Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-29-2008, 05:54 PM
Bloggingheads Bloggingheads is offline
BhTV staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,936
Default The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Afterthought

At present, some viewers may be unable to, well, view this diavlog on the video page. We are working to resolve the issue. In the meantime, the wmv and mp3 files are available for download.

--BhTV staff

Last edited by David; 08-29-2008 at 05:59 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-29-2008, 06:02 PM
popcorn_karate popcorn_karate is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,644
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Bill's mohawk rocks!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-29-2008, 07:39 PM
Joel_Cairo Joel_Cairo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cambridge MA
Posts: 198
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Bill Scher FTW!!!
__________________
Full Disclosure: I work for BhTV.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-29-2008, 10:51 PM
brucds brucds is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 940
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Could we get Eli Lake and David Frum discussing the Sarah Palin nomination ?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-30-2008, 01:44 AM
brucds brucds is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 940
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

I was kidding, but I was also prescient in the notion that having serious neo-con foreign policy guys discussing Palin would be lots of fun for those of us who think the McCain campaign is going to Twin Cities in a caravan of clown cars. Frum here:

http://www.nationalpost.com/national...html?id=756704

I Love Palin. McCain has destroyed any vestiges of credibility. But I'm an unpatriotic prick for stating the obvious because....drum roll....John McCain was a POW! Time for the Question of Questions - Why do rank liberals such as myself "hate America" ? Maybe because of the fatuousness of so many of it's alleged "serious men" and "heroes" - like John McCain. All kidding aside, I sure as hell hate this Republican Party.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-30-2008, 02:12 AM
InJapan InJapan is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 92
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucds View Post
All kidding aside, I sure as hell hate this Republican Party.
We never could have guessed.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-30-2008, 02:24 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Even given all I know about Conn, I still cannot believe he can sit their with a straight face, complaining about MSNBC's bias and Keith Olbermann's manners. I don't care that he claims never to watch Fox News. There on his team, they are for more dishonest in their bias, and as far as manners go, I believe Bill O'Reilly owns the copyright on the phrase, "Cut his mike."

At least they recorded this before Obama's speech, so I don't have to listen to Conn tell me what a disaster it was.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-30-2008, 02:26 AM
harkin harkin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Congrats Bill on realizing Olbermann is a 'blast of propaganda'. What you call 'close to the edge' is really just shameless disinformation, bile and delusion.

Conn's great point on the difference between KO and Chris Wallace should not go unnoticed (he could very easily have tossed in Chris Matthews and Dan Abrams too - too soon to judge the far-left yet polite Maddow).

MSNBC's claim as being anything other than Obama Central is a hoot. The absolute funniest aspect is that they've adopted the view of the Clintons that they used to ridicule as FauxNews. Happy to expose the corrupt couple but only when a new liberal star needs help. Wonder who they'll be pushing when they start admitting Obama is an empty suit.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-30-2008, 02:30 AM
themightypuck themightypuck is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 506
Send a message via AIM to themightypuck
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Conn is wrong most of the time, but other than the MSNBC politics, he had Bill on the back foot in this dvlog. My perspective was that Conn nailed the problem with Cap'n Trade. I can't imagine how this country would support a government program that increases the cost of energy at the point of sale.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-30-2008, 02:44 AM
brucds brucds is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 940
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

I was ready for MittMania - even a HuckaBoom, but I'm a bit blindsided by PalinPhilia:

http://www.vpilf.com/
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-30-2008, 02:52 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by themightypuck View Post
Conn is wrong most of the time, but other than the MSNBC politics, he had Bill on the back foot in this dvlog. My perspective was that Conn nailed the problem with Cap'n Trade. I can't imagine how this country would support a government program that increases the cost of energy at the point of sale.
Haven't gotten there yet. Thanks for letting me know there something else coming up.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-30-2008, 03:06 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

harkin:

Why do you even bother, when you've got the RNC-TV (aka Fox News) albatross around your neck? Do you really think anyone's is going to take you seriously when you complain about a news station being biased?

