the word “hero” to describe those members of the armed forces who have given their lives, I don’t think I lived up to the standards of rigor, respect and empathy for those affected by the issues we discuss that I’ve set for myself. I am deeply sorry for that.
As many have rightly pointed out, it’s very easy for me, a TV host, to opine about the people who fight our wars, having never dodged a bullet or guarded a post or walked a mile in their boots. Of course, that is true of the overwhelming majority of our nation’s citizens as a whole. One of the points made during Sunday’s show was just how removed most Americans are from the wars we fight, how small a percentage of our population is asked to shoulder the entire burden and how easy it becomes to never read the names of those who are wounded and fight and die, to not ask questions about the direction of our strategy in Afghanistan, and to assuage our own collective guilt about this disconnect with a pro-forma ritual that we observe briefly before returning to our barbecues.
But in seeking to discuss the civilian-military divide and the social distance between those who fight and those who don’t, I ended up reinforcing it, conforming to a stereotype of a removed pundit whose views are not anchored in the very real and very wrenching experience of this long decade of war. And for that I am truly sorry.
That didn’t satisfy all of Hayes’ critics. A group called Silver Star Families wants Hayes fired:
An angry Steve Newton, Founder of the Silver Star Families of America, called on Chris Hayes to resign or be terminated for his recent comments on MSNBC on the fallen of the United States Military.
“Mr. Hayes comments that he is somehow “uncomfortable” with the word “hero” to describe our fallen Soldiers are reprehensible. As with a lot of the pundits in Washington he seems unable to separate politics from the sacrifices of our military.”
He continued, “He seems to have no sense of the hurt his words will bring to the families and friends of those who have paid the ultimate price for his freedom. I would strongly suggest another line of work for Mr. Hayes that might increase his empathy and his love of country—say in the military.”
While I understand how Chris Hayes made Newton and the families of those killed in service to our nation feel, for what reason would Hayes be fired? He’s paid to have an opinion. Granted, this opinion is out there on the fringe, but take another look at the video from Sunday. Hayes didn’t foam at the mouth, slander or libel anyone, or call for the overthrow of the United States. The opinion might offend a great number of people, but Hayes appeared to be at least sincere and somewhat thoughtful in his presentation of it. Ed Schultz can be more offensive when he clears his throat than Hayes was in this segment. His apology comes across as sincere and fully accepting of responsibility for his own words, not a “sorry if you were offended by my brilliance” non-apology apology that is so fashionable in media and politics on both sides of the aisle.
Hayes is certainly open to criticism, as are we all, for what he writes and says. Honest opinions offered by opinion journalists shouldn’t result in demands for dismissals merely because almost everyone disagrees with what was said or written, with or without an apology. We can offer our opposing views without chasing someone from the open market of ideas, and the better ideas will prevail. An apology should be sufficient, and in the case of MSNBC, rather noteworthy.
What do you think? Take the poll:
Related Posts:
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
heh
via drudge
cmsinaz on May 20, 2013 at 8:24 PM
i just had to click on the linky
poor girl…
cmsinaz on May 20, 2013 at 8:27 PM
Snort.
Resist We Much on May 20, 2013 at 8:29 PM
Occam is killing himself with his own razor.
Bob's Kid on May 20, 2013 at 8:29 PM
That is just nuts!
VegasRick on May 20, 2013 at 8:35 PM
Oh, My…Just When You Thought That It Couldn’t Get Any Worse… Obama’s IRS Went After A Survivor Of A Japanese Concentration Camp For Her Political Speech
Seriously bad optics.
Resist We Much on May 20, 2013 at 8:45 PM
That reminds me of MoDo’s ‘sad sack’ article on the REB.
slickwillie2001 on May 20, 2013 at 8:46 PM
AUGGGHHH.
Brain bleach, please.
;-)
cheers
eon
eon on May 20, 2013 at 8:57 PM
Needs a boyfriend. Plain and simple.
