I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
If you haven't written Meet the Press about this, but would like to the address is:
mtp@nbc.com
or you can contact General Electric, owner of NBC
https://www.ge.com/ge/feedback.htm
Krugman is not a journalist.
Krugman is an economist, and academic, and a very smart and thoughtful guy. Nothing like your typical journalist.
He's also a lonely voice crying in the wilderness. And you know what they did to John the Baptist, right?
All my love,
Salome
I've yet to see a good reason why Dean is getting all this support from bloggers besides the fact that he talks tough about Bush and Clark is a military man (to appeal to the rightwingnuts). Is that it? That they are the only ones that we think can beat Bush?
He just doesn't look too charimatic to me and ya gotta have that these days. Also where is he/are they on the issues? You know that if he has anything at all questionable in his background the Right, like the snakes in the grass that they are, are just waiting for his nomination to bring it to public light and torpedo him.
Maybe we should give the other candidates a fair shake.
Man, Unka Karl is desperate... I'd love to see their internal polling pitting Dean against The Drunken Fraud.
"He just doesn't look too charimatic to me and ya gotta have that these days. Also where is he/are they on the issues? You know that if he has anything at all questionable in his background the Right, like the snakes in the grass that they are, are just waiting for his nomination to bring it to public light and torpedo him."
That could apply to the present occupant of the Oval Office...or the finalist on "American Idol," for that matter.
The main reason I support Dean (I won't speak for anybody else) is best summed up in the recent words of Jerry Greenfield (of Ben & Jerry's fame): "In terms of incremental change, he’s the best of the lot who’s running."
Put simply, incremental change is the only kind that actually happens on any kind of regular basis. So while I think, in a utopian society, Kucinich's ideas would be best, I think Dean is the best choice for the here and now.
I also like that he's willing to put his issue stances out there and be judged on them. Go to his website if you think he doesn't have his positions published.
As to the charisma.. well, I find him charismatic. Moreso than a Lieberman or Edwards. Nobody in the field can hold a candle to Sharpton, though, in terms of raw speaking ability.
What would happen if all the dem candidates boycotted MTP?
On another thread, I proposed today be another "Ignore the Trolls Day." However, I really have to acknowledge the absolutely incompetent attempt at manipulation in the post above. It reads like a bad example from a "Propaganda for Dummies" book. I especially like the pathetic attempt to sound worried and concerned: "Maybe we should give the other candidates a fair shake."
This single, completely inept post should end any questions as to whether or not the RNC is deliberately unleashing their troops on these boards.
U GUYS 3 TIMES POSTIN TEH KRUGMAN ARTICLE IS NOT ENOUGH WE NEED IT 4 TIMES OR MORE SO TEH SCLM AND TEH MORONIC BROWNSHIRT REPUGS CAN GO IN TEH DUCK PIT!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Glad to see this Russert story isn't going away. Still needs bigger media attention, though. He purposefully acted as an operative of the GOP, under the guise of "journalism". I believe that's called "unethical". Not that journalism is into ethics, these days.
Dean did fine, for this stage. He got a "real" questioning, and gave back decently. They'll be studying the tapes, and doing more prep.
(Oh -- and in a world in which Drinky McStupid can be declared "charismatic", I'm not thinking the charisma bar is set too high, this election.)
Point proven.
America needs a man of vision, not just someone who can attack back. Negativity alone won't win an election.
If the person has the intelligence and wit this could be a golden campaign since when you're at or near the bottom all you can do is go up. And we are. People are at each others throats politically, the economy sucks, democracy is being stolen from us and a general feeling of malaise and paranoia permeates the country. Really, it should be EASY to get the people motivated and a good candidate should be a shoe in. But he/she needs to be a good, well thought out candidate
"This single, completely inept post should end any questions as to whether or not the RNC is deliberately unleashing their troops on these boards."
He Dave, get a grip. I hate BushCo. as much as you. Just askin' questions.
How about me, I'm a uniter not a divider; it's your money, clean skies, help small business, ...
Dean in his own words straight from the MTP transcripts.
Russert: It will happen? We will have a secondary military power?
Dean: If we continue following George Bush’s military policy and defense policy, will become a secondary military power.
...
Russert: But we will always have the strongest military under President Dean.
Dean: Oh, under President Dean, we certainly will always have the strongest military...
...
Russert: Let’s talk about the military budget. How many men and women would you have on active duty?
Dean: I can’t answer that question. And I don’t know what the answer is...
...
Russert: But how many troops—how many men and women do we now have on active duty?
Dean: I can’t tell you the answer to that either. It’s...
Russert: But as commander in chief, you should now that.
"What would happen if all the dem candidates boycotted MTP?"
Not just MTP, they should just skip American mainstream media. They should all go to the BBC, CBC, Noticias, etc.
They should reach out to the specialty press and trade press. Give interviews to everyone from Field and Stream to Information Week.
And the should give interviews to Buzzflash, Eschaton, etc.
That would send a powerful message to the celebrity press corps that if they are not interested in the story there are organizations who do want the story.
What would happen if all the dem candidates boycotted MTP?
It would confirm what most believe about them. Cannon fodder for Hillary 2008.
Man, Dean blew and the Deanie Babies can't get over it. So once again, Dean in his own words:
-------------------------------------
Some excerpts from MTP
--
Treasury Department Data Fuss
I don't see the fuss over Russert using Treasury Department numbers. He didn't hide the fact from Dean.
Dean: Well, first of all, were those figures from the Treasury Department, did you say, or CBO?
Russert: Treasury Department.
Dean: I don’t believe them.
Fair enough, he doesn't have to believe them. However, Russert wasn't acting as a toadie for the BFEE. This wasn't his data, he made that clear. If you read the transcript, he constantly preambles each statistic with "They said" not "I believe" or "It's a fact that".
---
Why Does Dean Hate Medicare & Social Security?
Russert: You would be willing to limit the growth...
