You were accused of bias?  Apparently I heard exactly what you and Lee were saying, because I didn't hear any bias.  It's hard to be "unbiased" when Obama is turning out to be the front runner!

You are very unbiased...I must say, the last Debates sponsored by ABC were a disaster.  RUdy Giuliani should have been given muzzle on his time allowed; My opinion only: He cannot think on his feet, he cannot maintain facts in his head, he stutters when he speaks; is this someone that we want running our country?  He does not communicate well spontaneously.  He appears to be yelling rather than addressing crowds of people. However, he spoke way too much and was given far too much airtime than other candidates, striking out at Fmr. Gvr. Mitt Romney. However, NBC continues to be my News caster of choice because of it's reporting integrity and accuracy and lack of bias. I have no idea where this particular viewer got any "bias" on your part?

Look to the parties making the accusation of bias. That accusation can't be that much of a surprise in this hothouse political environment where every breath someone takes is desperately parsed for meaning.

One other point: it's grating to me to hear pundits (Matthews, Olbermann, etc.) continually call Senator Clinton by her first name, but rarely use the same diminutive form of address for the men in the campaign. It's overly familiar and disrespectful.

Brian, As Managing editor I am asking you to but some balance into Chris Matthew's and Oberman's anchor coverage of the primary election. Find someone to stand up to his biased characterizations of Hillary based on no evidence. He called the Hillary supporters "dinner voucher" people. In a discussion of the human moment where Hillary's voice cracks as she talks about how badly she wants to help the country, He devotes  minutes telling a story about the insincerity of Richard Nixon's emotional voice in a TV speech.  Just listen to his coverage and his bias and contempt for Hillary is just palable. I am not asking you to take him of the air.  Give one of your fine reporters the mandate to call him on his excesses.  A couple of days  from now John Stewart of the Daily sho is going to put together a montage of his craziness and Chis will be the laghingstock of MSNBC.  

I'm getting to old for this stuff Brian I think I grew more grey hair in the last 2 hours.  I ok now Hillary won now it's on to the next State.  I am so proud of Senator Obama as he has made our country look more like what it really is.  You do an excellent interview with Senator Obama. I do believe his Mother is watching over him and is proud of him.

Brian you looked like your catching a cold better take care of yourself this will be a roller coaster ride and you should be ready for a bumpy ride.

Now I told you we were in a recession you wouldn't believe me now Merrill Lynch as said we're in a recession do you believe them.

As to the comments regarding bias well take it from a long time viewer if ever you change or become bias I'll be the first to tell you so. A real friend let's a friend know when he/she is taking a different direction. As for now you're still the only evening news anchor who is honest and non bias keep up the good work, we need you.

Oh Brian check out the numbers of voter for Republicans vs Dems that says it all.

Brian, two points I want to raise and inquire about.

1. On last night's news Kelly O'Donnell reported that McCain was "lighting" up the room with his post victory speech. Meanwhile, at the same time on MSNBC Chris Mathews, Joe Scarborough, and Keith Oberman were giggling about how bad McCain's speech was, how he read it off of cards, and did not get through a single sentence with stumbling. I guess given the nature of the crowd McCain could have lit up the crowd while essentially babbling through his speech.  But who had it right?  Kelly or the frat guys on MSNBC?  Or were both right?

2. How can you stand to talk to Wolfson. The guy strikes me as a biggest slime ball this side of Karl Rove.  Isn't his job to be the hatchet man for the Clintons by spinning negative gossip and rumors about political opponents.  There is blood on this man's hands, he strikes me as having a low ethical threshold, and yet he is characterized by you as being one of the best in the business. Wolfson strikes me as a slimeball -- perhaps a necessary evil, but a slimeball. Is he really on the up and up and an ethical political operator, or is ethical political operator an oxymoron?

Yes, you are very biased Mr Williams. Perhaps you can look over your comments of the last couple of days and especially the last 48 hours. Your apparent personal dislike for Mrs. Clinton is obvious in your reporting although you arent as bad as your Chris Matthews....hmmm  

Brian

I remember as a child watching Walter Kronkite on CBS.  I asked them "Why do you watch this man every night?"  They told me, "Because he is worth listening to".  I didn't understand them but later learned they were right.
I later grew up watching Tom Brokaw on the Today Show before school and then beyond proceeding you.
 Brian Williams - You have filled the shoes well.  I am now 36 and watch you every night because you fit the mold of what I grew up on.  Keep up the good work and remember there are always two sides to the story - dont forget the good things our troops do abroad.

