If Ed Shultz is moving to 8PM...

[There Is No Spoon]

Is Lawrence moving to 7PM with Tweety being cut to a single showing at 5PM?

[Cha]

I read on theobamadiary that LOD is moving to 10pm spot. Does this mean ES has more ratings since he's got the Prime spot now?

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-19-2011 09:54 PM)Cha Wrote:  I read on theobamadiary that LOD is moving to 10pm spot. Does this mean ES has more ratings since he's got the Prime spot now?

Not sure, but I assume moving to 8PM will improve Ed's ratings. Kinda sucks for me since Lawrence is a "must watch" and Ed is a "depends on my mood - and his" kinda situation, though lately he's been good due to Obama's renewed focus on populism and OWS - which is pure populism (obviously I consider Ed a populist.)

[Cha]

(10-19-2011 10:05 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  

(10-19-2011 09:54 PM)Cha Wrote:  I read on theobamadiary that LOD is moving to 10pm spot. Does this mean ES has more ratings since he's got the Prime spot now?

Not sure, but I assume moving to 8PM will improve Ed's ratings. Kinda sucks for me since Lawrence is a "must watch" and Ed is a "depends on my mood - and his" kinda situation, though lately he's been good due to Obama's renewed focus on populism and OWS - which is pure populism (obviously I consider Ed a populist.)

Thanks, I hope it works great since we need all the fact givers we can get on cm.

[SeattleGirl]

(10-19-2011 09:54 PM)Cha Wrote:  I read on theobamadiary that LOD is moving to 10pm spot. Does this mean ES has more ratings since he's got the Prime spot now?

Per Ed today, MSNBC felt the change would "flow better". And since the name of LED's show is "The Last Word" they also thought it made sense to have LED's show as the last one in the primetime line-up.

[Cha]

(10-19-2011 10:26 PM)SeattleGirl Wrote:  

(10-19-2011 09:54 PM)Cha Wrote:  I read on theobamadiary that LOD is moving to 10pm spot. Does this mean ES has more ratings since he's got the Prime spot now?

Per Ed today, MSNBC felt the change would "flow better". And since the name of LED's show is "The Last Word" they also thought it made sense to have LED's show as the last one in the primetime line-up.

Oh good! Thanks Seattle Girl. I've read that LOD really likes FLOTUS. Others were discussing him today. Seems one time some jerk was trashing her and O'D called him out.

[jaxx]

This will get Tweety and Ed over with and have Rachel and Lawrence to tie up the day with sanity. Tweety and Ed go where the wind blows.....I prefer the sanity.

[yowzayowzayowza]

(10-20-2011 06:32 AM)jaxx Wrote:  This will get Tweety and Ed over with and have Rachel and Lawrence to tie up the day with sanity. Tweety and Ed go where the wind blows.....I prefer the sanity.

My thoughts exactly. I vary rarely catch Ed or Tweety live, mostly just the occasional video clip. I get more of LOD & Rachel live than in clips.

[Cha]

(10-20-2011 06:32 AM)jaxx Wrote:  This will get Tweety and Ed over with and have Rachel and Lawrence to tie up the day with sanity. Tweety and Ed go where the wind blows.....I prefer the sanity.

Yeah, sounds good..The Last Word. I saw a list of all of their ratings on theobamadiary but it didn't have a link. Anyway, I noticed LO'D's ratings were higher than Ed's.

[Fire1]

I certainly hope that's the case. I don't need to hear Tweety twice in one night. Ed is the one who "needs two shows"

[jaxx]

Ed just had Cornel West on and West trashed the Democrats and went on to trash PBO. Ed meekly says 'do you mean that' and West went on a rant.....he's the biggest Obama hater on the planet. Then he wouldn't shut up, Ed kept trying to get out of the segment and West kept ranting. That MoFo is no friend of the Democrats. Ed should have told West to STFU and get his ass off the show.

edit to add.....this is why Ed is not good on tv, he bends to the wind, has no guts with people he should be shutting down.

[There Is No Spoon]

I don't mind not being spoon fed only opinions I agree with, though I would normally change the channel when an idiot like West is on. If you can't take any criticism of the President, turn the TV off.