Dean: Absolutely.
Russert: ...in Defense, in Medicare and Social Security?
Dean: You have to do that...
--
General Dean?
Dean claims that the military will be stronger under him than President Bush. Then we learn he doesn't know much about the military.
Russert: It will happen? We will have a secondary military power?
Dean: If we continue following George Bush’s military policy and defense policy, will become a secondary military power.
...
Russert: But we will always have the strongest military under President Dean.
Dean: Oh, under President Dean, we certainly will always have the strongest military...
...
Russert: Let’s talk about the military budget. How many men and women would you have on active duty?
Dean: I can’t answer that question. And I don’t know what the answer is...
...
Russert: But how many troops—how many men and women do we now have on active duty?
Dean: I can’t tell you the answer to that either. It’s...
Russert: But as commander in chief, you should now that.
---
Clinton Democrat?
Russert: Well, you apologized to Bob Graham.
Dean: No, I didn’t.
Russert: You called the AP and recanted the statement.
Dean: I called the AP and said, “I’m sorry I said that.”
Russert: Well, that’s an apology.
Dean: No, it’s not.
Russert: “I’m sorry I said it” is not an apology?
Because it's about sex, lying is ok.
Howard Dean falsely accuses a father of incestious rape.
Russert: In terms of who you are, I want to refer you to your comments at the National Abortion Rights Action League in January. And I’ll read it to you and our viewers. “One time a young lady came to office who was 12 years old, and she thought she might be pregnant. And we did the test and we did the exam and she was pregnant. ...And after I had talked to her for awhile, I came to the conclusion that the likely father of her child was her own father. You explain that to the American people who think that parental notification is a good idea. I will veto parental notification.” And then this in USA Today. “Dean told a powerful story but left out a key fact. ...What Dean didn’t say was that he knew the father was not responsible, someone else was convicted.” That’s a pretty big omission.
Dean: What do you mean?
Russert: To say to people at NARAL, “Leave us a suggestion”...
Dean: I don’t think it’s—omission. A pretty big omission, you mean? Yeah.
Russert: Yeah. That’s a pretty—to say that...
Dean: I don’t think it is at all.
Russert: To suggest her father may have been...
Dean: I thought it was. At the time, I thought it was.
Russert: But when you told that story, you knew otherwise.
Dean: That’s right.
--
I'm completely against Gun Control except when I'm for it.
Russert: Talking about politics and saying what you believe in, you said in July of last year that Al Gore should have taken the gun issue off the table. It cost him three states and he lost the presidency. Why would you be afraid to take—stand up for any issue? Why take issues off the table if you really want to...
Dean: Because I don’t think it should be on the table.
Russert: Why not?
Dean: We have no gun control in Vermont.
Russert: Well, you’re for the Brady Bill...
Dean: Yep.
Russert: ...which means there’s a waiting period before you buy a gun. You’re against...
Dean: Well, I’m for—it’s backgrounds.
Russert: Well, OK.
Dean: The Brady Bill’s InstaCheck. It’s not a waiting period.
Russert: But you...
Dean: Well, there’s a small waiting period, that’s true.
Every post proves my point.
Best to Unka Karl!
Anonymous, I just love the incredibly tortured hand-wringing you are doing here. Go ahead and throw a few more tantrums for our amusement, please.
dave, if someone starts pointing out the problems with running Al Sharpton as the Democratic candidate, are you going to assume that she's a Republican operative too?
Jesus Christ, let's try to keep the discourse useful, mmkay?
"What would happen if all the dem candidates boycotted MTP?"
Not just MTP, they should just skip American mainstream media. They should all go to the BBC, CBC, Noticias, etc.
They should reach out to the specialty press and trade press. Give interviews to everyone from Field and Stream to Information Week."
Field and Stream may be your best bet if that's the strategy. I took a trip to Red country, Deep Red country, Tulsa to be exact, and was surprised to find in the Marriott that there was no CNN. Headline News, yes, and of course FOXNEWS. But CNN's ubiquity evidently hits some kyptonite in Smallville. But do we really want these candidates to get LESS coverage?!?
The issue is that if presented in a fair, simple straightforward manner I think a lot of the Red population would agree w/ the Blue proposals. Look at the tax issue. Find out how much local taxes increase in Topeka, and does it beat the 'tax cut'? Whip out a typical 1040EZ for someone making 20K. This isn't rocket science.
Seriously, if Democrats are not ready to understand what our candidates' drawbacks are, we're going to get slaughtered.
This doesn't mean that you harp on the problems; it means that you are well-informed about them and ready with a rebuttal and an explanation. Politics 101, kids.
Lawyering, too. If you don't tell your lawyer everything that's relevant, it will come out in court, to your disadvantage, and then your lawyer will bitch at you for not telling him so he could be ready to defend you.
We have to act as defense for the Democratic candidates. If we respond to every suggestion of their imperfections with "Right Wing Conspiracy!" we're going to lose. We have to be ready with the defense.
I agreed with your sentiment earlier, PG, but the excessive, long, out-of-context posts by anonymous now appear simply to be the sort of hatchet job dave assumed it was at first...
"...if someone starts pointing out the problems with running Al Sharpton as the Democratic candidate, are you going to assume that she's a Republican operative too?"
If they use the same obvious propaganda tactics, and they're plastered virtually word-for-word over every other board in the blogosphere - yes.
geez, the monkeys really are afraid of dean.
don't worry monkeys, you've got the entire mainstream media working for you. or are you afraid even that isn't enough?
"What would happen if all the dem candidates boycotted MTP?"
Not just MTP, they should just skip American mainstream media. They should all go to the BBC, CBC, Noticias, etc.
They should reach out to the specialty press and trade press. Give interviews to everyone from Field and Stream to Information Week."
Field and Stream may be your best bet if that's the strategy. I took a trip to Red country, Deep Red country, Tulsa to be exact, and was surprised to find in the Marriott that there was no CNN. Headline News, yes, and of course FOXNEWS. But CNN's ubiquity evidently hits some kyptonite in Smallville. But do we really want these candidates to get LESS coverage?!?