Our nation needs all the good news it can get.

Darren Armstrong
Everett, Washington

Earth to NBC after the NH primary -- polls, exit and other kinds -- lie. Tim Russert may have to find a new day job. How long have you been covering politics?

As someone who has watched NBC news for most of my 53 years, I was thoroughly disgusted and disappointed to hear of your personal bias toward the newborn politician who wants to grow up to be president, Barack Obama, at the expense of your journalistic ethics. It was thoroughly inappropriate of you, and after a lifetime of NBC viewership, I'm surveying other news outlets for better, more responsible viewing options.

Furthermore, as stated above by another viewer, this woman bashing that Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman -- whose only shtick is to be snide and snipey, which causes viewer fatigue -- and so many other media-men engage in toward Hillary Clinton is unprofessional and discriminatory. Get these offenders help, please!

It's well documented that Americans are capable of choosing unqualified and inept national leaders. Please do not contribute to this psychology of the lowest common denominator by pre-selecting presidential candidates for Americans. All of us need to educate ourselves and make intelligent choices. Don't squash that responsibility -- contribute to it.

How many people, who would have voted for Obama in the New Hampshire primary had they thought the Democratic race to be close, actually voted in the Republican primary where they believed their vote would have greater impact? Could the pre-election polls and analyses influence voter choice in a state like New Hampshire where voters can choose the primary in which to participate on the day of the election?

I have to agree that the reporters involved in campaign coverage are forgetting that their task is to report on, not shape this election.  I for one am becoming increasingly tired of hearing how one caucus and one primary have decided the race for the rest of us whose primaries are later in the year.  I would like to see more information about candidates and less "analysis" about them. I do not want my primary vote to be restricted to one or two candidates because the media has decided to anoint early winners of a couple of contests.  I think Tom Brokaw said it best last night when he stated that through all the years he has seen election coverage that unanticipated outcomes do happen and everyone should be very careful not to make assumptions from preliminary information.  I also agree with the previous person about how obnoxious Chris Matthews has become in his manner - last night he and Keith actually cut off Andrea Mitchell before she was finished in order to make some inane comment!  Please stay focused on the important choices the nation must make this year and provide helpful information so that we can make those choices intelligent ones.  

Dear Brian,

8:45AM.  Chris Matthews cuts of colleagues who try to express a different opinion from his own.  Now He is claiming there was a racial motive to the discrepancy between the polls and the voting results [based on zero evidence].  A minute later he said bill Clinton is like a Kenyan Politician,  He said the same thing yesterday many times.  The reference is an attempt to imply that Bill's defense of his wife is like a Kenyan politician stirring up ethnic hatred that results in churches being burned down with innocent children inside.

Tom Brokaw was great last night. Russert was also an adult but he was overwhelmed by Chris's bloviating. Persuade Tom to come back in the anchor role for election nights.  Or alternatively do the anchor job yourself and use Chris as a pro-Obama commentator who is balanced by someone else.  

Chris Matthews' bizarre rantings against Hillary Clinton are getting really hard to endure. Last night I had to give it up and switch over to CNN. CNN has its problems but Matthews isn't one of them.

To echo a point made by several other commenters, because of the commingling of MSNBC hosts with NBC reporters and anchors, NBC news coverage has accepted responsibility for the favoritism, wild speculation, mind-reading, sophomoric humor, and outright character assassination that is MSNBC.

NBC news is not only Brian Williams, but Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and David Shuster. You can't have it both ways.

To say the coverage is not leaning toward Obama is absolutely insane. From Chris Matthews to Morning Joe it's almost like Clinton winning is an insult to the process.
It's silly that I have to look to Pat Buchanan for a voice of blanced journalism right now. The media is being swept up by a man with no experience, a gifted speech writer and a talent for delivery. The voters of New Hampshire thankfully said, "wait a minute, let's see what Obama really is about." Clinton showed her passion in the last debate and is seemingly still the smartest and most experienced person in the room. Obama might end up being the best person for the job, but can the media PLEASE wait a for a few primaries to pass before putting the crown on his head. I mean it's January 9th.

