By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

Mostly what Atrios said:

I've thought a lot about what Boehlert had to say about concerns about liberal bloggers channeling Drudgico type horsesh[*]t about Hillary Clinton. I think his basic point is important and correct, but he's wrong to make it an Obama/Clinton thing. One can certainly find pro-Clinton bloggers and commenters who do similar. Personally, I've tried to call media bullsh*t on both sides when I see it and as much us possible live by my basic rule of not reinforcing right wing narratives against Democrats. But I don't claim to be perfect or imagine that I always succeed at what I intend to do along those lines.

What Atrios glosses over is NBC. Because MSNBC has been the cable network that has been most fair to Dems generally for the past few years, Left blogs have given it a pass on its blatant sexist and misogynistic anti-Hillary bias. Most will not tell the truth about Keith Olbermann especially - he has become a bad joke. Most will not say that. And that is what Boehlert is talking about.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

Apparently, Michael Stickings did not understand my post. More likely Clinton Derangement Syndrome took over. Stickings writes:

Indeed, the view of the media as supporting Obama over Hillary is a popular one among Hillary supporters — see Taylor Marsh and TalkLeft’s Big Tent Democrat, for example, both of whom, believe it or not, argue that Rendell is right. Here’s the latest Clintonian trend: suck up to the right-wing media. . . I’ll let Steve Benen translate: “Rendell’s argument seemed to be that Fox News is more negative towards Obama than the credible cable news networks, which therefore makes Fox News ‘fair,’ ‘objective,’ and ‘balanced.’”

Stickings denies the Media favors Obama over Clinton? Well, what more do you need to know about where his mind has gone. But it is a shame to see that Steve Benen suffers from the same Clinton hating disease. Let me explain to Benen and Stickings one more time. The argument is NOT that Fox is fair to Dems. It is not. It is unbelievably unfair and biased against Dems. We all know this. The point is that the Obama News Network (NBC) is so in the tank for Obama, and so anti-Hillary, that Fox is fair by comparison to NBC. Now they KNOW this was the point. But they ignored the NBC point of Rendell's comments. It's sad really what Clinton hate can do to once fine minds. More . . .

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

TPM wakes up to its and other Obama supporters' errors:

That Hillary is now pushing this line [that Obama surrogates have called for her to drop out] suggests that her advisers believe Obama surrogates erred in giving her an opening to galvanize her supporters and play the feisty underdog -- something the Obama campaign may recognize, too, judging by its efforts to rapidly dial back the calls for her to leave the race.

Um, duh. And Josh Marshall's own laughable attempts to retract his negative campaign against Clinton's continuing in the race demonstrates TPM "erred" in its campaign for its favored candidate, Barack Obama. More . . .

• Thanks to Paul Krugman for citing TalkLeft on his blog yesterday.

• Another Gitmo detainee has been charged with a death-penalty eligible crime.

• In Denver, an ICE agent is on trial for improperly accessing the NCIC database and providing the information to the unsuccessful gubernatorial campaign of former Rep. Bob Beauprez.

This is an open thread? You can pick the topics, just keep it civil.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

Talk Left friend Kos writes today:

But aside from that, I'd be saying the exact same thing [about MI and FL] I'm saying now, I'd just swap out Clinton's name for Obama.

Kos in January 2008:

Clinton was the only top-tier candidate to refuse the ultimate Iowa and New Hampshire pander by removing her name from the Michigan ballot. That makes her essentially the de facto winner since Edwards and Obama, caving to the cry babies in Iowa and New Hampshire, took their name off Michigan's ballot. Sure, the DNC has stripped Michigan of its delegates, but that won't last through the convention. The last thing Democrats can afford is to alienate swing states like Michigan and Florida by refusing to seat their delegates. So while Obama and Edwards kneecap their chances of winning, Clinton is single-mindedly focused on the goal.

Just sayin' More . .

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

I highly recommend this Matt Yglesias post. The money line for me:

I think that's right, and it's a reminder that though the cliché is to say that Democrats are torn between two very strong candidates, in some ways we're torn between two very weak ones.

This will make me popular with no one, but neither candidate is very electable now and neither is what I wanted from our nominee this year - a Fighting Dem. I support the candidate I believe is the more electable - Barack Obama, but I have no illusions about his weaknesses, on electablity and on political style for governance. My expectations are low now. And yes, I strongly believe a Unity Ticket is necessary for Dems to have a good chance in November.

By Big Tent Democrat

speaking for me only

This is the type of post that burns me up. Bowers writes:

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking speaking for me only

Apparently, Josh Marshall got a lot of "feedback" for his post that I discussed here. His reply to that feedback seems equally nonsensical to me:

[W]hat is this new gambit for her about? Is she really serious about taking her case to the convention's credentials committee -- which seems almost certain to have a majority of Obama supporters -- and trying to get them to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates on her terms?

. . . [F]rom my view, saying she's in it till August isn't about August. It's not even about June. It's about stamping out doubts about her viability and determination to stay in so she can still be in the game in April and May.

(Emphasis supplied.) This makes no sense to me. Clinton's viability is absolutely tied to Michigan and Florida. The reason Clinton is fighting for Florida and Michigan is because she needs them to capture the nomination. Oh by the way, it happens to be the right thing for the Democratic Party if Obama supporter Marshall actually cares. More . . .

Shine a Light, Martin Scorcese's new film about the Rolling Stones opens in theatres, including IMAX, April 4. The The LA Times has a good feature article on the film.

Who's looking forward to seeing it? Hillary. [more...]

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

While it is true that Super Delegates can change their mind at any time up to the Convention, I have always supported counting the announced super delegates based on their stated public preference. Thus I think Chris Bowers' post on that is helpful. But I would be remiss if I did not note that Chris flip flopped on the issue of counting superdelegates:

By Big Tent Democrat

MYDD has brought on an old blog friend of mine, Carnacki, the proprietor of West Virginia Blue, to blog the May 13 West Virginia Democratic primary. It will be must reading.

Let's make this an Open Thread.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

Via commenter white n az, a report from the Eschacon Media criticism forum (see also Susie Madrak's own report, she was the moderator):

Media Matters' Eric Boehlert. . . . [T]here's a new phenomenon ... it goes back to Gore's press in 1999 which was "really unfair and really weird." What's happening online now is potentially dangerous: HRC has gotten dreadful press, not fair, "gotcha," and so on -- there's a portion of the blogosphere that has ignored that and there's a portion that has encouraged that. It's dangerous because the media criticism has to be consistent and relentless, and we can't very well say, "You can't go after our candidates ... except this one." I get nervous about pushback regarding disingenuous coverage - our response needs to be, "You can't treat Democrats this way." When people in the left blogosphere are quoting an anonymous Matt Drudge source, it makes me nervous.

[Susie] Madrak: the rule of thumb is that if you read or hear something that makes you hate another Democrat, you need to dig down further because there's more to the story. The real enemy is the media, and they see themselves as the only superdelegates.

(Emphasis supplied.) BTW, Eschacon sounds great, Krugman will be discussing DFH economics with Duncan. MORE . . .