I don’t have TV, is there an internet feed anywhere?

Lawrence is going on about how Glenn misrepresented him, but doesn’t want to get into that.

Ah ha. Thanks! :-D

Lawrence: “Say what you wish you had said on Morning Joe.”

Glenn: “I’m pretty happy with what I said.”

Is Glenn reading from the transcript, because it’d be pretty easy to dismantle Lawrence’s objections?

Lawrence: You can’t have liberals like Speaker Nancy Pelosi unless you have Blue Dogs to vote for them.

He really thinks Blue Dogs are conservatives, rather than crooks.

Wow. Scoring.

lawrence is presenting this as why glenn doesn’t like l o’d when it is very apparent that l o’d is the one who does not like glenn.

Jon Walker’s famous line: Democrats in the 90s didn’t pass this health care bill because it was a Republican bill and they rejected it. They weren’t willing to stoop that low until now.

This is sorta one of the major problems with measuring our election results isn’t it? The huge block of people who don’t vote at all end up playing marionette for anybody and everybody who wants to take advantage of their silence to fit pretty much whatever narrative they desire.

I’ve often longed for compulsory voting if for no other reason than to mitigate the effects of speaking on behalf of those who’ve opted not to speak.

Hah, that’s great. That deserves tweeting.

thanks jane. just tweeted it

O’Donnell? The socialist!?

Heavens, how did a socialist ever get on the teevee?

(Of course, if O’Donnell is a socialist, that puts me somewhere to the left of Karl Marx, and I’ve never even gotten all the way through Das Kapital.)

O’Donnell:
“See how magnanimous I am, Glenn? May I take a bow?”

And ate up air time with Jimmy Smits/West Wing.

Gah.

lo’d: sorry, glenn, i used up all your time showing fiction as my rebuttal

They irony of that clip from West Wing is that it wasn’t “liberals” who got women the right to vote it actually was “progressives.”

New dinking game? “I used to work on Capitol Hill.” Put him and Tweety on the same panel and you’ll be shit-faced in 10 minutes. Tops.

omg what an incredible fuckwad LO’D is — “Sorry Glenn, Jimmy Smits just used up all your time.” You could see Glenn start to laugh when Larry went to the clip, and he couldn’t control himself afterwards.

Seriously, if anything rates an indefinite suspension from MSNBC, it’s this behavior: “Come on my show and watch a clip of a fictional program I wrote fifteen years ago! Then: buh-bye!”

o’d is way over-matched in a brain contest with Glenn.

maybe hippy Jesus

Did I miss something???

are we suppose thank the current dems in congress for passing a republican health care bill and hate the democratic congress of 1994 for not passing a republican health care bill

Lawrence the DEMS in 1994 were real DEMS

Which (not)Blue (just)Dogs actually voted for Pelosi? Didn’t most of them vote for Steny?

hahahahhha

really.

I admire Glenn for appearing, although it was too bad he never got an opening to explain to LO’D's viewers why he’s forced to live overseas and that he doesn’t HATE LO’D. Ginning up ratings with the HATE word was incredibly irresponsible.

For this, LO’D will probably get a bonus.

I hear LoD say “I’m a Liberal protector…
I think: “I get jokes…”

and that is why i wont watch L O

Clearly, the satellite feed to Rio works better than wherever Janis Karpinski was located, probably an undisclosed location far from Rumsfeld’s goons.

now Lawrence thinks he is a lefty?

There’s not enough liquor on earth to make that a good time.

the DEMS in 1994 were real DEMS

Lieberman was there also, and took to the well of the Senate to castigate the Clenis for its wandering ways. Then they made him Gore’s V.P. candidate.

“when i was working in the senate”. Bottoms up.

Is everyone watching something different than me? Glenn’s not in that youtube clip. It’s Lawrence, Ed Schults, and Keith Olbermann talking about Blanche Lincoln’s loss.

Depends what you do with the empties.

I felt embarrassment build and build as that clip was being shown. It was like a little kid showing off his or her “I participated” ribbons.

and for a scene from “The West Wing” that I wrote…..

