home

Pre-Clinton Speech Media Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:09:30 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Delay in ETA of Clinton speech.

Ok, I am watching the coverage and well, it is pretty blah blah blah. I just find it banal, not even offensive.

I'll update this piece as more thoughts come to me. Add your thoughts on the Media coverage below.

Zfran points us to this column by the LATimes media critic Howard Rosenberg that takes Keith Olbermann to task. So far today, Olbermann has been quite understated, for him. I wonder if he read it?

Oh, and Democrats and Barack Obama should have made a DIFFERENT Democrat than Donna Brazile available to CNN this morning. Just looking at her on TV hurts unity. Indeed, I think one of the things the Obama campaign MAY want to consider is asking Ms. Brazile to stay away from TV during the Fall campaign.

More . . .

NBC is discussing what Hillary should NOT say. Eugene Robinson says do not discuss white people or any electoral problems. Um, I am pretty sure she won't NOW. The campaign is over.

Buchanan says she needs to be careful about being TOO effusive because she may come across as insincere.

I find it all pretty boring. I really am struggling for things to write about here. I am going to stop trying and will instead wait and listen to Hillary Clinton's speech.

< Saturday Morning Open Thread | Hillary Clinton Speech Live Blog >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Pre-Clinton Speech Media Thread | 187 comments (187 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Banal? (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by DCDemocrat on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:14:56 AM EST
    Nah, it's no where that good.

    CNN has the Nerve to put Brazille as voice of DEMS (5.00 / 8) (#2)
    by janedw420 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:16:11 AM EST
    Who tries to explain the difficult purchase, er, huh,decisions that were made for unity!? Laughable

    Before she became a ridiculous Obama (5.00 / 7) (#6)
    by andgarden on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:18:42 AM EST
    booster, I remember that everyone thought she needed to stop giving television interviews. She made Democrats look bad. here is one printed example.

    [ Parent ]
    Agreed (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:22:20 AM EST
    Your comment spurred my last graf.

    [ Parent ]
    WAIT A MINUTE, PETER HART! (5.00 / 4) (#98)
    by NO2WONDERBOY on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:08:30 AM EST
    On CNN "explaining" why she "lost":
    "She didn't understand the voters, she didn't this, she didn't that..." BALONEY!
    What she didn't understand, foolish her was that the Super Delegates would turn on her.

    For Pete's sake CNN, MSNBC AND THE REST OF YOU  PEANUT GALLERY!

    SHE WON THE VOTES OF THE PEOPLE, HE WAS SELECTED!

    Wasn't this the Mantra of the Dems in 2000 against Bush's nomination win? It will come back to haunt you and bite you in the tuchus!

    [ Parent ]

    I saw her and muted the tv (5.00 / 4) (#20)
    by kenosharick on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:31:02 AM EST
    that is CNN really giving the finger to Hillary.

    [ Parent ]
    Gloria Borger (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by vigkat on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:38:59 AM EST
    Is just as bad or worse.  She has become increasingly  strident in her fervor to spread the anti-Hillary meme.  Not to mention the other member of the panel, good old Carl what's his name, the author of THE book.  This is one time that I think it best to switch to MSNBO for the countdown.

    [ Parent ]
    Nah, nothing is worse for this (5.00 / 4) (#53)
    by brodie on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:46:07 AM EST
    Hillary supporter than having to watch Clinton haters Tweety and Keith, especially when they further stack the anti-HRC deck with goofy Gene Robinson and O cheerleader Rachel Maddow.

    Thanks, but I'll take my chances with CNN, even with Borger's harsh tone and Carl Bernstein's damn with faint praise commentary about Hillary.  

    Well, that's not quite true.  Donna Brazile is almost too much to sit through.  And am I the only one who's just about reached the breaking point listening to that overexposed voice of hers?  I mean, I actually used to find southern women's voices charming.  Now I'm sick of it, especially her constant dropping of her 'g's.  

    Thanks again Al Gore for elevating such an overrated and divisive figure.  

    [ Parent ]

    Apt (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by Athena on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:53:52 AM EST
    Seen on another website re the DNC: "The Boys from Brazile."

    [ Parent ]
    Borger's worse (none / 0) (#142)
    by zebedee on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:27:26 AM EST
    Look at this:

    http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/gborger/2008/06/06/its-not-about-you-hillary.html

    I find when someone is obviously in the tank we can treat it like an official Obama supporter. KO and Tweetie are obviously that. It's the ones who are supposed neutral pundits, the independent reasonable observer, that get me. Borger, Roland Martin and most others are in this category. I hadn't read anything by Borger and was quite shocked at how strident she is in writing while on CNN she tries to dress her biased commentary as a voice of reason.

    As for MSNBC, I'm finding myself surprisingly drawn to Pat Buchanan as the only one who might give a straight opinion. Unfortunately I've even begun to appreciate Sean Hannity a bit. Yes, he has political views I find completely objectionable but he makes no bones about that so he's less nauseating to listen to. And he dislikes Obama and Clinton equally so Fox comes across as  more balanced than CNN and MSNBC.

