Redd!

Hi Christy!

Those media boys can just go shove it. They are a danger to democracy — and they claim to be democracy.

Morning everyone. Need more coffee…

Tweety seems to have gone off the rails… Yes, he’s obsessed with Hillary. Maybe he’s a misogynist. But he’s also obsessed with Cheney.

I think it was a pup here at fdl that came up with the term Tweety Effect yesterday evening. I don’t have time to look it up, and it may have already been borrowed by that commenter, but it sure fits.

Gawd–after reading this, I remember why I am so glad that I don’t watch cable TV.

I live in NY–and I can tell you that Hillary did not win because of Bill. If one is to give credit to a man for Hillary’s becoming a NY Senator is is worth remembering that she was running (originally) against a pre-9/11 Rudy and well, at that time his personal and political life was an absolute trainwreck.

More to the point, she was a great candidate in 2000, and she seems to have returned to her NY State campaign style in NH.

Race and gender, those categories of difference, are certainly exposing a bit of ugliness (to put it mildly) in this electoral cycle…

I am having real difficulty following how Bill’s messing around leads to a political advantage for his wife.
Can anyone fill me in on how that works?
Precedent?
Didn’t think so.
Mathews is unhinged – totally bonkers.

What is wrong with Chris Matthews?

I’m sorry, but in the interest of bandwidth space, I’m gonna pass on that one…

‘morning, Redd – Tweety hasn’t given it up yet this morning… no matter that the polls are being evaluated and women turned out en masse, he is still insisting it is the Bradley effect… and no, it couldn’t possibly have anything to do with him – “NH voters are racists and liars…”

Tweety this a.m.: “The only reason Hillary is a senator is because Bill messed around on her.”

I don’t think he’s helping his case here at all…

off to work.

From Fox News:

“She pretended to cry, the women felt sorry for her and they went for her,” said Dick Morris, a former Bill Clinton adviser and current FOX News contributor

As much as I love free speech, I find myself thinking this country could use a better libel law.

No cable in the Mack household.
Just never can justify paying for TV.
I miss baseball.
The rest I can keep up with well enough online.

I couldn’t believe there is actually a piece on the Edwards campaign in the NYT this morning, and
links on screen to videos of his remarks. Is it possible that he is going to get the attention he deserves?
I fervently hope so.

the CORPORATE media IS TELLING US who we may vote for….that is all…you have VERY little choice in this matter..in 2000 and 2004 you had NO CHOICE

It is interesting how often women, both in personal and public life, are accused of faking tears (I will bet every woman who has ever cried in front of another person has been accuse of this–it begins when we are little girls, and I can’t remember hearing that little boys are thought to manipulate with tears…even though they cry just as much). Yet, when a man cries crocodile tears, it is oh so authentically manly.

Hillary was a terrific Senate candidate in 2000 — was really surprised by what an effective campaigner she was, particularly in upstate (another world).

Woodhall Hollow is right — in terms of remembering she was running against the “real Rudy”. Have always thought he left that race because he thought he’d lose…not because of the cancer.

I never knew before that Hillary won her Senate seat because of Monica! Wow, the stuff our pundits know, but then that’s why they make the big bucks.

So did Matthews get his job because NBC felt sorry for him when Tip O’Neill died?

I thought exactly the same time, because he was well on his way to a huge trouncing. Hillary was awesome in upstate NY, which was not initially receptive territory.

I’ve been saying this time and time again. Russert, Tweetie et al., actually sound prurient when they speak of Hillary Clinton. It’s disgusting. I doubt they would show the same disrespect for Laura Bush or any other rethug “ladies.”
Big Question. I haven’t seen Edward’s speech last night. But I heard it was good. How on earth can we get him more media coverage? The lack of media really does hurt. It hurt Dodd and some people I talk to don’t even know Edwards came in secnd in Iowa, as if it’s all Hillary v. Obama.

It sounds to me like Mika understands the limits of polling data, and Tweety has no clue about polling, other than it tells him what to believe.

Gary Langer, the head of ABC’s polling operation — one of the most respected outfits according to other professional pollsters — has a great column up about what might or might not have happened that caused the differences between the pre-election polls, the exit polls, and the actual results.

No tinfoil from him — just a lot of questions regarding pollsters, their methodologies, and the limits to which polls can answer your questions. Says Langer:

There will be a serious, critical look at the final pre-election polls in the Democratic presidential primary in New Hampshire; that is essential. It is simply unprecedented for so many polls to have been so wrong. We need to know why.

But we need to know it through careful, empirically based analysis. There will be a lot of claims about what happened – about respondents who reputedly lied, about alleged difficulties polling in biracial contests. That may be so. It also may be a smokescreen – a convenient foil for pollsters who’d rather fault their respondents than own up to other possibilities – such as their own failings in sampling and likely voter modeling.

[snip]

A starting point for this analysis will be to look at every significant Democratic subgroup in the New Hampshire pre-election polls, and see how those polls did in estimating the size of those groups and their vote choices. The polls’ estimates of turnout overall will be relevant as well.

In the end there may be no smoking gun. Those polls may have been accurate, but done in by a superior get-out-the-vote effort, or by very late deciders whose motivations may or may not ever be known. They may have been inaccurate because of bad modeling, compromised sampling, or simply an overabundance of enthusiasm for Obama on the heels of his Iowa victory that led his would-be supporters to overstate their propensity to turn out. . . .

Oh, but that kind of nuance is a bit much for Tweety to handle. You know, math and all. He’d much rather blather, blissfully unaware of the real world.

when he got Malaria a couple of years ago;IT DID NOT change him at all…most peeps change and grow from a near death experience…i think his swollen brain ate up any smarts he had

Dick morris: another creep I from where I am ashamed to call home sometimes.

Way OfT – one does not want to blow off jury duty in Indiana – you GO TO JAIL!!

this is ridiculous and unconstitutional, but hey – it’s Indiana, where details like that tend to be terribly trivial.

http://www.indystar.com/apps/p…../301090009

Of course they loathe her. She’s Bill Clinton’s wife, and when she was first lady, she was outspoken on a few good points, and she tried to do something about health care.

And Matthews is right about this; she got a TON of sympathy votes in her N.Y. Senate race, to put her in congress.

I was elated.

Then came the decision to run for president. And the power-lust got crossed with the stupid gene, and she and her staff (which includes bubba, hisself) were brickdumb enough and corrupt enough to think that she could triangulate her way into catching votes from people who, well, LOATHE her.

Now? She’s nothing but republican lite. If she was on fire in my front yard I wouldn’t walk out there and pee on her. She’s truckled to bushCo and the corporate power that he rode into office like a dyed in the wool gooper.

Most real progressives have zero use for her, which is why she gets her ass kicked in the polls taken on progressive blogs.

Her support now is mostly from women who want to see a woman nominated so badly that they don’t care a tinker’s damn that it will probably cost us this election, which is so very important.

It’s shameful that her defenders ignore her track record and continue to support her, simply because republicans and conservatives across the board hate her. Tnat is NO reason to hand her the nomination like it was damn bandaid for the hiding she regularly takes from the right and a lot of the center in america.

Last night, the republicans dodged a huge bullet, when we missed a chance to give a body blow to her candidacy. I only hope that it’s the last time we do it.

I didn’t know that. Interesting.

Tweety is the worse, he just cannot comprehend the polls not giving him the answer he wanted. He a little later on in the show blamed racism for Obama losing, dragging up the old Virgina campaigns of Doug Wilder. My comtempt for him grows everytime I listen. I might to change channels or just listen to rock’n’roll music.

When Sen. Clinton called him on it he repeated that he wasn’t ‘obsessed’ over and over again. Like a character in a movie who is obsessed and is melting down at having been caught.

-G

I’m in central NY. Mostly ignored. But Hillary is here a lot. She even bought a home in the area. No idea if she’s ever been there but she visits this area quite often. 10 times more than Schumer. Say what you will, but she has a strong work ethic.

This is great the more Tweety and Modo beat up on Hilary the more they help her win. The only bad thing is that Hilary might keep Penn around that guy’s advice could still lose it for her.
The Center Democrat position will not work when the voters are still to the Left of her.
Voter ignorance of her position on the issues should fade as Americans start to pay attention to the Primaries.
She needs to back up Chris Dodd in the Senate and start taking some real stands to end the war now.
Actions not empty words.

I’m sure that most posters at this blog are familiar with the Daily Howler, but in terms of “what is wrong with chris matthews,” Bob Somerby has deeply analyzed matthews, russert, dowd, rich, and most of the liberal or progressive media. Said analysis does include the “War on Gore,” but extends well into the present. If you (generic) haven’t read it, you should.

Let’s not forget Tweety was the one who described Bush as “Lincolnesque” in his handling of the Iraq war.

he sold his soul like Faust,when he signed on the dotted line,that old MOFO Jack Welch gave him…..there is a leigon of FAUST impersonators in this country,the fallen angel is smiling

The funny thing is that talking heads who put someone down- publicly humiliate them – are doing the very same thing psychologically as a philandering husband, whose behavior shames his wife.

Somehow they probably think a “shamed woman” should hide in a corner. I think some people switched to her out of sympathy and many switched out of anger. But I’m thinking it was an emotional thing, maybe even unconscious, for those who were undecided and voted for her.

That doesn’t mean she can ever count on those same factors again.
And likely it was a confluence of factors. If she stays real and makes the voters the center of her focus, maybe that will stick.

And I have no doubt that people publicly dumping on a sympathetic person (and she appeared so on Monday) provokes a backlash. It’s as if the contest was against the press, rather than against Obama. And she won it! The voters shamed the nasty pundits!

Real men don’t do “nuance.” George W Bush told me so.

What struck me about Rachel Maddow’s comments last night was how quickly Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman ran away from them. I’d expect that from Matthews, but would like to think that Olberman is a little more capable of seeing the big picture. It will be interesting to catch his show tonight and see if the topic is brought up.

Bob Kerry was on Imus this morning and he was heaping praise on her for her effectiveness in NY.

Another one of Faux’s reptile squad. A perverted malcontent who oozes bile and makes money hand over fist shivving people who he was paid to be friendly with.

