Rank Punditry Edition

[Bloggingheads]

[bjkeefe]

Why oh why do we keep having this pair on? This is a caricature of cable TV talk shows -- Jonah the rightwinger comes on and spews a non-stop stream of "everything about my side is perfect, and all liberals are bad," and Peter the centrist (but plays a "liberal" on TV) murmurs, "You may have a point there."

This diavlog started right off epitomizing why I can't stand Jonah -- given the opportunity to be a little self-deprecating (about not understanding the topic they agreed not discuss), he showed once again that he's either unbearably full of himself, or too insecure, or both, and insisted that lack of knowledge had nothing to do with why he didn't want to discuss it.

I gave this diavlog five minutes. That was four more than it deserved.

Bob, if you insist on having Jonah on to build your cred with conservative viewers, please pair him with someone who is as nakedly partisan as he is. Let's have Rosa Brooks back, for example. This pairing is boring beyond belief, and Peter is too much of a wimp to call Jonah on his howlers in real time.

[claymisher]

There have been a lot of great episodes lately.

I guess that couldn't last forever.

[claymisher]

Naw, Rosa Brooks is too good for him. There's only one person who Goldberg deserves: Matt Stoller.

[claymisher]

Goldberg's too chicken for a legitimate sparring partner though.

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by claymisher

Goldberg's too chicken for a legitimate sparring partner though.

I do get that sense.

[rgajria]

How about Jane Hamsher with Jonah Goldberg? That could be fun. In the rank punditry sense.

[AemJeff]

Originally Posted by rgajria

How about Jane Hamsher with Jonah Goldberg? That could be fun. In the rank punditry sense.

A great suggestion.

[AemJeff]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

This diavlog started right off epitomizing why I can't stand Jonah -- given the opportunity to be a little self-deprecating (about not understanding the topic they agreed not discuss), he showed once again that he's either unbearably full of himself, or too insecure, or both, and insisted that lack of knowledge had nothing to do with why he didn't want to discuss it.

Sadly, yes.

[BeachFrontView]

Jonah using his new Macbook? I thought only east coast liberals had macs. As far as Jonah's remarks about sarah palin, he has apparently bought into the conservative paranoia about how the media is out to get them. You sound whiney. whine whine whine whine

[violetcrown]

Jonah seems to suggest that since the power and the influence of the vice-president has only been so big in the last 16 years, that anyone who fears that Palin will maintain that level of influence is overreacting. To me it seems like a trend that's very unlikely to be reversed.

Is there any reason to believe that the role would shrink again? It doesn't seem like any vice president would want to shrink their own potential responsibilities. The role is very poorly defined constitutionally and as evidenced by Cheney's claim that he's not part of the executive branch, it seems like a person can do what they want with it.

The Palin pick struck me as another surprisingly un-McCain choice in a series of them, as his campaign advisers and tone has shifted. John McCain could very well be a healing, moderate, effective bipartisan president, but I think Palin and the people who go nuts for her see an opportunity here, and I don't really see any 21st century VP fading into the woodwork unless they deliberately wanted to.

I blame my late realization of how scary Dick Cheney is on my then-youth, but fool me once, you can't get fooled again.

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by violetcrown

I blame my late realization of how scary Dick Cheney is on my then-youth, but fool me once, you can't get fooled again.

Rarely is the question asked: is our commenters learning?

Glad to see we misunderestimated you.

[Ocean]

Originally Posted by violetcrown

John McCain could very well be a healing, moderate, effective bipartisan president,

I think that after you scratch the surface of charming bipartisanism, you are left with someone who is rigidly stuck in a world view limited to "To war or not to war." He has no substance, no policy and no ideology. He is a politician by accident. And now, on top of that he is demented. Not much anyone can expect from him, not from the Democratic side nor the Republican.

So, yes, we are talking Palin now.

but I think Palin and the people who go nuts for her see an opportunity here, and I don't really see any 21st century VP fading into the woodwork unless they deliberately wanted to.

