Working Blue

[Bloggingheads]

[brucds]

Cyd Charisse violated the rule of 3.

[brucds]

On Mickey's idiotic, potentially disastrous Obama VP fav, Ed Rendell, I think it's amazing that Hillary Clinton campaigned for weeks with a guy at her side who effusively praised Louis Farrakhan in his presence at an NOI mosgue, caught on a video tape, and nobody seems to even know about it, much less see it looped on cable. Remember Hillary hammering Obama with that "reject and denounce" bullshit re: Farrakhan ?


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...g_n_97784.html

[uncle ebeneezer]

Bob, I was joking on the Ivory Tower remark. I agree with you that tennis and golf really aren't indicative of "elite" status nowadays, but that is just the kind of silly statement that I could see your Republican foes (Mickey) using against you to try to disprove your everyman persona. Golf courses and tennis courts are incredibly diverse nowadays and one could argue that they are even more so than basketball courts (which tend to be predominantly black) or soccer fields (Mexican & Latin American). Although i would venture to guess that if one looked at income levels, golf and tennis would still represent more economically prosperous participants than basketball or soccer.

Of course, had I been serious about the "ivory tower" thing then your rebuttal would be slightly off-topic. I was referring to how people would treat you based on being a FAN of golf and tennis, not playing them. And while I've seen great growth in diversity on the courts and link, thanks in no small measure to the successes of Tiger Woods and the Williams sisters, I still find that hardcore fans of both sports (The kind of people who get up in the morning to watch wimbledon or early rounds of major golf tourneys) that I come into contact with still tend to be largely White, and always of a high income level. And since you had never mentioned being a FAN of basketball or baseball etc., but then you mentioned both tennis and golf, well...

PS is there any footage out there of Bob/Mickey running ball back in the day? Who knew.

[InJapan]

The combination of orange Bob and cyan Mickey I find particularly disturbing. This is like looking at an old color photo negative.

[Mean Dean]

I was trying to notice whether Mickey's pupils were indeed successfully dilated.

I think I can see it.

[Gadsden]

Bob's position on torture seems contradictory. On one hand, he says that the criteria for whether torture is justified should be laid out clearly in advance, and not justified by hindsight results. On the other hand, he think that the law should allow no exceptions and that the president should be personally responsible for justifying exceptions to the no torture policy. It's hard to think of a more results-oriented, hindsight-driven policy approach.

[Wonderment]

Bob's position on torture seems contradictory. On one hand, he says that the criteria for whether torture is justified should be laid out clearly in advance, and not justified by hindsight results. On the other hand, he think that the law should allow no exceptions and that the president should be personally responsible for justifying exceptions to the no torture policy.

Bob's view is that torture should never be legal, and that includes waterboarding and the other "enhanced interrogation techinques" authorized by Bush, Powell, Rumsfeld, Cheney and others.

Crystal clear and not contradictory.

He is saying that the president should be prosecuted for violating that law if s/he orders torture, but that a jury might be persuaded not to convict if the torture appears somehow justified when all the evidence is in and the arguments made.

Bob is simply saying that in a ticking-bomb scenario, the jury would nullify the law and acquit.

[jdpeace]

Hey guys. Quick fact-check. The Ivies don't have athletic scholarships, so Bradley didn't get into Princeton on one.

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by jdpeace

Hey guys. Quick fact-check. The Ivies don't have athletic scholarships, so Bradley didn't get into Princeton on one.

I'm surprised Mickey didn't claim Bradley's Rhodes Scholarship was an athletic one, too.

[bjkeefe]

... for calling Mickey on his innuendo posts.

Maybe it won't do much good, but it's good to hold him to account, nonetheless.

As for Mickey's lame defense ("I thought it was interesting ... I haven't decided ... let my readers decide for themselves ..."), I ask: how many times has he attempted to plant similar seeds of FUD about John McCain?

[Wonderment]

The Johannson and Million Man March innuendos are just more attempts by Mickey to undermine Obama by playing the race card.

There's nothing there in either case, and Mickey knows it.

The Million Man March won't be enough to revive the dead-and-buried Farrakhan connection, nor will a couple of emails be enough to cast Scarlet effectively in the role of Hollywood elitist liberal and sultry miscegenistic blonde.

[graz]

Originally Posted by Wonderment

The Johannson and Million Man March innuendos are just more attempts by Mickey to undermine Obama by playing the race card.

There's nothing there in either case, and Mickey knows it.

