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! 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 >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Friday Night Open Thread | 218 comments (218 topical)
    Clyburn saying stuff on Media that he doesn't (5.00 / 1) (#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 / 0) (#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? (4.33 / 3) (#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 / 1) (#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 / 4) (#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
    Beating up... who? (5.00 / 3) (#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 / 5) (#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

    That's the saddest part! (5.00 / 4) (#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 / 0) (#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
    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 / 4) (#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 / 4) (#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.

    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 / 5) (#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.

    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.

    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 / 0) (#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 / 1) (#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 / 0) (#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.

    Parent

    Not Quite Again (1.00 / 0) (#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
    It's like the Obamamaniacs have infested every inch of it. They've even ruined the TelevisionWithoutPity.com forums for me. Granted there are a couple of sane voices occasionally posting there (on the News board), but they are drowned out and nearly bullied into leaving. Really sad.

    I'm watching Bill Maher's show now, and he's being extremely fair! What a breath of fresh air! (Even though his panel is resisting, but eff them.)

    I know what you mean (none / 0) (#90)
    by americanincanada on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:50:17 PM EST
    I can't even watch tv anymore. The DAily Show, Colbert Report, TWOP, My DD (on some days)...I swear you can hardly say anything in support of Clinton without getting your head ripped off.

    Parent
    Clinton Rapid Response Team (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by caseyOR on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:24:27 PM EST
    I just got an email from the Clinton campaign inviting me to become a member of the Rapid Response Team. The RRT will counter lies and misleading statements about Hillary and her campaign. Campaign will provide team members with daily talking points about the campaign and daily talking points about the smears and lies that are out there.

    I guess Hillary is mad and isn't gonna take it anymore. And I say, about time, girl.

    Excellent! Hope I get that email, too (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:33:52 PM EST
    as it is just what is needed . . . although it may mean scouting out the boyz blogz, and I may not have the stomach for that.  It's a dirty job, so if you can do it, good for you.  Tell us how it works, how it goes.

    Parent
    You can join at her website. No need to wait. :-) (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:39:39 PM EST


    Parent
    Thanks -- I get several emails a day (none / 0) (#124)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:40:41 PM EST
    for months now, having signed up there, but not this one.  So I'll go to the site and look for the RRT.

    Parent
    What took them so long?? (none / 0) (#157)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:51:49 AM EST


    Parent
    I doubt anyone makes it this far (5.00 / 4) (#142)
    by ghost2 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:11:37 AM EST
    But please read Somerby.  He makes you laugh and cry at the same time.  His take of Rachel Maddow (whom liberals love, but is really another Olbermann in the making):

    Maddow's presentation is very familiar--familiar because it typifies the work of the mainstream press corps over these past many years. Maddow seems to know all the key moves: Mock a Big Dem. Then, Misstate your facts. In the process, Refute an argument nobody made. Garbage like this is pushed at young liberals night after night on this horrible show. Olbermann feeds on their gullibility like a thing which crawled out of a swamp.

    Somerby is tough and blunt, but he is honest to the core.  

    McCarthy (5.00 / 2) (#145)
    by DandyTIger on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:22:33 AM EST
    Yes, I said it. KO has turned into Joe McCarthy. If you say anything positive about Clinton, you are evil. If you don't love Obama, you are a racist. KO has turned into what he purports to be against.

    KO, you sir, have turned into that which you have said you hate the most. It's time to stop. Stop this insult to journalism. Stop this hate mongering. Stop this race bating. Stop your own version of the red scare. You sir, have no integrity left. Do us all a favor, and resign now. If you have any shred of decency left. I'll await your response.

    Goodbye, and good luck.

    Rev. Wright on Bill Moyers (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by facta non verba on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:09:35 AM EST
    It was informative with a tonne of background. Overall I'd say a net positive to neutral for the Rev Wright and neutral to a bit disconcerting for Obama. Still, as historian I have to say that I came away with the feeling that the Rev. Wright is in dire of a few history lessons. Two sermons were hightlighted Sep 16 2001 and Apr 13 2003. He veers into serious historical inaccuracies on several occasions most esp on Truman's decision to use the atomic weapon on Japan. On this the Rev Wright is simply wrong.

    Those who watch this programme are likely not the ones who Obama and the Rev Wright need to reach in any regard but there is not any fodder for the news cycle apart perhaps from the already out there comment that Obama is "a politician."

    There was one interesting photo of Obama as a community organizer standing in front of a poster that read "It'a Power Thing." That struck me.

    The Rev Wright is articulate no doubt but still I have an unease about him. He talks about all this love our enemies and yet still in his sermon of Jan 13 2008 railed with such hate against Hillary Clinton herself. That sermon was not broached.

    Disappointing that Moyers did (none / 0) (#168)
    by MarkL on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:21:35 AM EST
    not mention that sermon.

