home

Friday Night Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:36:58 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Read Somerby on Olbermann. Scroll down to "The Torch Is Passed."

Countdown has almost surely become the most propagandized show in cable “news” history. Yes, you can still find pure crap in the mainstream press. But pure crap abounds now on Countdown.

Obama's O'Reilly is Olbermann. This is an Open Thread.

Comments now closed. Thread cleaned of some insults. Not finished yet.

< Dean on Final Primaries and Superdelegates | Prepare to Read the Fine Print in Your ISP Agreement >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Friday Night Open Thread | 222 comments (222 topical)
    Clyburn saying stuff on Media that he doesn't (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by TalkRight on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:44:15 PM EST
    think it is true.. but is saying only because people are saying so... opps.. you would think he could do better... ! Now you know why DNC leadership s*cks

    What did he say on O? (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by rooge04 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:55:16 PM EST
    cuz I totally will not watch that show but I am curious to know what Clyburn said.

    [ Parent ]
    Clintons raicst, he got monica in, if Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Salt on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:26:35 PM EST
    is nominee Blacks wont vote threat, and Norton flubbed it beofre him so the story goes Wrights as Obama surrogate not doing Obama any favors and Bill Clinton racist comments not doing Hillary any favors....... it was pitiful really nothing different than SC.  

    Stephine Tubbs Jones kicked butt she was great she is an excellent, excellent offical and a role model for all.

    [ Parent ]

    The usual stuff (none / 0) (#12)
    by TalkRight on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:05:57 PM EST
    Enjoy

    [ Parent ]
    That's it ? (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by mrjerbub on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:13:45 PM EST
    I didn't hear O'ber-rielly say a dog gone thing. Does anybody have anything more?


    [ Parent ]
    Its Hillary's fault if white working voters don't (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by TalkRight on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:19:33 PM EST
    vote for Obama in the November, if he is the nominee.. my god, isn't that what Hillary has been all along warning the super delegates that come november Obama doesn't have the profile to win the white working class (that Axelrod has already said they have lost, and really don't worry about it.)

    Just blame Hillary/Bill for everything that goes wrong.. (isn't that the republican strategy?)

    [ Parent ]

    Hillary's fault (5.00 / 1) (#208)
    by cawaltz on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:04:56 AM EST
    It'll be Hillary's fault if white working class  don't vote for Obama but it isn't Obama's fault if AAs don't vote for Clinton(which is what Obama surrogates have been implying)? Oh that's right, I forgot the standards are different for the two campaigns. One campaign takes on the responsibility and the other places the blame on everyone else(Gosh THAT sounds familiar for some reason too.)

    [ Parent ]
    "(isn't that the republican strategy?".. (none / 0) (#41)
    by mrjerbub on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:40:01 PM EST
    Unfortunatley. But is that really the source? In order to continue parcipitating in this election cycle, I need to know whether I'm part of the problem or not. I will not help destroy the DemocratIC party. I need it.

    [ Parent ]
    what for? (4.50 / 4) (#89)
    by sas on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:50:05 PM EST
    Really-why do you need the Democratic party?

    I've been a Democrat since 1971 - hardcore.

    With all the crap the party is doing now, and with its ROTTEN leadership, I am thinking why did I cling to it so long?

    Was it abortion?  Is it now stem cell research?  Social Security?  Universal Health care?

    I have realized if it's Hillary - that's my Democratic party.  She speaks for me.

    If it's Obama - what the hell is it?  I'm not even convinced he is a Democrat, or holds the same things dear as I do.  I think he's in it to play the game - smooth talkin' Barry rides into town, takes what he needs from unsuspecting small town idiots, then leaves - without having done anything, leaving a trail of slime.

    OMG-he can't win the Democratic base - this is a friggin' nightmare.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Well (gulp) (none / 0) (#172)
    by mrjerbub on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:26:54 AM EST
    I'm what the repubs call one of those "entitlement" people. I receive VA disability and my daughter (IMO and many others)is disabled due to my exposure to agent orange. Republicans don't believe in evolution, but they sure believe in natural selection.

    [ Parent ]
    what for? (3.00 / 1) (#92)
    by sas on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:53:59 PM EST
    Really-why do you need the Democratic party?

    I've been a Democrat since 1971 - hardcore.

    With all the crap the party is doing now, and with its ROTTEN leadership, I am thinking why did I cling to it so long?

    Was it abortion?  Is it now stem cell research?  Social Security?  Universal Health care?

    I have realized if it's Hillary - that's my Democratic party.  She speaks for me.

    If it's Obama - what the hell is it?  I'm not even convinced he is a Democrat, or holds the same things dear as I do.  I think he's in it to play the game - smooth talkin' Barry rides into town, takes what he needs from unsuspecting small town idiots, then leaves - without having done anything, leaving a trail of slime.

    OMG-he can't win the Democratic base - this is a friggin' nightmare.

     

    [ Parent ]

    I guess that I will vote in 2012 (none / 0) (#17)
    by TalkRight on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:09:08 PM EST
    I will stay home this year!! Thats what he is saying!

    [ Parent ]
    Rovian (none / 0) (#206)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 07:49:40 AM EST
    In effect, Clyburn said: "I don't think this, but... others in Congress are saying it..."