[jaxx]

(10-20-2011 09:39 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  I don't mind not being spoon fed only opinions I agree with, though I would normally change the channel when an idiot like West is on. If you can't take any criticism of the President, turn the TV off.

No, if I want criticism I can watch Fox. If I want the Democratic view I can watch MSNBC. It's not about what I can 'take', it's about why rambling West and his personal vendetta because he didn't get a ticket to the inauguration gets by with this crap. And why Ed, who will go after pubs for saying the things West said, but will cower and stutter and let West by with trashing the Dems and the President.

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-21-2011 07:56 AM)jaxx Wrote:  

(10-20-2011 09:39 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  I don't mind not being spoon fed only opinions I agree with, though I would normally change the channel when an idiot like West is on. If you can't take any criticism of the President, turn the TV off.

No, if I want criticism I can watch Fox. If I want the Democratic view I can watch MSNBC. It's not about what I can 'take', it's about why rambling West and his personal vendetta because he didn't get a ticket to the inauguration gets by with this crap. And why Ed, who will go after pubs for saying the things West said, but will cower and stutter and let West by with trashing the Dems and the President.

So we complain about the exception, that one segment where a guest wasn't raked over the coals, instead of the rule - which is that 95% of the time this man is fighting for the average worker in this country. I find that overly sensitive and hardly useful since politics involves discussions of opposing viewpoints & attempts to understand and influence those who see things differently through intelligent and thoughtful dialog. Or we can just root on those we already agree with. Which is boring as hell and why this site isn't growing - because many people who stop by have commented in private that they see us as a bunch of mindless cheerleaders.

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 07:56 AM)jaxx Wrote:  No, if I want criticism I can watch Fox. If I want the Democratic view I can watch MSNBC.

This is the best example I've seen in awhile of the problem people often have communicating about political issues. Many people equate "criticism" with what they see on Fox. That is wrong.

Fox News is not "criticism." Fox News is partisan propaganda. By calling it "criticism" you're implicitly giving it legitimacy by equating it with the kinds of genuine criticism our President and Democrats in general need to be subjected to. But it's not legitimate. Fox doesn't belong in the conversation.

Many of the President's actual critics do belong in the conversation, as much as most of us may disagree with what they have to say. I don't like West either and believe his motives are tainted by his own narcissism, but the reality is that he is a genuine player who is expressing a kind of dissatisfaction with the President that is not unique to West.

Quote:And why Ed, who will go after pubs for saying the things West said, but will cower and stutter and let West by with trashing the Dems and the President.

Now you're editorializing. I watched this segment, and he did not "cower." I would suggest he was less harsh on West than he is on some Republicans because he respects the man's scholarship. As an academic, West has impeccable credentials. If he's not a genius, he is doing a fine impersonation of one. Unfortunately he has allowed his personal love affair with himself to get in the way of good judgment when it comes to President Obama.

West is not the enemy; he's the distraction that white controlled corporate media likes to put up on the screen to criticize the President in the hopes of covering their own racism. West has foolishly allowed himself to be used as this tool, but that's more his problem than anyone else's because almost everyone who matters sees right through the charade. Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, etc. are the enemy. They have actual power. They deserve to be taken to the mat at every available opportunity. They are the ones who would prefer we direct our ire at people like Paul Krugman, Michael Moore, Cornell West, et al for the same reason we like to see Perry and Romney almost get into a fist fight. It doesn't hurt them. It hurts us.

[jaxx]

Well then, I guess that's that. If people who stop by see us as mindless cheerleaders that sort of kills the idea of this place, doesn't it? Looks to me like people need to post more instead of sitting back criticizing behind closed doors.

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-21-2011 08:41 AM)jaxx Wrote:  Well then, I guess that's that. If people who stop by see us as mindless cheerleaders that sort of kills the idea of this place, doesn't it? Looks to me like people need to post more instead of sitting back criticizing behind closed doors.

I agree - not sure what they're waiting for.

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 08:53 AM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  

(10-21-2011 08:41 AM)jaxx Wrote:  Well then, I guess that's that. If people who stop by see us as mindless cheerleaders that sort of kills the idea of this place, doesn't it? Looks to me like people need to post more instead of sitting back criticizing behind closed doors.

I agree - not sure what they're waiting for.