-G

Ilove the way Pat Buchanan predicted that Hillary would lose big in the South, “blacks et al will flock to Barack Obama.” Umm, he doesn’t seem to be in touch with the fact –that according to BlackAgendareport.com & what seems kinda obvious– the Clintons have an organization of long time supporters there. Obama hasn’t done much wooing there with his denial of racial issues and lack of substance in general.

What stuck me was the ridicule of McCain’s by everyone on MSNBC. They were really yukkin it up.

Great post, Christy. Your transcript of Matthews attempting to one-up Brzezinski is a boilerplate for everything wrong w/Tweety-style punditry.

Time to take Chris Matthews’ bully pulpit away, the one he decided a while back to pick up @ beat us over the head with. ‘Way past time that he be minimized, or off the air. Even his attempts @ snark are lousy & all self-referential…

I saw the beginning of John Edwards’ speech last night and watched most of it. I never once heard him reference Iraq or the troops or say anything about the ME.

it makes sense,everything you say

CHS -

None of it has anything to do with substance. It’s as if a pack of hyenas were crossbred with the characters in Mean Girls and then sent out to play at journalism.

Hope someone does a photoshop of tweety’s body and hyena head…..I’d pay money for that one. *g*

Have to agree with you both. I was officially living outside Hartford but working in Manhattan and living in Battery Park City during the week for most of Y2K. The cancer made a real nice excuse for Rudy to duck out of an a** whuppin’.

This is great if they start studying the polls which I think were accurate at the time the only new variable that happened to throw the election Hilary’s way was the Tweety effect.
The American people have had enough of the Media’s catty attacks on Hilary. Voters are paying attention and want a fair media to report and not decide for them the issues.

i hope KO is not sipping koolaid,he was strange last nite

Actually a lot of posting and comments are now considered by a lot of people on the Internet. Of course Mainstream Media ego giants like Chris Mathews, and Joe Scarborough who dump on Hillary with the same proportion and poison Hannity openly admits to. That he, Hannity, will use every resource at his disposal to prevent Hillary from being elected, and is something they all want to avoid you from thinking. Chris is exactly that old Roman, Marcus Brutus— Caesar’s most famous assassin. One can picture that sweet video were Chris pinches Hillary on the cheek, but very well would stab her in back. Chris the Slick Der Word Meister always with that quality blend of deceit smoothed into food for your mind without the average person knowing it. Here, Chris Mathews is a master craftsman of his group who can slip his intellectual IED timed for his advantage, but is discovered a tools of the elite rich, were, Americans now understand we have been had. From poles to imaged trolls, mainstream Media are loaded with corruption and deceit.

Mainstream Media across the board accused Hillary of attacking Obama negatively just becuase she asked Obama questions. This whole thing brings to the forefront some very powerful ideals were the Mainstream Media has been complicit with the Bush and Company for the past seven years. Specifically why has not Mainstream Media ever questioned Bush about his friendship with the Bin Laden family? Were America has been chasing this bandit, Osama Bin Laden for seven years. How come American can not get those one on one interviews with the Arabs about issues like that. The price of oil would go through the roof. So, here we are, Obama, an Islamic name running around telling everyone he is a Christian, to me not very solidly committed, or baptized as one to take a christen name. Or Geez wiz, get your grandma to sell the farm and get her out the crazy country you stupido.

All you hear is we can change, lets change the world, we have power to move in a new direction, well move grandma so America doesn’t have to use troops, there are no limits to what we could do. On and on and on with all this hype, no one asked “How”? if you do ask why, or how do you intend to do this stuff your negatively attacking Obama. The news Media Across the spectrum relentlessly pounding this mantra of negative bias if one simply calls Barrack Hussein Obama by his full name your on a political negative attack campaign. Why? because it might open up debate about Islamic extremist. America is going to embarrass the Arabs who are our oil trading partners and Bush’s business friends? Well, yes. So, were is the patriotism, probably in Swiss bank accounts.

The more our ‘elite’ pundits are pwned like that the more people will ignore them or look to someone new. I watched way too much MSNBC last night… the coverage was unreal. All of these national media types pontificating on retail politics without interviewing anyone local — other than the candidates’ spinmeisters. Fact free.

Thinking about the puerile likes of Dick Morris and Tweety, I’m wondering about the “mommy” factor. Hillary was arguably the one best “mothers” in the White House ever (Chelsea has been, and is a class act). She came across as a conscientious, involved and authoritative mother–something the little boys of the world with their unresolved “Dark Mother” issues, are likely to find very threatening. It all gets projected onto any woman with real power — whether that power is expressed intellectually or emotionally. Just a thought.

By the way, does anyone have a link to that Edwards speech? Want to see it! Couldn’t stomach the pundits last night. Pat Buchanen, Tweety and worst of all Russert, I just had enough.

Toward the end he talked about bringing our troops home — not much else, though.

oh let us not forget the “little brown wren” Ms.Greenspin,given an Indian tomahawk to slice and dice Hill

Poor Hillary. Big Bad Chris is so mean to her. It’s not fair.

I see Crooks and Liars has McCains victory speech up. *gag*

My favorite speech moment last night was Obama’s “Something is happening in America!”

he is just a butthead,and im sick of his lies

he is PATHETIC,sorry he is embarrasing

Have thought there is a weird dynamic going on at MSNBC for awhile now. When Keith is on with the likes of Tweety or Russert, he becomes more like one of “the guys” a la ESPN…e.g. the “Gameday” crew.

That didn’t work for him back then (over the long term) as I remember. He may feel as if his “pulpit” a 8 PM will be threatened is he doesn’t “go along” more. I disagree but then again, NBC has been fully corporatized by GE.

Tweety’s malaria was actually last year…

My recall is just a tad hazy on this, but Matthews was taken apart piece by piece by Jon Stewart a few months ago for avocating LYING in his book. And Matthews didn’t disclaim it.

Where’s your Bear country? Here’s two recent takes on Alaska bear country.

Why is everyone so eager to make Hillary’s impressive victory about Tweety? First of all it’s irrational, and secondly, it implies Hillary’s win was simply an act of voter revenge, and not deserved for any other reason.

Doesn’t Tweety also have real issues controlling his diabetes?

I watched a bit of Buchanon vs Maddow. She was magnificent. A phrase Edwards used was quoted (can’t remember the wording). PB said that was a slogan used by illegal immigrants. Maddow said, ‘wrong. It’s a phrase used by labor unions’. PB asked what the dems were going to do now since they’re in such disarray. RB said it was the repubs who had problems since they don’t like any of their candidates. It was beautiful.

More on NH. With alot of the late deciding voters giving Hillary the edge, it occurs to me that another element of this was the HUGE lead given to Obama by notoriously right wing pollster Zogby and others. With many of the undecideds deciding late, a number who may have said they wanted Obama and who gave him a “bump” pre-election, may have decided that Obama was “in the bag” and so they decided instead to try to get a more moderate Republican in as well (McCain) rather than Huckabee or Romney. It would be very interesting to know how many of those who polled earlier with the Obama camp, in the end decided to vote Republican to make a difference there.

And it gets worse, Christy. I found myself agreeing with Laura Ingraham–Laura Ingraham fergawdssake–on Imus this morning talking about the media as a pack of lemmings….

I’ve borrowed Mr. S’s contention that they are the cocktail wienies. But whatever metaphor we come up with–and jackals is a good one!–the one clear, incontrovertible emerging fact is: they are a bunch of jerks.

And their bare backsides are exposed these days, thanks to the blogs. I think they could all–including Russert–use a strong dose of Punkinhead-style “let’s go to the tape” truth and accountability sessions.

The louder they cling to their status quo, the more the people are going to reject them en masse, just like they’re rejecting BushCo. [back to catch up on comments now….]

Doesn’t Tweety also have real issues controlling his diabetes?

oh he’s got control issues, all right.

I heard that too. Rachel Maddow and Katrina van den Heuvel were great. Much better than the stuff I was yelling at the TV…

Not to make anyone gag, but remember this video of Laura Bush? I rest my case about disrespect for Hillary v. rethuglican woman.

If you watched the late wrap up of MSNBC it showed a clip, of the widely reported, Hillary patting Chris on the cheek. But what the clip showed is that as Hillary approached Chris he reached out and pinched her cheek.

How dare he touch another mans wife in that way. He is not a close family friend, only a reported that covers her. She is a US Senator and a leading Presidential candidate.

He just had to find a way to put her in her place.

The only saving grace from the clip was Keith O spoke up and said “You touched her first, that is not the way the incident was reported”

I hope Keith will make Chris his Worse Person in the World today.

oops, hyenas…gotta slow down and read clearer before the adrenaline rant rises. Boyoboy did you hit my hotbutton this a.m. Christy.

I don’t understand how 2 different outcomes in 2 different states with very different populations translates into “disarray.” If that’s the case, aren’t the Reps in more “disarray?” After all, they’ve had 3 different outcomes in 3 different states.

I know, preaching to the choir.

I think it would be helpful for some enterprising video artist to make a mash-up of Matthews greatest misogyny moments.

“Come closer to the camera….”

The polling info is very interesting and worthy of study. I’m wondering if when you say the tinfoil hat conspiracists if you’re referring to people who question the voting machines themselves? I just watched this video about the New Hampshire machines, and the person John Silvestro who counts all the votes. Included is a demonstration of how easily hacked the machines are. Why must one be called a tinfoil hat conspiracist when this is brought up? The New York Times Magazine published a story on Jan 6th, ‘08 entitled Can You Count on Voting Machines. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01…..ref=slogin

This isn’t a conspiracy. I think Karl Rove must be very proud of his work on this one. Even on our side, to even question this makes you the nut. Please people watch this or read the story.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiiaBqwqkXs

Believe it or not, my bear country is northern NJ. We have them walking through our yard quite often, and our back yard in the woods nearly every day from early spring to late fall. The bears are black bears, but they can grow to 400-500 lbs. Here they just want to eat and mate and be left alone.

At least one commenter at Mystery Pollster offered the same hypothesis — which seems a pretty likely explanation for some of the shift.

