OT: 2008 Elections/Politics thread, Part 2

[JRod]

I'm out of this debate for now.

Like Inuyasha said, if you don't think it's racist or insensitive well...

I'm thoroughly convinced that is the case here. I'm not going to name names -- while I disagreed with a lot of people here, I could always accept what they said and move on.

The original ad was done in a time where stereotypes were accepted. While images like that in our culture are rare they do linger on. You can walk into a store and find Aunt Jemima's maple syrub and Big Ben's rice. By putting a picture of Obama's head on that ad they are sub-textually making racist or at the least insensitive overtones.

This was done with a tinge of racial tones to it.

[TheGamer]

Teal, I'm sure you are not a racist, and I'm positive that you didn't have any racist or insensitive intent with the pic, but you have to see where some would consider all 3 of those pics racist and insensitive, and it doesn't mean we are overly sensitive and/or always looking to cry racism.

[Teal]

These two sick f*cks have gone so far in their hatre
While I like Olbermann, and despise Moore, the timing is as I mentioned, EXTREMELY ironic.

With Mr. McCain playing high and mighty "country first" leader [and gag me on that slogan, as if Obama hates America, LOL] and the whole RNC turning into a kumbaya moment for fundraising, the question of who is profiting off of this "disaster" (and it's no Katrina) is the question that should be asked now.

Oh, hell, Johnny, this is ludicrous. There's a BIIIIIG double standard at play. So, are you saying that if McCain and the RNC went ahead with the big bash as originally planned, that you'd be fine with it?! Hell no, you and others would be decrying the 'big, evil RNC for ignoring the plight of the hurricane victims to carry on their fat cat party'. So they show a little concern and sensitivity toward the hurricane victims, and now, they're showboating.

Admit it...they can't win no matter what. Show your cards, man. They're showing anyway.

[Jackdog]

And it's only a joke because you see it as such and agree with him.

No I don't agree with him. I called it a stupid joke. Don't tell me what I think.

Quit playing innocent when McCain campaign and their ilk have been playing the patriotism and God card for much longer, and frankly, should have been called on it by their candidate themselves (aka the McCain 2000).

I am never innocent and when did I mention McCain?

[Jackdog]

Sorry for the Alanis Morrisette quote, but:

"isn't it ironic...don't you think?"

While I like Olbermann, and despise Moore, the timing is as I mentioned, EXTREMELY ironic.

With Mr. McCain playing high and mighty "country first" leader [and gag me on that slogan, as if Obama hates America, LOL] and the whole RNC turning into a kumbaya moment for fundraising, the question of who is profiting off of this "disaster" (and it's no Katrina) is the question that should be asked now.

The fact that you like Olberman makes it easy for me to understand why you think raising money for a disaster is a bad thing.

[Jackdog]

Teal, I'm sure you are not a racist, and I'm positive that you didn't have any racist or insensitive intent with the pic, but you have to see where some would consider all 3 of those pics racist and insensitive, and it doesn't mean we are overly sensitive and/or always looking to cry racism.

I know he's not a racist. I've spent hours on the phone with the man and if anything he's a realist. I find it odd there are no comments on the Condi Rice cartoon.

[TheGamer]

These two sick f*cks have gone so far in their hatre
While I like Olbermann, and despise Moore, the timing is as I mentioned, EXTREMELY ironic.

With Mr. McCain playing high and mighty "country first" leader [and gag me on that slogan, as if Obama hates America, LOL] and the whole RNC turning into a kumbaya moment for fundraising, the question of who is profiting off of this "disaster" (and it's no Katrina) is the question that should be asked now.

Oh, hell, Johnny, this is ludicrous. There's a BIIIIIG double standard at play. So, are you saying that if McCain and the RNC went ahead with the big bash as originally planned, that you'd be fine with it?! Hell no, you and others would be decrying the 'big, evil RNC for ignoring the plight of the hurricane victims to carry on their fat cat party'. So they show a little concern and sensitivity toward the hurricane victims, and now, they're showboating.

Admit it...they can't win no matter what. Show your cards, man. They're showing anyway.