    Parent
    Agreed (none / 0) (#174)
    by facta non verba on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:33:40 AM EST
    That is part of why I think Wright hasn't explained himself fully or at least to my satisfaction. Still that sermon is really mostly offensive to Hillary supporters and especially women. And historically the Rev Wright may be in the Bible but he is not in the history books.

    The whole non-persons thing. In 1868, when the 14th Amendment was being discussed guess who opposed including women in the text? Frederick Douglass, that's who. He was for the rights of men and continued subjugation of women even though the early suffragette movement had been strongly and anti-slavery and the first social movement outside the New England Churches to advocate for emancipation.

    Like Douglass, Wright has his good point but he still approaches the world from a sexist perspective. In the end, that's what I think of Wright a good man with serious flaws and capable of hate and still suffering from a lack of understanding of the human condition.

    Parent

    Wright kept lapsing into (none / 0) (#198)
    by andrys on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 06:10:11 AM EST
    ... into outstretched arm expressiveness in that theatrically manipulative way he has.

    Parent
    good analysis (none / 0) (#207)
    by white n az on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 07:56:05 AM EST
    Though personally, I think that the use of atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, like the firebombing on cities in Japan and Germany represent serious black marks on America's history. Given the intensity of World War II, there is some argument to dismissing the significance of these events.

    I found myself rather liking Jeremiah Wright though I found him hard to hear/understand as he spoke rather oddly and very fast...and I am usually pretty good on picking up on various accents and I'm from Chicago originally. That sort of bothered me.

    Clearly the sermon on Hillary was one where he left religion behind and put politics center stage for one of his own.

    One thing is obvious from watching his interview on Moyers...that Rev. Wright is far more mainstream and likable than Rev. Hagee.

    Parent

    Wright Flaw (none / 0) (#230)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:54:54 AM EST
    Now, this really irked me.  He talked about his ministry being of the kind that did not separate the world of the outside to the world of the church and mentioned the prof of theology guiding him to combine the worlds.  Well, then he goes into how Obama has one world and he is another.  Guess what, you cannot have it both ways.  He preaches that you combine the worlds then Obama gets to do something else?  

    I agree his history is faulty.  No mention of the AIDS  and the US government.  No mention of him a preacher humiliating Hillary.  I did not find him likeable, actually I found him to be a liar.  I prefer the angry one, and not the one trying to clean up his image.  

    Parent

    Letter from Maya Angelou (5.00 / 4) (#169)
    by nycstray on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:23:56 AM EST
    {sigh} I'll admit it, I'm in the tank for Hillary AND Maya.


    I am Honored to Say I am With Hillary for the Long Run
    by Dr. Maya Angelou
    4/24/2008 2:39:10 PM

    Dear Friend:

    I am writing to tell you about my friend, Hillary Clinton, and why I am standing with her in her campaign for the presidency.  I know the kind of president Hillary Clinton will be because I know the person she is.

    I am inspired by her courage and her honesty.  She is a reliable and trustworthy person.  She is someone I not only admire but one for whom I have profound affection.

    Hillary does not waver in standing up for those who need a champion.  She has always been a passionate protector of families.  As a child, she was taught that all God's children are equal, and as a mother, she understood that her child wasn't safe unless all children were safe.  As I wrote about Hillary recently in a praise song: "She is the prayer of every woman, and every man who longs for fair play, healthy families, good schools and a balanced economy."

    It may be easy to view Hillary Clinton through the narrow lens of those who would write her off or grind her down.  Hillary sees us as we are, black and brown and white and yellow and pink and relishes our differences knowing that fundamentally we are all more alike than we are unalike.  She is able to look through complexion and see community.

    She has endured great scrutiny, and still she dares greatly.  Hillary Clinton will not give up on you, and all she asks is that you do not give up on her.  She is a long-distance runner.  I am honored to say I am with her for the long run.

    I am supporting Hillary Clinton because I know that she will make the most positive difference in people's lives and she will help our country become what it can be.  Whether you are her supporter, leaning towards her, undecided, or supporting someone else, I believe Hillary Clinton will represent you - she will be a president for all Americans.  It is no small thing that along the way we will make history together.

    Vote for Hillary Clinton and show your support at www.hillaryclinton.com. I know she will make us proud.
    OOPS! Link here! (none / 0) (#170)
    by nycstray on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:25:48 AM EST
    http://tinyurl.com/4el79p

    Parent
    Didn't Hillary (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by kenoshaMarge on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 05:48:51 AM EST
    say that Iran knows that we would obliterate them if they attacked Israel? I forget the exact quote but I do know that she did not say she would be in favor of just obliterating Iran.

    Arianna Huffington is an ex-republican, Clinton-hating liar of monumental proportions. Which is why she infests our airwaves so frequently.

    I posted what she actually said above (none / 0) (#203)
    by andrys on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 06:34:47 AM EST
    The key thoughts included were that she'd been asked her response to a NUCLEAR attack on Israel and she said those who ran the Iranian govt should remember if they plan such a thing that we WOULD BE ABLE TO totally obliterate them and that she wanted them to understand that in hopes it would deter them from such a reckless, foolish and tragic move.