Watching the speeches last night, it was obvious that Obama was looking at teleprompters. Go back and review the speech. He had two focal points and never made eye contact with anything but those two focal points. For a minute there, I thought Obama was going to break out into the Pointer Sisters with his "Yes we can. Yes we can! i know we can make it! I know that we can! I know darn well, we can work it out! Yes we can! I know we can can, yes we can can, we can make it we want to yes we can can!" After watching Bush read speeches from teleprompters 7 years or obfuscate the English language freestyle, it is obvious. Senator McCain read his speech with the expressions of an old school teacher reading a story book to an elementary school class. Senator Clinton gave a speech from her heart and head with notes. It looked like she would read a topic she wanted to touch on and then delivered a thoughtful feeling about each topic. Edwards delivered a straight up speech from his head and heart without anything. I guess that was his courtroom trail experience coming through. He was awesome, so was Hillary. Obama OUT!! McCain WAY OUT!!

Switching through the channels, MSNBC, CNN and Fox last night I have to say MSNBC was the most self-centered and snide. For the last 3 days they have been assuming they grant the next presidency when in reality it is the voters that decide.  

I think they have been especially hard on Senator Clinton. Without asking real questions of Senator Obama.  What has he done--in a real way.  In the ABC debates when Senator asked for a reality check; I don't think she was the only one asking for that. Edwards was talking about Natalee and the bill of rights he passed in the senate; only to find out it didn't pass the House and never became a bill.  He shouldn't be acting like that is an achievement when he wasn't able to make it a reality.

I also find it kind of disappointing when some of your analysts and pundits started to call the race card when they couldn't understand why their polling was off. How about they asked the wrong people.  MSNBC can be very elitist and it is not to hard to believe that they poll the people they want to hear from.  All they have been reiterating is the bashing comments of Clinton.

At the Iowa primaries when Senator Clinton was conceding the race, Andrea Mitchell kept on stating how the whole room was manufactured.  All campaign rooms are manufactured to some extent.  They all hire PR people and set decorators etc.  She was speaking like this was unusual.

I agree Senator Obama is a great orator, and I may still vote for him. But honestly as a voter I don't know enough about the real way he will make decisions.  When you get underneath the flowery beautiful speech, what has he done and what will he do?  That is YOUR JOB to find out the man underneath the flowery speech-- Not to bash his opponent.   Change is a concept. Actions create change. How does Senator Obama translate his speech to work and what accomplishments he can achieve?  Senator Clinton is a tireless worker and one that shows great resolution in times of trouble.  We have all seen it.

Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann are getting little to high on their horse.  It was a relief last night to see Tom Brokaw (an objective observer with interesting comments), Tim Russert, Brian Williams; I feel like you three brought some civility and intelligence to the night.  I also have to put my hat up for Pat Buchanan who never follows the popularity race and always says what he thinks, (love him whether I agree or not) and Joe Scarborough.  Why don't you bring some of the people from the McLaughlin group to prime time news.  Those debates are always interesting on that show.

I was completely turned off by Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann. They came across hateful and pompous.  And all of Keith questions to people came across as if he were pushing them to support Senator Obama.

I support neither Obama nor Clinton (I still hold out hope for Edwards, as silly as that might seem).  However, with full knowledge that MSNBC and NBC are separate entities, but also being aware that there are any number of intra-entity personnel linkages, I have to say that MSNBC's coverage following the Iowa caucuses and right up to the time when it first appeared that Clinton might upset the expectation applecart, was absolutely disgraceful in its slanting against Clinton and towards Obama.  In fact (and I truly believe I am being objective in making this observation), certain commentators on MSNBC - - most obviously Chris Matthews - - were positively gleeful contemplating a Hillary collapse.  

Brian
At one point last night you told us that "71 year old John Mc Cain had won" What does his age have to do with anything? Why not tell us Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Obama's age if age is so important to you? Bias?

