Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angeles Today

Like it or not, the massive pushback against ABC fueled by outrage over Wednesday's debate has been an impressive mobilization of the left, especially online. As Ben Smith puts it:

[The debate] triggered the most furious outrage I've seen from the huge, and growing, Obama activist base, which in this case merged with the liberal Netroots -- which aren't always on the same page -- to generate a volume of complaints about the first 45-minutes of questioning that are pretty impossible to miss.

It's just a small glimpse, I think, of the level of heat the media is going to take in the general election, and John McCain doesn't seem to have any equivalent.

As I've written before, it's really important that the blogs serve as a check against the media no matter who wins the nomination. It was after all out of the vacuum of any media accountability that the blogs emerged. So I'm excited to see the Courage Campaign (for whom I do part time work) launching an action in Los Angeles today. From their e-mail blast:

Did you watch ABC's prime-time character assassination of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton last night?

The day after this disastrous "debate," Americans are shaking their heads in disbelief at what they witnessed, sarcastically speculating whether ABC News decided to launch an early roll-out of the Republican "swift boat" campaign. Editor & Publisher called it "perhaps the most embarrassing performance by the media in a major presidential debate in years."

Their idea: giving ABC a taste of their own medicine.

Please join us at ABC's headquarters in Burbank on FRIDAY to protest and pass out flag pins to ABC employees leaving their Disney corporate office. Your mission: Ask ABC/Disney employees whether they can pass their own flag-pin litmus test: "Are you patriotic enough to wear a flag-pin?" [...]

At 4 p.m. please join the Courage Campaign and your fellow activists at ABC's Disney Studios in Burbank in front of the West Alameda Gate, between S. Buena Vista and S. Keystone Streets. We're going to protest ABC's debate disaster and ask their employees to pass the flag-pin litmus test until about 7 p.m.

If you're in LA and would like to join the protest, please RSVP here.

Personally, while I found the debate cringe-inducing and pretty disgusting the way the moderators disproportionately targeted Senator Obama and that it took more than 45 minutes to get to a substantive question, the fact is these issues, as trivial as they may seem, are on the minds of many Americans and there's value in giving him a platform to address them. Having said that, I think ABC absolutely deserves the drubbing they're getting and I wish I could be there in Burbank to hand out flag pins with the fine folks at Courage Campaign. So join them if you can (RSVP HERE.)

Tags: abc protest, Barack Obama, courage campaign, flag pins, Hillary Clinton, philadelphia debate (all tags)

Comments

206 Comments

Re: Thought The Debate Sucked?

After seeing this video:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/18 /stephanopoulos-once-criti_n_97363.html

I'm even more angry over that pitiful excuse for a debate that ABC held.

by RussTC3 2008-04-18 11:20AM | 0 recs
I have a DVD I made of the debate and all I saw

was what has been happening in debates all year. I don't see what you could possibly be angry about.

They are running for PRESIDENT. This isn't some little thing. They HAVE to be TOUGH.

Do you think some enemy will treat the President with kid gloves because of all your whining?

NO.

by architek 2008-04-18 11:35AM | 0 recs
Re: I have a DVD I made of the debate and all I sa

"The candidates that can't face Fox, can't face al-Qaeda. And that's what's coming," Fox News boss Roger Ailes said Tuesday.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/200 7/06/fox_news_chiefs.html

by The Great Gatsby 2008-04-18 11:37AM | 0 recs
Re: I have a DVD I made of the debate and all I sa

If you want to call it whining, fine, but what's Hillary Clinton's excuse?  Does this have to be a partisan issue?

by Mostly 2008-04-18 11:39AM | 0 recs
Re: I have a DVD

You're missing the freaking point.  I DON'T CARE ABOUT TOUGH QUESTIONS.  I want more of them.  The problem is I want legitimate questions.  Not BS questions like the "Bosnia", "Wright" and "Bitter" comments.

by RussTC3 2008-04-18 11:40AM | 0 recs
Re: I have a DVD I made of the debate and all I sa

Terrorists, the mortgage crisis, and the leader of Iran aren't going to basking Barack Obama about how much Reverend Wright loves America, friend.

That is why these issues are stupid and not relevant.

How Obama, or Clinton, or McCain, would deal with each of the above, IS relevant, however.

That is why the debate was a travesty.

by RidleyGriff 2008-04-18 11:45AM | 0 recs
Obama is the only candidate with guts.

Isn't Obama the real fighter here? Unlike his opponant, he is not content to sit by and let the media manipulate voters.  The American media needs to be confronted and Obama is the only major candidate willing to do this.

by dystopianfuturetoday 2008-04-18 12:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is the only candidate with guts.

Wake me up when Obama and his supporters march on MSNBC. This is a targeted response designed to shut down any opposition to Obama, Hillary, if and when she is mentions is just a strategic ally to be discarded when the mission of shutting down ABC is accomplished. Sorry, not buying.

by superetendar 2008-04-18 12:58PM | 0 recs
Sleep as long as you want.

by dystopianfuturetoday 2008-04-18 10:54PM | 0 recs
Hillary was the most hurt by the debate, not Obama

You're delusional if you think that debate had anything to say about toughness.

No one was more hurt by the nature of that debate than Hillary Clinton.  The moderators coerced her into being nasty yet again, and lo and behold, her numbers went down yet again.  I can't understand why Hillary supporters are so stupid about this!  Hillary is at her best on real problems, real issues.  She looks petty attacking Obama on stupid little side issues that don't matter.  

Thank God Obama has the courage to force a debate about the insulting nature of the media's treatment of American voters.  I'm glad he won't just buy into it the way Hillary has done.

If that debate had been about the issues, Hillary would have hit a home run.  She can talk circles around Obama on the issues.  

Instead, she was led by these assholes into silly attack after silly attack on Obama, and none of her real gifts were highlighted.  The right wing noise machine scored a double whammy.  

That debate did a grave disservice to Hillary Clinton, it did a disservice to Barack Obama (though less so, which is why he's laughing about it) but most of all, it insulted the American people.  

ABC obviously hates America, and doesn't care if we get a president who can solve real problems.  They're unpatriotic.

by tibbs 2008-04-18 12:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary was the most hurt by the debate

Dead right there...

When Hillary is policy-wonking, she is scary good, she makes Bill AND Obama pale by comparison.

When she goes attack-dog, she is lousy at it?

She comes off as "shrill" and yes, I expect to be firebombed for that, but that is how my girlfriend describes it to me....

If she was GOOD at it, but it's the moments when it is clear she is reading from a script someone (Penn?) fed her the lines?  It comes off as phony and contrived.

The ProHillary crowd loves it, because they think she is bringing down Obama...

But, what she is REALLY doing is reinforcing the stereotype of her (which, btw, I think is bull) that she will say anything she needs to to win.

She's not adding to her GE vote total here by pileing on;

She is just convincing the independents, if it's her and McCain, to vote for Teflon John.

by WashStateBlue 2008-04-18 12:51PM | 0 recs
Re: I have a DVD I made of the debate and all I sa

You are my favorite GOP troll...but you are still a GOP troll.

by JDF 2008-04-18 01:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked?

Anyone interested can sign the Move On petition here.  If they get 100k respondents they will run an advertising campaign calling ABC to account for the debate.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-04-18 02:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked?

I'm not sure this is the appropriate time to address the press's role in all this, and I am fearful of the havoc MoveOn tends to create.  They sometimes seem to have an off-key political ear.  I think the time to do this might be when we are not in such a competitive situation.  

by mady 2008-04-18 02:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked?

You are no doubt referring to Move On's controversial and ill advised 'Betray us-Petraeus' campaign?  I personally believe that the national media betrays a persistent and insidious bias towards the Republicans which has been overshadowed so far in our Democratic nomination controversies, consider:


It would be refreshing to place the likes of Gibson and Stephanopoulos and their peers on the witness stand for a change to explain their choices and prejudices. Why did they require Democrats to make tax-cutting pledges that are based on bad economics and worse journalism? Why should they focus on Obama's tenuous connection with a reprehensible but inconsequential figure like former Weatherman Bill Ayers, when they have never mentioned the White House coddling of Cuban exile terrorists? Why do they obsess over the "bitter" gaffe by Obama while passing so lightly over the confusion of Sunni and Shia groups by McCain, supposed master of foreign policy?

Details may be different but the double standard remains the same. If the coverage of this election already induces a nauseating sense of déjà vu, be warned. It will only get worse.