Axe on May 20, 2013 at 9:08 PM
Sorry. Sold separately.
lol
cheers
Resist We Much on May 20, 2013 at 9:14 PM
Of course, you’re not Jonesing for the position.
Resist We Much on May 20, 2013 at 9:16 PM
you’ve. no. idea.
Axe on May 20, 2013 at 9:18 PM
From the look of the ratings, even the low information voters are leaving MSNBC. You really can’t blame them, it’s one thing to be considered low information, it’s quite another to be considered stupid and anyone who takes MSNBC serious is in the stupid category. About the closest thing they have to sanity is Morning Joe and there are a lot of times they’re off on cloud 9 too.
bflat879 on May 20, 2013 at 10:03 PM
These people really do smell President Obama’s farts .. and then rate them
J_Crater on May 20, 2013 at 10:12 PM
Even SNL is openly mocking MSNBC.
slickwillie2001 on May 20, 2013 at 10:12 PM
MSNBC: Where We Listen To The Voices In Our Heads!
pilamaye on May 20, 2013 at 10:24 PM
All fever swamp logic is ironclad and inexorable…
elgeneralisimo on May 20, 2013 at 10:52 PM
This will leave a mark. The Dems will become increasingly aggressive on this because it potentially impacts them in their own districts. The scandal is a national one but the victims are scattered in every state and every decent sized municipality. T
The national story is morphing into a local news story. It is becoming a human interest story for local tea party groups on page 3 of the local paper. These are neighbors who (while they may not agree with their politics) don’t look like the toothless white supremacists they’ve been made out to be. When victims of outside IRS bullying can be found in congressional districts or local tea party groups are contacted by the local media for comments……a politician’s first instinct is self preservation. This creates real problems for the White House.
When heretics are being burnt, it is dangerous to come to their defense. I expect Democrats to begin collecting wood.
R Square on May 21, 2013 at 12:27 AM
Bishop!
KCB on May 21, 2013 at 12:41 AM
This is why Republicans need to only appoint Conservatives into office. The “appointed by Bush” meme is infuriating. They wish to pass the blame, as they always do, to him. Also, if he had appointed a Conservative rather than a liberal, we might not be having this mess.
Theophile on May 21, 2013 at 1:34 AM
It’s also because Fox and CNN have actually been covering news stories with seriousness while MSNBC is adrift in their Obama echo chamber.
Case in point, on May 6th, CNN was in non-stop rolling coverage on the three Cleveland women who escaped captivity (they were able to afford to as HLN was unofficially renamed the Jody Arias Circus Channel). Fox went all-in on Benghazi (with O’Reilly and Hannity), then split coverage between Benghazi and Cleveland. It was actually a good night for both networks, as Fox had a leg-up on the start of what is becoming Scandal-a-palooza and CNN didn’t terribly botch up their coverage in Cleveland (at least until the following morning).
And MSNBC ignored both stories, devoting their time to the predictable (and boring) ad hominum attacks on conservatives with Maddow and Looney Larry. It was as if they had nothing to report on while attempting to defend Obama at the same time. They looked lost and tone-deaf when they should have been reporting the news.
That night, coinciding with MSNBC’s unbelievable brain fart of replacing the liberal caricature of Rush (and public union lackey) Ed Schultz with “Up Yours” host Chris Hayes, could be tied into the network’s major ratings free-fall of late.
And it really says a lot when David Shuster takes down his former network the way he did. I would have expected it from Olbermann, but not from Shuster.
Myron Falwell on May 21, 2013 at 1:47 AM
The walls of the place must stink from the years of ooze thrown at them to see what sticks. Ah such is journolism. They could start fresh (new studio) and just work from the facts. Revolutionary I know, and given these usual suspects we’ll no doubt witness insight unlike anything we’ve seen in decades.
Such as: “This whole I.R.S. kerfuffle can be summed up to one thing-It’s these cans! They hate these cans!!”
onomo on May 21, 2013 at 7:11 AM
Germany the beginning of WWII.
Adolph speaks:
“I Invaded Poland, Czechoslovakia? That’s a lie.”
