1) TPM and Will Bunch pointed out that the woman who asked Obama the "Why do you hate the American flag?" question in Wednesday’s debate had already appeared in an NYT story a couple of weeks ago… asking, "How can I vote for a president who won’t wear a flag pin?" As TPM and Bunch point out, it looks an awful lot like ABC actively sought her out because they wanted someone to ask Obama that ridiculous question. Someone who wasn’t Charlie Gibson or Mr. Snuffalupagus.
2) Snuffy got one of his questions directly from Sean Hannity, who had been peddling the Weatherman story for months. Maybe it had something to do with Hannity being one of ABC’s prize radio personalities:
Why does Sean Hannity connect so well with his millions of listeners? Is it because of his commitment to family? Could it be his community involvement? Perhaps it’s his love of politics and his genuine American spirit?
It’s because he is one of you.
Sean Hannity is the voice of the working class and champion of conservative values and politics.
If that’s true, the working class has a lot to answer for… but I digress.
And then there was Snuffy’s lame defense of the questions, where he essentially argued that asking frivolous gotcha questions is actually a brilliant way of assessing a candidate’s electability. Which is apparently far more important than what kind of president they would be, or their plans to repair the Bush-inflicted damage they would inherit, or whether they would attempt to hold Bush and his minions accountable for their crimes.
Oh, and do you know Snuffy has on This Week this week? Why, John McCain, of course. Will he ask McCain whether he had an affair with a lobbyist, or (as Mike Stark suggests) about how he dumped his first wife for a newer, richer model? No, of course not. After all, the Republican voters have already picked their candidate, and apparently they didn’t need any shallow questions about flag pins or Inconvenient Pastors to make up their minds. No doubt because they’re so much more bold and decisive and manly than we soft, dizzy hippies.
All of this incestuous coziness and media catapulting of Republican manufactroversies is why I sort of agree with Josh Marshall:
[W]e have now crossed an important threshold where the Republican operative cadre has sufficiently disciplined and trained the press (and more than a few Democrats) that their own role may simply be redundant.
…[M]embers of the prestige press appear to see… a positive journalistic obligation to engage in their own organized campaign of falsehood, distortion and smear on the reasoning that it anticipates the eventual one to be mounted by Republicans.
(This is especially striking when contrasted with Jonathan Alter on Countdown two weeks ago, saying that "it’s up to the Democrats" and not the media to put dents in McCain’s maverick image.)
Josh has perfectly encapsulated the what, but I think he’s missed the why. The media don’t actively smear Democrats (and tiptoe around Republicans) because the GOP has duped, seduced, or bullied them (although that’s a convenient alibi), they do it because their Republican corporate ownership dictates it, whether explicitly or implicitly.
Sure, there are lots of journalists of integrity – Krugman, Froomkin, Pincus, Olbermann, and these people, to name a few – but they’re not the ones with the megaphones, they’re not the ones dominating our national discourse.
Which is not to say that the media are completely immune to pressure and shaming – they’re just a lot more responsive to it when it comes from the boss’s team.
(hat tips to Scarecrow, Peterr, TeddySanFran, and Mike Stark)
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Eli! Zedders
CTut!
Reuters reported on it too…
Tap, tap, is this still turned on…? ;-)
There are so many “gotcha” guys out there now that you can’t tell them all without a scorecard. Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, all the Fox News blowhards, especially Chris Wallace, Stephanopolous….to a man they are more interested in their own press than in getting information out to voters. It’s enough to make a political junkie stop watching.
Yeah, even for a Friday it seems a bit slow. Maybe everyone got it out of their system on Wednesday.
Hey Eli!
Clueless or Complicit? Maybe both.
Let’s face it. The uncomfortable truth is that most folks do not want to think. Especially at the end of a long day at work. They just want to be spoon fed. So, naturally, they are the perfect set of sheep for the media to hypnotize.
Daahhh.
srry 4 OT so soon Eli: #9, will read soon.
duggggg :)
Georgie gets to rake Mac over the coals this weekend. I’m sure he’ll be brutal.
Great post, Eli. Loving the use of “Snuffy”!
Very damning:
1) TPM and Will Bunch pointed out that the woman who asked Obama the “Why do you hate the American flag?” question in Wednesday’s debate had already appeared in an NYT story a couple of weeks ago… asking, “How can I vote for a president who won’t wear a flag pin?” As TPM and Bunch point out, it looks an awful lot like ABC actively sought her out because they wanted someone to ask Obama that ridiculous question. Someone who wasn’t Charlie Gibson or Mr. Snuffalupagus.
Maybe, but your post is more of a bigger picture question. At least to me anyway.
I never watch the talking head shows. They’re just too awful. I may have to watch This Week this week though, so I can contrast Snuffy’s treatment of the Democrats with his treatment of McCain.
You have it exactly right.
I’m with demi.
Why do you persist in this either/or mentality? Both/and is much more likely.
Cluelessly complicit — aka, the Sgt Schultz defense — explains things a lot more clearly. “I know nothink!”
Deep Thought for the Day:
How come we never hear a question to a Republican defended with the rationale that it will be used against him by the Democrats?
.
I never watch them, because I’m at work. (Working on the weekend never looked so good.)
Well, I guess for me the real question is “Complicit or not complicit?” If they’re not complicit, then they *have* to be clueless. If they *are* complicit, then the cluelessness can go either way.
How come we never hear a question to a Republican that would even require such a rationale?
Eli, you are an official media pundit. Somebody at the deadwood KC Star (pg. 2), is reading FDL. FireDogLake is cited and you are quoted about the debate.
If he has been listening, he may believe he has to be more aggressive….you know, to appear fair. Maybe.
Ok, read it. Complict!
I think Steven Colbert used Hannity’s bio to make his Colbert Report character.
Damn good question and point! ;-)
“Sean Hannity is the voice of the working class…”
If you woke up and heard that Sean Hannity had appointed himself the spokesperson for your class, wouldn’t you be bitter too?
.
Hee, I saw that. I got quoted a few other places too, but I suspect they were all because Americablog included me in their reaction roundup.
my vote: complict while pretending to be clueless
“One man’s kidney stone . . .”
Priceless!
(I’m a KC person myself, but missed that one. Thanks!)
Eli:
That was one of my intended points.
.
((( ELI )))
I vote for “complicit” … or was it rhetorical ? *g*
All right, that’s settled, then. I’m off.
Yeah, I think it’s a cover.
What scares me is that a lot of Democrats exhibit the same kind of “cluelessness”.
I especially love this one:
“Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey: “Kudos to ABC News for taking on both candidates fearlessly. John McCain has to feel grateful not to be included.”“
In other words, “Phew! John McCain would have had a tough time up there! Kudos to ABC for protecting him from public embarrassment!”.
Bingo!
But they may have overplayed their hand. What if many of those sitting on the fence saw this woman and her obsession and said “You know, that Obama guy is sorta right about some of these folks…that’s really lamebrain”. And then they read that the woman is actually not undecided at all, but a pretty hardened Clinton supporter…and a bit of a nut that fits what Obama is speaking about…people who vote against their own benefit on “red button” issues.
They might actually swing to Obama.
One can hope that at least they’ll examine the issues!
Eli! This is why it is so exciting this week to see everyone taking ABC down. The new tv followers got a chance to realize that the bias is there. Maybe tonight they’re listening to the news a little more closely.
Good post, and a good point about pleasing the corporate bosses.
Allmost politicians have a price, or they wouldn’t be in this game …So I figured.
“Do you prefer puppies or kittens, Mr. Cheney, or do you like them both equally?”
But they never ask about what kind of sauce.