The Million Man March won't be enough to revive the dead-and-buried Farrakhan connection, nor will a couple of emails be enough to cast Scarlet effectively in the role of Hollywood elitist liberal and sultry miscegenistic blonde.

Maybe we are giving him too much credit and not evaluating him on his own terms:http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/122...8&out=00:27:39

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by graz

Maybe we are giving him too much credit and not evaluating him on his own terms:http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/122...8&out=00:27:39

So the best defense for Mickey against charges of being a sleaze is to argue that he's another kind of sleaze?

[graz]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

So the best defense for Mickey against charges of being a sleaze is to argue that he's another kind of sleaze?

Yes as his counsel, I am sorry to admit that his best defense is either pathetic or disingenuous.

P.S. I am currently listening to today's testimony by Yoo and Addington, perhaps that influenced my answer.

[Wonderment]

Down for the Zinni thing?

Zinni has some credibility because he was against the war and because he's not an imbecile on global warming, but do we really want a Republican general in the Cheney slot?

Zinni, like Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al has cashed in bigtime with defense contrators.

Zinni joined M.I.C. Industries as its president for International Operations in 2005.

Zinni also serves on the advisory boards of eight different companies, including the security testing firm, Mu Dynamics.

From Zinni's Wikipedia entry:

In 2004, Zinni was singled out by The New York Times investigative reporter Diana Henriques for serving on First Command's board of advisors. Henriques alleged that First Command used its military connections "to lend credibility to their sales efforts". First Command defended its affiliation before the U.S. House of Representatives stating, "It would be unfortunate if anyone inferred that these honorable individuals would take any action or support any organization that did not act in the best interests of service members." The SEC and NASD concluded that First Command willfully violated the Securities Act of 1933 Section 17(a)(2) dealing with inter-state fraud. First Command settled without admitting guilt.

Of course, since Mickey thinks Zinni is "a great guy" who wants his children to learn foreign languages, we can ignore the sleazy get-rich-quick factor and refrain from making up sex stories about Zinni, as Mickey has done with John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Ed Rendell.

But Obama would do better to stick with civilians who are not on the military-industrial complex payroll. I think Edwards would be terrific. Mickey sliming him at every possible opportunity is unconscionable.

[graz]

Wonderment:

Thanks for the due diligence on Zinni. Bob sure didn't seem to have his head in the game today. He gave Mickey every chance to put his foot in his mouth. Somehow Mickey didn't fail:http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/122...5&out=00:20:17... Please Mickey finish the thought. "I don't think doubling down on African Americans is ________?"

[look]

Originally Posted by graz

Please Mickey finish the thought. "I don't think doubling down on African Americans is ________?"

-a good idea
-politically savvy
-gonna fly

graz, my former fellow Mickey fan...where's the Mickey love?

[graz]

Originally Posted by look

graz, my former fellow Mickey fan...where's the Mickey love?

I'll condense my reply to both of your posts here.

Call me conflicted about the love part. He is like a friend that infuriates, yet I wouldn't stop seeing him.
Not only would I miss him, I really don't want him to go.
My overreaction is to what you portrayed as his courage. It reminds me of a slogan that a radio station of my youth employed:
"Daring to be different." BFD.

The problem is that he is not using a microscope. It's a Mickeyscope - he sees what he wants and doesn't feel the need to investigate.
That is gossip, not news. He may only be in it for the traffic as he jokingly admitted to Bob about putting Scarlett in his heading for increased hits. Good for him, and he needn't justify his role.

But I think you give the provocateur too much credit. His claim to support is not merely hypocritical - it reduces journalism to joke telling.

A blind unexamined link to the mere fact that Obama attended MMM serves you how? Did you need him for that? If that is new to you, will you filter it through a Shelby Steele prism to further psychologize the half-black man. Thanks for that Mickey. Public service rendered.

While sometimes entertaining, the Mickey/Bob shtick has limited value for me. Debate on issues - fine (un-pc or otherwise). Denial of rumor mongering and racially charged innuendo - not so much. Like I said, if a friend continues to lie to me, maybe he's no longer a friend.

[look]

Call me conflicted about the love part. He is like a friend that infuriates, yet I wouldn't stop seeing him.
Not only would I miss him, I really don't want him to go.
My overreaction is to what you portrayed as his courage. It reminds me of a slogan that a radio station of my youth employed:
"Daring to be different." BFD

I didn't use the word courage.

The problem is that he is not using a microscope. It's a Mickeyscope - he sees what he wants and doesn't feel the need to investigate.
That is gossip, not news. He may only be in it for the traffic as he jokingly admitted to Bob about putting Scarlett in his heading for increased hits. Good for him, and he needn't justify his role.