Joe Conason - Obama, get ready for the "Clinton rules" Salon 18 Apr 08

It is time for Democrats to take the initiative in exposing this bias and if the national media, with all the resources at it's disposal, is to be called to account I can't think of a better way to do it than through a grass-roots, independently subscribed organisation like Move On.  We are going to need a voice.  Obama seems to get it too:


But Obama drew by far the roughest questioning, as one woman noted when she took the microphone at the Raleigh rally. "You were really pummeled," she told him. All those questions on Ayers, Wright, flag pins and guns made her wonder about the general-election attacks that could come. "What is your strategy to beat the Republicans in November?" the woman asked Obama.

"That was the rollout of the Republican campaign against me," Obama responded. "That is what they will do. They will try to focus on all these issues." He said he would answer the attacks "sharply and crisply" and seek to turn the debate from "tit-for-tat silliness" to serious issues such as the economy and Iraq. "If Republicans come at me, I will come right back at them," Obama asserted, to loud cheers.

Shailagh Murray and Perry Bacon Jr. - Obama Looks To Turn Debate Into a Victory Washington Post 18 Apr 08

Whomever the nominee we will face this pernicious national bias, now, with cable bubble-heads as intermediaries, more than ever.  In spite of Hillary's assertions to the contrary Obama understands this and we as Democrats need to as well.  Whether Move On is your cup of tea or not we must do something and we must be prepared to do it soon and well.  Any suggestions?

by Shaun Appleby 2008-04-18 02:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked?

I totally agree we must do something.  Just for now with Democrat against Democrat going on, I think any commentary on the role of the press will be manipulated.  As I said, I would also prefer a different messenger than Move On.  I remember wincing in the last campaign at how devisive many of their ads were, and this is a problem one would want most Americans to get behind since there is general dissatisfaction with the national media.

I agree with the persistent and insidious GOP bias existing in the media, and I think the huge number of new activists drawn into this campaign who can individually e-mail and call the press on their idiocies will be something of a curb of this.  One of the lovely things about Obama's constituency is that they do not have a long history of becoming discouraged easily.  In this case many individuals acting in concert but not as a group might be more effective than the actions of any advocacy group, at least for now.  Nothing like a spontaneous outpouring to worry the sponsors.

by mady 2008-04-18 02:43PM | 0 recs
ABC Debate was great; previous debates sucked

Especially MSNBC and CNN debates - people just hate Clintons. I suggest you start you protests with MSNBC and than go to CNN. We will see what the will say, but I think SNL already said what we all know.

And by the way: Hillary won all debates, and Obama lost all of them

by engels 2008-04-18 11:22AM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great; previous debates sucked

You thought a debate where neither candidate was asked about a single issue for 45 minutes was "great?"  That's certainly an "interesting" perspective.  

I mean, sure we're at war, the economy is in the tank, peoples' houses are being foreclosed on, and we're moving towards 50 million people without healthcare, but who cares about that.  Lets talk about lapel pins...

Regardless of who you support, that's pitiful.  

by HSTruman 2008-04-18 11:39AM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great; previous debates sucked

They went over all that in the previous 20(!) debates, this last one was about character and electability, and it exposed Obama's baggage and showed he was too weak to push back when attacked.  The right-wing 527's will chew up Obambi and spit him out, he's gonna be the new McGovern/Dukakis/Kerry if the Democrats are foolish enough to nominate him!

by BlueDoggyDogg 2008-04-18 12:12PM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great; previous debates sucked

The Right Wing 527's will attempt to chew up and spit out anyoe we nominae...  That is their goal in life and stated purpose...  They are Right-wing...  code for Republican and do not want a Democrat to win period.

The only questions are, should Obama get the nomination, will Clinton supporters sit idly by and giggle or will they defend the nominee, and vice versa should Clinton get the nomination.  

by JenKinFLA 2008-04-18 01:01PM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great; previous debates sucked

Gee... I wonder what they will do... my guess is that they are already getting ready for 2012 gleefully assuming that Obama can't win without their help.

by JDF 2008-04-18 01:09PM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great

I can only speak for myself, but I'm going w/ Ralph Nader if Obama is nominated.  Thank Kos and his minions who have slimed this great woman and DEMOCRAT worse than Rush Limbaugh ever could.

by BlueDoggyDogg 2008-04-18 01:50PM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great

Oh spare me the outrage.

Seriously spare me the excuses.  If you vote or Nader it is because you are voting for Nader.  Quit blaming other people.  This "it's all your fault I'm not voting for Obama" bullshit is just that... bullshit.  It works the other way too.  If you vote for Nader or don't vote rather than vote for Clinton, that is your decision and yours alone.  You own it, you take responsibility for it.

If you aren't going to support the nominee, fine, don't.  That is your decision.  But both candidates have been slimed by supporters of the other in this contest... and their supporters have been slimed too.  Did Clinton get slimed over at Kos...?  Sure... but Obama gets a daily trashing here and this site is nothing compared to noquarter or hillaryis44 when it comes to that.

To suggest even implicitly that one side has been angelic and the other purely Devilish (minions... ?  Really...?) is so completely untrue it borders on laughable.

by JenKinFLA 2008-04-18 02:45PM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great

thank you :-D

It warms my heart to see another person talking this way...

by JDF 2008-04-18 07:26PM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great; previous debates sucked

agreed 100%

by engels 2008-04-18 04:32PM | 0 recs
Engles.. I think you probably meant to say that

the MSNBC and CNN commentators OBVIOUSLY HATED HILLARY CLINTON and that in those two debates the nasty questions they asked Hillary were obviously slanted to make Obama look good.

I didn't see that in this debate and it seemed remarkably mellow. What I did see is Obama being asked some TAME questions about issues that have come up recently, issues that will clearly come up in the general election should Obama be the nominee. People need to have them asked, so its fair game.

Did they give Hillary a fair shake in the other debates? NO. They would not and did not.

Did they give Obama a fair shake in this one. Yes.

by architek 2008-04-18 11:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Engles.. I think you probably meant to say tha

Yes, I meant that. And by the way: I love you comrade!

by engels 2008-04-18 04:37PM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great; previous debates sucked

I really don't see it as a partisan issue between the candidates as much as a depressing indictment of the media's failure to tackle substance in an intelligent manner.  Both Hillary and Obama were there to take their view of the Democratic Party to Pennsylvania voters; and Gibson & Stephanopolis failed miserably in their responsibility to allow any meaningful examination.  Stephanopolis used prepared questions from Hannity for god's sake; how ridiculous does it have to get before HRC gets offended?

I have no problem with Obama getting grilled on any of the faux controversies; but 45 minutes of crap to both candidates?  Both candidates were robbed of an opportunity to discuss more substantive issues.  Want to talk about Wright or Ayers?  Fine.  Wan to dredge up Tuzla again, go ahead.  But 45 minutes of this shit?  C'mon, even HRC ought to be pissed off at the inanity.  She, like Obama has a message to deliver, and these guys wasted her time as well as ours.  

I don't see why HRC supporters are full of glee about this.  Hillary got shafted too.

by rb608 2008-04-18 12:34PM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great; previous debates sucked
Excellent analysis.
The debate was crap for both candidates.
by skohayes 2008-04-18 02:44PM | 0 recs
Re: ABC Debate was great; previous debates sucked

ok, let's talk about your points:

1. Obama will not be a nominee.
2. If he will be nominated, you are getting 2 big problems:
a) I will not support party where Obama is (and many will do as me)
b) Obama will lose in landslide to McCain, so all your idiotic efforts to nominate him will be equivalent to the waste of time, efforts and money.

  1. I am a Democrat it is why I am supporting Hillary. I do nor see Obama as a real Democrat, he is a boring fake and unacceptable generalist and opportunist to me.
  2. what is progressive means? if you meant socialistic, than Obama is not a socialist, he rather close to my enemies - republicans
  3. therefore if (and this is a big if) if Hilary is not on a ballot I (and 28% of Hillary supporters) will vote for our enemy, Mr. McCain. Mc Cain is much more acceptable to me than Obama.

6) Again: Obama is not progressive candidate: he is a Cult Leader, friend with Wright & Rezko, enemy of the universal health care and he likes
types like Reagan.
7) I am not betraying my party: but you are and Obama is the divider and TRAITOR.

8) just put in your head: NO TO OBAMA, "¡No pasarán!"!

by engels 2008-04-18 04:53PM | 0 recs
Oh please....

I'm genuinely embarassed to be a Democrat today.

by Little Otter 2008-04-18 11:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh please....

Then join McCain and the Repubs.  Based on your baseless posts and venomous screeds in opposition to anything or anyone related to Obama, you're there in all but name already.

by fogiv 2008-04-18 12:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh please....

Yeah, what is it about the nasty people who post comments and diaries here?  Sheesh.  I thought this was a Democratic blog.  WRONG.

by tibbs 2008-04-18 12:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh please....