    Parent
    Blame Hannity who was on this for weeks (5.00 / 0) (#202)
    by andrys on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 06:30:43 AM EST
    and then it was picked up by other $$$news$#$$ too.

    Your guy is in the lead but you're exhibiting bitterness over the thought of a possible loss caused by 'monsters' ... and will cling to that.  It's understood.

      Obama has caused its own problems and when you wake up you will know this.  His ad that HE didn't take oil money when it's against the law for 100 years did require a "negative" ad correcting the false implication.  He'll say anything to get elected though, won't he.  Typical politician.  Ask Wright.

    It Never Fails To Amaze Me That A Candidate (5.00 / 2) (#209)
    by MO Blue on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:09:17 AM EST
    who is presenting himself as someone for hope and change attracts and inspires so many supporters who are so into hate and destruction.

    Obama's supporters like you are one of the prime reasons that Obama will lose the GE. So when he is defeated in November, make sure that you take a bow for your contribution.

    Labels (5.00 / 1) (#228)
    by AnninCA on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:41:29 AM EST
    such as "progressive" make very little sense to me.  Her proposals are far bolder and more progressive than his; yet his "progressive" supporters don't seem to care about the actual platform all that much.  Assuming that he will even be a force behind progressive policies is based upon a lot of wishin' and hopin', since he certainly isn't promising that.

    Labels such as "real Democrat" also don't make sense.  Hillary now commandingly leads with "real" registered Democrats, 75% to his 63%.  Obviously, she is the favorite of the "real" Democratic party.  Now, you may wish to change the "real" Democratic party to be more along the lines of the new wave of Obama supporters on the internet blogs or in organizations such as Moveon.org....but that is one group within the "real" Democratic party.

    We're all tired at this stage.  However, we have two highly viable candidates.  In a Democracy, we don't tell one person to quit when it's so obviously this close.

    As for negative attacks, those have been coming steadily from Obama since Texas.  He's attacked her character constantly.  She has not done the same.  He has used fear tactics to scare people about her health plan.  He has sent his surrogates out to bully her out of the race.  He has implied that she lies about her experience without valid proof.  She did none of that to him.

    She didn't bring up Ayers.  The moderators did.  She merely clarified that he was minimizing his relationship with Ayers.  If he caught flack, it's because he joined up with Ayers years ago.  He got by with minimizing Rezko in one debate.  Remember?  4 or 5 hours legal work?  Then it hit the news that they were tight for 17 years.  She merely didn't let him do the same again.

    The notion that Hillary is not suppose to campaign so that Obama can just win is ridiculous, given 75%, repeat, 75% of the registered Democrats have already voted for her.

    To suggest that many people be ignored is patently absurd.

    Obama learnt the cling stuff from Rev Wright. (none / 0) (#11)
    by TalkRight on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:03:09 PM EST
    Wright used it again and again in the PBS interview.

    Yeah (none / 0) (#42)
    by txpolitico67 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:40:36 PM EST
    I noticed that, too.

    Parent
    Anyone know of any data that suggests caucus (none / 0) (#13)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:07:24 PM EST
    wins translate to GE wins? And isn't Iowa usually wrong about the eventual nominee or GE winner(I forget which)? I don't see how such a small number of voters means much. Seems you have to be pretty committed to caucus since it's such a hassle.

    If I Was More Conspiracy Minded... (none / 0) (#19)
    by Dave Latchaw on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:13:27 PM EST
    ...I would think the Obabmapeeps were setting up Hillary to take the fall for Barack losing to McCain so he can run again in 2012.

    If he loses, he's finished. (5.00 / 0) (#33)
    by jeffhas on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:24:17 PM EST
    Losers are viewed as losers.

    If Hillary loses the Nom, she can make a credible case of 'I told you so'... because it has been thisclose.

    Parent

    As valid as the MCMers' narrative she's working (none / 0) (#29)
    by jawbone on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:21:18 PM EST
    to set herself up in '12.

    Of course, she keeps saying a Dem must be elected--it's so important. So she's off message?

    This is ridiculous.

    Parent

    Oh, but Michelle said (none / 0) (#30)
    by shoephone on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:23:23 PM EST
    we must elect him now because he will never run again!

    Those threats don't work too well with me.

    Parent

    Don't worry - we'll hold her to that. (5.00 / 0) (#34)
    by jeffhas on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:26:18 PM EST
    ... and she better not try any funny business by running herself - she would have to be very proud for a second time in her life to have that kind of audacity.

    Parent
    Anyone watching Bill Moyers? (none / 0) (#31)
    by txpolitico67 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:23:28 PM EST
    Jeremiah Wright is on.  Wonder why he keeps speaking some words in Spanish and pronouncing words with a Spanish accent?

    Man talk about a whitewash.  Bill Moyers is one of the greats in his field.  But it seems like the interview is more like an infomercial.

