Ms. Brown, you have hit the nail on the head with this witty and pithy commentary on the state of the NBC network.
Surely, there is a replacement out there that can fill the slot of an anchor job for NBC without all the hype and hoopla that Tim Russert gave to this job.
Rachel Maddow, is an excellent choice and one which I would gladly welcome. A breath of fresh air and also a person who has the interviewing skills that are needed for the desk of that most superior position.
Should the NBC airheads get this choice right I will start to watch the show again, bet you not though!

An article going to the heart of the problems at MSNBC!
There's a distinct gap between the true journalists (Brokaw, Whitaker etc) and the television personalities like Olbermann
and Matthews that the network will have to address - sooner or later. The internal war is so evident to regular watchers and makes the old cola wars between Pepsi and Coke look tame. My guess is that in a time when things are turning austere that the journalists will win out and Brokaw can return to the ranch in peace rather than shame. Maddow is interesting but not all of us have warmed up to her. Unfortunately for her, she was positioned too close to Olbermann both in time slots and in viewpoint.

Oh, as for HItchens, please! He's every bit as bad as O'Reilly and a distinct argument for waterboarding.

Rachel Maddeow is a perfect replacement- thought about her while viewing her show last week.Wouldn't that upset the whole apple cart? Lol Go with it, Tina Brown- right on!

David Gregory dancing with Karl Rove perfectly shows what is wrong with anybody whom NBC might choose if they are staying in character as perfectly illustrated by your article.

Maddow would be a fine choice as would Josh Marshall. In the end, though, the key will be to get somebody who isnt ready to trade access for his or her soul (gregory) or read talking points as if they're gospel truth (anybody on fox and most on the other networks)

Personally, my dream host would be Jack Cafferty, LOL. can somebody please liberate him from his mouse hole on cnn?

While I'm not sure how in the world you can think Van Susteren is even remotely competent or charismatic enough for Meet the Press, I'm with you on Rachel Maddow.

Great point about Russert. I had always felt that he was almost sacred to anatagonize his guests..., asking them to respond to quotes from various publications..., one of the reasons I stopped watching Meet the Press. It was almost like- I did not say this, dont get mad at me, this is what they are saying, how do you wish to repond to 'them'?

Totally agree with you on Rachel Maddow... She's great. My girlfriend, who would cringe when I watched Hardball or Countdown, has come to love Rachel's show. In addition to not being as inane as Matthews or abrasive at Olbermann, she isn't afraid of debating the issues intelligently with people who vehemently disagree with her.

As far as Van Susterenenenen (thanks John Stewart), not sure what you're going for there. She is a total whack job and her daily interviews with Sarah Palin are creepy...

I have been thinking this for some time, and am SO glad that someone else agrees with me. Rachel Maddow's new show is the BEST, and it's the only cable news show I can think of where I learn NEW information that no one else has. THIS WOMAN DOES HER RESEARCH. She is a female Tim Russert!

Andrea Mitchell is "nice," but continually gets tongue-tied. David Gregory is rude and seems to lack respect for women. In addition to that, I can't get that picture of him dancing with KARL ROVE at a White House Press Event, out of my mind!
Chuck Todd would be good. He's a breath of fresh air, too. Loved his "number crunching" during the election. Very intelligent young man, and likeable. But I think Rachel is the one who is ready NOW.

Finaly someone points out the nonsense that is Meet the Press. Its tired old left/ right point of view is un inspiring and leaves us knowing less then when we started. Fareed's GPS is exactly where we should be going. Bright individuals with global views, challenging our understnading and widening our dicourse. Thank Ms. B
Miss you madly on the tele.

A panel with Hitchens, Zakaria, and Boies? I'll watch that any day of the week.

What about Tina Brown for the Russert position. If you watched her TV interview show you know that she is comfortable interviewing people from all walks of life. And her life as a journalist (Vanity Fair, Talk, etc.) only adds to her credentials. An attractive, well-spoken, intellectual, international woman could make Meet The Press interesting once again.

100% RIGHT ON! I have been talling anyone who would listen that Rachel would be the BEST!!GO!

Rachel is the "Change we can Beleive in" Tim Russert. I came to this conclusion after she so deftly and politely carved up the pompous, snivelling, pumpkinhead named David Frum on her show October 13. I sent an email to Meet the Press the following day that we have found Tim's repelacement. David Gregory is a lightweight!