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks BTD truer words were never spoken!! (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by athyrio on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:44:42 PM EST


    Read further down. (5.00 / 2) (#149)
    by ghost2 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:37:53 AM EST
    According to MSNBC transcript of Wed 23/April, Olbermann was just, oh, chatting with a guest, and referring to the three guys in an Obama video with a particular t-shirt, thought they were plants by the campaign. From DailyHowler:

    MECURIO: Absolutely, but I don't believe the campaign. I think it was a plant. Remember when Barbara Bush said Hillary rhymes with "witch?" Well, Obama is sending a message to the world that she rhymes with "Fitch." ...

    ...   "You're saying it was to get everybody to think that Hillary Clinton was rich," Keith playfully countered. "Don`t want to get the network in any more trouble."

    Can the misogeny and the bandruptcy of the discourse go any lower?  Are Obama and his supporter deliberately trying to help Hillary and sabatoge themselves?  What crap is this?

    [ Parent ]

    I thought it was a bad move to (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by nycstray on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:51:20 AM EST
    have those guys behind him. The voters he needs to attract don't buy that brand.

    [ Parent ]
    Barbara Bush should ask for a correction (5.00 / 2) (#156)
    by Cream City on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:51:21 AM EST
    and apology, too.  Not what she said, and she wasn't talking about Clinton.  (It was "rich" and about Ferraro.)

    Olbermann can't even get facts straight on his show -- the 2 percent or so that is even about facts.  the rest is just what he pulls out of his posterior.  

    [ Parent ]

    KO Has Become What He Disdained.... (5.00 / 5) (#3)
    by PssttCmere08 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:44:45 PM EST
    As has Kos.  It is said because KO used to be so strident against Bush and made so much sense.  But, then he went in the tank for Obama and has lost all sense of objectivity and honesty.

    Wouldn't it be great if they would all (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:57:50 PM EST
    go back to beating up on Repubs? I miss the good old days.

    [ Parent ]
    Yeah, but in those days (5.00 / 7) (#10)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:01:48 PM EST
    I actually believed that some of what they said was true.

    Now I know that EVERYTHING they say is hogwash.  

    [ Parent ]

    Guess there's no going back now. *sigh* (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:08:40 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Heartbreaker... (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by mrjerbub on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:14:36 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Those Days Are Officially Gone (5.00 / 15) (#22)
    by NOBAMA08 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:16:57 PM EST
    I'm glad this election has woken much of us up to reality. Hating Bush isn't hard. I now Republicans who hate Bush. That doesn't make someone a liberal, a Democrat, or a good journalist. Bush was the best thing that happened to these "journalists" the last eight years. He made their careers: Olbermann, Jon Stewart, and all the other liberal pundits and entertainers who became famous for their Bush bashing. Do you think they would have nearly as much to complain about if a competent president was in power? These people live for conflict and incompetency.

    Bush also made any politician next to him look good (cough Pelosi cough). Now that Bush is leaving office, many of us need to gain a new perspective to what is really going on in the Democratic Party and the progressive movement. Folks, we've been fooled. The Democratic leadership is incompetent, just not as incompetent as the Bush administration. They have not worked in our interest. Pelosi never worked in our interest - she took impeachment off the table. Why did we vote for these people in the first place if they weren't planning to do anything with Bush and ending the Iraq War? We could've just waited until 2008 to elect a new president.

    They look down on most of us. They could care less about our votes because they've chosen a candidate for us anyway. Bush also allowed these progressive organizations like MoveOn.org fool so many of us into donating our time and money into helping their organization until they all turned their back on us and not only endorsed Obama but are fighting to make sure the voters in MI and FL don't count.

    I'm sorry but this is bullsh*t. I did not wait 8 years for this mess. I will not support the Democratic Party or the "progressive" movement is this is their plan for the next 8 years - disenfranchising voters and electing another inexperienced leader to power. This just shows us that the DNC and "journalists" like Olbermann are very similar to what we hated in the right wing except with a different ideology. The things they do share with the right wing, however, are too disgraceful to ignore: disenfranchising voters, sexism, disdain for the poor, and absolute disregard for the will of the Democratic base.

    I lived through 8 years of Bush. I'll live through 4 years of McCain if it means getting rid of these jerks and building a new and better Democratic Party from the ashes.

    [ Parent ]

    That's the saddest part! (5.00 / 5) (#28)
    by rooge04 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:20:46 PM EST
    I was sooo excited. So elated. So damn happy for this year to come.  And now it's here and I wish it were 2005 again.

    [ Parent ]
    2005? (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by CoralGables on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:20:35 PM EST
    Choose the late 90's and I'll go with you

    [ Parent ]
    Beating up... who? (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by BackFromOhio on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:17:47 PM EST
    It seems to me KO, Democrats in Congress & Co. are far better at beating up people within their family of Democrats than at standing up to the Republicans....

    [ Parent ]
    one of the reasons I oppose Obama (5.00 / 6) (#82)
    by Josey on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:38:41 PM EST
    While Obama trashes the Clinton administration, he assures voters his administration would reflect Ronald Raygun's.
    I don't trust him. The DC/Dem establishment and elites own him. Obama is a Centrist - not a Progressive. The insiders couldn't handle that much change. And they certainly wouldn't be supporting him if they thought for a minute he'd "change Washington."

    [ Parent ]
    The thing with (5.00 / 4) (#130)
    by Serene1 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:47:23 PM EST
    Obama is that he stands for Nothing.

