Document The Atrocities

On Saturday nights, Atrios invariably gave a listing of the guests expected on the Sunday shows and he would title that post "Document The Atrocities." Have you noticed how the Left blogs no longer document those atrocities anymore?

Bob Somerby still does:

Russert assembled a jury of six angry scribes—and not one juror spoke for Clinton! He didn’t have Romano there—Romano, who had conducted the interview. He didn’t have Marie Cocco there—Cocco, who had written a biting piece about the misogyny for the Washington Post. Were Cocco or Romano invited? We don’t know. (We e-mailed Cocco; she hasn’t answered.) But surely, Russert could have located someone to assert the Clinton view. Instead, he had a jury of six—and they all trashed Clinton for everything.

No one seemed to have any idea what the two Clintons were talking about. Matthews, Shuster, Olbermann, Carlson? Such names slipped all jurors’ minds.

Left blogs used to be outraged about this sort of thng. Not anymore. I wonder why. Nah, I know why.

Speaking for me only

< "At the Death House Door" Airs Tonight | Michigan Calls Out DNC For Its Hypocrisy On "The Rulz" >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Atrios has really slumped lately (5.00 / 5) (#1)
    by andgarden on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:08:00 PM EST
    reading too much dkos, I think. His latest about how Clinton supporters think a black guy can't win is just one example.

    Somerby is a gem.

    Thank goodness for Somerby. (5.00 / 6) (#4)
    by madamab on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:11:47 PM EST
    He's got job security for a long time to come.

    i'm just avoiding as much conflict as can (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Salo on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:23:18 PM EST
    while still able to vent a bit.

    Kool-Aid or fumes-make it difficult for Atrios to (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by jawbone on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:54:09 PM EST
    see beyond the Truthiness of the Obama Narrative.


    I am disappointed. But I've noticed that Media Matters doesn't seem to find any matters which reflect how Clinton is being maltreated in the press. At least not on the sidebar lists.

    Don't they realize that if they don't call out all BS, they lose cred?



    I've been noticing that too (none / 0) (#39)
    by Radiowalla on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:01:14 PM EST
    at MediaMatters.

    They are really falling down on the job in that department.
    Not good!


    Yeah, they should have a section (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by rjarnold on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:14:06 PM EST
    for criticizing Keith Olbermann who has said just as many dumb things as O'Reilly.

    I probably count some friends (none / 0) (#62)
    by andgarden on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:42:26 PM EST
    or friends of friends among staffers. The Obamabot mentality among young Democrats in DC is insufferable. For the first time ever, my Republican friends are easier to talk with.

    heh (none / 0) (#68)
    by andgarden on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:55:09 PM EST
    I have my ticket out too. Not a different coast, though.

    I consider him to be a hero (5.00 / 5) (#36)
    by Radiowalla on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:00:07 PM EST
    His chronicling of the puerile press is without compare....or as he would say, incomparable .

    I've been reading him since '99 and I swear that without The Daily Howler I probably would have gone beserk.

    Since he is your friend maybe you have some insight into why he won't let his readers send him a little "love" via PayPal.  Or why he doesn't include action links so that we can do a bit of howling when it is in order. ..like writing Russert and screaming about his Sunday "panel" of Clinton bashers.

    I write him from time to time and he sometimes answers with a funny reply.  He told me once that he doesn't want to make money off of The Howler.  That's his choice, but I just hope he doesn't get discouraged and give up.

    All Hail,  The Daily Howler!!!


    He doesn't have ads on his site (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by bridget on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:04:44 PM EST
    which would help him financially?

    Maybe he just doesn't need it. I hope he is rich :-)
    I hope he never gives up, too.

    It's interesting that he doesn't want to make money off the Howler. But it takes a lot of his time and effort to write a daily post like he does.


    I rarely email but I will sent Bob a hi w. thanks (none / 0) (#120)
    by bridget on Thu May 29, 2008 at 11:18:07 PM EST
    just finished reading the nine-page Howler post from today - glad I gave up MTP because that would have driven be around the bend - glad Bob gave it the right treatment

    over the years I have emailed him two or three times but I always feel I may bother him or that he may not want to read all this mail

    do you think he reads all his reader's emails?