    [ Parent ]

    Hannity is sexist (none / 0) (#158)
    by Newt on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:35:38 AM EST
    and Fox Fake news is a complete joke.

    Puleeez!

    [ Parent ]

    MCMers seem to be required to speak GroupThink (5.00 / 4) (#90)
    by jawbone on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:02:07 AM EST
    to appear on TV.

    Plus, when to they have time to do anything other than catch the latest DC/Village gossip and accepted CW? When do they have time to look at a politicians' words and actually understand what it going on? So they become stenographers and taped playback machines.

    Last night Bill Moyers discussed the McClellen book sans the author (I'd thought he was going to be one), but it was even more interesting, two folks from the real news reporting newspaper group, McClatchy, John Walcott, the bureau chief and John Landay, senior national security and intelligence correspondent;
    and Greg Mitchell of Editor & Publisher.

    Landay wondered how reporters actually had time to get any invetigating, vetting, source development done when they were under such tight deadlines and duties. Among those duties are appearances on cable talk shows, in order to feed the 24 hour beast.  Landay said that it takes time to cultivate sources. to develop the relationships which make them comfortable enough to tell a reporter about the actual facts.

    I've often wondered what time these talking heads have to do any real reporting. Along with schmoozing the TV types to get better gigs, and fluffing the powerful to keep in their good graces, when do they do any real journalism?

    Cable news, after the destruction of the original CNN model where the news was the star, may be the ruination of many good reporters.

    And Olberman keeps asking how low Clinton will curtsy or whether she'll throw herself face forward on the floor in full obeisance to The One. Actually that's the wrong word--obeisance is going down on knees or knee. What is it called to go flat on the ground, face down so as not to look at The One, not to rise until granted permission by the sacred leader? (And now they're ticked off that Clinton is there at noon.)

    [ Parent ]

    Surrender? (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by vigkat on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:08:35 AM EST
    Actually, the term now appears to be "self-abnegation."  Actually, her "mission," as explained by Timme, appears to be multi-faceted.  She has her work cut out for her and it all involves falling to her knees, apparently.

    [ Parent ]
    Prostrate. (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by Joan in VA on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:19:52 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Of course--a senior moment? (4.00 / 1) (#177)
    by jawbone on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:45:25 AM EST
    Yes, indeed. Prostrate herself to the power of The One. To signify respect and desire for unity.

    [ Parent ]
    Instead give Senator Clinton a salute (5.00 / 2) (#156)
    by Salo on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:35:06 AM EST
    She did everyone proud.

    [ Parent ]
    That's The Kowtow (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by Blue Jean on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 01:04:57 PM EST
    The prostration of the body.

    [ Parent ]
    That's The Kowtow (none / 0) (#193)
    by Blue Jean on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 01:05:22 PM EST
    The prostration of the body.

    [ Parent ]
    Big mistake (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by vigkat on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:03:43 AM EST
    I tuned into MSNBO just in time to hear KO's inquiry about whether Hillary will engage in "self-abnegation," which apparently is what he deems to be necessary at this point.  It's more than clearl nothing less than that will suffice, and it's even more clear that she will have to continue abnegating herself whenever called upon to do so, on cue.  I'm not sure I can watch this.

    [ Parent ]
    Sounds like anything short... (5.00 / 3) (#111)
    by Dawn Davenport on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:17:15 AM EST
    ...of her wearing a hairshirt and dragging a wooden cross will signal a lack of appropriate humility on her part.

    I used to think that the call-ins on C-span were pretty nuts, but they actually make more sense than the cable-news commentators this morning. At least the C-span callers openly admit whom they back, rather than hiding their bias behind a transparent veneer of objectivity.

    [ Parent ]

    Tweety just indicated (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by vigkat on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:21:11 AM EST
    That THIS, her speech today, has to make up for what did not happen on election night.  He sounded and looked annoyingly smug as he said this.  She has to make up for what she didn't do on election night.  What were they expecting?  

    [ Parent ]
    She is smarter (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:49:00 AM EST
    than Tweety. She will be remembered as a great women in history while he will be ...Tweety who?

    [ Parent ]
    Er, make that... (none / 0) (#116)
    by Dawn Davenport on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:18:10 AM EST
    ..."objectivity."

    [ Parent ]
    Please don't watch MSNBC (none / 0) (#196)
    by IKE on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 01:53:19 PM EST
    Please don't dignify that network by watching it. That network attitude towards Hillary was too damn disrespectful to warrant any dignity. CNN is just as bad, I know. Fox news is ridiculously bias, at least that network doesn't pretend to be neutral. It's the at least of the three evils. Heck, C-SPAN is always available.

    [ Parent ]
    Donna Brazile singlehandedly.... (5.00 / 4) (#72)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:54:11 AM EST
    ...makes CNN harder to watch than MSNBC. Now that this is over I find that the Obamabots on MSNBC don't bother me as much. I am able to clearly see them as the buffoons they are. They are now watching her house, her car...they are covering this like a funeral. It's actually kind of funny.