    When he was in Chicago he was with the cool gang of Wright, ayers etc and his views then were always far left in tune with the political climate there.
    Now when he is running for the GE he becomes a centrist more of the off right centrist variety.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama wants you to think he's a centrist (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by kimsaw on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 05:00:50 AM EST
    I don't think Obama's anymore a centrist than he is a democrat. His worst trait is that he plays to it all. Just think Lieberman and Lamont, his anti Clinton years drum beat, his McCain gaffe, the race card, you're likable enough and he comes out looking like a confused teenager still trying to figure out who he is. Young people totally get that, like he is them.

    He has not defined himself which creates distrust, throw in a cult like revival rallies and the middle of America, the birth place of common sense, gets nervous or at least some of us do.

    [ Parent ]

    Hmmm... (none / 0) (#62)
    by Addison on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:11:32 PM EST
    ...makes you wonder if he was always so right about Bush and the Republicans, huh? I mean, most Obama people think he's "making sense" being so "strident" for Obama now. So, I mean, eye of the beholder. Something for the non-omniscient among us to think about.

    [ Parent ]
    Is Abrams responsible? (5.00 / 5) (#4)
    by MarkL on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:45:29 PM EST
    Someone is letting the "boys" on MSNBC act this way. Where does the buck stop?

    Abrams is no longer general mgr (5.00 / 5) (#5)
    by andrys on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:52:08 PM EST
    I watched for a few minutes but KO spent the entire time wanting someone to discuss with him his favorite theory that Hillary MUST be intent on destroying Obama right now and maybe even the party so that in 4 years she can run for President.

      He was serious.  Anyone else would know she wants it now and if they pay attention and are willing to accept it (he's not) there's a possibility she can get it.

      But he'd rather believe she is 'harming' Obama (as if he doesn't do it on his own and will have been innoculated by what Hannity brought up early) in order to be able to run in 2012 after Obama loses this year.

      He was going on and on when I changed channels.  The man needs a doctor.  Or a lawyer, for what he's trying to do to her character via the air waves.

    - Andrys

    I enjoyed the sarcastic (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Coldblue on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:55:20 PM EST
    commentary of Olbermann when he was railing against Republicans, not Democrats.

    But I'm not a member of the Creative Class either.

    Great analysis by Somerby... (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by MaryGM on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:57:34 PM EST
    ...as usual.  And quoting from VW's Flush?  Random, but I agree. It's the hidden treasure in Woolf's catalogue.

    I was trying to post a nearly identical (none / 0) (#32)
    by Radiowalla on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:23:51 PM EST
    comment, but some gremlin in the tubes ate it.  Yes, indeed, the Virginia Woolf segment was simply delicious!

    Bob Somerby is a national treasure, no way around it.

    [ Parent ]

    What'd he say? (none / 0) (#52)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:57:10 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Read BTD's link (none / 0) (#94)
    by cymro on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:58:29 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    It's not thatt the sneer campaign is (5.00 / 7) (#14)
    by WillBFair on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:08:13 PM EST
    so idiotic: Hillary bought a new watch; she's pandering to the tinker's union before betraying them for a loaf of designer bread. What's sad is that Obama's young worshippers ate it with a shovel. They also were hypnotized in three minutes by the most shallow rhetoric from a candidate since Bush's compassionate conservatism, or Nader's proportional representation. Obviously the colleges aren't teaching critical thinking. I haven't heard that much name calling since kindergarten. This is ignorance at the cellular level, and there's no point trying to talk with people who prefer childish insults to rational discourse, and who never learned the art of adult conversation.

    LOL* (none / 0) (#160)
    by AnninCA on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:04:42 AM EST
    Tell us how you really feel.  :)

    [ Parent ]
    It does make you wonder (none / 0) (#210)
    by esmense on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:14:57 AM EST
    what is going on in our institutions of higher learning. It also perhaps accounts for all the incompetence we've seen demonstrated at the most elite levels of finance, business, public service and politics over the last several years.

    [ Parent ]
    Please, no anti-intellectualism here (none / 0) (#218)
    by Cream City on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:44:27 AM EST
    Leave that to the right wing; they've been doing it so long, they do it so much better.  

    As a history teacher at a campus, I can tell you that we're teaching plenty of critical thinking in such classes -- ye olde liberal arts.  Of course, what's going on at your institutions of higher ed is that the number-one most popular major is business.

    So take your ire to the business schools that turn out the MBAs like Bush, the business schools that get the massive funding and the new buildings from the business sector.  At the public campuses, that's in addition to their larger take from your taxes, although your tax support is going down and down -- leaving us very little of what's left.  

    Take that issue to your state legislators to effect change in higher ed.  We're teachers, not lobbyists.

    [ Parent ]

    Sorry Cream City (none / 0) (#237)
    by esmense on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:07:38 PM EST
    I was just being a little snarky. I've read so many narrow-minded and bigoted blog comments recently from self-congratulatory "creative class" members that I've begun to wonder if they learned anything at their institutions of higher learning other than undeserved self-regard. But it is wrong to confuse failures of moral character with failures in education -- or to blame educational institutions for those personal, moral failings.

    [ Parent ]
    ko and the rest will go back to (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by kenosharick on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:08:19 PM EST
    slamming  repubs after they have finished off Hillary. How hysterical will they be when he gets creamed by mccain partly due to how they all chased away millions of Hillary supporters. Of course they will blame her TOTALLY for the loss.