    Not that I was looking for a hit piece, I doubt that would be Moyers' style.  However, I didn't think that it would be such a fluff piece, either.

    Wright/Moyers (none / 0) (#67)
    by sleepingdogs on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:20:08 PM EST
    I watched too.

    I liked where Wright was trying to explain what he meant with the "God D@mn America"  sermon.  He said that all governments, past, present and future "change, fail and lie."

    Well, Axelrod/Obama decided to start with "change."  Next step?

    Parent

    I watched a bit of it... (none / 0) (#86)
    by kredwyn on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:49:19 PM EST
    But he seemed to be conflating a whole bunch of historic moments together in his discussion of what "isn't" being taught in the history classroom.

    I definitely remember learning about the Trail of Tears as well as other events in my HS American History classes.

    Granted I graduated from HS a couple decades after he did. But still...it seems to me that he hasn't really looked at what's being taught in the classroom since he left the classroom.

    Parent

    Funny (none / 0) (#141)
    by angie on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:08:41 AM EST
    I've been worried about what he has been teaching in his church.

    Parent
    Olbermann as McCarthy (none / 0) (#38)
    by christinep on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:32:38 PM EST
    Thanks to Exeter for the astute observation that KO may have transformed into Joe McCarthy.  What an irony! But, self-righteousness will do that.

    When Obamann reaches the paper-shaking stage (none / 0) (#184)
    by Ellie on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:20:08 AM EST
    ... his brain has wandered into the Zombie Zone.

    He'll be like Republican Palace spokesdoofus Scott McLellan waving around dental records that "prove" Bush's teeth weren't AWOL during his missing year, or Colin Powell waving around a tube of unidentified powder at the UN to "prove" the "irrefutable" case that Saddam had WMDs and did 9/11.

    Obamann sputters more but he's as much of a huckster and lying sack.

    Parent

    It is time for a tough commercial- (none / 0) (#39)
    by kenosharick on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:33:00 PM EST
    esp. in NC that goes " While our men and women are fighting overseas to combat terrorism, Barack Obama has an unrepentant "former" terrorist as a friend and fundraiser"  and "Is this the type of judgement and CHANGE you want in the WH?" Low blow? No worse than them trying to turn the Clintons into racists.

    I wouldn't want to hear the outcry (none / 0) (#48)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:52:29 PM EST
    if she did that. She would get more criticism than it would be worth. She has to stick to the high road because of the Obama Roolz.

    Parent
    Joan- I say to heck with the high road (none / 0) (#226)
    by kenosharick on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:27:42 AM EST
    they paint her as the devil and Barack as a saint no matter what happens. She could cure cancer, while he was committing some horrible crime and the media would spin it as "Hillary puts doctors out of work- Obama reaches out to whoever"

    Parent
    The NC GOP already made that ad... (none / 0) (#65)
    by Addison on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:15:06 PM EST
    ...even McCain wants it pulled.

    Parent
    McCain trick (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:23:25 PM EST
    See, this is how he always tricks the gullible.  He creates a fuss, and knows that it will not change anything, gets the benefit of the ad, but gullible uniter kind of people think:  Wow, see  McCain is a great honorable guy.  He did that with torture, huffs and puffs and votes for it.  But what stays in people's heads:  McCain is great, he is against torture, he is not as bad as Bush.  The point is he is Bush.  They are Republicans.  

    Parent
    Indeed... (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Addison on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:24:44 PM EST
    ...that is what's going on. However, I don't see the point in Democrats advocating the ad.

    Parent
    republicans might cross over to vote for Obama (none / 0) (#43)
    by athyrio on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:41:36 PM EST
    as he is viewed as toast in the general election in NC....Wonder what percentage that would effect?

    A bunch (none / 0) (#54)
    by diplomatic on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:59:58 PM EST
    And if they do, the superdelegates can come to their own conclusions about what that means.

    Parent
    Not going to happen (none / 0) (#144)
    by angie on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:17:35 AM EST
    A hotly contested primary in NC for governor is also going on -- if any Repubs. "cross over" to vote in the Dem primary then they will not be able to vote in the Repub. primary. They aren't going to "waste" a vote on Obama.

    Parent
    why is it (none / 0) (#50)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:56:12 PM EST
    that Guis Baltar is the only former Caprican who speaks with an English accent?

    I'm slightly embarrassed to admit I know this, (none / 0) (#57)
    by tigercourse on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:04:18 PM EST
    but I believe it's because he isn't from Caprica. He talked about being from some kind of backwards, poor planet.

    Parent
    oh, that's not embarrassing (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:11:44 PM EST
    Embarrassing is knowing that he left Aerelon when he was 18, and learned a Caprican dialect that was used by the wealthier classes.

    So, it begs the question: if that's a Caprican dialect, where are the other Capricans who speak it?  Did all the wealthy people get killed in the attack?  Surely, some of them had to be toodling out there in private space yachts and such.

    It just makes you wonder...

