Letters to the Editor
-
Richard Wolffe, then with FT, gave away the game once also
He said Bush "charmed the pants off us."
Link: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,386955,00.html
-
Come on Glenn...
You're obviously a closeted unity '08 supporter. You're negative post on that phenomenon was base trickery. Your past posts when taken collectively lead inexorably to that conclusion.
-
O/T Sorry - Harman's letter to CIA re: tapes is declassified
From Raw Story
http://tinyurl.com/2cftcn
Something along the lines of, DON'T destroy the tapes, or I'll deliver a stern look...
-
Glenn
GG:
Before answering your points, I'd like to ask you a question: which candidate are you supporting? Obama? Edwards?
How is that material to this? You are writing about how the press follows the leader, right? Or are you writing a post about how one candidate is getting a bum rap? Clarifying this for me will help me understand your motivations.
It isn't the job of reporters to like or dislike a candidate. That's the whole point.
Exactly, it isn't part of a reporters job. Their job is to report ... to write reports. Reporters are, for the most part, human. Which means that they are prone to liking and disliking all sorts of folks. Just like lawyers who defend neo-nazis. But, if these lawyers and the press are doing their job well, the liking and disliking shouldn't come into play. If your point is that this isn't happening, show me some data that backs that up. Conjecturing that reporters /feel/ something based on their behavior on a bus is crap. But that doesn't mean that you are wrong. Maybe just lazy in this particular ... albeit isolated ... incident. So, I refrain from calling you a lazy person.
Clearly, I'm a secret Hillary supporter finally unveiling my plot to help get her elected -- I waited until the night of the Iowa caucus, criticized the behavior of journalists towards her, and have thus bolstered her "talking points" just in the nick of time.
This is your standard, ironic, straw-man argument, Glenn. I didn't accuse you of supporting Clinton. I was merely inferring and observing based on your behavior. I hear that is fair game.
-
Flamthrower
Sociopaths can be extremely charming when they want something from you.
AncientAssyrian: The piece yesterday on Edwards that spoke of his "beautifully coiffed" rhetoric was just so far over the top that I had hard time believing I read it.
-
Hillary and the Press
When you ignore the press bus, then show up for 90 seconds just before the caucus, you do run the risk of appearing to be sucking up as your poll numbers slip. These things are far more complicated than high school elections, but at the same time it is hard to fake sincerity. Just ask Romney (who is being beaten by a squirrel eating baptist preacher). It really is about more than talking points. Personality is in play.
-
So, what else is new?
These are the same jerks who thought MC Rove was so clever, but could not stop scowling when Colbert put the smack down on them.
-
totoro
How is that material to this? You are writing about how the press follows the leader, right? Or are you writing a post about how one candidate is getting a bum rap?
That's only part of what I wrote about. The other part was this:
And the irrelevance of the differences between most of the candidates is matched only by the intensity of reverence the loyalists harbor for their chosen one and the bottomless animosity they harbor for all the others.
I added in comments that supporters of one candidate will find all sorts of non-existent meaning in anything that is vaguely critical of their Candidate or vaguely supportive of the Enemy-Candiadte.
You're clearly finding meaning in what I wrote that isn't there, so I'm interested in knowing if you're an illustration of what I was describing. Edwards or Obama?
-
Re: Where is Hunter Thompson when we need him?
Hunter/Thompson 2008!
Draft Duncan Hunter/Fred Thompson for 2008!
I'm sorry that ther assyrian guy thinks Obama is the bomb.
He's not.
Barack Obama's delusional Kos diary
Submitted by lambert on Thu, 2008-01-03 02:12.
Obama published a diary on Kos in 2005. Here’s an excerpt.* Readers, I’m not making this up!
http://correntewire.com/barack_obamas_delusional_kos_diary
You have to read it. It's sickeningly "bipartisan" and drips with high and low Broderismm.
-
And now, the rest of the story ...
WNYC, New York Public Radio, had a decent interview segment yesterday on the "political narrative" that we're all subjected to.
The interview, conducted by Leonard Lopate, affirms, with just enough snarkiness to generate a few laughs, what many here are talking and complaining about: the sorry state of commercial news gathering in this country, especially reporting on politics.
Go to wnyc.org. Look for the Leonard Lopate Show. Click the first segment on his Wednesday, Jan. 2 program.
-
Bob Somerby, too.
Can't stop to check if you've already seen this, or if someone else has flagged it... Apologies if redundant.
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh010308.shtml
KURTZ (12/29/07): When the votes are counted and we decide who did well—for example, Hillary Clinton. Let's say she doesn't win Iowa. Let's say she gets edged out by 1,000 votes. Is the press going to savage her as a loser?
MILBANK: The press will savage her no matter what, pretty much.
KURTZ: If she wins?
MILBANK: Well, obviously if she wins by any great margin—the press with Hillary Clinton, it's a poisonous relationship. And I visited the various campaigns out there. It's a mutual sort of disregard. And they really have their knives out for her, there's no question about it out there. So—
KURTZ: And to what extent do you think that is affecting the coverage of Senator Clinton?
MILBANK: I think it unquestionably is. And I think Obama gets significantly better coverage than Hillary Clinton does, and given an equal performance he'll come out better for it.
KURTZ: Is this because journalists like Obama better than Hillary or—
MILBANK: It's more that they dislike Hillary Clinton. There is a long history there, her antagonism towards the press. It's returned in spades. And it is a venomous relationship that I see out there.
-
Now it all makes sense
So the reporters have their little gaggle within which they can develop these stupid memes that the sheeple will endlessly parrot? It makes sense because repeating what you hear and see on TV and radio qualifies as "analysis" and being able to quote Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olberman verbatim means you are an informed pundit in USA2008.
Bullshit Memes incoming!
Hillary is OK with 3rd! Edwards is going to win Iowa (and he's gay)! McCain is surging! Huckabee is the frontrunner! Ghouliani is going to take off in FL! Fred Thompson is boring! Ron Paul is a kook! Kucinich is crazy! The surge in Iraq is working! We are winning in Iraq!
All of the above is true because I saw it on the TV. Charles Krauthammer and Fred Barnes told me so, and they are always right!