I'm not embarassed to be a Democrat; but I'd be damned embarassed to be a journalist.

by rb608 2008-04-18 12:36PM | 0 recs
Still baffled

I'm still baffled by this, frankly.

This debate was tame and on-track compared to other debates.  Tim Russert in particular comes to mind.  It really amazes me to see how emotional Obama supporters get when their candidate is asked a question.

This false outrage will not save your candidate from the GOP war machine.  They invented false outrage, and are much better at it.

In the meantime, you stampede over good men like Tavis Smiley.  No casualty matters in your Holy War on the Democratic party.

by bobbank 2008-04-18 11:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

And you have also seemed to be miss the point.

All this anger is generated over supporting a candidate who can no longer win the nomination unless the super delegates override the will of the voting public.

It's a shame really.

by RussTC3 2008-04-18 11:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

Bob is a little factually challenged.

by Mostly 2008-04-18 11:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

What's cute about that comment is that, each and every time you have trolled me (and that is what you are doing), I have responded to you with the facts that support fully my position.

This is something you have never done.

I really don't mind when people disagree with me.  But at this point, you are pure troll, and it's time to rate you as such.

by bobbank 2008-04-18 11:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

You said this debate was tame and on-track comapred to other debates. I mean, that is simply wrong. It's just untrue.

by LandStander 2008-04-18 12:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

You said the Obama campaign said "Hillary Clinton ain't never been called a n*gger".

If you've responded to me I haven't seen it, but it's indefensible.

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

I will respond to you yet again, and as a final courtesy.

Rev. Wright was a National Adviser to the Obama Campaign when he made those statements.  This is the reason his church is now under investigation for having violated their tax-exempt status - because he was using the pulpit to deliver campaign talking points.

Question:
Why did Barack Obama need to fire Wright from his campaign?

Answer:
Because he was on the campaign.

Am I getting through to you yet?

This is not unique to Rev. Wright.  The campaign's co-chair, Jesse Jackson Jr., also said that Hillary only won New Hampshire because white voters gave into racism at the last minute (that is what "Bradley Effect" means - look it up).  He also famously said that because Hillary cried, she was a racist.  I can't make this up.  "Those tears have to be analyzed", he said ominously.  He then laid out his logic: because Hillary cried when reflecting on her own motivation, but did not cry when talking about Katrina victims, African Americans in South Carolina should be very concerned.

Finally, campaign Co-Chair Jackson called on Black superdelegates throughout the country, and told them that, if they did not vote based on skin color, they would find themselves out of a job.  This was confirmed by all parties, including Jackson, who boasted about the conversation.  (see: Emanuel Cleaver story)

So, please, take your head out of the sand.  I fully respect your prerogative to make an informed choice in this primary.  But to repeatedly troll me, and try to call me a liar, when you don't know what you're talking about - it's embarassing and nonproductive.  So cut it out.

by bobbank 2008-04-18 01:14PM | 0 recs
So, you Obama folks would rather see the Dems lose

because this stuff is real and if he's nominated, it IS probably going to cause Obama probs in the GE.

Can't you see that possibility looming?

by architek 2008-04-18 11:43AM | 0 recs
Re: So, you Obama

I sure as hell hope it doesn't turn up in the debates.  I can understand it turning up elsewhere, but not in the debates.

I don't want this filth IN A DEBATE.

by RussTC3 2008-04-18 11:49AM | 0 recs
Re: So, you Obama folks would rather see the Dems
What was wrong with the "gotcha" questions was that most had already been dealt with by both candidates as much as was possible. All Obama or Clinton could do on those questions was reiterate what had already been said ad infinitum. So since no new information was gathered, what were they trying to accomplish - embarrass the candidates?  

So a lot of time was wasted and to no avail whatsoever. Only one new scandal-type question was asked and it was hardly a scandal. That was the one about he Weather underground guy. That one was from Sean Hannity. Figures, and it was really stupid. As Obama said - 45 minutes before any substantive questions were asked. Shameful.

by Becky G 2008-04-18 12:17PM | 0 recs
Re: So, you Obama folks would rather see the Dems

I certainly recognize the right of activist to fight for a cause , but I am not a fan of protesting/picket the media just because the question they asked your candidate was tough...

It is certainly within everyone's right , I have often complained about Clinton's coverage as well.

by lori 2008-04-18 12:38PM | 0 recs
Re: So, you Obama folks would rather see the Dems

The questions weren't simply "tough," they were pointless and simply designed to damage the candidate regardless of what their answer was.

Tough would be asking him hard questions about policy NOT about his lapel pin or lack thereof.

Tough would be asking her about the tone of her campaign NOT the Bosnia lie (which was a stupid mistake but hardly the type of thing I think should destroy her candidacy.)

by JDF 2008-04-18 01:13PM | 0 recs
Delusions about the GE

Obama sat on a charity board with Ayers who used to be a Weatherman terrorist but Bill Clinton pardoned convicted Weathermen involved with the killing of 2 cops and a security guard and pardoned 16 FALN terrorists who planted 130 bombs and killed 4 people. You think it's Obama who will have a problem in the general? The crap that they brought up in the debate which Obama has already weathered (zero impact on his poll numbers) is nothing compared to the mountain of garbage Hillary is sitting on.

After Rezko, Wright and Bittergate it's Hillary's negatives that are exploding while Obama is barely scratched. What happens when the GOP lets loose on all the crap she has been getting a pass on? Her buddies Scarborough, Hannity, Fox and Scaife will turn on her with a vengence if she ever got the nomination. And considering her negatives seem to have no floor she'll be at GWB levels of approval in no time.

Why didn't they ask Hillary if she killed Vince Foster? After all enquiring minds want to know and any manufactured gossip and swiftboat garbage should be shoveled now not by 527's, no now we should have mainstream journalists do it.

by hankg 2008-04-18 12:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

I read your post twice and cannot understand your point.  The public hasn't finished voting yet.  Barack Obama worked hard to make sure the public would not be allowed to vote in MI.  The public has voted in FL in a fair way, but Barack is working hard to make sure those votes don't count either.

Yet, despite efforts to ignore two critical swing states, it is still well possible for Hillary to wind up winning the most votes when this nominating process is over.

But, the Obama campaign doesn't want to have that.  So now they are attmepting to use Superdelegates to shut the process down before it's over.  Dean has said he wants to make sure that Superdelegates cast their votes without knowing the will of the people.

However, I'm not talking about any of that.  I'm talking about the way in which "generation Obama" has been willing to savage good, loyal Democrats that have served us for years, dismember admirable public leaders like Tavis Smiley, and wage an all-out assault on our collective political resume, all in the name of some manufactured hatred of Clinton.

Furthering this self-destructive course, Netroots has now apparently decided to excise or purge any non-believers from the party.

I see this temper tantrum the same way.  Witnessing Obama perform so terribly when faced with the mildest hint of media scrutiny, the Crusade now turns its sights on mass media - which is ironic considering that Obama exists primarily as a figment of the mass media.

Since the media created him, supporters might want to be cautious about biting that particular hand.  He can be destroyed by the media just as easily - and as the saying goes, there is nothing the media loves more than to build someone up before tearing them down.

by bobbank 2008-04-18 11:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

Before I respond point-by-point, I would like to say that I think it's perfectly fine for Clinton to stay in the contest until ALL voting is completed.

"I read your post twice and cannot understand your point.  The public hasn't finished voting yet.  Barack Obama worked hard to make sure the public would not be allowed to vote in MI.  The public has voted in FL in a fair way, but Barack is working hard to make sure those votes don't count either."

Astonishing.  1) Obama had no say in what the DNC did in MI and FL, 2) He wasn't on the ballot, 3) he never campaigned in Florida, while Clinton was IN Florida (though not in any campaign capacity apparently) when the voting took place and 4) Less voters voted in MI and FL than Republicans.  Obviously, many voters decided not to vote those days.

"Yet, despite efforts to ignore two critical swing states, it is still well possible for Hillary to wind up winning the most votes when this nominating process is over."

Even when you add in FL and MI as-is, which would of course be unfair since he wasn't on the ballot in MI, Obama would STILL be ahead among pledged delegates.  That's with the enormous advantage she gains by the inclusion of the MI delegates.

"But, the Obama campaign doesn't want to have that.  So now they are attempting to use Superdelegates to shut the process down before it's over.  Dean has said he wants to make sure that Superdelegates cast their votes without knowing the will of the people."

Dean is wrong in saying that.  I don't agree.  However, when the voting is over in June, the delegates should decide.  The pledged delegates (decided by the voting public) should be more a factor than superdelegates who by the way represent the democratic party, not their states or constituency.