    Parent

    Here's something else to wonder about, (none / 0) (#79)
    by tigercourse on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:31:10 PM EST
    they've developed the techonology to jump huge distances in space,  even created a pill that prevents radiation poisoning (then forgot they had that in a later episode) but haven't made any advances in actually treating cancer.

    Parent
    He's on Wiki (none / 0) (#61)
    by waldenpond on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:10:46 PM EST
    Gaius Baltar claims to be from the colony of Aerelon, a largely agricultural world that was known as the "food basket for the twelve worlds." He was born and raised on a dairy farm outside of the town of Cuffle's Breath Wash. At the age of ten, finding the Aerelon dialect to be detrimental to his career dreams, he trained himself to speak with a Caprican dialect in hopes that one day he might be considered a citizen of one of the more respected and wealthy colonies, Caprica specifically. This implies that a number of colonies (for example Sagittaron and Gemenon) are not only poor worlds, but also viewed as intellectual and cultural backwaters. According to his account, Baltar left Aerelon after his 18th birthday.

    So odd that one can look this up.  :)

    Parent

    OKay (none / 0) (#64)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:12:47 PM EST
    I am going to pretend I didn't know that off the top of my head.

    Parent
    Kathy, I asked this before (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:25:33 PM EST
    Should I consider forgiving my Obamacon nephew because he likes Battlestar and annoys me each time that I should watch it, in the same way that he talks about Obama?  Or should I give him a second chance?  

    If I watch it I will not turn into one of them?  

    Parent

    Chug beer while watching (none / 0) (#87)
    by waldenpond on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:49:44 PM EST
    preferably from a dented styrofoam cooler you have your feet propped on, to maintain proper Clinton creds and you will be safe.

    Now, excuse me while I work on my cred.  :)

    Parent

    don't do it stellaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (none / 0) (#91)
    by cpinva on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:52:45 PM EST
    it hasn't been the same since lorne green died! lol

    Parent
    Lorne Greene was on it? (none / 0) (#97)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:02:20 PM EST


    Parent
    He was (none / 0) (#99)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:04:42 PM EST
    He was Adama in the old series.

    Parent
    Sounds confusing.. (none / 0) (#106)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:13:06 PM EST
    My level of "science fiction" was Lost in Space:  Danger, Danger Will Robinson.  And that was all.  All those planets and powers way over my low information head.  

    Parent
    Ah (none / 0) (#110)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:19:40 PM EST
    But if you know your astrological signs, you kind of know the planets. Although since they've all been nuked, you no longer need to know them really.

    Parent
    Speaking of planets... (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:29:22 PM EST
    Have you seen these images from Hubbel?  Really cool, galaxies colliding

    Parent
    Oh (none / 0) (#125)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:42:37 PM EST
    No I hadn't seen them. They're beautiful. And black holes are everywhere. PANIC!! :D

    Parent
    Nah, I don't think so. (none / 0) (#131)
    by janarchy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:49:49 PM EST
    My mom and I both watch BSG religiously as do friends of mine. We're still deep in the Hillary tank. It is political but hysterically, people on the right are into it as much as people on the left (or wherever we're now considered to be) and everyone can get something out of it. Well written, well thought out and lots of eye candy for whatever your preference may be.

    Parent
    You must be from (none / 0) (#69)
    by waldenpond on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:21:17 PM EST
    Caprica (all knowing Clinton supporter).  I must be from Gemenon (non-knowing Clinton supporter).

    Parent
    Mars/Venus? Haha! (none / 0) (#73)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:23:38 PM EST


    Parent
    I don't watch the show, but (none / 0) (#77)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:29:06 PM EST
    am I seeing too much in this bio -- that reads a lot like Obama's?  Is that why BSG is so hot with all of you?

    Me, I watched a historical movie tonight about Bertie and Elizabeth and World War II.  I'm so boring.

    Parent

    For me (none / 0) (#96)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:01:46 PM EST
    As Adama said "It's not enough to survive. One must be worthy of survival."

    Especially when the show started, it was about surviving against all odds after the worse possible tragedy and in the process not losing everything you thought you were. Its the classic good vs evil except that its not that clear at times which is which.


    Parent

    Yikes, they made my life a sci-fi show? (none / 0) (#112)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:25:00 PM EST
    And here I said that, at times, my life was a soap opera. :-)

    Parent
    Scarily (none / 0) (#132)
    by janarchy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:51:49 PM EST
    Gaius Baltar has become a New Messiah on the show this year. But it was written over a year ago so the Obama parallels are merely coincidental. Of course, he's also one of the most narcissitic, hedonistic self-absorbed people out there so then again, maybe there's something there.

    The President on the show is a woman. Although lately, she seems to be challenging George Bush.

    Parent

    Unlike Obama, Gaius is (none / 0) (#219)
    by FlaDemFem on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:44:37 AM EST
    a scientific genius. He has a very fine mind, misguided though it has been on many occasions. I have not heard that Obama is especially brilliant at anything. Yeah, I know, Law Review, but what has he shown since then?? Nada.