    I envy you that you know him (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by Radiowalla on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:17:03 PM EST
    and I quite agree with you (and Al Gore!) that he is very, very smart!

    I like the fact that he holds both sides to the same standard.  In my view, this gives him the credibility that so many others lack.

    A while back he was trying to get his book on the 2000 election published, but nothing came of it.  This really puzzles me because he is the lone observer who was taking notes all the while the press was pounding on Gore and delivering the election to Our Naked Emperor.

    Well, I hope that Bob knows how much his work is appreciated.
    Please tell him that we love him!


    Heh (none / 0) (#101)
    by Steve M on Thu May 29, 2008 at 08:53:40 PM EST
    You're a fine one to talk, after you never answered my emails!

    I send him emails from time to time (none / 0) (#111)
    by Radiowalla on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:12:32 PM EST
    but I don't like to be a "groupie", if you know what I mean.  I really respect him and don't want to be a nuisance.

    Frankly,  I had hoped that the media "elites" would have stirred from their long slumber and realized the mess that we are in.  After delivering Bush into our arms in 2000,  the press could have, should have, elevated themselves into a higher plane.  Alas, they have not.

    Frankly, I'm more discouraged than ever.  Thank goodness for gin, thank goodness for family, thank goodness for music, thank goodness for my garden.  


    I wish he would just add RSS (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by andgarden on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:18:31 PM EST
    He is right not to have a comment (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by bridget on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:19:14 PM EST
    James Wolcott doesn't care about that either.

    thanks for writing about the ads - answered my question

    lol@Now Bob doesnt "do" cell phones and such ;-)


    he was a sanity saver during 2000 (5.00 / 4) (#40)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:01:49 PM EST
    unfortunately he doesn't go to the right cocktail parties and has little influence with the incestuous media elite.

    The lefty blog have, with exceptions, become a joke.  I think it is about traffic and making money or maybe about being "with the winner" which they so often are not....
    All I know is that there are several which are just as obnoxious as the wingnut right.


    true dkos: if you (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by jpete on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:23:03 PM EST
    oppose Obama, you are a racist.

    Somerby is a gem (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by stillife on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:13:35 PM EST
    I respect him a great deal and always look forward to reading the Daily Howler.  It makes me gnash my teeth and tear my hair, but that's a good thing.  As the saying goes, if you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.  Somerby makes you pay attention.

    I learned so much from Bob Somerby (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by bridget on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:29:48 PM EST
    I was so appalled by the MSNBC 2004 campaign coverage. I just didn't understand these pundits, what was going on there. The panel discussion were packed with rightwingers (remember Ron Silver backing Bush?) ... and they all treated this important campaign as if it was a all big game. Lots of fun and giggling and ridicule (and the same is going on there this time, again).

    I always wondered, don't these people worry about what happens to their families, themselves, the world? Anything? They certainly didn't to the citizens any favour with that kind of coverage.

    I found no answers until I decided to read Bob Somberby every day late into the night. He was discussing cable and esp. NBC at the time and for me the whole experience was like attending a course in Grad school again. And he has the archives to back everything up.

    After Olbermann made this first horrible Special Comment about Hillary I was so annoyed I emailed Somerby and begged him to include Olbermann in his next post. He did. I bet lots of unhappy folks like me emailed him about it, too.  Olbermann is mentioned often now in his posts along with the regular pundits.

    thanks goodness for Bob Somerby :-)


    Well, (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by cmugirl on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:08:34 PM EST
    Here's something the MSM will claim is an atrocity....


    BTD, see the letter from Levin and others (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Cream City on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:12:41 PM EST
    linked in this -- it's your argument about the waiver for NH.  But the letter went too soon to benefit from your full argument.  Hope they read TL.:-)

    Just posted on it (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:19:57 PM EST
    Big Tent: you said you know "why"... (none / 0) (#72)
    by dotcommodity on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:06:33 PM EST

    What is to be gained by this insanity?


    I believe we live in a 3rd world (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by zfran on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:14:00 PM EST
    country, either that or I have to go back to the Invastion of the Body Snatchers and the "pod" theory. Stay awake Hillary supporters!!

