MyDD :: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM

Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM

by indydem99, Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 08:45:18 AM EST

The primary campaign has come to an end with Hillary's speech past Saturday. Our leader Hillary Clinton has told us that the time has come for the "two paths" to merge and support our party nominee Sen. Barack Obama. I agree with her.

For Hillary Clinton supporters one part of our struggle has just started. The media misogyny and bias against Hillary has been nothing short of savage and it continues even to this day under the guise of "Anatomy of Hillary's failure". Their snarky attitudes, their veiled bashing continues.

Hillary Clinton supporters on various websites are coming together and we plan to target MSNBC and their biased anchors. We plan to talk to various advertisers on MSNBC and organize boycotts. We plan to target other networks and their media personalities as well that have exhibited similar misogynist attitudes.

Here is a sample of how Hillary has been treated this primary season. Their behavior will not be swept under the rug:

Tags: Hillary, Obama, NBC, MSNBC (all tags)

Permalink :: 303 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (2.00 / 6)

I agree. I'm not going to forget it. I've switched to Charlie Gibson and won't watch NBC news.

by ottovbvs on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 08:50:12 AM EST

EXCELLENT (2.00 / 4)

After Chris Matthews helped swiftboat Kerry, gallant Kossacks forgot all about it. So much for the attention spans of pubescents.

And since Matthews is having diarrhea mouth on Clinton, he is a hero with the Obama crowd - who are unfamiliar with Matthew's tendency to make a 180 degree about face, when the payola is slipped into his soft, pudgy palm.

by layer cake on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:45:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Olbermann will get his (1.75 / 8)

won't we have a laugh when the Repugs who have been keeping his ratings artificially high, drop him like a dinosaur turd as soon as the convention is over.

THAT'S when he finds out that the "thousands" of Kossacks he's been sucking up to are all of 4 sock puppets, and he pissed away his loyal viewers - who are now watching his nemesis BILL O'REILLY!!!!!

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

by layer cake on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:49:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (1.85 / 7)

So instead of going after the obviously sexist Clinton-hating Chris Matthews, you go after Olbermann, who initially defended her on many occasions, including after the infamous MSNBC debate? I think you are blind to criticism. Olbermann became a major critic of Hillary, but it was borne out of frustration with watching her campaign get more and more negative over time as her chances to win the nomination got slimmer and slimmer.

I think you guys ought to give Olbermann a pass - and you probably will once you see how great an ally he is against McCain.

And if you don't want to see McCain taken down, then this diary wasn't aimed at you.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:37:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 5)

Olbermann is the worst of them all. He's become as nutty as Bill O., and his "special comment" rants against Hillary were the final straw.

by Chelsea in 2020 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:48:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 4)

Yea like this special comment!

What a jerk!

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:50:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 4)

Of course you forget about this one when Olbermann pleaded with her to change her campaign tactics, huh?

Minds of pubescents indeed.

I'm riding the Low Road Express. Join me at www.lowroadexpress.com

by LtWorf on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:02:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 2)

Huh?

Ferraro was a disgusting embaressment and BLACK eye (no pun intended) to our party.

You are proud of racists like Ferarro and Hariet Christian?

No thanks, I will stand tall and proud behind people who have REAL American values.
Ferraro may have been raised in a different time, but that was the WRONG time.

Please try and come a little better when trying to bash and smear a great progressive journalist who you would love to see tared and feathered and drawn and quartered just because he didn't pander buckly and bow his head to Hillary Clinton.

God you guys ran out of straws so now you want to eat your own.

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:11:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 2)

Who the heck are you talking to? I posted a comment and video to back it up PRAISING Olbermann who tried like hell to give Clinton the benefit of the doubt in his first special comment about her.

I'm riding the Low Road Express. Join me at www.lowroadexpress.com

by LtWorf on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:21:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 1)

Exuse me, but understand that these looney tunes are using that Special Comment as the reason they want Olbermann to 50 years of forced hard labor.

A logical person, especially today would watch that Special Comment and say it was good advice that would have worked had it been taken.

Sorry LtWorf for the misunderstanding.

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:43:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 2)

It's cool dude..

I'm riding the Low Road Express. Join me at www.lowroadexpress.com

by LtWorf on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:26:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks for posting this (2.00 / 1)

Olbermann was spot on.

Anybody's vote is worth having. But not everybody's vote is worth campaigning for.

by Freespeechzone on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:15:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

So you blindly claim something which is not supported with any evidence.

Do you want me to do the work for you and prove why Olbermann is good and Matthews bad? Or are you just a troll from the McCain campaign?