    Parent
    Time for Real Time with guest Arianna (none / 0) (#56)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:02:37 PM EST
    Huffington. Should be interesting. Tracey Ullman's impression of her is hysterical-catch it if you can.

    Bradley effect BIG TIME!!!! (none / 0) (#59)
    by athyrio on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:07:10 PM EST


    Doug Wilder, of the eponymous effect (none / 0) (#116)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:28:24 PM EST
    here on the East Coast, recently gave Obama some advice: Don't believe the polls! Seriously.

    Parent
    Top Chef... (none / 0) (#76)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:26:59 PM EST
    I still can't get a favorite.  Got any faves and why?

    Richard maybe? (none / 0) (#109)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:18:37 PM EST
    It grossed me out when Tom said the Australian guy was testing and threw his spoon back into the soup 2 weeks ago. Dale is good. 2 girls are good but I get them all mixed up. I liked the group on last season more. I would really like to be able to taste the dishes when the judges talk about how good something is. Like can't they share,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Parent
    Love Richard and Dale. Dislike Spike. (none / 0) (#118)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:30:55 PM EST
    Andrew is certifiable. The women are pretty ho-hum.

    Parent
    Yuck Spike... (none / 0) (#129)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:47:00 PM EST
    arrogant.  

    I must say since that guy a couple of episodes ago, the foam guy, it has not been fun in a catty way to watch.  

    Parent

    Not Richard! (none / 0) (#185)
    by angie on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:33:09 AM EST
    Richard is the one with the stupid hairdo, right? I hate him based on that alone and his unwarranted smugness isn't helping him any. But, I do have to give him credit as being one of the few on this season with a modicum of personality so that I can distinguish him from the rest.  Antonia -- hate her and that stupid "I'm not cooking polish sausage" attitude of hers.  I kind of like Dale -- but I'm pretty "eh" about the rest.

    Parent
    great question Stellaaa (none / 0) (#81)
    by Terry M on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:37:26 PM EST
    I don't have a favorite either or a favorite one to hate (like Hung or Marcel of previous seasons).

    This is going to sound totally off the wall, (none / 0) (#93)
    by Anne on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:56:25 PM EST
    but tonight as I was driving home, C-SPAN radio was playing today's presser by the Syrian ambassador to the US, and the topic was the so-called Syrian-North Korean connection and the alleged "nuclear facility" that the Israelis bombed last September.

    I don't remember the ambassador's name, but he was on a tear against the Bush administration - just ripping them up one side and down the other.  I especially enjoyed his comment to the media not to be gullible, not to just write down what the government told them, not to make the same mistake the NYT and the WaPo made in the run-up to the Iraq war...seriously, he said that.

    I haven't done enough reading about the incident, other than that the Congress is once again furious with Bush for not telling them about this until now.  The Syrian ambassador says that he is hearing from people inside the State Department and the CIA that they are very uncomfortable with the administration's claims on this.

    I drove home with my jaw gaping, listening to this guy talk about administration's fondness for manufacturing evidence and the lip service it pays to efforts to broker peace in the Middle East.  He promised that the whole story would fall apart in the coming days, so I guess we will have to stay tuned.

    If you can find a transcript, it might be worth reading - i didn't hear the whole thing, but it was something else.

    Larissa Alexandrovna (none / 0) (#114)
    by white n az on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:26:20 PM EST
    Editor in chief of RawStory.com and her own blog atlargely.com - see Massive Propoganda at the WSJ posting from 2 days ago...on this topic.

    Of course with the story last week about the military using various generals to game the news media, this is hardly surprising.

    Parent

    It's so pathetic (5.00 / 2) (#154)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:50:55 AM EST
    that we literally don't know anymore whether the Syrians are telling the truth or our own government is.

    Parent
    I read some where (none / 0) (#103)
    by IKE on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:12:06 PM EST
    that Oblerman aplogize to Hillary is this true? This guy has become some an idiot that it pains me to say. I don't know how in the world that network even considers itself to be news worthy. Wounldn't it be easier if they came out and said we are supporting Obama and will do anything we can to get him elected instead of pretending.

    Not quite -- actually, not at all (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:38:07 PM EST
    He apologized to any offended viewers, not to her.

    And he only apologized for a bad choice of pronouns.

    See what you think; here it is.

    Me, I think a half-a*ed non-apology shows what a half-a*hat he is.  He can't even do that right.

    Parent

    Sigh. Trying again (5.00 / 2) (#123)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:39:52 PM EST
    Hope this works.

    Parent
    Nope. He tried to worm his way out (none / 0) (#120)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:36:16 PM EST
    in a response to a story written about the incident on Huffpo. The story is on the front page of TL.

    Parent
    DNC RBC meeting (none / 0) (#107)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:16:47 PM EST
    They've scheduled the meeting of the Rules & Bylaws Committee for May 31 to decide on the Ausman appeal regarding Florida's delegates. Mark your calendars. :D

    Dick Morris, (none / 0) (#135)
    by sas on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:57:16 PM EST
    with emphasis on the word Dick, is deep in debt.  One way for him to accrue funds is to daily trash the Clintons.  He's a regular on Rasmussen Reports....