So, you're driving down the street, and you see this new bar. It looks nice on the outside, has free valet parking, advertises awesome wings for half the price of what the other guy charges and promises that any fights will be dealt with by the new AntiFightenator 2001 that's all the rage in Europe after diffusing a political crisis that would have led to WWIII.

So, you go in, and there are about 100 tables and a wide open dance floor. It's Friday, about 11pm. There are 3 other people in the place, all of whom appear to know each other and. Seeing them, you say, "Hey, does this place play country music?" They shake their heads. One throws an insult at you. You see the problem and clarify by saying that you just don't like country music and were wanting to make sure. They soften but from here on are clearly judging your worthiness.

What do you do? Do you think, hey, this is a great place, and if I put a lot of my own effort into it to try to help out the people who own it, whom I don't even know, I might make these people who are sitting there looking at me suspiciously like me, and this place could take off?

Or, do you leave and continue down the road where there are 198,234 more bars that look just the same on the outside to try to find one that seems more welcoming?

[jaxx]

Your opinion isn't mine. Ed cowered, he did not ask questions, he allowed West to rant. I don't care how smart West thinks he is, and hell no I don't respect him. For what? Acting like an ass? People like him and the others you mentioned hurt the Democrats everytime they do their anti-Obama dance.

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 10:44 AM)jaxx Wrote:  Your opinion isn't mine. Ed cowered, he did not ask questions, he allowed West to rant. I don't care how smart West thinks he is, and hell no I don't respect him. For what? Acting like an ass? People like him and the others you mentioned hurt the Democrats everytime they do their anti-Obama dance.

Ed did not "cower." You *are* editorializing.

And no one asked *you* to respect West, but you need to step outside your own head for a moment and try to consider why some people do not automatically turn their attempt at a news and opinion show into an episode of Jerry Springer every time someone says something they don't like.

[jaxx]

Wow. Thanks for nothing. I really don't need you to tell me what to think.

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 10:50 AM)jaxx Wrote:  Wow. Thanks for nothing. I really don't need you to tell me what to think.

I did not tell you what to think. I said that you needed to consider other angles to the problem(s) under discussion. You can think whatever you like, but if your thoughts are based on a lack of information or fail to consider applicable variables, those thoughts are open to criticism.

[jaxx]

You mean if I don't do it your way. I've always done it my way, I'm comfortable with that. Criticize away, I'm not going to agree with cutting down President Obama and I don't care who's doing the cutting.

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 11:00 AM)jaxx Wrote:  You mean if I don't do it your way. I've always done it my way, I'm comfortable with that. Criticize away, I'm not going to agree with cutting down President Obama and I don't care who's doing the cutting.

"Cutting down"?

Let me just ask a blunt, simple question. Do you believe any criticism of President Obama is appropriate? If not, why not? If so, can you provide an example of what you believe to be appropriate criticism?

[jaxx]

I'll give you a blunt answer. So far I've seen nothing that warrants actual criticism. I've seen things done that had to be compromised on to make any headway. I've seen a war ramped up with the exit strategy announced. What people criticize are the best case scenarios where the repubs and the blue dogs don't exist and all is wonderful in Obamaland. Anyone who reads knows he hits a brick wall in congress with the pubs, and some of the Dems. But it's expected that if he is at all competent he will ride over the top and beat them into submission. I don't see it that way.

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 11:35 AM)jaxx Wrote:  I'll give you a blunt answer. So far I've seen nothing that warrants actual criticism. I've seen things done that had to be compromised on to make any headway. I've seen a war ramped up with the exit strategy announced. What people criticize are the best case scenarios where the repubs and the blue dogs don't exist and all is wonderful in Obamaland. Anyone who reads knows he hits a brick wall in congress with the pubs, and some of the Dems. But it's expected that if he is at all competent he will ride over the top and beat them into submission. I don't see it that way.

I think your explanation here effectively describes the problem of not considering all the variables prior to passing judgment on someone's actions. Often there are very good but not always obvious reasons for the policy an individual adopts. When their efforts on the whole seem to lead in a positive direction we appreciate, is not better to give them the benefit of the doubt? I think so. I have given President Obama the benefit of the doubt on many, many things that, were I to cast judgment based only on how it appears initially, would be deserving of scathing criticism.