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:50:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 1)

I've given reasons for not watching KO before. http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/2/17203 2/9908

by Chelsea in 2020 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:00:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 1)

Hmmm. Presidency in sight for Democratic party and we should turn our collective energy toward MSNBC, NBC and MSM? I must have missed that in Hillary's incredible speech on Saturday.

It is incredibly hot in D.C. today, wicked hot, Africa hot. How's the weather in your neck of the woods?

by niksder on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:22:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 2)

I can multi-task. And it hardly takes energy to turn the freaking channel, which I have done and will encourage everyone else to do.

Oh, and it's Sunny and 80 out here in LA...like every other day. All the more reason not to be in the house watching MSNBC. :)

by Chelsea in 2020 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:28:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

err... what channel? (none / 0)

why not just ditch the TV.

news is better on the net anyway.

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 02:56:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

Aha. But you see, Obama did not appear on Hannity and Colmes. He was interviewed by Fox News' Major Garrett. And let's not forget that Obama ignored Fox 100% for a very long time until Hillary started asking him to submit to a Fox-run debate and Bill Clinton appeared on Limbaugh.

Hillary sat down face-to-face with O'Reilly - and if you watch Olbermann, you'd know that Keith would go just as nuts if Obama had tried to play nice with Billo. Keith attacks O'Reilly on pretty much every show, and with good reason.

In any case - that's not sexism.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:37:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry... (none / 0)

but Hillary lost points with me when she sat down with O'Reilly. i think that's the point where I came off the fence and moved behind Obama.

She did it after McCain had won his party's nomination, and it was well-known that Republicans were now voting in Democratic primaries to keep the Democratic race going. It seemed very calculated to me as an attempt to say "It's OK" to those voters, who would never vote for her in the primary anyway.

I never caught Olbermann's take on it, but to me, it was a step down for her to appear on Fox like that (similar to Bill Clinton appearing on Rush Limbaugh).

by lalawguy on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:38:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry... (none / 0)

so, are you saying that one should never sit down with one's "enemies"?? i thought that was the central part of BO's foreign policy statements...

by jentwisl on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 04:06:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Olbermann (1.16 / 6)

Olbermann is a pig.

When Olbermann became a major critic of Hillary, he most certainly crossed the line into campaign surrogate for Obama, regardless of the opinions of many of his loyal viewers. I for example used to watch his show all the time, and now never again. I guess I should not be surprised coming from a former SPORTS ANCHOR who has a similar record dealing with women when he focused on that genre.

I did like how he was the loudest and perhaps most effective critic of the Bush administration, but that is not hard to do at all. That is a sitting president who has created a lot of strife in the world after rising to power through a stolen election. His faults are so obvious and the wake of destruction so heinous it was easy for him.

by Al Depansu on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:58:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann (2.00 / 2)

Ok, your opinion is yours, but the campaign is over.

So now your only complain is his job is too easy?

What about when Olberman and Abrams WERE THE ONLY MSM TO PICK UP ON AMERICAN SERVICE WOMEN AND CONTRACTORS WERE BEING RAPED IN IRAQ AND HAD NO RECOURSE?

Not even HRC (the woman's candidate) or Obama (the antiwar candidate) even talked once about these victims of institutionalized rape.
This news hit right at the beginning of the primaries too.

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:05:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann (2.00 / 2)

Olbermann has a daily program, and SHOULD talk about these things all the time. He gets no brownie points for actually reporting news.

No one is saying that KO hasn't done some good in the past, we just also see that he has done a lot of harm too.

Why do you care some much whether people watch him?

by Chelsea in 2020 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:11:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann (2.00 / 1)

I care ALOT because no matter how much we type away at our keyboards the majority of Americans have politics clued out 100%, those who are "smart" enough to know to care get easily dissuaded when they turn on the tube and see right wing smear jobs or even zombie anchoring by Wolf Blitzer, or repetitive xenophobic diatribe of Dobbs.

My point is no matter how much we don't like it the mass media has huge influence over our political system, they can make or bury a story.

I heard about the Iraq rape cases (see up/down thread) for DAYS on liberal radio, blogs, and the Nation magazine.
So in a rage when I conveyed the news to others the story carried little weight since the ONLY MSM to carry it was Olberman/Abrams (people always ask where I see and read it, I always list MSM and independent separately).

See on the streets the media that WE the political elite citizens(face it we are) absorb (blogs, journal, radio)carries no weight because by the nature of it's elitism it ends the discourse since the person you are talking to knows nothing of your sources.

I encourage you to watch this analysis of what Olberman means to our movement.

This is by Cenk Uygur, he just ran a day long panel the Media Reform event in Minnesota last weekend, I think this is a very balanced take:

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:35:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann (2.00 / 3)

Boy you really like this guy.