And don't try to hold up Chris Wallace like he's at all representative. It won't wash. He's the outlier in that outfit. The bulk of the people who like Fox News like it for BillO and Hannity and Fox & Friends and the regular rotation of guys like Kristol, Krauthammer, and Novak.

Payback is coming, at long last. Deal with it.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-30-2008, 03:15 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Now Conn is being a concern troll about NBC's brand. This is hilarious. Or painful. Maybe both.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-30-2008, 03:25 AM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjkeefe View Post
Now Conn is being a concern troll about NBC's brand. This is hilarious. Or painful. Maybe both.
There has been a concerted effort afoot to undermine KO and MSNBC in general. Page six of the Murdoch owned NY Post is pushing blind items to stir the pot.
Conn has been dropinging the NBC should be ashamed meme for a few months as I recall. Faux concern if ever.

Can't blame them for trying to keep the deck stacked. But as you gleefully reminded harkin... They better get used to the push-back.
I do see the potential for a backlash against MSNBC by the suits at the parent NBC, but not if the demand continues. M$M has money as its middle name after all.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-30-2008, 03:26 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default On TV's political coverage

You want to see (well, hear -- he's off-camera for this one) someone who deserves a shot on TV? Check out this interview.

I didn't realize until recently that Cenk Uygur (Young Turks) did more than riff on the news. This might be the best pressure I've seen put on a campaign spokesperson this century. And it was a guy ostensibly on his own side.

I wouldn't at all mind having him on BH.tv, either. Could be a good new media discussion with, say, someone from TPMtv. Or Bill himself.
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 08-30-2008 at 03:30 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-30-2008, 03:40 AM
brucds brucds is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 940
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

I want a Bloggingheads between the dumbest person at NRO, Kathryn Jean Lopez who is gaga over Palin - or the second dumbest, Goldberg who's also gushing at the VPILF, although that wouldn't be nearly as much fun - and one of the best that NRO has to offer, Bloggingheads regular Ramesh Ponnuru. Here's Ponnuru on the awesome Palin pick:

Quote:
(Palin) may strike people as a reckless choice; it strikes me that way. And McCain's age raised the stakes on this issue.

As a political matter, it undercuts the case against Obama. Conservatives are pointing out that it is tricky for the Obama campaign to raise the issue of her inexperience given his own, and note that the presidency matters more than the vice-presidency. But that gets things backward. To the extent the experience, qualifications, and national-security arguments are taken off the table, Obama wins.

And its not just foreign policy. Palin has no experience dealing with national domestic issues, either. (On the other hand, as Kate OBeirne just told me, we know that Palin will be ready for that 3 a.m. phone call: Shell already be up with her baby.)
(I'm glad Kate O'Beirne said that and not Joe Biden.)
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-30-2008, 05:14 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by themightypuck View Post
Conn is wrong most of the time, but other than the MSNBC politics, he had Bill on the back foot in this dvlog. My perspective was that Conn nailed the problem with Cap'n Trade.
Now that I've had a chance to listen, I don't at all agree with your perspective.

I don't know enough about Cap and Trade to be able to fully evaluate the worth of the points raised, but listening to these two, I did not at all sense that Conn "had Bill on the back foot" or "nailed" anything. It sounded like Bill was trying to explain a new program while not being sure of how wonky he should be, given the audience, and Conn had a set of simplistic objections that he's well-rehearsed at delivering.

Conn, as usual, also did his trick of slipping in half-truths everywhere along the way, which obviously annoys and frustrates Bill, which is just as obviously Conn's intent. You can tell by the smirk. This diavlog was the same as it always is whenever these two talk about big policy ideas -- Bill tries to talk about the big idea, Conn tries to win peripheral arguments, and often in a less than honorable way.

