Engage isis. Are the antiwar commentators acting out of antiideology or sparking a healthy media debate . Pundits on a crusade in the race of the race try fiasco and the benching of more players and the commission are saying he is sorry. What, exactly, does zero tolerance mean to the nfl . Will the nfl, with its power, take the lead on the issue of Domestic Violence. If any of the victims is someone you loved would you be satisfied with the way the league handled the crisis . I am not satisfied from the get go. I made a mistake. Are the media putting a whole league on trial for the transgression of a few. Lousy reviews forc the new lineup of the view. Let me ask you about, you know. Yeah. Yeah. You can say it. Sarah palin. When did you want to up . Did rosie and Nicolle Wallace, can they make it work . This is media buzz. The debate over isis too a new term when congress was sold he would recommended the use of Ground Troops against isis and pundits pounced on the contrast and some call it overflown by dempsey. The commander in chief is handcuffing military leaders and jeopardizing this mission in its entirety. Can i point out how ridiculous the Beltway Press is . That is not a scandal. We have this notable and important thing in this country with the guys in uniforms no matter how many meadows and stars and fancy hats, they do not get to decide whether or how the United States conducts a war. More voices in the media challenging the war strategy or flatout opposing it. Just be totally clear, we are committing to a military conflict in iraq and syria that may involve United States troops on the ground and already involves a few just like you cannot be half pregnant there is no such thing as a little bit of war. And we have chief washington correspondent for fox news, editor at large of hot air and from National Public radio, a fox news contributor. James, what do you make of the valve antiwar voices . The question that is properly raised, whether the voices that are repeatedly emitting an antiwar sentiment in response to the military operation announced by president obama are voices from which with respect to any military operation we should expect to hear a hardy yes, including rachel who displayed an unyielding hostility to the mill that with references to medals and stars and 19 and fancy hats. Hawkish than rachel or democrat necessary or bill maher but this is a disjoined way the administration has defined the threat. Many of the people and there are others we could show, on the left and ordinarily would be supporters of president obama. They are torn. They are not in favor of jumping into the middle east again with a reflection of war wirery but getting more hawkish as we see the horrors of isis and a reflection the president is reporting contradictions because there are major contradictions how the Administration Explains it and where they draw a line that is something we should discuss. Many of the conservatives favor the direction which president obama is moving, toward military action but they are piling on the criticism it is not enough and he is not aggressive enough. And as a Republican Congress person said, we like the way the strategy goes but if it doesnt go line we can blame him or if it goes good we can say, what took so long . One of the thread it was, you said there were be no boots on the backgrounds and there are. Dempsey said they could need more. The question is, we have a public that is for this. The war weary public fixed when they saw the beheadings. Because of the heavy Media Coverage of the isis threat which some think is overstated. It is hard to miss it on youtube. They are there. The media is holding the white house to what it calls a high standard, you say there is not a combat mission but there are 2,000 advisors there now. They will be armed. They will have boots on. They will be on the ground. They might be accompanying iraqi forces to the frontlines. Does that mope they are engaged in combat . At what point is it too much of that for the american public. As our historian, james, how do you compare the media opposition to this war with the outright skepticism the press showed in being the passivity the press showed during the runup to iraq . There is a lot of mythology about the prewar period a decade ago during the bush and cheney administration. One myth is the idea the press was passive. I was in the Briefing Room during the first bush term in the white house james brady Briefing Room alongside people like David Gregory and the wees put to ari were proning about the weapons of mass destruction situation in iraq, the war intention, the occupation. If you go back and look at the transcripts and briefings you will see a very engaged press. But the overall tone and i wrote a lengthy story how the Washington Post a few voices that were skeptical of the strategy, they were delayed and buried and spiked but maybe that should tell us the debate, now, is healthy. Myth or not, there is react of the press corps to that standing narrative. The press meals they did not do their job. When a president as commander in chief and we have this line where we leave politics at the water edge the press is more likely to be more dutiful when the president is making the argument and being strong and the American People are moving with him. Here you do not see the clarity and the strength of the message. A year ago in syria it felt like it was the press pushing for the action. That felt like a reflection of the same. This time around the drumbeat was coming from the media with the president as a reluctant warrior but in 2002 and 2003 there was a sense if you opposed what was a strong drive for war by george w. Bush you were unpatriotic. Why see that now. It changed. Having members beheaded on camera is powerful. It changed things. I dont think the