I am sorry, but his coverage of the NEWS is his job. I am glad that he covers topics that I wish did get larger exposure, but I don't think that gives him license to basically try to destroy a candidate that MUCH of his FORMER viewing base supported.

With his comments and coverage, he wasn't reporting anything at all when it comes to Hillary, since most of his viewers were following the campaign closely. He was just trying to persuade, like a salesman.

I know because I was a viewer. Never again.

by Al Depansu on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:36:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann (2.00 / 3)

When did he try and destroy Hillary?

What falsehoods did he present?

If anything I think he was the most fair and most realistic of them all.

Show me where he lied about her and I will go back to doing the job I am paid to do (but avoiding here)

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:48:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Why would I do that? (2.00 / 1)

If the special comment which was basically a rant against her didn't even make you blink, nothing I say will have any impact on you either.

Regardless, there are enough people that DO agree with me on this issue, and have been for months.

Your insistence in invalidating a PERCEPTION from someone who regularly watched the program is not productive nor correct. I have no interest in discussing this further with you.

Good night and good luck.

by Al Depansu on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:01:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would I do that? (2.00 / 1)

He went over the top with the RFK special comment. So I would say that he's mostly done better work than other MSM anchors, and went a little over the top during the primaries (as did a lot of people). I still think that as one of the few high-profile voices of a progressive perspective, we should be happy he's out there.

Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd. -Voltaire

by kydoc2 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:22:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would I do that? (none / 0)

Yea he did go over the top with that but who wouldn't.

RFK was a prolific candidate that I can only try to comprehend by reading history and listening to folks that were alive at the time.

KO was and I was not.

So to that matter he gets a pass, in the end the whole fiasco did the small benefit of reminding America the profound message RFK brought to us and how he is a hero to our movement and our country.

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:29:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would I do that? (none / 0)

he doesn't get a pass for making shit up.

he made a lot of shit up, such as passing the blame on Hillary's campaign for stuff that was denied.

by colebiancardi on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:38:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Really, it wasn't reporting it was ... (none / 0)

locker room trash talk against the "girl" candidate and he's off my "watch" list forever. Any "movement" that needs a hack like either Olberman or O'Reilly is not one I want to be a part of. Plus, good grief, the guy is so in love with himself he can't be counted on to acurately assess anything more important than sports.

berkshiretrueblue Commited to helping elect a Democrat as President "Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo" Ambroise Bierce

by berkshiretrueblue on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 03:01:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Olbermann is also against torture, (none / 0)

the only anchor on network or cable news to openly and regularly criticize the Bush administration for its torture policies.

That makes him a LIVING GOD, in my book.

by Dumbo on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 06:13:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann (none / 0)

So why wasnt it easy for FOX to bash Bush? I wish some of you guys showed half the outrage for the various crimes FOX has been committing in the name of fair and balanced since its inception. THey have vilified war critics far worse than MSNBC has vilified Hillary. And for people with short memories, they haven't been exactly fair to the CLintons either in the past.

by Pravin on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:11:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

LOL (2.00 / 1)

I don't think anyone here watches FAUX, so there's no need to boycott them. It goes without saying that FAUX and most of talk radio is trash and propaganda.

by Chelsea in 2020 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:18:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOL (none / 0)

I guess you are fortunate enough to have missed quite a few comments from some MYDDers praising FOX as fair and balanced(it wasn't just Terry McAullaugh) that said that.

by Pravin on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:21:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (1.66 / 3)

are you serious? he's the worst of the lot from his shed comment to using rachel maddow as his cover to tear up on a female candidate. after her speech on saturday, the first thing that came out of his mouth was doubt for her sincerity. he was not gonna be satisfied with whatever she said until she knelt down and licked obama's ass. on that point, keith should tell us how it taste seeing as he help himself to a whole scoop every night on his show.

by darwinism on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:38:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

Olbermann criticized Clinton and you can't handle that. It has apparently never occurred to you that all candidates deserve scrutiny and critique. Go after sexism, racism, and Republican love-fests in the media - stop being bitter because someone criticized your personal favorite. You're placing your own personal feelings over taking productive action against media bias. We should be talking about Pentagon-supported media analysts instead of heaping hate on the one guy with the balls to call out the rest of the media on its lies.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:44:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 1)

I'd like to believe that Olbermann's sudden turn against Hillary was based on his convictions, but the timing tells me a very different story. His very good buddy, David Schuster, said some inappropriate things and got some pushback from the Clinton campaign, as everyone remembers. Keith Olbermann apologized that night on the air. Interestingly enough, though his voice sounded sincere his apology itself sounded way over the top - "...we're very very very very VERY sorry..."