Granted, I am more sympathetic to Bill's point of view on the whole energy problem. I am convinced that we can't keep doing things the way we have. Also granted: I am convinced that Conn, as a representative of Heritage, wants exactly to maintain the status quo. His paymasters' paymasters want to get every last dollar out of fossil fuel as quickly as they can, the way they have been for the past century. Conn's job is to carry out these wishes by opposing anything that might change the game.

It's almost always easier to play the obstructionist, especially when real concerns exist about short-term pain and transition costs. It's even easier to play this role when you feel no compunction about exaggerating, distorting, obfuscating, and being otherwise disrespectful of the person with whom you're debating.

I don't know how it works for other people, but for me, the longer I listen to Conn play it this way, the more often I think he's close to lying, and the more suspicious I become of everything he says. I'm sure that Heritage doesn't care about winning over people like me -- being short-term-minded, they're all about 50% + 1. But I thought I'd throw that out there anyway -- maybe a seed will get planted.

Quote:
I can't imagine how this country would support a government program that increases the cost of energy at the point of sale.
That's exactly the sort of vague and ominous-sounding rhetorical tactic that Conn uses all the time in these diavlogs. Could we support a program that raised the price of energy 0.01% at the point of sale? Of course. 0.1%? Of course. 1%? Of course. 10%? Sure, but it starts to hurt. 100%? Probably not, at least not overnight. So just saying something that sweeping is not at all helpful. We don't even know what order of magnitude we're talking about here, and we certainly didn't get a chance to learn it from this diavlog.

There's another piece, which Bill tried several times to get out, but Conn wouldn't let happen. I don't know the details, but it seems to me that the general idea is that part of the C&T plan involves compensating people for increases at the point of sale. It would have been nice to be able to hear a little about that, instead of Conn just interrupting to repeat over and over again, "It's a tax! Brawwwk! It's a tax! Brawwwk! It's a tax! Brawwwk!"

There's a third piece, too. Clearly, we're not going to be able to shut our eyes, wish really hard, and make energy prices stop rising, particularly not petroleum-based energy prices. We're long past the time where we should have begun adapting to this reality. Consequently, it's going to be that much harder to get started, and that's going to mean some short-term pain. Done right, it can be viewed as sacrifice, even investment, with a long-term payoff.

I am prepared, personally, to accept some price increases and to figure out how to adjust to them as necessary. I think most other people are, too, provided they're not being bamboozled with fear-mongering and provided they have some sense that there's a long-term strategy that they are a part of, one that shows some light at the end of the tunnel.

No one likes to think about paying more for something, particularly right away. Conn works for a small group of people who actually have the clout to prevent this from happening to themselves, at least for just one more chunk of time, and they do this by preying on people's reluctance to change their habits and their fears of anything new. They've been doing it for a long time now, and they're good at it.

The problem is, the problem isn't going to go away. We're in a crisis now, thanks to putting off what we should have started on thirty years ago. We're not going to be able to drill our way out of the problem, we're not going to be able to borrow our way out of the problem, and we're not going to be able to invade our way out of the problem. We have to make fundamental changes, and lots of them, and we have to start now.

Maybe not every new idea being proposed by the side that Bill represents is going to work. But it would be a lot more useful to try them, learn from them, make adjustments, and develop new ideas. Simply standing in the way of everything new just won't cut it any more, and from everything I can tell, that's all that Conn's side wants to do.

P.S. Upon re-reading, I realize that you're suggesting that Conn "was winning" on other topics discussed. I'll have to let card check go -- I don't know anything about this issue. If there were others besides this and the MSNBC part, sorry for not addressing them. They didn't stick.
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 08-30-2008 at 05:17 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-30-2008, 05:21 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by graz View Post
I do see the potential for a backlash against MSNBC by the suits at the parent NBC, but not if the demand continues. M$M has money as its middle name after all.
Yes. Ultimately, I think that's what it will come down to, too. If MSNBC can make money while offering a clear liberal perspective, GE is not going to be unhappy.