News1: “But here are the pictures of the bodies and your swastikas on the tanks…”
Adolph: “Why, was I never told about this? It had to be some underling like Herr Bush. I can assure you that I will put a stop to this”(right after we conquer the world.)
News1: “Nice guy that Adolph–did you see the way his dog loves him?”
News2: “I believe he’s a man of honor and will keep his word. Where shall we toss these pictures?”
Don L on May 21, 2013 at 8:03 AM
S…..T…..R……E……T……C…..H……..
CurtZHP on May 21, 2013 at 8:52 AM
So Al-JaCurrent is ripping MSNBC for bending over too much?
Heh.
MNHawk on May 21, 2013 at 8:58 AM
Comcast would be better off firing everyone at MSNBC and simply relaunch the channel with a new identity, new everything. It can’t be saved in any way, shape or form.
Myron Falwell on May 21, 2013 at 9:04 AM
Sounds desperate.
TimBuk3 on May 21, 2013 at 9:07 AM
Yeah, Allahp, that spot-on sums up the scumplicit slimestream media.
And what does Shuster mean–when was MessNBC not the place for utter ignorance?
stukinIL4now on May 21, 2013 at 9:17 AM
What’s even more hilarious about stories like this is that these are the same folks who repeatedly accuse the GOP of being conspiracy theorists when they’re trying to get to the bottom of these scandals, and then they concoct a ridiculous conspiracy theory like this. You can’t make this stuff up!
scalleywag on May 21, 2013 at 9:24 AM
Five star comment. It could be applied to SO MANY THINGS related to these “Republican Scandals”.
scalleywag on May 21, 2013 at 9:27 AM
Stuck.
On.
Stupid.
dpduq on May 21, 2013 at 9:42 AM
In the midst of a political scandal that dwarfs Nixon’s Watergate, Democrats / the Obama administration is feverishly scrambling to come up with ANYTHING to head off the appropriate CRIMINAL investigation and IMPEACHMENT proceedings that should be coming!
easyt65 on May 21, 2013 at 9:49 AM
History will not look kindly on the LSM during this time period…
They have “mostly” chosen advocacy over honest journalism…
It is truly a sad time in the Republic regarding this specific matter…
Khun Joe on May 21, 2013 at 10:12 AM
Sorry to be later to party, but here is my theory:
Barrack Hussein Obama Jr. is Really a GOP mole whose sole purpose is to be so bad at his ‘Job’ that he will destroy the concept Socialism and the National Democratic party.
How else could you explain someone so inept at being the Preezy that he would destroy his own ideology and party?
Galt2009 on May 21, 2013 at 10:16 AM
The core of Socialist thinking. Pathetic.
gregbert on May 21, 2013 at 10:20 AM
To quote the King of Snarkdom, “As theories go, I’d say it’s 51-percent-assed.”
scalleywag on May 21, 2013 at 10:21 AM
Mother Jones…the leader of the This Is A Republic Scandal pack…next to Little Green Footballs.
scalleywag on May 21, 2013 at 10:22 AM
Sadly, there is at least a semblance of truth to this lie. IMO the GOP openly is an enemy of citizen control of government. The co-ruling parties’ will-honed game of good cop, bad cop, doesn’t sway me a bit.
It was they that destroyed Palin and attacked the citizen led tea- party. Karl Rove has them sent on a mission to destroy the tea party less they get uppity again and the GOP is behind that.
That being said; on Benghazi, IRS, AP-gate: let’s not blame WWII Japan for invading Poland! The left owns that…er, lock, stock, and barrel, but both parties are the enemy of a free citizen run republic. Unless you didn’t notice Schumer asking if his conspirators in the gang of eight got their usual pass (from the GOP) to destroy America with their “friends across the aisle.”