John McCain doesn't care about black people!!!

[Jackdog]

John McCain doesn't care about black people!!!

[Teal]

Oh, hell, Johnny, this is ludicrous. There's a BIIIIIG double standard at play. So, are you saying that if McCain and the RNC went ahead with the big bash as originally planned, that you'd be fine with it?! Hell no, you and others would be decrying the 'big, evil RNC for ignoring the plight of the hurricane victims to carry on their fat cat party'. So they show a little concern and sensitivity toward the hurricane victims, and now, they're showboating.

Admit it...they can't win no matter what. Show your cards, man. They're showing anyway.

John McCain doesn't care about black people!!!

You'd think he didn't!

[JohnnytheSkin]

Oh, hell, Johnny, this is ludicrous. There's a BIIIIIG double standard at play. So, are you saying that if McCain and the RNC went ahead with the big bash as originally planned, that you'd be fine with it?! Hell no, you and others would be decrying the 'big, evil RNC for ignoring the plight of the hurricane victims to carry on their fat cat party'. So they show a little concern and sensitivity toward the hurricane victims, and now, they're showboating.

Admit it...they can't win no matter what. Show your cards, man. They're showing anyway.

It would be GREAT if they held their bash as originally planned...sure the Left Wing bloggers would have a field day but I know how much time and money (as I LIVE here) was invested in the parties and the bash. Hell, most of the delegates and congresspeople are being dined and REALLY wined as we speak for money, votes, etc.

I just think the whole facade that will occur now is a joke. Again, if there was something similar last week, would you not feel the same way if there were big fund raising crap going on at the DNC?

[XXXIV]

would you not feel the same way if there were big fund raising crap going on at the DNC?

There wasnt?...why was this reporter arrested?

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Conventio ... 622&page=1

Glass houses...glass houses...

[JohnnytheSkin]

The fact that you like Olberman makes it easy for me to understand why you think raising money for a disaster is a bad thing.

Jesus Motherf***ing Christ man, because I like Olbermann? I don't care about raising money? After all, what disaster? As far as news reports go it's a regular ****ing Gulf Coast hurricane. They happen annually...it's GW and Johnny Mac who are making it sound like it's the second coming [of Katrina], not to mention that Obama has called his vast network of volunteers to help people in need...oh wait, you ignored that.

Christ JackDog, you are in my city, man, and you see how the Republicans have re-routed traffic, caused issues, busted up benign protests, and frankly, have disrupted life for those that live and work here. And it's OK?

Hell, I leave on a trip on Wednesday from MSP and I'm scared shitless about what delays McCain arriving will have...not to mention the foot tapping that may or may not occur in any MSP restrooms.

[JohnnytheSkin]

would you not feel the same way if there were big fund raising crap going on at the DNC?

There wasnt?...why was this reporter arrested?

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Conventio ... 622&page=1

Glass houses...glass houses...

Fundraising for a "disaster"...I should have been more specific.

All the stupid business fund raisers and crap (as mentioned by Matt Taibbi, et al) are terrible things for both parties.

I just think capitalizing on a hurricane is low class, but what can you expect for a party and president polling in the low 20s (or less) in approval questions.

If Georgie Boy didn't go all out he would have been crucified by his own...it's just "convenient", and hopefully clear thinking Americans see through it.

[XXXIV]

would you not feel the same way if there were big fund raising crap going on at the DNC?

There wasnt?...why was this reporter arrested?

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Conventio ... 622&page=1

Glass houses...glass houses...

Fundraising for a "disaster"...I should have been more specific.

All the stupid business fund raisers and crap (as mentioned by Matt Taibbi, et al) are terrible things for both parties.

I just think capitalizing on a hurricane is low class, but what can you expect for a party and president polling in the low 20s (or less) in approval questions.

If Georgie Boy didn't go all out he would have been crucified by his own...it's just "convenient", and hopefully clear thinking Americans see through it.

Different story...