It was like Norma Desmond making Joe Gillis watch her old movies.

He was making the case on Morning Ho that he’s a socialist.

But clearly a very well-connected one. You do know he worked on the Hill as Chief of Staff for Daniel Patrick Moynihan, right? Because if you, don’t Larry will remind you.

We are laughing here.

Hahahahahahahahaha

Seriously, that is killing me.

It’s a silly argument. The squabbles turn people off to voting.

One of the very few times I’ve been pissed to see Jimmy Smits on my homescreen.

Rousing defense of the “socialist” safety net programs enacted under Dem leadership. Good one Larry. How long til your equally rousing support of the Catfood Commission recommendations that those programs be… um.. not cut… um… just.. “tempered around the edges”?

Hey Larry: Blame it on Rio!

OK – so LO’s just finished SOCIALIST thing was one of the weirdest things I have seen on TV.

Looks like it. No GG in this one.

Oh, I see, you guys are watching it live. Damned! Fooled by the YouTube clip. :)

“I’m ready for my closeup, Mr Griffin!”

I think there’s something amiss with the video. It looks like election night coverage on MSNBC. Or something. Loudmouth Schultz babbling about Lincoln. Or something.

call Mr.DeMille!

Maybe I should just go to bed. I read that as:

talking about Blanche Lincoln’s lossass

As a moderate former Democrat who knows exaclty what the sellout Democrats did to rip defeat out of the jaws of victory following the 2006 and 2008 electoral successes, I can safely say that O’Donnell is a wannabe tool.

Debating him and his lame effort at election-night spin elevates him to a level he and his spin don’t deserve.

In short, I don’t care what this tool says to spin the 2010 defeat corporatist Democrats.

Why post this video? It makes no sense. GAH. I’m going to bed. Maybe it will make sense in the morning.

Does Lawrence really think we should thank the current dems for passing a republican health care bill in the middle of Great Depression Number 2?

LOL

heh heh. I can sort of see that myself. :)

agree,he tries so hard to be relevant

Ow! That’s gonna leave a mark.