    I don't really care. (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by rooge04 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:28:10 PM EST
    I don't care if they blame Hillary, Bill or her millions of supporters. In fact, I'm sure they will. I don't care though. I fully expect it. It will just add to the list of "Yep, I knew it" during this campaign season. Like the sudden racism charges before a large AA population votes (which is odd considering it's not like Obama is um, losing ground there).  How will it affect Hillary? I don't think she'd run again in 2012.  And her voters will add to the rolls of Indies and Republicans in the next couple of months nevermind years.  Democrats will DESERVEDLY find themselves in the political wilderness.

    [ Parent ]
    The race card... (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by NO2WONDERBOY on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:26:42 AM EST
    HAS been played all along since the post-New Hampshire, pre-So.Carolina primaries very effectively by the Obama campaign. It has been corroborated on many occassions that President Clinton's remarks were twisted  around and misrepresented; yet it stiill 'sticks', when they want to win a point. HOWEVER, this SUBTERFUGE IS QUICKLY BECOMING AN ANACHRONISM since we first heard his pastor's incindiary astaments, his wife's, his OWN "BitterCling-Gate" and see that the shoe is in the other foot, so to speak. Consequently, it is not as important that he said it or not, simply because he wont so that he can claim he did not know anything about it, as he has done with all with all of his associations' reprehensible pronounciations and/or actions.

    Yesterday morning,the campaign (Obama's) tried, with the tacit cooperation of the 'favorable' media, to point out Senator Clinton's win in Penn. as a racist vote on the part of the white voters, but I noticed it wasn't getting enough steam then. None of them however, have made a similar claim to the solid block votes of the blaacks. 9 out of 10 voters for Obama are black, and this are not scrutinized under the same prism?
    NOT Fair! LOL.
                                                                                                                                                                                                       

    [ Parent ]

    I noticed that too (none / 0) (#201)
    by stillife on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 06:28:23 AM EST
    There was some poll of PA white Dem voters with about 15% who said race was a factor in their vote, and of those 15% about 25% didn't vote for Obama.  Or something like that - I don't recall the exact numbers.  Of course, there was no mention of the 90% AA vote going for Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    I really doubt they can finish Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by diplomatic on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:29:05 PM EST
    The joke's on them.

    [ Parent ]
    Totally true. (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by rooge04 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:33:58 PM EST
    I doubt they can finish her off for the primary.  I think they wouldn't be able to beat her in the GE. She'd win that too.

    [ Parent ]
    Zombie bloggers are burning up accumulated cred (5.00 / 3) (#175)
    by Ellie on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:39:50 AM EST
    Political and media watchdog blogs became an alternative information source after 2000 by countering hooey with demonstrable facts.

    Raising funds and support to maintain this was resourceful (in every sense) and lent itself to replacing abusers of the public's govt, resources and trust.

    The downward spiral happened when prominent bloggers decided to become abusive themselves and venture into kingmaking, using tactics like extortion and thugging.

    The Bush "re"-"election" and the Obama campaign, predicated on the conceit that "we" could have our own Rethuggernaut has seen a once valuable service now used to dispense DIS-information as suits personal ambitions.

    I think that it's a phase but a bad one and the blogs that work this to the extreme will collapse on themselves. Whatever respect they earned over the years by being scrupulous when dispensing research and objectively sourced facts -- on Iraq, torture, Plamegate, govt malfeasance etc -- they've burned through in propping up new houses of cards.

    I'm not talking about blogs that openly exist as meeting places to swap opinion and commentary, or promote individual voices, but blogs that venture into exercises like, eg, deploying astro-turfing and trolls to harass "rival" opinions and shut them down. That's just gooning and thugging.

    Recent example: the establishment in Newsweek, Markos Moulitsas employer, that HRC had to win PA by 20 or it wasn't a "real" win. The use of dKos to dispense this to troll brigades to spread around and pressure people not to believe their lying eyes. What a pointless, stupid exercise to do nothing more than create a black hole to obliterate time, skill and resources that would have been better used to empower and inform the public with real information about candidates for office.

    [ Parent ]

    Olbermann's tale is sad (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Exeter on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:09:19 PM EST
    He began with such good intentions, trying to emulate his idol, Edward R. Murrow. And for awhile he was really good. But at some point, his ego got the best of him.

    He literally started using Edward R. Murrow's sign-off and seemed to get himself so worked up with his "special comments" that he seemed to be almost convulsing.

    Then, finally, the Clinton-Obama campaign came along and he finally plunged off the deep end. Obsessivley ranting against Clinton each and every broadcast. Taking partial truths and trangressions and turning them into beyond-a- reasonable-doubt Class A felonies.

    In short, Olbermann had ironically become who his idol fought to stop: Joe McCarthey.

    What if the Ed Murrow imitation was a ploy ... (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by cymro on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:12:31 PM EST
    ... designed to establish his liberal credentials? Later, having ingratiated himself with Democrats,  he would be positioned to attack them during the election.

    After all, if you are trying to shape public opinion and control the outcome of elections, you can't just control one side of the debate. You need to control both sides, and manipulate things to make it look like there is a real contest going on.

    So we have FOX and MSNBC acting as if they are are political opponents, but working towards the same outcome. And newspapers like the NYT that are owned by RW moguls but which the RW routinely ridicules as "the liberal media".