I was upset that MSNBC's pundits felt the need to say racism was a factor . The two candidates stand on issues where close enough that I could have gone either way. The truth is we are hurting and the signs are coming each day that it is only going to get worse. I love Senator Obama , I truly believe his speeches and his intentions for this country. However hope and good intentions seem to die in Washington. With things so bad , do we have time for the rest of Washington to listen to us, to work with him. When it came down to the wire I was afraid to take the Leap of the Faith . The political pundits scoff at the idea of likability, it is trust, the need to believe that the candidate we choose will listen to the American People ,care about what happens in our daily lives, something which is missing now, something which was never one of the Clintons faults. I believed in both of them, in the end it came down to who I believed could make Washington listen.

I am very upser that Brian Williams, with all his class, would bring up a situation of President Clinton's 4 years ago on the night that belonged to Hillary alone.  I was very disappointed in Mr. Williams poor taste.  He can't take it back so move on and forget that...nothing to do with H.H. primary.  Shame on you.

I watched the video and even though Lee Cowan showed a preference for the candidate, you certainly did not.

With the polls so badly wrong and the herd mentality among reporters interviewing one another, the NBC/MSNBC "commentary" and "analysis," before the vote, was useless. You should do what you can to see to it that your folks learn from these early miscues. NBC is better than this.

I want to start out by saying,Brian is this not the most exciting primary season ever!!! I'm on my 12th hour of coverage and I can't see enough.I waited untill 8:52pm pacific time for someone to utter the 3 most important words in poling history,DEWEY defeats TRUMAN.thank you for being the one to mention it.I may be a bonified news junky but I've been holding this in since the results came back from the NH primary.First jounalist are human beings,sometimes their wrong,but think about how much the current administration could keep from us if journalist were not there as the vanguard of our democracy.What about the likes of Ernie Pile,Joe Rosenthall,David Greene and hundreds of journalists who have gave their lives to bring the right story truthfully and unbiased.If you think it's easy try a story like the abandoned children in Serbian mental institutions,their emasiated and mutated bodies were hard to see on the screen.Just try being the reporter standing there,thank you Anne Currin for bringing that heart wrenching story,to our attention.By the way the answer to the big question, is how did Hilary do it?
As a man you have to visit your female side to understand.Women generally are the nurturers,they want to put Backtine on your scaped knee and give you a cookie.On the other hand a mans response might be get up brush yourself off, suck it up and don't be a wussy.Women in NH saw another woman hurting the way only a woman knows.They came to her aid in unheard of numbers.

I agree! the bias reporting toward Barack is what is ridiculous. Brokaw did say it best about not making assumptions.

Brian, I have always thought you were one of the good guys, but yes, your reporting has been clearly slanted toward Barak. I am thrilled Hillary won. Not necessarily because I support her. I haven't decided between her and Edwards yet, but I fear that with your reporting, I might not even have a chance. Let my vote count for something.

If you can't be fair, then keep your yap shut. Obama is not the change for ALL of us. Stop telling us how to vote.

I have always found NBC balanced, but I have to say I saw some leaning last night. I agree with the person who said the focus needs to be on the issues. And I also agree that Chris and Keith need to find some balance.
I also want to point out that if I see the clip showing Hillary "tear up" one more time I may scream. It wasn't the tears that brought the female vote to Hillary last night, it was the coverage of those tears. There are many women who have been accused of being "too emotional, weak, vulnerabe or even calculating" when they have showed emotion in a professional setting. We know all too well the standard that exists in that arena and the more the clip was played and discussed, the more it motivated many of us to stand with Hillary. Several of the pundits - especially Chris Matthews went overboard on this one.

Brian - you do an excellent job - keep up the good work.  

well Lee apparantly has a man crush for Obama as you can very well see by his face. Talking about the infectiousness of his energy and the energy surrounding the campaign is one thing, but saying that it is hard to stay UNBIASED becuase of that energy, is ridiculous. He might as well be an editorial writer and not a journalist or reporter.

The inherent problem now is that any reporting Lee does in the future, will now be looked at with skepticism because of these comments, as well as your defense of him. His journalistic integrity, as well as yours was put on the line there with those comments and the defense.