Palin wouldn't fade since McCain won't last. But, whether some go nuts for her or not, she is no political leader. She would be a puppet like other Republican presidents of recent times have been.

I blame my late realization of how scary Dick Cheney is on my then-youth, but fool me once, you can't get fooled again.

I hope you are right. Don't get fooled. Vote Obama.

[John M]

Hello My Friend Muffin,

He has no substance, no policy and no ideology. He is a politician by accident. And now, on top of that he is demented.

I am not demented. I get a little confused and forgetful sometimes, but if I'm lost at an airport, a lot of people recognize me and help me get my bearings. I wear a bracelet with my name and address on it.

Let's call a spade a spade. You'd be demented too, if you spent 5 years in the Hanoi Hilton, while B. Hussein Obama was studying the Koran in a Syrian Madrassa.

I may not know who the King of Spain is or the difference between a shoeshine and a Shia, but my fundamentals are as sound as the American economy. That's why I said, "Thanks but no thanks for that bridge to nowhere."

Here's some straight talk: I don't need a big old fat resume with stuff I can't even remember. Here's all a president needs to know:

America the beautiful is the greatest country in the history of mankind.
We are good guys.
Ruskies and Islamofascists are bad guys.

Up is down and War is Peace,
John M

[benjy]

I defend these two! Way above the level of cable news! No shouting and no interrupting! Seriously, this isn't as bad as you're all saying, they both make a number of well thought-out and argued points, which one may or may not agree with, but certainly nothing approaching that exasperating hack financial analyst guy a while back who offered no coherent defense or evidence for anything he was saying with his sidekick interviewer (some kind of Greek name) who nodded along with the guy's Laffable alternate universe....

Peter does differ with Jonah many times, he just doesn't get hot and bothered about it. I actually really like these two--they're both very smart and use language well in service of their ideas, although of course I agree with Peter more being a good liberal BhTVer. Jonah's certainly not as crazy as I figured he'd be when his book came out, in which I'll guess there was some level of provocation for publicity/sales effect.

[Ocean]

Originally Posted by John M

That's why I said, "Thanks but no thanks for that bridge to nowhere."

America the beautiful is the greatest country in the history of mankind.
We are good guys.


Up is down and War is Peace,
John M

My dear John,

Yes, I know that you are a good guy, somehow, somewhere. You just keep forgetting about people, and presidents and kings and queens! And bridges! By the time you were done crossing that bridge you wouldn't remember where you were going... So you'd think it's nowhere...

Good night. Get your sleep.

Wake up America (the Beautiful)!

Up is down as War is Peace. But not if you look from above...

Ocean

[TwinSwords]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

Why oh why do we keep having this pair on? This is a caricature of cable TV talk shows -- Jonah the rightwinger comes on and spews a non-stop stream of "everything about my side is perfect, and all liberals are bad," and Peter the centrist (but plays a "liberal" on TV) murmurs, "You may have a point there."

This diavlog started right off epitomizing why I can't stand Jonah -- given the opportunity to be a little self-deprecating (about not understanding the topic they agreed not discuss), he showed once again that he's either unbearably full of himself, or too insecure, or both, and insisted that lack of knowledge had nothing to do with why he didn't want to discuss it.

I gave this diavlog five minutes. That was four more than it deserved.

Bob, if you insist on having Jonah on to build your cred with conservative viewers, please pair him with someone who is as nakedly partisan as he is. Let's have Rosa Brooks back, for example. This pairing is boring beyond belief, and Peter is too much of a wimp to call Jonah on his howlers in real time.

Peter Beinart makes Alan Colmes seem like a rabid partisan dog. There's no mystery why Jonah likes having him around as a sparring partner.

For what it's worth, I'll go second your request that Bob bring on someone who can actually stand up to the pantload.