    Dick Morris, a.k.a. ... (none / 0) (#147)
    by NO2WONDERBOY on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:33:42 AM EST
    E tu Brutus ?
    Thank you, thank you, thank you for drawing attention to the public about Dick Morris and his lack of integrity concerning his cheap-shot vitriolic "stand" against versus his past laudatory characterization of Hillary Clinton while he contributed, with political and economic lucrative personal gains: disreputable behavior.  
    It is disgusting to see and hear him relentlessly smear Senator Clinton. What a disgraceful, contemptible excuse of a man!
     

    DM is the embodiment of the woman who serviced him (5.00 / 0) (#166)
    by thereyougo on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:15:56 AM EST
    awhile back,I'm actually thinking he might even be jealous of the Clintons.

    Parent
    Heh (none / 0) (#221)
    by stillife on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:50:45 AM EST
    Dick Morris has an unhealthy obsession with the Clintons.  His commentary is absolutely worthless.  He's incapable of answering questions - even when asked about Obama, all he does is change the subject and go back to vilifying the Clintons.

    Even for Fox, he's a joke.  When O'Reilly rolls his eyes at the answers, you know it's bad.

    Parent

    A diary fairly criticizing Barack Obama (none / 0) (#150)
    by eleanora on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:42:25 AM EST
    actually made the rec list at DKos. A friend sent me the link this morning and I read all 770 comments with my jaw dropped :0

    There was some HRC hate in the comments, but most of them are thoughtful and very on point with what Obama should do to jazz his campaign up for this last big push. I'm actually relieved and hope this spreads. I don't support him right now, but if he's our nominee, he needs more constructive criticism like this and much less rah-rah cheerleading.

    A Dissenting Opinion From a Huge Obama Fan

    Really? I thought it was awful... (none / 0) (#151)
    by MarkL on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:47:19 AM EST
    there are  a lot of diaries like that at DK: they pretend they are going to give some really serious criticism of Obama, but turn out to be rah-rah delusions. I stopped at point 2: why don't the media talk about Hillary's failure to win the black and liberal vote?
    Um, DUH---because those are not swing voters!
    The answer the diarist gave is that it's because Clinton has already lost..
    and so on.

    Parent
    I haven't been over there much, (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by eleanora on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:08:05 AM EST
    but last week Obama was still uniformly The Shining Light Who Will Lead Us All To The Glory Place. So I thought that diary was a nice change, even though I didn't agree with all the points. And several of the commenters suggested that he

    • Concentrate on Q&A's instead of huge rallies
    • Be more specific about his policies and plans
    • Explain to voters what he intends to do for them, instead of how he wants to Be President and Change Politics.
    • Instead of getting mad about it, have fun and enjoy the fight.

    Sounds like another candidate I know :)

    Parent
    He has no details to give (none / 0) (#197)
    by andrys on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 06:08:04 AM EST
    He tells people to go to his website.

      !  That's why he halts and stammers.  He is just not into all that boring and tedious detail on how to get all that stuff done.

    Parent

    DKos are mulling over the PA race, saying how (none / 0) (#164)
    by thereyougo on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:10:20 AM EST
    well Obama did in central PA.

    I think they're still picking apart the state  licking their wounds

    Hillary's position on Iran (none / 0) (#177)
    by PennProgressive on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:01:21 AM EST
    I just heard Ariana Huffington say on Bill Maher that Hillary Clinton said that she would obliterate Iran. Huffington stated that several times. Can any one tell me whether HRC at all said that and if she did, what was the context? A few days back I was very interested to read about HRC's comments about umbrella of deterrence in relation to Iran. I have not seen much discussion about that elsewhere (i.e.,outside TL) and now Huffington's criticism!

    The context (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by diplomatic on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:41:50 AM EST
    It would be in retaliation for an Iranian attack on Israel.

    Parent
    the clip is from LK (none / 0) (#179)
    by thereyougo on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:07:08 AM EST
    its above a few comments- 6 or7 up on the DK link of criticism of Obamas campaign post PA.

    Parent
    Arianna was also on 20/20 talking about welfare (none / 0) (#181)
    by thereyougo on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:09:44 AM EST
    and how the Clinton policies were failure, from her 7 mil house of course. rolls eyes

    Parent
    What Hillary actually said (none / 0) (#200)
    by andrys on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 06:26:36 AM EST
    Below, a transcript  of the entire exchange:
    +++
        CHRIS CUOMO: You said if Iran were to strike Israel, there would be
        "massive retaliation." Scary words. Does "massive retaliation" mean
        you'd go into Iran? You would bomb Iran? Is that what that's supposed to
        suggest?

        CLINTON: Well, the question was, if Iran were to launch a nuclear
        attack on Israel, what would our response be? And I want the Iranians to
        know that if I am president, we will attack Iran. And I want them to
        understand that. Because it does mean that they have to look very
        carefully at their society.