Starting the next night and every night for the next two weeks, he dedicated the first 15 minutes of his show to direct attacks against Hillary Clinton.

So you see, some of us Clinton supporters have a hard time not ignoring those dots that are begging to be connected.

The universe is a casual place, not a suit-and-tie affair.

by mtnspirit on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:41:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

I see...so even when he gives an unprompted, sincere apology for something a colleague said, he still loses.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:42:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 1)

You aren't listening, are you? You hear what you want to hear to make your little criticism and ignore the rest. There was nothing sincere about the actual text of his apology. I do NOT think it was sincere. I think he was ordered to apologize and make it sound sincere, then was given free reign afterward to do whatever he wanted.

All speculation, but the timing of his attacks I believe is directly related to his personal rage at the Clintons for going after his good buddy.

The universe is a casual place, not a suit-and-tie affair.

by mtnspirit on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:11:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 1)

You aren't listening, are you? You hear what you want to hear to make your little criticism and ignore the rest.

Nothing like a hysterical response to get people to take you seriously.

But really, it makes perfect sense that Olbermann would be "forced" to apologize for someone else who made comments on an entirely different show. It's funny, but I don't recall Tucker Carlson making a similar apology even though Shuster was guest-hosting for him at the time. Oh wait, maybe Olbermann was secretly named the president of MSNBC and must apologize for everything his employees do!

Thankfully, we've got supersleuths like you on the job to figure out how many "very"s are too many to still be sincere. (Saying "very" twice would've been fine--more than that is obviously a sneaky ploy to be insincere!)

And I'm sure if he hadn't offered an unsolicited employees, people like you would've jumped on him for not apologizing. So once again, whatever he does, he's still wrong.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:20:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 1)

Hysterical - as in having problems with my uterus?

I'm a male, fwiw. T

There's nothing hysterical in the post, so please don't use lame and obnoxious name calling to try and dismiss the point.

The universe is a casual place, not a suit-and-tie affair.

by mtnspirit on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:26:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

When your opening remark is wildly disproportionate to anything I actually wrote--as if I had just insulted your mother--I consider that to be hysterical. I notice how you glossed over everything else in the post, but that's okay. I guess you just read what you want to read before making your little criticism.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:39:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 1)

Sounds like you're describing yourself.

The universe is a casual place, not a suit-and-tie affair.

by mtnspirit on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:44:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

awesome. some of mtnspirit's other response ideas:

"I know you are but what am I?"

"I'm rubber, you're glue..."

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:45:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

So glad you've become an expert on me. Now why don't you try learning how to READ. If you had READ my WHOLE post from the very first we wouldn't be wasting our time with this petty argument. Rather than ignoring the main thrust of my post and then complaining about how I'm ignoring the main thrust of YOURS you might recall that this conversation started when you responded to something I had to say in a way indicated that you only keyed in to one thing that wasn't even the thrust of my post.

I think it's really humorous when people get offended at other people for doing what they themselves do commonly. Case in point -- you complaining about me not reading your whole post.

The universe is a casual place, not a suit-and-tie affair.

by mtnspirit on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 05:48:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

Oh, I wasn't complaining, I was mocking you.

And that was your second response since I pointed out it makes no earthly sense that Olbermann would be "forced" to apologize for another network employee guest-hosting an entirely different show. You seem to have ignored that entirely.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:36:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

All I can tell you is I turned many people onto KO - I felt he was an alternative for me - someone who attempted to be a real journalist - I started watching him last election cycle. I didn't care for what I picked up as some aspects of his personality, but I also wasn't all that concerned either. After all I wasn't inviting over for dinner, I was watching him as a journalist. However with the manner he acted during this primary season I can no longer watch him. I know several others who feel as alienated as I do. He took someone who was a very deep fan & managed to cement a huge amount of negative feelings that will be hard to repair. The manner in which I have been alienated this go around has been quite a feat, I will say that.

by jrsygrl on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 05:07:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (2.00 / 1)

And that was when Clinton launched her attacks on "Elitism", wasn't it? I hope someday you will see the folly of Democratic candidates adopting anti-intellectualism on the campaign trail.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:13:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nah (2.00 / 1)

Olbermann burst through normal journalistic barriers to become a partisan Obama shill.

The "Well, Obama's better than McCain" argument makes perfect sense when settling down die-hard Clinton supporters threatening to vote for the GOP, but not when talking about a media personality.