[bramble]

Life is too short for an hour plus of B&G. I didn't get through even the 1st topic.

But give the devil his due. JG is correct to say that the william jennings bryant skit is not going to work for McCain. Obama is going flay him alive in the coming debates for the flip-flops McCain has made this week. McCain should have instead tried to muddy the waters about exactly who is to blame for the crisis, as Bush did with the intelligence failures after 9/11. And as D. Gross pointed out in the diavlog before, the Dems do bare some of the blame for this mess.

[bookofdisquiet]

to suggest that this economic crisis is not an advantage for Obama. McCain has been preaching less government, less regulation, government get out of the way, and this crisis is a product of a lack of government oversite. Obama is way out ahead on this issue, with a two minute commercial and solid regulatory plan laid out on his web site. Democrats have an advantage when the free market system breaks down as it occasionally does sometimes and they have a tradition of filling the gap. Free markets aren't always the answer and if this economic crisis continues Obama will win in November. Wake up Johah.

[Eastwest]

Gad.

Conn Carroll, Ross Douthat, James Pinkerton. These are folks I'm OK listening to on Bhtv.

But Jonah Goldberg?

No.

Bhtv is getting worse than NPR. This sense that it's necessary to bring every right-wing idiot personality on as "balance" to mainstream reasonable discourse is just idiocy. When I saw Richard Land showing up, I knew this place was doomed.

Gosh, Bob, can't you uphold even the most minimal standards of selectivity?

EW

[Ocean]

Originally Posted by Eastwest

Bhtv is getting worse than NPR. This sense that it's necessary to bring every right-wing idiot personality on as "balance" to mainstream reasonable discourse is just idiocy. When I saw Richard Land showing up, I knew this place was doomed.

Gosh, Bob, can't you uphold even the most minimal standards of selectivity?

EW

You could say this is BhTV's way of teaching creationism. Just to balance things, you know...

[harkin]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

Why oh why do we keep having this pair on? This is a caricature of cable TV talk shows -- Jonah the rightwinger comes on and spews a non-stop stream of "everything about my side is perfect, and all liberals are bad," and Peter the centrist (but plays a "liberal" on TV) murmurs, "You may have a point there."

Actually, this discussion illustrates the stark difference between TV talk shows and BhTV. Peter is much more interesting when he has someone who actually counters his points and provides enough facts to get him to approach common ground. The alternative is Peter providing campaign talking points and Stephanopolis' head bobbing up and down like one of the dogs that people used to stick in their car's rear window

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

I gave this diavlog five minutes. That was four more than it deserved.

Bob, if you insist on having Jonah on to build your cred with conservative viewers, please pair him with someone who is as nakedly partisan as he is. Let's have Rosa Brooks back, for example. This pairing is boring beyond belief, and Peter is too much of a wimp to call Jonah on his howlers in real time.

Did you get that Bob? Someone who listened to less than 10% of the entire dialogue is telling you a better way of presenting the participants. This has nothing to do with seeking to maintain your standards here, this is just an attempt to dilute Jonah's effectiveness, in essence contradicting the complaints coming from the very same person.

Originally Posted by Benjy

I defend these two! Way above the level of cable news! No shouting and no interrupting! Seriously, this isn't as bad as you're all saying, they both make a number of well thought-out and argued points, which one may or may not agree with.................

............Peter does differ with Jonah many times, he just doesn't get hot and bothered about it. I actually really like these two--they're both very smart and use language well in service of their ideas, although of course I agree with Peter more being a good liberal BhTVer. Jonah's certainly not as crazy as I figured he'd be when his book came out, in which I'll guess there was some level of provocation for publicity/sales effect.