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-21-2011 11:35 AM)jaxx Wrote:  I'll give you a blunt answer. So far I've seen nothing that warrants actual criticism. ...

Nothing? Nada? He's never done anything worthy of criticism since being in office? Never underestimated the Republican intransigence? All of his cabinet appointments have been flawless? He's done an excellent job of messaging - never once did you wish he sold something he wanted (we waned) to the public in a way more like what he is doing now? So he went into a job he's never done before and he was the prodigal son - perfect from day 1? Even President Obama doesn't think this highly of himself. He asked for people to help him - that means criticism. You've never wanted to help him out with some advice because he is essentially perfect? I'm kind of in shock here - I've never heard this sort of praise heaped upon any man - it borders on worship. Is that all we're supposed to do here - sell his actions to others and never once question what he's doing? That's not really the way this country is supposed to work. Please tell me you have overstated your position or meant something more negative that simple criticism.

[jaxx]

(10-21-2011 03:24 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  

(10-21-2011 11:35 AM)jaxx Wrote:  I'll give you a blunt answer. So far I've seen nothing that warrants actual criticism. ...

Nothing? Nada? He's never done anything worthy of criticism since being in office? Never underestimated the Republican intransigence? All of his cabinet appointments have been flawless? He's done an excellent job of messaging - never once did you wish he sold something he wanted (we waned) to the public in a way more like what he is doing now? So he went into a job he's never done before and he was the prodigal son - perfect from day 1? Even President Obama doesn't think this highly of himself. He asked for people to help him - that means criticism. You've never wanted to help him out with some advice because he is essentially perfect? I'm kind of in shock here - I've never heard this sort of praise heaped upon any man - it borders on worship. Is that all we're supposed to do here - sell his actions to others and never once question what he's doing? That's not really the way this country is supposed to work. Please tell me you have overstated your position or meant something more negative that simple criticism.

Nobody said he was perfect, you surmise that from your own crystal ball. Glad I shocked you, maybe the inquisition will end.

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-21-2011 06:43 PM)jaxx Wrote:  Nobody said he was perfect, you surmise that from your own crystal ball. Glad I shocked you, maybe the inquisition will end.

Perfect = Beyond criticism.


Inquisition eh? So you state something that appears to me as just a bit over the top, and when I ask if were you completely serious in using this language, you call it an inquisition? Really?

[jaxx]

(10-21-2011 09:47 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  

(10-21-2011 06:43 PM)jaxx Wrote:  Nobody said he was perfect, you surmise that from your own crystal ball. Glad I shocked you, maybe the inquisition will end.

Perfect = Beyond criticism.


Inquisition eh? So you state something that appears to me as just a bit over the top, and when I ask if were you completely serious in using this language, you call it an inquisition? Really?

You're not going to believe this, but I didn't even look to see who wrote it....thought it was RoyG and I still exchanging ideals. I apologize for not paying attention.

But the truth is I don't analyze every move, every appointment, every deed done by PBO. I read the pros and the cons and go on. If something annoys me, I look into it further and either like it or not. I don't like everything. I also don't bring my whines to the public arena when it comes to the President. There is enough of it out there and I'm not going to cut him down. Personally I'd like to see him smack Cantor, but it's not going to happen. So what's to criticize?

ps.....I once heard that the only thing left after perfect is death and nobody wants to go there!

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-21-2011 10:03 PM)jaxx Wrote:  

(10-21-2011 09:47 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  Perfect = Beyond criticism.


Inquisition eh? So you state something that appears to me as just a bit over the top, and when I ask if were you completely serious in using this language, you call it an inquisition? Really?

You're not going to believe this, but I didn't even look to see who wrote it....thought it was RoyG and I still exchanging ideals. I apologize for not paying attention.

But the truth is I don't analyze every move, every appointment, every deed done by PBO. I read the pros and the cons and go on. If something annoys me, I look into it further and either like it or not. I don't like everything. I also don't bring my whines to the public arena when it comes to the President. There is enough of it out there and I'm not going to cut him down. Personally I'd like to see him smack Cantor, but it's not going to happen. So what's to criticize?

ps.....I once heard that the only thing left after perfect is death and nobody wants to go there!