    [ Parent ]

    Columbia Journalism Review on Olbermann (5.00 / 2) (#205)
    by Josey on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 07:46:39 AM EST
    http://tinyurl.com/3sl5nw

    There's really no getting around the core problem here: that a prominent newsman suggested, on national television, that a candidate for the presidency of the United States should be beaten up (or worse). Even being generous and leaving aside the sexism/violence stuff...it was a stupid thing for Olbermann to say. Not "stupid" as in "inappropriate"--although it's that, too--but "stupid" as in "intellectually vapid" and "insipid" and "a waste of everyone's time." There's so much that the press, reporters and commentators alike, could be talking about right now when it comes to the campaign--and when it comes to everything else that's going on in the world. Instead, here's one of the most powerful men in the media, a man who can boast an audience of nearly a million viewers each night, vocally amusing himself at the image of the Democratic superdelegates "deciding" the nomination by beating up the second-place candidate. It's frustrating. It's insulting. It's baffling.


    [ Parent ]

    Not Quite (1.00 / 1) (#101)
    by Spike on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:05:24 PM EST
    I've watched Olbermann nightly for years and I think he soured on Clinton when she started adopting the Rovian political tactics of the Republican Party. After railing against Bush for so long, he probably felt that he had to remain consistent to his often stated values.

    [ Parent ]
    Spike just comes here to mix it up (5.00 / 2) (#137)
    by Cream City on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:01:09 AM EST
    and never replies.  Check out his record.  Don't bother with him.

    [ Parent ]
    And what would those Rovian (none / 0) (#102)
    by tigercourse on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:11:36 PM EST
    tactics be?

    [ Parent ]
    examples please (none / 0) (#113)
    by angie on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:25:07 PM EST
    Obama supporters often accuse Hillary of "Rovian tactics" with absolutely no support. I personally doubt that anyone of them can define "Rovian tactics" because it is quite clear that Hillary is not the one using them in the Dem. primary.  

    [ Parent ]
    Rovian (none / 0) (#161)
    by AnninCA on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:07:30 AM EST
    is just a demeaning term, as far as I can see.  What I don't like about the new type of political talk is that so few people bother to offer examples of proof.  How can I judge an idea without any examples?  What if the examples are obviously misinterpreted?  Lopsided?

    These light opinion makers are turning politics into nothing more than a kind of entertainment show.

    That seems very dangerous for the country, frankly.

    [ Parent ]

    Well, you are right to a point (5.00 / 2) (#187)
    by angie on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 03:07:26 AM EST
    as the Obama camp uses the term "Rovian tactics" it is just demeaning -- but there are specific tactics Rove successfully used to get W into the office of Governor of TX & into the WH, and those are tactics that Obama has been using: 1. Go negative and cry foul (injection of racism); 2. Attack your opponents strengths to turn them into weaknesses (Hillary's experience as First Lady now = hosting tea parties); 3. Redefine your opponent on your terms (Hillary was only elected because of Bill's affair; Hillary is the "most secretive politician in America, etc); etc. I haven't seen that Hillary has used any of these divisive ploys, but clearly Obama keeps going back to the Rovian well.  

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks (none / 0) (#229)
    by AnninCA on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:42:52 AM EST
    Angie for clarifying.  That term had no real meaning for me.

    I kept reading bits and pieces and thinking, "But that's what he's doing," but everyone seemed convinced it was her tactics.

    I agree with you.  It's exactly what he's doing.

    [ Parent ]

    And a major Clinton strength (none / 0) (#231)
    by Cream City on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:56:37 AM EST
    that won us the presidency for the only time in more than three decades was their record on racial issues, which won AAs.  So you might notice that the anti-Clintonites in the party put forward an AA candidate, one who claimed to be post-racial -- while his surrogates made it about race even in the Iowa campaign, and then as soon as Clinton won her first primary in NH, Obama's surrogates claimed it was the "Bradley effect" (incorrecly using that theory, btw) and called Bill a racist and claimed that Hillary didn't cry about Katrina's AA victims, etc., etc.

    The most Rovian of strategies -- in picking the candidate that Kennedy/Kerry/Durbin, etc., would push -- and of tactics by the candidate's campaign.

    [ Parent ]

    Rovian (none / 0) (#126)
    by janarchy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:43:52 PM EST
    Yes, I heard Arianna Huffington use that same word tonight on Bill Maher's show. Since I can't ask her, please, tell us and give us examples of these tactics of which you speak.

    [ Parent ]
    You list the fall quite well. (none / 0) (#27)
    by jeffhas on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:19:59 PM EST
    As much as I loved how he skewered the Repubs even I became unsettled with his behavior...

    His stealing of Murrows close was especially annoying...

    ... then I became sick of his special comments because they seemed like such ego-fests.

    I watched him less and less... and this was long before his Hillary hatred, but that sealed the deal for me.  Why couldn't he just remain an objective journalist/commentator?  Why reveal your preference?... I would argue even O'Reilly hid his  nomination preference better than KO.... how sad is that?

    Good Night and Good Luck KO...

    [ Parent ]

    Somerby was in such fine form today! (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by Radiowalla on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:17:12 PM EST
    I swear, that man is a national treasure!  

    His little piece from Virginia Woolf was pure delight.