All media, that is corporate media, is biased one way or the other. We are all a product of our own biases and look through our own selective filters...even reporters and news journalists. Fox news is biased to the right, yet nbc is to the left. It happens, but whne you try to cover up your bias with this non-sence it makes you look stupid.

Listen, I have so much to say, there's just not enough time or room, so let me start like this. Ha! Ha! Ha! Senator Clinton and her campaign blew you guys right out of the water, and I couldn't be more thrilled. I've read all of the above, and agree wholeheartedly with most of what has been written. Now, to the disrespect -- Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and plenty of other pundits are shamefully disrespectful of Senator Clinton -- calling her by her first name, yet I've NEVER heard the "male" candidates referred to as Mike, Barack, Mitt, John, Dennis, Rudy, etc., etc. Show some class !! Finally, I, too, don't like one or two states telling me who I have to vote for in this presidential race, and I particularly don't like pundits telling me that same thing. Report the news!! Don't "make" the news!!!!

Any sane person, judging MSNBC on the 'quality and fairness' of its journalism would have to come to the conclusion that you all wear your dislike of Hillary Clinton on your sleaves. It's so insulting to watch Matthews contempt for Clinton displayed night after night. It's appalling to see such arrogance. It's clear that Matthews is no journalist - just a macho jerk with a megaphone provided by MSNBC.

If you don't want people to think you're biased try providing some actual reporting and not horserace analysis and high-school sniping.

Lee Cowan said that "...it's almost hard to remain objective"... for heaven's sake, isn't objectivity part and parcel of being a journalist?  I must admit, Brian, that I do feel that you were a bit much in your overly long and friendly tone with Obama.  I am waiting for an objective journalist to have the guts to actually quiz Obama on many issues.  I've heard him continually speak of the need for change, and I understand that he feels this is what people want to hear.  My concern is exactly what does he intend to change, and how?  Asking Obama how he feels about seeing his face on the cover of Newsweek is hardly journalism.  Brian's interview with Obama was more of what I would expect on a Barbara Walters program.  You certainly don't mince words with the Republican candidates, so why do it for the Democrats?  Just be fair.  You ask us to judge you on the basis of your reporting; I have, and I have to say, I believe you are somewhat easy on the Democrats.

Brian, the bias of NBC and the Republican administration has been obvious for many years including the refusal to accept an advertisement that supported the troops and then reversed its position.

With regards to NBC Obama bias one only had to watch GMA this morning. Matt Lauder interviewed Obama first and them Meredith interviewed McCain. Now how can GMA insult Senator McCain more by putting Obama in front of a long serving senator and war hero.
Your subliminal bias SHOUTS out Democratic candidates.

I thought Obama blew his lead on Tuesday.
What was he thinking by scheduling only one rally on that important day? Contrast the images of confident,almost smug candidate reporting to that sole rally with Hillary's non-stop whirlwind pavement pounding to win over every voter she could.
Also negatively impacting his New Hampshire campaign were the sights and sounds of some of his supporters attempting to drown out Hillary at some of her stumps, images not lost on voters, especially the undecided ones.

Let me state that I would never vote for John McCain, however last night on MSNBC you associated yourself with something that is totally unacceptable. You and your associates actually joked about John McCain's speach. You ridiculed him. What are you trying to do, be like FOX news? Where is the profesionalism? You were supposed to be reporting on the NH returns and instead you took the oportunity to trash a person that you probably don't like. This is not news or reporting. MSNBC should give John McCain equal time to bash MSNBC.

I have a couple of comments in comparing Chris Matthews and Tom Brokaw in the NH election coverage last night.  Early in the evening Chris Matthews was ranting about how in the 1992 NH primary, Bill Clinton was up by 20 points, finished 8 points behind, and had the gall to call himself "The Comeback Kid".  He complained that the media at that time, assuming that that included Tom Brokaw, let the claim go unchallenged.  Soon after Hillary Clinton's victory was announced, and the acknowledgement that the pre-results polls were disasterouly wrong, Tom Brokaw said that maybe the pundits should stand back and not trust the polls so much.  Of course to anyone who has watched "Hardball" knows that polls are at the core of the show, and that Chris Matthews is always badgering his guests to tell him what's going to happen before it actually happens.