    [ Parent ]
    I am emailing CNN to complain about Brazille (5.00 / 3) (#93)
    by Aqua Blue on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:04:30 AM EST
    She sickens me so much.   When she speaks, I hit the mute button or change the channel.

    Brazille is a snake-in-the-grass hypocrit.

    Gloria Borcher is just as bad.   And, Candy Crowley and many others make me want to vomit.

    CNN pundits are just awful...all of them!   And, they pretend to express both sides of the issue.    Give me a break!

    [ Parent ]

    "The Best Political Team (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by brodie on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:20:59 AM EST
    in Television."  

    Heheh ...

    [ Parent ]

    I'm a convert. (none / 0) (#152)
    by jpete on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:32:55 AM EST
    This was a time when I was extremely hesitant to pile on when a democratic woman was being dissed.  But Donna B has changed my perspective.  She is awful.  She seems to be one of these dim people who has no conception of how much she doesn't understand.  OR, most of it is some contrvied and misguided act.  Either way...

    [ Parent ]
    I'm not watching it (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by bmc on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:16:14 AM EST
    It's peaceful, intelligent, and interesting, not  offensive in the least. ;o}

    I think you can watch at Hillary web page (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:29:16 AM EST
    I got an invite yesterday

    [ Parent ]
    I am watching C-SPAN (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by andgarden on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:16:18 AM EST
    which, in the leadup to the speech, is showing AIPAC from Wednesday. As is my habit, I have muted the TV.

    the woman is in her place (5.00 / 9) (#5)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:17:34 AM EST
    now.  Of course he's understated.

    Winds are blowing (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:31:07 AM EST
    folks.

    [ Parent ]
    Faux Respect (5.00 / 9) (#7)
    by NYCDem11 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:19:03 AM EST
    After treating Senator Clinton with such glaring disrespect, the media's attempt to fawn over her today is really disturbing. Where were these kind words from Donna Brazille before today?

    I don't agree that it's Senator Clinton's responsibility to motivate her supporters to get behind Sen. Obama. He's the nominee. It's time for him to do the work. Where's his big speech on gender and women's roles in society? Where's his big speech on poverty and the role of economic disadvantage in our country? It's up to him to attract these new bases.

    Exactly (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by vigkat on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:43:44 AM EST
    It's too little, too late and totally insincere.  The "now that I've won, I can be nice to you," kind of thing.  It's almost worse than what has been going on all these months.  

    [ Parent ]
    BTD, I hope you (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by masslib on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:20:34 AM EST
    got my comment in the other thread.  I was in no way calling you arrogant.  

    Hillary has a tremendous amount of political capital now, and a much better read of the public than she did 16 months ago.  She's a listener.  She'll do great things just like Al Gore did after they wrote his obit.  My secret hope is she goes to Iraq and gets those Iraqi politicians to nix the permanent bases Bush is pushing that will have us there for the next 20 years.

    My secret hope... (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by NYCDem11 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:22:48 AM EST
    is that she runs again in four years. She's the candidate of a lifetime and I'd like to have the country benefit from her leadership.  It was a rare opportunity that the party just passed up.

    [ Parent ]
    THAT is why she lost (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by Foxx on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:23:15 AM EST
    She's the candidate of a lifetime. These mediocre people wanted someone mediocre.

    [ Parent ]
    nycdem11 Hillary in 4yrs (none / 0) (#59)
    by JON15 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:48:05 AM EST
    That is why I will,depending on his VP choice,
    vote for John McCain in November. It will be far
    better to have McCain for 4 yrs,with a Dem majority in Congress, than 4 yrs of Obama's learnig curve. We are better with no health care
    than a poor program that does not meet the country's needs. I will not waste my vote.


    [ Parent ]
    Nothing Could Make Me Vote (none / 0) (#153)
    by creeper on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:32:59 AM EST
    for McCain.

    Or Obama.

    This is what the write-in blank is for.

    [ Parent ]

    Nothing? (none / 0) (#166)
    by squeaky on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:39:37 AM EST
    Nice to hear that your life is secure enough that you can afford to take such a stand off position. Maybe a trip to Iraq would be a wake up call for you. The Iraqi people and the US troops do not have the same luxury you enjoy.

    [ Parent ]
    Maybe the utter vast wasteland (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 12:30:45 PM EST
    of trying to get healthcare for yourself as an individaul insured will be YOUR wakeup call.

    The Democrats just elected someone who threw healthcare under the bus.  I am hoping we have a DIFFERENT Democrat next time. That is what I'm voting for.

    Iraq isn't the only issue in this country.  Besides, you're going to be SORELY disappointed when 2 years from now your candidate has us still in Iraq.  He has no plan to get us out.  He was pandering TO YOU.

    [ Parent ]

    My Candidate (none / 0) (#190)
    by squeaky on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 12:44:00 PM EST
    Was Hillary, but unlike you I had no illusions that her Health care plan was going to get traction. Shoot for the moon you may say, well, her shot fell a bit short for me. A single payer plan is what I would like to see.

    Did you follow her health care plan when Bill was president. The democrats canned it. There is zero chance that her current plan or Obama's current plan will work until we get at least a dozen more progressive Senators in congress.