ok,exhausted,g’nite pups

~~~The video clip above is one of the sources of the friction that played out on Morning Joe last week. It is from MSNBCs election night coverage.~~~

Damned, gotta wait til Glenn posts it tomorrow …

I’m guessing Glenn got a KO (sent O’Donnell straight down for the count)?

Yes. But that’s because he’s a socialist. Said so himself in the clip up at the top of the page.

Ah, all clear with the McKinnon interview now.

O’donnel just marginalized Glenzilla, claimed Centrism is Socialist, and has McKinnon to refute Palin.

Centrism; the bastion of Corporatism!

early? did you use up that extra hour already?

O’Donnell: I am a socialist. I protect liberals. I wrote a television show that defended liberals. I worked in Congress. Etc.

I wonder if O’Donnell ever complained about identity politics when Women, Homosexuals, Blacks, Latinos, Asians, etc. engaged in that kind of politics?

Out of protest against what Phil “The Ego” Griffin did to Keith Olbermann, I haven’t watched MSNBC since last Thursday.

Unless this fight with LoDoh is part of an opening round in the war between corporatist Democrats and the Democrats’ soon-to-be-former base, I don’t care.

O’Donnell is not the first person I have heard attampt to boost their liberal cred by claiming to be a “socialist.” It is utter bullshit. You live in the U.S. and shill for neoliberals Lawrence, you are definitely NOT a socialist.

O’donnel just marginalized Glenzilla, claimed Centrism is Socialist

True. Why would a Socialist spends so much time mourning the defeat of Blanche “Show me the money” Lincoln?

OK, I watched the clip. I really don’t agree with the “primaries wound the candidate” framing. I think the case is that “weak candidates attract primary challenges”, and “weak candidates become weaker by being primaried”. A strong candidate can pretty much shrug off a primary challenge.

As to WV, you should run the most progressive candidate that is electable. Maybe we can’t do better in WV, maybe we can. Ask me again in five years.

thank you!

he even said Obama is a socialist? does that make LoDo a tea party follower?

I must have a bad dictionary?

Everything that isn’t bolted down is being stolen and/or stripped by the neo-con corporate kleptocrats.

It’s the only skill these corporate leeches have anymore. They do nothing that is productive for society.

The strip productive assets of every cent value. Sell the pieces. Pocket the money.

The willingness of the old guard Democrats to compromise everything away to the Republicans is exactly why I left the party, and the condescending and patronizing attitude from folks like O’Donnell doesn’t help matters. I’d rather get my face bloodied than cower to the Right-wing. I don’t think the old guard understands that we’re not looking to play nice anymore – we’re looking for a street fight.

Yes Grayson lost but he still has his soul.

OK, I watched the clip. I really don’t agree with the “primaries wound the candidate” framing.

I contributed to Halter. I’ll be contributing to any and all candidates who will stand up against sellouts and enablers infesting the Democratic Party for the rest of my life.

The point LOD seems to be trying to make is a false equivalency between the “left” (aka actual Democrats) and the Tea Party. Halter would have had a tough fight, but was potentially electable. Mike Castle was a solid candidate, replaced by Christine O’Donnell, who is … I think the technical term is “flake”. It is a big difference, and Shultz was trying to make that point.

Another reason why so many people are pulling the plug on the teevee, canceling their cable (many can no longer afford it) and getting rid of the teevee except to play DVDs or go on the internet. And I think that the carpet bombing of political ads might just accelerate that trend. Not just among progressives but also independents and folks who are tired of political points of view being forced on them by the networks.

Like Politico, which doesn’t matter a whit out here in the boonies, cable (and not just for talk) is dying as a medium. It’s just a little slow to go compared to newspapers. Facebook friends posting YouTube has become the medium of political discussion for a lot of folks. For other it is and always has been their talks with their neighbors or co-workers.

I expect very soon there will be consumer pressure for a la carte cable. $10 a month for ESPN alone. Or $24 a month for a bunch of DIY or home shows.

The political medium to track is political talk radio. There are stations that are not political talk stations (mostly in rural areas) that carry Rush Limbaugh as a segment between the farm market report and some music and some religious programming. And the talk is timed either for lunchtime or drive time depending on the market. That has more political consequence that Lawrence O’Donnell.

And on topic, it is amazing how clear O’Donnell and Schultz are now that Obama never supported the public option. Where were they when the fight was going on? Schultz was plumping for the public option almost every night. Didn’t seem to know then that it was a lost cause. Oh, the wisdom of hindsight.

I think the right way to stand up to sellout Dems in 2012 is to support candidates who will run against them as independents or third-party candidates.