Mr. Williams:

While I like and respect your newscast, I must agree that the cross-pollination of the NBC nightly news with MSNBC pundits like Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann has made your election coverage far less palatable for me. I want to see fact-based reporting, not opinion and speculation. In fact, the media reporting seems to have lost all objectivity. Why are reporters now being held up as authorities, while outside political experts and scholars are rarely consulted?

Through their reporting techniques media outlets have effectively narrowed a large, diverse field of candidates who deserve the right to be heard to a very small group of those whom the media seems to believe are most viable, by denying media time to those who aren't deemed frontrunners. But we've only had three, yes three, state caucuses or primaries so far!

I applaud the humility of your most recent blog, and hope that you will help guide NBC news reporting, in all outlets, back to a position of integrity and leadership. It's obvious from the posts here that I am not the only American troubled by the increasing bias of modern news reporting. Thank you for your time.

This is what you pathological liars calls unbiased.  NBC has always been a sorry joke.

No, Mr. Williams, it's not ridiculous. The uneven coverage pushed independents--thinking Obama was a lock--over into the GOP primary and galvanized the undecideds to vote for Hillary after they saw all the media piling on her. So the media directly influenced the election results by its lack of professional objectivity. Please work in your corner of the world to clean up your act.

Tom Brokaw has earned my respect and admiration.

It is natural to respond positively to a person of integrity and authenticity and when you add the intelligence of Barack Obama to the mix it is inspiring to those who can see the possibility he represents for our country. His intelligence will guide him to surround himself with smart and experienced people in the areas where he is personally lacking in experience, and his integrity, authenticity and ability to trust himself will make him a wise steward of the position and authority that the office of President bestows on an individual. Hillary Clinton has demonstrated a serious lack of integrity and authenticity in her  years of experience. Remembering the Whitewater scandal, the removal of furniture from the White House on her departure, the hundreds of thousands of dollars from special interest groups. And most recently her warmth and compassion? She can't be trusted and if people get sucked into her pretense or give her their sympathy vote we will be in worse shape than we are with GW Bush. Enough is enough give our news media the freedom to respond authentically and report on what they actually see from their unique perspectives. If the facts and circumstances appear biased by those who are more interested in sugar coating the reality of Hillary they should stick with FOX.  

Hello,
    I believe Chris Matthews has lost all objectivity and therefore, credibility. He needs to be removed from election coverage.
    Keith Olbermann is excellent.
    Thank-you.

I hope you men realize you do not want to turn this race into a female v. male contest.  See, you men have no follow-through.  You need a woman President just like most of you need a woman to run your life.  We don't want any woman to do the job we want HILARY!!!  And we all know who the real "President" was during Bill Clinton's time in that office.

You are cool, Brian, I have no idea who, if anyone, you are supporting.  Russert, on the other hand, is an obvious Hillary-hater, an opinion reinforced by his MTP interview and his debate "moderating."  The overall tone of NBC is pro Obama and McCain.  Try harder to at least appear un-biased.

I was watching MSNBC last evening for the New Hampshire Voting results.  I was appalled at the comments made by those gathered to report to us last evening.  I compare it to a group of vultures waiting for those running for president to take their last breath. Their words were as drool of delight dripping from their mouths when they discribed the desperation of Hillary Clinton's campaign.  And when they began to belittle McCain's performance as he gave his victory speech I could stand no more and changed to CNN.  You in the media should apologize and take a long look at your performances!

wow, what a mistake, first the michael douglas voice-and now bias-and it's all on camera-crazy

You and Lee were unbiased, but I cannot say the same for Chris Matthews.  Please cover the news withour giving the pundits air time.  I have heard enough spin to last a lifetime.

I think its funny the the media and NBC thinks they are not bias.  Just look how and who they ask what questions.  I just read today that somewhere between 75% and 80% don't trust the media that is sad in a free country.