    As far as Iraq goes, I would be surprised if either Hillary or Obama gets our troops out anytime soon, but both will get them out waaaaay sooner than McCain.

    I maintain that it is a sign of comfort and certain callousness to  either sit out this election out, or vote for anyone but Democrats top to bottom. We need some sanity in the WH. Our men and women are dying as is our reputation in the world.

    [ Parent ]

    My Comment Wasn't a Long One (none / 0) (#199)
    by creeper on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 06:25:32 PM EST
    I should think you'd have read it before taking issue with it, especially since you accuse me of doing the very things I said I would not do.  
    I maintain that it is a sign of comfort and certain callousness to  either sit out this election out, or vote for anyone but Democrats top to bottom.
    I have no intention of voting for McCain or sitting this one out.  I will write in Hillary Clinton's name.  

    As for voting for Democrats top to bottom, you are advocating placing party above country.  That kind of mindlessness is typical of Obama supporters. Interestingly, it's also one of the things about Republicans that we condemn loudly.

    Your thought processes are so off-the-wall that I thought it might be good to get some idea of your history here, so I checked your comments. S'funny...you didn't used to be so loyal to the Democratic party.  

    Speak Fondly Of? (5.00 / 1) (#202)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 05:52:18 PM EST
    Not me. Yes, I think that the Democratic party is much better than the GOP, but they are not anyone I would speak fondly of, not these days.

    But that was a long time ago...way last Thursday.


    [ Parent ]

    Sorry For You (none / 0) (#200)
    by squeaky on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 06:49:12 PM EST
    And my apologies that I did not bother to include the silly write in idea you short comment included. You will break Hillary's heart, by writing her in and not voting for Obama.

    I voted for her in the primary, but never elevated her to deity status. She is just a pol not much different than Obama. But both are waaaay better than McCain. And it is true, I have no fondness for the Democratic party, they are more to the right than I am comfortable with. But I will take them over the GOP in a heartbeat.

    [ Parent ]

    They may be being cautious (5.00 / 4) (#13)
    by kmblue on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:23:11 AM EST
    because they're still stinging from Tuesday night.
    Ah, the memories of the dropped jaws and bewilderment after Hillary's speech.

    Do be careful, Tweety and Keith!  ;)

    What was amazing about Tuesday night (5.00 / 8) (#14)
    by andgarden on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:25:48 AM EST
    Is that the campaign told everyone that there would be no concession, and no one believed it.

    [ Parent ]
    Not so (none / 0) (#26)
    by indy in sc on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:33:52 AM EST
    I think people knew that she would not concede, but they weren't expecting her to be introduced as "the next president of the U.S." in complete disregard for what had just happened (the 2118 threshold having been crossed by someone else).  I think people were expecting a speech more like the one she gave after the NC/IN primaries in which she obviously did not concede anything, but had a tone that suggested she understood this may not end up going her way.

    [ Parent ]
    A threshold crossed in secret - (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by liminal on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:17:39 AM EST
    - based on SECRET endorsements made PRIVATELY to news organizations.  In my opinion, she had the right to be introduced like that, and the clear duty to her voters and supporters to at least call those superdelegates herself to confirm the counts made by the media.

    [ Parent ]
    I know I shouldn't be watching but... (5.00 / 7) (#15)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:26:13 AM EST
    ...MSNBC is horrid. The Hillary friendly commentator, I suppose, must be Patrick Buchanan!!!

    Now Maddow and Robinson are listing all the things that she must NOT do in her speech.

    My favorite part of the LA times article:

    Olbermann and Matthews co-anchored MSNBC's coverage of this year's party caucuses and primaries, and when Obama clinched the Democratic nomination this week, calming down these guys would have required a defibrillator.

    Omigod and it was just now Buchanan who had to scold Rachel Maddow for calling Hillary an attack dog.

    I tell ya, it's a bit easier reading this (5.00 / 4) (#28)
    by nycstray on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:36:50 AM EST
    crap than watching it first hand!

    [ Parent ]
    LOL Russert and Tweety are... (5.00 / 6) (#31)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:37:31 AM EST
    ...shilling for Gore as Obama's VP!!!!!!!!!!

    [ Parent ]
    lol!~ Oh man . . . (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by nycstray on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:39:18 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Well, g'luck with that. (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by masslib on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:39:41 AM EST
    Gore has been there and done that.  He's not going to be anyones second.

    [ Parent ]
    Gore as VP has the same problem (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by BGP on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:50:44 AM EST
    as Hillary as VP. His record and his gravitas would overshadow Obama's.

    [ Parent ]
    Why (none / 0) (#171)
    by chrisvee on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:42:40 AM EST
    would Gore want to be Obama's VP???? These pundits are ridiculous.

    [ Parent ]
    My bet is on (none / 0) (#191)
    by PamFl on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 12:56:15 PM EST
    a surprise VP choice, already decided months ago, that Wall Street will love-Bloomberg.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, mass media will do everything in (none / 0) (#62)
    by Aqua Blue on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:50:17 AM EST
    their power to stop Hillary as VP.