The issue is that if presented in a fair, simple straightforward manner I think a lot of the Red population would agree w/ the Blue proposals. Look at the tax issue. Find out how much local taxes increase in Topeka, and does it beat the 'tax cut'? Whip out a typical 1040EZ for someone making 20K. This isn't rocket science.
To paraphrase Dumbya:
We will not engage in nation building, we will increase funding for Americorps, No Child Left Behind, tax cuts for every taxpaying American, Iraq is an imminent threat, we are committed to homeland security.
All lies.
Nothing like a strong grassroots movement to get the trolls a-writhing. Have a nice trip, see you next fall.
As I read the comments I can't help but think of the people I encounter at work, in my family...etc, and simply they do not care. They have a job and they're doin' ...ok.
People don't want to believe that anyone could possibly use 9-11 for the political purposes that have been used by this administration.
Most People don't even know what Meet The Press is, let alone Russert.It is highly unlikely that Dean, or any of the Democratic candidates can break throught the veil of 9-11 that AWOL has wrapped himself in... or is it the American people...media?
My hopes are for 2008 when Hillary runs and has to undo all the damage that has been done by AWOL and company.
I'm sorry to be such a pessimest but unless one of the Dem candidates can break through and come out slugging I highly doubt that we'll have a new president until 2008.
Dean causes the Rove operatives to shit their pants.
He terrifies them.
Which is why they're so busy spamming, the pathetic wretches.
They'd better pray that Dean or someone like him does win, or they're going to find themselves in the duck pit with their masters.
this is mostly unrelated, i'd just like to point out that the headline "the soft bigotry of low expectations" is from Get Your War On, the funniest comic since The Boondocks. If you haven't seen it yet, you're missing something.
http://www.mnftiu.cc
I think the answer is that we need to find someone the American public can really relate to, and nominate that person. E.G. someone stupider than dirt, without a curious bone in their body, who couldn't string two sentences together coherently if the country depended on it.
The problem with the Democrats seems to be that we keep trying to nominate qualified people. Apparently, that's not what most of middle America is into these days.
>i'd just like to point out that the headline "the soft bigotry of low expectations" is from Get Your War On,
No, it's from AWOL's own mouth: http://www.issues2000.org/
George...h_Education.htm
Oh yea, Gary, we are SOOOO afraid of Dean and the Deanie Babies. We are practically shaking in our boots. Yea, right. As last weekends MTP butt whipping Dean took (from himself) shows, he is a light weight that can't keep his answers straight. Read the transcripts. The man stumbled all over himself trying to cover his lies and mistatements.
We will be serving Crow in the Duck Pit™ and have a table reserved just for you. You can even reap a whirlwind after dinner.
Go Deanie Babies! Make sure that Dean is nominated! GO! GO! Go!
Deanies, take a pill. No Repug here but a PROUD DEMOCRAT who doesn't get the Dean thing at all. Pro gun? What's up with that. Anti war, groovy, but you can be anti-war and still pro-military. Gimme Graham's take over Dean's any day of the week. Protect our country and get out of the Middle East by getting us off the Arab oil. Graham's the only one with the credentials calling Smirk a liar. You Deanies are starting to sound like Naderites and alienating Dems like me. No circular firing squads. Aim it all at the Junta.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
BTW, I love it when the trolls pretend to be several different people.
I've heard Bush constantly repeat "the soft bigotry of low expectations" line.
Does anybody know what the hell it means?
dave, i love it more when you guys eat your own. I guess that is what happens when you don't tow the Deanie Baby line.
he is a light weight that can't keep his answers straight. Read the transcripts. The man stumbled all over himself trying to cover his lies and mistatements.
Ack! Can't breathe! Irony... too... thick!
I've heard Bush constantly repeat "the soft bigotry of low expectations" line.
Does anybody know what the hell it means?
I hate Bush, but I think it's a pretty good rhetorical line. I understand it like this: there's a "hard" bigotry of stone-cold hate (racist, it's implied), but there's also a "soft" bigotry that doesn't hate but still denigrates by not presuming to ask much of the underachieving (blacks, it's implied).
Sounds nice, good cadence, even has a meaning, though I can't say it's particularly connected to actual administration policies.
As a frequent reader and semi-frequent commenter I am really getting sick of people like anon. Allthough I'm loathe to ban people with opposing views I would like to request his IP banned. He adds nothing to the conversation. He's BORING.
Whatever.
Don't know if you're a troll. You don't sound like one but it's hard to say with some of the fedayeen out there. Anti-war and pro mill. Of course you can. Just like pro choice people who decide against abortion for themselves. Not to mention the fact that he is not a pacifist he was against this war for obvious reasons like most of the people here.
Whatever
If you are not a troll I apolagize for the slam.
I happen to be very happy with the field, especiall the top tier. If Graham were to get the nom I would back him just as strongly as I back Dean Would you?
Please remember not to eat or own. If for no other reason than to not make moronic anon people unhappy.
The problem with the Democrats seems to be that we keep trying to nominate qualified people. Apparently, that's not what most of middle America is into these days.
Hunter
Let's face it: we need someone who, as part of a campaign ad, is willing to do donunts in a Nascar stock car atop an aircraft carrier, with rubber burning and tires squealing, waving a flag and shouting out of the window "LET'S ROLLLLL, AMERCICA!" while the television viewing audience ogles on, slack-jawed and dreamy-eyed, like the cave man staring at the flame in that movie Quest for Fire.
Brett, I think your interpretation is right. I also think we should start flooding MTP, et.al. with complaints about how unpatriotic it is to denigrate our president that way. Every time they hold a Dem to a higher standard, they insult our commander-in-chief. How is the poor man supposed do his best work when the press keeps reminding him they think he's second-rate?