"However, I'm not talking about any of that.  I'm talking about the way in which "generation Obama" has been willing to savage good, loyal Democrats that have served us for years, dismember admirable public leaders like Tavis Smiley, and wage an all-out assault on our collective political resume, all in the name of some manufactured hatred of Clinton."

I'm not familiar with this, if you want to elaborate feel free.

"Furthering this self-destructive course, Netroots has now apparently decided to excise or purge any non-believers from the party."

Says who?  First off, why are you linking Obama to this, or saying it's his fault?  I'm reminded that Obama actually supported Lieberman quite significantly when he was up for re-election in 2006.  That was very much against the Netroots.

"I see this temper tantrum the same way.  Witnessing Obama perform so terribly when faced with the mildest hint of media scrutiny, the Crusade now turns its sights on mass media - which is ironic considering that Obama exists primarily as a figment of the mass media."

Really, because it seems to me that he improves when faced with media scrutiny once given the opportunity to counter.

"Since the media created him, supporters might want to be cautious about biting that particular hand.  He can be destroyed by the media just as easily - and as the saying goes, there is nothing the media loves more than to build someone up before tearing them down."

The media didn't create him.  You're not giving him enough credit for he has accomplished.  That Clinton and Obama have gotten this far in this "gotcha" climate of media coverage is extraordinary.  You do them both a disservice by claiming that either of them was manufactured by the media.

by RussTC3 2008-04-18 12:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

Obama had no say in what the DNC did in MI and FL

MI legislators, Hillary's campaign, Howard Dean AND the DNC rules committee had all signed on to the MI revote plan.  I've just named every stakeholder but one.  Campaign Obama sent their team of lawyers to kill the bill.  They wanted to make sure that MI votes were not counted.

No, he didn't author the original decision.  But we had a chance to address that mistake, and he alone prevented us from doing that.

Even when you add in FL and MI as-is, which would of course be unfair since he wasn't on the ballot in MI, Obama would STILL be ahead among pledged delegates.

This is not a pledged delegate contest.  There is no rule, precident or even guideline that suggests that superdelegates should automatically give their vote to whomever has the most pledged delegates.

If this is about the will of the people, delegate math clearly does not reflect that, since the number of delegates per district and per state are not proportional with the number of people.  So I prefer "most votes" as a better measure of the will of the people.

Dean is wrong in saying that.  I don't agree.  However, when the voting is over in June, the delegates should decide.

We agree.

The media didn't create him.

We don't agree.  The Barack Obama that supporters conjure up in their minds is a media fabrication.  Once you figure out his marketing strategy you can begin to understand it.  Actually, Barack Obama describes it best in his own book.  According to him, the reason he is so popular is because he presents himself as a "blank screen", onto which others can project their own values, beliefs and hopes.  To do this, he remains vague and nondescriptive.  This is why, despite complaining so much that the ABC debate did not focus on issues, during the more-than-half the time that the moderators were asking about issues, Barack did not give a single specific or substantive response - other then to break his own promise and admit within minutes that he would in fact raise payroll taxes on those making less than $250,000.

The most telling part of this "blank screen" marketing strategy is, again, from Barack's own book.  He goes on to say that, because of this advertising technique, he is "bound to disappoint some, if not all" of his supporters.

So which will he disappoint?

by bobbank 2008-04-18 12:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

Wow, you're quite the mindreader.  The only memo I've seen from the DNC was from two pro-Clinton members of the Rules & Bylaws Committee stating that, in their personal opinion, one of the proposed plans would meet with approval by the full R&B Committee were it ultimately presented to the R&B Committee.  Likewise, the only indication I've seen is that of 17 Democratic state legislators in Michigan, only 2 approved of whatever form the plan was in just prior to the deadline.  But that's just me - I don't pretend to read minds.

Your popular vote argument is also specious at best.  Do you honestly believe that 0 people in Michigan support Obama?  If not, then wouldn't giving him 0 votes merely benefit Clinton at the expense of the Michigan electorate?  Is it truly about "enfranchising" voters, or simply about benefiting Clinton?  

by rfahey22 2008-04-18 01:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

As I already said, this was about having a REVOTE in Michigan.  If you are familiar with any of my posts or diaries I have never once suggested that we count Michigan results as they stand.  Barack's decision to remove his name from the ballot, in coordination with Edwards, made the results of the first primary problematic.  (Understand - this was the intention of their joint-decision to do this - they knew that only one of them would be left to compete with Hillary downstream.)

Now, fortunately, you do not have to be a "mind reader" to know that the DNC supported the proposed MI revote.  They issued an official statement about it.

We have recently been asked whether the legislation as proposed by Michigan would fit within the framework of the National Party's Delegate Selection Rules. Our review of this legislation indicates that it would, in fact, fit within the framework of the Rules if, it were, passed by the state legislature and used by the Michigan State Democratic Party as the basis of drafting a formal Delegate Selection Plan.

As the Washington Post put it in the title of their Mar 18 piece: "Michigan Revote Plan Up in the Air, and Up to Obama."  There is no good reason why Obama could not do well in MI, and there is no good reason why we, as a party, should not be demanding that every vote be counted.

by bobbank 2008-04-18 01:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

Well played, Bob.  Obama faced, for the first time, the same kind of scrutiny that Hillary has faced since the start of the debates.

Add to your list of Democratic stalwarts that have been ex-communicated by Obama supporters: Paul Krugman and Bill Clinton (and his legacy)

by steveinohio 2008-04-18 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

I'm hoping they do not extent the same treatment to Dr. Angelou.  She is participating in a campaign event with Hillary today in NC.  It would be a shame if Obama supporters decide that her legacy, too, must be destroyed.

by bobbank 2008-04-18 12:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

extend*

by bobbank 2008-04-18 12:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

Just curious - do you consider the flag lapel pin to be a legitimate issue?  Do you believe that the wearing or not wearing of one is in any way an indication of someone's patriotism?  Are you wearing one now?

by rb608 2008-04-18 12:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

I am not wearing a flag pin.  I think that someone who evaluates a person's patriotism based on that pin is silly.

Having said that, I also understand that half the country disagrees with me, and finds his refusal to wear such pin disturbing.

During the debate, Obama tried to dismiss this by saying he has never refused to wear the pin.  But he did exactly that, when he first explained this.  He was very specific.  He said that, because of the Iraq War, he decided that he would not wear a flag pin and demonstrate his patriotism by opposing the war (something which, by the way, he never once did in Senate until he began running for President).  The GOP is dusting off that "flip flop" lable they used on Kerry - those shoes fit Obama too.

So, to answer your question - it doesn't affect me, but I recognize that it affects others.

Also, I want you to consider what McCain would have done with the answer he gave at that debate.  Mind you, Clinton handles Barack like a kitten and is very gentle with him.  Ask yourself what McCain would do after Obama implied that our flag is a "manufactured issue".

Excuse me, sir, but I risked my life for that flag, and so have thousands of others, all so that you could have the right to denigrate it the way that you have.  I have endured torture for the sake of that flag.  And I will not stand by while you condemn our flag as false patriotism.  Speak for yourself.  Some of us wear this because it actually means something to us.

Just an example off the top of my head.  McCain's people will do better with it.

by bobbank 2008-04-18 12:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

I appreciate your perspective.  I disagree that McCain could succeed against Obama with it, though.  If that flag is used to symbolize the Iraq war or support for our troops, Obama will murder him with it.  Given Obama's gift of oratory, I actually look forward to McCain or his surrogates even bringing it up.

by rb608 2008-04-18 02:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

As far as "shutting the process down before knowing the will of the people" - this primary has heard the will of the people more than any primary I can remember. We normally have a candidate picked long before most states have voted in a primary. In Ohio, I have never had my vote count. Most of us don't bother to vote since it's either decided or it's obvious who it will be. The idea of having to go through every state before it's done sounds insane. We're going to know where this is going in the very near future.

by Becky G 2008-04-18 12:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

The idea of having to go through every state before it's done sounds insane.

I'm a progressive.  I not only find the notion of counting every vote sane, but moral.

by bobbank 2008-04-18 12:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

So every previous nomination process in recent memory was immoral in your eyes?

by JenKinFLA 2008-04-18 01:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

No, and that isn't what I said.

Try to be relevant.

by bobbank 2008-04-18 01:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

Here is what is relevant...  for all the cries of "democracy now" coming out of the Clinton supporters, there was silence when FL and MI were being decided...  why was that...?  Why is there a chorus now?  Forgive me if I am suspicious of the motives.  This was our local news... there was no outrage then, so I don't see why there should be now.