Interesting analysis of “Bradley Effect” claims about Obama in NH–from the NY Observer:

Memo to all pundits analyzing the New Hampshire returns: Barack Obama’s surprise loss should not be attributed to “the Bradley Effect.”

In 1982, Tom Bradley, then the mayor of Los Angeles, seemed poised to win election as California’s first black governor, building a solid lead over many white voters to side with a black candidate in the privacy of the voting booth. Since the final pre-primary polls showed Barack Obama comfortably ahead of Hillary Clinton–and in light of the predominance of white voters in the state–some pundits are now suggesting that the Bradley Effect reared its head in New Hampshire last night. The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson even talked up the possibility on MSNBC last night.

But the data does not support this theory. Hillary Clinton’s unexpected win can be attributed almost entirely to women voters. In the final primary polls before the primary, she and Obama ran virtually even among women. But in the primary itself, Hillary won among women by nearly 15 points, accounting for her overall two-point victory. And there is a reasonable explanation for why women flocked to her in the end: her much-publicized tearing up episode on the primary’s eve, which seems to have reinforced among women (especially in light of Saturday night’s debate) the idea that she was being ganged up on and unfairly targeted by her opponents and the press.

Moreover, this same phenomenon did not happen in Iowa, an equally white-dominated state where Obama and Clinton ran even among women on caucus night–thus accounting for Obama’s win in that state.

Tweety is biggest, ugliest manifestation of the strong anti-Clinton, misogynist bias in the traditional media. That’s why he’s a lightning rod here. He’s obviously not personally responsible; his ratings aren’t high enough for that to be the case.

Is this the Edwards speech last night?

like I said, he’s got control issues, self control being one of them

One of Smeigel’s Real Audio segments would be great!

There ain’t enough brain bleach in the world . . .

blow up this photo…and stick it EVEYWHERE

http://dragonballyee.blogs.com…..sh_500.jpg

You found it!

I didn’t think it was possible, but Keith O even pissed me off.

In my neighborhood, we’ve never seen any bears, but we’re only a mile from the nearest black bears, six from the nearest grizzlies. At our old house, we couldn’t leave the kids outside unattended.

misogyny. Have you seen the way Matthews treats strong effective professional women on his show. It’s not just Hillary. He’s a misogynist. There are lots of them out here, with an underlying “mom” complex and fear of strong women who might get control over them. And it is sexism. I think that she is facing sexism in a way that Obama is not yet having to face racism. I must say it surprises me. However, I work in a an agency that treat domestic violence and of course, the numbers are not going down. There are a lot of dead women out there at the hands of the men in their lives.

I don’t know if the numbers are the same in terms of hate crimes…but a lot of d.v is hate crimes against women.

Matthews makes me sick and after last night, I am done.

Hillary is an accomplished lawyer and did a hell of job as a senator. To state that her only value was as a wife that forgave her husband is disgusting.

bradley effect does not apply in Iowa, where there are no secret ballots.

We may be seeing newly named Hillary effect, where women lie to pollsters and their husbands, and then flip the lever for the woman in the race.

But I don’t think so. Too many female senators represent counterexamples.

Newsweek: How two campaigns rose from the dead.

good grief.

mebbee,they offered him 10 Million a year like Beck and the other twits

I keep waiting for KO to reach over and slap Matthews silly. At least Dr. Maddow will stand up to him. Maybe instead of Tucker, she will replace Matthews.

Will tweety ever be a WPIW? He certainly earned it.

If that is the case, then one could conclude that NH women voters are misogynistic and voted for a candidate solely based on gender.

ACLU petition to close Gitmo. Jan. 11 action day.

If I don’t know the candidates for some of the low level positions, I generally pull the lever for the one who has a woman’s name. But also, I think the blow back against the MSM and the clearly “trumped up” crying charge – to say nothing of the “iron my shirts” people, and the way that in the Dem debate Gibson put it out there that Obama WAS the candidate to bead (let’s not forget his role in this) made the often ornery (here independent) NH voters say “screw you” I’ll do this in part to spite you.

I know about polling. I know about statistics. There are plenty of plausible reasons — many quite likely — that can explain the discrepancy.

I am getting frustrated by the knee-jerk reaction of some folks, that every time a result comes in that does not match their hoped-for outcome or the outcome predicted by a given survey, the FIRST reaction is to cry “vote rigging!” Does election fraud happen? Yes. But problems in polling happen a lot, lot more often.

Fallible pollsters are a lot more numerous than black-box vote stealers.

There’s plenty of evidence this morning of the fallibility of pollsters, and none — not one whit — of anything to support a theory of a stolen or tampered election results.

Bill O’reilly doesn’t believe that there are people sleeping under bridges.

Would someone please say something about the voting machines? Why isn’t it an issue for anyone? If the machines have been manipulated isn’t that the first order of business before all the analysis of Tweety, and the rest of the media, Hil’s tears, the anger at the continued treatment of women, Obama’s charisma and the movement surrounding him, Edwards media blackout?

Have we all bought into “get over it”?

08 at 7:28 am
65

Doesn’t Tweety also have real issues controlling his diabetes?

I think he is probably a Type I diabetic..dementia seems to be associated with Type II diabetes.

Christy–

There have been a spate of blogs by you and Jane the last couple days on inappropriate behavior of the media towards Senator Clinton.

I would hope for a complementary spate of blogs on qualities in her and the voting record that must be invisible to me, that I hope is visible to you, that makes her the best of the three viable candidates for President or if not the best, a good one.

Every year, the media is going to get more ridiculous in primary/caucus season and in general.

What would bring much of this to a screeching hault would be a series of regional elections and the people are responsible for this fiasco.

Let It Start Now; End the Stupidity of States who All Want to Be First

What is wrong with Chris Matthews? With all of these media people?

They reflect the education and poor taste of the bell shaped curve of their viewers. This is a channel that would be devoting two hours to Britney at Cedars-Sanai on days when there isn’t a primary or caucus. If viewers were better informed and demanded better quality, GE, Tweety’s parent company, would deliver it to them.

Their building up of Barack Obama is only their prelude and set-up for the frenzied clawing and shredding of him that is to come.

“The frenzied clawing and shredding of him” from whom, Christy, MSM or Hillary and company?, bring it on please. Obama can handle it.

Edwards’ campaign is well aware of the rampant schizophrenia of the media, and they will keep on doing what they have been. They are in for the long haul.

…Calling it “‘The Tweety Effect,’ where the misogyny of a talking head in the MSM so enrages a demographic that they go out and vote in a manner that will put egg on the face of the talking head.”

You are really, really overestimating in one tiny state, the effect of anything that happened this week while HRC was in NH, either from her, her campaign or Tweety and the rest of the media towards her.

The misogyny effect is a myth. Tweety did not account for Hillary’s narrow–and I said narrow victory in N.H.

Voters are as pissed as you say they are, and because of that, it won’t be Hillary in the general. The voters are pissed at what Bush and Cheney and Addington and Gillespie and Rove have wrought. Hillary has supported many of their key initiatives in the Senate.

You know what one reason for such large crowds at political events this year could be?

Yes–we’re tired of being played as suckers and deigned to stupid to get information from Bush, Congress and your former agency DOJ.

From Scarecrow’s recent blog:

When Clinton castigated the oil companies, the insurance companies, the drug companies, the predatory loan companies, she was echoing Edward’s speeches. “For seven years they’ve had a President who stood up for them. Now it’s time you had someone stand up for you.”

In fact, Clinton’s list of donors reads as a who’s who of large corporations:

TOP CONTRIBUTORS HILLARY RHODAM CLINTON

Stop with the logic. Please!

My mistake — he brought up the troops, but only how some of them are homeless after they return home. No real mention of Iraq at all.

Have you read the article in the New York Times magazine or watched the video? There are reams of evidence of vote rigging and I don’t understand why we choose to be blind to it.

Good Edwards says he’s going to stick in there. It’ll be a good fill in the blank for the void that is often Hillary/Obama.

Hillary does not face adversity well, as soon as she faced adversity she played the misogyny card. Then she phoneys up tears, then you people fall for it. I am very disappointed in you folks, I had you pegged as intelligent people, now, not so much.

It occurs to me that Matthews has unintentionally hit the nail on the head: a president who has the rare ability to make a comeback after dreadful humiliation is exactly what America needs right now.

The presence of Columbia U on that list, makes me think that they are interested in part in her role as a Senator in bringing back the bacon (funds for research, centers etc.). In short some of these are clearly 2-fers.

I give up for now. The logic of turning a blind eye to the problems of the voting machines doesn’t seem logical to me.

BINGO! Although I am not a HC supporter, this comment is really on the mark.

That sounds right since we currently have a President who is a dreadful humiliation.

At first I really thought NH was going to be a repeat of Iowa if younger voters came out for Obama.

I don’t know if anyone has said so or not but could it be that the earlier polls saying that Hillary was very strong in NH were correct, and that the bounce did occur for Obama? I mean it was 39 to 36. She was supposed to blow everyone away in NH before Iowa came down. Maybe the young folks got Obama a very close second but couldn’t overcome the strength of Clinton, plus the split between the undecideds.

I beleive that if more attention was paid to the fact the Edwards beat Clinton in Iowa (as opposed to Obama beats Clinton, and not Obama beats Edwards then Clinton). He would have done better. I also believe that Clinton is really splitting Edwards vote or vice versa. I don’t believe that either edwards or clinton voters would vote for Obama (not including undecideds at the last minute). 17 is still respectable. Look at what romney and McCain got in Iowa and are still in the race. Edwards will do well in the South. Richardson will drop out soon, and I think those voters would likely go to Edwards.

Oh, let it be. The replacing Matthews w/Rachel Maddow part. KO pasting a couple on Tweety would happen in a parallel universe, not even. Olbermann has to watch it more & more in his interactions w/Matthews IMO so as not to ruffle in any way the mighty Tweety Ego.

Actually, I come here for the logic – - and the passion!

Well, we are extremely disappointed that you are disappointed. Your opinion of us means everything.

That was a response to PJBUK.

There’s plenty of evidence this morning of the fallibility of pollsters, and none — not one whit — of anything to support a theory of a stolen or tampered election results.

