If it were not so embarrassing to most children, especially older male children, I wish Mothers would do this more often. I think the world would be a better place. God bless Jonathan Capehart for letting his Mom have her say, no matter how embarrassing it might be to him.
I say this as a Mom who has embarrassed my kid by standing up for her at moments that she found quite inopportune. I try not to do that. I really, really do. A lot of things really piss us Moms off. I tell you true.
It's really kind of funny after listening to it a couple of times. Or maybe it's absurd that I'm thinking of.
Who's worse? This government, i.e. President Obama
or er, uh, um... the British?
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| Tea Party Tyranny | ||||
| ||||
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| Intro - Bon Affart | ||||
| ||||
The Ed Show premiers on Sunday. Shuster's got a new show in a different slot.
Here's one more from Jonathan. My favorite is still 'Hey Paul Krugman, where the hell are ya, man?'
I was watching Olbermann as he teased his way to the end of the show where he finally made 'the announcement'.
Ed Schultz will have his own show at what I like to call the 5 PM time slot because I live in the Central Time Zone. For everyone else apparently, the time will be 6 PM.
I have caught pieces of Ed on 1600 when he has subbed for Shuster and I have been impressed, although not totally captivated. Impressed is very good though, don't get me wrong. The fact that anyone on television has the audacity to stand up FOR unions and make the case FOR unions and give context to the positions that affect unions and working people scores some high marks with me.
David Shuster will take over the 2-4 PM CST slot so he won't be gone, nor forgotten.
The fact that MSNBC is giving Schultz a spot in their line up is astounding to me, but most welcome.
I used to wish that everything could be fair and balanced. I don't mean that in the Fox News way. I mean really fair and balanced news coverage. But if there must be Fox News, and it appears that they are here to stay, there has to be a counter balance as well and MSNBC provides it with some factual information.
| If you were grading George W. Bush on his performance as president, what would he get? * 165170 responses | |||||
| He gets an A 11%  | |||||
| He gets a B 16% | |||||
| He gets a C 9.7% | |||||
| He gets a D 16% | |||||
| He gets an F 46% | |||||
Not a scientific survey. Click to learn more. Results may not total 100% due to rounding. | |||||
From The Political Carnival...
It wouldn't be funny if someone called me 'Tamron Hall the magic negro anchor lady.'
Jim Cramer and Mike Barnacle lay waste to the Wall Street Gang.
source: DU blogger
Really good video...........here's the outrage
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
I am unable to watch Joe Scarborough in the morning due to the time required to warm up my Big Yellow School Bus, 
and living conditions that disables television viewing in the early morning hours that only serves to drive other household members stark raving mad from time to time.
I am however, extremely grateful for the position I am in, in that I do not feel obliged to be exposed to any commentary from Joe Scarborough, especially during this period of scandal and high drama in the State of Illinois.
I am further pleased as punch to know that there are those who are keeping an eye on the banter on the airwaves, while pointing out the errors in thinking and outrageous rationalizations.
Thanks Paddy. I thought you were really polite too. Well, except for the 'ass' thing at the very end, but still a multitude of thanks, but even with that last comment you stayed accurate.
Dear Joe Scarborough
Hey, it's me. I know you're busy manufacturing outrage and hot air over this whole Blagojevich thing, but I wanted to set your mind to ease on one little point.
You're going on and on (I presume it's a Rush talking point) over the "fact" that (and I paraphrase), "We sent 20 reporters to Wasilla, Alaska to dig into Sarah Palin but sent none to Chicago to dig into Obama".
Chicago is a major metropolitian city in the United States. Here is a link to the media in that city (much of it investigative award winning). Sometimes Chicago is even called "The Second City"! Imagine that. Wasilla Alaska has the Mat Su Valley Frontiersman, and a guess to the circulation of the paper would be less than the population of the city, so somewhere under 10,000.
I'd think there were plenty of reporters in Chicago willing to make their careers by uncovering any untoward activity by Obama (Remember the broohaha over releasing the Annenberg papers? Sure you do.) So, to summarize, there were plenty of reporters, time and effort put into investigating Obama's activity in Chicago and they came up with nothing.