Almost every recent primary has been decided before every vote was counted.  That is why I asked if you thought they were immoral.  It is actually normal for every vote not to be counted in any given election for various reasons.  That will become even more the case if the GOP gets their way nationwide and we see state-sanctioned disenfranchisement for real.

by JenKinFLA 2008-04-18 02:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

Holy War...?  Seriously...?  Out of all the words in the English language, you chose Holy War...?

by JenKinFLA 2008-04-18 01:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

Yes.  Would you like to explain why you think that I'm not being serious?

by bobbank 2008-04-18 01:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Still baffled

Holy war is probably, especially in light of the political climate in the Middle East, a mildly disturbing choice of words to say the least...

How does this situation equate with a Holy War in your eyes?

by JenKinFLA 2008-04-18 02:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked?

To be agree about a bad debate this late in the game is pathetic.  Poor Obama was treated harder - true, so what?  It was a bad debate, but there have been several bad debates.  Todd, it sounds like your 'debate value system' is tied more to your protective feelings regarding Obama and less about quality debates.

by oc 2008-04-18 11:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked?

1.  Todd is a Clinton supporter

2.  This has to be one of the fairest and most unbiased front page posts in weeks - it manages to analyze an issue fairly without smearing fellow Democrats

3.  How in the hell could any progressive Democrat NOT want to see ABC held accountable for such shoddy political reporting?  If Democrats can make these guys scared to be Republican shills, it will only help future debates and political coverage be more substantive.

If you've ever seen a crappy debate, this is part of how we change that.  The fact that it was so historically bad that MOST OF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA  panned it shows that this isn't just a matter of Obama supporters having selective outrage.

by The Great Gatsby 2008-04-18 11:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked?

1. Ouch, sucks to be wrong, thanks for correcting me.

2. I agree

3. It's not that I disagree that the debate moderation sucked, I disagree that it is an issue worth a march in LA because the debate was 'bad' for Obama.  I do believe Obama supporters are outraged more by what it meant for Obama than the style itself.

But thanks for correcting re Todd.

by oc 2008-04-18 02:12PM | 0 recs
Issues on the minds of "many" Americans
This is short hand, and it needs to be said loudly and clearly "Issues on the minds of inbred brain dead oxcontin addicted idiots whose only other television appearance was on an episode of Cops."
by bernardpliers 2008-04-18 11:27AM | 0 recs
Issues on the minds of "many" Americans

What the hell?

by JustJennifer 2008-04-18 11:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Issues......
"Sean Hannity Democrats." The kind who say "I'd vote for Obama but he's a Muslim." Jesus, get them on methadone or at least to a needle exchange program and keep them away from children.
by bernardpliers 2008-04-18 12:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Issues......

You are seriously disturbed.  And you must be a troll.

by JustJennifer 2008-04-18 12:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Issues......
Keep telling yourself that. And look both ways when you cross the street.
by bernardpliers 2008-04-18 12:33PM | 0 recs
Protest MSNBC over 10/30 mugging of Hillary?

Selective outrage won't advance us toward a better, fairer political media.

by fairleft 2008-04-18 11:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

So once, just once, Obama gets a "disproportionate" amount of the tough questions, and all hell breaks loose?

Do you people understand that this is why others think of the Obama side as completely entitled and spoiled?

Really, too many Obama supporters remind me of these  privileged, pushy parents who show up for Parents Night at the local school and really do think that their child must be treated as a little demigod -- screw the children of everyone else.

Heaven forfend that anyone might presume to criticize their child! No amount of harassment of the teachers or the administrators will assuage their anger. Heads must roll. Lawyers must be hired. A great and unforgivable injustice must be corrected!

by frankly0 2008-04-18 11:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

Question:  How many previous debates have been panned by the mainstream media for being unbelievably biased and a disservice to democracy?

Try not to make this one issue about hating Barack Obama, please.

by The Great Gatsby 2008-04-18 11:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

Oh, please.

As if the media "panning" is not precisely the same sort of behavior of a privileged, pushy parent -- as if it has not been observed by nearly all that the media is completely in the tank for Obama.

by frankly0 2008-04-18 11:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

No, the media is in the tank for McCain...

Focus please.

by JenKinFLA 2008-04-18 01:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

I don't think you realize that you just made the opposite of the point you wanted to.

When prior debates consisted of nothing but trashing Hillary based on irrelevant trivia, the drumbeat from the media - completely false by the way - was that "this is how the frontrunner always gets treated, suck it up."  It happened at the NBC debate last year in Philadelphia.  You could look it up.

By contrast, when a debate gets held where Obama gets repeatedly trashed based on irrelevant trivia, the media response is that, as you say, it's an inexcusable disservice to democracy.

By all accounts, this debate was indeed a travesty.  But when you claim it's something unique because this was the first debate "panned by the mainstream media for being unbelievably biased," you ascribe to the 'mainstream media' a degree of objectivity they have not earned.

There is a very obvious reason why this debate is being singled out.  It has nothing to do with this debate being historically unique, and everything to do with who the target was this time.  Now, if you promise me that Obama will get the benefit of the same protective treatment from the mainstream media in the general election, I'm totally fine with that!

by Steve M 2008-04-18 11:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

Actually, bloggers have brought significant pressure on Chris Matthews and on whomever it was who made the "pimping" remarks.  Moreover, I believe that MSNBC was protested - just this past week - by Clinton supporters.  So, if your point is that this is a unique occurrence, I think that that is factually inaccurate.  The media has been called on its more blatant biases against Clinton as well.

by rfahey22 2008-04-18 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

Yes, they've been called out by Clinton supporters, just as Obama supporters are calling out ABC for this latest sham.  That's all well and good.  The question is why the "mainstream media" chooses to lambaste ABC in this case, while in the case of the anti-Hillary debate, the excuse you heard from all quarters was that "the frontrunner always gets treated this way."

As long as we don't indulge the silly claim that no one has ever been the target of unfair debate moderators like Obama was the other night, I am happy to agree that it is 100% wrong in all cases.

by Steve M 2008-04-18 12:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

I think there are two things going on simultaneously.  Obama supporters are complaining about the "tough" questions directed toward Obama that hurts their chosen candidate; but the "media" is complaining about the total f*cking meltdown of journalistic integrity that hurts their chosen profession.

I daresay that if the bulk of the idiot questions were directed at Clinton, it would be different supporters bitching; but much of the same media.  Yeah, it may or may not have been a political mugging; but it was most certainly an embarrassment to journalism.

by rb608 2008-04-18 12:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

Your argument is belied by the fact that no one in the media had a problem when NBC made a mockery of journalism at the earlier debates with similarly odious questions directed at Hillary.  In that case, the standard refrain from all corners was "this is how the frontrunner is always treated."

The media has never, ever been embarrassed by its relentless trashing of the Clintons; not in this campaign, and not before it either.  Remember when Hillary released her White House schedules, and the first thing the media multitudes thought to do was run to see where she had been when Bill got his blow job?  I don't recall a lot of self-reflection on the media's part in that instance.

by Steve M 2008-04-18 01:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

Much truth therein; but I disagree that it's apples to apples in this case.  Your points about the media in general have merit; but this was a very specific and prime time screw up.  

by rb608 2008-04-18 02:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

As was the NBC debate in Philadelphia.

by Steve M 2008-04-18 03:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

I'm happy to stipulate that the media has treated Hillary like crap as well.  But I do, respectfully, think it's slightly different when the "trivial" issues constitute 45 minutes of asking variations on "Senator Obama, why exactly is it that you hate America?."  

by HSTruman 2008-04-18 12:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

It always hinges on whose ox is being gored.  "Why do you have such a problem telling the truth?" and "Why doesn't anyone like you?" are not such great debate themes, either.

By the way, I'll just remind you that the flag pin is a 100% self-inflicted wound.  It pains me to see Obama voluntarily join battle on issues like that where Democrats can only lose ground, never gain any.

by Steve M 2008-04-18 12:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Thought The Debate Sucked? Protest ABC In Los

"So once, just once, Obama gets a "disproportionate" amount of the tough questions, and all hell breaks loose?"

Yes.

"Do you people understand that this is why others think of the Obama side as completely entitled and spoiled?"

Why I was Edwards, then uncommitted after he dropped out.

"Really, too many Obama supporters remind me of these  privileged, pushy parents who show up for Parents Night at the local school and really do think that their child must be treated as a little demigod "

Bingo.

"screw the children of everyone else."

See above.