         Because whatever stage of development they might be in their
        nuclear weapons program, in the next 10 years during  which
        they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we
        would be able to totally obliterate them. That's a terrible thing
        to say, but those people who run Iran need to understand that.

         Because that, perhaps, will deter them from  
         doing something that would be  reckless, foolish,
         and tragic.
    +++

    Parent

    Yep (none / 0) (#180)
    by AnninCA on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:07:25 AM EST
    she said it when asked to explain her ideas about how to negotiate with Iran and neighboring countries.

    It was on a morning show day before yesterday.

    Parent

    she said this only *if* Isreal is attacked by Iran (none / 0) (#183)
    by thereyougo on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:14:54 AM EST


    Parent
    Clyburn behavior reckless circular political stunt (none / 0) (#214)
    by Salt on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:26:41 AM EST
    using Bill Clinton as their target and by the morning its obvious the charges are false he just pissed using Bill as a white power symbol, now Sharpton a former candidate for the Dem nominee threatening to shut down NY hurt peoples pocket books his protestors shouting down charging its the  KKK, add Rev Wrights resurgence and videos. Has anyone begun to think about how many voters the Party will loose to save the Clyburn masses of AA that he says will stay home if Obama is not nominee, my guess you can kiss my District good bye its 40 60 an open seat, the Republican paper of course their loving this stuff a big NY photo in today's paper of what appears to be riot behavior of AA fighting with police throwing the KKK charge and maybe that's the goal suppress the white, working class, seniors through ugliness and fear in Ind hoping the bitter folks don't want to identify with a Party that has leaders inflaming civil discourse recklessly because it will.

    This is so-ooo (none / 0) (#216)
    by magisterludi on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:37:12 AM EST
    destructive on so-ooo many different levels.

    Parent
    He (none / 0) (#215)
    by sas on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:27:11 AM EST
    got humilated in PA. He won 5 counties. Five.

     He lost many counties by 75-25, 65-35.

    The only thing keeping him from drowning completely was the heavy black vote in Philadelphia.  He got Harrisburg, one Philly suburban county, and a couple of counties with big college populations.  But it was Philly, mainly.

    How many states that are swing states, have a Philly?  

    Certainly Florida and Ohio do not.

    Why no DailyHowler on the blogroll? (none / 0) (#224)
    by Radiowalla on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:18:29 AM EST
    How about putting Somerby's "DailyHowler" on the TalkLeft blogroll?

    I think you should blame (none / 0) (#225)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:20:34 AM EST
    someone other than Hillary for Reverend Wright.

    How about Fox News?  How about Reverend Wright?  How about Obama for attending such a church? Oh, he shouldn't be blamed for any of his behavior.

    The right wing brought out Wright.  It wasn't Hillary.  And you don't think that the right wing wouldn't have brought him out for November?  You'd be fooling yourself.

    I know exactly how you feel though, because although there are quite a few folks like you on the Obama side, there are about 20-30% more like you on the Hillary side.  You have to ask yourself why would that be?  Could it be because any unfairness that has been thrown Obama's way, has been at least doubly thrown Hillary's way?

    Anyway, just know you aren't alone in your feelings.  There are those of us on both sides.

    This is the kind of thing (none / 0) (#227)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:37:30 AM EST
    that statements like Olbermann's encourage:

    Clinton comment: Threat or prank?

    The fact is, there are influencable crazies watching Olbermann's show (just as there are watching his counterpart O'Reilly/Rush Limbaugh's show).  Any of them would take his, uh, hyperboly, to heart.  

    Personally, I think Olbermann needs to take a vacation until this election is over.

    BTD - just FYI (none / 0) (#234)
    by jeffhas on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 12:04:24 PM EST
    The situation of Alice Palmer has bothered me intensely.

    The story goes that Alice Palmer was a mentor of sorts to Barack, and when she was called to run in a currently Republican district as a 'good democrat' she gave it her best shot, and suggested Obama be the placeholder of her current seat.  Unfortunately she lost.  When she came back to claim her original seat that Barack was holding, he literally sued to keep her name off the ballot so ho wouldn't have to run against her and surely lose.

    This story that is quite old, and was one of the first things that early on made me very wary of Obama - I mean if your about a different kind of politics - this isn't it.  It started my belief that he is a charlatan.

    I believe that Hillary having Alice Palmer working with her campaign has the potential to bring this narrative back up in regards to Barack Obama (another skeleton out of the closet), and how he really supports those who have supported him, and his bar-knuckles approach to politics... he really is no different from anyone else.

    I'm not sure the article I'm attaching - which links you to the original ChiTrib story - follows the details as they had been told to me...

    But for those of you who didn't know the story at all... here you go:

    http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/former_obama_friend_stumps_for.html

    comments now closed (none / 0) (#238)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 02:41:57 AM EST


    Friday Night Open Thread | 218 comments (218 topical)