    Media pundits know that the Dream Ticket is unstoppable.

    Media has created exactly what they wanted during the entire Primary process.   Republicans wanted Obama to win nomination.   Now at all cost they do not want Hilary on the ticket.

    Looks like Republicans have accomplished their goals and now are giving McCain a boost.

    Rove calls the plays with media (big business).

    [ Parent ]

    It's regular news on (none / 0) (#55)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:46:38 AM EST
    FOX with a split screen on the crowd waiting for Hillary to show up.

    No ugly pundits going on and on about what she MUST or MUST NOT say in this speech. Just clean coverage.

    Major Garrett is the one standing by at the speech location.

    [ Parent ]

    c-span is great, listening to (none / 0) (#91)
    by zfran on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:02:14 AM EST
    callers.

    [ Parent ]
    So am I (none / 0) (#100)
    by waldenpond on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:09:40 AM EST
    they are usually  atrocious, but today not so bad.

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks - I switched to C-Span (none / 0) (#164)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:38:43 AM EST
    but, had to mute the callers.

    It bothers me tremendously to hear people parroting the talking points of the pundits. All they tell us is which critical phrases were the easiest ones for them to relate to and remember.

    [ Parent ]

    Plain and simple 4 me: (5.00 / 4) (#16)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:26:39 AM EST
    I don't like Obama so I won't vote for him.  

    I have moved on.  Let him and the NuDemz do the heavy lifting.  A very astute poster commented on here, "okay young ones, it's time to spread your wings and win one for your guy."

    The media giveth and then EFF you!  Obama's lovefest will soon come to an end.  I would be surprised if it lasts until the convention.

    Add the other bashers to that list. (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by badu on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:33:17 AM EST
    I can't believe CNN has Brazile and Carl Berstein commenting!  Both have been horrible to Hillary.  Maybe they could dig up Alex Castellanos before the speech starts.  I turned on MSNBC for a couple seconds and heard Timmy saying obnoxious things.

    I'd like to say that the only positive to come out of all this is that Hillary won't be a target anymore.  But I'm afraid they will always find a way.  I predict that even if Obama wins in November, he too will find a way to blame all the bad things on "The Clintons."  After all, its worked for Bush for 8 years.

    If she's the VP pick (5.00 / 2) (#131)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:23:13 AM EST
    they won't stop obsessing over her.  I'm now convinced that the media obsession with Hillary overrides any possible benefit Obama could get from having her on the ticket.  If she's anywhere in the picture, they will talk about her incessantly, far more than they will about Obama.

    They're all in a rage because she keeps stealing the spotlight from Obama, but they're the ones who keep giving her every utterance and non-utterance OJ Simpson coverage.

    Just look at this speech, they're all treating it like a state funeral or an inauguration, for God's sake.


    [ Parent ]

    Do you honestly believe that (none / 0) (#170)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:42:36 AM EST
    Obama didn't have to promise many of those superdelegates she would not be VP in exchange for their support?

    Obama does not have a spine of his own. He needs to be carried up the ladder. He's been told what to do, and how to do it all along. I do not want David Axelrod in the Whitehouse.

    [ Parent ]

    No, actually (none / 0) (#194)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 01:19:47 PM EST
    I don't believe that.


    [ Parent ]
    My point was not the phrase so much... (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:37:00 AM EST
    ...as the fact that the old bigot Pat Buchanan was the one that had to remind the supposedly progressive Maddow that now was not the time to associate Hillary Clinton's name with a dog of any kind.

    Sorry (none / 0) (#40)
    by mbuchel on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:40:38 AM EST
    There have been plenty of things to take offense to, but this in no way was.

    [ Parent ]
    Thank you for telling me what to find... (5.00 / 6) (#58)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:47:51 AM EST
    ...offensive. I appreciate it very much. But to the substance of your protest (or should I say your defense of Rachel Maddow?)Patrick Buchanan, in my opinion, was reacting to the criticism that MSNBC has received for sexism. I took it more like he was cautioning Maddow to keep it in check, which I thought was funny that it had to come from him.

    [ Parent ]
    You're not alone, Marcia (none / 0) (#178)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:46:36 AM EST
    It always surprises us who have watched Buchanan for decades that he represents the voice of fairness and reason at MSNBC when it comes to Hillary Clnton these days.

    I didn't see anything in your first comment that said you were offended. :)

    [ Parent ]

    Here we go again (none / 0) (#180)
    by Newt on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:47:33 AM EST
    Pat Buchanan stirs the pot, implying that Rachel Maddow
    did or would
    call Hillary a b&@ch, and here we are discussing sexist, racist, bigot Buchanan as if he should have any credibility on any left leaning blog.

    Too many Republicans are stirring the pot of hatred between Hillary & Obama supporters.