I am depressed that these two candidates are left.  Hillary is a triangulating and calculating liar (for the most part).  Obama is a smug and arrogant, not to mention inexperienced, typical politician passing himself off as fresh.

by reggie44pride 2008-04-18 11:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

hmm , no.

if he can't handle tough questioning he has no business running for president.

by lori 2008-04-18 11:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

That comment is ridiculous.  On par with Fox News saying "If you can't handle us, how can you handle al-Qaeda?"

You're completely OK with the way the process is, or you just think we should wait for a better time to try to change it?

by The Great Gatsby 2008-04-18 11:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

On par with Fox News saying "If you can't handle us, how can you handle al-Qaeda?"

- you are not making much sense.

Again if he can't answer questions from poor ole stephanapolous he has no business running for the highest position in the land

by lori 2008-04-18 11:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

"The candidates that can't face Fox, can't face al-Qaeda. And that's what's coming," Fox News boss Roger Ailes said Tuesday.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/200 7/06/fox_news_chiefs.html

vs.

"Again if he can't answer questions from poor ole stephanapolous he has no business running for the highest position in the land"

As my friend Kanye would say, "You're saying the same thing like a synonym"

by The Great Gatsby 2008-04-18 11:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

That's so very disingenuous. He can and did answer them. He answered and fended off a 3 person tag team for most of the debate. Now. The next issue is that we, the public want substantive debate questions. If HRC supporters didn't organize to protest in the past that's not our problem. Obama supporters are going to try to do something about it.  For one thing it shows what an active base Obama has energized. I've heard that remarked on in other circles as a very important feature of an Obama candidacy in the GE. McCain has nothing comparable. I'm really pleased they're doing this.

by Becky G 2008-04-18 12:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

Clinton supporters did, in fact, organize in the past.  Obama supporters chose to mock them rather than join in, which is why they now have a partisan protest where it looks like people are just upset because their candidate was the target, rather than the unified Democratic protest we might have had.

by Steve M 2008-04-18 12:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

Well, some of us Obama supporters have actually called out the media for sexism against Clinton.

by HSTruman 2008-04-18 12:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

True, but that wasn't the most common response.  More frequently, what we got was that we were feigning outrage.

by Denny Crane 2008-04-18 02:14PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

I think it helped Barack

and it silenced Hillary's argument to the supers

1. the Wright Fiasco , Ayers rezko, bitter backlash Barack survived all of them Hillary plummeted after Tuzla  

2. the nail in the Coffin when asked Directly can Barack beat McCain in the GE she said YES YES YES he can beat him

3. Barack strongest critics can no longer claim the media is going easy on Barack

Hillary won the debate she is the better Politician  but that is the problem right there, Politicians are not perceived to be trustworthy and will say anything to get your vote or donation. Barack is not a experienced Politician nor is he trying to be ...he is trying to be a leader and so far he is doing a better job of showing us how he is not only different from Clinton  but he is Different from you "typical" politician

Please don't waste your time and energy protesting its not helping  and its making Barack look weak. If you really want to help Barack or even Hillary donate or volunteer

by wellinformed 2008-04-18 11:35AM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

how he is not only different from Clinton  but he is Different from you "typical" politician

- by whining lol , oooh poor obama.

how dare they ask me tough questions , that mean ole stephanopolous

by lori 2008-04-18 11:38AM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

And your reaction is what, exactly?  A counter-whine?

by rfahey22 2008-04-18 11:41AM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

I don't recall any tough questions.  I recall silly questions.

"Senator Obama, do you believe Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?"

Watch John McCain on Steph's show this Sunday.  I'll bet you any amount of money that the same guy who asked Hillary Clinton about Tuzla (again) and Obama about lapel pins (again) gives John McCain a backrub.

by Mostly 2008-04-18 11:42AM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

Try and put aside your candidate preference for one second.  We're at war, the economy is in the tank, the housing market is crashing, and 47 million people don't have health care.  In this debate, the moderators didn't ask a single issues oriented question for 45 minutes.  

I get that you don't like Obama, and that you want him to lose.  Fine.  But are you really saying that it's good/fair/useful for a network to wait 45 minutes before asking a single substantive question?  If so, that's sad.  

by HSTruman 2008-04-18 11:43AM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

I believe asking questions about Wright , Bosnia , Ayers and rezko are pretty legitimate questions for someone running to be president.

The only thing is that Obama was the one that got the tough questions.

Frankly Obama and his supporters whining would not help him.  

by lori 2008-04-18 11:52AM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

Wow, what a nonresponsive response.

I listed actual, important issues, that ABC chose not to address till the debate was half over.  Your response is that its perfectly legitimate to ask Obama 45 minutes of questions that essentially amounted to "why do you hate america?"  That's really sad.

Oh, and since I know you are a big John McCain fan let me let you in on a little secret.  He doesn't wear a flag lapel pin either.  So he clearly hates america too.  Although that might be balanced out by his love for war.  I'm not sure and need to check with Joe Lieberman and Sean Hannity on that one.  They're the experts on patriotism.    

by HSTruman 2008-04-18 12:06PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

I listed actual, important issues, that ABC chose not to address till the debate was half over.  

- I listed actual important issues that ABC asked in the first 45 minutes .

What is sad is that you would think others would think that questions about character , trust , judgement are not important issues.

Aren't these the attributes Obama is running on .

The questions ABC asked were pretty legitimate and important questions .

Just because these questions are posed to Saint Obama doesn't make it any less legitimate.

Character , judgement , trust and associations are legitimate questions to ask about in my opinion.

This is all about supporters of Obama whining when he is asked tough questions about his character , judgement and associations.

If it was Clinton that had these questions asked of her it would be perfectly legitimate for his supporters.

by lori 2008-04-18 12:21PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

Actually, no it wouldn't have been legitimate in my view if the media had attacked Hillary's patriotism.  I was appalled when the swiftboaters did the same thing to John Kerry, and I'll be appalled when the GOP tries to do it to Hillary if she wins the nomination.  I think it's quite literally the ugliest form of GOP garbage out there -- and for me, the candidate being attacked in that way doesn't matter.  

I'm sad to see you think those questions are "legitimate," since I can only assume that by that you really do question Senator Obama's patriotism and love for this country.  

by HSTruman 2008-04-18 12:51PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

Step into the other guy's shoes for a moment.

We just went through about a two-week period where the most pressing issue facing America was whether Hillary lied about her visit to Bosnia in the 1990s.  The media, the Obama campaign, and certainly the supporters were all over that one with a single-minded frenzy.  I don't recall anyone stopping to observe that the Bosnia flap wasn't helping anyone get health care.  Instead, it was viewed as a critical window into the irredeemable dishonesty at the core of Hillary Clinton's soul.

This is emblematic of the message ju-jitsu that the Obama campaign has utilized throughout, for the most part successfully.  They switch back and forth from a style of negative attacks to a style of lamenting old-style politics where people engage in negative attacks, and no one calls them on it.  I recall a written statement from that Bill Burton character where he lamented Hillary's insistence on launching negative personal attacks rather than talking about the issues, and then went on - in the very next paragraph after saying the focus should be on the issues! - to take a shot at Hillary over Bosnia.

I get tired of the high-minded speeches after a while.  No one ever complains about the focus on irrelevancies when it's their own candidate doing the attacking.

by Steve M 2008-04-18 12:06PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

It's a matter of degree Steve.  They're all politicians, so of course we're not talking about anyone being pure.  Some Obama staffers hit Clinton on Bosnia a handful of times.  Clinton talked about "bittergate" herself everyday for about a week and ran a barage of TV ads on the topic here in PA.  Did they both do something unfortunate?  Yep.  Is it "the same?"  I don't think so.  

We all come at this stuff from a somewhat biased point of view, so its no surprise that you're more likely to see an attack on Clinton and I'm more likely to see an attack on Obama.  But at the end of the day we're also all supposed to be Demcorats.  The comments on this thread saying that Obama should shut up because the ABC debate was great are pretty sad to me.    

by HSTruman 2008-04-18 12:13PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

Well, of course it's silly to claim that it was an awesome debate.  But understand, the dynamic here is that if you celebrate when the media trashes the other candidate, it's hard to get the other candidate's supporters to sympathize when the media trashes your own candidate.

All along, some of us have argued that it's important to put up a united front when the media engages in unfair attacks against Hillary, because ultimately that sort of behavior ends up hurting all Democrats.  But as you'll probably acknowledge, all too many people were happy to join the pile-on.  It's just like what happened to Gore in 2000, where too many liberals were happy to see him get trashed up and down during the primaries.

If we're only going to fight back when it's our own candidate being targeted, no one will ever take us seriously.

by Steve M 2008-04-18 12:19PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

You nailed it.