Supporting primary challengers seeking Democratic Party nominations was the right thing to do in 2010, but now it’s time for everyone who supported Dems in 2006 and 2008 only to be badly disappointed by them to support candidates who run as independents or as third-party nominees against the sellouts and enablers infesting the Democratic Party.

“Come on my show and watch a clip of a fictional program I wrote fifteen years ago! Then: buh-bye!”

O’Donnell doesn’t realise that the show he wrote was fiction. People on The West Wing TV show don’t behave like that in real life. WW is way too idealised and slick for my tastes. I prefer British political dramas. Much more realistic, intelligent, and better written.

“Globalisation, works for people, works for corporations. It’s amazing!”

That’s an actual line from The West Wing.

A socialist would never write/say that. A DLC, corporate Dem like O’Donnell would, though.

The only way we are ever going to get a Progressive America is if we pillory, chastise and beat into submission anyone like LO’D who dares to hold even slightly different opinions than the only true rational Progressive positions.

It is essential for all of us to spend as much time as possible making it clear that it is the LO’D's that are the true enemy, and we must make sure that all American’s realize that Progressives will simply not tolerate any deviance from orthodoxy.

Glenn should be ashamed of himself for even appearing on LO’D's show because it just rationalizes allowing Larry’s opinions to be considered anything but 100% supportive of Glenn Beck, Rush and Sarah Barracuda.

We’re all doomed unless we are as intolerant of apostasy as the wingnuts on the right.

Has anyone at the lake started a pool on how long it takes L O’D's show to get the ax? I don’t watch cable news much at all but when I do see him on I just keep going. I really have never heard him make a comment I found insightful. I don’t give him long.

We must make sure that all American’s realize that Progressives will simply not tolerate any deviance from orthodoxy.

We’re all doomed unless we are as intolerant of apostasy as the wingnuts on the right.

Aren’t you repeating the same fallacy that LO’D has been spouting?

I put that in the form of a question to be polite, as you appear to be deliberately not getting the point that Democrats have fucked over the voters who supported them in 2006 and 2008 and don’t deserve our support or our votes. Americans won’t be buying their empty promises anymore.

O’Donnell doesn’t realise that the show he wrote was fiction.

I don’t know about that. It seemed as if the whole idea behind L O’D'oh inviting GG onto his show was to show that West Wing clip, knowing full well that the West Wing was fiction, and counting on his viewers to fail to make that realization. That is, it seemed as though O’D'oh was saying “hey everyone, look at this dramatic and provocative clip that shows you should be proud to be labeled ‘liberal’ — GG should be ashamed to disavow it!”

I suspect O’D'oh thought the ‘liberal’ ‘progressive’ labeling thing was his most cogent argument and he wanted to use it to make a rhetorical show against GG. That would explain why he denied GG the opportunity to more directly counter O’D'oh’s claim about labeling and why he downplayed the allegation that GG misrepresented his election night comments. Regardless of O’D'oh’s motives, what he did was sleazy and odious in the extreme.

you appear to be deliberately not getting the point that Democrats have fucked over the voters who supported them in 2006 and 2008 and don’t deserve our support or our votes.

Um, no.

I agree with Glenn’s viewpoint, not Larry’s.

It’s healthy to have a debate, and I’m glad Larry had the guts to have him on his show and I’m glad Glenn engaged him. I think that it gave airing to both sides, no matter how much Larry may have “wasted” time on the West Wing clip–something that really backed Glenn’s viewpoint more than Larry’s!

What I detest is the tendency in many of the posts above not to really discuss the issue–as I think both Jane and Glenn do a marvelous job of–and spend time saying “apostate LO’D is evil and should be denounced.”

I agree with Larry’s later piece this evening, “we’re all socialists” because quite frankly until we make being a progressive/socialist/liberal something that *everyone* can feel good about, we’re going to get no where.

The more time we spend attacking people like Larry who are 3 degrees too far to the right for our taste, instead of engaging them and using their own appeal to folks even further to the right to reel them and their followers, the harder it’s going to be to create a “center/left” America.

Stifling debate is the evil. Not voting democrat this cycle is a position I FULLY support. Luckily I live in California and voted for Jerry and Barbara and Gavin and feel lucky and glad I helped, and I hope that having done so, I can be accepted even though some think I *should* have protested by not voting. To say I was evil by doing so does not help. I’m happy to argue the specific pro’s and con’s of having voted for Jerry, but I think denouncing me and saying I’m invalid as a result is detrimental to all of us.