president would be doing this without the kind of expert he is getting from the public. A year ago he almost struck the syrian government, for a different reason, because Bashar Alassad is still there. But a strategy is direct bid what the American People allow and this is merit but, there is a sense from the press when there is not this pitch that is clear and strong, there are more questions. I disagree. I think the president has talked a lot about this. He is out there and talking about it. But the strategy comes from Public Opinion opposed to a strategy to win. The reason they change the public was not clamoring for this but merely supporting. Some of the media has been pushing for it. As least with the commentators. You were someone who pressed the state department, why arent you using the word war, and on the question of Ground Troops there is condition fusion in the media or debate, are they impossible . Unlikely . Or inevitable . In any organization where there is a middle struck with one person at the top. Like a triangle structure and the president is the figure in this administration, that lack of coherence on the mission, in terminology and the war aims, and even the percentography where it is carried out, that confusion emanates from the top. And fill the airwaves about not ruling out this is a drumbeat, why isnt he listening to the generals . That is the question is. There is the quote, as well, people do not want to discount this is anyone in danger. They like the idea of the political line of no boots means there are no people on the ground and it is not the fact we should not discount that americans will be in danger regardless. That is what people are trying to understand. Is the press correct to suggest that somehowed president is not doing the right thing . George w. Bush fired a jensen shake would was gone when he said there were hundreds of thousands needed in iraq. There is reaction to the bush years but a genuine question where the strategy is coming from and why it was formed and wasnt formed because of Public Opinion or because of the generals. Isis was a real threat and the assessment of isis changed from the jv team to a group that took tremendous territory and a tremendous amount of money. Finishing up, is it suspect, then, should the media raise all kinds of alarms that the president could differ . It is fine to raise this but it is important to put it in context because it has always happened. That has been the case throughout history. I agree the way she phrased it, it is right they have a right to differ and the president can make decision. Alet the record reflect, howard kurtz likened george w. Bush to abraham lincoln. We always read the best tweets at the end of the practice. Are the media trying to damage the National Football league over Domestic Violence . An extremely harsh politico piece talking about wasserman being in trouble. Arnish her. One day, machines will be sprayed to be made. And making something stronger. Will mean making it lighter. One day, factories will work with the cloud. One day. Is today. That would be my daughter hi dad. Shes a dietitian. And back when i wasnt eating right, she got me drinking boost. Its got a great taste, and it helps give me the nutrition i was missing. Helping me stay more like me. [ female announcer ] boost complete nutritional drink has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. All with a delicious taste. Grandpa [ female announcer ] stay strong, stay active with boost. Scott walker has given women the back of his hands. What people are doing is theyre grabbing us by the hair and pulling us back. Debbie Wasserman Schultz later apologized for those comments about wisconsins governor. Shes the subject of a very tough piece in politico saying the democrats and republicans have lost confidence in her. When you have anecdotes like Wasserman Schultz insisting that her wardrobe be paid for, which she denies i think this is partly triggered by that comment she made about scott walker which truly was, even with the low bar of political rhetoric was really, really nasty. And i think undermined what is supposed to be her strength, which is to appeal to women voters. It turns that into something that worked for scott walker. I think thats where some of this is coming from. It happened every couple of years, that people get upset with debbie wassermanschultz. Were getting rid of a woman in the dnc doesnt help that narrative. Did this have a whiff of the white house or her critics using politico . There are a lot of critics and they all willingly cooperated. I think it was nine pages long. It was a hit piece with lots of sources from the cooperation that didnt like her. Does anybody in the country care about whether the dnc chairman is on the outs . This is a true inside the beltway story. Its a spec tack to see her credit side like this over and over again in print. She probably is on the way out. But i dont think there would have been a time when we would have seen this kind of piece, this long, this lengthy. Most of thely, people dont like her. I think the chooe and immediate effect of which is to make it such that the person being recorded on across all Media Outlets thereafter is described in battle. I thought it was a fair oocspie. If you look at the number of quotes in the piece, they are evenly distribute d between on the record quotes and blind anonymous quotes. The actually lead says dws is combined washington insiders have lost confidence in her at a time when they need her most, period. There is no sourcing there. It should say critics say and its not until the third and fourth graphs that you have that. I also dont like the leading anecdote is the wardrobe one which i think draws this line to the sarah palin story, she denied it. Debbie was interested in the piece, there