You don't really need to defend the participants, you're just seeing the normal amount of hate and dismissal by the regs here for any discussion that contains points they disagree with (or worse, bits of truth that crack the meme). A good indicator of a conservative making a thoughtful, salient point is the amount of appeals to Bob to ban the person from the site (or the new tact, pair them someone different). I think only one person actually complained about Peter, one of their own, for participating in a polite, respectful give-and-take instead of talking over Jonah (getting in one's face I think Obama calls it). Notice how he earns the Scarlet C (for centrist) just by being forced to concede some alternative points, something you don't see very often when Peter is on TV.

Originally Posted by Eastwest

Bhtv is getting worse than NPR. This sense that it's necessary to bring every right-wing idiot personality on as "balance" to mainstream reasonable discourse is just idiocy.

Did you pick up on that Bob? You're not worse than FOX News, you're not worse than the WSJ.........you're worse than NPR.

I guess that means that if your habit of offering moderates and conservatives a place to hold a civil discussion with a liberal continues unabated, you risk being branded worse than Democracy Now!.

[sam]

I second benjy's comments and am surprised at the negative reaction to this diavlog. I thought Beinhart was impressive precisely because he didn't get hot and bothered. Isn't that what bh.tv is about? Rational ideas not emotionally driven ones? As for bjkeefe's comment about Goldberg not answering because he didn't have a good answer...I sensed that too. That said, I'd like to put my counter vote to Bob to keep Goldberg and even this pairing. I think bh.tv benefits from multiple views. I thought that was the whole point of this enterprise.

[glh17]

Jonah needs to travel the countryside before he defines "mainstream" media. There is no comparison between the "attacks" on Palin by the NYT, MSNBC, ABC, etc. and the attacks on Obama heard everyday on talk radio in my city, Nashville, TN. Beginning at 6:00 a.m. and running throughout the day on two major talk radio stations all you hear are attacks on Obama. Some are local hosts and some are national (Hannity, Limbaugh, Savage).
I listened to a couple of local hosts talk about Obama's tax plan for 2 hours on Tuesday of this week and didn't hear one truthful statement about his plan. Hannity and Limbaugh do about the same thing. I heard that he would raise the average tax rate on middle income earners, he would double the capital gains tax rate, he would raise the tax rate on small business' to 60 percent, he would double the average tax rate middle income and upper income taxpayers. There's still strong support for the idea that he may be Muslum, he dissed the troops in Iraq, he supports Hamas, he isn't qualified to be Pres. because he wasn't born in the U.S., he hates Israel, he wants to teach about condoms in Kindergarten, etc... This stuff goes on 24 hours, 5 days a week. Fox News is somewhat more balanced, but I wouldn't describe it as "fair and balanced." I don't know how you exclude talk radio and Fox News from any meaningful definition of mainstream media if you're considering the effect of media on public opinion.

[Dee Sharp]

This pairing is of course different from a McWhorter-Lowry session, but has some of the same virtues. They know the issues and each other well enough not to waste much time on exposition, or in talking past each other. Their best discussions, such as the What's Your Problem episode on the causes of WWI, are on subjects they don't particularly disagree on. A certain intimacy may be required before a discussion can move toward a deeper intellectual level.

[bookofdisquiet]

Amen. Thank you for highlighting these partisan hacks in this forum-- it would take a full time job to expose most of the propaganda they spew. I'm convinced they suffer from blogginghead's envy--they're jealous and angry because they think they could advance their points better in a head to head with Johah or some other conservative. The truth is, they'd just come off like the irrational, frothing at the mouth, Daily Kos type,--the type that compensates for their lack of argument with smug and snarky insults. I've been arguing with some of them here for a couple weeks now and find myself devolving into insults as well-- be careful--their contagious.

[Ocean]

Originally Posted by glh17

Beginning at 6:00 a.m. and running throughout the day on two major talk radio stations all you hear are attacks on Obama.