But I think you give the provocateur too much credit. His claim to support is not merely hypocritical - it reduces journalism to joke telling.

Kausfiles is a blog...is he touting himself as a serious journalist? This is a venture for earning money and drawing hits to Slate.

A blind unexamined link to the mere fact that Obama attended MMM serves you how? Did you need him for that? If that is new to you, will you filter it through a Shelby Steele prism to further psychologize the half-black man. Thanks for that Mickey. Public service rendered.

Here's the part I don't understand. What is wrong with just a link? It's his site. He's Mickey. Case closed. I think the likely truth is that the link was pretty harsh, and not commenting on it was Mickey laying off. If anything should be questioned, it's the conservative sourcing.

(Does anyone have an icepack for that right hook graz just threw? )

[graz]

Originally Posted by look

(Does anyone have an icepack for that right hook graz just threw? )

Just a glancing blow, sorry.

Damn, he's not a journalist? He's a Bloggist. My bad.

[Mean Dean]

If you want a general, how is Zinni a better option than Wes Clark? Clark is:

- An actual Democrat
- Better known
- Has been through a presidential campaign already; has talked a lot on TV and in political settings; generally more experienced politically (compared to a total neophyte, anyway)
- Was also against the war
- As a very loyal Clintonista, would help win over the holdouts
- Since he's staked out liberal positions on social issues and doesn't have a "tough guy" personality, wouldn't make Obama look like a wimp who needed a manly man beside him

Literally the only advantage I see for Zinni is that he has connections to the swing states Pennsylvania and Virginia, which I honestly think makes very close to zero difference (and which neither Bob nor Mickey mentioned.) Well, I think Clark was against the surge while Zinni was not, but I think only Mickey would see that as a significant advantage for Zinni.

Edwards would be the safest choice, since everyone already knows him and polls show he'd help the ticket substantially. These are your two best candidates, I think.

[Wonderment]

Agreed that Clark would be better than Zinni, if only on the grounds that he's a loyal Democrat.

The thought of Colin Powell as VP (floated here and in previous BHVlog) is simply ridiculous. Will just any general do? Even one who lied his ass off to the UN Security Council, sat in on torture authorization meetings and sold the bogus war of choice to the American people?

But even more troubling than We-need-a-military-macho-man-to-buff-up-Obama is the Surge-opponents-were-proven-wrong meme that Mickey and the rest of the right wing have been promoting.

Mickey claims that Zinni got two things right: being anti-war and pro-surge. But the surge is costing a fortune, Americans are dying and being maimed every day, Iraq remains a basket case on the verge of failed-statehood, and there's little reason to believe continued US military presence will lead to better mid or long-term benefits for Iraqis.

Violence is down for the moment in Iraq, but that may have much more to do with ethnic cleansing than with an uptick in US troops.

Also, subtling treating the two decisions -- war and surge -- as if they were of equal weight, is outrageous. Waging war on Iraq in 2003 was one of the worst decisions in the history of the country. Being right or wrong on the surge pales by comparison.

Bottom line: The surge will probably be debated for decades, but branding it as a "success" when the prognosis for Iraq remains horrific and the costs of war to the US in blood and treasure are astronomical is nothing more than Bush-McCain-Mickey propaganda.

[look]

Originally Posted by Mean Dean

If you want a general, how is Zinni a better option than Wes Clark? Clark is:

- An actual Democrat
- Better known
- Has been through a presidential campaign already; has talked a lot on TV and in political settings; generally more experienced politically (compared to a total neophyte, anyway)
- Was also against the war
- As a very loyal Clintonista, would help win over the holdouts
- Since he's staked out liberal positions on social issues and doesn't have a "tough guy" personality, wouldn't make Obama look like a wimp who needed a manly man beside him

Literally the only advantage I see for Zinni is that he has connections to the swing states Pennsylvania and Virginia, which I honestly think makes very close to zero difference (and which neither Bob nor Mickey mentioned.) Well, I think Clark was against the surge while Zinni was not, but I think only Mickey would see that as a significant advantage for Zinni.

Edwards would be the safest choice, since everyone already knows him and polls show he'd help the ticket substantially. These are your two best candidates, I think.