    Stephanie Tubbs Jones (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by lilburro on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:19:55 PM EST
    corrects John King on the subject of Harold Ickes and Wright.  SHE says Harold Ickes did not bring up Wright with the Super Ds, but that they brought it up with him and he suggested they make their own choice on the matter.  I like how she said to King, "Excuse me sir, I won't talk over you, don't talk over me."

    Clyburn is the next subject.  Then the polygamists, then um, sharks.  

    This has been a good show I think.

    She was great, and John King (none / 0) (#232)
    by Cream City on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:58:30 AM EST
    deserved that slapdown.  I am so appalled at the treatment that tv gives guests, especially women, no matter their status and stature.  

    Of course, it probably means that we won't get to see much of her again on CNN.  But I will be watching her elsewhere.  And taking lessons. :-)

    [ Parent ]

    Who is inserting race in the campaign? (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by ChuckieTomato on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:42:51 PM EST
    wasn't there a "typical white person" comment a while back that every one in the media has forgotten about or ignored???

    Yes. (5.00 / 6) (#47)
    by shoephone on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:51:58 PM EST
    Wasn't that special when he tagged his own grandmother as a "typical white person"?

    [ Parent ]
    "typical white woman" (none / 0) (#95)
    by nycstray on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:58:35 PM EST
    if I remember correctly. You know, us pansy a** white women that cringe when we see a man of color on the street . . .  or so they say.

    I say, 'typical' male perspective. They are clueless that we view ANY man on the street as a threat in 'those' situations . . .

    [ Parent ]

    the "wrong" response too (none / 0) (#143)
    by andrys on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:15:30 AM EST
    You're right about it being any guy in an even mildly threatening situation.  In his book he explained the situation more -- it wasn't just passing one on the street, it was when she sat next to a guy who asked her for money and was not happy with only the $1 bill she gave him way back then.  He wanted more from her, and she felt threatened by him.

      Obama referred to the "typical white person" response of his grandmother as "wrong" and inferred the TWP would need educating and a higher consciousness.

      Incredibly remote guy and I guess he has issues with her to include her (a very private person in bad health) in that way as an introduction to the electorate, someone who made her cringe when Wright did not.

    - Andrys


    [ Parent ]

    Yeah, he has a real way with words ;) (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by nycstray on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:35:22 AM EST
    it's not the first time he's said something and then tried to re-explain it and make it worse.

    Funny thing is, it also wouldn't matter what race his grandmother is. It's a girl thing ;)

    Interesting that it was sitting next to someone and money. Public Transportation is another place women have to be careful. I've relied on it my entire adult life. Nothing like a crowded subway to make you feel violated, as there are those guys . . .

    Methinks Obama needs some educating beyond his limited sight. It might just raise his consciousness where gender is concerned.

    [ Parent ]

    He is not aware of (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by andrys on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 05:28:25 AM EST
    .. of how women can feel when a stranger of ANY complexion or outfit asks you for money and then is not happy with what you can give.  

      He could see only the 'wrong' response -- sounds like a guy who lives in books and theory and has little understanding of women.  His empathy for his grandmother's fear was definitely missing.  This was a time when she was earning the money for the household too.

    - Andrys


    [ Parent ]

    Lack Of Empathy For Women And For Poor (5.00 / 1) (#211)
    by MO Blue on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:22:29 AM EST
    people is very apparent in many of his remarks. Not to mention misplaced loyalty. Portraying his grandmother publicly in an unfavorable light to save his political a$$ goes against some of my very hard core values. This is something that is just not done in my family.  

    [ Parent ]
    Somewhere I said (none / 0) (#212)
    by Molly Pitcher on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:22:42 AM EST
    (inexact quote of song!) "Mamas, don't raise your sons to be misogonists."  Tha's not a joke, son! (atttibution to [Fred] Allen's Alley, I think.)

    I wonder if one of those once-ubiquitous personality analyses would diagnose O. as having felt emotionally abandoned by his mother?  

    [ Parent ]

    Somewhere I said (none / 0) (#213)
    by Molly Pitcher on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:25:32 AM EST
    (inexact quote of song!) "Mamas, don't raise your sons to be misogonists."  Tha's not a joke, son! (atttibution to [Fred] Allen's Alley, I think.)

    I wonder if one of those once-ubiquitous personality analyses would diagnose O. as having felt emotionally abandoned by his mother?  

    [ Parent ]

    Actually, it was "typical white person" (none / 0) (#233)
    by Cream City on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:00:24 PM EST
    so he wasn't just stereotyping white women.  He typifies all whites that way -- and that isn't a concern about someone who wants to be president?

    [ Parent ]
    It is good to see (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by bjorn on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:46:02 PM EST
    people taking on Olbermann. I have friends that are for Obama and used to watch KO, even they are too embarrassed to watch any more...that is how bad he has gotten.
    I think the only ones watching now are the male twenty-somethings.
    oh (none / 0) (#134)
    by sas on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:53:51 PM EST
    surely someone they can look up to

    [ Parent ]
    Hmm.. is Josh Marshall seeing (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by MarkL on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:56:08 PM EST
    the craziness?
    He links to Clift Note, with a bemused comment.
    I infer he thinks Clift is a bit daft---she's saying that Hillary will be settling a lot of scores if she wins the nomination.
    Well, actually.. I hope so!!
    hahaha
    But not with Obama. He has to be brought in, if she wins.