Fine. Let’s check those machines so that we can put the question to rest. But I will never again trust the results produced by a hackable voting machine.

no….i did not even know John Edwards middle name,cause nobody ever speaks of him in PRESIDENTIAL TERMS Hillary,RHODAM Clinton,Barrak HUSSEIN Obama …etc ,etc

So, storm the bastille if you want to.

Reams of evidence in THIS election? I must have missed that part.

You are correct, The “talking heads” instead of discussing issues, Oil and enegy costs, health, recession, cost of living, education, war with Iran, terrorism, they berrate us with junked overkill of political analysis. Too bad they could not expend the same amount of energy and brainpower on issues that detract from the quality of life for average Americans, and make the “corporate aristocracy” all powerful. Is it the East Indias Tea Co. or Haliburton?

Wonder what they’ll find “wrong” with Reid?

I’m sorry, I must have msised where calling Tweety on his misogynistic bullshit and on the whole media circus atmosphere surrounding every Democratic candidate this time around meant that anyone here was supporting Hillary Clinton. Don’t let your bias against her and for your supported candidate, Obama, make you read into this post anything than what I said: media bullshit, as much as anything else, is driving voter interest in this election.

We are all digusted — by lying politicians and lying media pundits alike. And they ALL need to know that — including every single Democratic candidate. Don’t put words or sentiments in my mouth.

Yup!

America’s sick of bullshit? I agree. But what if alot of them conclude that Hillary’s emotional display was just that? Not at all good for our side. I thought MoDo’s column was OK although the headline was dumb. i enjoyed it.

Does Edwards get put into the “misogynist” box for what he said? I don;’t think so.

I said it earlier and I’ll say it again. Edwards message was right on and Hillary better listen: it’s a tough fight and you gotta suck it up. i thought she knew that but she’s never been a national candidate before.

Since HRC is getting the “sympathy” women’s vote. Does this mean that Edward’s will get the “sympathy” expensive haircut’s vote?

Pete,
You seem to have a lot of ideas about what should be covered here at FDL. So why don’t you establish your own blog and cover these issues instead of telling Jane and Christy and all what you think they should cover?

Tweety has completely lost the distinctions between:
1) reporting news–ie actual facts
2) commenting on the news–”this is what I think about those actual facts”
3) presenting his opinion AS fact

He just cannot seem to get away from #3. Which is not legitimate journalism, it is propaganda

Good Speech Edwards. Goddess bless you for staying in the race.

CHS,

Yes………………………..

it is a very DEMOCRAT name…..lol

What’s amazing about the media coverage of this election is how far the standards have fallen in a relatively short time. I tend to ascribe this to the “Dubya effect”.

We’re in “Alice in Wonderland”territory here folks. The MSM doesn’t want to admit that we know that and have read the book.

Great piece up at Talk Left on this same subject: the MSM is serving to unite many Dems here.

And don’t let the door. . .

I know about polling. I know about statistics. There are plenty of plausible reasons — many quite likely — that can explain the discrepancy.

I am getting frustrated by the knee-jerk reaction of some folks, that every time a result comes in that does not match their hoped-for outcome or the outcome predicted by a given survey, the FIRST reaction is to cry “vote rigging!” Does election fraud happen? Yes. But problems in polling happen a lot, lot more often.

Fallible pollsters are a lot more numerous than black-box vote stealers.

There’s plenty of evidence this morning of the fallibility of pollsters, and none — not one whit — of anything to support a theory of a stolen or tampered election results.

Peterrr–

How in the world do you know that fallible pollsters are more numerous than black box vote stealers. Black box vote stealers aren’t calling or emailing Peterrr when and if they hack the vote machines.

Rubin and the MIT team and countless others have been able to hack the Deibolds in minutes that NH and most other states are using.

The fact alone that NH has 81% of their votes counted by Deibold machines is a strong enough premise to question the accuracy of votes any time they are in use.

Silvestro – the Cat with the Exclusive Contract to Control New Hampshire and New England voting machine programming

They can be hacked in less than 5 minutes, and NH like most states has turned a blind eye to this.

I saw the beginning of John Edwards’ speech last night and watched most of it. I never once heard him reference Iraq or the troops or say anything about the ME.

Equally important, I think, is the absence of any discussion of the way this Administration has walked all over our Constitution, overstepped their rightful powers, usurped Congress’ and the Courts’ role in government, and openly defies Congressional subpoenas, etc. I want to hear more civics lessons in our political speechifying. I want the people to be allowed to grasp the fact that GWB was trying to politicize the entire Executive Branch of government in order to grab power and change the power structure permanently. I want people to be more aware of the internal dangers to our democracy from such assaults.

A few Truths and Falses from The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder:

2. The Bradley/Wilder effect — voters were afraid to tell pollsters they didn’t want to vote for a black person, so a certain percentage of them lied about their preferences. But wait — the pre-election polls did NOT overstate Barack Obama’s support. He averaged 36.7%, according to Mark Blumenthal’s compilations.

If anything, they understated Hillary Clinton’s support by nine points. Let’s name this phenomenon the “Dorothy Sbornak” effect — for some reason, older women voters refused to disclose their preferences to pollsters, or refused to admit that they favored Hillary Clinton.

Mickey Kaus postulates an application of the reverse Bradley effect — that Iowa Democrats somehow felt social pressure to stand up in front of their peers and cast a vote for a viable black candidate.

3. The exit polls were wrong. — No — by the third wave, they were basically correct. In Iowa and New Hampshire. So something is working for Edison-Mitofsky Research.

4. Ballot placement helped Clinton. Probably true, but it does not account for the discrepancy.

5. Obama actually won New Hampshire because both he and Clinton were allocated the same number of delegates (true) and he has more New Hampshire superdelegates than Clinton (true). Cute. But by that score, Clinton has a national lead because she has more pledged superdelegates nationwide than Obama.

Why isn’t Mika Brzezinski anchoring the nightly news?

Oh, for the days of Jonathon.

Big deal (snark). But all he is doing is following the model of the NYT of late!

If you are a woman and you saw the Russert debate, you’d recognize the disgusting leer that Hillary got, and be outraged. And I am an Edwards supporter.

right on bro
they still pretend its 1984

Do you care about reams of evidence in THIS election? You don’t seem to care to even examine the evidence in New Hampshire. Check out the video with John Silvestro the owner of LHS Associates, who handled the counting of the votes and then tell me you’ve considered one iota of the problems. Are you afraid to read the article in the New York Times magazine, since you’ve apparently already made up your mind?

Blackboxvoting has the reams of evidence. John Conyers has the reams of testimony about the problems in Ohio. Why aren’t they worth consideration?

No Edwards should get the sympathy vote for being treated as the invisible candidate who actually has something to say.

You might want to take a stroll through the FDL archives, and check out the reaming that Christy, Jane, and others have given Hillary over that last couple of years, over some of the very issues you raise.

They have no problem taking on Hillary when she merits it — or anyone else for that matter. They also are willing to give props to her and others who merit them, despite disagreements over other matters.

and that makes me want to scream
The Jack Welch affect

JAYsus, can he *get* more disrespectful? Someone needs to pull and Imus on Matthews. This “She only got to where she is by sleeping her way to the top” thing is straight out of the Misogynist’s Handbook. Honestly, I can’t think of another time when that word, misogyny, has been thrown around so much for good reason. He just oozes white guy resentment and entitlement.
He just oozes.
And he spits too.
MSNBC needs to yank him, if only temporarily in order to desensitize him. It’s like an allergy with Tweety.

Carmen — We’ve talked about voting machine issues here several times. Just because we don’t talk about it in every post doesn’t mean it isn’t an issue. But it also isn’t the only issue in the whole wide world, either.

Folks, I know everyone is tired from being up late and everything, but can we all take a deep breath and stop the sniping at each other this morning? I’m tired, too, and really not in the mood to referree flame wars all day. Thanks.

Gosh, I pray so. That is about 2/3rds of the American Population!

What would the motive be to do this through this means. You are basically assuming that the Rethugs want to run against Hillary rather than say Obama or Edwards. Considering how positively “gleeful” the Right MSM pundits were in clobbering Hillary and announcing her demise, I don’t think this is the case.

Whistlin Dixie I’m afraid.

Carmen, John Conyers has reams of testimony about a lot of wrong-doing in the Bush administration. He hasn’t moved forward significantly on much of it

Thanks for this post Christy. I am sick to death with MSNBC’s talking heads (except Obermann) and Mika constantly gets drowned out by Joe Scarborough. They hate Hillary and it shows. I can’t watch them any more. But do credit MSNBC for having Rachel Maddow (love her) and the editor of the Nation (forget her name). It does add a little leverage — at least when they are permitted to finish their thoughts.

My $.02 on ‘the cry’ — it was real. I imagine there are probably several times that display of emotion is held back for any one time it comes out. With such a veteran campaigner, the only question for me is was it a ‘chink in the armor’ or was it instinct to let down her guard at that particular time in the race? In any case, I think it worked more for her than against her this time.

Word has it that Harry Rid may have wired Nevada for Hillary…

I’ve borrowed Mr. S’s contention that they are the cocktail wienies. But whatever metaphor we come up with–and jackals is a good one!–the one clear, incontrovertible emerging fact is: they are a bunch of jerks.

I was so pissed off at Howard Fineman last night due to his rudeness to Katrina V. that I decided whenever I see his face on a program, that program gets turned off immediately, and doesn’t get turned on again until he’s gone, be it the next day or whatever. Katrina made a (very) good point and he angrily commented about it being a diatribe against Republicans (I’m paraphrasing, but that was the gist of it.) Hope someone has the clip of that. Would like to see Katrina’s point again.

Harry Reid…

I agree Obama got the same percentage in both states. It is just the 10% voted for Clinton instead of Edwards? Or could it be that Edwards got 10% more than figured before. In nationwide Polls he has always run about 20%-15% of the vote. Is he stuck? or is it just NH was already pretty set on clinton, but the get out the vote drives of Edwards and Obama caused those numbers to completely change in providing more votes for Obama and Edwards?

The media effect is just beginning – remember, we’ve been paying attention, but what about the mostly apolitical rest of the country who are just beginning to listen – that is where the tweeting of the MSM will have the most influence.