I totally agree with comments regarding Chris Matthew's nasty treatment of Sen. Clinton.  What's going on with him...a mid-life crisis?  I used to watch Hardball, now I am using the remote to click off Chris.  But, I am shocked most with Keith???
I am a huge fan of his commentaries...but what a dissapointment.   I know Chris crowned George Bush,
without questions he ignored playing hardball with
George, but can't he learn from that mistake.  Chris,
if you can't play hardball with Obama, who in my opinion is starting to show the same ego, arrogance,
and non-transparent personality as George, we will
again have the media leading lazy voters to follow you over a cliff.  Please, just report news and stop your own ego from bloating your face.  Ask the tough questions and if you comment one more time that Sen.
Clinton is not likeable, I will never watch you again.  She has proven that she is human just by all of her accomplishments as the parent of a lovely daughter, as a wife who kept her marriage together,
shown the capacity of forgivness, worked extremely
hard to help families in our country to have better lives, championed children's causes, showed strength
as First Lady for eight years, and whether or not you
mem want to admit it, behind every sucessful man IS
A GOOD WOMAN.  She has given all of us a voice and it is sad that you want to take our voices away.  Let the American people be informed of the news, stop
swaying the busy folks who listen to a few comments
from TV, and can't get the real deal from news people.   I think Sen. Hillary Clinton is the real thing we do like her.  She represents what it takes
to be a leader...the heart to care about helping
others and the courage to fight for our rights.

Laura, Sammamish, WA.

I can't believe all the negative comments in regards to Chris Matthews.  That is his personality loud and opinionated, but certainly very knowledgable; its part of his appeal.  Regarding last night's coverage, they did seem to be getting a bit "punchy", but after covering hours and hours of campaigning, somewhat understandable.  What I found more offensive then Matthews and Obermann, was Joe Scarborough and his panel.  It was a contest to see who could talk over the other one faster, and the lone woman on the panel, couldn't get a word in edge-wise.  Everytime she opened her mouth, either Joe or one of the other panelists jumped in and started talking right over her.  My husband kept saying ~ they won't let her speak!  Joe Scarborough is one of the loudest most obnoxious reporters on the air, and I would like to see him reeled in.
   As for you Brian, I remain faithful to you and your reporting.  I think you're very fair and I don't think bias in the least.  I can watch you and Tim Russert (my other favorite) all night, its the other ones who get a bit trying.  Keep up the good work.

This is my first blog post on any blog anywhere.  I am a lifelong Democrat and an avid viewer of both NBC and MSNBC.  I am undecided between Clinton and Obama.  I admire them both and have qualms about each as candidates.

All that said, there is absolutely no question that NBC's and MSNBC's campaign reporting has been totally biased towards Obama and against Clinton to an absurd degree.  I am one of apparently many undecided Democratic voters and NBC and MSNBC viewers who are disappointed that your networks have so totally abandoned your objectivity in this race.

By the way, on another point, now that it will be a close race through January, doesn't it look even more stupid that the Democrats are boycotting the Florida primary?  What is the point in giving two small states like Iowa and New Hampshire the power to anoint the Democratic nominee while ignoring what is probably the most electorally significant state in the country?

I am so sick of all the news reporters who seem to forget they are suppose to be non biased. Americans have the right to make up their own minds about who they want for President not who the reporters want us to vote for. Obama came out of nowhere and no one seems to really know what kind of "changes" he thinks he can make. Why do all the reporters seem to be backing him? Hillary Clinton is running on her own laurels and not Bill's. She has a right to be respected for who she is and not her husband's mistakes. I think the way all the reporters are saying that she shouldn't have shown emotion in her statements the other night are way off the mark. She showed a side of her that people need to see. A softer side. She is a very intelligent woman and should be proud of her accomplishments. She wasn't "crying" because she thought she was losing something. She was emotional because she sees the shape of this country and feels so strongly about wanting to help. What's wrong loving your country? No one comments on John Edwards when his wife speaks out and bashes the other candidates. No one mentions Obama's religious background of being a Muslim and that his middle name is Hussein. Why not? Don't the American people deserve to know that? With this country in war with Iraq and Afghanistan and the way the Muslims hate us, why should be trust a man who is avoiding that issue. Just because Obama won Iowa doesn't make him the candidate to beat and the reporters need to stop supporting particular candidates and let us think on our own. Their job is information only.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):