...and shouting out of the window "LET'S ROLLLLL, AMERCICA!"
Shouting "Let's roll, AmerICa" would be even better.
One of the things to like about Dean - and this is something not really on anyone's radar as far as I know - is that he is strongly opposed to the Christian fundamentalist mentality of the current administration. That I respond positively to this is one thing - but who knows how it will play with a public in which over 60% claim to believe in the devil? When you have a president who is willing to pander to the mystiest superstitions of middle America and shamlessly peddle that old time religion snake oil as the cureall for what ails this country, you have something that is really difficult to attack head on. It was, after all, Gallileo who recanted - even thoug he was right. Superstitious bigotry trumps truth in the short run all the time.
[I should add that the "low expectations" part is meant to dovetail neatly with the views of those who say that affirmative action causes the people it benefits to doubt their own abilities.]
I have the perfect Democratic candidate: Chauncey Gardner. Not only is he every bit as simple and plainspeaking as GW, he's probably the only person whose past won't be dug through and wildly spun by the SCLM.
Whatever-
I support Dean, but will support whomever the eventual nominee is. I support Dean because he was standing up to Bush before it was "hip", unlike the spineless Kerry, Gephart, Edwards.
I respect Graham and think he would be a good candidate too. I think Kucinich is too looney to run an effective campaign (you can't break into song in the middle of speaches!)
I could possibly support Clark, but don't know enough yet.
On the Gun issue, I totally agree with Dean, I live in California, we need gun laws. He lives in Vermont, they don't. That makes perfect sense to me. Gun laws should be decided on a cost/benefit analysis based on situation, decided by the people who live there. The social cost of guns is so high in California, we need stringent laws, but in more rural states, that isn't really an issue.
I saw Clark on Crossfire Wednesday. He was real quick with the answers.
Any comments, pro/con??
I can't think of any blogger who has amassed, day after day, more incisive, effective, analytical work than the Daily Howler.
There was a time when his point of view struck me as rather over the top, and his denigration of the American press too extreme. Between what he has written, and what our press has done, and failed to do, over Bush's term, I have become convinced that the man has got our political/social milieu down cold.
His latest point is a killer. Remember when our press treated it as an unforgivable trait in Gore that he, allegedly, tended to exaggerate things? Remember how every story about Gore seemed to bring up this point, inflicting great damage on him?
Yet now the same press is treating the fact that Bush and others may have only exaggerated in getting us to go to war as an EXONERATION of their behavior!
These idiots in the press don't know what to think until someone tells them. They don't know what's right, what's wrong, what's important, and what's trivial, until someone in power tells them so.
They are sheep, they are children, they are pussies.
One look at the press in Britain demonstrates what a tribe of whores we got stuck with on our side of the Atlantic.
>>...and shouting out of the window "LET'S ROLLLLL, AMERCICA!"
>>Shouting "Let's roll, AmerICa" would be even better.
Or pronounce it "mur-ka " - like the Shrub.
My hope with Clark is that he does't jump into the race. I think it would scramble things up a bit too much. There is a good head of steam going right now and I'm glad to see all the Dems are hitting Bush instead of each other a liitle more.
I'd love to see Clark as a VP can. Or part of a cabinet. The man is smart and articulate.
Salome, what do you mean Krugman is not a journalist? None of the nice things you said about him PRECLUDES his being a journalist. You've just seen so many whores dressed up like journalists you've forgotten what a real one looks like. Being a journalist, just like being a compassionate conservative, is an honorable thing. But pretending to be one is something else entirely.
Pesky--
I think the intent was to say that Krugman is not a journalist by profession, and so that means he is more free to question conventional wisdom than someone who needs the paycheck from the SCLM.
He's a tenured economist, so he doesn't stand to lose his livelihood, no matter how bluntly he tells the truth about the Bush disaster as it unfolds...
I think she means Krugman is not a "journalist" by training or profession.
He's not - he's a *writer*!
Two great minds...
>There was a time when [Somerby's] point of view struck me as rather over the top, and his denigration of the American press too extreme. Between what he has written, and what our press has done, and failed to do, over Bush's term, I have become convinced that the man has got our political/social milieu down cold.
That's how he struck me at first too, but dammit, his early essays (c. 199
look, if anything, excessively fair-minded in retrospect. And I think he'd agree.
"I try to be cynical but I can't keep up." -- Lily Tomlin
Russert: But as commander in chief, you should know that.
Is Tim implying that Gov. Dean is now CinC? What is it with conservatives and their inability to conjugate the verb "to be?" (Rhetorical question, of course.)
"If they use the same obvious propaganda tactics, and they're plastered virtually word-for-word over every other board in the blogosphere - yes."
OK Dave, I am the Anonymous that you first responded to, not the one who has posted at length after me (I'm off today and have a baby to look after). Please show where my comments are "plastered virtually word-for-word over every other board in the blogosphere".
Waiting.
"Not just MTP, they should just skip American mainstream media. They should all go to the BBC, CBC, Noticias, etc."
Which news outlets are mom & pop average voter watching? Not much alternative I wouldn't think.
Yes do interviews there to but somehow you've got to be available to the masses.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
Democratic candidates who go on Sunday morning TV shows are now on notice. You better be ready.
Solutions: 1)Don't go on them. 2)Be prepared.
Brett W:
I see what you mean.
Sort of when "the thousand points of light" meets "the soft bigotry of low expectations."
It could even be set to music.
"Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
dave | 06.27.03 - 4:10 pm | #"
Thought not.
Russert: Well, you apologized to Bob Graham.
Dean: No, I didn’t.
Russert: You called the AP and recanted the statement.
Dean: I called the AP and said, “I’m sorry I said that.”
Russert: Well, that’s an apology.
Dean: No, it’s not.
Russert: “I’m sorry I said it” is not an apology?
My comment: No, "I'm sorry I said it" does NOT have to be an apology. One can regret having said a certain thing, in the sense of acknowledging that it was a mistake or foolish to have uttered it, WITHOUT apologizing to the person who felt injured.