As far as I am concerned, he was Obama's "sweetie" and I am in no rush to watch his program again.

by activatedbybush on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:53:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nah (none / 0)

Mmm... I dunno. "Try it, you'll like it" can be a pretty persuasive argument. His show is very entertaining and helpful to the progressive cause. You could be angry, or you could be entertained and informed.

I'm just saying, there's plenty of reasons to watch Olbermann.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:16:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I didn't think his show was bad (none / 0)

But I don't watch TV anyway, and would rather not reward what I see as his bad behavior. That hour I would have watched can be spent watching less partisan commentators, staying away from politics (have had too much of this topic anyway the last year) or better yet away from TV altogether!

by activatedbybush on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:34:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I didn't think his show was bad (none / 0)

That's fair.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:37:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Let's see... did Olbermann wait until Clinton lost (none / 0)

to engage in propaganda against her?

Survey says: No. He was blasting Hillary Clinton on February 2, 2008. Gee, what happened AFTER February 3, 2008? Super Tuesday, perhaps?

My name is Barney Gumble, and I'm an alcoholic. Lisa: This is a girl scouts meeting. Barney: Is it, or is it you girls can't admit that you have a problem?

by PJ Jefferson on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:54:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's see... did Olbermann wait until (none / 0)

He was blasting Obama then, too. You want some examples of Keith criticizing Obama in the early part of the season>

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:17:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

While you're at it, could you paste the url to the (2.00 / 1)

videos of Keith's reaction to Samantha Power, and compare and contrast it to his reaction to Geraldine Ferraro?

While doing so, please compare and contrast the blame assigned to Hillary Clinton for Ferraro by Olbermann, vs. the lack of blame assigned to Barack Obama for Power by Obama.

While doing that, be sure to note the amount of froth in the corner of Olbermann's mouth when he talks about Ferraro, and see if it compares to how much he hated Samantha Power (or didn't, however the case may be).

And while doing that, let's PLEASE not forget about the Obama surrogate who brought up Bill Clinton's sperm on Monica Lewinsky's dress. I'm sure you can find a clip where Olbermann blamed Obama and begged millions of people not to vote for him, because of this surrogate's words>

I can't wait to see the videos. Hurry up!!!!!!!!

My name is Barney Gumble, and I'm an alcoholic. Lisa: This is a girl scouts meeting. Barney: Is it, or is it you girls can't admit that you have a problem?

by PJ Jefferson on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:25:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: While you're at it, could you paste (none / 0)

That's a pretty hefty assignment. I'm at work at the moment. Which means either I can do what I offered and ignore what you asked, or I can address both when I get home tonight. I'm going with the latter.

Will you still be reading then? I just want to make sure the effort isn't wasted.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:35:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

LOL, fair enough. I'll check in this evening, but (2.00 / 1)

its a few minutes here, a few minutes there, and most of the time playing with my kid.

I look forward to it, and I only hope that if your research shows that I'm right on this issue, you'll concede my point. That's something I don't think we see enough of on the internet - people giving their opponent credit for a point well made. There's too much bravado on the internet, as opposed to face-to-face (this is a general statement - not directed at you).

My name is Barney Gumble, and I'm an alcoholic. Lisa: This is a girl scouts meeting. Barney: Is it, or is it you girls can't admit that you have a problem?

by PJ Jefferson on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:51:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOL, fair enough. I'll check in this (none / 0)

Well, I should warn you - I'm going to dissect the issues themselves as well.

For example, if you don't want to hear an argument about why an off-the-record remark that Hillary being a "monster" is different from implying that black candidates have an easy time getting elected, you may want to just skip it. This is a topic I tend to get very lengthy on.

I do strive to be fair - however, I do not consider all possible offenses to be equivalent.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 02:14:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Then don't forget to compare every single person (none / 0)

who brought up Obama's race as it relates to this... uh... race, such as John Kerry, and compare and contrast how Olbermann reacted to Kerry vs. how Olbermann reacted to Ferraro.

My name is Barney Gumble, and I'm an alcoholic. Lisa: This is a girl scouts meeting. Barney: Is it, or is it you girls can't admit that you have a problem?

by PJ Jefferson on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 02:40:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Then don't forget to compare every (none / 0)

Geez, now you're going to set me back to tomorrow. Do you want me to pick you up a six pack while I'm out, too?

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 03:31:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Vodka flavored beer? (none / 0)

My name is Barney Gumble, and I'm an alcoholic. Lisa: This is a girl scouts meeting. Barney: Is it, or is it you girls can't admit that you have a problem?

by PJ Jefferson on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 08:53:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Vodka flavored beer? (none / 0)

My wife's friend backed out on their concert plans last night, so I had to go with her instead, thus preventing me from working on the absurd number of tasks you've assigned me.