    LOL (n/t) (none / 0) (#11)
    by DandyTIger on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:17:00 PM EST
    I'm loading up the "I told you so"s (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by DandyTIger on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:15:43 PM EST
    to shoot them with when things swing the other way. As soon as that happens and they start complaining again, we should all right in: oh, you mean like when they said this or that about Clinton... oh wait, you were OK with that weren't you. So then you have no room to complain about it then do you. Hmmm, that reminds me of something... on yea, I told you so.... :-)

    It's hardly as if Obama can complain (none / 0) (#15)
    by Salo on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:20:55 PM EST
    if the nature of the unfairness replicates the unfairness toward Clinton.

    complaining? permissible (within reason)... (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by kredwyn on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:54:09 PM EST
    Listening? Optional...

    Hasn't Obama (none / 0) (#38)
    by abfabdem on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:01:11 PM EST
    already made threats to stay away from Michelle?  Yeah, they will listen to that entreaty.

    Another good read is Gene Lyons on a (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by gish720 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:16:51 PM EST
    similar topic as Somerby, it's on his Moose and Squirrel site entitled; Infighting Threatens Democratic Party. Some very good ideas there, too.

    Love me some Gene Lyons (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by DFLer on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:02:56 PM EST
    Infighting article on the Arkansas press site too, as per Norma's email.

    Lyons is terrific! (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by kenoshaMarge on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:36:09 PM EST
    Didn't you just love this line in Lyon's piece:  
    The courtiers, courtesans and character assassins of the imperial Washington press deem themselves America's rightful ruling class.

    When (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:24:24 PM EST
    the press turns on Obama like it already is I certainly won't waste one minute complaining. You reap what you sow.

    The press is turning against (none / 0) (#27)
    by zfran on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:52:30 PM EST
    Obama? Please enlighten and brighten my day.

    Obama is Carter (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by waldenpond on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:09:09 PM EST


    Obama a Huge Risk?
    Too many purple states with Obama.

    An article yesterday referred to Obama as the Gaffe a Day Express but I can't find it.


    Thank you. (none / 0) (#51)
    by zfran on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:16:02 PM EST
    the msm.

    The press was for Obama? (none / 0) (#77)
    by samtaylor2 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:17:52 PM EST
    I didn't and don't see it.  I just saw someone who dealt with it well.  I never thought the media (during first electon cycle) was pro Bush, I just thought he dealt with the hits well.  There is an art to rolling with the punches that some people have (e.g. Bill CLinton) .  I (like Hiliary I believe), don't roll with the punches well, and fight back when the goal should be to relax and go with it till need be.  McCain has the same problem has Hillary (he just gets excused because he is and old crotchedy white guy).

    Heh (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by Steve M on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:25:28 PM EST
    The months and months of glowing profiles is part of it.

    The constant harping on Hillary's negativity, while pretending that Obama was running a positive campaign despite his ongoing attacks on Hillary's character, is a bigger part of it.

    Basically the media decided that it would be an awesome thing for the country to have a black President - which, in the abstract, it surely would be - and that they were going to make sure it happened.  Well, I hope it works in November, is all I can say.


    Didn't see it (none / 0) (#80)
    by samtaylor2 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:28:53 PM EST
    I do think it WILL be great to have a Black president.  You should get on the bus

    Heh (none / 0) (#82)
    by Steve M on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:39:55 PM EST
    I'll vote for Obama!

    But I think any good progressive should resent the notion of the media choosing our nominee for us, even if it happens to be the nominee you'd prefer in this case.  We have such a dysfunctional media in this country and they're only retrogressing.


    Agree and disagree (none / 0) (#85)
    by samtaylor2 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:52:36 PM EST
    I will respectfully disagree that Obama was choosen, but I will definitly agree with you that our media sucks, lazy, etc.  I can name 2 or 3 gotcha moments for both Obama and Hiliary, that were obviously fed to the media by both these candidates, which the media, if they did their jobs, would have thought was rediculous and not worthy of air time.

    In my mind the only decent debate was the debate on NPR.  That was awesome, and I think trully showed how good ALLvthe candidates are.  Nothing can be learned in 30 seconds as seen in the tiresome gotcha style, sell you the brooklyn bridge debates we had on major media outlets.  30 seconds are meant for selling stuff not to learn anything.