If you don’t agree with Larry–and a lot of the time I don’t–great! Say so! Exercise your 1st Amendment rights! Calling him names serves no purpose.

Thanks for posting this Jane, because I think this is in the same spirit: I just wish we could have a more positive and open discussion that will really advance wider support of progressivism through honest and open debate.

On the same point, I think the Jimmy Smits character (Matt Santos) hay have been a proto-Obama but Alan Alda’s character (Senator Arnold Vinick, R-CA) was too progressive for a Republican. I guess he was to the left of McCain 2000. “The West Wing” ended in 2006.

I’d like to see Rachel or KO invite Glenn on to say what he needed to say.

Oh, Jane, you’ve stolen my heart!!!

“primaries wound the candidate” is just Neo-Liberal speak for “let us, the great, all-wise pooh-bahs choose the candidates. Behind closed doors. We’re so smart. We’re so attuned to the political winds. We can apply all our wisdom [$$$$$] and choose the candidate who’s going to win.

“So STFU with this “primary” crap and vote for whomever WE choose!!”

I hope there’s someone around the Lake who can make one of those neat video things that starts with a picture of Lieberman and step by step morphs it into L’ODuh.

Can’t WAIT to see Glenn’s write up of this tomorrow. The pen — his pen, at least — is mightier than the extended, rude tv clip.

[Poor L O'Duh probably doesn't realize he's now added to the already substantial video evidence re what a turd he is.]

Amen.

I’m also on Glenn’s side in this debate, but I like O’Donnell a great deal, as well. I’m also happy that O’D did what he did later in the show on the topic of socialism. That was pretty damned good–and amazing–teevee in my mind.

Someone needs to air stuff like this so that the American people can come out of hiding whenever the term “liberal” or “socialist” is uttered.

Congrats to O’Donnell for a great Tuesday night show. Hope lots of folks were watching.

If O’Donnell represents socialism I haven’t got a fucking clue what I thought I believed in all these years, but it sure as hell isn’t anything Larry’d stand up to fight for.

Someone should have asked him how he came to this conclusion and exactly what his beliefs are because I think Gene Debs and the socialists who died for their beliefs fighting capital are probably turning cartwheels.

I doubt O’Donnell could lucidly explain the difference between socialism, communism, anarcho-syndicalism, and any other -isms aside from corporatism. That one I’m sure he knows.

No Glenn in the embedded video – maybe MSNBC switched content at that link.
Anyways, O’Donnell really believes in Clinton-style “Progressivism” where as long as you give lip service to progressive social values, you can be ‘pragmatic’ on economic issues – meaning – you can sell your soul to Wall Street and Pharma, because they have smart people who make bad arguments sound good.
And you can roll over on any specific progressive social issue where it is “practical”.
This brand of pragmatism pervades the Democratic party.
O”Donnell’s patronizing tone has pissed me off since Left, Right and Center.
Tony Blankley was less annoying and made more sense on that show.

I sure wasn’t watching the tool’s show. The problem is not that he’s a few too many steps to the right in some imagined left/right spectrum. The problem is that he’s with the corporatist sellouts infesting the Democratic Party.

I’m not impressed by whatever he did later in his stupid little show.

I’m not interested in debating him.

I’m not interested in being called a socialist.

Corporatist sellout Democrats and their enablers among the base who’re worried about Republican electoral victories are going to say all kinds of mean things about me as we get closer to the 2012 election season. Their only goal will be to silence the majority of the former base of the Democratic Party who aren’t interested in empty promises and will not support their sellout candidates. They can go to hell.

It’s not about Buffy’s orthodoxy. It’s not about Buffy’s notion of apostasy.

It’s about holding the assholes we helped get elected in 2006 adn 2008 accountable for fucking us all over.

O’Donnell and his pontifications and smug aura of accomplishment have been aggravating me since he was a guest on Keith Olbermanns’ show. His function seems to be to pretend to be the “adult” in the room.

I find him limiting, boring, pretentious and his defense of the blue dogs is indefensible. That must be his real mission, but, in order to be successful that act should be clandestine – and it’s not – his ego takes over.

Like the majority of pols (& in LaDo’s case, ex-pol), ego trumps ideology.
Lore wince can’t think or imagine beyond his own glorious past.
He reminds me of Stuart ‘look what I can do’ from Mad TV, more than Norma.

Bad call, Buffy. Adopting the methods that are kicking our asses would just make us the butt of more ass-kickings. What you suggest leads to a race to the bottom. Not that Blue Dogs aren’t way out in front on this one. How’s that working out for Dems?

There’s a good reason we don’t use the same tactics and strategies as the Right. We value compassion, respect, understanding, reason, etc. You know, the “better angels of our nature.”