My reaction to Russert's questioning of Dean on the number of active duty military was, Does Russert have ANY reason to believe that BUSH knows the answer to those questions? Did Russert ever dare to pose such questions of candidate Bush?
Look, no doubt that Russert has evolved into a bought and paid for journalistic thug. On the other hand he may have actually done U.S. a favor by apparently showing that Dean is a bit confused on the issues. You can't be that and run for President.
Another question: Is the current list of candidates ALL that we have to choose from? Is the process now closed? The country needs another Clinton (er, minus the circus)!
Russert=Whore.
From a Daily Howler:
After the show, Russert interviewed three hopefuls. First to appear were Gov. and Mrs. Bush; Russert treated Bush like a long-lost buddy he'd just met at a neighborhood bar:
RUSSERT: Were the Buffalo Bills robbed Saturday?
BUSH: That's what I was going to ask you. I was hoping you'd ask me a question. I wanted to ask, I wanted to get a question for you—
RUSSERT: This will determine my objectivity for the next year.
BUSH: —the video. The videotape. Listen, this is the old Houston Oilers—
RUSSERT: Oh, so you think the Bills were treated properly—
BUSH: No, I didn't see it. I didn't see it...
This conversation about football went on a while longer, with Russert and his new best pal exchanging quips about the '93 play-offs.
http://www.dailyhowler.com/
h0112...h011200_1.shtml
Anonymous--
The point is that Russert actively went to the Treasury Dept and acquired bogus, obfuscatory statistics with which to ambush Dean and make it APPEAR that Dean is confused on the issues.
It is hard to answer blatant propaganda without seeming confused and/or defensive. Russert was not doing the US any favors, intentionally or otherwise.
And the bullshit exchange on the numbers of people in the service and in Iraq--Dean was not far off, and Russert reacted as though he was as clueless as, well, Bush is about most everything.
"I'm sorry I said that."
Is Russert this flamingly stupid? "I'm sorry, Senator Graham, for what I said about you," is an apology. "I'm sorry I said that," can mean anything -- including, "What a dumbhead I am for saying that to a reporter."
Double zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
But if it'll help you fill out your vouchers for Unka Karl, you can start at Daily Kos...
We return you now to "Ignore the Trolls Friday."
yeah anonymous, dean was real "confused". like when bush stood up at the republican convention and claimed that our military wasn't prepared. it was pure, unadulterated bullshit. either he was lying, or totally clueless. either way, pretty troubling for a major party candidate, wouldn't you say?
you really don't want to see dean debate bush, do you? hell, you don't want to see bush debate anybody.
"The point is that Russert actively went to the Treasury Dept and acquired bogus, obfuscatory statistics with which to ambush Dean and make it APPEAR that Dean is confused on the issues."
If true than that should be plastered all over the media (with the evidence) and Russert should be fired or at the least reprimanded for blatant journalistic dishonesty.
The discussion way back up there was briefly about "charisma." So I'd just like to say that anyone who finds Chimpy McSmirk charismatic is blind, deaf and dumber than a box of rocks.
There wasn't that much going on about Clinton until he roared out of the pack and WON TWO TERMS. In spite of everything the moronic brownshirt fucks tried to to do get rid of him both before and after he was in office.
And as far as the trolls go, their proliferation is just another reminder that they are freaked out, the poor dears, what with the sodomy law overturned, the right to privacy upheld again and
THE CASTOR OIL AND RUSTY BARRELS FOUND UNDER THE ROSE BUSH IN IRAQ
To Dave and the worm,
You two are just a bit paranoid (understandable in today's political climate). If someone is going to run for the office of most powerful person in the world they'd better be ready for tough questions and ambushes. Or as PG put it "Seriously, if Democrats are not ready to understand what our candidates' drawbacks are, we're going to get slaughtered."
Tell you what debate I'd have loved to see, would STILL love to see, Bush v Clinton. Clinton would make him look like the mean, stupid little thug that he really is.
Look, no doubt that Russert has evolved into a bought and paid for journalistic thug. On the other hand he may have actually done U.S. a favor by apparently showing that Dean is a bit confused on the issues. You can't be that and run for President.
Actually, I can see NON-M.B.F. Anonymous' point. We cannot be so naive that whoever gets the nomination is going to have an easy ride on the networks. (Which we MUST go on, since "typical America" doesn't know what BBC is, let alone watch it -- or get a desciption from Faux News. Going only on BBC, CBC, Internet blogs, etc. is at best, preaching to the choir; and at worst, it's a head-in-the-sand manouver.) Any non-Bush presidential hopeful must not only think that s/he might be fried by the Media Whores, they should EXPECT to get fried for no logical reason other that Bush and his handlers OWN the media.
In other words, the nominees have to get the job done, but also prepare to fight for the victory. You don't go into a boxing ring thinking you'll get George Foreman (as he is currently); you've got to treat every opponent like s/he's Mike Tyson or Laila Ali -- someone who has enough power to kill you in less than 5 seconds. The same goes for fighting the Bush syncophants.
That being said, let's not be too hard on Dean -- it's a trial run, he went in there cold. Now we know what to do and not do for next time. Look at the video, study it, and practice the fighting moves.
Where's the tapes (not just the highlight reels) of Gore and Clinton when you need 'em? This is like a basketball team -- with Gore and Clinton as the coaches on this team of hopefuls. If we are to win, we need their help -- NOW -- even if only behind the scenes. The Democrats must no longer be pussies anymore!!
(Sidenote: folks, STOP EATING YOUR OWN!! I am a true Independent, I will never vote for Bush, but if this infighting and feuding continues [that goes for Green-bashing for no reason too], then the terrorists have won. "Terrorists" meaning the 4th Reich of Bushco, of course...)
I need a blog...
Gee, is it time for the troll switchover in the boiler room already?
