Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts
Thursday, July 25, 2013
The President's OTHER speech on the Economy from July 24, 2013 in Warrensburg, MO
The main speech will post at 2:30pm, today.
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
In two videos, @Lawrence O'Donnell breaks down the REAL "IRS Scandal"...
Day 1: May 13, 2013:
Day 2: May 14, 2013:
Day 2: May 14, 2013:
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Monday, April 29, 2013
The White House Correspondent's Dinner Complete Speeches... (VIDEO)
The President's Speech:
And Conan's:
And bonus video:
And Conan's:
And bonus video:
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Thursday, March 14, 2013
@RuthMarcus, Villagers and the evolution of media bull@#$%...
My distaste for Ruth Marcus goes back a while. So I guess I shouldn't have been completely surprised when yet again decided to act as the Chief Villager for a Newspaper run by nothing but Villagers when she wrote her latest (cough-cough) column.
After listing through some of the nasty comments House GOPers were tweeting as the President was speaking to them about reaching a Budget Deal, she quoted the President calmly assessing the situation with George Stephanopoulos:
One would think after all the Filibustering and insults (some of them actually racist) that have been hurled at this President from the start of his administration, a columnist might react with shock and surprise that the sitting President managed to keep his cool.
Instead, Ruth Marcus offered this:
Excuse me, but...I did not think it was anatomically possible for one's head to get that far up one's...--never mind.
I don't know how to tell Journalists this, because...I really thought they would have covered it in Journalism school, but...it's not your job to balance the argument.
I know you think that's your job. But let's be clear about what your job really is.
Your job is to present both sides of a story...
Your job is not necessarily to lend them equal weight, particularly when they don't deserve it.
Again, you don't elevate both sides into equality. We don't need you to do that. In fact, it's a really bad idea if you do do that.
If you're a columnist, as Ruth Marcus is, this is even more tricky. Why? Because, a columnist offers nothing but opinion. They don't do any actual reporting. They don't go digging around for facts anymore...they've been excused from that particular activity. In fact, they are paid a substantial salary to say only what they think. Even if what they think has no basis in reality, as Ruth Marcus clearly demonstrated today.
One would think that some measure of journalistic integrity would matter in a circumstance like this, but again...you'd be wrong. The Washington Post is more than capable of publishing utter complete bull@#$% so long as it fills column inches. After all they employ Jennifer Rubin, Marc Thiessen, Robert Samuelson, Richard Cohen...and Ruth Marcus.
(Hey, at least Ezra Klein -- and I know me some Liberals who hate him for some reason -- no idea why -- does actual work to preparing his pieces.)
One would think it would matter to the folks at the Washington Post that their own readers can smell this line of crap a mile off, but we don't matter of the folks at the Washington Post. Ruth Marcus has proved...once again...that the Villagers are talking only to other Villagers.
Which could explain why most newspapers are in trouble.
We need Newspapers and Magazines and Media in general, advocating for their audience, and not entertaining their damn selves.
For example...if someone...say like the President...presents something that is backed in fact, and his opposition presents something that is cloaked in bull@#$%...we kinda need Media to call out the bull@#$%.
But they're not.
They used to. But they're not.
I mean it happens...sometimes, but it sure as hell didn't happen today with Ruth Marcus.
Let me quote something a columnist said not too long ago:
That was from August 10, 2010. My goodness who wrote such a prescient piece?
C'mon, this is easy. This was Ruth Marcus...in a piece backing Robert Gibbs when he called out the Professional Left.
So what happened?
Apparently, Ruth Marcus...still employed by the Washington Post...has lost the ability...to count.
Ruth Marcus got lazy. She and the paper needed column inches to fill, and bull@#$% magically transpired.
When you say the President isn't showing leadership after showing in just a few short paragraphs that there's no one who's willing to be lead, we do wonder why the President is to blame, and not the Congress. And if you can't make that elementary of a call, it calls into question your ability to observe things...or any thing, for that matter.
I mean, I don't meant to tell Ruth Marcus in particular how to do her job, but I figured someone ought to.