    I was at the gym when this aired (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by ineedalife on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:33:18 PM EST
    Nothing like fury to get you through a workout.

    russert's one of the good guys, now (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Turkana on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:35:37 PM EST
    like sullivan. and even, at times, drudge.

    James Wolcott is still on the top of my list (none / 0) (#83)
    by bridget on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:46:19 PM EST
    his blog is the first I visit when going online

    unfortunately, Glenn and Joan (esp. Joan when punditing on TV) disappoint a lot - same with digby who doesn't do the job IMO

    Joe Conason (sp) kept me sane during the Impeachment and Whitewater

    Mediamatters does a great job. I hope Boehlert really tells it like it is in his new book.

    Bob Somerby is amazing but I wish he would be even tougher on certain bloggers whose feet should be held to the fire. He is holding back. Guess he has his reasons.


    Yes I know he said he doesn't want to (none / 0) (#119)
    by bridget on Thu May 29, 2008 at 11:09:54 PM EST
    criticize our side too much

    lol@theJoshMarshallthing - that was v. funny ;-)


    You left out a few: (none / 0) (#124)
    by desert dawg on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 11:37:34 AM EST
    eriposte at leftcoaster.
    riverdaughter (and ronk?) at confluence
    lambert (and vastleft and bdblue and lukasiak?) at corrente
    Jay Cost at Horse Race Blog is a consistently even-handed poli sci geek.

    I think most people are afraid to (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by dianem on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:15:41 PM EST
    I've been reading Joan Walsh's column in Salon, and the hostility toward her for defending Clinton is amazing. She hasn't endorsed anybody, but she has been open about her dismay about the bias and sexism in this election, and the Obamabots have been all over her. I admire her for standing up for what she believes, but I'm surprised that she has been willing to continue, considering the attacks. Some have even threatened to try to get her fired.

    How many people are willing to subject themselves to the anger of the Obamabots in order to defend a candidate who has little chance of winning? The Obama machine has effectively shut off discussion of Obama's weaknesses in most of the progressive blogosphere and on the talk shows. They are entirely focused on attacking Clinton. It's the only safe position, because anything else is going to result in vicious attacks of bias.

    I find it amazing how many people discount racism (none / 0) (#79)
    by samtaylor2 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:26:46 PM EST
    I would never come to you and say that wasn't sexist.  I might ask you to explain and then comment, but I would never just say no that is not.   I just think it is rude.  Millions of Black people (who I don't think are crazy or stupid) seem to have taken offense.  Are we wrong, have been been bamboozeled by the Obama campaign? I trully don't think you would say that statement about racismin a non-Anonymous environment, which should make you question the validity of saying it.

    I find it amazing you find it amazing (5.00 / 4) (#93)
    by Richjo on Thu May 29, 2008 at 08:31:56 PM EST
    There are two things about racism I am certain of-it exists in America, and false accusations of it exist in America. I believe that the second has been far more prevalent in this race than the first.

    Barack Obama is an inexperienced, under qualified, unaccomplished leader. In spite of his claims to the contrary he does not practice a new brand of politics, but rather a has raised the art of being a self serving hypocrite to a new level. He is a gifted communicator and a brillant man, but there are a lot of people like that who will never be President of the United States (Joe Biden and John Edwards come to mind.) I have no doubt in my mind that Barack Obama was on track to one day be President, and has been for a long time. I also have no doubt in my mind that there is no way that he would be close to being President in 2008 given his minimal experience if he were not able to offer people the exicting possibility of electing America's first black President. Many voters are willing to overlook his major and significant weaknesses and short comings because of this. Those who are not voting for him are not doing so in any significant number because of his race. They are not voting for him because he is unqualified, has no record of accomplishment, and they don't truly understand what he stands for- other than that he can tell most groups what they want to hear on some occasions, and yet tell other diametrically opposed groups the same in front of them. He is a champion of the Arabs and the Jews, the relgious crowd and the pro choice crowd, the far left and the middle right. You don't have to be a racist to have very good reasons not to support Barack Obama, yet that is the explanation that seems to be offered most by his supporters and the media for those who do not want to worship in his cult of personality.