Oh, and you're an ass.source: The Political Carnival
Mark Murray at MSNBC crunched the numbers today regarding President-elect Obama's approval with the American people.
The poll shows President-elect Barack Obama with a 67 percent to 16 percent positive/negative rating. That’s compared with the 48 percent to 35 percent rating President George W. Bush had in December 2000 and President Bill Clinton’s 60 percent to 19 percent rating in December 1992.
Two out of three respondents say they’re pleased with Obama’s early appointments and three-fourths believe that the level of his involvement in making policy has been exactly right.
Another two-thirds view the president-elect in a positive light — a rating that's more favorable than the numbers Bill Clinton and George W. Bush received 1992 and 2000.
...The poll shows President-elect Barack Obama with a 67 percent to 16 percent positive/negative rating. That’s compared with the 48 percent to 35 percent rating President George W. Bush had in December 2000 and President Bill Clinton’s 60 percent to 19 percent rating in December 1992. source: MSNBC
What on earth did Steve Hildebrand say?
‘This is not a time for the left wing of our Party to draw conclusions about the Cabinet and White House appointments that President-Elect Obama is making,” Hildebrand wrote. “Some believe the appointments generally aren't progressive enough. Having worked with former Senator Obama for the last two years, I can tell you, that isn't the way he thinks and it's not likely the way he will lead. The problems I mentioned above and the many I didn't, suggest that our president surround himself with the most qualified people to address these challenges.”
...“As a liberal member of our Party, I hope and expect our new president to address those issues that will benefit the vast majority of Americans first and foremost,” Hildebrand wrote. “That's his job. Over time, there will be many, many issues that come before him. But first let's get our economy moving, bring our troops home safely, fix health care, end climate change and restore our place in the world. What a great president Barack Obama will be if he can work with Congress and the American people to make great strides in these very difficult times.”
With a long list of tasks ahead of him, Obama needs liberals to stand by him as he deals with a faltering economy, home foreclosures, an auto bailout and two wars, Hildebrand wrote Sunday on Huffington Post. Even so, Hildebrand added, Obama was elected “to be the president of all the people – not just those on the left.” Politico
A Word from the Sometimes Naive
I think it is outstanding that there are critical thinkers who are thinking critically. The problem is not with the critical thinking skills of Lefty bloggers, but with the amount of power and influence that some of those bloggers wield.
The discourse itself is a much needed change from what we have seen from the Republican party. Amazingly refreshing. Open and transparent. I've only been on the blogs for four months now and I wish I had discovered this world a bit sooner.
Katrina van den Heuvel makes a good point. There was tone in Hildebrand's statement. She also addresses the issue of the media's attention to much of what the bloggers have to say, especially when there are expressions of disappointment and outrage. It makes for good ratings to discuss divisiveness.
Republican Senator Arlen Specter is potentially vulnerable in his 2010 bid for re-election. A Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Pennsylvania voters finds Specter leading MSNBC pundit Chris Matthews by just three percentage points, 46% to 43%, in a match-up that may foreshadow one of the nation's most closely-watched Senate races.
Matthews, whose handling of the presidential campaign drew loud complaints of bias from Republicans, has expressed interest in the race. His contract with MSNBC expires next year.
While Specter attracts support from 32% of Democrats, only 70% of Republicans say they would vote for him.
Trouble with Republicans is nothing new for Specter. In 2004, he barely survived a Republican Primary challenge from Pat Toomey.
While it is always troubling for an incumbent to poll below the 50% level when seeking re-election, much could happen to reshape this campaign with nearly two years to go.The 68-year-old Specter has served 28 years in the Senate.
When asked about a possible challenge from Matthews, the senator said on CNN's "Late Edition," "I never look over my shoulder, never look behind. Somebody may be gaining on me. I run with blinders. I'll be prepared, whoever my opponents are."