The Right valorizes dominance at any cost. So do too many Dems (Lieberman, Clinton, Gore, Obama, and the rest of Robert Rubin’s damn Hamilton Project, I’m looking at you!) Doing what our opponents do to us, not because we think it right but because we envy their successes, dooms us all to a Rovian world.

Holding our erstwhile public servants accountable to our interests? What is this strange thing of which you speak?

The President is the Keeper of the Throne of Heaven Bully Pulpit, god’s own landlord here on earth. How dare you question the wisdom of our Betters! /s

Blue Dogs (aka Bush Dogs) ARE conservatives — extreme conservatives, just like the Republicans.

From my perspective and that being a Native America/Chicano, one needs to look back at the past two years and see that little, if any legislation, was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama and which focused on “empowering the Individual”.

And now, looking forward to this Lame Duct Tape of Congress and starting next week, this “empowering the Individual” will be readily absent. And starting in January of next year and till the re-election season kicks off in the Summer of 2012, there will be little, any legislation focused on “empowering the Indiidual”.

Consequently, this verbal fracas between “O’D” and “Glen” proves my point, both start their “arguementation” on bamaboozlement and contiues as political entertainment and nothing else. Given the valuable “real estate” on the airwaves, new “ideas” are discouraged and at times prohibited, given that “racial and ethnics” are not “invited” to participate. Otherwise, the white guys as political candidates would ‘trashed’ given that said candidates do not have the inclination or need “to reach out” to Republican women. To wit, ya’ can find a white guy, anywhere and anymore, advocating for bringing back the national dialogue for the Equal Rights Amendment.

So, spare my the mere mortal crappola and which I find to be quite offensive for more of this criminal stupidity.

And as an aside, it seems that when I post of late, I tend to kill the applicable thread, and perhaps this one too.

Jaango

O’Donnell was on the Hill as Chief of Staff for Daniel Patrick Moynihan, an average historian who pretended to be a great economist and expert on Social Security as he tried to sell out Social Security for right wing praise.

Hard to think of a better background for our “socialist” Larry. \s

It is still a quite new show – and has a chance because Larry does get opposing views on – and is occasionally saying the obvious progressive truth when he is not trying to see the non-obvious as both wisdom and obvious and beyond question – for example of the latter we have his “progressives need blue dogs” and the logical conclusion “nothing too progressive can ever pass”. I give him a few more months before I draw a final conclusion – but at the moment he is just another suck-up to Joe Scarborough.

But Glen was great! :-)

I agree with the posters who called into question Glenn’s even appearing on cable TV or on shows like O’D’s as lending to them a legitimacy they don’t deserve. It seems from Jaango’s post here that many viewers will gain a distorted picture of Glenn and what he advocates. I couldn’t bring myself to watch this drivel but several posters above described how Glenn was never given a fair chance to set forth his ideas, how a big chunk of the time was given over to airing a scene from WW (a show I always thought was way overrated by many progressives, populated as it was by Clintonistas and representing the first wave of the inexorable push ever rightwards that got underway in a big way with Clinton. The line applauding globalization says it all.).

Jaango,
I wish you would read some articles by Glenn G; I predict that you would then see that his arguments are in no way grounded in bamboozlement (great word, BTW). And what you say in these words:

“Given the valuable “real estate” on the airwaves, new “ideas” are discouraged and at times prohibited, given that “racial and ethnics” are not “invited” to participate.”

is exactly right. Unfortunately, commentators as astute as Glenn who happen to be non-white, “racial or ethnics” are seldom – ever? – allowed on the TV. And no one is more aware of these inequities than Glenn.

cybieharry,

My complaint or whine, if you will, is not directed at Glen per se, but Democratic candidates for public office in Congress. Virtually none, “reach out” to Republican women.

To wit, I don’t want to climb on my soap box for Janet Napolitano, the former Governor of Arizona, and now Secretary of Homeland Security. Her stellar career is comprised on her “reach out” to Republican women. As such, when she was Governor, no Republican woman would run against Napolitano, because the potential candidate knew that Napolitano had a “lock” on Republican women.

And when the leadership of the Republicans, realize that Democratic candidates are “wooing” the Replican women votes, this behavior undercuts the Republican candidates since virtually all of them are men. Take, for example, should a Democratic candidate “connect” with Republican women, Michelle Bachmann from the Midwest, would quickly find herself on the sidelines complaining to the Republican men that they shoved the political shiv in her back.

Jaango