    He will be the least qualified President in modern times, and he will face greater challenges than any President in modern history. I am really glad it makes people feel good to see someone like them elected President. Whether it is African Americans or the rich affuent whites who have finally found a black candidate just like them- a professional who was educated in private school and the ivy league- voting for Obama seems to make people feel good. I don't mind that all that much, but forgive the rest of us who actually wanted someone we were confident was up to the job and ready from the beginning.

    The dream of women everywhere to see a woman elected President is being deferred and very well may be denied to them in their lifetime, all so that a man who would have had plenty of opportunity to qualify and prepare himself to one day be President can avoid having to work his way up the ladder like all those who came before him. He can't be worse then what we currently have, but forgive those of us who were hoping to get a bit more than that out of this election.


    Oh, my... (none / 0) (#115)
    by Radiowalla on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:49:39 PM EST
    I am going to vote for Obama...if I have to.. but you said what has been on my mind for a long time.

    Those of us who have not bought into the hype will have to decide if we want to put our faith  in Obama or in McCain.

    For me, it's a no-brainer:  It's Obama, hands down.

    But I'm not happy about it.


    I Admire You For That (none / 0) (#123)
    by Richjo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 09:14:41 AM EST
    I am certainly leaning Obama, but it is by no means a no brainer. I am totally open to him earning my vote, but I haven't seen him do anything to achieve that yet. I have started to realize that electing Democrats doesn't mean anything if they will take our support for granted.

    You have been bamboozled by BO08 (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by RonK Seattle on Thu May 29, 2008 at 08:45:09 PM EST
    ... and in my opinion his cynical exploitation of racial antagonism makes Obama morally unfit to hold the office.

    Count me on the other side if Obama is the nominee.


    Jeeze, Ron (none / 0) (#116)
    by Radiowalla on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:51:37 PM EST
    Aren't you worried about the Supreme Court?
    Aren't you worried about health care reform?

    What are your reasonable  alternatives if you eliminate Obama from your list?


    Beating Obama means supporting McCain (none / 0) (#122)
    by RonK Seattle on Thu May 29, 2008 at 11:40:05 PM EST
    McCain would do substantial harm to progressive interests. Obama would do irreparable harm.

    If an independent candidate showed potential to take a few states and throw it into the House, that would be an option ... but a long shot.


    You, too? (none / 0) (#117)
    by Radiowalla on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:54:33 PM EST
    Where are you going to go?
    Staying home?

    I'm not one single bit happy about Obama, but I'm more worried about McCain than anything else.  


    It's hard to talk about race (none / 0) (#90)
    by dianem on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:43:48 PM EST
    First of all, it's harder to hold a discussion than it is to write a post. When I write, I can re-read what I just said and (hopefully) correct anything that I said poorly. Also, when someone reads what I wrote, they probably "hear" more than they would if I were speaking. Not always, but generally. Of course, emotion doesn't transfer well, but that can be an advantage.

    It's also easier because I don't have to consider the race of the person I'm talking to. Everybody is equal on the net. You could be black, or Asian, or gay... I won't know. I think this allows people to be more honest.

    Finally, there is a certain insulation in anonymity. I may get responses, but I will be able to read them when I am ready, reply if I want to,  and not have to risk getting into a serious fight or being attacked for my views in person. For shy people that is a blessing.

    I hope that people's arguments are taken on their merit, and not from the perspective of "that's racist" or "that's sexist". I don't think that people discount racism in this election so much as resent that good people, people who are not racists, have been tarred as race-baiters or racists. Personally, I didn't expect to see race raised as a significant issue, and I believe that the Obama campaign is responsible for it being an issue. I have stated that I believe that his campaign used race as a shield and a weapon to gain him sympathy votes. Good people were manipulated by people who didn't care what damage they did. It was the equivalent of using 9/11 as a campaign tool. I expected some people to raise race, but also that most people, who are not racists, would shout them down quickly. I didn't expect what we had. And it angers me that we have been divided this way. It should not have happened. Perhaps that anger results in me speaking more plainly than I should, but I hope that my, and other's, words can be taken in the spirit in which they are offered.


    An odd thought (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by jpete on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:48:21 PM EST
    If the mainstream media wanted to co-opt the netroots and ruin their credible independence, they might well arrange for what we've got now.  