Or maybe Unka Karl canned someone's ass...
Tena,
I read somewhere that the American public may not like what Bush is doing as president, but they like him, because they perceive him as a "regular guy."
Of course, he's no more a regular guy than Prince William is (in fact, I read that his family can trace its roots to the British Royals).
But what is real and what is perceived are two different things. Smoke and mirrors. He's the son of New England Brahmins, and he enjoyed a legacy education in the nation's top schools, then proceeded to fail at everything he did in the private sector, while struggling with alcohol and drugs.
But the public doesn't see this. They've fallen for the pseudo-Texan veneer, just like the people here in So.Cal., who named an airport after an actor who played a cowboy and a soldier (wasn't one in WWII) in the movies.
I'm afraid a lot of our fellow citizens would rather feel warm and fuzzy about a persona rather than take the time to educate themselves about who the real Bush is.
Americans don't look behind the feel-good moments of President Codpiece to discover the utter banality of the man.
OK Dave, I am the Anonymous that you first responded to, not the one who has posted at length after me...
Gee, I don't know why he couldn't tell that from your HANDLE.
Calling Bush "President ADHD" is an insult to people with ADHD.
You can have ADHD without being stupid, willfully ignorant, and careless.
Shaw Kenawe - the only place where I differ with you is where you say "Americans," and I'm reading it to mean all Americans besides the ones here at Atrios. (everyone knows we're special
) 'Cause I don't think all Americans are taken in by him. I agree there are way too many who never look beyond the superficial. Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I keep thinking somehow others are awake, too, just quiet about it. Don't want to be called "unpatriotic."
Sidenote: folks, STOP EATING YOUR OWN!! I am a true Independent
Thank you!
Listen folks. Russert was not as bad as the pundit CW. He should have been more prepared but it was a hickup not a heart attack. The problem (and I told them this) is the handleing. He is moving from wanna be to contender. The staff has to be big time now and I think they are getting the picture.
The level of trolling and talk radio/media whore trashing tells you all you need to know. If he didn't worry them they would stay quiet and hope he wins.
I was at the rally yesterday at UCLA and there is a spark in alot of supporters eyes out there. Will that translate into a win? I don't know.
The cool thing was I saw a Kunsinich supporter out there. He was the only one and I allmost felt sorry for him. Then I realised he was working to change the direction the country was headed. When I saw his button I said "I like your guy. I like mine better but yours has some good things to say." He said "If my guy doesn't get it I hope yours does."
That is what we should all be saying.
Exactly,Tena. All Americans are NOt Taken in by him. We're being "told" all these good things some people say about him as if it's some widespread wave of adoration. It's PROPAGANDA, pure and simple.
Oh, some people like him, some people like him because he's their "friend," but the rest of us either see what a loser he really is or don't care about politics.
Let's see if we can get those voting percentages up next year. Bush will lose and lose badly.
When I saw his button I said "I like your guy. I like mine better but yours has some good things to say." He said "If my guy doesn't get it I hope yours does."
That is what we should all be saying.
Mike S, that's the best advice I've heard all day!
It's smart thinking. We need to be smart.
Thanks Pie.
I'll be back later. Ignore the trolls and keep our eyes on our goals.
Tena and pie,
I should have qualified my statement by saying "some Americans."
Obviously Eschatonians are not taken in, nor are my four Republican friends and family members who worshipped Reagan and have always voted Republican. That they detest Bush with such a passion is astounding to me.
How many others out here in lefty blogville have Republican friends and family who feel the same way?
Bravo, Mike S! I put "STOP EATING YOUR OWN!!" in bold for a reason, he got it! Thanks much (I hope you see this when you come back.)
Throwing "You're a troll!" "He's a moronic brownshirt fuck!" "To the Duck Pit™ with him!" unjustified to those who give constructive criticism is NOT going to help us (us==all of us, not just Democrats, who want Bush out on his ass); because it can hurt someone who was not meant to be hit. Be careful with this, dave...
As The Brain (from Pinky and The Brain) always said to Pinky when he said something stupid: "FOCUS!" Even an inpenetrable suit of armor has a weak spot inside; inpenetrable != invincible. Get the Democrats to know this; it is possible to beat Bush, but it will NOT be as easy as it seems on the surface. Simply calling him on the googolplex of atrocities he has done will not work; these guys are channeling Joseph Goebbels, so we must work smarter, not harder (thanks pie!) We must think, know, and feel intuitively that the 4th Reich can be destroyed!
"I should have qualified my statement by saying "some Americans."
Only enough to have lost the 2000 election.
Calling Bush "President ADHD" is an insult to people with ADHD.
Calling him "President" is an insult to all Americans...
Yes, Mom...
I'm surprised a little fact has been left out here:
2 weeks before Dean went on the air Russert asked for and got an analysis of his proposed tax policy from the Treasury Department.
Treasury works for Russert, and vice versa. He's a paid whore of the Bushies and all of his cred is shot.
Man I depsise that whore.
Shaw Kenawe - Well, my husband is a conservative who calls himself independant, and votes republican mostly. He hates Bush. He's not totally opposed to the whole package, however, so I keep working on him. I think between Bush's total stupidity - which drives him crazy, and the economic disaster we're in, he'll not be voting for Bush in '04. Especially if I lock him in a closet sometime around the election, just to make sure.
Mike S - thank you for your comment about Dean and about the Kucinich supporter. I'll vote for any one of the Dems with all my heart.
...I'll vote for any one of the Dems with all my heart...
Except Lieberman!!!!!
"'Cause I don't think all Americans are taken in by him. I agree there are way too many who never look beyond the superficial."
I'm not terribly hopeful, they voted for the empty suit that was Reagan because he was actor they used to like.
They also elected Al Gore by a majority of the popular vote. And gave Bill Clinton 2 terms, in spite of the kangaroo impeachment.
Tena
You should have married like me. She may be less than perfect but she does what I tell her come election time. (just kidding)
The Tec...