    [ Parent ]

    Call his Political Views Whatever (none / 0) (#201)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 07:09:21 PM EST
    As for Buchanan, call his views whatever you want, but I find he is one of the view talking heads who calls the polls and political developments as they are.  Let's remember he was against the Iraq War from the getgo, called it a major blunder, I believe he said we invaded to get control of oil; he argued the other morning with Richard Cohen who insisted only white voters voting for Hillary were bigots, he's pointed out many times how important Hillary's constituencies are for electing a Democrat as president, and he's many times over pointed out Obama's weaknesses.

    [ Parent ]
    Donna Brazile (5.00 / 5) (#34)
    by americanincanada on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:39:05 AM EST
    talking about how Hillary has been a tireless fighter for civil rights is making me seethe. then she goes on and on about women, working class voters, GLBT voters and how Hillary needs to rally her base because Obama can't win without them.

    Where was this thinking during the primary? Has she ever been part of a winning campaign?

    Funny, because she emailed me and told (5.00 / 4) (#41)
    by masslib on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:40:59 AM EST
    me the Clintons were racists and blacks had seen their "inner deamons".

    [ Parent ]
    I know...me too (5.00 / 4) (#47)
    by americanincanada on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:42:58 AM EST
    I just cannot believe she is the only person CNN could find. Sittng there talking with that smirk on her face, patting herself on the back for resolving MI/FL and talking about how now that we are 'united' the credentials committee will more than likely restore them to full voting power...it makes me sick and even more angry than I already was.

    this is NOT helping.

    [ Parent ]

    Are you serious? (none / 0) (#45)
    by ajain on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:42:17 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    100% serious. (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by masslib on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:43:34 AM EST
    I blogged about it.

    [ Parent ]
    Link, please? (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by BrandingIron on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:53:50 AM EST

    I've been interested in all of these "Donna Brazile emailed me back" blogs.  I only read one of them (the one where the blogger repo'ed Brazile's email back to her that said that Clinton supporters were vile).

    [ Parent ]
    It was a guest post at Taylor Marsh. (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by masslib on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:55:06 AM EST
    You can go there and find it in the archives.

    [ Parent ]
    masslib (none / 0) (#168)
    by creeper on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:41:26 AM EST
    Taylor Marsh doesn't appear to have a search function available to non-members.  Please post a link.

    [ Parent ]
    In My Experience (none / 0) (#183)
    by squeaky on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:53:04 AM EST
    It is usually better to use google than a site's own search engine.

    In a google window type in this:

    site:xyz.com your keywords here

    [ Parent ]

    You can find it in the archives. (none / 0) (#198)
    by masslib on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 04:25:09 PM EST
    I'd have to do that myself to find the link.  I wrote it aon my laptop which is not available.

    [ Parent ]
    You need to make this public (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by Andy08 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:01:16 AM EST
    I am very serious. That woman has been a destructive force in all this and she needs to be OUT of the party for good.
    Please consider making her replies more publicly available.

    [ Parent ]
    Hokay . . . (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by Landulph on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:12:14 AM EST
    Er, why is Obama the nominee again, if only Clinton can win over the blocs needed to win in the fall?

    [ Parent ]
    BTD a request for RESPECT (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by waldenpond on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:40:14 AM EST
    This is an awful request.... but do you think it would be possible that the coverage for the speech could be an item for Clinton supporters only?  

    I realize it is selfish, but I would like to request one item that is a positive reflection of Clinton and her campaign... and while a private site is for all to comment on and for all opinions, it would be a huge sign of respect Clinton and for the Clinton supporters here.

    Then an additional post could be opened for all to critique her speech?

    I think Jeralyn would like to have the memory also.

    What do you think?

    I agree (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:41:21 AM EST
    And it will be enforced in that way. You  know what to do.

    [ Parent ]
    Respect (1.50 / 2) (#57)
    by indy in sc on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:47:43 AM EST
    I understand and respect your request and when the separate thread is opened, I won't seek to post.  I would just like to note for the record that being pro-Obama (I would argue pro-democrat) or at least not wishing for his political demise does not mean that I do not support Clinton.  There was a time earlier on when most of us were supporting both.

    [ Parent ]
    You would surely not argue (5.00 / 4) (#65)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:52:03 AM EST
    that you are representative of Obama supporting commenters on blogs. I have worn out my finger at this site deleting offensive attacks on Clinton by Obama supporters.

    And the hatred expressed at the A-List blogs for Clinton has been scandalous.


    [ Parent ]

    Agreed. (none / 0) (#80)
    by indy in sc on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:58:03 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    LOL, I don't mind doing the MSNBC.... (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:42:01 AM EST
    ...commentary. If you don't mind that it is colored with my own brand of truthiness.

    Olbermann is begging Dana Milbank to tell him what he wants to hear...that the huge crowd is there to rebuke Hillary's low class in her speech on Tuesday because they want her to do it right.

    They are happy that the Clinton supporters seem to be doing the stages of grief in rapid time. I'm sure they are

    hoping
    it means that they will accept the Kool Aid that is being offered as refreshments.

    Thanks for doing this; I couldn't bear to watch (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by Ellie on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:28:23 AM EST
    No TV today, so your sacrifice to take one for "the team" and document the dreck is much appreciated! (For me it's a co-op Tenants' Assoc. meeting, household drudgery and C-span audio.)