“Play nice” Pups – I love that phrase!

Likewise: while I rate Hillary above Obama, I’m rooting for Edwards; a quarter-century is long enough to go without a genuine Democrat in the White House. But I must say that right now were I the other side of the pond and entitled to vote, I’d be tempted to cast it for HC out of pure rage.

Cenk Uygur has an AWESOME rant regarding the treatment of Hilary Clinton right now….http://bravenewfilms.org/election?utm_source=rgemail

I watched the Brave New Films webblog last night and it was great,

The final report by the CNN/WMUR pollsters [pdf] contains this little nugget:

Even though there are only 2 days until the election, only 53% of likely Democratic primary voters say they have definitely decided who they will vote for, 26% say they are leaning toward a candidate and 21% said they are still trying to decide. Among voters who say they have definitely decided who they will vote for 45% support Obama, 35% support Clinton, and 14% name Edwards.

I didn’t hear many pundits like Tweety, Wolf, or others mentioning that first sentence. They just skipped ahead to the last one, which showed Obama with a 10 point lead. But the first sentence says it all. These pollsters told their customers — the media — that this election has a lot of undecided voters and voters who are soft in their support for a given candidate. But the talking heads didn’t want to hear that part.

Tweety doesn’t do nuance.

Word from whom? Link? Don’t throw out a theory without some back-up to it, please, there are enough rumors to chase down these days as it is.

i think ,a woman ,or a black man,is far easier to defeat than Edwards,that s my oppinion..and with Obama ,i can see they are setting him up as a neophyte ,inexperienced if a terrorist attack,should happen,wink ,wink

I like Harry Rid better; And that may explain the union switch.

I think the corporate media and corporate world would rather run against anyone but Edwards. And sorry Christy I don’t feel like I’m sniping. I care as much as anyone here to see a democrat in the whitehouse and even though I’m a big supporter of Edwards I would vote for any of the big three. I know that there have been some posts on the voting machine issue and I appreciate it. Okay, I’ll stop now since this is unwelcome at this time.

I think there’s a missing snark tag.

I think women said enough is enough.

FU. Outta the kitchen and use this vote.

Telling me I’m not liked in front of millions…YUK, YUK.

She CRYING, SHE’S LOST IT, can’t stand up to the pressure,
underlying message is that this is a MAN’S JOB. hahahahah

And women over 40 in a quiet revolution said, enough is enough. I am not putting up with this put down of my gender. She has my sympathy for today anyway, whatever her politics, these jokers with the power of the MSM behind them completely misunderstand us.

So FU, I’m voting for her behind the curtain……

Remember the Female Eunich? Gloria S. must be smiling today.

Word from Chuck Todd, MSNBC’s political director. I heard and saw him say that on MSNBC…

“iron my shirts” people,

richmond–

I heard that was some kinda Boston shock jock stunt. Didn’t keep it from CNN’s air though.

Carmen — I didn’t say you were sniping. I did a general “Folks” at the start of that portion of my comment for a reason. That’s what I get for putting two separate comments in the same one for efficiency’s sake, I guess….

My intial thoughts last night that the powers behind the scenes got what they wanted — or sorely needed. A clinton and McCain win. In the power brokers’ minds, Obama or Huckabee would be a disaster, and so they made sure that their preferred candidates had a win, hopefully to prevent one to run away with the whole show.

Because these two wins keeps both in the game. Clinton and McCain are who the punsters want — and they are going to do everything to get them as candidates. Then let the slashing of Clinton begin. They are very afraid of the chrasismatic effect on America of Obama and Huckabee, where not even tampering with the voting will get them the candidate they want. They had to stop them there.

JMO (just my opinion)

I don’t know that I agree, but following your scenario anyway, why would it matter enough for them to change votes just to but Hillary ahead of Obama? It is that part that doesn’t make sense in your argument.

John Conyers not moving on much of any of the reams of testimony on his desk about many subjects is very frustrating.

Thanks Christy, I should have read it more closely.

yes

I assumed Biodun you were referring to the food services union people and the on again off again decision to switch from Hillary to Obama to don’t know.

Yeah, Peterr, the undecideds held for a long time. But it doesn’t look like they broke that strongly one way or the other. I’ve seen 39-37, 40-36–not enough to swing a high single digit lead.

Something happened to change female voters’ minds. And all that is out there were the unrelenting, misogynistic, joyous and, thus, premature celebration of Clinton’s downfall.

I’m sorry, I must have missed where calling Tweety on his misogynistic bullshit and on the whole media circus atmosphere surrounding every Democratic candidate this time around meant that anyone here was supporting Hillary Clinton. Don’t let your bias against her and for your supported candidate, Obama, make you read into this post anything than what I said: media bullshit, as much as anything else, is driving voter interest in this election.

We are all digusted — by lying politicians and lying media pundits alike. And they ALL need to know that — including every single Democratic candidate. Don’t put words or sentiments in my mouth.

I understand Christy that you and Jane have scrupulously and successfully not stated a preference or cheerled for any particular candidate, and in trying to analyze the dynamics of the election and the candidates, that is not an easy thing to always accomplish.

The absolute fact that media bullshit is driving interest in the election is a very tough thing to change or improve. All the campaigns are spending millions on personnel to manipulate the media bullshit as effectively and completely as they can, and have for years.

I appreciate your calling Tweety and the media on their frenzie which is very analagous to Mean Girls and the “Kill the Pig” dynamic in Golden’s Lord of the Flies.

If you take quotes from either MSNBC commentators/”pundits” or the MSM since Iowa, and juxtapose them, and plenty of people are, they are a cascade of frenzied direct contradictions.

My preference for Obama, and Edwards after him, and my non-support of Senator Clinton doesn’t blind me to the quality and character of media coverage or comments that are msyogynic.

But I do think the dysfunctional facilitator of much of the media’s behavior is the ridiculous situation of states rushing to be first and the convoluted, byzantine, inconsistent primary/caucus system we have now isn’t helping us fairly elect the best candidate.

Misogynist jerks like Matthews never learn & never change. They just can’t believe that not everyone thinks exactly like them. I think they are in big denial that their attitudes about women is not predominate anymore.

I don’t pretend to understand the logic of vote manipulation. I just know that when races are perceived to be very close that it’s easier. As Edwards said there are 99% of the people yet to vote so I’ll wait on that.

Absolutely no snark. Please see my 171.

Have to head over to work now, but I’ll leave you w/a link to Pat Lang’s excellent post on NH & the media circus. For those of you who might have thought otherwise, Pat is a lifelong Democrat, albeit a somewhat conservative one:

Homage to New Hampshire

Got to go now. Read you all later.

I said it earlier and I’ll say it again. Edwards message was right on and Hillary better listen: it’s a tough fight and you gotta suck it up. i thought she knew that but she’s never been a national candidate before.

I don’t think it’s the right message at all. Some have even credited that teary incident with turning the tide and smashing Hillary’s ice maiden image. Beside that, even Scarborough said that he doesn’t know any politician that hasn’t had such an incident wherein they reach a point of exhaustion where their emotions are so raw that they can be brought to the point of tears more easily. He says he’s had moments like that, and even brought up that Pat Buchanan has had an incident very similar. So, no, Hillary doesn’t have to be a man about her feelings to be President.

Tweety caught some much needed flak last night an’ I was tickled to see it.
You could almost see people leaning away from him like he was crazy.

OK then. But there were real reasons for the illegal vote switching in Florida and Ohio – both benefitted the Republicans enormously. IN this case I just don’t see that as happening.

You’re right there. I need to catchup because I haven’t read FDL before a few months ago. That’s my loss and I will keep trying to do that.

It’s like having a set of books with excellent political/government analysis, but it takes time to get through.

I believe that Christy and Jane have gone to great lengths in the coverage I’ve read to be objective and non-biased.

With Boener crying every other minute, it is clearly not a “gender” thing either

Chris Matthews slaughters the Hillary every single solitary night on his Hardball show. He is as much responsible for her knee-jerk reaction win as the New Hampshire voters who voted for her because they felt pity for her. Write to him and complain at: hardball@msnbc.com.

I would hope that everyone concerned about the voting machines get active in the organization in their state
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

Well Jane and Christy, you can relax now.

Ah, the sweet voice of reason….with the knowledge base to back it up.

Tweety should be fired. NOW! Call NBC and demand it!

Yep. That’s part of it. And this from the NY Observer today:

Now Hillary stands a reasonable chance of winning two of the three remaining contests in January, the prelude to the February 5 mega-primary: Nevada, where her win may prevent the defection of critical union support to Obama that had been expected before Hillary’s win tonight;

Pollster.com has a preliminary analysis of the difference between the exit polls and the preliminary polls. Biggest difference is women- more of em voted for Hillary than said that they would vote for her- and college educated women were the most prominent in switching. More to come later.

This is a terrific piece. Thanks!

Well said Christy!

Tweety is doing what I would have thought impossible. On the merits, Hilary ranks below several of the other Dems in my estimation. But his dismissive, snotty coverage of her (along with his man crushes on whoever is the latest hunka hunka burnin mindless machismo for the repugs) is causing me to be more supportive of her rather than less. I also tend to think that there is another factor responsible for the results in NH which will not show up much in the polling results because the pollsters so far as I have seen, did not ask about it: I suspect that some people read the obituaries for Hilary and the coronation columns about Obama and simply decided that they did not want the process settled so early, that they wanted the process to play out over the primary season. I would wish that those who felt that way had turned to Edwards–but I suspect that had Hil won in Iowa, the NH would have lifted Obama

The Dems have a strong field of candidates. I would like to hear more discussion regarding the issues facing the country and how we need to address those issues. Even the candidates speeches offer little in the way of specifics, and they need to be challenged more. John Edwards wants to break the ironclad grip corporations have on our government and run lobbyists out of Washington on a rail (picture peasants with pitchforks and torches), BO wants to incite change by appealing to our better nature (Rodney King “Why can’t we all get along) and HRC wants to triangulate us out of a war and into a single payer health care system(National Healthcare System ala “Sicko”). She sounds to me the best bet, although I have been supporting JE, I am open to changing my mind. But until we have an honest and clear discussion of the issues we will always be pawns to our corporate masters. What we need to be working for is creating a landslide election this fall, pulling in enough Senators the Joe Lieberman can join the Republican party and we will not need him anymore. We need to make politiacians like him irrelevant, and if Hillary can galvanize the Democratic Party, or Barrack or John for that matter, I say go for it. Blackboxes and conspiracies be damned. I want equal rights for GLBTs, health care, revivied social security, environmental protection, eliminate those who attacked us on 9/11, positive diplomatic relations around the globe, and my favorite, the criminals who lied us into the devastating Iraq war brought to justice.