Hi Eli, finally caught one of your posts while it was active. Good points, I think. It just seems so obvious to me that when a few conservatives (Murdoch, Scaife, Sun Yung Moon) own so much of the American news it’s going to have a conservative slant. And yet, this somehow is overlooked in favor of selective outrage at particular instances when the news didn’t bow to the conservative line.
Can’t believe I’m writing this. I sound like a conspiracy theorist. But as someone once said, you don’t need to posit a conspiracy when everyone knows what they’re supposed to do. Your last line really sums that up.
Thanks, CTuttle. I would just love for that to become a meme and to hear someone ask it of a reporter, say Stephanopoulos, the next time they use the lame excuse of “But the Republicans do it!”
.
Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re *not* out to get you.
exactly.
The tightrope that the media must walk, is that they can never give away the game. If the majority of Americans realize that the media are essentially Republican propaganda, they’ll start rolling their eyes and reading between the lines (although possibly not simultaneously).
Or better yet, turning to alternative news sources.
Cheney: kittens’ heads fit in my palm so nicely.
that’s not conspiracy theory – that’s systems analysis
George S. is giving Sesame Street a bad name.
Eli, speaking of kittens, check out one of my bumper stickers:
http://whitenoiseinsanity.word…..-stickers/
LOL
707!!
Nice to see ya, Cujo! And thanks!
It’s why I’m always mystified by the explanation that the news media are just trying to pump up their ratings or circulation. If that were the case, they would have been all over “Manwhore In The White House!” and “President Okayed Torture!” And they just shrugged. The parent corporation’s bottom line is what matters, not the news division’s.
Of course, if they can make money smearing Democrats and distracting from Republicans, that’s great too.
…After he shoots them in the face. You know, for practice.
Great post, Eli! I’m so glad this is still being talked about. Out in tall timber country my chattering classes are mallards and freshly stirring chipmunks so I’ve been a tad out of touch.
But not so out of touch as not to see last night’s Stewart and Colbert. Wowzah.
I vote for clued-in to the corporate, co-opted and corrupted…
Prairie Today: Puttering…”Tough but fair”
LOL Exactly. Or he just eats them alive. Ewwww. He’s Evil. Pure Evil.
you laugh? i was serious.
Hannity didn’t go to college and is a loud mouthed bully.
Were I on the receiving end of these questions I would call them out for the idiots they are and probably refuse to answer any questions which were not substantive.
I would also send a letter to the network or editor and refuse to allow X, Y or Z to interview me. Just cut off the assholes and ignore them. If THAT becomes a story in itself use it to expose the entire idiocy that the MSM has become. Enlist Media Matters to show exactly what a bunch of jerks these people are.
Give more interviews to the REAL journalists like Amy Goodman and LinkTV.
We need to boycott the MSM and the candidates need to do it too and talk back to them and send them a message in no uncertain terms that they will only deal with real journalists. First sign of BS and that journalists is persona non grata.
From The Virgin Mary’s Face in the Pizza Slice Dept:
WaPo headline-
“Holy Cow. Did Obama Give Clinton the Finger?”
True.
Josh’s reasons may be what the media or its milder outside critics tell themselves. But I think you and Deep Throat have it right: follow the money. Take telecoms mergers as analogy, because the template doesn’t apply just to newspapers and broadcast news services.
There were a series of large-scale telco mergers in 2004-06 which went through with relatively genial, if still expensive, review by the DOJ and related agencies, like the FCC. The players involved, from CEOs to their outside antitrust lawyers, made out like bandits. The price for such light-weight oversight may have been a little (paid) help with domestic eavesdropping.
Newspaper owners have something different and equally unique to sell to government. Message control. Owners, like the magnate who recently acquired The Tribune Company, are now either investment bankers or entertainment moghuls. News is an afterthought. They make money putting deals together and in cross-utilization of one group company’s resources by another. Money made running a newspaper is peanuts, though the same rate of return on assets or capital employed would earn an auto manufacturing CEO a gold star from his board.
They make the most money of all supporting a business-can-do-anything-it-wants GOP. Because when they want to do something new — be a foreigner and own lots of media, enter new businesses, or claim ownership of otherwise private data owned by their customers (which they utilize without regulation to make still more money) — Shrub says, “OK. That’s what I’m here for.” What’s a little bent news or an overfed reporter shilling trivia compared with that, I ask you?
If pols want to get a message out, call a press conference and say they have an important announcement. Usually the grunt reporters cover those events anyway.
I would NEVER EVER agree to a debate with any of the clowns they use to ask the questions. Not one of the MSM people INCLUDING Jim Lehrer.
I would love to see that. Obama at least called the moderators on it, which was progress.
Also, bear in mind that if they do that, the media narrative will be “Hillary and/or Obama refuse to answer question about their ties to al Qaeda.”
Why not just ignore the inane “got’cha” question and reply on a topic of real substance, to make the point. Then, when they get all agitated, make the pushback / calling BS tactic explicit for them and the viewing public.
I hate it when you’re serious.
At least we now have video to throw back in their faces when they go after Obama’s bowling and say he is totally inept physically. Check out his basketball skills (and a pretty good interview with Bryant Gumbel).
As to the clueless or complicit question, I have to say clueless with a huge dose of elitist. They appoint themselves the arbiters of what the regular guy thinks, even though the bigger names in the media are multimillionaires and haven’t talked to a regular guy in years.
Factored in is a cluelessness that means that they can’t come up with analysis of their own, and so they become much more of an echo chamber than they accuse the blogosphere of being. Think about the speed with which “bitter” swept through all of the pundits. Once one of them said it, they all had to because they are incapable of independent thought.
‘…if they do that, the media narrative will be “Hillary and/or Obama refuse to answer question about their ties to al Qaeda.”’
____________
So, you preempt by saying right then that that is what the red herring MSM headline will read.
The multi-millionaire talking heads who work for the mutli-billion dollar media megacorps:
In on the game.
Thanks to Cenk for this round of simple answers to simple questions.
And thanks Eli for this great post.
(and thanks to the NWS for the news about possible snow showers north of here Saturday….the tent can wait a few more weeks…)
The connection is:
Business interests are served by republicans who suck up to the wealthy.
The media and their bobbleheads ARE the same as business – they are the wealthy and so they dance with the republicans. What’s good for them is to have republican low tax and wealth and laissez fair polices so they can make more money.
The people are not being well served by their government or the media which is supposed to be a watchdog on government. Instead it is the mouthpiece of government. That’s how we got media consolidation and trashed the fairness doctrine.
All of this is about class warfare or exploitation of working people by the wealthy ne’er do wells.
So was I.
You’ve either got to laugh or cry these days. I prefer to laugh.
Bowling skills?
I would bet that if the media wanted to select a president from this crowd based on their bowling score alone – Obama would win easily over McCain and Hillary.
Anyone wanna bet?
good call.
The working class people who vote republican are doing so against their own self interest. They are screwing themselves for their racist views and association with the wealthy.
Lehrer works for the Republicans. The MSM is complicit. The networks are belong to Republicans. Remember Lehrer in the 2000 “debates”? I do. Unquestionably a right wing tool like Gibson, Snuffalopogus, Russert, Couric, Williams and the rest of the con artists who pose as unbiased journalists. They are worse than O’Reilly and Hannity because they are stealth operators via their perceived credibility.
In McCain’s case, it wouldn’t be fair. Thanks to his stay in Hanoi, he can’t lift his arms above his shoulders. Hillary might surprise us, though.
Yep.
The news media have largely become corporatized, with profit interests that run directly counter to being independent pursuers and communicators of truth.