    I hope she settles even more scores (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by ruffian on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:05:02 PM EST
    if she does not win the nomination.  All the superdelegates she has spent the last 20 years of her life supporting and campaigning for?  Please.

    [ Parent ]
    heck yah... (none / 0) (#55)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:00:44 PM EST
    and we will be the cool kids....Ha.  

    [ Parent ]
    Not Ever (none / 0) (#115)
    by Spike on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:27:50 PM EST
    Clinton has to bring Obama in?

    Not in your life!

    At this point, they hate each other with a passion.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama does seem to have a lot of hate (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:59:18 PM EST
    in him, but you clearly are in his camp, so you have not watched Clinton in this campaign and for years.

    That's not the way she works.  Check out their very different ways of working the SOTU night -- she was the one who reached out to Obama, to Kennedy . . . and Kennedy is another old pro who knew how to handle it the same way, with cameras watching.

    Obama, not so much.  He turned away, he blew it, and we all could see it.  Not ready for prime time.

    [ Parent ]

    Oops, you had to go there (5.00 / 2) (#140)
    by waldenpond on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:07:37 AM EST
    but you don't understand Spike's personal animous for Clinton..... per spike....

    [in the wake of the SC campaign I reached the conclusion that I could never vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstances. Nothing she has done since has changed my mind. This has been personally painful for me because I was a mid-level staffer in the Clinton White House for eight years. I spent years defending the man with my friends and family. I don't regret those years because I got a lot of things done I'm personally proud of. But I will no longer defend Bill Clinton's record because that legacy has been permanently tainted in my eyes.]

    I don't know about you, but it sounds like a personal conversion to Obama event to me.

    [ Parent ]

    It sounds like something (5.00 / 4) (#146)
    by Cream City on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:25:13 AM EST
    I'd salt heavily before consumption, frankly.

    [ Parent ]
    LOL* (none / 0) (#176)
    by AnninCA on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:40:53 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Oh my. (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by rooge04 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:53:14 AM EST
    Doesn't the fact that they used to work for the Clintons make it all the more nutty that they became converts? LOL They weren't exactly horrid stewards of our nation.  I always find that examples of how much people used to love the Clintons as proof of how horrible they have become in their eyes rather funny.  Because it just shows how utterly insane some can become when under the Obama spell. LOL

    [ Parent ]
    it really is sad (none / 0) (#222)
    by ccpup on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:05:40 AM EST
    how unhinged some of his more vocal supporters seem to have become.  

    Perhaps a Basket Weaving for Obama therapy group when Hillary gets the nomination might be a good idea?

    :-)

    [ Parent ]

    BBC America's Newsnight Profile on Obama Focusing (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by SunnyLC on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:56:58 PM EST

    Link to the video and a synopsis at my site at:

    http://insightanalytical.wordpress.com/

    Good Site - Thanks n/t (none / 0) (#220)
    by MO Blue on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:46:25 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Bottom line on Post racial (5.00 / 3) (#53)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:59:25 PM EST
    lets face it, Obama promised that he was beyond race and that we are in a new era.  Well, truth be told he smeared the Clintons with racism, his pastor said all that stuff.  Now I want to know something.  Will the average post partisan white male, educated or not, still want to be worried about being considered racist every step of the way?  Will he want to watch his step and be careful?  People are not racists, they just don't want to be accused of it every time Obama sneezes.  

    This is the BEST thing (5.00 / 5) (#60)
    by americanincanada on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:10:17 PM EST
    I have read in a long time. Anyone who thinks this primary has become bizzaro world really should read it. But don't be drinking anything...it will shoot right out your nose!

    HUMPHREY

    That is a MUST READ (none / 0) (#70)
    by diplomatic on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:21:41 PM EST
    I hope Jeralyn or BTD front page a link to that blog.  Wow, that was a classic!  Really highlights the absurdity of what's going on in this primary.

    [ Parent ]
    Wasn't it though? (none / 0) (#84)
    by americanincanada on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:42:48 PM EST
    I have read it a few times already and it cracks me up every time.

    It IS Humphrey!

    [ Parent ]

    That is (none / 0) (#167)
    by AnninCA on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:17:14 AM EST
    fabulous!  

    [ Parent ]
    very funny! (none / 0) (#78)
    by sleepingdogs on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:29:51 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    that was pretty hilarious, (none / 0) (#88)
    by cpinva on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:49:59 PM EST
    in a "oh damn, my right hand just fell off!" kind of way. i especially loved poster "adam"s long-winded, but wrong posts, explaining how the guy who lost in the PA primary by 10 points to sen. clinton, actually beats her there in the GE.

    he claims to be formerly from va, and that obama has a real chance here in the fall. not f*ing likely! neither of them have a snowball's chance here in the fall.

    i did so enjoy dr. violet's responses. lol

    [ Parent ]

    Just got back from a Hillary rally! (5.00 / 4) (#66)
    by lansing quaker on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:17:03 PM EST
    Just got back from a Hill rally in East Chicago, IN!  The energy was ELECTRIC!!!

    Off topic? (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by Lahdee on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:22:50 PM EST
    Heh, I can't be off topic in Open Thread. I love open thread.
    Despite a loss in the closing minutes of their contest with the Penguins tonight in Pittsburgh I still loves me my Rangers. Go Rangers!