As you are well aware, I also think the excessive piling on is utterly non-productive and harmful to getting things done. It also pisses me off quite a bit. At the same time, I've also made it clear that one of the things I was looking forward to here at DFP was the ability to criticize the President in a constructive manner. I WILL NOT let the idiots on the left cow me into a position of not criticizing him in public. Just because there are extremists in the world doesn't mean that I am a slave to their whims. If my criticism just happens to parallel something that one might read on a nutty left site, should I just stop and say "oh, I don't want to feed that". No, of course I shouldn't be manipulated by others on the internet. There's a reason that I don't visit those sites - it pollutes one's thinking and I do not need their hate in my life. What is more crazy? Watching Ed or reading a nutty left site like FDL or DU?

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 10:47 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  What is more crazy? Watching Ed or reading a nutty left site like FDL or DU?

Well, here's a weird thing I've gotten out of all this.

Just to make sure I was tracking things appropriately, I re-watched the segment with Ed and Dr. West. Then, having noticed something I didn't notice before, I went and found the transcript.

I believe Dr. West made a comment about Abraham Lincoln that was wrong, and I used that just now as a thread starter on a discussion forum my seminar class uses to communicate on days we don't meet. (I'm not sure it was wrong, but a quick search on it didn't turn up anything. Will have to look deeper.) This could be lively.

So, in that sense, I'm glad I happened to be watching Ed Thursday. I normally don't watch any of these shows but for some reason found myself sitting there when it came on.

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-21-2011 11:00 PM)RoyGBiv Wrote:  

(10-21-2011 10:47 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  What is more crazy? Watching Ed or reading a nutty left site like FDL or DU?

Well, here's a weird thing I've gotten out of all this.

Just to make sure I was tracking things appropriately, I re-watched the segment with Ed and Dr. West. Then, having noticed something I didn't notice before, I went and found the transcript.

I believe Dr. West made a comment about Abraham Lincoln that was wrong, and I used that just now as a thread starter on a discussion forum my seminar class uses to communicate on days we don't meet. (I'm not sure it was wrong, but a quick search on it didn't turn up anything. Will have to look deeper.) This could be lively.

So, in that sense, I'm glad I happened to be watching Ed Thursday. I normally don't watch any of these shows but for some reason found myself sitting there when it came on.

Stinkin' Lincoln up to his usual tricks. Good luck with that thread.

Besides, if I want to keep up with what those who go overboard in their rhetoric are saying, I can just scan the politics hot page on reddit. In addition, downvoting and hiding the dumb posts is easy and satisfying.

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 10:47 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  At the same time, I've also made it clear that one of the things I was looking forward to here at DFP was the ability to criticize the President in a constructive manner.

Part of the problem with our society at the moment is that there is not enough constructive criticism. Pundits make the observation that we're polarized, but they never analyze what that means, or if they do they do it badly.

In this sense, polarization means that we've got Republicans and Democrats and the unaffiliated acting in totally irrational ways. The rest of us sit here and watch this and just shake our heads in awe at the enormity of the stupidity, and we start to associate any complaints we might have with all this other nuttiness. Criticism becomes associated with lunatic ranting or pure obstructionism, and we certainly don't want to be a part of that. So, we do nothing outwardly but complain about the complainers.

That doesn't really help things.

I don't know who is really in charge of the OWS movement, but I have come to suspect it's not the rag-tag bunch of misfits it was originally made out to be. Or, if it was, those misfits have had some serious training. This thing has gotten big, and one reason for that I believe is that it, so far, has managed to transcend this situation I'm describing above and targeting what is really and truly wrong. They're not playing the politics of personality either, rather laying out an issue that affects all of us other than the 1% who are obscenely wealthy and indicating that if you want to be taken seriously as a representative, you need to address this, genuinely address it, not use it for a speech or your television show. And it doesn't matter who you are or what party you belong or don't belong to. If you get this wrong, you'll be criticized.

We need that in our politics.

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-21-2011 11:10 PM)RoyGBiv Wrote:  ...

They're not playing the politics of personality either, rather laying out an issue that affects all of us other than the 1% who are obscenely wealthy and indicating that if you want to be taken seriously as a representative, you need to address this, genuinely address it, not use it for a speech or your television show. And it doesn't matter who you are or what party you belong or don't belong to. If you get this wrong, you'll be criticized.