After listing through some of the nasty comments House GOPers were tweeting as the President was speaking to them about reaching a Budget Deal, she quoted the President calmly assessing the situation with George Stephanopoulos:
Obama: “You know — I think whatever I’m for, it’s very hard for a Republican to also be for. I think they always have to be a little bit — you know, maintain some distance.”
One would think after all the Filibustering and insults (some of them actually racist) that have been hurled at this President from the start of his administration, a columnist might react with shock and surprise that the sitting President managed to keep his cool.
Instead, Ruth Marcus offered this:
The president has made this point before, and maybe he’s right. Yet this analysis leaves him in a distinctly unpresidential posture — not leaning in, but holding back.
Excuse me, but...I did not think it was anatomically possible for one's head to get that far up one's...--never mind.
I don't know how to tell Journalists this, because...I really thought they would have covered it in Journalism school, but...it's not your job to balance the argument.
I know you think that's your job. But let's be clear about what your job really is.
Your job is to present both sides of a story...
Your job is not necessarily to lend them equal weight, particularly when they don't deserve it.
Again, you don't elevate both sides into equality. We don't need you to do that. In fact, it's a really bad idea if you do do that.
If you're a columnist, as Ruth Marcus is, this is even more tricky. Why? Because, a columnist offers nothing but opinion. They don't do any actual reporting. They don't go digging around for facts anymore...they've been excused from that particular activity. In fact, they are paid a substantial salary to say only what they think. Even if what they think has no basis in reality, as Ruth Marcus clearly demonstrated today.
One would think that some measure of journalistic integrity would matter in a circumstance like this, but again...you'd be wrong. The Washington Post is more than capable of publishing utter complete bull@#$% so long as it fills column inches. After all they employ Jennifer Rubin, Marc Thiessen, Robert Samuelson, Richard Cohen...and Ruth Marcus.
(Hey, at least Ezra Klein -- and I know me some Liberals who hate him for some reason -- no idea why -- does actual work to preparing his pieces.)
One would think it would matter to the folks at the Washington Post that their own readers can smell this line of crap a mile off, but we don't matter of the folks at the Washington Post. Ruth Marcus has proved...once again...that the Villagers are talking only to other Villagers.
Which could explain why most newspapers are in trouble.
We need Newspapers and Magazines and Media in general, advocating for their audience, and not entertaining their damn selves.
For example...if someone...say like the President...presents something that is backed in fact, and his opposition presents something that is cloaked in bull@#$%...we kinda need Media to call out the bull@#$%.
But they're not.
They used to. But they're not.
I mean it happens...sometimes, but it sure as hell didn't happen today with Ruth Marcus.
Let me quote something a columnist said not too long ago:
Excuse me, but can these people not count to 60? Have they somehow failed to notice that Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have not exactly been playing nice? That while the left laments Obama's minor deviations from party orthodoxy, the right has been portraying him, with some success, as an out-of-control socialist?
That was from August 10, 2010. My goodness who wrote such a prescient piece?
C'mon, this is easy. This was Ruth Marcus...in a piece backing Robert Gibbs when he called out the Professional Left.
So what happened?
Apparently, Ruth Marcus...still employed by the Washington Post...has lost the ability...to count.
Ruth Marcus got lazy. She and the paper needed column inches to fill, and bull@#$% magically transpired.
When you say the President isn't showing leadership after showing in just a few short paragraphs that there's no one who's willing to be lead, we do wonder why the President is to blame, and not the Congress. And if you can't make that elementary of a call, it calls into question your ability to observe things...or any thing, for that matter.
I mean, I don't meant to tell Ruth Marcus in particular how to do her job, but I figured someone ought to.
Friday, March 1, 2013
"These aren't the cuts you're looking for..." (VIDEO)
Here is the President's brief Press Conference on the Sequester:
That's right. He went with Jedi Mind Mend.
I was entertained no end. The rest of the Geek world was not, preferring instead to chastise my President for getting his franchises confused. (Yeah, like that's never happened to them.)
Leave it to the Geek Godather, Leonard freakin' Nimoy to put it all in perspective:
Yeah, baby, YEAH.
Also. It seems that the White House has chosen to OWN it (OWN IT, I say!!):
That's right. He went with Jedi Mind Mend.
I was entertained no end. The rest of the Geek world was not, preferring instead to chastise my President for getting his franchises confused. (Yeah, like that's never happened to them.)
