0 moved on and we see a video, videos of the terrible, horrible 400 children who were gassed and killed that everything changed. pundits started to say, no x we are not going to -- no, we are not going to do this. reporters, anchors started to have a skeptical tone. >> what strikes me is often when it comes to president obama you have the gang at msnbc and they are acting as a cheerleading squad, but on this one, chris matthews, ed schulz and others opposing the president on inter veption in syria and i wonder if that says we reached a moment where obama at least on this issue has no friends in the press? >> strange bedfellow here not only in the press, but in congress. you have people like liz cheney and barbara lee agreeing on this that america shouldn't intervene. some people call it a war and the white house is calling it a military inter veption in president of the united states -- i want to stay focused on the media. >> you say he has no moral authority. you are acting as a public dit and saying -- public dit and saying this guy doesn't have what it takes to persuade the country. but don't people in our business have a lot to do with this? their tone has consistently been skeptical, aggressive, is this another iraq? >> gee, i wonder why after the history of the administration? that's our job. they come out and sell this and -- i tell you who has done a good job in the media, cspan with the congressional hearings. mike mccal from texas when he questioned the nature of the opposition and kerry's facts were all over the place. there is no radical, oh, maybe 20%. they have been telling us a narrative without facts. >> when the "washington post" describes the evidence of chemical attacks by the assad regime as alleged i wonder if he would have seen that in 2002 and 2003 and whether there is such a hangover from the dark shadow of iraq that many in the media feel like they have got to be more cautious and skeptical about this. >> it is the reason why the media is singing this chorus of caution. you see it everywhere. people remember and journalists remember the iraq war and the mistakes that were made in that war and in reporting that war. >> that's right. people lost their jobs, right? everybody thinks about judith miller's reporting. >> at the new york times. well she went to jail on an unrelated case, but people lost their reputations and people had to apologize for being too credited you los about the bush administration's claims. here you have almost a perfect storm. you have the natural skepticism of the press having taken a beating over iraq and you have the fact that there is so little support apparently in the country for this military intervention. it would be different if the president had just done it unilaterally. in a way are the media reflecting public sentiment? >> they reflected public sentiment back during the iraq war too. the context was we were just hit in september in the public and they very much were wanting blood in someways and believe there is a connection between saddam and al-qaeda and i think the press reflected that. i don't think the press should always reflect what the public thinks especially if the public is misinformed. but i think with this it is very very -- i have had a hard time finding just regular people let alone folks in the press supportive of this war. most people are skeptical. >> we talk about the pictures or lack there of since there are few reporters in syria. it is dangerous and risky to go there, but the new york times ran that and obtained out of syria last year. talk about that front page picture and what impact it may have had. >> the 27-year-old rebel commander who they call uncle has guns pointed over these seven soldiers. >> cap you are tood government soldiers and later executed and that was quite an eye opener. >> right. but it also muddles for reporters. while we were thinking that the narrative was the rebels are okay and the assad regime is wrong, but then you look at that and then you think, wait a minute, it is happening on both sides. >> i have an exit question here having to do with the role of commentators. we saw white house strategy sessions, trying to get everybody on the same talking points and who goes over there but a bunch of former obama aides. talking about stephanie cuter who is the new host of "cross fire" and former msn people who are now common -- commentators. >> it is outrageous. we talked about that especially with gibbs and axel rod. when i watch them, especially gibbs, he sits there in a coma and somebody says something bad about president obama and he jumps up. they are loyalists. they are hard core loyalists. that's not what the media should not be -- >> one at a time. >> that's their job. it is very clear who stephanie cuter is. she worked for obama and she is on a show that is an opinion show. >>- q. i and that's why she was -- >> that's why she was hired. viewers expect her to have an inside knowledge of how the white house works and a current pipeline. i don't necessarily -- i don't think anyone thinks stephanie gibbs -- stephanie cuter or robert gibbs are commentators. >> of course she will be pro obama. there seems to be a little difference between that stance and going to strategy meetings. by the way -- >> yes, so he can craft his message. >> by the way, when karl rove appears on fox and he is in charge of raising money for public candidates and presidential candidates possibly the last time around newt gingrich appearing on fox it was fair to question whether they are pushing an agenda. >> let's go to war for moral reasons. let's convince the country of the moral righteousness of it and not five spin doctors sitting in the white house cooking up a strategy. >> i'm sorry, but that is what the program is. as long as you are transparent to your readers -- >> that's the question. will they be transparent? >> they know who these people are. >> we are out of time for this segment. send a tweet to our show at media buzz fnc. we hope to read some later. when we come back, a billionaire is visiting his new property. and the staff tweets everything about the new founder. we'll take you behind the scenes in a moment.