Sounds good to me. Another approach which I think would have been a huge success would have been to appeal to the audience.
“Who here wants to hear some *real* questions?” would have gotten HUGE applause.
How does ANY republican policy or initiative serve the needs of the working class or the middle class? Name one which even remotely advances their well being.
Who here wants Eli to moderate the next debate?
Nice post. Just one thing that struck me:
Sure, there are lots of journalists of integrity – Krugman, Froomkin, Pincus, Olbermann,
Krugman has integrity on economic issues, but he has been anti-Obama on virtually every front (not just his legitimate beef about his health care policies), with no apparent attempt at balance – and without his usual rigor. Given his absolute consistency in attacking Barack and supporting Hillary, I regard his arguments for same with some suspicion.
So I still read him religiously on policy, but I skip his take on (Democratic) politics. There’s enough people that are up to their necks in intra-party partisanship. Shame that Krugman has gone their too – would have liked him to stay above the fray.
(and let’s not even mention where Joe Wilson has gone – boy, have I ever lost respect for him!)
Count me in.
Both hands in the air.
(Hey, Loo Hoo, gonna be here later? I wanna talk to you about a single sex education story I heard about.)
both hands raised.
and i want his partner to be amy goodman.
I’m tellin’ ya. What do you have to lose in such a circumstance? Just call bullshit pointedly and snarkily right there, and go right to talking about stuff of policy substance, while the “moderators” get all in a huffy snit. Don’t let them frame the “debate.”
Szasz wryly observed “The law of the jungle is ‘eat or be eaten.’ The law of civilization is ‘define or be defined.’“
”Oh, and do you know Snuffy has on This Week this week? Why, John McCain, of course. Will he ask McCain whether he had an affair with a lobbyist, or (as Mike Stark suggests) about how he dumped his first wife for a newer, richer model? No, of course not. ”
ok, bullhorn one more time…….
c’mon, let’s load that bale of hay, just a few more and we can sit on the porch sippin’ homemade lemonade and be proud of our work, and have a barn full of feed.
write the cretin–send george stephanopolis with what you want asked. here is the submission form, right at your furry fdl pup paws.
http://abcnews.go.com/Site/page?id=3428174
i keep sayin’ a letter written to the point, with a fact or quote or two, is all that is needed.
why do you think i keep on saying that??????
cuz maybe it works.
my uncle, who worked for the guggenheim institute, taught me that……. he wrote letters outside of the field of his expertise, got answers back. he wrote them all in the same tone, persistent, passionate, informed, and right with facts.
write the godd@mn letters. just write them. innundate them with them, the same freakin’ facts, then new facts, then newer facts…..same consistent source, YOU, that is found when you CONSISTENTLY write them with valid information………..they recognize you after you consistently provide factual information.
if i said examples, then that would be into vanity, and i’m not one who is going to do that.
write the letters.
it works, it really does. just write.
*ding*
Egregious, where do I stand to caucus for that?
Guys like Lehrer are so isolated from working people and reality that they can only think as a person of wealth and means and so they are think like their class and their class is served by republican and right wing ideology. They can’t even see their own bias; most people can’t and most like Lehrer will say they are fair minded.
Money in the hands of a few has really screwed the working class because the few have all the power and the working class refuses to fight back.
Agree with one caveat. There are not a lot of them. There are a handful of them by comparison to the status quo.
I really like Krugman, but his column today made me cringe. And Olbermann is perhaps a little more anti-Hillary than he should be. But at least they’re willing to call out Bush and the GOP when no-one else will. But yeah, I would rather that they had not so obviously chosen sides.
And Jeremiah Wright is to be Moyers’ guest next week.
Selise!
Jinx. Same time stamp, but I was first, so I believe you owe me a diet coke.
Joe Wilson IS a republican who got shafted by republicans. His not a progressive. He’s an elitest right winger and his wife was a spy, albeit it a pretty one who git shafted by Rove, but a spy nevertheless.
Progressive don’t need spooks who won’t repudiate the agency when it does bad and it does bad a lot.
I like how they invite questions for the guests, but that’s not actually one of the dropdown categories…
what about adding Eugene Robinson to the journalists with integrity?
Fur sure? Next, not tonight?
I won’t miss that one.
Should be really good.
I know for a fact, Obama would beat me at bowling. LOL
Okay, here’s mine:
Can you ask Senator McCain his thoughts on the president’s admission that he authorized his principals to orchestrate interrogation methods that most people consider torture?
You could ask him if he experienced any of those techniques first-hand, and whether he would consider them torture. If so, please ask him whether he would appoint a special prosecutor to hold the president and his principals accountable.
Obama looked very presidential calling them out too. They almost forgot that he could well be the next president.
They are cut off if he is. Just like FOX.
Lets focus on what ABC was to afraid to ask until the end if at all the War, the Economy, was Healthcare even mentioned?
This smear campaign is a distraction because McCain’s answers will not poll well with Americans while Hilary’s and Obama’s answers would.
Charlie’s talk about the Capital Gains taxes shows his bias and his removal from reality after all the Bush tax cuts have had how many years to work their magic?
We need to ask Charlie and George the moron bothers a question when adjusted for inflation just how much higher is the Stockmarket under Bush than it was at the Clinton peak?
If the stockmarket is indeed higher at all (depends if its good day).
Seven approaching eight years of Bush and the invisible hand of the market is struggling to get a little higher than Bill’s shadow!
I’m not a big Olbermann fan… other than it’s a good thing to have at least one show host who isn’t totally owned by the Republicans. Some of his attacks on Hillary have been really over-the-top, bordering on misogyny. (That from someone tired of all of the overblown accusations of sexism following any criticism of her).
Rachel Maddow on the other hand – awesome!
can i get you something other than a coke?
after all, coke is the drink of the death squads.
Because then they can say he was afraid to answer the question.
No argument here. I was trying to keep the list short, so I left a lot of people off. Dahlia Lithwick, Rachel Maddow, Bob Herbert, Murray Waas, Seymour Hersh, Dana Priest…
thanks for the heads up on McCain’s appearance on This Week. I will read the transcript. I will not watch ABC anymore. I will go to their website and download transcripts, and note who is advertisint there and write the sponsors that they will never have my business because they are associating themselves with an unprofessional and unethical corporation.
I am trying to think of what kinds of questions George Stephafraudulus should ask McCain in order to resotroe balance.
But, not sure that is right way to go, because even to do that is to play a loser game with the GOP. Every single thing about the ABC Pennsylvania debate is poisonous to our democratic system, except for the boos and catcalls the audeince threw towards the incomptent and unprofessional moderators at the end.
I will think a bit and see of if some decent tough questions for McCain come to mind that are relevant to his performance in office. Some will arrive, I just want to filter out garbage. I mean, Stephacredulus could ask McCain if he is not patriotic because he has appeared in public without a flag lapel pin, but that kind of thing is a road I do not want to go down.
Here’s a question for McCain:
Are you going to pursue a “Strong Dollar Policy” like Bush, and have the dollar drop 40% in your presidency too?
I do!
selise, thanks for that great pick-up re coke: drink of the death squads.
why am i thinking of small stickers and viral outreach campaigns?
“What would you have done differently the last 8 years?” might be an interesting one.
McBu’ush is now on the record unequivocally (Matthew’s Hardball College Tour) as saying “the United States should never torture anyone in our custody.”
“Anyone.” It, then, simply remains to probe as to what he considers “torture.” Fairly short list of obvious tactics that shouldn’t take much yes/no response time.
Agree. Telling that he is such a strong Hillary shill.
Yes for a while. I never know how long!