It'd be pretty funny if they did so well that they started burying Fox News, and all of the sudden, Roger Ailes started lobbying for the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine.

Dreams.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-30-2008, 05:26 AM
banco banco is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Conn gets the best of the argument about MSNBC.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-30-2008, 05:32 AM
themightypuck themightypuck is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 506
Send a message via AIM to themightypuck
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

I'm just speaking about my view of political reality. If a program increases POS prices, I have little faith that it has a chance of getting enacted. I could be wrong. I'm not necessarily against a carbon tax, I just don't see how you manage a meaningful one politically.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-30-2008, 05:34 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucds View Post
Here's Ponnuru on the awesome Palin pick:
Here's the link to the Ramesh's article. It's pretty good.

Here's another BH.tv regular, David Frum: also not happy.

As to Jonah, this was my favorite line from him:

Quote:
... she's an exciting, exotic (yet heartlandish) female pick.
The poor guy. So many competing narratives to spin simultaneously, like a clown trying to keep all the plates in the air. Alaska: heartland! Hawaii: still exotic!

By the way, John McCain is 23 years older than the state of Alaska.

But he doesn't own any houses there. I think. I'll have to check with my staff and get back to you on that.
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 08-30-2008 at 05:39 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-30-2008, 05:38 AM
themightypuck themightypuck is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 506
Send a message via AIM to themightypuck
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

I'm not really in a position to argue the details of card check. I've never worked in a union and don't really have a lot of perspective here. My view on unions is mostly positive and historical, but I can't see why union elections shouldn't run by rules similar to federal, state, and local elections. I admit that my knowledge of the nuances here is weak.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-30-2008, 06:24 AM
JIM3CH JIM3CH is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 157
Default Re: On TV's political coverage

If he were to rename his organization I think youd hear a lot more from and about him.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-30-2008, 07:37 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: On TV's political coverage

Quote:
Originally Posted by JIM3CH View Post
If he were to rename his organization I think youd hear a lot more from and about him.
What's wrong with Young Turks? You mean the Armenian connection?
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-30-2008, 08:20 AM
JIM3CH JIM3CH is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 157
Default Re: On TV's political coverage

Yes. I could never figure out what benefit he gets from that name that would outweigh the down side. I agree with you he is a savvy and interesting commentator and does a good interview.

Last edited by JIM3CH; 08-30-2008 at 02:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-30-2008, 11:28 AM
brucds brucds is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 940
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Okay I've got it - Best Bloggingheads ever. Since it's come out that Sarah Palin and her husband were fundraisers and supporters of Pat Buchanan in '96 and '00, I'd love to see a Buchanan/Frum BH on Neo-Conservatism and the McCain campaign/Palin. The Varieties of Conservative Experience haven't proved good for much else in recent incarnations, so it's up to Bob to mine them for entertainment value.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-30-2008, 02:11 PM
rcocean rcocean is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,077
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Good points by Conn.

Nothing shows the intellectual bankruptcy of the left more than their support of KO. The man's a former sportscaster who can't speak without a script. His childish battles with Scarborough and Matthews show he's incapable of working with others. All the important interviews are shunted off to Matthews or someone else since he doesn't have the political knowledge. He never interviews anyone who disagrees with him. The excuse is, he doesn't want to do "cross-fire" - the fact is he's too dimwitted and slow to effectively counter any opposing argument on a real time basis.

Even if you agree that MSNBC needs a liberal anchor, KO is simply inadequate. He makes Chris Matthews look like Edward R. Murrow.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-30-2008, 02:41 PM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcocean View Post
Good points by Conn.