I'm going to have to give up on the idea of spending hours online finding and editing video clips, and just leave my points unsupported by video evidence. Possibly we'll complete this argument another time, or perhaps forget it entirely. In any case, I apologize for not being able to take the time to do what you asked.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 08:00:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Apology accepted on one condition: Vodka flavored (none / 0)

beer. I want some. :)

My name is Barney Gumble, and I'm an alcoholic. Lisa: This is a girl scouts meeting. Barney: Is it, or is it you girls can't admit that you have a problem?

by PJ Jefferson on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:30:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

If Olbermann had applied the SAME standards to Obama as he did to Hillary then I wouldn't have a problem with him.

He has been a total tool in this primary and I'll NEVER watch the guy again.

I hate Olbermann, not McCain. McCain didn't trash my candidate. McCain didn't play the race card on the Clintons. He also didn't give a "special comment" about Hillary that was totally one-sided.

Olbermann is a partisan hack and he can go to hell.

by mmorang on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 05:27:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Olbermann will get his (none / 0)

Sorry, had to downrate. I had given mojo at first because I thought it was delicious SNARK, but the posts downthread seem to indicate otherwise. Let me know if the original interpretation was accurate...

by Sleepwalkr on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:43:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: EXCELLENT (2.00 / 1)

Huh? Kossacks don't care for Matthews, either. Sure, he's sometimes entertaining--often in a trainwreck fashion--and was terrific when he demolished gasbag Kevin James. But it's not like Tweety has been embraced by the Obama netroots by any stretch. I don't know how else to put it other than that you are flatly incorrect.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:26:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: EXCELLENT (none / 0)

Thanks Johnny, look Chris Mathews is a professional "news anchor guy". Nothing more nothing less.
I don't think he shills for any party except MSNBC.

He has been abysmal before and at some point I totally wrote him off.

But I know people who have interacted with him personally and I believe he is a good man with good intentions.

And I can't lie, the stuff he was saying during the announcement that Obama had clinched the nomination was awesome and worth watching for yourself.

So although I wont defend Chris I hope they keep him for now, I like his show and love how Chris tends to do things his way (hence his high amounts of gaffes)

and now, for Chris Mathews ONE moment where he redeemed every douchbagery thing he ever done [with commentary]:

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:38:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Charlie Gibson? (2.00 / 1)

Seriously?

Did you know Iraq has been a stunning success?

No? Well Charlie will tell ya!

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:46:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Gibson has been the most balanced (none / 0)

and independent of the entire bunch.

I don't agree with him on everything, but he won't throw democrats under the bus, and I guarantee NBC and CBS will.

by layer cake on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:52:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh I think he will (2.00 / 1)

I think he'll play the "Iraq is a success" meme in early October, which will play right into McCain's hands.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:13:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Gibson yeah right (2.00 / 2)

Loved that B.S. debate on ABC...

I'm riding the Low Road Express. Join me at www.lowroadexpress.com

by LtWorf on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:01:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Gibson has been the most balanced (none / 0)

Gibson embarassed his profession when he maintained there was nothing they could have done to shed light on the Bushies during the lead up to the IRaq war.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2 008/05/28/gibson/index.html

by Pravin on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:18:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Gibson has been the most balanced (none / 0)

....he won't throw democrats under the bus...

----

Unless they try to mess with his capital gains deductions, then look out!

by Bush Bites on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:22:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Seriously (2.00 / 2)

ABC is the new FOX.

Some of the most disgraceful journalism I've seen in ages.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:54:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (none / 0)

"I've switched to Charlie Gibson and won't watch NBC news."

Who wasted he first hour in the last debate grilling Obama on petty trivialities. Good grief.

I'm not going going to stick up for the corporate media, just point out how ridiculously hilarious YOUR bias is.

Anybody's vote is worth having. But not everybody's vote is worth campaigning for.

by Freespeechzone on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:10:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

So, You Support ABC? (none / 0)

Remember, they were the ones who ran "The Path to 9/11" a couple of years ago. Remember how all good Democrats were gonna boycott ABC and Disney for blaming Clinton and kid-gloving Bush? How'd that got? How are YOU doing with that one?