Sorry about the name. Destroyed short term memory in high school.
I like to hear constructive criticism. I even pass it on to the campaign people I talk to. It's hard to not yell at people that are trolling. Yesterday on Koz there were at least 6 trolls that acted like they were supporters that kept linking the same wpo Terry Neil article. The favorite new tactic is to change names and it gets kinda old. Especially when you recognize the writting style.
Yesterday on Koz there were at least 6 trolls that acted like they were supporters that kept linking the same wpo Terry Neil article. The favorite new tactic is to change names and it gets kinda old. Especially when you recognize the writting style.
That, of course, would never happen here!
"They also elected Al Gore by a majority of the popular vote."
Clinton would have won over Bush in a landslide. I like Gore and voted for him but he he was a bore so though he got more votes than boy George it was not a landslide. In fact the polls until then vascillated between Gore and Bush every day. You've got to have a vision that translates as charisma. But it should be easy, as I said before, since almost everything connected to Bush has been negative. When you're at the bottom you can only go up.
"And gave Bill Clinton 2 terms, in spite of the kangaroo impeachment."
If I'm not mistaken, his impeachment was into the 2nd term.
On the other hand I thought that Dean's comments that "I don't know" when asked for ultraspecific information that probably a four-star general wouldn't know smacked of honesty.
Mike S - It is the new troll tactic. A week or 10 days ago it was sophmoric dirty words. This week it is all these snarky liberal sounding people making carefully snarky statements.
And you can tell by how they respond if you call them on it - they get snarkier, instead of trying to actually talk to you like a real person.
Clinton would have won over Bush in a landslide.
Clinton would beat Bush in 2004.
And the repubs know it.
That's why they put Bush up as unbeatable. Don't make me laugh. Clinton was out there on the battlefront all the time.
Little Georgie hides in the White House, because they're too afraid, rightly so, that he'll screw up if left to his own devices. Little man.
Charisma? Georgie?
Clinton steamrollers him.
Too true Tena
Go check out Josh. He's got a couple of great posts up. One is a e-mail from Bush Cheny elect. Addressed to Talking Points Memo. There's a line that says something like We need you, Talking Points, To help.
"That, of course, would never happen here!
dave | 06.27.03 - 7:41 pm | #"
Gosh dave, I could just as well call YOU a rightwing infiltrator since you seem to be trying so hard to squelch discussion - the back & forth kind necessary to hash out a candidacy and positions on issues, and seem to be trying to sow discord here. But it would be wrong as I suspect that you are probably just young.
No doubt rightwing trolls are about and will increase their presence but, believe it or not Dave and any others, I am not one.
As to the candidates, like gold which is refined from ore in fire or diamond which forms under tremendous pressure, they'd better be ready to be examined down to their DNA if necessary. I know it's stupid since nobody's perfect some people like Bush and Reagan seem to get a free ride but they have to expect it.
"Charisma? Georgie?
Clinton steamrollers him."
Agreed, he has no charisma. He acts 'folksy' though, in front of the cameras and the average joes buys it.
OK, that's it. Go Dean!
the average joes buys it.
Says who? The "polls"?
The "average joe" who is picked for an interview?
For everyone of him or his female counterpart, I'll find FIVE who will NOT buy it.
Wanna play?
Anon
I think the problem people have with you is your name. Kind of puts up red flags. I've sort of had a hard time figuring you out. You don't sound like a troll and you are right about back and forth.
This isn't AA so any name will do. I suspoect Tena is a man since she nailed most of our fantacies on the comments yesterday.
(kidding Tena)
"For everyone of him or his female counterpart, I'll find FIVE who will NOT buy it.
Wanna play?"
Now if you can just get them to the polls...
Mike S - that's the first time I've been called a man, but I'll take it as a kind of compliment.
Mike S - oh, and I'm with you on the Anonymous thing - it is driving me crazy. I don't know how many Anons are posting currently and I can't remember which one is which.
Mike, maybe you're right but I guess I figure that how do we know that some name that someone puts out has any bearing to reality. Like you say Tena could be a man, other posters seem to borrow each others handles at will like the various Cronkites posting here. I just type out my thoughts and hit the OK button. It's the message not the messenger ay?
Now if you can just get them to the polls...
And that, my friend, is what we will do.
Excellent point!
It has more to do with concistancy. I used to be mike. But one day another mike showed up and it looked like all about eve for a while. When I see Tena I know who I'm talking to. For all I know her name is Hildegard but I do know who I/'m talking to.
pie - "Now if you can just get them to the polls..."
That is the single largest problem we face and it is the key to the whole thing.
It's also easy to find me with my horrible spelling.
Mike S - Hildegard?!!!!!!
Someone had a count of voters today, I think at Kos, that had the last 6 or so elections. There was a big diff every other election. I'll see if I can find it. Judging from the trend we should have a large turn out this time.
Presidential Election Total Voters
2000 - 105,412,329
1996 - 96,277,633
1992 - 104,426,758
1988 - 91,595,720
That is the single largest problem we face and it is the key to the whole thing.
Yes, I agree, that many more people should vote. I think more will vote, for various reasons.
I think those votes will tip the scales, so to speak.
So Hilde
It looks like I was wrong on the trend. I guess we'll have to work hard on the get out the vote front.
I do expect a large turnout. I think a big help will be rides to polls for older people and invalids. They can't be happy w/ King George. Of course that's his reason for prescription drugs
I have to fill water baloons for my nephesws bday party tomorrow. I'll be back later.
That is surely the best excuse I have ever seen for taking a hiatus from a blog comment section.
Ok to change the subject, whatever happened to all the Hildegards, Ethels, Agneses and Olgas, Freds, Marions, Oscars and Barneys?
I guess it's like that guy says in Don't Sweat the Small Stuff, 'look at it this way, in a hundred years - all new people'.