Nothing shows the intellectual bankruptcy of the left more than their support of KO. The man's a former sportscaster who can't speak without a script. His childish battles with Scarborough and Matthews show he's incapable of working with others. All the important interviews are shunted off to Matthews or someone else since he doesn't have the political knowledge. He never interviews anyone who disagrees with him. The excuse is, he doesn't want to do "cross-fire" - the fact is he's too dimwitted and slow to effectively counter any opposing argument on a real time basis.

Even if you agree that MSNBC needs a liberal anchor, KO is simply inadequate. He makes Chris Matthews look like Edward R. Murrow.
Thanks for your unbiased expertise. You must be a regular watcher?
It must rankle you that your ideological opponents can be more effective and wittier and smarter than your one-note wonders on Fox.
KO is besides the point. The result of the counter spin and reality assessment are a net positive for the viewers. I think they (MSNBC), for the most part, offer an intelligent if biased perspective that allows the audience to make "fair and balanced" judgments. There is a preaching to the choir aspect, but it is an essential push-back on Fox noise.
Also, TV = entertainment. KO may be clownish, boorish and over the top at times, but he drinks O'really's milkshake always.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-30-2008, 03:11 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: On TV's political coverage

Quote:
Originally Posted by JIM3CH View Post
Yes. I could never figure out what benefit he gets from that name that would outweigh the down side. I agree with you he is a savvy and interesting commentator and does a good interview.
I'm not sure how good a measure I am, but the truth is, I was only able to say "the Armenian connection?" after Googling. I was previously aware that there is a long-standing sense of hostility between Turks and Armenians, one that still presents in some Americans who are generations removed from either of those countries, but I did not know the phrase "young turks" had anything to do with this. Until yesterday, the only thing "young turks" meant to me was something like a group of brash upstarts, people looking to break free of constrictions. Which, obviously, is part of why Cenk Uygur and his friends chose that name.

Glancing at their site, I see they have the following at the top of their "About the show" page:

Quote:
Young Turk (n), 1. Young progressive or insurgent member of an institution, movement, or political party.
2. Young person who rebels against authority or societal expectations. (American Heritage Dictionary)
One could read this as them being defensive, I suppose, but my guess is that it's more a case of them worrying that their target audience would be unlikely to know that their name had any significance at all; i.e., that even the American English idiom is not well known.

As I say, I don't know how good a measure I am, but if I had to put a number on it, I would say that I was at least in the 75th percentile among all Americans in general historical knowledge. It is possible that I'm kidding myself about this, or that this is just one of those weird gaps where I don't know something that "everybody else" does, but my best guess is that the overwhelming majority of people in this country, particularly the younger ones, would have even less likelihood to be offended by the name Young Turks than they would be by phrases such as "I got gypped at the store" or "Let's go Dutch treat."

Out of curiosity, are you Armenian or of Armenian ethnic origin? Any connections like that, say, best friend, significant other? If no to both, would you say that you consider yourself above average in general historical awareness?

Anybody else besides Jim have a negative reaction to the name "Young Turks?"

And finally, given our culture's fondness for "edginess" as regards borderline offensive names, do you think that name choices hurt growth in popularity for the Dead Kennedys, Marilyn Manson, Gang of Four, or Spandau Ballet?
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 08-30-2008 at 03:13 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-30-2008, 03:42 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcocean View Post
[...] Nothing shows the intellectual bankruptcy of the left more than their support of KO. [...]
I happened across this post by John Cole of Balloon Juice yesterday. If you don't know he is, he's an erstwhile Republican (note that he's part of Pajamas Media) who has recently changed sides. He could not have expressed how I feel any better, and I suspect that goes for a large number of us.

Quote:
This Editor and Publisher piece about Olbermann calling out the AP for their ridiculous hit piece really is a perfect example of what I consider to be the Olbermann conundrum. While Olbermann is a an obnoxious, overbearing, over-the-top, irritating, pompous, smug and self-referential fathead who is difficult to watch, the reason he gets away with it is because HE IS THE ONLY ONE SAYING THINGS THAT NEED TO BE SAID.