I disagree. You cut that off right at the outset, by saying publicly that that is what the media will claim. You turn the table on them.
I like the idea of tying it to his own personal experience. Maybe it’s a cheap shot, but I have a hard time feeling bad about that now.
Viral outreach and Coke?
“I want to teach the world to sing . . .”
david rovics is wonderful – a singer/songwriter/activist in the best tradition.
What? Excellent!
This is what I wrote on this the day after the debate.
I fall into the group that thinks that the talking heads we see so much of or see in print so often are millionaires and the viewpoint they have is that of millionaires. It is as relevant to most of us as if the news was given by Martians.
And ask him why he voted in favor of torture.
Standing ovation
Now, some of the hypervenilating lefties inaccurately (and intentionally?) characterized his response as that we should never torture “Ameicans,” but I watched that show, and he said directly and without hesitation “anyone.”
At a recent GOP primary debate you denied that you had admitted your knowledge of economics is weak, but it appears that your statement was not true (play tape). How do you explain that discrepancy to the US public? Can you be trusted to tell the truth about your qualifications to be president.
You said that you sought out the support of reverend Hagee who most people would believe has some very extreme beliefs. (show slide or play clip of McCain statement). Hagee’s religious beliefs, by his own statements advocate a US foreign policy which will hasten a world war then ends all life as we know it on earth, and that not to do everything to hasten his own ideas about Bibilical prophecies to that end, is immoral and against the world of God. (play clip of Hagge or show slide of Haggee quote) Can you explicitly renounce Hagee’s views about US foreign policy? What can you say to the US people that will assure them that such extreme views will never influence our conduct of foreign policy?
Lemonade?
Or is that too bitter? Ha Ha.
Okay, okay. Chamomille tea.
eli-at 89–
yeah, sometimes that is the case, and when it is,
i’m not talkin’ about the front door, i’m talkin’ the back door. look around for the back door.
i said the other day, sometimes i have to get in throught the ’terms of agreement’ link…….
but i find a way in…..and write the fre@kin letter……..same tone, same facts, same information. no matter how frustrating it was to find a way in, same tone.
and i have gotten emails back from going in the back door to the netherlands link.
really.
write the fre@kin letters.
my uncle started in the 40’s, he has binders full of them, and the answers he got back, i looked at them, read them and thought ”oh, that’s nice”
NOW???????
a few years ago i thought, how do i do this in the ’updated way”? didn’t know…..
so, wrote a few here and there, and stepped it up a few years ago…got results;
then, when ali was murdered, i stepped it up again, and have gotten many many back.
so, kick it up, state it, tell it, do it.
baling hay is dirty work, but you get to sit on the porch later.
and i have to say, it brings tears to my eyes when my uncle, who is now in assisted care and is 82, asks me, what did i used to do? and i tell him, you DID A LOT!@@
your are an exceptional human being for doing all of the things that you did not have to do……and yet you did them. you cared enough about people to stick your neck out and ask questions that needed asked and defend someone when something wasn’t accurate, you are my hero.
and that doesn’t even include the research he did at the guggenheim………
so, that’s where i come from, one of the places, and why i know it is true. he has binders to prove it.
writing letters works.
Did anyone see Keith O’s questions for McCain this evening? If not and you can still catch the rerun, do. One of the questions had to do with “Why did you commit adultery. No, not with the lobbyist, with your current wife when you were married to your first wife.” All the questions were perfect, IMO.
But now, since all of your blood pressure is up anyway, try this link at TPM. It’s entitled, “Mukasey: The Law Is What The Justice Department Says It Is”
“Natural allies” is also a very plausible explanation.
Reminds me of Warren Beatty’s comments as Bullworth in response to an inane question from the (millionaire) debate moderator.
less.
at least martians wouldn’t have their salary dependent on their lack of understanding.
No, not tonight. But a very good Iraq story with an interview of reporter who has been there for quite awhile.
I just sent them an email, bro. Requested and provided some pertinent topics for mccain/snuffy sunday smoochfest.
Yes! That is a great exemplar.
When McCain made his personal experience the centerpiece of his foreign policy and military credentials, this is NOT a cheap shot. It’s just asking him to reflect on his vast experience as a prisoner in the hands of people who may or may not have considered the Geneva conventions as binding.
“So, Senator McCain, had the North Vietnamese forced you to endure waterboarding, would that have been considered torture?
“Would it have been illegal if the North Vietnamese had not told the International Committee of the Red Cross about your captivity?
“How would you have felt if the North vietnamese had put you before a military tribunal, with only the protection of a NVA lawyer as your counsel?”
And that’s just for starters.
Here’s a question for McCain:
Are you going to pursue a “Strong Dollar Policy” like Bush, and have the dollar drop 40% in your presidency too?
Good One! Egregious
McCain will either waffle that question so he does not embarrass Bush or he will say he will do better.
Our reply: What makes you think you can do better than a Harvard Masters of Business Administration? What makes you think America can survive another four years of Herbert Hoover, sorry Bush economic policies?
Standin’ up, too, and shoutin’ “you go!….”
Upton Sinclair, Orwell, past is prologue…
But what that really means is that he has the same policy as Dubya: Never *call* it torture.
Excellent question. Too bad you’ll never be a moderator at one of these party-sponsored things.
Something that maybe we ought to mention in the discussion of debates is the reason that the LWV no longer does them – the parties didn’t want them to actually control how they operate. On one level, I think if Obama and Clinton are disappointed in how the news channels handle the debates, then they have only themselves to blame.
Don’t want to go all OT.
I’ll look up the link at NPR and send it to ya.
Hi Eli xxxxxxoooo
my .02 cts
ABC/DISNEY is here to dumb down your kids,and the greater public discourse…go watch ESPN,or some more cartoons…but please dont pay attention to REALITY
“I want the deathsquads to kill for Coke…”
nope – I better leave this to David Rovics…
Off topic:
Richard Quest a British CNN reporter has been arrested for drugs…(pictured here) [repaired by mod]
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..er_charged
Oh boy.
Okay, going to bed. Have a good night everyone. ;-)
Salut! to your uncle and to you.
Did you pups remember to contact your local ABC affiliate, too?
Yeah, but that’s pretty easy to debunk.
yup.
even convinced me to watch the debate the next day .
LOL I guess I’m tired. I put the link between the words instead of actually selecting the words. Oh for crying out loud…
Nite nite.
I’m not disagreeing, but you’re quoting Hugh, not me.
Isn’t that the guy who called the Catholic Church a Great Whore?
If so do you think a single American Nun would vote for a guy who hangs with a guy who calls them Whores?
Should Catholics be worried about John McCain?
Dubya’s gotten away with it for at least 3 years…
ah, i see you listened to the youtube. *g*
long day, my apologies to both of you.
eli at 89–thanks, that’s what i’m talkin’ about!
journalists like to thing they are intellectual, so emotional diatribe won’t even get read………so, when people tone it down, include quotes or facts, it gets read…….
my step-sister is an editor at a national paper, i KNOW that’s what gets press……….
just write the letters. every time you hear a contradictory statement, think how you would be influenced if you were them……play on that…….
i know i’m a pain in the ass on this subject, but is one i was raised on and family members went into the field, so, here i am pressing my own agenda, and it still isn’t enough having this knowledge, but it is enough to keep it in play……so let’s keep the issues in play, and what i am saying is how to do it.
and i am someone who would rather blend into the wallpaper than say these things but am starting to realize that i can’ t do that anymore…..
blush.
Please explain in detail why you flip-flopped on your ownn immigration bill within three months time? What new factors and information explains you change of mind. What kind of immigration bill would you propose now?