As far as polling I see the only people polling lower than "georgie boy" are the congress...dems in charge there no?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/ ... d=18#polls

[Teal]

Oh, hell, Johnny, this is ludicrous. There's a BIIIIIG double standard at play. So, are you saying that if McCain and the RNC went ahead with the big bash as originally planned, that you'd be fine with it?! Hell no, you and others would be decrying the 'big, evil RNC for ignoring the plight of the hurricane victims to carry on their fat cat party'. So they show a little concern and sensitivity toward the hurricane victims, and now, they're showboating.

Admit it...they can't win no matter what. Show your cards, man. They're showing anyway.

It would be GREAT if they held their bash as originally planned...sure the Left Wing bloggers would have a field day but I know how much time and money (as I LIVE here) was invested in the parties and the bash. Hell, most of the delegates and congresspeople are being dined and REALLY wined as we speak for money, votes, etc.

I just think the whole facade that will occur now is a joke. Again, if there was something similar last week, would you not feel the same way if there were big fund raising crap going on at the DNC?

Johnny, I like you man-you know that. But no, I'd be tarring and feathering them if they ignored what was going on down south and just continued on, just like any credible journalist should. Of course, whenever something like this comes up, we always see who the credible journalists are...and there ain't many of 'em.

McCain congratulates Obama on an historic nomination-and it's a PR stunt. If he ignored it, someone would slam him for ignoring the successes of the black community. If he doesn't insist (and that's what has helped me respect him-he bucked against the RNC by insisting that the convention be scaled back and possibly even moved, if the hurricane turned into something catastrophic) that the convention play second fiddle to the hurricane victims, he'd be pegged as an elitist prick who doesn't care about the hurricane victims. If he does what he does, he gets pegged as an opportunist. He can't win!

Was there a political calculation in all this? Sure. Would the dems make the same calculation? Absolutely. They'd be crazy not to consider those parameters. But does that mean that all of it was politically motivated? No, and I think it pretentious at best to infer that this was all that was.

[JohnnytheSkin]

Different story...

As far as polling I see the only people polling lower are the congress...dems in charge there no?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/ ... d=18#polls

And...they...SUCK!

I won't defend the Pelosi/Reid led Congress, they were terrible. At least they drove out a few career Republicans however to "retirement" as they realized they had no hope of re-election this year.

[Teal]

would you not feel the same way if there were big fund raising crap going on at the DNC?

There wasnt?...why was this reporter arrested?

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Conventio ... 622&page=1

Glass houses...glass houses...

Fundraising for a "disaster"...I should have been more specific.

All the stupid business fund raisers and crap (as mentioned by Matt Taibbi, et al) are terrible things for both parties.

I just think capitalizing on a hurricane is low class, but what can you expect for a party and president polling in the low 20s (or less) in approval questions.

If Georgie Boy didn't go all out he would have been crucified by his own...it's just "convenient", and hopefully clear thinking Americans see through it.

Holy s***, Johnny-could it not just simply be that this is evidence of 'lesson learned'?! Why the hell does it have to always have to be some f***in PR stunt, especially...ESPECIALLY when it's a republican? Oh, that's right...they are evil little bastards who hate black people, hate gay people, will eat your children and steal your money.

Sorry...I forgot.

[pk500]

I just think capitalizing on a hurricane is low class, but what can you expect for a party and president polling in the low 20s (or less) in approval questions.

Huh? Then why did Obama send an e-mail today to his donor and supporter lists, urging them to contribute to the American Red Cross? And if BO wanted to do it low-key, then why was that information released to the media? No PR spin there, trying to counter McCain's photo op packing supplies for hurricane relief, huh?

And if Obama also wasn't trying to capitalize on the hurricane, why did he cut short his campaigning after today and return to Chicago to "monitor Gustav?"

WTF does that mean? Watching Jim Cantore being pelted by rain on The Weather Channel? As my wife said: "What the hell can either McCain or Obama do to help people affected by Gustav? They're not the president; they don't oversee FEMA; they're not the governor of any of the states affected by the storm."

She always has been a smart broad ...

Take care,
PK

[RobVarak]

And I'm now officially back from vacation, and can actually post on this thread. (I go away for a week, and the forums turn into the bastard child of Daily Kos and the National Review.)