Olbermann and Matthews really disgraced themselves with their schoolgirl gushing last night, but Olbermann was exactly right about the AP piece- it was shit. And just as it was the case with many things over the past few years (torture, the failure of this administration, domestic surveillance), Olbermann is the only one to bluntly and explicitly say so.
On behalf of "the left," I don't accept the charge of intellectual bankruptcy. There's a difference between being stupid and being willing to accept imperfections in an all-too-rare media representative for our point of view. I often wish Olbermann would dial down the bombast even as I'm applauding his main point, but given the choice between him and the sort of equivocating centrist who has been TV's typical "liberal" for the past three decades, I can live with a few personality warts.

As far as dumbness goes, I doubt very much that there are enough pixels in the universe to list every conservative blowhard currently in mental Chapter 11. As far as you finding Olbermann offensive, I can only say: tough. We're sick of letting the right be the only ones who get to televise loudmouths.

I am delighted every time I hear a conservative complaining about Olbermann. It means to me we're finally being heard outside of our own circles. Maybe if people like you started paying a little more attention, rather than sweepingly dismissing "the left," we wouldn't need to shout so loud. But for the time being, whatever it takes.
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 08-30-2008 at 03:56 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 08-30-2008, 04:06 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by themightypuck View Post
I'm just speaking about my view of political reality. If a program increases POS prices, I have little faith that it has a chance of getting enacted. I could be wrong. I'm not necessarily against a carbon tax, I just don't see how you manage a meaningful one politically.
That's a reasonable point of view. Clearly, the plan will need some selling. People will have to understand why they're being asked to fork over their money, if indeed they are. It will have to be explained how much they're really going to have to pay out, what they're going to get in return, and how they might find offsets to the POS pain.

Really, the only thing I'm asking here (and sorry it took me so long to say so last time) is for an honest discussion of the pros and cons. I just don't get the sense that Conn plays fair in these discussions, or that Conn and Bill together are a good way of laying out what's really involved.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-30-2008, 04:18 PM
JIM3CH JIM3CH is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 157
Default Re: On TV's political coverage

However arcane it may be, to a subset of the US population no doubt including some influential members, it would emote the same as "Hitler Youth", which you have to admit is every bit as offensive as the deutsch Hitler Jungend. It is also inflammatory in a meta sense because those with Turkish sentiments are offended by anyone who is offended.

I am not Armenian, nor am I particularly close to any. This issue received some prominence a few months back when congress passed a resolution (to Turkeys displeasure) recognizing the Armenian genocide. I guess I just happened to hear about it.

As to the name, I just remain puzzled as to what benefit Cenk Uygur sees in it. I cant help but believe that it provides nothing but a negative connotation. He, never-the-less, is able to attract quite a few mainstream politicians to his radio program; I can only assume that he would become even more well known if he adopted a name other than Young Turks, even if it were more conventional.

I suppose you are aware that he posts a lot on Huffpo. I do find him worth a read now and then.

Last edited by JIM3CH; 08-30-2008 at 04:21 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-30-2008, 06:33 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: On TV's political coverage

Jim:

Quote:
However arcane it may be, to a subset of the US population no doubt including some influential members, it would emote the same as "Hitler Youth", which you have to admit is every bit as offensive as the deutsch Hitler Jungend. It is also inflammatory in a meta sense because those with Turkish sentiments are offended by anyone who is offended.

I am not Armenian, nor am I particularly close to any. This issue received some prominence a few months back when congress passed a resolution (to Turkeys displeasure) recognizing the Armenian genocide. I guess I just happened to hear about it.
Yes, I do remember that resolution business, and as I said, I did know about the ongoing sensitivities between Turks and Armenians.