Until we talk seriously about the issues, we will always remain cynical, fragmented and left out of policy making in Washington, as we find ourselves today.

So cudos to FDL and all the others speaking out, lets cover more policy and less politics.

I would hope that everyone concerned about the voting machines get active in the organization in their state
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

Good site. Thanks for the link.

Tweety is a Hillary plant!

they would just find another Faust to take up where he left off imo

I don’t think that Tweety has enough viewership to shift an election- but it wasn’t just him- the media in general were out to bury her and a bunch of college educated women said “Hell No”.

You do not think Hillary winning the Democratic nomination does not benefit the Republicans? There is not a more polarizing, motivating the opposition candidate, than HRC.

On a side note. Does anyone else get an ask.com window to pop up after hitting in the text field?

Gotta LOVE that Senator Reid all right. Doing what he has done all along to mess up this country. Speaking of which that was one strange brew of Dems and Repubs out west recently pressing for a Bloomberg run. Way strange – and why weren’t those Dems taken to task by the party for outright calling for (or at least contemplating) supporting a Republican in the next election?

Wouldn’t Mitt and Rudy would be doing better if the votes were rigged? They’re from the Poppy Bush/Big Money/Gin & Chthonic side of the rethugs.

Carmen — We’ve talked about voting machine issues here several times. Just because we don’t talk about it in every post doesn’t mean it isn’t an issue. But it also isn’t the only issue in the whole wide world, either.

Carmen, I spend WAY way more of wha should be billable hours (much to my law partner’s chagrin) working on election monitoring issues. I run an election monitoring program, chair a bar association sub-committee on election fraud, and write extensively–both here and elsewhere under my own name on the issue.

Bleieve me, I take it seriously. But as of this morning, I have not heard any allegations of voting irregularities. Caremen, when results are scewed there are “tells” which I’m not going to get into on the internet, b/c I am still working towards my goal of actually indictable and prosecutable cases when someone f**ks with something as sacred as our vote.

If you have ANYTHING specific, tell us. Believe me, I will jump on it. But gernralized whinging about the outcome without any actual facts to back it up has that “crying wolf” effect that will make my job that much harder when I try to overcome some prosecutor’s inate scepticism with a real case, with real facts.

we gotta save it for when we can prove it.

Persons refused to disclose their opinions to pollsters is actually likely. (1) this is New England. (2) Persons are really sick of phone calls etc. have called id etc. This happened during the Lamont v. Lieberman primary particualry when people really, really got sick of HoJoe’s relentless robocalls, including the one that used Lamont’s voice, pretended to be from the Lamont campaign and ran people’s machines down. Did I say Lieberamn is a corrupt prick? OK, I’ll say it again. Anyone know if Obama used robocalls? At any rate a lot happens at the ground level, that the media or we don’t get to see. Pollsters be darned.

LOL – somehow I like it, but it would be real fun to get it out there and see how he responds!!

More speculation from NY Observer:

What’s more troubling for Obama is the matter of how he lost New Hampshire. Clinton’s machine, which was steered by a team of veteran New Hampshire operatives and aided by the support of much of the party establishment, was a major factor, as was the embrace women voters gave to Hillary. But where Obama really may have lost the race was in last Saturday’s debate, which was watched more intensely and by a larger audience than any previous debate. In it, Hillary pressed her talk vs. results theme very effectively, flashing her detailed and wonkish policy knowledge, while Obama talked in mostly lifeless platitudes.

Barack Obama is back to being the underdog. And New Hampshire has just sent him a troubling warning: Powerful speeches alone won’t defeat the Clinton Machine.

(Same link as my 195.)

Please take what I have to say as constructive criticism.. I was a Gore then Obama supporter so I see things from a different perspective.Gore

What you don’t see and won’t see is that you are just as guilty as they are or I am -you dish out a similar style of journalism and reporting as they do.
I know most of you here are pro-Hillary -because I feel it in you’re biased writing. I now know Maddow is pro-Hillary. Rachel has been in somewhat of a foul mood since Obama rose in the polls. I never actually connected the two, until I saw Rachel beaming away all evening at Clinton’s lead and final win.

Matthews has been on Hillary’s bandwagon for two years while at the same time stressing how deadly the ‘inner Democratic party machine’ is to anyone not part of the inner circle or trying to buch the old ways of the inner party. And the Clinton machine is part of that group. He frequently talks of all the nationalistic candidates stomped on by Washington. And he’s right about that.
You’ve missed Matthews train of thought entirely -he is not anti-Hillary. He’s anti-machine. Obama looked to be the first one ever to equal their machine and to break through the inner circles of Washington -and through many of the special interests who own the Clintons.

As usual -the special interests will likely get their White House back.

please somebody tell me WHY THE MSM…DESTROYED Fooliannie?

Re:

As if an entire week’s worth of Pundits Gone Wild idiocy weren’t enough, this morning’s Cuppa Joe on MSNBC sent me right over the edge.

I said something similar to a friend last week. She had an absolutely brilliant suggestion that shocked me when she said: “You know, if it annoys you, you can just turn the TV off.”

Brilliant. Chris Matthews was a terrible annoyance to me, three years ago. Now I couldn’t care less what he says. I never pay attention any more.

Here’s what I wrote to Digby, who seems to be all atwitter with tweety mania as well:

“It’s hard to imagine that Chris Matthews actually has much of an effect among the general electorate. The most recent figures I can find indicate that he has an audience that averages under 400 K viewers daily. New Hampshire’s share of that, if proportionate to the country’s population would be 1,600 viewers, with a disporotianate bias toward male viewers that would mean between 400 and 800 women in New Hampshire might watch Chris Matthews on any given day. The overall voter turnout was a little over 500,000, so the female Matthews views who voted in New Hampshire were about one-tenth of 1% of the total vote in New Hampshire. IMHO, no matter how offensive Matthews is, I think we can put the Tweety Effect to rest.”

http://mediamatters.org/items/20…ms/ 200608080009
Ray Duray | Homepage | 01.09.08 – 5:36 am | #

***
What I’m wondering is if instead of whining about pointless talking heads we ought to be organizing a revolution or something useful along those lines? (grinning)

If the election was heisted– the evidence would be in the exit polls- but apparently it is not.

She is definitely NOT my candidate, but if you look at the national polling she did better against all the Rethug candidates than Obama did a couple of days ago. If McCain is the candidate neither the corporatists nor the evangels are likely to support him. And you can go through the others too that way. Short of a 3rd party (Bloomberg, Dobbs) or some national event where the elections are put off or a major switching in vote boxes, any of the Dems are likely to beat any of the Rethugs.

I think you mean Keep their Whitehouse.

I just read one of the articles Peterr linked to:http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenumbers/2008/01/new-hampshires.html
about New Hampshire’s polling fiasco.

One of the interesting points was that the pre-election polls on the Republican side were not off.

Looseheadprop I appreciate all of your points and will stop whinging.

Re:

the evidence would be in the exit polls- but apparently it is not.

No, it would be in the memory cards of the scanners. But that’s proprietary, so you’d never be able to determine if fraud had been perpetrated. Nifty, huh? I think our present election counting system is a marvel, from the viewpoint of the clever hacker it is pure genius. The public doesn’t question the system, and the harried county clerks of the country are so perpetually starved for funding they jump at the labor saving aspects of our wonderful black boxes.

Well, you’d be incorrect. Of all the Dem candidates, if I had to rank them, Hillary Clinton would not be close to my top pick. But fair is fair — and Matthews being a factless dickhead based on misogynistic grounds is beyond craptastic and patently unfair. I don’t give a shit who his target is.

As I said earlier, stop reading your own biases into what I write. I will make up my own mind for myself, thank you very much. Although, as a girl, all this thinking makes my pretty girlie head hurt — maybe I should just lay down and eat bon-bons or something and marinate in my non-existent yet still perceived out of thin air biases and watch a soap opera or something.

Re:

One of the interesting points was that the pre-election polls on the Republican side were not off.

Yes, it puzzled me at first as well. Here’s a good graphical representation of the anomaly of the Clinton/Obama flip while all other candidates track beautifully with the pre-election polls.

Or maybe all women should just take a midol. That tends to be the response I sometimes get (is it your time of the month thing) when I am trying to articulate an issue that is bothering me.

You’re probably not here Looseheadprop, but before Christmas I read that the national election board was going to force New York to buy the machines they choose because New York had been taking their time and doing an extremely thorough job of researching and vetting the machines and issues associated with them. What’s happened? I heard that New York’s work is a model other states were using.

Also, vis a vis evidence. Watching the you tube video of John Silvestro, owner of LHS Associates, testifying about his machines, it seems that tests were not run and that known risks were not fixed.

Ah well we New England democrats tend to show a little perversity in the face of national politics. Just ask Lieberman.

Ray

Perhaps I should be a bit more specific.

If an election is stolen through manipulation in the vote count, there will be a discrepency between the vote as recorded and the exit polling- unless the exit polling is somehow manipulated also. In this case there is apparently not such a discrepency.

On the NewsHour last night, Bobo and Shields speculated that the 911 schtick was getting way old. When old guard pundits like that say something’s gotten old, it’s positively CRUSTY. ;)

What you don’t see and won’t see is that you are just as guilty as they are or I am -you dish out a similar style of journalism and reporting as they do.
I know most of you here are pro-Hillary -because I feel it in you’re biased writing.

You know, some of the front page posters have revealed in private email to each other, where our actual preferences lie. I think youwould be surprised if you actually knew the spectrum.