Welcome back to the fray.

First, there have been a lot of posts trying to link Obama to corruption, either saying he's a "product of the corrupt Chicago machine" or mentioning Rezko. As for Rezko, Obama answered every question from the Chicago Tribune in a 90+ minute interview about it (link to the summary here and the actual interview here. There's no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama, no investigations into unethical behavior by Obama, etc. People are trying to use the guilt by association argument with Obama...that if he dealt with a corrput politican, he MUST be a corrput politician too. Or if he worked with Ayers (on a board with a bunch of Republicans), he must somehow share Ayers' most insane viewpoints. Or if his pastor was Wright, he must share Wright's most radical beliefs. Or that he must be a closet socialist because...well, I don't even know why.

All of this arises due to the fact that Obama is a cipher in so many ways. He hasn't had enough time in the Senate to develop a national reputation and record. The nation only has so many elements to look at to try to figure out what he's about. There's his legislative record, which is thin in the US Senate and so parochial as to be nearly useless in the Illinois State Senate. He didn't have significant professional experience prior to entering government either. So voters and the media are going to look at his circle of personal relationships to fill in some blanks.

Individually, having any one of Ayers, Wright, Emil Jones, etc. in that circle may not be particularly damning. But when you have that entire cast of characters on stage, I think it's totally reasonable to have concerns about Obama's judgment, beliefs and integrity.

Peole point to the fact that there were Republicans on the Annenberg board, but that glosses over the fact that Obama and Ayers were already acquainted and that they shared a number of common friends. Moreover, none of those Republicans are running for President, or their association with Ayers would also come under appropriate scrutiny.

Anyways, if anyone has any actual evidence that Obama is corrput (investigations, documentary evidence, etc.) then go for it, produce it. But all of this above is just a silly game of six degrees of corrput/extreme politician. And you can play this game with ANY political candidate.

Sure you can. But few polticians in recent memory have gotten this close to the Oval Office with a record and background this thin and murky. Saying he is a product of the Chicago Machine isn't hyperbole or even remotely inaccurate, by the way. It's a natural fact. There are two types of politician in the machine, those who will be indicted and those who are too powerful to be indicted. If Obama had been sponsored by some run of the mill state senator in North Carolina or Delaware, links to corruption would be a stretch not worth considering. Emil Jones is Obama's political Godfather. And he's as crooked as the day is long. Here's one just for starters.

http://illinipundit.com/2007/07/10/emil ... -contracts

I'm not saying Obama is corrupt himself. But when all we have is a state legislative history of backing up his patrons in the Machine, it would be irresponsible to ignore the nature of the people with whom he was in bed.

Sure he could be as pure as the driven snow, and he might be a transforming figure in the history of the United States. But to me following the favors in politics is as important as following the money. And knowing the people to whom Obama owes a debt does not make me confident that he will make good decisions down the road as President.

Plus this nation doesn't have a good record with Daley-annointed Presidents.

And the funny thing is that for all the posts about corruption and unsavory characters around Obama, Palin is actually under investigation for corruption right now by a Republican state congress. And McCain was one of the Keating Five.

The whiff of scandal may stick to Palin, but I think given her successes in reform that's unlikely. If it does stick, it'll be for the same reason that Obama can't shake off the stink of Chi-Town. Becuase she's just not enough of a known quantity. The inverse of that situation applies to McCain and Biden. The Keating Five incident and Biden's disgraceful withdrawl from the 1988 campaign don't resonate because they're small factors to consider in records of significant lenght and detail. If all we knew about those two were those scandals and a few other details, they may have more weight.

As for Palin, the arguments that Palin has more "experience" than Obama is absurd, unless you're equating two years of governor of a state of about 650k with two years Senate experience representing Illinois, eight years state senate experience for a part of Chicago, and putting together a successful campaign for President of the United States. The whole exercise of defining "experience" solely by time in an executive position is pretty silly. To follow that logic, then did Clinton have more "experience" to be President than Dole? Does Palin have more "experience" to be President than McCain?