Anon - I've known 2 Ethels, 1 Barney, 3 or 4 Freds, 1 Marion, 0 Oscar, 0 Agnes, 1 Olga. They aren't all gone yet.
pie - The word needs to get out to the retirees just what is happening to their future - that it ain't going to be there in a matter of months if they don't see the light. Prescriptions, medicare - these could be major issues. Healthcare is one thing that really gets everyone's attention, with the exception of the wealthiest, who are going to need another issue.
Tena, where's the AARP? Why aren't they saying more about this? On regular TV?
pie - I don't know, but someone needs to talk to AARP. I haven't seen their publication since Mom died, but maybe you can buy it off the stands, I don't know. I don't know what they're saying, but I'm really surprised they've been so quiet. I wonder if you can write letters to their publication?
All right, just went to the AARP website. Pitiful. A short article that included this:
Frist can make that vision sound attractive, but herein lies the political quagmire.
Most Democrats argue that such sweeping changes over time would privatize Medicare, making beneficiaries vulnerable to the vagaries of a for-profit industry. Medicare is a basically sound and popular system, they say, to which drug coverage could be added now without changing its structure.
Frist disagrees. With the Medicare population due to double over the next 30 years, he believes the present program is fiscally unsustainable. "If we just added prescription drugs," he says, "the system won't function, can't function."
Frist's faith in the "efficiencies" of the private sector to bring down costs is in his blood. His father founded one of the nation's largest private health care companies. But many Democrats dispute that private plans would save money.
Emphasis mine.
pie - well, I guess somehow we have hust got to show them the light.
pie - should read "just."
"It is the new troll tactic. A week or 10 days ago it was sophmoric dirty words. This week it is all these snarky liberal sounding people making carefully snarky statements."
Ain't it odd though--- I hate to sound paranoid, but I've seen a few "Now I'm a liberal myself but..." comments that I SWEAR are trolls in sheeps clothing. If so, how very clever of them. Scuze me, I need to adjust my tinfoil hat just a little.
"No doubt rightwing trolls are about and will increase their presence but, believe it or not, I am not one."
Whatever you say, sportin' life...
"I've seen a few "Now I'm a liberal myself but..." comments that I SWEAR are trolls in sheeps clothing."
MWO exposed this tactic long ago... the old "As a lifelong Democrat" bit.
Funny, no sign of Brownshirt W today...
PeskyFly - this is the party line this week. Last week it was all dirty words. This week it is all snarky liberal sounding comments that say nothing. Then if you call them on it, they get snarkier and slide sideways. It has been all - "you people just call everyone Nazis and drag the discourse on Atrios down."
It's bullshit.
Sorry for making the same comment twice - I should read the thread a little more closely.
Mmmmmmm...trolls!
Mmmmmmmm...trolls!
Ah, fuggid...
Sorry I'm late, but I had Real Life™ stuff to do.
"I've seen a few "Now I'm a liberal myself but..." comments that I SWEAR are trolls in sheeps clothing."
MWO exposed this tactic long ago... the old "As a lifelong Democrat" bit.
OK. I am a true Independent (not an Bill O'Reilly "independent" who gives us a bad name).
What does it take for me to prove to y'all that I'm NOT a troll??
/me sighs....
Damn Haloscan! It ate the rest of my post. Here it is again.
Anyway...
I just thought of something. This election is going to be scary, and we may get Bush again. Here's why:
We all know that Gore won the 2000 election, recounts or not, electoral college or not. However, the Bush Mafia Clan played CalvinBall with the USA election process, forcing a facist monarchy (covert dictatorship) over our country.
Even if...hell, WHEN the Democratic candidate wins the election, what can we do to stop "Operation Stealing Freedom" again? Obviously, the electronic voting systems with no paper trail are a horribly bad idea (and as one studying Computer Science for most of my young life, I should know from a technical standpoint). But that's just the steppingstone to what's coming for America, we ain't seen nothin' yet. After all, what's Bush planning with raising double the bucks he got in 2000? I think the BM Clan's going to pull something to make the reselection of Bush "look like an accident," or IOW, make it like Bush won fair and square, and America will be oblivious since it's not out in the open like 2000.
Any thoughts/solutions to this??
Department of Corrections:
facist=>fascist
"This election is going to be scary" => "This election will be the ugliest in the history of the world, not just the U.S. of A."
"What does it take for me to prove to y'all that I'm NOT a troll??"
Well, there's the secret handshake and the decoder ring. Aren't you eating your Atrios Sugar Corn Puffs?
"Any thoughts/solutions to this??"
Yeah. Win big. Or as big as possible. Which means we get to work now, eschew sniping at folks not on the Dark Side, and set our sights on getting the country back.
"What does it take for me to prove to y'all that I'm NOT a troll??"
Give it up. Duh - dave's on a roll here. He seems to be of the opinion that if you disagree a bit with the party line or just want to stretch the discourse a little more you must be one of the bad guys.
I guess no one's told him that lock-step, straight jacketed, don't you dare question US thinking is a hallmark of the Repugs.
Hmmm, perhaps he'd be more comfortable over there...
Look dave, growth happens with discussion and with argument. If we can't hash things out we'll still be at square one come election day.
And if you're telling me that Dean IS the man by golly, then fine. Perhaps he is; if he's the nominee I expect I'll vote for him. But it's early yet and there are other candidates. Why not give them a fair shake? That alright with you?
Now what have I said here that makes me a brownshirt?
Mike, maybe you're right but I guess I figure that how do we know that some name that someone puts out has any bearing to reality. Like you say Tena could be a man, other posters seem to borrow each others handles at will like the various Cronkites posting here. I just type out my thoughts and hit the OK button. It's the message not the messenger ay?
If you pick a handle and stick to it then there's a consistent voice and development of credibility. It's also basic courtesy. I couldn't care less what your real name is.
It's nice to be liked.
"If you pick a handle and stick to it then there's a consistent voice and development of credibility. It's also basic courtesy."
May I suggest Ralphie?
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
