(Video) MSNBC finds popcorn more important than Iraq

Today on MSNBC, congressional correspondent Mike Vicqueira was supposed to inform the audience about the latest Iraq bill that passed the House yesterday.  The bill might help put pressure on the Republicans to end the war soon.  But anchor Contessa Brewer spent a majority of the interview joking with Vicqueira about the popcorn he was chewing.

In all, they spent a total of 77 seconds talking about popcorn, and only 74 seconds on Iraq:

VIQUEIRA: Senator Harry Reid -- he is the Democratic leader -- talked last week about a presidential waver.  Even if the Iraqis are not meeting those benchmarks, the President can wave the benchmarks and still keep sending more money and troops to Iraq.  It seems to be heading somewhere in that direction, although House Democrats are still fighting very hard to keep a timeline in whatever they're doing.  Contessa.

BREWER: So did that popcorn have any butter on it?

On the surface, this might seem like something little.  Though, with Republican lawmakers under increased pressure from their constituents to end the war, it is just a matter of time before they break from the President.  The more pressure, the sooner they will break.  This issue is very important to military families across the country.  They are the ones fighting this war.  The rest of us are far removed.  Spending the majority of a segment that was supposed to be dedicated to Iraq on popcorn underscores just how far most of us, especially those in the media, are removed from the war.  3,387 U.S. soldiers have been killed.  Maybe I am off-base about this -- but I'd say it's about time the media took issues like this seriously, or at least made up for their lack of objective reporting before the war.

Comments

[George]

Well, did it have any butter? You cut off the interview at its climax! damn you.

I probably would have seen this had I not been watching O'Reilly. He and Rivera were debating whether Paris Hilton should go to jail. Rivera gave us this quote:
"Justice should be blind...they should treat her as if her name were Hilton Paris, and not Paris Hilton."

So I ask you - what war?

[granny]

Good one, George!

And to you, Todd. You hit the nail right on the head, once again!

It's not a small thing at all. It's a major - relevant observation. This is precisely how we all are being "trained" ~

The "thinking bubble" says ... this whole flap isn't very important, look where it fits in the whole of our evening discourse. I'll go get some popcorn. The "mind" is never engaged, the mind's person can "see" that this is not noteworthy.

I noticed, for example, that after the Republican debate, there were a notable number of references, by conservative commentators, to partial birth abortion (even though it was not a subject in the debate - Roe v. Wade was) In every instance that it was mentioned it was couched with words like "horrible", "horrifying" "grisley", "inhumane" "unimaginable procedure". Sometimes with accompanying theatrical facial expressions (all by men, I might add) In every instance I watched, it was never referred to as "partial birth abortion" without pointed, subjective modification. This is manipulative language and behavior. We almost are never without its presence in this current culture. We need to learn to see it, and identify it.