Comparing experience in politicians may be an absurd exercise in itself. To me the Obama-Palin comparison isn't as informative as the fact that we quite regularly elect governors (even one-term governors) to the Presidency despite the fact many have little additional useful experience and most have no foreign policy experience at all.

People are jumping up and down screaming about how Palin would be unqualfied on the international scene, but there is virtually nothing to differentiate her foreign policy experience from that of Carter, Reagan, Clinton or Bush (or Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren or Woodrow Wilson, for that matter).

As for her pick, short term, it's great because it sucked up media coverage after Obama's excellent speech.

Agree that it successfully grabbed the headlines, but I've seen Obama give at least 4-5 better speeches. But you can go back about 20 pages to see my opinion on that

However, I don't think it's a good pick long term, because she's very conservative (she was a big Buchanan supporter),

Ah HA! Now we're talking. This is where the Obama campaign has made a mistake thus far. I expect they will correct themselves soon. They should be busy painting her as a right winger, not as too inexperienced. The early polls have shown that the issue of experience listed as a concern by more likely GOP voters than independents. I think the Democrats would find more success trying to cut off her appeal to moderate independents rather than trying to sever her from a GOP base that seems pretty enthusiastic.

This goes back to a point I made Friday (probably 15 page ago LOL). She was not picked because as a woman she could go right after Clinton-supporting Democrats. She was picked to go after Clinton-leaning Democrats and undecideds. Having the Dee Dee Myers of the world undercut her for not being a proper woman and the Obamites going after her record does not strike me as a good way to marginalize her appeal to independents. Making her out to be Pat Robertson in a skirt might be.

and I don't think she was vetted enough by McCain. For example, although Palin said she was against the "Bridge to Nowhere" in her speech with McCain, Palin was actually a supporter of that bridge and actually campaigned on having it built, changing her position afterwards when it was politically expedient to do so. Flip-flopping, if you will. Then you've got Troopergate, where Palin is under investigation for using her position as governor to fire the Alaskan Public Safety Commissioner for not firing her brother-in-law.

I'm too tired and too modest to get self-referential enough on this issue. But I addressed these points over the weekend. And Democrats may want to be careful about using the word "Troopergate." They should probably find something without the historical baggage.

And I think she'll get beat in a debate w/Biden, especially on foreign policy.

A valid opinion, but I don't see why either side should be confident on this one. It's televised political theater, not an essay test. Public opinion on these things often turns on matters totally unrelated to the content of the answers, or sometimes only on one exchange. And even if Biden does best her, there's the illustrative example of Lloyd Bentsen. Sure he had his way with Quayle, but that didn't work out so well for Dukakis in the end.

Now go back on vacation so that I can get back to pithy 5-word dismissals of Siam and his ilk

[Jackdog]

Jesus Motherf***ing Christ man, because I like Olbermann? I don't care about raising money? After all, what disaster? As far as news reports go it's a regular ****ing Gulf Coast hurricane. They happen annually...it's GW and Johnny Mac who are making it sound like it's the second coming [of Katrina], not to mention that Obama has called his vast network of volunteers to help people in need...oh wait, you ignored that.

Christ JackDog, you are in my city, man, and you see how the Republicans have re-routed traffic, caused issues, busted up benign protests, and frankly, have disrupted life for those that live and work here. And it's OK?

Hell, I leave on a trip on Wednesday from MSP and I'm scared shitless about what delays McCain arriving will have...not to mention the foot tapping that may or may not occur in any MSP restrooms.

at MSP restrooms!! That was funny!! We moved to St Paul 2 months ago. I haven't seen the Welcome to JohnnyTheSkin Minnesota signs yet.

If you don't see Gustav as a disaster then I really don't know what to say. All the networks are covering it as such. As far as what Obama has said about it ,I have no clue. I was out in the streets all day today. I do know New Orleans was lucky they didn't get hit head on. If so it would have been worse than Katrina.

Benign protests? Unless your with them and agree with them f*cking up our city I have no idea how you can call what they are doing benign. We live on Mears Park. F*cking anarchist have done their best to f*ck our night up. Not the cops or Rupublicans. It was the assholes in black masks. The same assholes that laid down on an entrance ramp at Kellogg and 94 today.