    KO is ridiculous, but so is Maddow (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by Terry M on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:34:16 PM EST
    I rarely watach MSNBC at all anymore, but I do every now and again watch David Gregory's show.  EVERY time I watch, Maddow is on, and she is billed as an MSNBC political nalyst.  Yeah right.  She is more in the tank for Obama than Axelrod is.  What was really funny was her anger over a Karl Rove article the other night.  Gregory described Rove as a political analyst, and Maddow went into faux disgust because she couldn't believe he was so described since Rove was obviously working for the McCain.

    Uh, Rachel, hello?  When do you do anything but whine and shill on behalf of Obama every single time you appear on tv?  I think you write his talking points every morning.  You, of ALL people, are in no place to complain about anyone else's biases (not that I give a rat's ass about defending Rove).

    And Chuck Todd.  I can't wait for November to come just so I won't have to hear the other insufferable Obama shill, Todd.  He used to say, before Penn., Obama leads by every metric; pledged delegates, popular vote, number of states won, blah, blah , blah.  But now, oh now, he says the popular vote is something we shouldn't even be considering.  It is just about pledge votes now(even though Obama is not close to reaching the pledged delegate vote minimum threshold yet, but nevermind).  Oh, and supers can't exercise their independent judgement - even though that is what they are there for precisely - but nevermind.

    Honestly, how much does Obama pay MSNBC? The same rate he pays a super when he or she commits to him? It is worth every penny for him because they never fail to stop fawning.  I hope they look back at their shows a couple of years from now; if they have any decency, they'll stick their collective heads in an oven out of shame.

    I saw that show and had the (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by bjorn on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:40:53 PM EST
    same reaction to Rachel. Every now and then she says something nice about Clinton to prove she is not in the tank for Obama, but she aint foolin anyone any more.  She also talks over people a lot on David's show.  I think she is too smart not to know when she is BSing.

    [ Parent ]
    Did you see Buchanan tell Maddow (none / 0) (#195)
    by andrys on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 05:51:53 AM EST
    ... to stop with the Marxist stuff?  LOL!  IT wasn't Marxist at all but it did stop her stream!

      She CAN be fair, infrequently, but she is emotionally too caught up in the Obama thing and looks almost weepy when people are too hard on him.  Feels very strongly about that Iraq vote and wept, she said, when she heard what the vote was.  Can't blame her for that, certainly.

    - Andrys


    [ Parent ]

    Not Quite Again (1.00 / 1) (#108)
    by Spike on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:17:07 PM EST
    Maddow was actually quite neutral in the Obama-Clinton race for a long time. She moved toward Obama when Clinton started her "McCain is qualified to be CiC but Obama isn't" message campaign. Clinton totally alienated Maddow by elevating a right wing Republican as a way to attack a fellow Democrat. But Maddow isn't unique. The way Clinton has gone relentlessly negative on Obama has driven a lot of previously neutral observers into the Obama camp. It's just collateral damage...

    [ Parent ]
    You're funny (none / 0) (#138)
    by waldenpond on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:01:28 AM EST
    Clinton has gone relentlessly negative on Obama

    Leave Obama aloooooone!

    [ Parent ]

    Isn't Marcos still writing for Newsweek too? (none / 0) (#105)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:12:34 PM EST
    anger over a Karl Rove article the other night.  Gregory described Rove as a political analyst,
    Wouldn't that be the way Marcos would be described as he is writing the Left Side to Rove's Right Side? Kos might not be getting paid to support BHO, but he is a influential Obama supporter and use his site to promote him more. What is the difference?

    [ Parent ]
    Maddow and Todd -- analysts? (none / 0) (#178)
    by cymro on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:02:47 AM EST
    Who are they kidding? All they do is regurgitate spin with a straight face. I'd like to see them try that with a well-informed interviewer who wasn't buying it, Ted Koppel maybe.

    Can you imagine them trying to pass off their fluff to a good newspaper editor? Picture the reaction of Ben Bradlee of the WaPo, as played by Jason Robards in All the President's Men.

    It's fun to imagine an alternative universe in which  such daydreams come true.

    [ Parent ]

    Still a Maddow fan hoping she comes back to form (none / 0) (#182)
    by Ellie on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:09:57 AM EST
    I liked her from day one on Air America and thought she was a hidden gem: a smart, insightful and sorely-needed commentator. (She was on at a ridiculous hour so I'd cache it to portably podcast later on my way to the salt mines.)

    Even somewhat woozy on the Obama koolaid, she's still head and shoulders above the TV buffoons with "tenure".

    I don't mind bias in any commentators as long as they're ethical when laying out any facts in presenting their POV. Maddow use to maintain balance despite personal biases or allegiance to an issue or individual, and always scrupulous about her research. I hope she shakes off the magical brew and returns to her old form.

    [ Parent ]

    same here (none / 0) (#188)
    by LCaution on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 03:38:47 AM EST
    I was really impressed with her and kept hoping that MSNBC would hire her - but by the time they did, she had bought into HDS hook, line and sinker.

    I understand that pressure to "be one of the guys", but, damn, it still makes me angry at how little it took for her to sell out.

    OTOH, there aren't exactly a lot of man in the media willing to stand up for Hillary.  I have this image that each morning the boyz get together and decide what the day's story and the spin on the story will be and everybody goes along, just like in high school.  

    [ Parent ]

    I feel like a refugee from the whole internet. (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by rockinrocknroll on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:46:57 PM EST