Clark may have been against the war, but he talked a blue streak on CNN during the invasion. I marveled how glibly he could go on hour after hour, day after day. I do think he would be a good choice. As Chris Matthews doofily said about Edwards and Obama on stage during Edwards' endorsement, 'just sit back and enjoy the sheer physicality of the pair.' I think Clark and Obama would look well together and the electorate would find Clark an acceptable back-up. Clark would be non-threatening and down-right obsequious. Edwards? Meh. He'd be ok, but I don't think he added much to the Kerry ticket. Bad Karma.

[StillmanThomas]

At long last, Mickey agrees with my vicious, curmudgeonly criticism of him. I feel so vindicated!

[Eastwest]

This has got to be the most boring Wright-Kaus DV ever.

But at least I now get why this site has its ghastly-green color scheme: BW was reminiscing about some golf course (or maybe pea soup) when choosing from designer options.

Warning: Never watch these things. Make sure you're at least doing something useful (like washing dishes), otherwise, post-DV, it will feel like a wasted hour.

EW

[bjkeefe]

It's entirely understandable why this 24 June story didn't make the cut, given the importance of the Scarlett Johansson email crisis and the ongoing obsession with the veepstakes, but I wouldn't have minded hearing it mentioned: Government Study Criticizes Bush Administration’s Measures of Progress in Iraq.

The author of the article, James Glanz, the NYT's Baghdad bureau chief, also appeared on Fresh Air yesterday, where he expanded upon some of the points addressed in his article. Well worth a listen.

Jargon watch: Writing in a letter disputing the GAO's report, as noted in the article, the acting deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East says that the Pentagon ...

... “nonconcurs” with the conclusion that a new strategy for stabilizing Iraq was needed.

I don't know which is more hilarious, his jargon or his job title.

[Wonderment]

“nonconcurs”

That is truly non-unamazing.

I'm looking anti-backward to unignoring the report.

[handle]

Originally Posted by Wonderment

“nonconcurs”

That is truly non-unamazing.

I'm looking anti-backward to unignoring the report.

Your comment seems a little predisenconcurtious.. yet I am compelled to concurify.
I'm done... carry on

[jdpeace]

A good Slate piece on Bradley's SATs and what to take away from the test in general.

http://www.slate.com/id/73787/

Points out that while Bush stayed mired as a C-student through his college career, Bradley overcame some early freshman struggles to graduate with honors and (as a another commenter pointed out) win a Rhodes Scholarship, where his ability to play basketball would not have come so much in handy.

[osmium]

rush limbaugh balanced by josh marshall? a testament to the might of josh marshall or an insulting equivalence? oh no.

[harkin]

Bob's and Carlin's 'C' words are different, Bob's is 'Coulter'.

As much as I liked and laughed at Carlin in my lifetime, I also recognize that he sometimes pandered to racism (whites and the Blues) and fear of 'the man' (his cop-out on the 9/11 truthers, give me Penn & Teller any day).

He was no Lenny Bruce.

[TwinSwords]

Originally Posted by harkin

As much as I liked and laughed at Carlin in my lifetime, I also recognize that he sometimes pandered to racism (whites and the Blues)

Carlin did not pander to racism. I've been listening his routines for 30 years, and have never heard him utter a word that could even remotely be construed as racist. Carlin grew up in Manhattan and, as a teenager, attended high school in Harlem. From the earliest age, he was surrounded by and friends with people of all races; like most people who grow in cities, Carlin loved all people and reveled in the diversity he saw all around him.

I suspect what you are really trying to pull here is the old Republican "reverse racism" canard, which is essentially a repackaging of the KKK's cry of "race traitor." Is that what you're saying? That Carlin pandered to anti-white racism?

I would guess so, since you cited this "anti-white" routine.

Originally Posted by harkin

[Carlin] sometimes pandered to [...] fear of 'the man' (his cop-out on the 9/11 truthers

Carlin never pandered to fear of anyone or anything; he was fearless. And you're so vague that it's impossible for anyone to know what you are talking about with reference to a "cop-out" on 9/11. I suppose you mean his non-committal "I always question the received reality; the consensus reality is often intentionally misleading," and "it's just speculation."

Originally Posted by harkin

He was no Lenny Bruce.

You're right. He far surpassed Lenny Bruce. George Carlin is to Lenny Bruce as Nolan Ryan is to Denny McLain.

[uncle ebeneezer]

If you loved Carlin & Bruce, check out Bill Hicks. He combined Carlin's humor with Bruce's social commentary in a way that was, IMO, greater than the sum of the parts. He was calling out the evils of the GOP (at the top of his lungs) back during the Reagan years, and yet doing it in a very funny way.