Quote:
As to the name, I just remain puzzled as to what benefit Cenk Uygur sees in it. I cant help but believe that it provides nothing but a negative connotation. He, never-the-less, is able to attract quite a few mainstream politicians to his radio program; I can only assume that he would become even more well known if he adopted a name other than Young Turks, even if it were more conventional.
Nothing to say except to repeat that I suspect you are in a small minority in reacting like this, and that most Americans have positive connotations when they hear "young turks," if they have any reaction at all. Maybe I'll drop him/them a line, and see if he's/they've ever gotten any blowback. [Update: email sent. Waiting on response.]

I don't dismiss your reaction out of hand. I'm just saying I don't think it's a common one, and therefore, doubt it's hindering the show's advancement.

Quote:
I suppose you are aware that he posts a lot on Huffpo. I do find him worth a read now and then.
Now that you mention it, I do remember seeing him there, but I hadn't really connected that memory with his show. Thanks.
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 08-30-2008 at 10:14 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-30-2008, 09:43 PM
rgajria rgajria is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Posts: 177
Default Re: On TV's political coverage

http://youtube.com/user/heathr456

Real Time with Bill Maher is here.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-30-2008, 09:52 PM
themightypuck themightypuck is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 506
Send a message via AIM to themightypuck
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

I think Conn is playing more fair than Bill with his "it burns...IT BURNS" response to Conn's true point that a cap and trade program is a carbon tax and that tax will be felt at the pump or in people's monthly electric and heating bills. Do you really think the polis has no preference between (a) paying now and getting a rebate later and (b) not paying now?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-30-2008, 10:06 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by themightypuck View Post
I think Conn is playing more fair than Bill with his "it burns...IT BURNS" response to Conn's true point that a cap and trade program is a carbon tax and that tax will be felt at the pump or in people's monthly electric and heating bills. Do you really think the polis has no preference between (a) paying now and getting a rebate later and (b) not paying now?
To your question: No. Of course they have a preference. But I don't think it's that simple.

Couple of minor points: I'm not even sure what you mean by choice (b) -- sounds like a free lunch -- and I am unwilling to accept at face value your assertion that Conn is making a "true point."

I am suspicious that Conn is making things sound worse than they would be, and in any case, I don't think we have any choice but to start making major changes in our energy policies. So, I really don't have much patience for a point of view that essentially argues for doing nothing different.

Here's an analogy: I don't have any patience for yet another debate about whether humans significantly contribute to global warming. I am only interested in hearing people talk about this when both sides start by accepting that as given, and talk about, say, how bad it could get, or what needs to be done, or how we should go about reducing emissions.

As I said at the start, I don't really have enough of an understanding to be sure about this C&T program. It's just that, based on past experiences of listening to Conn talk about stuff that I do know more about, I'm skeptical. He's representing a point of view that isn't stipulating to enough base-level facts for me not to distrust where he's coming from.

I feel like I'm repeating myself here, so I'll beg off. Please add a final thought, it you like.
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 08-30-2008 at 10:13 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-31-2008, 12:03 AM
rcocean rcocean is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,077
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

If the Left is willing to settle for KO as "their" TV anchor and defend him - OK with me. Myself, I dislike pompous/stupid TV talking heads of any political stripe. That includes Cal Thomas, Sean Hannity, Fred Barnes, and Bill Kristol.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-31-2008, 07:12 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa家h
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcocean View Post
If the Left is willing to settle for KO as "their" TV anchor and defend him - OK with me. Myself, I dislike pompous/stupid TV talking heads of any political stripe. That includes Cal Thomas, Sean Hannity, Fred Barnes, and Bill Kristol.
Glad to hear the second part.

As to the first part, you missed the point in graz's, John Cole's, and my remarks. To be clear: we aren't "willing to settle for KO as [our] anchor." I know I wouldn't say okay, now that we have Olbermann, we're all set, and I doubt graz or John would either. All three of us acknowledged his personality flaws. All three of us characterized him as being a counterweight to the right wing noise machine, and an antidote to the fetish-for-"balance" MSM, that dominates TV. He is a useful voice, and a good first step, and his affect may be a necessary evil, but he's hardly the be all and end all for those of us who would like TV to rise out of the sewer where it usually resides.