Er, about van Susteren. Anyone who could interview the Palin's with such gullibility is no journalist. And just who are Todd Palin's "contractor buddies" who built their house for them?

Tina, I agree with your main points,
but Greta van Susteren????
Only if her interview subject were
the "first dude."

There are so many semi-literates here trying so hard to leave clever, biting comments! This is the mirror image of Fox News. Thank goodness there are many literate, intelligent people who are not represented by the weak, shrill, unbalanced comments here and at the very similar Fox News channel.

Ha ha ha! Do you actually think defense contractor giant General Electric would allow any truth on such a show? With declining consumer product sales, GE wants the profits from murdering humans overseas in wars made made of lies.

Just because Russert died is that supposed to mean we rewrite the facts of history? He was nothing but a shill. Either a GOP corporate shill or a GOP/FBI government shill. Occasionally you got 5% truth in the show just to make it look a little honest.

Rachel is too progressive=honest for such filthy scum lying media corporations!

Please, NO MORE DAVID GREGORY!

I love Rachel Maddow. I might actually watch the show. On another note: did anyone think NBC went a little over the top with Russert's death. It was as if a head-of-state passed away. I'm not saying Russert was a bad person and didn't deserve some coverage, but NBC reported on nothing else.

Rachel is a smiling face who recognizes the speed at which events change and mold a new world stage daily. Her demeanor and skill at refining global issues to simple questions require a forum where those in power feel compelled to answer those questions.
High profile power brokers have escaped appearing on her show during the early weeks and those who now trot upon her stage evade, explain away or simple refuse to supply Rachel's viewers with truthful answers. The Meet the Press stage would provide the forum where her curiousity and intelligence might actually prompt answers from her guest.
Nice choice Tina.

Rachel Maddow would be a brilliant choice. She is bright, articulate, does her homework. Her response to David Frum was breathtaking. And it would be good to get her separated from Keith O, who does her no favors.

Rachel Maddow for MTP moderator is an inspiration, Tina. Hitchens, Buckley, and Josh or Glenn on the panel would complete the best and most entertaining news team anywhere. I would gladly watch it faithfully even though I gave up network and cable news for my 1994 New Year's resolution.

It's like the Doonesberry class of Dr Kissenger's with the stoont who praised his new autobiagraphy, together with Eddie Fisher's, published at the same time. You destroy all credibility for a wise Rachel choice by stoking Greta von Suckup.

Although what I most remember of her was in a close-order fictional account by Dominic Dunne of the Simpson murders, when the protagonist after the outrage of the verdict was asked by Suckup: "Does this send a message to the LAPD?"

Ponder that a minute. Or pander it, which is what she was doing; presenting the ridiculous alibi of these showboating shysters in order to suck up to the killer in order to score a hot interview.

All journalists sell out. Joan Didion said that, I think. Enquirer pays hard cash, whereas the more respectable media outlets promise favorable coverage together with a possible book deal from another part of their corporate forest.

As for this Greta von Suckup; give me Eddie Fisher every time for my money.

Rachel Maddow is my favorite commentor, bar none. Keith O is a close second and was my favorite until Rachel. However, Rachel is a commentator, not a journalist, and is too biased for the job. If a fresh face is needed (and it is), I would suggest Ana Marie Cox, as she is willing to give credit to both sides when due. Gregory is pathetic and weak. Brokaw is too old school and I get embarrassed watching him. Olbermann is too biased, too.

So I'm going to throw out a name that I think would be a brilliant move, a true show of change, and a real audience-maker - Shepard Smith from FoxNews. He's always been too unbiased for FixNews, too much of a journalist, and this is an opportunity I think he'd take.

The Meet The Press host should be a neutral journalist who can ask hard hitting questions of everyone and who is perceived by both sides to be a fair player. Rachel Maddow plays for the "left" team quite openly and aggressively. Suggesting her indicates some misunderstanding of what Meet The Press is and how to keep it that way.

Katie Couric is a very good suggestion. Apparently some say she's a softball interviewer, though? I never get that sense from her. Quite the opposite.

Greta Van Susteren is wholly inappropriate. She's as poisoned by her association with Fox as Maddow is with Olbermann and MSNBC. She also is sorely lacking in the charisma and gravitas department.