Yes, BobbyG! Necklace MSM with the Rethug frame they carry, and then wheatpaste the progressive message on the framed talking head.
(metaphorically speaking, natch)
Yeah, i saw that. It was fantastic. I especially liked the exposure of the hypocrisy of Stephy. He was for pertinent issue topics before he was against them.
In the second Star Trek pilot, the first with Kirk, guest star Gary Lockwood’s character was struck by a force at the edge of the galaxy. He was fast mutating, acquiring omnipotence and godlike powers, and soon had as much in common with his old shipmates as a scientist has with his white mice.
Like the famous redshirts, he didn’t make it to the end of the episode, unlike real world villains and media millionaires.
sleep well, KayInMaine…
hackworh i’m a girl, all over, though i did do a non-traditional job for many years which influences my lingo…all girl, all the time.
Hahahaha
comfort the afflicted and afflict,the comfortable
Good!
Ah, original Star Trek episodes…the good ol’ days.
Dinosaur dialup’s doin’ me in…g’night pups.
Where No Man Has Gone Before. Good episode, even if the acting was a bit overwrought.
Goodnight, Prairie Sunshine and KayInMaine.
Your agenda is a good one, dmac.
Nite, KIM.
Tribbles :)
g’nite, Prarie Sunshine…say hi to the critters for me.
Off to the market myself for some (non-camping) dinner fixin’s
and eli, thanks for letting me be a pain in the ass about this subject–it is one of those things that it is so simple it is hard.
my uncle’s favorite letter was from dorothy fuldheim, a helen thomas, years and years on the same station until she dropped, told it like it is, a long-revered broadcaster in northeastern ohio==she answered one of his letters with–
maybe you were right. that was his favorite one.
he got answers back from legislators, presidents, authors……….and had articles on the legislation that his letters affected……think about that…….one person….and all he did was write. from his heart backed up with facts.
Dude, that’s like half of them. Probably more.
White House Life by Mark Fiore
Funny and on target once again!
Sent.
McCain wants to cut the gas tax? Which pays for roads and bridges repair and the GOP Convention is in Minnesota where a bridge fell down all killed lots of people.
Just who is setting McCain’s policies and do they know where the GOP Convention is this year?
Sometimes I’m surprised to discover the gender of the people here. Not that it matters. Sometimes I know and then I forget. Sorry I called you bro. Now I won’t forget.
Froomkin’s a real reporter? Perhaps that’s why he’s had a quiet feud with the WaPoo for years, and why they keep shifting his place on their web page. I think it’s changed twice in the past year.
Earlier, Rove made such a stink about Dan’s White House coverage the WaPoo agreed to relegate his column to “opinion” rather than reporting and shift it to a back page. Without his Net popularity he might have been banished.
The WaPoo, like the GOP, is not the newspaper that broke the Watergate story. It’s a newspaper that’s spent years trying to make up to the GOP for having done it.
“Mukasey: The Law Is What The Justice Department Says It Is”
That’s sure not how I remember the Constitution.
I wrote months ago that I thought, based on what he’d said about torture, that he had no business being a judge or an AG. I’m even more convinced of that now.
For fairness’ sake, I’ll point out that the testimony is actually a little less autocratic than the headline. In fact, it sounds similar to what LHP was saying in the previous column. The problem, I think, is that in Mukasey’s case there was clearly no qualification to his statement that the OLC could determine who could be prosecuted. Perhaps he thought the qualifications were obvious, but given his stance on torture, I doubt it.
You already have some of the lowest gas taxes in the world.
You know, I’d really like to see more than the two second clip of the audience booing Gibson and Stephanopolis. How long did it go on, and what were people saying?
True, except some were mediocre and at least a few were bad…
eli and pups—i can’t give justice to the whole thread, and i’’m sorry , there’s no way i can catch up on comments–i’m on dial up……..i was out planting and came in and saw the subject and had to jump in….i only saw hackworth’s comment while it was loading, slowly…usually i read them all first, but damm@t i just wanted to say, all you gotta do is write a few lines and send them off, this is the information highway, find the freakin’ link and send it.
no stamps, no havin’ to go to the library to look up an address, nuthin’ like that.
i wish i could tell about uncle sonny’s letters, and now, my own, but what is the point of that?
make you own binder, send the letters and see what you get back. and know that when they quote you, you know it came from you, and hopefully, from many saying the same thing.
The roads in Ca. are awful and I keep wondering if we will ever get them repaired. Probably not.
I’m pretty sure that’s not right either. I think it’s more like “The Law is what the White House tells the Justice Department to say it is”.
Thanks. At this point, I’m not seein’ the major downside. If Obama declines another uselees got’cha “debate,” they’ll spin it as “scaredy-cat.” If he accepts, and yields to the same kind of treatment, he gets the same time-wasting shit.
If, on the other hand, he agrees to another debate, and comes out on the attack by dismissively and openly going “thanks, but no sale” on the got’cha stuff, appealing to the local and wider audiences explicitly and attempting to talk directly about substance, he can then play the “what are you afraid of” card to the “moderators” and HRC if they object and what to dwell on trivialities.
“Overwrought acting” is probably not a characteristic that would distinguish one original Trek episode from another; it’s Shatner’s trademark. (Except for Judgment at Nuremberg; even he underplayed with Tracy, Schell and Clift on the set.) Thankfully, he discovered self-parody, which assured his success.
Ha!
I’m sometimes surprised by genders here. But, it’s no biggie.
I have learned, however, that Dude is not gender related. :)
Get rid of Prop. 13.
I would love to see Howard Dean give both candidates some pointers for the next debate.
Froomkin is one of those who shifted from dead-tree reporting to online reporting, but his bosses failed to appreciate that the only real difference in his work was the lack of wood pulp involved.
Check out NiemanWatchdog.org, where he is co-editor.
I call my girlfriend Dude *all the time*. I probably shouldn’t admit that…
How about putting the money spent on the war into the states where it belongs?
The quality of the stories and the guest performances are what distinguish them, I think. Kirk was generally overwraught, and McCoy often so as well.
I think there needs to be an organized public movement to confront the networks and replace the current system.
That is the only thing that will scare them, since it is the only thing that will really hurt them. It will damage the viewership of their news long term, and deny them the easy profits from the cheapo debate productions.
Move-on has announced no plans yet other than delivering their petitions.
And really, at this point, given the abysmal performance of incompetent and unprofessional hacks like Russert, Stephaclodulous and Gibson, the only safe thing to do is to try to scrap the current debate system starting right now.
We may not be able to scrap it before November but we can very seriously damage its credibility.
And we must quit the whining tone. We should not ask or request anything. We should tell them that they are finished.
There should be no ’shape up or else.’ What the media has done so far this election cycle is unforgivable. There can be no restitution no reform, becaue their crimes are too immense and the costs of continued malfeasance are too high.
The right wing reactionaries have been successful in corrupting the media in such a way that it is extremely corrupt and unreliable. Many if not most of their prominent reporters and analysts are so corrupt and incompetent that they are irredeemable.
Our goal must be to destroy the power of the corporate media’s natonal affairs press, and we should start right now.
First task, take away their power to produce national debates, and do it in a way that publicly humiliates them.
I don’t think Hillary would take his suggestions. If she is the nominee he is gone.
A few months back, I was thinking of a boycott of all soft drinks. When asked for your drink order, say “Just ice, please”. The idea is to restore justice in our country and to put pressure on some useless but very large corporations by hitting them in the pocketbook. The viral campaign would put “Just ice, please” stickers in prominent spots. Once someone typed in the website, they would realize “Justice” was involved. I tried doing without diet soda for a week or so. It was tough, but I made it.