God, how people forget everything in the heat of passion.

by RNinNC on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:50:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (none / 0)

Charlie Gibson is a tool.

by Bush Bites on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:19:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (2.00 / 1)

good luck with that

PUMA: Particularly Undeveloped Mental Ability

by wellinformed on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 08:53:53 AM EST

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (none / 0)

Coporate for-profit media is basically always flawed. Corporate news outlets will inevitably serve shareholders and advertisers before serving the public. I understand why people are upset at MSNBC, but turning to other corporate media is not the solution, especially Fox News which is at heart a Republican organization. Speak up when you feel that a media source has been biased or unfair, but always remember that there is no real "honest" news source in the corporate world for you to turn to. The blogosphere has allowed the public to serve as a sort of ombudsman for the media, and groups like Media Matters are doing just that already.

by wahoomatt on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:28:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

They are the problem no matter what (2.00 / 2)

No matter whose "side" any particular news entity seems to be on, the corporate megagiants that were allowed to circumnavigate the anti-trust laws and dominate the market manipulate the news, message, tone, and attitude of the people.

People do not realize how much influence it has since the media is now everywhere, and it is managed by a few.

We were all warned about this, but it was always through a simple website and organizations that definitely don't have millions of extra production dollars available to spread the message.

FOX is not that different than the others. Their "niche" just happens to be diametrically opposed to what most on this site and myself might believe in. Even if some overpowering media entitly is temporarily aligned with my politics at one point or another, I still won't trust it.

This primary season reaffirms this to me.

by Al Depansu on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:07:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: They are the problem no matter what (none / 0)

Mojo to that. Repeal the Telecommunications Act of 1996!!!

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:21:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: They are the problem no matter what (none / 0)

That would be the one Bill Clinton signed, right?

by Bush Bites on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:26:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: They are the problem no matter what (none / 0)

In the name of unity, I was trying not to say that. I haven't forgiven Gore for pushing for the bill, either.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:32:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (2.00 / 2)

the media didn't attack hillary because she's a woman, they attacked her because she's as big a jerk as any male politician.

ed muskie cried too, and the media jumped on him in an even BIGGER way.

she's not a saint, guys.

in her own words: if you can't stand the heat, get outta the kitchen. (oh, perhaps i shouldn't say kitchen.... that's sexist)

also, notice how the headline singles out NBC and MSNBC? where's the outrage at FOX?? i remember reading on this site that hillary supporters thought FOX was the most balanced of the bunch during this primary.

GIVE ME A BREAK!

by minimei on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:10:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (2.00 / 1)

also, i'd be more receptive to this sort of criticism if the diarist were as 'outraged' at the media's racism against obama and ageism against mccain.

by minimei on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:14:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (none / 0)

Racism's dead, just ask Paul Krugman. Colbert backs him up.

by niksder on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:25:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (2.00 / 5)

I think these "journalists" (and I use that word lightly) need to spend more time investigating and not hanging out at blogs to feed their hatred.

seriously, KO spent wayyyyy too much time at dKos this primary season (he wrote a few blogs there to get feedback on his rants against Hillary)

I wonder if he is mature enough to look back at what he did and feel any shame about it and do a rant against himself.

nah. I doubt it

by colebiancardi on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 08:55:23 AM EST

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (2.00 / 2)

I think we should make them realize that there are serious consequences for their behavior.

You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat

by indydem99 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 08:59:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (none / 0)

Hmm, your talk sounds like that stereotypical of a religious extremist (think crazy pro-lifers, bin laden etc).

You guys are so so so silly........ A MSM anchor spends time on progressive blogs?!?!

Light the torches! Lets Lynch him!

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:00:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (2.00 / 2)

since dailyKos doesn't represent the split of the democratic party and was a pro-Obama site, yes, there is something to be said (and not in a positive light) of a so-called journalist whose judgment could have been influenced from such one-sided sites.

an echo chamber is not a good thing in journalism

by colebiancardi on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:24:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (2.00 / 0)

So post primary we still want to decimate the only media that is willing to tell the truth.

You guys would choose Wolf Blitzer over Olberman, that is absurd.

Olberman is a hero to a huge amount of Democratic voters.

We could debate until we are blue in the face about what was percieved during the primary, but the dust has settled, we have a General to win and as far as I am concerned Olberman and Abrams are the ONLY cable/prime timers going after the administration without ANY fear.

And to the point of our own administration I hope the media does not make the same mistake with Obama as they did with Bush.

We are electing Obama for not only his unifying message but also believe he holds the intelligence and JUDGMENT to make the right decision for our country.

We NEED a critical media to keep his admin in check so that they are careful not to make mistakes and when the policies are successful they will be that much more transparent.

And, please think twice before bashing this man:

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:49:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I remember (2.00 / 1)

Right about the time I got fed up with KOS and his site and left it, there was Olbermann and his star power, preening himself for his special comments. I thing he got really big really fast, and started to consider his own judgment infallible and believed his believers a bit too much.