    But could they have done that?  Or is there just some general weakness - like indulging in the fantasy that Obama will really take all the problems away and make everything better - that's seized so many?


    And sadly, (none / 0) (#121)
    by jpete on Thu May 29, 2008 at 11:21:21 PM EST
    we all live with the results!  Which may well include a McBush presidency.

    "Left blogs used to be outraged about (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by bridget on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:11:24 PM EST
    this sort of thing. Not anymore."

    Excuse me, when were they outraged about this sort of thing? And Which blogs?

    I joined dkos after watching yearlykos on CSpan in 2006 - and after watching the kos book interview on "Russert" w. Armstrong and the kos pundit appearance on Sunday of the same week.

    I was absolutely appalled when I saw posters trash Hillary with impunity on dkos. I knew already that Moulitsas had this "anyone but Hillary' attitude on yearlykos and written negative articles about Bill Clinton as well. But since he assured Russert that his people powered blog was ruled by democracy I gave a try.

    That was quickly tested. I received an immediate Trollrating when I pointed out that dkos had rabid  Hillary bashers. From a "famous" loyal frontpage poster, too. Yup. Obviously he had never seen what I saw right away (or better, he agreed w. the bashing and preferred to be in denial).

    One poster immediately preached blog moral to me and told me how to post on dkos if I wanted to be a good dkos member and avoid problems. Another posted however spoke up and said that it was true, rabid Hillary bashers posted on dkos. I was  Glad I caught that comment before the whole thing was hidden frim my view ;-)

    btw. DailyHowler has always been my "must read" blog but it was anything but popular on dkos et al. And that is too bad. But not unexpected.

    Speaking for myself, too.

    Next... (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by p lukasiak on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:13:46 PM EST
    Somerby is crucial because he's been around so long.  I mean, there was no blogosphere when Bob started DH back in 1998.  

    And Bob will still be an island of consistent sanity no matter what happens -- its going to be very interesting to watch what happened to the once progressive blogosphere in the coming months and years, and DH will be an anchor for us all.

    And political assassination humor (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by UncleDavid on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:50:29 PM EST
    Something else I remember from that MTP. Out of nowhere, Jon Meacham:
    I don't think we talked about Henry II enough in campaigns...Just stay away from the pastors, you know.  "Who shall rid me of this troublesome priest?" Turbulent priest.

    Now, maybe I'm being over-sensitive, but was it really a good idea to make fun of a shocking political assassination just days after RFK-gate? OK, granted it was over 800 years ago, but it did grate a little. (also, in the long run, Thomas got the better of that particular rivalry)

    Also, as Bob didn't note, asking MoDo to comment first on personal attacks on Hillary was like asking Leona Helmsley if the Bush tax cuts were a bad thing.

    Hmmm... (1.00 / 2) (#32)
    by nikkos on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:54:38 PM EST
    In fact, Atrios, who is not and should not be immune to criticism, posted up the latest "Document The Atrocities" all the way back on...May 25. Of course, a quick perusal of his site would reveal this. I wonder why you did not conduct such a search. Actually, to quote you, "Nah, I know why."

    Her campaign is over. Get over it.

    Man, the reading comprehension (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:04:08 PM EST
    of the trolls has really gone even further downhill lately.

    Troll Depression (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by waldenpond on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:10:53 PM EST
    has set in.  They don't even try any more.

    This is why (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Steve M on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:20:38 PM EST
    education policy is one of the most important issues.  We've obviously been letting our kids down big-time.

    You sure you know why? (none / 0) (#3)
    by koshembos on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:10:53 PM EST
    I am not sure. How about because they are not left blogs but fascist blogs.

    Blogs On the Verge of Absolute Power. (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Salo on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:22:43 PM EST
    BOVAP.  It resembles paranoid meglomania.

    actually (none / 0) (#6)
    by Punchy on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:12:19 PM EST
    liberal fascists, right?

    are you implying something about integrity (none / 0) (#5)
    by DandyTIger on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:11:58 PM EST
    and how when things swing back and those same shows and talking heads are back to trashing people they like, well, they just won't have a leg to stand on anymore. Nah, you can't be implying something like that... :-)

    And do these "left blogs" think that (none / 0) (#12)
    by zfran on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:18:02 PM EST
    McCain is just going to roll over. Hillary is still running her campaign...she cannot fight back too much like in the ge.