I listened to a couple of local hosts talk about Obama's tax plan for 2 hours on Tuesday of this week and didn't hear one truthful statement about his plan. I heard that he would raise the average tax rate on middle income earners, he would double the capital gains tax rate, he would raise the tax rate on small business' to 60 percent, he would double the average tax rate middle income and upper income taxpayers. There's still strong support for the idea that he may be Muslum, he dissed the troops in Iraq, he supports Hamas, he isn't qualified to be Pres. because he wasn't born in the U.S., he hates Israel, he wants to teach about condoms in Kindergarten, etc.

Thank you, glh17, for describing an unfortunate reality that pervades many areas in our country. You depict really well what so many Americans are exposed to day after day. This is all they hear. Lies and fear are the game. No wonder they vote Republican!

What I quite can't understand is how the Republican party and their media allies have managed to dominate this sector. Is it the Democrats' laziness or neglect of this population? Why don't Dems have a voice in rural America?

Regardless of the results of this election, the democratic party has to take this more seriously and try to develop a strategy to reach everybody. People are voting delusions. We can't afford that.

[michael.098762001]

As one who is on the social democratic Left (regular reader of Dissent magazine, The American Prospect) but, also of NRO and The Weekly Standard, I appreciate these dialogues between Beinart (whose book on Cold War Liberalism made some useful points vs. 60's New Left "anti-imperialism" his detractors here should consider, btw) and Goldberg. Far better than than extremely demogogic Jane Hamsher...who struck me as a hip version of my old Stalinist relatives who mutter that Trotsky was a Fascist.

[Ocean]

Originally Posted by bookofdisquiet

Amen. Thank you for highlighting these partisan hacks in this forum-- it would take a full time job to expose most of the propaganda they spew. I'm convinced they suffer from blogginghead's envy--they're jealous and angry because they think they could advance their points better in a head to head with Johah or some other conservative. The truth is, they'd just come off like the irrational, frothing at the mouth, Daily Kos type,--the type that compensates for their lack of argument with smug and snarky insults. I've been arguing with some of them here for a couple weeks now and find myself devolving into insults as well-- be careful--their contagious.

It may be contagious. You do sound envious and angry. I think that it would be more productive for you and harkin to comment on ideas and arguments instead of attacking the commenters. We will continue to express our opinions as we please, regardless of your whining.

Are you frothing at the mouth? I can't tell from your font...

[tomarsaigo]

I too am a fan of this pairing. While it certainly does qualify as "rank punditry," they go about it in a knowledgable and respectful manner that frequently draws upon historical trends and adds a sense of perspective. As such, their diavlogs are infinitely more valuable then simply listening to two hacks (like, I don't know... Carroll and Scher) argue about the merits of the latest garbage circulating around the blogosphere.

Goldberg certainly has the tendency to come of as a jackass when he's parroting talking points on FOX News or in other forums (or defending his absurd book for that matter) and I think that a explains a lot of the contempt for him in this forum. But as a BHTV persona, I thinks he's perfectly fine and actually contributes a lot, especially when paired with Beinart.

[basman]

Haven't even heard this one yet--some guys work for a living--but thanks on at least three grounds for keeping Goldberg coming back:

1. He's plenty good;

2. Telling the protesters against him implicitly to stuff it where the moon don't shine; and

3. He also counter balances that screaming, shreiking excuse for a thinking person--Jane Hamsher, who I don't tell you not to have on here.

Itzik Basman

[AemJeff]

Originally Posted by Ocean

Thank you, glh17, for describing an unfortunate reality that pervades many areas in our country. You depict really well what so many Americans are exposed to day after day. This is all they hear. Lies and fear are the game. No wonder they vote Republican!

What I quite can't understand is how the Republican party and their media allies have managed to dominate this sector. Is it the Democrats' laziness or neglect of this population? Why don't Dems have a voice in rural America?

Regardless of the results of this election, the democratic party has to take this more seriously and try to develop a strategy to reach everybody. People are voting delusions. We can't afford that.

Unfortunately the Democrats haven't figured out how to reach out to the insecure white chip-on-his-shoulder-and-wants-to-blame-someone-for-his-problems segment. They've masterfully manipulated this demographic on the Republican side.