We need that in our politics.

Completely agree. This is an important movement that could be the impetus for change that is desperately needed in this country.

I can remember having arguments with some of the usual suspects on another site, and even though there was no goodwill or agreement to be had, when the discussion turned to actually getting out there and doing something about it, I never disagreed that it needed to happen, I just didn't think it would happen in my lifetime. This is one instance where some of those pushing for action have been redeemed to a certain extent. Granted they had nothing to do with this movement, and change won't happen quickly, but they were at least prescient.

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 11:52 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  This is one instance where some of those pushing for action have been redeemed to a certain extent. Granted they had nothing to do with this movement, and change won't happen quickly, but they were at least prescient.

They were this:

[jaxx]

(10-21-2011 10:47 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  

(10-21-2011 10:03 PM)jaxx Wrote:  You're not going to believe this, but I didn't even look to see who wrote it....thought it was RoyG and I still exchanging ideals. I apologize for not paying attention.

But the truth is I don't analyze every move, every appointment, every deed done by PBO. I read the pros and the cons and go on. If something annoys me, I look into it further and either like it or not. I don't like everything. I also don't bring my whines to the public arena when it comes to the President. There is enough of it out there and I'm not going to cut him down. Personally I'd like to see him smack Cantor, but it's not going to happen. So what's to criticize?

ps.....I once heard that the only thing left after perfect is death and nobody wants to go there!

As you are well aware, I also think the excessive piling on is utterly non-productive and harmful to getting things done. It also pisses me off quite a bit. At the same time, I've also made it clear that one of the things I was looking forward to here at DFP was the ability to criticize the President in a constructive manner. I WILL NOT let the idiots on the left cow me into a position of not criticizing him in public. Just because there are extremists in the world doesn't mean that I am a slave to their whims. If my criticism just happens to parallel something that one might read on a nutty left site, should I just stop and say "oh, I don't want to feed that". No, of course I shouldn't be manipulated by others on the internet. There's a reason that I don't visit those sites - it pollutes one's thinking and I do not need their hate in my life. What is more crazy? Watching Ed or reading a nutty left site like FDL or DU?

I don't think you understand. I don't want to criticize President Obama. Others can do what they want and can be called out on it. There is plenty of criticism here, and done in a constructive way I think. I choose not to do so. It's not a cult thing, it's a personal thing. To my way of thinking PBO has been through the wringer, more so than any president (including bush2), and I just plain won't do it.
Truth is, I won't be cowed by anyone.

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-22-2011 08:15 AM)jaxx Wrote:  I don't want to criticize President Obama. ...

More power to ya, but that's off point.

The truth is there's a massive difference between stating that you prefer not to criticize him and "So far I've seen nothing that warrants actual criticism".

You were condemning Ed for not aggressively taking down Cornhole West for his criticism of the President. I take issue with that. This is about whether criticism is allowed and promoted here, or whether those who criticize will be subject to being gang tackled and run from the site screaming about "cheerleaders". It has happened already, and it keeps others from making post #1. Do we want lively political discourse here that promotes the perspectives and positions of Democrats, or are we here to Obama?

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 06:43 PM)jaxx Wrote:  ...maybe the inquisition will end.

What do you mean by this? Are you challenging whether it is proper to disagree with someone's interpretation of events and openly say so?

[jaxx]

(10-21-2011 10:00 PM)RoyGBiv Wrote:  

(10-21-2011 06:43 PM)jaxx Wrote:  ...maybe the inquisition will end.

What do you mean by this? Are you challenging whether it is proper to disagree with someone's interpretation of events and openly say so?

No. Have your questions. Proper doesn't interest me.

[jaxx]

I've given PBO the benefit of the doubt too, I wanted a public option. Was it realistic? Not in the end, it wouldn't have happened. I wanted the troops out of Iraq asap. Dubya signed the SOFA agreement and PBO stuck to it. It may surprise you, but I do read the many sides to a question. Scathing criticism to PBO I don't have. But then, I'm not a progressive, I'm a liberal Democrat. I gave up wanting miracles long ago, reality sometimes sucks, but it is reality.