    She is better off not fighting back (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by JavaCityPal on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:24:25 PM EST
    the irrepairable division of the democratic party falls squarely on the shoulders of the media as long as she doesn't get caught up in their web.

    I think they are trying their level best to get her mad so they can gather some footage to use in their own defense.

    She's too classy and too smart for them all.


    It does, but the media is his (none / 0) (#70)
    by JavaCityPal on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:57:56 PM EST
    bay window to the world and they are doing as they are told.

    Seen a word on Michelle since he called on them to leave her alone?


    surely you jest? (none / 0) (#13)
    by Salo on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:19:04 PM EST
    why sir,  we are on the verge of power sir. Absolute power!

    Okay...that's it... (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by kredwyn on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:56:14 PM EST
    step away from the Kool-aid bar. You're cut off.

    Hee hee hee hee... (none / 0) (#16)
    by madamab on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:21:15 PM EST
    KKKarl Rove thought that Permanent Republican Majority was happening too...he thought he had "The Math" in 2006...

    me? (none / 0) (#91)
    by Salo on Thu May 29, 2008 at 08:11:58 PM EST

    My respect for her qualities has actually increased over the grueling campaign.

    Teh Clintons did cock-a few things-up in the nineties though. But I'm more inclined to support a pol who will openly promote UHC like she does over Obama. I find his attitude on UHC to be alarmingly blase.


    Well, there was, is, a Salo (none / 0) (#112)
    by Radiowalla on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:29:38 PM EST
    on DKos.

    I remember the name as well.

    Maybe this is the person we remember


    It's me. (none / 0) (#114)
    by Salo on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:36:25 PM EST
    However I started to defend clinton quite aggressively after JJJr started his own private race war.

    When I got into fights with Clinton supporters Itwas mainly about backing Edwards.


    I went through (none / 0) (#113)
    by Salo on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:34:17 PM EST
    a phase of anti-Clinton sentiment but that tapered off in late October-early November. Always admired her stand on UHC. Mainly opportunistic pot shots from me and those shots were focused on policy, no deep antipathy though. It mainly centered around healthcare for me and potential continuity of Bill Clinton and George Bush FP policy.  In recent months I got a rep for shilling for Hillary of all things.    Defended her on Tuzla and Northern Ireland and the stupid photoshop skin darkening story, got sick of the stupid Obama inspired Gotchas and left Kos myself to cool off. Marcos turned into a disgrace with those accusations about her darkening the video to make Obama look blacker.

    The above comment was a parody of Totalitarobamas.


    That was the last straw for me as well (none / 0) (#118)
    by Radiowalla on Thu May 29, 2008 at 11:02:16 PM EST
    The front-page post by Markos showcasing unsupported accusations that Clinton had darkened a photo of Obama.
    I don't think I've read a more crass, more craven post on any web site, even Drudge.

    I remember your anti-Hillary posts, Salo.  It seems as if you have evolved in your thinking.  


    Atro-city Number 2 (none / 0) (#21)
    by DFLer on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:31:43 PM EST
    would be the fast-stepping that the capuns* did in discussing McClellan's book and his accusations re the lazy press not doing their job:

    yes we did! sez tweety et al

    ah course the Great Sommerby will no doubt cover that bogácity.

    * cable pundits

    OT - Breaking News: TUCC Video on FOX (none / 0) (#26)
    by JavaCityPal on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:49:31 PM EST
    Father Pff has supposedly apologized for his comments at last Sunday's services in TUCC.

    Fox is giving Obama a pass.

    re the HuffPo dump (none / 0) (#44)
    by DFLer on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:07:11 PM EST
    I am avid fan of Mr. Bob and read those comments. How recently did she dumped the Howler link, do you know?

    Sure seems to me that (none / 0) (#66)
    by Molly Pitcher on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:51:24 PM EST
    "How much mendacity do we have to suffer, how much brazenness do we have to swallow before someone, anyone, has the decency, the common sense, to relieve us of this terrible trifle, this pathetic madness?" is the literal equivalent of "Who will rid me of this turbulent priests"

    The unspoken evil, anyone?