[harkin]

Originally Posted by TwinSwords

Carlin did not pander to racism. I've been listening his routines for 30 years, and have never heard him utter a word that could even remotely be construed as racist. Carlin grew up in Manhattan and, as a teenager, attended high school in Harlem. From the earliest age, he was surrounded by and friends with people of all races; like most people who grow in cities, Carlin loved all people and reveled in the diversity he saw all around him.

Hmmm, are you saying that it's impossible for a white who grows up around blacks to become a racist? What a curious opinion.

My point about his 'whites singing the blues' routine was not only that it included a very Rev Wright similar meme of 'only blacks get the blues', but that it also had a very racist 'get the hell off the dance floor' part that pandered to the very worst racial stereotypes. You probably don't realize it but it's just as racist as if Carlin had chatised blacks for reading books and had said 'get the hell out of the library'.

In case you still don't understand, applying attributes to people based on race, whether negative or positive, is still racist. And I would think that the KKK also might agree with Carlin (and yourself apparently) that only blacks understand black music. What a crock of sh*t. If you project this brilliant bit of philosophy onto politics and life, you could actually be eligible for grand wizard.

Originally Posted by TwinSwords

I suspect what you are really trying to pull here is the old Republican "reverse racism" canard, which is essentially a repackaging of the KKK's cry of "race traitor." Is that what you're saying? That Carlin pandered to anti-white racism?

Another gem, for me to say that everyone is unique, that talent, honesty and intelligence has nothing whatsoever to do with race, is akin to being in the KKK?

Brilliant

Originally Posted by TwinSwords

That Carlin pandered to anti-white racism?

Whoops - maybe you are starting to get it.

Originally Posted by TwinSwords

Carlin never pandered to fear of anyone or anything; he was fearless. And you're so vague that it's impossible for anyone to know what you are talking about with reference to a "cop-out" on 9/11. I suppose you mean his non-committal "I always question the received reality; the consensus reality is often intentionally misleading," and "it's just speculation."

Here is absolutely a coward, he uses a variation on the form of 'always question the man' instead of offering even the remotest idea that the 9/11 truthers may be the delusionists they are.


But let me be clear, I'm the first to admit that I too laughed at many of Carlin's non-racist, non-anti-establishment pander routines.

Originally Posted by TwinSwords

You're right. He far surpassed Lenny Bruce. George Carlin is to Lenny Bruce as Nolan Ryan is to Denny McLain.

Not even close, Bruce was Koufax to Carlin's Max Patkin

[Baltimoron]

Lord Baltimore?

I don't bow to no lord, especially no Catholic Tory Englishman!

[harkin]

Originally Posted by Baltimoron

Lord Baltimore?

I don't bow to no lord, especially no Catholic Tory Englishman!

Instead of the founder of Maryland, I prefer the Indian tracker.

[Abu Noor Al-Irlandee]

Muhammad Ali did apply for conscientious objector status. He was turned down by the local draft board and state appeal board. After a long investigation and hearing, the Department of Justice hearing officer recommended that Ali be granted c.o. status. The Department of Justice, without giving any real justification overruled the hearing officer and denied c.o. status. As we all know the case went all the way to the Supreme Court where Ali prevailed 8-0.

http://abunooralirlandee.wordpress.com

[Abu Noor Al-Irlandee]

I would also like to preemptively come clean and admit, that I also attended the Million Man March and I'm not an African American Politician, so I don't really have a good excuse. Also, as an Orthodox Sunni Muslim, but I have serious problems with Minister Farrakhan on some theological issues. Still, I attended. (I did happen to be attending Georgetown Law School at the time so I was able to just walk a few blocks after class -- I didn't have to take a long bus trip or anything).

I found Mr. Kaus' whole explanation of this post to be completely disingenuous. Who, exactly does Mr. Kaus think is the type of person who would initially have a problem with someone attending the Million Man March, but would then think it was okay because Spike Lee made a movie about it? I would almost argue that throwing Spike Lee's name into it seems basically designed to compound whatever stigma attending the Million Man March would have on Obama.

http://abunooralirlandee.wordpress.com

[TwinSwords]

Originally Posted by Abu Noor Al-Irlandee

I would also like to preemptively come clean and admit, that I also attended the Million Man March and I'm not an African American Politician, so I don't really have a good excuse.

Come clean? Admit? Good excuse?

Are these just figures of speech? Or do you really believe that attending the MMM is something you need an excuse for?

It's just sad that there would be ANY potential to smear someone simply because they attended that harmless event.