    I'm only organized because I'd otherwise devolve into ferality and I do need to find stuff, but drudgery feels strangely cathartic today!

    [ Parent ]

    Wish I Could Join You (none / 0) (#179)
    by creeper on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:46:44 AM EST
    in the drudgery, but I can't.  In one week my candidate was defeated and I broke my pelvis.  Either one by itself would've been a disaster.  Combined, they just leave me numb.

    [ Parent ]
    Hope you heal soon and go easy! (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by Ellie on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:55:54 AM EST
    And in case this was a shameless pitch for me to do YOUR drudgery ...

    Heh.

    [ Parent ]

    Intered to Know (none / 0) (#202)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 07:13:44 PM EST
    What Dana Milbank said.  If you read his piece on the RBC meeting last Saturday, it was anything but complimentary.  He called it "Democrats Come Together to Tear Their Party in Half." Jeralyn posted it - article was in WashPo 6/1.

    [ Parent ]
    Just tuned in to MessNBC, and Dana Milbank was (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by jawbone on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:43:13 AM EST
    talking about how horrible Clinton's Tuesday night speech was--she didn't concede after winning a big upset in SD! WWTSBQ is still the theme, apparently.

    I'll take your word, BTD that the overall coverage isn't too bad; you're doing the hard work of watching the Bozo MCMers.

    Stay (5.00 / 3) (#51)
    by Cream City on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:45:35 AM EST
    calm.  We're gonna have our fun today.  The other sort of fun can be found at other blogs, if you really wanna see un-classy.

    Oh, and while we're having our fun, we probably will have a good cry, too.  Let no one, no one snark about it.  Wiser would be to understand that it's cathartic and therapeutic for us -- and, as I had to explain to my clueless ex when he saw my daughter throwing pillows, hitting and punching them, it was what I taught her to do when she wanted to hit him.

    So we may throw some things on this blog today, too, Boris.  Best would be to roll with the punches.

    This one's for Jeralyn (none / 0) (#86)
    by waldenpond on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:59:55 AM EST
    No today.  I asked BTD that this item be a positive appreciation of Clinton's campaign and her supporters.  Obama supporters are supposed to be quiet.  Another post will be opened to a critique of the speech.  Yeah!

    [ Parent ]
    LMAO, Club Obama and the NuDems are a hoot (none / 0) (#176)
    by Ellie on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:44:13 AM EST
    It's too much! They're constitutionally incapable of being nice about Sen Clinton (and HER tasty voters!) for more than 30-45 seconds.

    She's fabulous, just incredibly wonderful, and the women my GAWD the women, I could go on and on ...

    And then they amble towards the, you know, bad stuff and end up in sputtering hair-tearing pee-pee dance of rage over why she (and HER tasty voters!) won't get with the program.

    Sheesh.

    [ Parent ]

    May 31, 2008: A Day of Infamy!!! (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by NO2WONDERBOY on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:46:18 AM EST
    I for one am a steadfast supporter of Hillary Clinton and, like a loyal ally, will remain at her side.

    I thought that I could not be prouder, nor could  have respected Senator Clinton more. Today, my admiration for her has exponentially soared. I am humbled by her conviction and her loyalty to the core principles of the Democratic Party, even though that Democratic Party has not.

    I know we have to make the best with the cards that have been dealt, but this sure is a hard pill to swallow!

    Hillary will (none / 0) (#185)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:59:21 AM EST
    take this lemon and make lemmonaide!

    She will come out of this stronger than ever. That is what I love about this women. She has the group that the DEM Party needs to get the WH.

    They just gave her POWER! If we all stand behind her... she will get a position in the Party to provide her followers with the reforms we need.

    [ Parent ]

    It's HIllary's job (5.00 / 3) (#56)
    by sarahfdavis on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:47:33 AM EST
    to get her supporters in line and get obama elected.
    i was trying all of last night to understand this argument and i can't.
    I'm usually pretty good at seeing another pov, but i just can't make it work.
    will someone explain?
    thx

    A woman's work is never done? (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by masslib on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:49:20 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Media is once again setting Hilary up (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Aqua Blue on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:55:47 AM EST
    as a scapegoat.

    Hillay will get blamed if Obama does not win!

    The propaganda machine to control the people is beyond belief.   I doubt that we will ever have true reporting again.

    Thank God for Talk Left and other internent souces to seek out the truth.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Don't worry, Hillary will be blamed (5.00 / 4) (#89)
    by brodie on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:01:54 AM EST
    even when Obama wins.  

    The MSM line will be, "A lot of Dems tonight are wondering whether Obama might have gotten a larger mandate had it not been for the very divisive primary campaign he had to endure from the Clintons."

    [ Parent ]

    it may work on some blogs (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by ccpup on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:11:48 AM EST
    but I doubt very much the Media and the McCain campaign will allow that "it's Hillary's fault he lost" become a major talking point.