were no disparaging remarks, but on the other hand, the president can get rid of his dnc chairman at any time. One other item before we go to break, new yorks wnbc reported the other day that a federal probe found no evidence so far that Chris Christie knew in advance about the at the George Washington bridge. Brian williams described the story this way. The headlines here, the federal charges are now ruled out for Chris Christie and the affair that came to be known as bridgegate. Ouch. Nbc nightly news had to run a correction because the federal investigation is still ongoing. As christie has vindicated, i wonder if the Mainstream Media will devote as much attention to that as the drum beat of allegations. Coming up, is Nicole Wallace any match for Rosie Odonnell . And up next, the nfls Domestic Abuse scandals, are the media just going overboard . H. H check out all these airline seats. Lots of them, right . But when you try to get one by using your travel rewards card miles. Those seats mysteriously vanish. Why . All the flights you want are blacked out. Or they hit you up for some outrageous number of miles. Switch to the venture card from capital one. With venture, use your miles on any airline, any flight, any time. No blackout dates. And with every purchase youll earn unlimited double miles. Now were getting somewhere. Whats in your wallet . Moms with kids who making decisions about what the kids will do on sunday afternoon are making decisions it is not about people that rape women and beat the hell out of the their kids. What does it mean for fans whose dollars are so coveted by the nfl that make up an estimated 45 percent of the fan base . Are fans and families and we as parents supposed for come parmentallize everything that is happening and separate a violent gale on the field from violent acts off the field as we wait on the answer to the central question . What, exactly, does the nfl stand for . And now, a columnist, you wrote the nfl bashing is part of the media fake outrage industry, and the revulsion is general bit or deepseated . It reach as point, all we heard this week was this being a Tipping Point for the nfl, and goodell cannot survive this and he needs to be terminated or should step down. I ski on sunday night, telecast last week, nbc, the features nfl game at three year high in terms of rating and an nbc poll that says mine in ten will not watch one minute less of the nfl so while they may be shocked and dismayed they could be dismayed neither not tuning out and, therefore, the nfl goes on and up. I agree with you, the nfl is a jugger that it and it is not taking it down but you look at i stances involving the other players, include Jonathan Dwyer of the cardinals and head butting his wife, and from the Carolina Panthers convicted of cloaking and threatening a girlfriend and the minute my viking and the child abuse case, and peterson and suddenly these people are sidelined and not playing and what is interesting come natures on the networks with huge deals with the nfl, as does fox, they are talking about the violence and the behavior of the sponsors. It is opening the floodgates. Personally, that is good because for too long the nfl has turn add blind eye to the criminal off field behavior of the players. They have invested millions in these guys and they want them on the field. Have the media been guilty of, especially at national level, not focusing on the fact you have people being convicted and they are on the field on sunday . Some, yes, in part. The media has some parts, have scrutinized the nfl. Espn does not get a lot of credit for their investigation because they have a 15 billion deal with the nfl. We however, they are the ones on friday who released this smoke gun story about would knew what and when with the ray rice video. The reason it has spurred so much outrage is because for years the nfl turn add lend eye to this behavior and now it has exploded in all of the graphic detail in the horrible video. And the espn story, to fill in people, it was an extraordinary deficit reporting that accused of way venezuela of coverup saying they knew in hours that there was an elevator video showing ray rice pumping his buy. Great work by espn but they are hit california hypocritical. I wrote about the United States women soccer goalie since bill clinton was president , winning two gold medicals the most 307 particular female athlete and on espn, on thursday night, there she is playing, why does that matter . She is on two counts of Domestic Abuse charges, one again hence teen nephew but she has a trial in november and continues to play and i dont hear a storm or espn doing stories on hope solo because she a woman . It is soccer . It is just as important and this is too much of a this is an nfl problem, rather than an epidemic that happens across all industries and all genders. Even soccer. I like football and were watching it and i grew up playing football in the street but it has been appalling what the nfl has done, not that we should hold the nfl to a higher standard but hold it to a decent standard of behavior for players who do this kind of thing off the field. This is in longer a news story but it is a culture story and everyone in america is talking about this. Exactly. Everyone realizes the nfl has been irresponsible if how they have dealt with all of this. They have allowed these guys to continue to bring in millions in endorsements by making sure this stuff stays quiet and keep down the discussion about it and we are now engaged in a National Debate on Domestic Violence. We also, child abuse. To think the nfl could not have gotten its hand on that video, it strains belief. If ray rices attorney has it hours after it happened. And tmz. I have never seen the kind of hammering goodell took on the friday news conference. I have.