Jumping down someone’s thoat for over the top misogyny is not a sign of political support, it a sign af moral outrage. If anyone goes after Obama on race, expect the same kind of outrage. Frankly, when it looked like there was going to be piling on for Mitt over the LDS stuff, I started drafting apost in his defense, however, he handled the problem himself while I was still bogged down reading up on the Book of Mormon.

Anybody taking a cheap shot at any candidate ought to expect some pushback from us. We are trying to get the MSM and the public to pay attention to issues, positions and voting records when they make decsions about elections, not race, religion, gender or shampoo preferences.

From Fox News:

“She pretended to cry, the women felt sorry for her and they went for her,” said Dick Morris, a former Bill Clinton adviser and current FOX News contributor

Yup. Sure did.

Thanks Ray, I printed that off and will study it.

Re:

the 911 schtick was getting way old. When old guard pundits like that say something’s gotten old, it’s positively CRUSTY. ;)

Alternatively, they could be noticing that far too many professionals are beginning to take an interest in 9/11 as a false flag operation and wish to tamp down any public curiosity about how horribly the official story is botched.

rwcole: please keep us informed, I saw this am that the vote change was among women but did not realize it was college educated women in the main… thanks

TheraP: was there an increasing effect of cognitive dissonance among some women after hours and hours of MSM repetition and piling on HRC’s emotional moments?

Carmen,

While Brad Friedman expressed quite a bit of skepticism about the vote totals last night, he eventually came around, as I have, to deciding that the results were consistent with the so-called Bradley Effect. It’s probably not something we should talk about in public, eh, all this closeted racism that was probably on exhibit yesterday? Move along, there’s really nothing to see here. :)

Gene Robinson talked about it several times yesterday evening. Both about Tom Bradley and Wilder in VA. Just FYI. And Pam Spaulding mentions it as well in the link I provided in the post above.

mui1@222 I’m a man, but I could also use a Mydol right about now, after witnessing how we’re all turning on ach other here.

Can’t we all just acknowledge our own individual biases a little? Some of the women supporting Clinton think their gender ID is more important than the fact she’s been a lousy Democrat, those supporting Obama think their symbolic racial justice concerns trump his vague centrist positioning and shortage of experience, and the Edwards supporters, like myself, hate corporations and what they’ve done so much that I am willing to delay the short-term gratification of women and lover’s of racial diversity (two groups I normally support), in order to get someone who will torpedo the damn corporations right now, before we pass the point of no return. All of us biased according to our personal priorities.

But I will vote for any Democrat this time, and believe most of us will. Let’s not forget that we are on the same team as we bicker over who should be captain. Some of us here take entirely too much pleasure in pushing needles into their teammates. Makes me wonder if they know what a team is.

The end of Edwards and the rise of Obama; Read this article from Al Giodarno http://thephoenix.com/article_ektid48290.aspx It will amaze you at how accurate he was more than a year ago. From C&L and Barry Crimmins.

Well there is that, unfortunately.

Just this week NYS submitted a new timeline to the Court and DOJ. It involves putting a handi capped accessable ballot marking device in every polling place in 2008.

The testing standards have been set and a new testing lab contract let out to replace the contract with CYBER(which was decertified by EAC after NYS got rushed into giving them a contract–proof that DOJ is mucking up the process)

NYS is then somewhat at the mercy of the machine vendors who will or willnt submit product in a timely manner for testing–there is no way for NYS to compell the vendors to meet our timelines, if they don’t we will simply have fewer machines from which to choose.

However, IF the vendors all submitt machines for testing in a timely manner AND the machines pass the tests, NYS could conceivably have all new machines by Spetember 2009.

The BIGGEST SINGLE PROBLEM in this law suit, is that the judge is laboring under a total mistake of fact, to wit, that all 49 of the other states have , in fact, complied with HAVA.

This could not be furthter fromt he truth. 49 other states spent their HAVA money by or close to the deadline, but there is no proof whatsoever that what they bought actually complied with HAVA, and in the case of several states we know it did not, which is whythey are now scrapping the junk they bought and moving to yet another system.

Because the judges decisions all flow from this mistaken premise, ….well, garbage in garbage out? Actually, although he yells at the lawyers alot, and the transcipts really do not reflect a judicial temperament, the actual decisions are not so crazy. He does keep giving NYS time to make progress to the next stage. So, maybe all the ranting and raving is just meant to prod the State along.

More detailed results starting to come in:

60% of the Independents voted for Obama…

And women over 40 in a quiet revolution said, enough is enough. I am not putting up with this put down of my gender. She has my sympathy for today anyway, whatever her politics, these jokers with the power of the MSM behind them completely misunderstand us.

So FU, I’m voting for her behind the curtain……

Remember the Female Eunich? Gloria S. must be smiling today.

Jang–

Maybe you would like to see Gloria Steinem’s column that she wrote on the NYT Op Ed page yesterday:

Women Are Never Front-Runners by Gloria Steinem Jan. 8, 2008

There have been a spate of blogs by you and Jane the last couple days on inappropriate behavior of the media towards Senator Clinton.

I would hope for a complementary spate of blogs on qualities in her and the voting record that must be invisible to me, that I hope is visible to you, that makes her the best of the three viable candidates for President or if not the best, a good one.

Don’t hold breath.

Re:

Gene Robinson talked about it several times yesterday evening.

I suppose I should know but I don’t…. who is Gene Robinson? A contributor here? Thanks.

Well, that’s not good for Obama in the rest of the primaries because there are a lot of closed ones coming up which will be party member only. He’s in deep doo-doo. But it doesn’t surprise me. His stump speech is tailor made for the kumbaya independents who want to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony.

Re:

But I will vote for any Democrat this time, and believe most of us will.

Most but not all. If Ms. Clinton secures the nomination, I’ll vote Green Party. There is only so much I’m willing to do to bring about my own demise.

In a response to an earlier post I threw out two possibilities: One-the show of emotion was contrived – a legitimate question in my view considering Hillary knew no matter what happened she has a ghood shot of making up alot of delegates on Super Tuesday. Also, didn’t she know she was in good shape? So why wasn’t she happy? I think wether it was real or fake is a legitimate question. I think it was real and attributable in part to the stress of the campaign. To the extent that is true, she better suck it up.

Clearly not. But still, no matter what gender, if a candidate-male or female- is letting the stress of the campaign get to them in the first primary, they better knock it off and get it together.

With regard to all the nail-biting over Hillary’s tears (and the reactions thereto), specifically whether tears are a gendered issue:

No, a male could not “get away with” tears. Does no one remember Ed Muskie?

Also known as Eugene Robinson, columnist for the WaPo0, who along with EJ Dionne may actually be a liberal voice in the wilderness run by FFFH.

Can we have a moratorium on the word “misogynistic”? I think we’re reaching a point where every additional time it’s used it has less and less meaning and fits like a glove in one ear and even better right out the other.

Only when it no longer applies. How about directing the ire toward the people who trivialize women in power, spout bullshit about them being weak if they so much as blink quickly in a public setting, instead of at the people who call them on it? For starters…

Gender or no gender, a lot of the comments tend to sound like Ann Coulter to me, and it has the tendency to turn me off to whatever the commenter is advocating and promotes a perverse desire to support the target of nasty remarks.

Pete,

You seem to have a lot of ideas about what should be covered here at FDL. So why don’t you establish your own blog and cover these issues instead of telling Jane and Christy and all what you think they should cover?

dakine01–

I would never propose to tell Jane or Christy what they should do. I hope I never make that kind of ridiculous presumption.

I haven’t proposed “a lot of ideas” about coverage at FDL, although I don’t see anything at all wrong with asking talented people for their take on things of interest to anyone.

When the front pagers shine light on an issue, you have often have the benefit of 200 plus comments, from a lot of bright, articulate well read people.

In fact, I have proposed (besides book suggestions that were invited by Beverly last week) only two.

One was about HRC’s record, and I know now, that that has been amply covered in the archives by Christy and Jane, possibly others.

The other was a request to EW to update her take on Sibel Edmunds, and Bmaz LOL wondered why we were hyperventilating about Sibel, and I replied because the D.C. Circuit put a lid on almost all the information about her situation in upholding the absurd State Secrets claim by F.B.I. State Secrets has become a DOJ mantra now for coverup as DOJ actively and conspicuously under Mukasey continues to run interference for their own and Bush’s law breaking. The cowardly Supreme Court kept the lid on Sibel Edmonds’ claims by denying cert. to A.C.L.U. when they filed their cert. petitions.

I was very disappointed there, because it only takes 4 cert. votes, but the outcome of an opinion on State Secrets, should one come, is fairly predictable with Alito, Roberts, Scalia and (in my perception,his puppie dog because although he disagrees frequently, he does vote with Scalia on key votes) Thomas, and the increasingly frequent swing vote for Federalist Society causes, Kennedy probably affirming State Secrets claims by the corrupt F.B.I.

Gender or no gender, a lot of the comments tend to sound like Ann Coulter to me, and it has the tendency to turn me off to whatever the commenter is advocating and promotes a perverse desire to support the target of nasty remarks.

Crosstimbers–

What comments specifically “sound like Anne Coulter to you.” I haven’t seen anything on FDL that sounds like her to me.

Since you find “a lot of the comments” tend to sound like Coulter, you should have no trouble picking out a couple examples.

New campaign slogan up for grabs: It’s the bullshit, stupid.

Re:

What comments specifically “sound like Anne Coulter to you.” I haven’t seen anything on FDL that sounds like her to me.

And a sad thing it is. I miss the Bush Bashing, the Cheney Castigations, the Gonzales Gang Rapes and the Addington Assaults. We’ve been reduced to hen pecking tweety birds and it’s, it’s, it’s just so beneath our abilities. (wink)

RayDuray@243 That’s just great. See how well that worked out when folks like you did that by voting for Nader in 2000? If you don’t learn any better than that from recent mistakes, maybe you are greener than you realize. Fascism kills faster than pollution. Get it?

Glenn Greenwald today eviscerates Chris Matthews better than I ever could.