Before his media career, Matthews, a 62-year-old native of Pennsylvania, worked for President Jimmy Carter and House Speaker Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill Jr. read more here
by Jed L on Daily Kos
Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 04:28:58 PM PST
MSNBC's Norah O'Donnell interviews Markos on Thursday afternoon. Not only did Markos make all the important points about why Joe Lieberman represents the status quo, but his good-natured and eminently reasonable tone also helped puncture the myth that so-called "liberal bloggers" are beside themselves with fury and outrage.
for source - click here
On the Sunday before the election, Chuck Todd basically calls the election for Barack Obama.
I'm not going to hold my breath. I trust Chuck Todd, but Obama supporters are still working hard to GOTV. After 2000 and then 2004, Democrats are taking nothing for granted.
We shall see.
Brokaw: And Chuck, what about voter turnout and especially the organization of the two campaigns getting their people to the polls?
Todd: Well, we're seeing a lot of the early voting, a lot of long lines that's made folks question whether Georgia, South Carolina could end up being much closer than people thought because of this surge among voters, particularly African-Americans. And of course we've watched everything that's been happening in Florida and North Carolina this weekend, Tom.Brokaw: And why would John McCain be spending so much time in Pennsylvania and New Hampshire in the final weekend, Chuck?
Todd: Well, it's a simple math problem that he's got. Heres our columns here. Im going to put all of the current tossup states in McCain's column and watch his number as it grows right up here. If you move all of these states over, Indiana, North Dakota, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, and Nevada -- you see the problem he's got. He's still at 252. 18 short. So what does that mean? If he pulls a Pennsylvania over, we see Obama goes done to 265, McCain gets his 273. Then you ask why New Hampshire? Thats the insurance policy. Nevada, a state that Obama right now has that narrow lead in, if that went to him, then McCain would need New Hampshire to get back over his 270. So it is the only path he's got left. They know this and that's why they had to figure out how to put Pennsylvania back in play. We don't know if it really is. We know he's spending a lot of time there and they had to figure out if New Hampshire, a state that's been incredibly kind to McCain's political career in the past, to see if it can resurrect him one more time.
for source - click here
Some pretty astonishing observations of the McCain-Palin interview with Brian Williams coming out of Chuck Todd's mouth. Astonishing for the fact that he actually said it out loud and on television without mincing words at all.
I watched the first segment of the interview on Nightly News tonight. I didn't see anything different between John McCain and Sarah Palin than I have seen before, except that Sarah Palin seems more at east with being herself these days.
What a long strange trip it's been (as I bizarrely quote The Grateful Dead).
drained
they know they're losing
not rude
negative intensity
negative vibe
Maddow, on the other hand, wasn't interested in basing her approach on that of conservative talkers and wasn't given much guidance or feedback by the network's higher-ups. So she developed her approach to broadcasting on her own. Air America midwifed the birth of a new kind of liberal pundit largely by accident.
In this, Maddow and Air America mirror the haphazard paths to success taken by several prominent liberal projects of recent years. Like Air America, other institutions were built with the idea of emulating the successful entities of the right: The Center for American Progress, for instance, looked with envy at the Heritage Foundation, with its preference for public relations over actual ideas. But CAP moved beyond its imitative beginnings and evolved into a serious think tank, generating new ideas on poverty and national security and pairing them with a state-of-the-art online rapid response shop. They found a model, in other words, that suited liberalism's strengths. Other new progressive organizations of the last decade have gone well beyond the banal imitate-the-right premises on which they were founded.
Likewise, though Air America thought it wanted to create an analog to right-wing radio, it found its only breakout success in Maddow -- the furthest thing from Rush Limbaugh. Rhodes still appears with some regularity on cable news and, as of last fall, had one of the largest audiences of any liberal talk-radio host. Yet, she primarily reaches radio listeners interested in a strident, angry liberal. Because Maddow is now established on cable TV, she speaks to a much larger audience -- one that doesn't necessarily agree with her. She may have had to scheme her way onto Air America in the first place, but she is in many ways the network's greatest success story.
Posts
All Comments
Popeye became a Depression-era hero soon after he first appeared in the 1929 comic strip, Thimble Theatre. Segar drew Popeye as a “working-class Joe” who suffered torment from Bluto — sometimes known as Brutus — until he “can't stands it no more”. Wolfing down spinach turned Popeye into a pumped-up everyman hero, making the case for good over evil. source: Times UK