[look]

Nice mug.
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/144...6:07&out=16:22

Peter and Jonah, thanks for a thoughtful and nuanced discussion.

[Ocean]

Originally Posted by AemJeff

Unfortunately the Democrats haven't figured out how to reach out to the insecure white chip-on-his-shoulder-and-wants-to-blame-someone-for-his-problems segment. They've masterfully manipulated this demographic on the Republican side.

Unfortunately, while the Democrats can't figure this one out, we continue to lose huge segments of our population to the propaganda of lies. Where is the activism in this country? Civil responsibility. Education. Come on! I pitch in at work, but there I'm preaching to the choir. Movilize the masses!

Oh, well, deep breath... I feel better now.

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by harkin

Did you get that Bob? Someone who listened to less than 10% of the entire dialogue is telling you a better way of presenting the participants.

I have given Jonah more than enough attention to have formed a legitimate opinion of him. I'm sure you feel the same way about the choices you make about how to spend your time, too.

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by bookofdisquiet

Amen. Thank you for highlighting these partisan hacks in this forum-- it would take a full time job to expose most of the propaganda they spew. I'm convinced they suffer from blogginghead's envy--they're jealous and angry because they think they could advance their points better in a head to head with Johah or some other conservative. The truth is, they'd just come off like the irrational, frothing at the mouth, Daily Kos type,--the type that compensates for their lack of argument with smug and snarky insults. I've been arguing with some of them here for a couple weeks now and find myself devolving into insults as well-- be careful--their contagious.

You're dead wrong about that. I have listed on numerous occasions conservative diavloggers who I do enjoy, whose opinions I do respect, and whose arguments I do engage. The same goes for any number of other liberal commenters here.

What I, and others, are complaining about is the time given to a particular person who offers nothing of substance, who has no intellectual chops or honesty, and who never has anything interesting to say.

What you are doing is being a kneejerk reactionary -- defending someone just because he's on your team.

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by sam

I second benjy's comments and am surprised at the negative reaction to this diavlog. I thought Beinhart was impressive precisely because he didn't get hot and bothered. Isn't that what bh.tv is about? Rational ideas not emotionally driven ones? As for bjkeefe's comment about Goldberg not answering because he didn't have a good answer...I sensed that too. That said, I'd like to put my counter vote to Bob to keep Goldberg and even this pairing. I think bh.tv benefits from multiple views. I thought that was the whole point of this enterprise.

I'm as big a fan of hearing multiple views as anybody. All I am asking is to hear them from someone who can say something I haven't heard a thousand times before.

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by Ocean

What I quite can't understand is how the Republican party and their media allies have managed to dominate this sector. Is it the Democrats' laziness or neglect of this population? Why don't Dems have a voice in rural America?

Because fear and hate are the easiest messages to sell, and the rightwing noise machine has no compunctions about doing this.

[Ocean]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

Because fear and hate are the easiest messages to sell, and the rightwing noise machine has no compunctions about doing this.

Yes, I understand that. I guess my comment is more for the long term. Again, wouldn't it make sense to start building some balanced opinion in the areas that seem to be so massively dominated by Republican propaganda?

I just see an ever widening gap, and it isn't even about difference of opinions. It's about having opinions on different realities. And theirs is a one-sided reality.

[miceelf]

"massive movement to McCain as a reaction to the MSM attacks on Palin"????

Really? haven't McCain's numbers gone DOWN since the peak that was shortly after her nomination- i.e., before most of the attacks took place?

Good on Jonah to acknowledge the right's corruption of elite, but his read on the polls strikes as extremely wishful thinking/seeing what he wants to see.

Palin's personal approval ratings have also tanked. Whether the various attacks on her were fair or not, they haven't exactly strengthened her, except with the conservative base who were already with her.

Jonah is a very nice man, but he has a habit of basically ignoring the facts that don't suit him.