Don L on May 21, 2013 at 10:25 AM
Heh! Well, it’s a bit more than 51% but I figured I’d throw it out there.. :-)
Galt2009 on May 21, 2013 at 10:35 AM
MSNBC has a total of 5 viewers
Cause meet effect
neyney on May 21, 2013 at 10:56 AM
Dear Tom:
Facts? Do you have any . . . I mean somewhere other than on the teleprompter?
EB
EdmundBurke247 on May 21, 2013 at 11:06 AM
This is reminiscent of an old “Doonesbury” cartoon dating back to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. In it, the Soviet ambassador to the UN is trying to explain the invasion as the result of a CIA conspiracy; when asked incredulously by another ambassador, “Are you saying that the CIA asked for a Soviet invasion?” the Russian shouts in reply, “The CIA is capable of anything!” followed by, “It’s true, dammit!” while even the other communist ambassadors start breaking into laughter.
MSNBC’s performance here is emblematic of the liberal propensity to engage in pretzel logic in pathetic efforts to force the real world into conformance with their own Bizarro World cartoon existence. I don’t think that they’re trying to persuade anyone who isn’t already a member of their incestuous inhalers-of-each-other’s-exhale society as much as they are trying to buck up themselves. ANYTHING is better than letting reality crash through the barrier.
“One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool.”
- George Orwell
Spurius Ligustinus on May 21, 2013 at 12:00 PM
I think we should get rid of the concept of tax exempt organizations.
Instead, we should have a very, very, very streamlined tax code (perhaps a flat tax, hmmmm?) and low tax rates.
This business of deciding this entity or that entity does not have to pay taxes for this or that reason is another way to give the gov’t power. Power to decide what is, and is not, charitable, educational, religious, etc. Power to favor some groups over others.
And, let’s not forget that many “not-for-profit” organizations make huge amounts of money and pay their officers enormous salaries (and indeed, the % of money that goes to “charitable, educational or religious” stuff is pretty low as most of the money is eaten by overhead – i.e. salaries).
meanwhile, there are plenty of struggling businesses that make no money.
Look, I understand the motivation to make church’s tax-exempt, but I would rather all church’s pay taxes than, for instance, Scientology, be tax exempt. I understand the motivation for making charities tax-exempt, but too many charities are really just scams for raising money to pay big salaries to executives.
the whole tax exempt thing is simply far to abused by, for instance, celebrities – each with his/her own foundation that does next to nothing. And it is abused on the other hand by Gov’t – giving the gov’t the power to make these decisions means people are at their mercy – begging to get the status.
Just treat everything and everyone equally. If a charity is wildly successful in raising money, then some of that money goes to taxes. A church will have to pay taxes, etc.
You want to start an organization to save historic architecture in NYC? Fine. Do it. Don’t ask for special consideration from the Gov’t.
Why should some cause I find repugnant be tax exempt (and saying this, I know those on the left find causes I like repugnant and those causes should not be any more tax exempt)? Why should a religion I despise be tax free? Why should media matters not pay taxes?
Looking at it from the context of property taxes – I see tons of storefront churches with maybe 2 or 3 “parishioners” (read family members) that allow the property to be tax free. Or “museums” that charge fees and rent space for occasions (weddings, corporate gigs, etc.). Why do I pay property tax but they do not?
I just think there should not be those that pay tax and those who do not based on the gov’t's determination. That gives the gov’t too much power and lends itself to abuse by both the gov’t and the applicants.
Or, at the very least we should reform the tax-exempt criteria to make it much, much more difficult to achieve. the entity should be truly engaged in education, truly engaged in charity or truly engaged in religious purposes.
People will argue “but some really good organizations that do good work will be hurt, like the NRA or the American RedCross.” I say, nonsense. the only organizations that will be hurt are those that get by entirely on their tax exempt status – organizations like Media Matters. Organizations that do real good for society, that people really appreciate, will continue to receive donations. Sure, they will take a hit to pay taxes, but the NRA will continue to get donations as will ARC.
(This all assumes, of course, that rates are lowered and the Tax Code is reformed to make compliance much cheaper and easier).
Monkeytoe on May 21, 2013 at 4:43 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2