    McCain isn't going to do anything in this campaign to piss off Hillary Supporters as he sees the strong probability of siphoning off those votes.  And pushing the blame for Obama's mistakes to Hillary won't work with his "Obam can't handle the Oval Office" theme.

    Olbermann and Maddow may blame Hillary in the end, but they'll be the only ones doing so.  When Barack loses, it'll be his fault.

    I just can't wait for the definitive book to be written about this Primary Season so all his nasty tricks and the DNC's corruption can see the light of day and of public rebuke.

    [ Parent ]

    I've become a little afraid (none / 0) (#136)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:25:47 AM EST
    that Unity Ticket advocates are setting her up as well.


    [ Parent ]
    NuDem and Nu'mama line today: WSBQN??? (none / 0) (#83)
    by Ellie on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:59:28 AM EST
    Why's the Silly B!tch Quitting nnnnnNNNowwwwww???

    We need her 18 million vvvottttttess!!!

    Uh, yeah they do, don't they?
    Not a good reason.
    Not a good "new" platform.

    Obama ain't gettin' mine, though.
    I'm on the sidelines with so many millions, where they insisted I go.

    Downticket's not a given any more, given how the Dems fell over themselves in a contest to see who could be the bigger jerk.

    I'll be Uncommitted through the summer, maybe even on the ballot.

    I like being Independent, Unbought and Unbossed so Uncommitted suits me perfectly. That's probably where I'll be for whatever mileage is left in my carcass.

    I might write in Hillary and that's looking very strong too.

    The only certainty is not being a Dem anymore. Declaring Independence in '04 felt dayum good.

    [ Parent ]

    It's her 'job' if she wants to have a legacy (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by dugan49 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:56:05 AM EST
    within the Party. 50 years from now this election will be prominent in history books. She doesn't want to be seen then as someone who was simply obstructionist.

    As for us, her backers though, we can do what we think is right. I think the fact that McCain is perceived by some as a guy who will reach across the political aisle is going to help him in the present circumstance. If you had let's say, a Dick Cheney running against Obama, Clinton supporters would have a tough time jumping. McCain is another story and he will get some Clinton people. How many, or enough to tip the election? who knows yet?

    [ Parent ]

    so far (none / 0) (#174)
    by ccpup on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:44:03 AM EST
    Gallup has the number for those Hillary Supporters voting for McCain at 17% with a further 22% sitting this election out.

    so, he has nearly 40% of her supporters to win over.  beings how he couldn't do it during the Primary Season as he outspent her and had the Media behind him, I fail to see how he's going to do it in the General when the Media deserts him for their fave McCain and begins their daily Barack gaffe-a-thon.

    [ Parent ]

    My Sister (none / 0) (#203)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 07:19:00 PM EST
    an Obama supporter, says it's too close to the end of the primaries for these polls on Hillary supporters to be accurate.

    Any info with which I can counter?

    [ Parent ]

    I'm sorru, but if you aren't outraged (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by sallywally on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:59:08 AM EST
    about the abuse of Clinton, you aren't paying attention.

    [ Parent ]
    An Explanation (none / 0) (#73)
    by indy in sc on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:54:19 AM EST
    Hillary's most ardent supports are understandably upset at the outcome.  It's not likely those supporters will throw their support behind Obama just because he asks them to--given the level of acrimony it seems they would do the opposite of anything he asked.  Hillary's supporters are far more likely to listen to her if she gives them a compelling reason to support her rival.  If he had lost, it would be his responsibility to get his most ardent supporters to throw their support behind her.  Neither one would have an easy task at it.

    [ Parent ]
    still doesn't make sense (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by sarahfdavis on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:01:24 AM EST
    he's the uniter and leader now. HE"S supposed to do it. the folks that get kicked in the teeth are supposed to strap it on and forgive their abusers? makes no sense at all. obama and his supporters gleefully rode the hillary hate train and stomped on that misogyny pedal full throttle. i'm telling you, all i see is an abusive relationship and the abused are supposed to come whimpering home. NO.NO. NO. you guys really do not get it.

    [ Parent ]
    That is why it's up to her. (none / 0) (#159)
    by Joan in VA on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:37:41 AM EST
    No way in h*ll we're listening to him. She's the only one who has even a chance of getting us onboard.

    [ Parent ]
    I Don't Want To Get On Board (none / 0) (#187)
    by creeper on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 12:01:04 PM EST
    I don't like where that train is heading.  

    Obama won't get us out of Iraq, won't throw his support behind universal health care coverage, won't stand up to the big businesses that actually control this country.  

    How could he?  He's a neophyte who has figured out how to twist the system to get elected but hasn't a clue what to do once he's in office.  And if you think that's harsh, look at his record for the past two years.


    [ Parent ]

    That tact may work for some (none / 0) (#188)
    by MO Blue on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 12:12:41 PM EST
    Others probably not. Since my lack of support for Obama has absolutely nothing to do with Hillary, she can't FIX it. Obama has a slim chance to change my mind by what he does and does not do between now and November. It really is up to him and it has nothing to do with being hurt. From listening to others on the blogs and in REAL life, I am not alone in where I'm coming from even though Obama and his supporter