I don't see how different this debate was to other debates in which a lot of these types of questions were posed to Clinton , no one batted an eyelid then infact the same people that are outraged now I recall were celebrating those debates.

Now the tables are turned and the hypocrisy is showing.

by lori 2008-04-18 12:26PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

You're cheering now, and just defended the substance of the questions at issue, so I agree with you that hypocrisy is indeed showing.  

Some of us actually were offended by the MSM's sexist comments even though we don't support Senator Clinton.  I've also defended Clinton against stupid attacks about Bosnia and her purported "screw em" quote.  Because she's a democrat and because such attacks are a distraction.  Then again, I've never even considered supporting John McCain either, so apparently that places me in the minority around here...

by HSTruman 2008-04-18 12:55PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

Steve, HRC related the Tuzla "incident" three times on different occasions to buttress her foreign policy experience credentials.  She had previously claimed that she and McCain had experience in that realm and Obama didn't.  Don't you think that it is relevant and fair for Obama supporters to point out that she was making the incident up?  Yet even so, Obama refused to follow up on this during the debate, in contrast to HRC's capitalizing on the moderators questions about Rev. Wright.

by texasobserver 2008-04-18 02:32PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

Oh, okay, after hitting Hillary on the issue 15 times on previous occasions, he didn't bring it up during the debate.  Please.

Look, Obama explained why he doesn't wear a flag pin  in an attempt to make a positive argument for his candidacy.  That doesn't make it "relevant and fair" for Hillary to bring up, although it surely would by your logic.

by Steve M 2008-04-18 07:01PM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

See this is the sadest thing to me is that both sides try to pretend that the other side has not valid points.

The number of Obama supporters pretending that sexism isn't a problem and the same for Clinton backers and racism, or arguing over which is worse.

The ABC debate was ridiculous, not because it was "mean" to Obama, but because its the same BS, no real question till 45 minutes in, nuts.  Now the Clinton supporters response is don't whine.

Meanwhile, the MSNBC (and others) blatant sexism, which also lead to protests that were favorably covered here, was also ridiculous.

It's true they were Obama backers calling that whining, and now there are Clinton people saying that shouldn't whine.  Its understandable since everyone wants their candidate to win, but both sides are getting played pretty bad by the media.

by labor nrrd 2008-04-18 11:50AM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

Usually I hate all Wright/Flag-pin etc. questions because the innuendo underneath them gets stronger the more they're repeated.

But the ABC debate was SO bad that I can't imagine anyone bringing that stuff up again without people getting impatient.  Sort of how Gennifer Flowers innoculated Bill Clinton from all character attacks (which would have killed him any other year).

by Mostly 2008-04-18 11:46AM | 0 recs
Re: don't protest

Hmmm, you may be right.That's an interesting point.  I wonder if Obama will be somewhat inoculated from these stupid faux scandals in the future. I hope in the future people just groan when the media tries to start another gotcha issue.

by Becky G 2008-04-18 12:36PM | 0 recs
Jeez

I cannot believe the things people will protest.

This just gives Democrats, in total, a bad name when they are protesting ABC for the debate.  It was not that bad.  Sure, it was sucky in many ways, but have you watched debates in the past?  They are often BS

by reggie44pride 2008-04-18 11:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Jeez

It's not exactly a protest.  It's more a pieing.  Did you read the description?

by Mostly 2008-04-18 11:37AM | 0 recs
join the fight Clintonites!

it's time for supporters of the late lamented campaign of Hillary Clinton to get off the GOP bandwagon, come back to the party, and join the attack on the sensationalist bullshit media. this is your fight, too, no Dem ideas will ever get coverage if the MSM is playing "gotcha" all day. bad media is bad media. an hour without ANY substance in a political debate is bad for the country, YOU KNOW THIS.

so, if you haven't followed Clinton not ReThugland, start fighting ON THE RIGHT SIDE,  for a change.

by catchaz 2008-04-18 11:36AM | 0 recs
Re: join the fight Clintonites!

Some of these people are true delusional fanatics. I mean, we now have a reccd diary that focuses solely on whether Obama was flipping Hillary the bird. Totally batshit.

by mikeinsf 2008-04-18 12:01PM | 0 recs
Don't Let Fox News Run America NT
by bernardpliers 2008-04-18 12:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

I think it's funny, but I don't see the point of it.

John McCain is going to be on George Stephanopoulis' show this Sunday.  GS's excuse was that electability is what is on voter's minds, and people want to know how candidates handle tough questions.

So I'm sure on Sunday, he's going to ask John McCain about his reputation as a serial adulterer.  Or ask him why he left a woman who waited for him for years while he was in Vietnam when she was disfigured in an accident, and married an heiress who bankrolled his Senate career.  After all, these questions are going to come up in November.  

Ask him about the Keating 5.  Ask him why he's not wearing a flag pin on his lapel.

Oh, and of course ask him why he's not supporting the new GI Bill.

by Mostly 2008-04-18 11:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest

I love the reactions of some people here.  If the system's broke, but it favors my candidate, then it's all good.  I trust they'd be singing the same tune if they were on the receiving end of a pro-McCain debate.

by rfahey22 2008-04-18 11:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

Protesting ABC is stupid.

by mikes101 2008-04-18 11:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

inciteful analysis.  Thanks!

by HSTruman 2008-04-18 11:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

It's only a protest in a loose sense.  They're going to be passing out flag-pins to ABC employees.

You don't think that's at least a little funny?

by Mostly 2008-04-18 11:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

Actually, that part I'm not so crazy about.  That sounds to me like working stiffs getting hassled for something they had nothing to do with.

I tend to side with the working stiff.

by Trickster 2008-04-18 12:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

Think there are a lot of "working stiffs" at ABC in Burbank?  I mean I understand that you're for Hillary and you want to evoke lunchpails and six-packs as much as possible, but you're really stretching it.

I live in New York where most networks have their headquarters and it's nothing but Prada and guys with two blackberries clutched to their ears.  The people actually working there are easy to spot.

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

Of course I don't know the details of ABC's HQ, but I imagine it's like a lot of other corporate offices.  The top execs probably enter and exit through the parking garage (or even helipad).  A lot of middle managers, analysts, administrative and housecleaning staff go in and out the front doors.

Only a handful of people were involved in any decisions about content.  I doubt those folks will come anywhere near the place where flag pins are being foisted on people.

by Trickster 2008-04-18 01:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

It's a  little funny.  But what do the workers at ABC have to do with this?  I don't think this helps DEMs at all...

by mikes101 2008-04-18 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

People at their Burbank headquarters aren't going to be working stiffs, I promise you.  

Places like that are a mailroom and executives.

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

Good for them.

by DeskHack 2008-04-18 11:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable:

Where was the outrage from Huf Post and Kos at the bias, to say the least, against HRC in earlier debates?  Obama has had a free ride for way too long.  It's about time he has received some scrutiny -- should have happened a lot earlier.

by moevaughn 2008-04-18 11:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable:

Scrutiny = good.

bullshit question = bad.  That giant >bang< you heard when George S. asked "Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?" was millions of viewers shooting their teevees.

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:26PM | 0 recs
Re:

I agree that question was stupid -- subjective to say the least.

glad you agree on the bigger picture of scrutiny.

by moevaughn 2008-04-18 03:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

This is a really weird protest.  If someone challenged me to put on a flag pin... I would probably put it on.  I don't see how that's supposed to be an effective way of making the point.

I am thrilled to see the Obama supporters finally on board with holding the media accountable for its incessant focus on trivia.  For those with short memories, this is how the blogosphere used to be.

by Steve M 2008-04-18 11:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

If someone challenged me to put on a flag pin... I would probably put it on.  I don't see how that's supposed to be an effective way of making the point.

- Ya think.

Should be a no brainer.

by lori 2008-04-18 11:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

I love you ABC

I hate you MCNBC

I love you CNBC but I am boycotting GE anyway.

by DTaylor 2008-04-18 11:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

bizarre

by mikeinsf 2008-04-18 11:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

He's a McCain supporter.  Not sure what he's doing here.

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

  Isn't amazing how many McCain supporters are here on such a partisan Democratic blog?  

by cilerder86 2008-04-18 12:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

Its cause we are all Democrats...

by DTaylor 2008-04-18 04:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC

Funny when HRC was getting trashed by the questions asked in the debate i didnt hear much.  Maybe BO supporters can do the same thing to ABC that they did to Travis Smally.  Or John Lewis.

david

by giusd 2008-04-18 11:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC
Well, there was this. Yes, HRC supporters are always completely rational and never whine about treatment in the MSM.
by Fluffy Puff Marshmallow 2008-04-18 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC

THANK YOU!