“I’m a doctor, not an escalator!” is my all-time favorite McCoyism.
Mrs Dr Peterr, while very open-minded, would not take kindly to being called “Dude” — *especially* by Mr Rev Dr Peterr.
Its bridge repair that scares me I keep looking for rust and cracks.
I’ve only heard it used in an affectionate way, myself.
and,….since we’re kinda ot here, can I share the link I sent Loo?
Will do anyway, ’cause you dogs might appreciate it.
http://www.npr.org/templates/s…..d=89771250
But, Loo Hoo, you are still special to me. :)
Her loss. I didn’t much care for him as a candidate, but I really like him as an organizer and an anti-bullshit force in interviews.
The downward spiral in California started the day voters approved Prop. 13 and that was long before this stupid, wasteful war.
First task, take away their power to produce national debates, and do it in a way that publicly humiliates them.
reply
The candidates and the parties have that power. Explain to them you’re not going to watch these things, and it will probably go a lot farther than trying to reason with the “news” channels.
The shadowy and mysterious Codename V. may very well be the world’s biggest Bill & Ted fan.
When “wimp” is the subtext* MSM/Rethugs use with any Dem candidate (and elitist/effete the overt text), publicly bashing the talking heads – talking over them, calling them out on their class privilege (and their snivelling for their billionaire bosses) is a devastating reframe.
Dropping that on the first “gotcha” makes the MSM bias the story – everything else is gravy.
Jeebus, if a Harvard law grad can’t do that (actually, I know one who can – but her Plowshares felony wouldn’t help her win the WH), there are plenty of great progressive litigators who can.
I’d bet they’ve give (either) Senator lessons gratis.
“Honey” works for me. Or “Dearheart”.
I just try to stay current with the young ‘ins.
Scottie, OTOH, was the epitome of the put-upon engineer/bureaucrat: “Ye canna change the laws of physics.”
Based on the engineers and bureaucrats of my acquaintance, this is about as spot-on as you can get.
Damnit, Jim… I’m a ship’s doctor, not a tailor!
Agree. Imagine if he came out and said (after being assaulted with yet more insulting stupid questions):
“I’ve been called out of touch by my opponents and by you, the members of the media. Here’s what I’m going to do. I’m going to risk my political career on this one bet: that it’s you that are out of touch… by thinking that the american public cares about these idiotic distractions, instead of the real issues that affect them every day.
So unless you have some substantive questions about important issues, I’m not going to play. And If I’m wrong, then I’ll lose my bid for the presidency. But I’ll bet I’m not wrong. Now pony up!”
Think the audience wouldn’t go through the ceiling on hearing that!
“We can no longer trust the national media to run debates that are not parades of petty trivia and right-wing talking points. From now on, Democratic debates will be run by Democrats, as that is clearly the only way for them to server our primary voters.”
I’ve quoted that line a time or two. Funny how few people actually think it’s true.
I think my first suspicion that something wasn’t quite right with the last debate was when ABC advertised it as Survivor: Pennsylvania.
well, perhaps not to a shrink
*g*
The corporate national affairs press needs to be squashed like a pestilent plague-bearing bug.
Their corrupt and ignorant celebrity flunkies need to be publicly disgraced.
When you go to bed every night, you should ask yourself ‘What have I done today to destroy the corporate media national affairs press, and which one of their corrupt incompetent celebrity flunkies have I attempted to reveal as a corrupt incompetent flunky?
Agreed. The original series broke new ground, a fabulous achievement on such a small per episode budget, which went down each year in spite of the series’ popularity. Another trend “the suits” missed for over a decade.
It spawned so many children it’s hard to realize how novel it was. Reasonably good character actors, occasionally striking guest performances, an ensemble that took seriously the assumptions of the series and science fiction generally, and challenging scripts by the likes of Ellison and (I believe) Serling.
i saw froomkin mentioned flash by when the page was loading, here’s a few things about froomkin—
he is a fan of fdl. reads it.
he likes being emailed with facts. uses them.
he answers emails, not all the time, he’s a busy man, but if it’s ’choice’ he lets you know. with a thank you note.
i worship him, from the depths of my soul.
a battering ram in a stainless steel room that you’re trying to get out of, i want him on my team.
oh wait, he is on my team.
You Star Trek fans should appreciate this…
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5lxpNec3UAg
That is defeatist thinking.
And, even if you cannot achieve the goal of stripping them of the debaes before November, you can raise public awareness, and discredit their methods and reduce the effect of their corrupt methods on the public.
You want to really stick it to the media folks? Let me give you two words:
Lincoln-Douglas.
No media, no filters, just two candidates standing before the populace of the state of Illinois, again and again and again, speaking out on the great issues of the day.
(There’s a whole post in there, that one of these days will get spun out in its fullness.)
I hope he knows that I refer to him as The All-Seeing Eye Of Froomkin.
He also answered my questions the first two times I asked him stuff in his online chat.
Why can’t Obama just set the terms of the debate in advance. And make them publicly known in advance. He doesn’t need to behave like a punching bag.
Yes. Again, what’s the downside? Not a major one that I can surmise. Turn the tables. Call bullshit, by going straight to substance, and openly daring them to challenge you, which might then briefly make you the questioner, until they timidly STFU or make visible the asses of themselves that they are. Use your lawyer skills.
I’ve had the pleasure of exchanging more than a few emails with him, including a couple just today.
What endears him to me is that he appreciates knowing that he’s read, and at the same time he is not afraid of being challenged or pushed. These go hand in hand, as any front-page blogger knows.
Right, Eli?
Because Taylor Marsh will have an aneurism.
(snark)
If McCain looses which is a certainty unless the GOP cheats again. I think we should point to George and Charlie as preparing our candidate for the worse the GOP will do.
But the Press by not throwing slime at McCain is not preparing him for the real world outside of the press adoring bubble.
This is a change election voters are paying attention avoiding the issues for as long as you can so your opposition can’t attack you and spreading mean gossip won’t work this time.
You need a plan to accomplish what the people want because in an election like this people already know what they want and they care enough to vote.
Thanks to the Press McCain is seeing this election with rose coloured glasses.
If the goddess has an ounce of kindness, there won’t be any more debates.
I agree with an earlier comment that suggested that the debates be turned back to the likes of the League of Women Voters or Harvard’s Nieman organization.
Take it out of the hands of entertainment giants who want formulaic laughs and boos. Limit them to broadcasting the stuff or use PBS. When viewers watch serious debates in droves, the giants might promise to re-impose reasonable standards, but they would never keep them for long.
Problem is, how many fluff or machine candidates would accept being subject to hard questions that require real answers. Rove’s clients never would. The problem is not just the media; it’s a conspiracy of low expectations.
WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM ME????
I’d kinda like the genders to be separated for part of the day. They’re all twitterpated, and it affects their ability to concentrate!
Yes, right. where is your quote from? I cannot find it in the post or comments.
Is that part of the Move-on strategy that I missed. Where can I find their plan, then?
But in any case, I am still more ambitious, I want publicly produced national debates for the general election as well. I want a public spectacle that humiliates the national press and takes all national debates away from them.
That is defeatist thinking.
You can’t rewrite the laws of physics. In this case, the predominate force is inertia – the news channels don’t want to change, and there’s no reason (force) that will can make them if they care more about appeasing one party or constituency than they do about their ratings.
The Democrats, OTOH, should care if people aren’t going to watch the debates. Fewer people watching means fewer people who know what the candidates are about.
well we haven’t been terribly kind, maybe ‘mercy’ is the operative word
Shameless blog whoring… *g*
Well, not all natinonal debates. The GOP can have their corporate flunkies run their primary debates if they want… those stinking losers.