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 12:01 PM)jaxx Wrote:  I've given PBO the benefit of the doubt too, I wanted a public option. Was it realistic? Not in the end, it wouldn't have happened. I wanted the troops out of Iraq asap. Dubya signed the SOFA agreement and PBO stuck to it. It may surprise you, but I do read the many sides to a question. Scathing criticism to PBO I don't have. But then, I'm not a progressive, I'm a liberal Democrat. I gave up wanting miracles long ago, reality sometimes sucks, but it is reality.

So, since you understand the concept, let's go back to your comments about Ed Shultz. Since it is clear from the vast majority of his efforts and commentary that Ed is very much in your camp, why does his interaction with West, during which you seem to believe Ed showed cowardice and fear, cause you to level such scathing criticisms at him? The simple truth is I do not know all his motivations for interacting with West in the manner he did, and neither do you. Since that is the case, why do you presume to know enough about the situation to level such an attack?

[jaxx]

(10-21-2011 06:04 PM)RoyGBiv Wrote:  

(10-21-2011 12:01 PM)jaxx Wrote:  I've given PBO the benefit of the doubt too, I wanted a public option. Was it realistic? Not in the end, it wouldn't have happened. I wanted the troops out of Iraq asap. Dubya signed the SOFA agreement and PBO stuck to it. It may surprise you, but I do read the many sides to a question. Scathing criticism to PBO I don't have. But then, I'm not a progressive, I'm a liberal Democrat. I gave up wanting miracles long ago, reality sometimes sucks, but it is reality.

So, since you understand the concept, let's go back to your comments about Ed Shultz. Since it is clear from the vast majority of his efforts and commentary that Ed is very much in your camp, why does his interaction with West, during which you seem to believe Ed showed cowardice and fear, cause you to level such scathing criticisms at him? The simple truth is I do not know all his motivations for interacting with West in the manner he did, and neither do you. Since that is the case, why do you presume to know enough about the situation to level such an attack?

Ed made a couple small attempts to butt in and never got it done. West rambles as he rants, and Ed let him go on. If you want to excuse that, go ahead. For someone who validates himself by saying he's a former republican now turned Democrat.....he looked the former.

[RoyGBiv]

(10-21-2011 06:47 PM)jaxx Wrote:  Ed made a couple small attempts to butt in and never got it done. West rambles as he rants, and Ed let him go on. If you want to excuse that, go ahead. For someone who validates himself by saying he's a former republican now turned Democrat.....he looked the former.

And you believe because he didn't profanely eject Dr. West from his show, this justifies you referring to Ed as a coward and that he was acting like a Republican?

We rightly criticize those who have made it clear that they reason they dislike Obama is that he's not a liberal version of Bush. What am I to make of the implication that Ed Schultz should be a liberal version of O'Reilly in order to gain approval?

You have excessively high standards, which is admirable, but don't seem to be equitable about holding people to them.

[jaxx]

What are you talking about? There is criticism here, and that lively discourse you claim to want in one breath and then say it chases people away in the next......WTF?

You take issue about Ed, and you then say those who criticize are subjugated to being gang tackled? LOL

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-22-2011 09:12 AM)jaxx Wrote:  What are you talking about? There is criticism here, and that lively discourse you claim to want in one breath and then say it chases people away in the next......WTF?

Lively discourse is NOT 5 posters standing around beating a single poster with 2x4's. And for new posters, Roy's analogy above holds as well, who's going to go to that restaurant where people are shunned when others are more welcoming?

Quote:You take issue about Ed, and you then say those who criticize are subjugated to being gang tackled? LOL

Are you suggesting that several regular posters here jumped all over you for criticizing Ed, or ...? I can't figure out your logic here.

BTW, I almost missed this post since it doesn't directly reply to my post - it just showed up at the bottom of the thread far away from our discussion.

[jaxx]

Be clear. It seems you are telling people how they should post.

[There Is No Spoon]

(10-22-2011 09:50 AM)jaxx Wrote:  Be clear. It seems you are telling people how they should post.

YOU made an unclear statement and this is your clarification? Hmmm. Please make an argument versus accusing me of something.

And I point out the "reply to thread" thing as a common curtsey as your response ends up far away from the post it was responding to.



The default mode here is threaded, so this makes it difficult for visitors and new posters to follow the conversation.