My wife takes the 94 express to and from the Butler Bldg in Minny and gets off at Macy's everynight. Those idiots broke windows out of Macy's today and threw bricks at buses carring delegates. Is that cool with you? Who do they represent? It sure in the f*ck isn't the Republicans. They represent your party. http://www.rncwelcomingcommittee.org/?feed=rss2
Does that make you happy?

As far as Olbermann goes I think he's a biased hack. And NBCshould have fired him months ago. Hell even Bill Maher was ragging on him this weekend. The only thing he hasn't done is let Obama teabag him on the air. He is no different than Limbaugh or Bill O'reilly. I don't like any of them. Olbermann is an elitist prick IMO. If you like him so be it.

Now drop by Mears Park next week and we'll talk this bullshit over some cold ones. Believe it or not I have grown to like Grain Belt beer. I'll buy!

[FatPitcher]

Different story...

As far as polling I see the only people polling lower are the congress...dems in charge there no?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/ ... d=18#polls

And...they...SUCK!

I won't defend the Pelosi/Reid led Congress, they were terrible. At least they drove out a few career Republicans however to "retirement" as they realized they had no hope of re-election this year.

Pelosi/Reid having free reign for 4-8 years is probably the biggest reason not to vote for Obama. That's not to say I'm not glad that the Republicans were spanked in '06.

[TheHiddenTrack]

I'd prefer Palin's daughter to have her privacy like everyone else does. However, it's another reminder of how abstinence only education doesn't work (something Palin supports, obviously I don't know the details in this case). But it's something to think about...

The religious right hates abortion. Proper sex education has been proven to work better than abstinence only education (for obvious reasons)... so they end up causing more of something they abhor.

[SPTO]

Good morning.

Sounds like you guys had quite the debate last night. Anyways a couple things are on my plate here

1. I guess liking Olbermann is bad? I personally like the guy. I don't agree with everything he says and especially not the whole crap with joking around about Gustav. I just think that some people like me can separate some of Olbermann's more stupid stunts from the reality of the day. I don't mind Republicans scaling down the convention and doing a fund raiser for those who've been affected by the storm. It's a bit on the "oh hey look at us we care!" side but it's still good citizenship and helps to get people out there to help those in less fortunate circumstances.

Helping others even if it makes you look good is better then not doing a damn thing for anybody.


2. Also I find it pretty funny that some here are calling out McCain and the GOP for doing this and saying how they're trying to make themselves look all high and mighty etc etc. Let us not forget that during the midwest floods that Obama suspended his campaign for a week to dig ditches and barriers to keep the flood waters out of certain areas. The media also had a bit of a laugh at Bush and McCain's expense because McCain couldn't do much physically due to his war wounds and Bush more or less just flew over the damaged areas, shook some hands and I think he may have helped with some of the food relief and such but not to the extent that Obama did.

It cuts both ways. It's just in how you all interpret it. The Obama campaign has also been one that has tried to reach out during crisis situations with Obama or his top advisers sending out E-Mail letters urging donors to give money to various causes when disaster strikes.


That's all I have to say about that. Oh and about the Cream of Nothing picture. It doesn't bother me too much but there are definite racist undertones simmering under the surface. It's not overt or anything but I can see where some folks may take offense to it.

[Jackdog]

Good morning.

Sounds like you guys had quite the debate last night. Anyways a couple things are on my plate here

1. I guess liking Olbermann is bad? I personally like the guy. I don't agree with everything he says and especially not the whole crap with joking around about Gustav. I just think that some people like me can separate some of Olbermann's more stupid stunts from the reality of the day.