That’s an interesting question. Which is worse, questions about flag pins and patriotism, or questions about how you’re going to balance the budget and provide universal healthcare without raising taxes on anyone making less than $200-250k a year?
We’ve all learned a lot about tolerance and space.
That says it alot.
Thank you!
full belly of good food and even better wine. twas nice to leave the negative behind for a bit.
how is everyone this evening?
more david rovics:
how far from here to nuremburg
what if you knew?
fallujah
behind that gate
Not a quote, that was what they *should* be saying.
so, i guess everyone here sent a letter to george stephanopolus? (send a f @ cking letter, the link is in the thread, send it, inundate them with the same freakin’ questions over and over again.) do it and mean it.
kirk, can you add to what i have said to the psychology of what works in a letter? know you can…go there, please……..do a post on it, please.
beyond pavlovian response tactics? many more? yes, there are…….please oh please list them for us.
ok, i am done. so important, so know so much about it can’t help myself.
do it and mean it……….mean what you do and do what you mean, you can quote me on that.
: )
Agreed.
But too bad this is the last debate, and by 2012, all will be lost or forgotten.
We better make sure Net Neutrality happens. This is the only hope for government by the people.
“Captain’s Log: Thursday. Keep driving ship. Done.”
Fans of the original Trek can watch episodes for free, via CBS. I suggest you have a good firewall, anti-virus, spam detector, etc.
http://www.cbs.com//classics/s…..&cc=1
that’s our goobernuts answer to everything, build a wall
blech
Lincoln and Douglas managed to agree to a format and a basic topic, and cut the media out of the whole deal.
So . . . McCain, Clinton, and Obama, how confident are you?
Imagine a process where a group of media folks, academics, and others contributed a pool of questions. The candidates exercise some veto authority to dispose of the obviously slanted questions. Then the two candidates appeared, to debate a couple of these questions directly — speaking for themselves, and asking questions of each other.
How lucky do you feel, John/Barack/Hillary?
I thought only Thumper was twitterpated.
Problem is, how many fluff or machine candidates would accept being subject to hard questions that require real answers. Rove’s clients never would. The problem is not just the media; it’s a conspiracy of low expectations.
This is, in fact, part of the reason the LWV aren’t in charge now. Some candidates do badly in debates. Others don’t want to risk front runner status, etc. For a primary race, though, there’s the added motivation that whoever wins will then have to be introduced to the public. It’s easier to do that when more people already know them from seeing debates.
To a certain extent, the problem is how low the “lowest common denominator” has gotten. But if people won’t watch a debate, why have one?
Divide and conquer! About sums it up! ;-)
Hi Eli! Read, then jumped, so I’ve not read most comments (will go back later). I’ve been too busy throwing my shoes at the tee vee, and trying to explain to my UK guest about American politics, sheesh.
“You mean… your media gets to choose your nominee for you? How extraordinary.”
A lot of noise can be made and credibility of press damaged by organized public efforts. That in itself will do a lot of good.
Even if the networks and their flunkies do not respond, that is OK. The public will assume, correctly, that they do not respond because they cannot respond. That in itself will be victory.
(this may be a repeat comment, if so, my apologies)
Saw that earlier. Good job, CTuttle! I cannot believe this. We’re buying walls that expensive in Baghdad, while our bridges tumble.
rather theworld’s goobernuts. nothing like building a prison around the people to foster good will..wanna build something? how about a school or hospital….anyone?
Love the idea of targeted economic pressure – the folks at SmartMeme have a wonderful framework for this and other direct action techniques – and how to conceptualize/use them.
I put up a comment about it Thursday here with detailed linkies, but my search skills are too poor to find it. (if anyone can, I’d be grateful).
Why bother? ABC’s strategic blunder in the debates makes them the poster child for what progressives despise in MSM – and a great target for non-violent direct action. These techniques work against megacorps: they’d rather be seen to fold and let the ire “move on” to competitors.
ABC’ vulnerablity and our strength is targeting:
three major debate sponsors selling consumer goods (regular purchases, not mortgages or the like)
three biggest network sponsors selling consumer goods (regular purchases, not mortgages or the like)
They have ABC’s shorthairs – we just need to yank on the sponsors arms ’til they’re seen to twist the hairs.
If this sounds utopian, Forest Ethics and Rainforest Action (and others) used ‘em to push megacorps around with great success.
We can, too.
And now I gotta make a market run before dark.
Spring is here, and adolescent males have confused running stop signs in my residential “neighbor”hood at speed with rutting displays.
Not sure why the vehicular rutting is so omnidirected….the bucks have no competiton here: I think “does” with eyeshadow over much of their upper face are just pathetic. I’m sure the “does” don’t even see me.
But – as Scotty knows – Newton’s laws won’t give me special protection.
Gotta go and get home before the Friday night organ donor club meeting gets in gear…
Kirk out.
Substantive answers to questions like that turn votes, which is presumably why the networks and candidates avoid them like the plague. But the current methods of debate questioning and stage management are insulting to everyone except those who don’t want us to know their candidates, just vote for ‘em ’cause you’d like to have a vodka and cigarette with ‘em.
My contribution for the Star Trek inclined.
So Dr. McCoy, what do you think of John McCain’s chances politically?
McCoy: He’s dead, Jim.
And what are your opinions on Clinton staying in the race?
Spock: Totally illogical.
Scottie: She’s going to blow.
I think he just has to overcome his innate tendency to be cautious. He’s molded himself so much not to be the scary-black-radical-liberal type, knowing that without making lots of reassuring noises to almost every audience, there’s no way he’ll overcome the huge bar for a black man to be considered electable.
But I think his connection to his supporters and the energy they’re feeding back to him is pulling him both leftward and outward. He has more room to maneuver than he realizes.
The one thing I find really funny is people who think he’ll get worked in a match-up with McCain because he isn’t tough enough. It will be a replay of Kennedy-Nixon in the very first televised debate: the young, charismatic, natural leader looking to the future… and mopping the floor with the war-hawk dinosaur from the past. It won’t even be close when you put them side-by-side.
OT but Rev Wright will be on Bill Moyer’s Journal next Friday night. If you missed tonight’s show with the 26 year-old McClatchy Baghdad Bureau Chief catch it online.
Heh, ask them about ‘Parliamentary Questions’ always a great watch…! ;-)
It’s why we make lists. we can say “Done”.
Oh, God, The Mister just put Bill Moyers on 3 minutes early, and I said, Gawd, that sound like Heuuuuuullll Howser yellin’ at me. It was.
Question. Do Republicans love Star Trek as much as we do? Just wonderin’.
Friday night out at the Great Lakes Brewery with fam and friends — ate OUTSIDE!!!
Thanks, Ya’ll are quick, I just posted it…!
If everyone is hiding behind a wall who is going to do the fighting? Now that the Green Zone isn’t safe are they to build wall after wall to protect it?
You pretty much guessed it!
Also, think of the dissonance if the media are doing nothing but reporting on horse race and trivia, and the debate ends up having all this substantive content. It would completely expose the shallowness of the campaign reporting.
“That is defeatist thinking.
And, even if you cannot achieve the goal of stripping them of the debaes before November, you can raise public awareness, and discredit their methods and reduce the effect of their corrupt methods on the public.”
What if we challenge McCain to League of Women voters rules for the Presidential Debates or no debates at all? Then we get the networks who want the ratings on our side?
We create controversy by spreading the story that after Charlie and George’s abortion of a debate we can’t trust the networks in other words ABC blew it for everybody, remember we want to divide the press if possible on this issue as well. Sure the other TV networks had their problems and Fox News was knocked out early because of worries that this precise thing would happen but it was ABC and not Fox that did it.