Man, I used to watch him every day, but the fact that there was a writers strike really propelled his fame, to be sure. Watch him sink in the next 2 years, I guarantee it.

by Al Depansu on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:13:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (none / 0)

I thought Kos was a pro-Edwards site.

by Bush Bites on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:25:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (none / 0)

What can we do? How can we make this an issue?

Linfar's co-blogger opposing John McCain

by psychodrew on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 08:57:51 AM EST

Re: Our battle against NBC, MSNBC and MSM (2.00 / 3)

Unfortunately, this is the useless corporate media we have. It's not that they set their sights on Hillary, per se. Hillary was made to answer for every sexist stereotype of women. Obama was repeatedly made to be accountable for every black man who ever said anything controversial (e.g. Wright, Farrakhan).

McCain gets a free pass. It's an unfair game.

by Reeves on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:00:04 AM EST

THey predict, they don't report (2.00 / 2)

There are no reporters on these channels. Especially MSNBC. They just gab, predict.

I think future debates should not be on these channels as it gives them legitimacy. Also plenty of people I know do not have cable.

by catfish2 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:02:13 AM EST

Except for one thing. (2.00 / 1)

These networks are viewed by many people, and shows like Hardball and Countdown are viewed by many people in a set of demographics favorable to our candidate. It's senseless to demonize the main stream media. The trick is to recognize it for what it is, with its plusses and minuses, and use it to your advantage. The candidate that best uses the media has a huge advantage over their competition.

I'd suggest keeping our eyes on the prize. The overriding goal is to get Barack Obama elected, and we need the MSM to do that. Want to boycott them? Do it after the election.

John McCain supports privatizing Social Security.

by Travis Stark on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:07:57 AM EST

Re: Except for one thing. (2.00 / 2)

oh wow. You think that these shows will as favorable to Obama now that their object of hatred is gone?

with the exception of Countdown, the other shows will go back to their McCain loving ways.

The ONLY reason why they were favorable towards Obama was because of their Hillary hatred.

by colebiancardi on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:11:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Except for one thing. (2.00 / 1)

We'll see. I don't think they'll give either preferential treatment, but I think McCain is in for a nasty shock akin to the one Obama got after the Texas debate- in that a previous friendly media can turn on you in an instant if it'll make 'em a buck or two.

Hooray for John McCain!

by ragekage on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:25:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

CNN has pissed on every dem candidate since Gore (2.00 / 2)

Boycott the bastards, and now.

At 10 AM the morning of the SD and MT primary, they announced that Clinton conceded.
How's that for throwing an election?

Obama supporters who think that's just wonderful are going to watch their candidate slammed the back of the head with a CNN brick.

And threats won't do a damned thing. They know you'll come right back, like a yo-yo.

by layer cake on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:58:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Most Obama supporters aren't in with CNN (2.00 / 2)

CNN has been pretty bad this season; that's why we watch MSNBC for the most part. Verdict and Countdown have reasonably good info-to-noise ratios, despite Olbermann's left-wing leaning.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:28:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Most Obama supporters aren't in with CNN (none / 0)

Wolf was a shitty debate moderate.

The news guy was good, though.

by Bush Bites on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:27:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Most seem to like Cooper, I guess. (none / 0)

Anderson Cooper gets good reviews, but honestly I don't really see the appeal.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:33:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You miss the point entirely. (none / 0)

First, most of those network faces you pan for being "in the tank" for Obama, are that way because he is their personal question. There is no question that Chris Mathews, for example, is going to vote for Obama in November.

Will there be bad news cycles? Of course there will. It's best to accept that as the nature of the game and move on, because without ANY press coverage, we lose. Obama's campaign has proven adept at playing the press coverage game, and I expect that to continue. I also expect that some of the more liberal hosts are going to cut him a break. Finally, I believe there's more sensational news in McCain's campaign than Obama's and I expect that to be played by the media.

So decide what you want, but that MSM that you're thinking of boycotting. We need them.

John McCain supports privatizing Social Security.

by Travis Stark on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:09:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You miss the point entirely. (2.00 / 0)

No, they need us. They should have thought of this before they painted her supporters as uneducated and racist.

by Chelsea in 2020 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:12:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You miss the point entirely. (none / 0)

No hun they painted themselves as such:

What HRC staffer in their RIGHT mind would have encouraged this racist bigot, and party turncoat to represent the "protest" of the RBC:

And here is a doosy:

You can't blame the media for everything, according to your logic ANY reporting of negative factors in her campaign are attacks against her?

I can't believe we are arguing history here, there is no context to skew HISTORY anymore as there is no final outcome anymore, we reached it.
Obama won, Hillary lost.

http://www.truepat.org/

by CrushTheGOP2008 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:17:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]