My problems with Olbermann are simple.
1.He writes for the Daily Kos.
2. He's has been in the tank for Obama since day one. He gushes over him like a school girl with a crush. Remember this rant about the Bush and FISA? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ_kK8OOp4M

On January 31 of this year, Keith Olbermann donned his most serious face and most indignant voice tone to rail against George Bush for supporting telecom immunity and revisions to FISA. In a 10-minute "Special Comment," the MSNBC star condemned Bush for wanting to "retroactively immunize corporate criminals," and said that telecom immnity [sic] is "an ex post facto law, which would clear the phone giants from responsibility for their systematic, aggressive and blatant collaboration with [Bush's] illegal and unjustified spying on Americans under this flimsy guise of looking for any terrorists who are stupid enough to make a collect call or send a mass email." Olbermann added that telecom amnesty was a "shameless, breathless, literally textbook example of Fascism -- the merged efforts of government and corporations that answer to no government.

Olbermann flip flops on the issue and Glenn Greenwald calls him out on it.

Now that Barack Obama supports a law that does the same thing and now that Obama justifies that support by claiming that this bill is necessary to keep us Safe from the Terrorists everything has changed.But that was five whole months ago, when George Bush was urging enactment of a law with retroactive immunity and a lessening of FISA protections. Now that Barack Obama supports a law that does the same thing -- and now that Obama justifies that support by claiming that this bill is necessary to keep us Safe from the Terrorists -- everything has changed.
Olbermann invited Newsweek's Jonathan Alter onto his show to discuss Obama's support for the FISA and telecom amnesty bill (video of the segment is here). There wasn't a syllable uttered about "immunizing corporate criminals" or "textbook examples of Fascism" or the Third Reich. There wasn't a word of rational criticism of the bill either. Instead, the two media stars jointly hailed Obama's bravery and strength -- as evidenced by his "standing up to the left" in order to support this important centrist FISA compromise.

Glenn Greenwald spoke about Newsweek's editor and MSNBC's journalistic disgrace in a fashion few on the left dare to in mixed company:

Leave aside the fact that Jonathan Alter, desperate to defend Obama, doesn't have the slightest idea of what he's talking about. [...]

Obviously, Jonathan Alter has no idea what he's saying, but nonetheless decrees that this bill -- now that Obama supports it -- restores the Fourth Amendment. Those are the Orwellian lengths to which people like Olbermann and Alter are apparently willing to go in order to offer their blind devotion to Barack Obama.

All of the decades-old, conventional Beltway mythologies are trotted out here to praise Obama.What's much more notable is Olbermann's full-scale reversal on how he talks about these measures now that Obama -- rather than George Bush -- supports them. On an almost nightly basis, Olbermann mocks Congressional Democrats as being weak and complicit for failing to stand up to Bush lawbreaking; now that Obama does it, it's proof that Obama won't "cower." Grave warning on Olbermann's show that telecom amnesty and FISA revisions were hallmarks of Bush Fascism instantaneously transformed into a celebration that Obama, by supporting the same things, was leading a courageous, centrist crusade in defense of our Constitution.

Those who spent the last five years mauling Bush for "shredding the Constitution" and approving of lawbreaking -- only to then praise Obama for supporting a bill that endorses and protects all of that -- are displaying exactly the type of blind reverence that is more dangerous than any one political leader could ever be.

Matthews and Scarborough are pissed at the guy for this type of bullshit and they work for the same network.

Many fans of Olbermann hate Fox News because they say that network is in the tank for the right. That seems hypocritical to me. I watch some shows on both networks and enjoy them. I am not going to throw MSNBC under the bus because of Olbermann yet some on the left paint Fox News that way because of Hannity and O'Reilly. If you like him that's cool. I just can't take him serious.

PS. The WWP got bumped from "Morning Joe" today. I got the call around 4am. But we were promised a nice donation at the breakfast tomorrow so that's cool.

[SPTO]

Ah I remember that FISA rant. Pretty hilarious when I found out the whole context of it all. I don't hate Fox News per se. I hate the majority opinions expressed at the network but as i've said before I like some of the people there and there is some good programming.

People have to realize that cable news is sent out through a prism of a certain opinion. In many ways a lot of cable news today is just one big Op Ed piece.

Sorry to hear that you got bumped from Morning Joe but it's great that you guys are getting a big donation. I'd give one too but i'm kinda broke Plus I don't know if you guys take foreign based donations.