Then we close with a Joke Why wouldn’t John McCain want to debate according to the League of Women Voters rules, after all he has the advantage chances are he will be the only person in the room who remembers those debates.
Well, I read earlier about the walls built Tues. night. I just read yours now.
lol, outside? y’all having a heatwave? *g*
We had dinner outside as well and now the guys are doing music/dj stuff.
But good blog whoring. Here’s the permalink, BTW.
Many months ago, Pat Lang wrote that we’d succeeded in transforming Baghdad from a modern city into a Medieval one. This is part of what he was referring to.
peterr at 212 said so eloquently-”
I’ve had the pleasure of exchanging more than a few emails with him, including a couple just today.
What endears him to me is that he appreciates knowing that he’s read, and at the same time he is not afraid of being challenged or pushed. These go hand in hand, as any front-page blogger knows.
Right, Eli?”
thing is, even those on ’the other side’ respond the same way when presented with factual emails.
you’d be surprised. really.
over and over again, mail your factual comments when there is a discrepancy. a lot of these people are on the fence, and can’t keep up with all of it…….mail it, send it……..one letter may make the difference, just like one vote, here, in athens, the commisioner’s race, a guy i wanted to vote against, he won on a coin toss.
a hand recount is being done.
this was a county wide race. a tie.
your letter could be a tipping point. everyone looks for something big to determine things, but often it is a point brought up that makes someone shift their ’out post’ doesn’t have to be anything big, just a point of view that hadn’t been mentioned yet, how many of us have that to offer?
that’s my point. just write it., send it. you can find who to send it to, only takes a little digging.
and don’t forget local and state compadres, they need a little love too.
Hiya! What he did say is, “besides being a huge fan of the West Wing, I’m not all that crazy about democracy.” !!!
Something that’s struck me for some time is how we choose presidents. In Europe, candidates are often seriously and consistently tested for their substantive knowledge and professional debate skills. Neither Bush or Reagan would have survived question time in the House of Commons or even at university. Whether or not you liked her politics, Thatcher was accomplished. She had both a law degree, and a science degree from Oxford. Achievements not for the feint of heart.
Candidates like Hillary and Obama would go for hard debates; they would shine in them. Those like McCain never would. But isn’t that lack of confidence, a reluctance to be tested in public argument, an important fact voters would want to know?
Sounds wonderful…
He must love it here, then.
I saw Blair on CSPAN during question time early in his term. The questions were hostile and ruthless, but he fielded them all smoothly and effortlessly, and even seemed to be enjoying himself.
I can picture that of Bill (and probably Hillary) Clinton, Obama, Gore, and probably Kerry, but Bush or McCain would melt down within five minutes.
I think I’m going to be sick. Tweety’s on Real Time. I only tuned in because Markos is due on it.
Leila Fadel is the McClatchy Bureau Chief that Moyers interviewed.
it was. so now i sit chatting with you all listening to a mini jam session *g*
Actually, I think McCain might go for it — though his advisers would likely scream in protest. “I’m a think-for-myself maverick kind of guy . . . I can handle this.”
It would be out of hubris, not confidence, but that distinction would likely dawn on him only after the fact.
I would love to see the expression as that realization dawned…
My variation on the Scottie dialogue regarding Mrs. Clinton. A mysterious force traps the Enterprise, forcing it into a circular path at a phenomenal warp 10. Asked what’s happening, Scottie replies to to Kirk:
“I don’t know captain, but we’re going nowhere mighty fast.”
make sure you watch bill moyers …
Real Time…Markos says “Media elitism.”
– and of the multi-millionaire marionettes doing the reporting. The best BBC news presenters read their lines like Pulitzer winners compared to Brian Williams and company. But the English don’t pretend they anchor or report anything. They call them “news readers”…. Startling in its simplicity.
You have obliquely reminded me of the episode of Star Trek: TNG which convinced me that the show was never going to catch on:
The warp drive freaks out and they end up at the very edge of the galaxy, or maybe even the universe, with weird-looking things like giant cells floating around them… and then they fix it and come back. NOTHING ACTUALLY HAPPENS at the edge of the galaxy (or universe).
Yeah, the corporate media also needs to be held accountable for the crimes of ommission and commission. They are complicit and corrupt. They have become nothing more than a courtesan class.
Perhaps I should have said “faint-of-heart”, “feint” suggests an editorial on Thatcher’s politics.
Moyers is on my MythTV’s watch list, but I do need to get caught up on the back episodes…
Watching now….she is brilliant!
Wow.
Yes. Watch it.
(and, it’d be great if Moyers could do a debate.)
leila fadel reporting on sadr city. it is really good
Perhaps I’m elitist, but I think being able to do well in public debate, to be able to prepare, to digest reams of data quickly, to have the wit and self-possession and the speaking ability to do it, is essential in a senior politician. Lying politician may be redundant, but we can do without the fuzzy thinkers among them.
Perhaps that’s an overreaction to Bush, who can do none of those things. He can barely put a noun in front of the right verb, which is an indication of how little he thinks and how much he intuits based on limited data. That such limitations can be disastrous is painfully clear. Among other things, it leads Mr. Bush to lie about things great and small, especially about that micro-earpiece, like an early Babel fish, that allows him to be at least semi-literate.
Yes, those are good ideas, and it might be feasible to create some alternative plaftorms before November that way.
However, I still want an organized effort to publicly strip the corporate media of the power to dominate the production of national debates.
A big public noise, with a documented indictment of the corporate media performance will publicly disgrace and humiliate them, or, if not, will help discredi them with the public. They simply cannot respond effectively to a competently done critique of their grotesquely bad record.
And we need an alternative platform for debate. That would produce a better system. It would also be a permanent stain on the coporate media’s record.
They need to be very seriously damaged. Their public reputation must be mangled and maimed.
That consequence is an intended outcome of a well-run debate. There are supposed to be winners and losers. The idea that we can’t tell which is which outside of a media-sponsored, candidate lobbyist-infested “spin room” is the height of absurdity.
i’m humbled, she and i are the same age
I think more competently run debates will reduce the influence of the post debate comment shows full of ignorant loon millionaire.
If there are more substantive questions, and a more dignified and formal debate ground rules, then the audience will not rely so much on the corrupt flunkies.
One of the corrupt functions of the current debate system is to provide promo feed for the assinine commentary afterwards by vicious celebrity know-nothings. The debates are designed to maximize corporate publicity and ad revenue.
In a real debate, with real substantive issues discussed, the ignorant commenters won’t have much to add. I think there will be couple of issues in every debate where voters will look at the media celebs and say ‘that goof doesn’t know anything, I know more than he does.’
I don’t want a president I can hang out with; I want a president who is so incredibly smart that they intimidate the shit out of me. I don’t want to ever entertain the thought that, “Y’know, I think *I* could do a better job than this dickhead.”
My previous comment can be applied to pundits as well. Which makes it largely hypothetical.
Wish I could recall what John Stewart said along those lines during the 2004 election, but it was pretty similar. “I want a President who can say ‘I’ve been preparing all my life for this job, and I’m smarter than you’”, or something like that. Anyhow, yes, I’d sure like to think that the next President could do a better job of running things than I could, or even the dumbest person I know could.
Yeah, that’s the thing with Algore and Bill Clinton in particular – they’re both scary smart, and seem to be very knowledgeable on every conceivable topic.
Whereas Dubya always sounds like he’s faking his way through a report on a book he didn’t read.
Or better yet, maybe they have switched channels.