Leave it to the Geek Godather, Leonard freakin' Nimoy to put it all in perspective:
Only a Vulcan mind meld will help with this congress. LLAP
— Leonard Nimoy (@TheRealNimoy) March 1, 2013
Yeah, baby, YEAH.
Also. It seems that the White House has chosen to OWN it (OWN IT, I say!!):
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Did President Obama drop a Prop. 8 hint on ABC 7 News in San Fran (VIDEO)
Via Greg Sargent (heck his whole piece comes from Greg Sargent):
In an interview with an ABC News affiliate in San Francisco, President Obama made his most extensive comments yet on the question of whether his administration will weigh in with a friend-of-the-court brief on the Proposition 8 case set to be heard by the Supreme Court. He said:
“The Solicitor General is still looking at this. I have to make sure that I’m not interjecting myself too much into this process, particularly when we’re not a party to the case. I can tell you, though, obviously, my personal view, which is that I think that same-sex couples should have the same rights and be treated like everybody else. And that’s something I feel very strongly about and my administration is acting on wherever we can.”This is more encouraging than not. It shows that the administration is very actively considering taking this step. What’s more, Obama reiterated the view, spelled out in his Inaugural Address, that full equality before the law is the ultimate goal of his administration, stressed that he feels “very strongly” about it, and underscored that his administration is acting to bring this about “wherever we can.” Obviously, filing a brief in the Prop 8 case — one that forcefully articulates the view that Prop 8 is unconstitutional — falls into that category. It is something his administration can, in fact, do. And since the Court gives weight to the views of Solicitors General, doing it could help bring about a broad Supreme Court ruling that would put state laws banning gay marriage on the road to extinction — bringing us closer to the full equality that Obama himself articulated as a paramount moral goal.
At the same time, by saying that this is something his Solicitor General is examining, even as he noted the need to avoid interjecting himself into the case, Obama was also signaling that this process is unfolding as it’s supposed to: With the Solicitor General making this determination independently, on the merits. An optimistic reading of this is that it could give the Solicitor General the breathing room he needs to expound on the administration’s views of Prop 8 even if gay marriage opponents will inevitably cast such a move as political.
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Friday, February 15, 2013
Jon Stewart's complete interview with Susan Rice for Feb. 14, 2013 (VIDEO)
Don't think Jon did a particularly great job with the interview (nor did he do a sucky job either), as...and this has been the key to me in the whole Benghazi mess...Susan Rice was never in the chain of command in regards to decision-making when it came to Benghazi, for good or for ill.
She was invited on Television because if you can get the most visible Foreign Policy expert on your TeeVee Show (the Secretary of State), you get the second most visible Foreign Policy expert to be on your TeeVee show (that'd be the United Nations Ambassador).
So...why are we still asking her questions??
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
She was invited on Television because if you can get the most visible Foreign Policy expert on your TeeVee Show (the Secretary of State), you get the second most visible Foreign Policy expert to be on your TeeVee show (that'd be the United Nations Ambassador).
So...why are we still asking her questions??
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Senator Elizabeth Warren's First Banking Committee Hearing (VIDEO)
Since you people seem to enjoy the sight of elected Senators actually doing...you know...their jobs:
Wouldn't it have been easier just to let her be the head of the Consumer Protection Bureau?
Wouldn't it have been easier just to let her be the head of the Consumer Protection Bureau?
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) FINALLY gets in someone's face over Hagel Nomination... (VIDEO)
And the lucky winner is Mr. "I Likes to Wear Diapers", Mr. "DC Madam" Sen. David Vitter (R-LA):
Seriously, this guy gets to questions anybody's ethics...ever??
Seriously, this guy gets to questions anybody's ethics...ever??
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
The President's Complete speech from Minneapolis on Gun Control (VIDEO)
Much shorter speech than advertised. Only 14 minutes or so.
First the introduction:
And the speech itself:
This was really a low key speech. Even the audience seemed off. Though the mention of Todd Jones as ATF Chief seemed to get a rise out of them.
First the introduction:
And the speech itself:
This was really a low key speech. Even the audience seemed off. Though the mention of Todd Jones as ATF Chief seemed to get a rise out of them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)