Hillary put in a great deal of work, especially upstate, to be taken seriously as a candidate. Also Rudy dropped out leaving her with token opposition. (In other words Hillary has never been involved in a partisan race against a strong candidate under her own name any more than Obama has. Cough) Hillary may have CHOSEN TO RUN because her husband was humiliated by impeachment. But Hillary did not win because of that.

Perhaps we could all get Chris Matthews fired.

What ire? Here’s my problems with this whole thing. First, John Edwards is getting lumped into the “misogynist” crowd and there’s no reason to conclude that.
Second, the argument is made that “if men do it without mention, the same should apply to women.” I think it’s gotta be viwed case-by-case and you have to ask: “Why did Hillary react the way she did?” before you give her a pass. And the same, of course shouls apply to any candidate. Is there an answer to that question in Hilary’s case?

Re:

Fascism kills faster than pollution. Get it?

I regard Hillary Clinton to be a proto-fascist. I’m not going to vote for her. In case you haven’t noticed, the world has changed since 2000. A matter of a few little things like two raging wars, multiple assaults on civil liberties, extraordinary renditions, secret prisons, torture parties…

And all condoned by Hillary.

You want me to condone her? I beg to differ.

(1) I have written no post in which Edwards was called misogynist. None. Not in this post or elsewhere, so don’t misattribute sentiments, statements or thoughts to me that are not mine.

(2) If you are talking about the “Hillary emotional incident” or whatever you want to call it in the second part of your comment (which is unclear) I’ve seen the whole tape of that moment about a dozen times now, not just the tiny excerpted clip, but the whole tape showing what was going on before and afterward, and what was being discussed then as well. Personally, I found it a genuine moment with a candidate who was exhausted and caught by surprise by a nice question on a tough day. Not nearly the big deal thathas been made of it by the pundits who seemed to want it to be a Muskie moment, but that’s just my opinion.

And it has nothing to do with the fact that Chris Matthews said this morning that Hillary Clinton, and I quote: “She didn’t win it on her merit, she won because everybody felt, “My God, this woman stood up under humiliation,” right?” She did not win her Senate seat on her own merit?!? Good God, that’s condescending and sexist claptrap, and what made me sit straight up on my couch and run back the TIVO.

Nowhere in this post do I say anything about giving Hillary Clinton a pass. On the issues, on her campaign style, anywhere. I believe what I said was that the media are acting like a pack of rabid hyenas slobbering all over each other to manufacture bullshit about all the Democratic candidates, the truth of it be damned. I also mention that they are building up Obama to give themselves something to enjoy tearing down. And that Edwards and Richardson are being given the shaft. Last I checked, none of those three were supporting the Clinton for President bandwagon.

Jeebus…what in the hell is in the air today that everyone wants to nitpick shit I didn’t even say?

Re:

Jeebus…what in the hell is in the air today that everyone wants to nitpick shit I didn’t even say?

With both the Iron-y post yesterday and now the Matthews post today you have injected some very high powered emotional statements into your opening remarks to these threads. I felt the agitation to an unusual degree yesterday and hoped it was just pre-election jitters. Today, more of the same sort of emotive attack and the people here reading your words get the sense of your outrage. In the case of the buffoons at Hillary’s speech with the inane chanting, it proved to be a pair of hoaxers. Not a good thing to get caught up in that sort of a mess without a clear understanding of the circumstances.

As far as Chris Matthews is concerned, “who gives a shit” is what I usually say in private. I’m baffled at how well he’s managed to ruffle your feathers. If he reads your header, and I’m pretty sure he will, he is going to have one thing to say under his breath, “gotcha!”

How’d you let him get the upper hand? I thought you were a pretty cool customer until the last couple of days have shown another side.

Just some friendly observations from someone who after six decades remains mystified by what I cannot remotely understand about Venus and Mars.

Yep, you are so right, Ray. I’ll just go take a Midol and try to remember my place in the grand scheme of things and write only about important things that clearly don’t include the fact that the national media is treating a female candidate for president like a punching bag. Because pushback against something so clearly asinine is just plain unimporatnt to me or any other woman who has had to put up with that kind of dismissive shit in the workplace while their supervisor stared at their boobies and paid them less than the guy in the next cubicle because “he had a family to support.” Now, where are those bonbons…

Tweety said of Bush 2005 that he sometimes “glimmers” with a sunny nobility.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200510250003

Yeah I have to say the “emotional satements” and “emotional attacks” sounds a bit “take your Midol-esque.”

“Who gives a shit” about Matthews? Only the people who watch him, who get led down a really mysoginistic path when analyzing not only Hillary Clinton but all women in politics and media. Digby and Somerby write about it all the time. It’s not new. And pushing back against unfair media narratives — of which Matthews is an extreme example — is a lot of what we do here.

Well, I’d be careful with the bonbons. How about taking the Peanut for a nice long adventure to a local pond to see what the wildlife are up to? My friend who told me to just turn the damn TV off has a herd of mule deer who come to her house every day for a “free lunch”. She’s had up to 60 bucks, does and fawns at one time. It’s pretty damn cool. They don’t know a thing about Chris Matthews, and you can see it in their angelic eyes.

Jeebus…what in the hell is in the air today that everyone wants to nitpick shit I didn’t even say?

Tell me about it.

1) I never said you wrote that Edwards was a misogynist. I never attributed anything to you and not being clairvoyant, have no idea what your thoughts are. Maybe by “thing” I have problems with, you thought I meant your post. I didn’t. I meant this whole “Hillary emotional incident” (or whatever you want to call it) and the reaction to it and particularly to what Edwards had to say. I don’t think Edwards comment is nearly the big deal that some – relax, I didn’t say you – have made of it. But that’s just my opinion.

2) Hard to believe but at this moment, Chris Matthews is more full of shit than he ever was. On that I think we can agree.

more 2)I found it a genuine moment with a candidate who was exausted and caught by surprise by a nice question on a tough day.
(That’s an attribution.)
I agree with that, too.
And all I’ve been saying is things are gonna get harder before they get easier so she better stop having such “genuine moments.” (But since she did have one ,the male candidates are allowed one each. Fair?)

Again, I never said or meant to say that you said Hillary was being given a pass. I meant “You” plural, as in “you people.” We gotta change English that way. I simply said that in any case of “emotional incidents,” (or whatever you -you, you- want to call it) people (not just you) should look at the why for the “incident” (let’s stick with that). In your reply you said what you thought about that. You know what? I agreed. Now,if she’s gonna be our nominee – or hopes to be – she better knock it off.

Where I am, there’s nothing unusual in the air. I’m not one to pick nits or misrepresent what people say. Don’t do it. Period. I try to be scrupulous about quoting people word for word in italics. I believe we had a misunderstanding, for the most part, and actually agree on some stuff.

Please relax and take a deep breath if your air is OK.

Re:

And pushing back against unfair media narratives — of which Matthews is an extreme example — is a lot of what we do here.

There’s a ton of really articulate people here. How about we organize a boycott and start contacting all the advertisers who display their wares on Chris Matthews Show? Perhaps they would be interested to know how little consumers think of their chosen programming. I know it’s been mentioned before. But it seems better than kibbitzing with those of us who come to the Lake for the intellectual stimulation. I like the new angles and new insights I get here. Flame wars over talking heads just doesn’t seem quite as worthwhile to me somehow. But, I defer to the hosts. Who knows, enough bitching about Chris Matthews and I might take my own advice and turn the puter off. :)

Ciao!

The last sentence of my 266 was just for fun. Things ahve been a littel.. I duno… tense(?). Maybe it’s the election. Maybe it’s having to go back to work after the holidays. But I don’t want that to be misconstrued.

Looking forward to your new website, Ray: BoycottTweetysAdvertisers.com

Or did “we organize a boycott” mean “let’s you organize a boycott” ??

Re:

Looking forward to your new website, Ray: BoycottTweetysAdvertisers.com

You may have joined this conversation late. I’m the guy who said he stopped watching Matthews several years ago. If he’s worse now, I have my doubts about the sanity of anyone tuning in.

As far as activism, I’ve limited myself to local efforts for about 5 years now. It’s worked out quite well for me. I’ve accomplished quite a lot, and really P.O.ed the local Blue Dog Dems with my efforts. :)

Cheerio!

Sad to say, even Arianna looked tragically warped on Charlie Rose last night. She and Tweety have been drinking from the same cup of biased hubris kool-aid. She’s smarter than that, he is not.

The presence of Columbia U on that list, makes me think that they are interested in part in her role as a Senator in bringing back the bacon (funds for research, centers etc.). In short some of these are clearly 2-fers.

Agreed. Sure. But her broad brush stroke repudiation of Big Biz interests was disingenuous carried to a new level.

That presumes Tweety was once on the rails and that’s a fact not yet in evidence.

The schmuck is poor scum. I really don’t know how Olbermann can suffer sitting next to him for hours on end. Yeah, I realize he’s well paid but c’mon. He loves whoever is in front of him as long as they’re a gop.

He spent the better part of a year talkin’ up Rudy with his “big city, pol” shtick and now he’s got nowhere to go. It’s not like Huck Finished or Ron Paul is gonnna ride to his rescue.

If he got ratings he’d still be in KO’s spot. He’s Tucker – the previous generation. Abrams ought to trade him to Fox for the funeral rights for Bob Novak.

Pundits have to worry about their demographics, too. Their markets are as segmented as the political markets, and television journalism is a business. I’ve always suspected that Fox News’ appeal to misogynists is the reason for the network’s success.

Because Fox News has been consistently wrong on so many issues, it’s been losing the segment of viewers who can’t own up to their own misogyny. It’s sorta like the guys who claim to read Playboy Magazine for the articles. If the high-quality articles weren’t there, they’d have to admit being horny guys who look at nekkid women.

Many mysogynistic viewers have turned away from Fox News to preserve their own self-image as fair-minded. It’s curious that not everyone who hates women is aware of it. Chris Matthews is their man because he’s not fully aware of his inner Bill O’Reilly. In his own mind, he doesn’t Hillary-bash because Hillary is a woman.

For the record . . . Hillary first ran for Senate against Rick Lazio. Lazio’s Big Moment happened in a debate when he crossed over to Hillary’s podium and demanded that she sign some kind of document. Nearly everyone watching had the same response: Who the hell does he think he is?