I don't think of Olbermann as an anchor, certainly not in the classic Cronkite sense. I think of him as a vlogger with a bigger budget and platform. He is not at all a news source for me, except when he himself becomes the news. Like John Cole, I appreciate his willingness to deploy the moose, as it were, and like graz, I also enjoy him as entertainment.

Finally, I'll repeat that you're making a mistake to think of things in terms of "the left," just as you're making a mistake to pretend Olbermann represents everything about MSNBC or THE liberal perspective on events. It's just not that simple. You're hampering your understanding of the world by forcing it to fit that frame. Either that, or you're labeling yourself as so far off to the right that you can't see any difference in anyone who doesn't share your sheet music.

If you want to persist in the Bushian mindset of "you're either with us or you're against us," that's your business, but I would hope that you would take some time to reflect on the past eight or sixteen years and realize how poorly that works. I'm happy to hear that you find Hannity and guys like him not worth your time. Perhaps my hope will not be in vain.
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 08-31-2008 at 07:17 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-31-2008, 12:29 PM
ed fielding ed fielding is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 74
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

For inexplicable reasons, I never before now so clearly saw the reflexive emotional/perceptual valence of the word tax for committed conservatives.

This, from one who canvassed for Goldwater (memorably in a black neighborhood in Alexandria VA) and was crushed and despondent when he lost; whose best friends mother was a Bircher; and remembers when Norquist and Reed and the rest were first teething in public.
So tax=evil is no novelty.

But Conns no doubt expert and intelligent and informed response to and use of the word tax surprised me.
I had never seen so clearly that road maintenance might be seen as redistribution or that to tax an enterprise is to tax its clients and consumers. The logic is both plain and perverse. Conn sees the word as a self-evident signifier of evil; reflexively, conclusively, securely, yet with the ironic knowledge that neither Bill nor the liberal viewers grasp his simple truth.
He does this without the devious bluster or cynical manipulation I associate with such assertions. Natural as breathing, no trace of malice. Perfectly sane, to all appearances.

Bizarre and scary. Thank Heaven the majority sees through the scam transparently wrong-headed as it is.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-31-2008, 12:45 PM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Live From the DNC!

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjkeefe View Post
Glad to hear the second part.

As to the first part, you missed the point in graz's, John Cole's, and my remarks... All three of us characterized him as being a counterweight to the right wing noise machine, and an antidote to the fetish-for-"balance" MSM, that dominates TV. He is a useful voice, and a good first step, and his affect may be a necessary evil...

I don't think of Olbermann as an anchor
Yes, yes and exactly.
His role is critical because anchors exist more in concept than reality.
If an anchor were to be defined as a delivery vehicle for unvarnished facts, I would say that I have rarely witnessed such a performance by a so called anchor. It's hard to disprove that bias enters into the equation once a speaker mediates events or "facts." But what Fox created, demands a counter measure.
The AP controversy is a telling example of what happens when the delivery of news has crossed over into the shaping of opinion (now if I were to cite Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent, rcocean might tune out). But this is why Olbermann's affect is required. One result being that it challenges the acceptance of the dominant and pervasive wire service (AP). Which has a ripple effect, that may demand greater objectivity from a supposed "news" source. Or at least identify their bias.

rcocean: I guess you are aware that you were pushing anti-KO talking points? Do you really believe that he is unintelligent and unable to meet the demands of an opposing view? Yes, he was a sportscaster -so was Sarah Palin. And? His history of clashing with co-workers is all of a piece with performing the dirty work of push-back on the BS. It's hard to separate the valuable aspects of his mission from the self-aggrandizing parts, and therefore easy to dismiss him. But there is a method and a beneficial result. Perhaps even you might come to appreciate the merits of looking at the news through an alternative lens. Maybe not?
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.