I had forgotten about that one, I just had vague recollections of howls that lasted for three months.

Gradually I'm putting the pieces together.  There's also this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/11/1521 12/023#commenttop

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:29PM | 0 recs
Any Demographics On Who These Patriots Are?
Since these flag wavers have been annointed by the media as political gods, who the hell are they? It wouldn't be that hard to get some people to answer a survey declaring their love of flag pins, and then run criminal background checks on them. No consent required! I'm guessing we'd find an usually high number of crack smoking, drunk driving, child molesting types in this crowd. But since we literally have no idea who they are, why are the worth quoting? oh wait, because ABC loves them.
by bernardpliers 2008-04-18 11:50AM | 0 recs
Hmm..

how about the questions to Chelsea about how her mom handled the Monica Lewinsky situation?  Those were defended as valid by many even though Chelsea wasn't even involved in that situation.  So if any question is "fair game" then why is Obama exempt from being asked questions, even if they are stupid?  Jeesh is the guy too wussy to even answer questions, or to say "that is a dumb question"?

by JustJennifer 2008-04-18 11:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Hmm..

Wasn't it a college student who asked her that question?  How is that relevant?

by rfahey22 2008-04-18 11:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Hmm..

It's relevant because many people defending the situation saying it was ok to ask Chelsea those questions because she chose to campaign for her mom.  So if that logic follows, it's ok to ask any question no matter how rude or insulting it is.  Even if the person being questioned is Obama.

by JustJennifer 2008-04-18 12:02PM | 0 recs
And She Refused To Answer
Because the guy asking was rude and pulling a political stunt. On the other hand, this would be fair to ask Hillary. Once. Should she be asked at every event? Oh you know that's coming if she gets the nomination! Seah Hannity won't be her buddy then!
by bernardpliers 2008-04-18 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Hmm..

Uh, ok.  Just so you know, you can find "some people" who would defend anything.  That's not very compelling.

I suppose you didn't support the protests against MSNBC then?

by rfahey22 2008-04-18 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Hmm..

I do think the media has been unfair to Hillary pretty consistently.  I don't think one night of tabloid style questions makes the same true about Obama.  Asking him questions vs running negative news stories 24/7 about her is quite different.  

In general I do think the MSM is total crap.

by JustJennifer 2008-04-18 12:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Hmm..

I call bullshit - the vast majority of Obama supporters did not consider them valid.  And I'm being charitable here because I can't remember a single one.

You seem like you want to believe that they thought it was okay, and that's a problem common to a lot of Hillary supporters.  There's a diary on the rec list right now where people are swearing that Obama is giving Hillary the finger in a frame from a recent speech.

Stop trying to believe the worst about people.

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Hmm..

I don't believe the worst about people at all.  I do think it's silly and a bit whiny for people to complain about questions being asked of their candidate.  I also think it's silly and whiny for his campaign to complain about it.  I think there are plenty of things to be upset about in this country right now and a bunch of questions is not on that list.

by JustJennifer 2008-04-18 12:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Hmm..

It was a disgusting question when put to to Chelsea, who was after all a child/teenager when the adultery of her father was taking place, and I must imagine had been horribly hurt by the whole ordeal.

I would not have minded the issue being put to Hillary Clinton herself though -- but I've not noticed it being done.

I'd certainly want to know if Monica Lewinski exemplifies the sort of dignity that the Clintons would be bringing back to the Oval House.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-04-18 12:16PM | 0 recs
Brushing Off Shoulders Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZJex9Ge2 -Q

Copy and paste, great video of Obama brushing off sholders to Rap music, pretty cool!

by bacalove 2008-04-18 11:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Brushing Off Shoulders Video

You really think it's "cool" for a candidate to disrespect another candidate with a juvenile physical gesture?

Find me one other major Presidential candidate EVER who used a physical gesture of disrespect against another candidate.

"New politics" indeed.  What's new about it is that it's worse than ever.

by Trickster 2008-04-18 12:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Brushing Off Shoulders Video

You consider a guy brushing himself off after a metaphoric "mudslinging" disrespectful?  What is wrong with you?

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Brushing Off Shoulders Video

It's called "the old brush-off."  It signifies either that the person you are brushing off is dirt, or that you feel dirty by having been in conduct with him/her.  It's exceedingly rude.

So about that cite to any other candidate, ever, using an impolite physical gesture in a speech?

by Trickster 2008-04-18 12:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Brushing Off Shoulders Video

"It's called "the old brush-off."  It signifies either that the person you are brushing off is dirt..."-Trickster

I agree it is a juvenile gesture. What's this guy going to do when he confronted with a tough dictator, start furiously brushing away? Its also a passive agressive gesture. Obama could not or would not face down or counter Hillary, Gibson or Stephanoupolous in the heat of the moment. But with conflict safely out of the way he tries to recover his cowardly stance and mete out insults in some sort of revenge play. What a wuss.

by superetendar 2008-04-18 01:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Brushing Off Shoulders Video
Histrionic much?
by bernardpliers 2008-04-18 12:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Brushing Off Shoulders Video

Never.  Why do you ask?

by Trickster 2008-04-18 03:20PM | 0 recs
Corporate media.

Better go after CNN for running the Ayers story too.

Should be interesting if they go after McCain this weekend . This pressure could help for that.

Of course, it is corporate media and they will not hand over power to any Dem without a fight.

by gotalife 2008-04-18 11:55AM | 0 recs
Too bad you didn't post the NBC/MSNBC Protest

for the biased, distorted and heavy handed coverage, let alone the debates we've been seeing for over a year.

...bias indeed.

by LindaSFNM 2008-04-18 12:01PM | 0 recs
Sorry...just shows the left's hypocrisy...

Hillary was treated to that kind of abuse in debate after debate...

Where was the outrage then?

Now that the "chosen one" finally came under a little harsh scrutiny,  all of a sudden the left has a problem with the trivialization of political discourse...

Too transparent to take seriously

by SaveElmer 2008-04-18 12:02PM | 0 recs
One Does Not Question The Precious!

This has nothing to do with demanding a fair and balanced media.  Rather, this is all about "don't be mean to Barack"!

The same people supporting this march are the same people who have aided and abetted NBC and MSNBC during their non-stop Clinton bashing during this entire campaign.  

Woe to those who dare to question The Precious!

by BigBoyBlue 2008-04-18 12:04PM | 0 recs
Re: One Does Not Question The Precious!

another whiny, bitter Clinton supporter enabling the right-wing media.

Your girl lost, she was never ahead, always behind.

I guess when you're a carpet bagger in power for only nepotistic reasons, it's hard to realize why you fail so hard.

by pacified 2008-04-18 12:14PM | 0 recs
Participation

I'm not sure I see protesting the press's idiocy in this debate serves any purpose.  

It is good, however, to see that the seeds of a very activist Democratic presidential campaign are there for this one once we get though this increasngly repulsive primary.  Not sure about the cause in this instance, but love the passion.

by mady 2008-04-18 12:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

Quit Picking on Obama!!!!

where is that kid that did that vid for Britney?  I think we need him here...

lol

by colebiancardi 2008-04-18 12:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

Here ya go:

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable:

What I still don't get about this debate is that Steph said they chose to focus on issues that had come up since the last debate.

But if we were going to wade waist deep into Bosnia, flag pins and 60's radicals, why no mention of the Columbian trade deal? Demoting your chief strategist is kind of a big deal not to mention having your former president husband collecting money from these people. But it never even came up.

by SFValues 2008-04-18 12:17PM | 0 recs
Let me know...

When and where Obamanation is holding its anti-Pennsylvania protest next week.  I look forward to the continuing theme of "rally the troops against tough questions and small towns."

by BPK80 2008-04-18 12:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable:
I've said this before but again, some Clinton supporters don't seem to understand is this debate was an insult to you also. The questions asked suggest that what 'Mainstream America' cares about is vapid, tabloid fodder. Remember in an early debate when Hillary was asked if she preferred diamonds or pearls? Would they ask McCain if he prefers boxers or briefs? Remember Hillary's cackle and her cleavage? Bosnia? Gore's flop sweat? Kerry's windsurfing tights? These are the kinds of things that are meant to distract from real issues. I feel bad for the woman who was taped asking the question about the flag pin. She was made a fool of. No wonder independents are taking another look at McCain. No wonder people voted republican when they wanted to 'restore dignity to the White House.' We as DEMOCRATS must elevate this discussion or we will lose again in November.
by grasshopper 2008-04-18 12:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable:

thank you for your faux concern about Hillary.  Where were YOU when Hillary was slammed, demeaned and insulted in the previous 20+ debates?

crickets....

so, maybe we aren't as "insulted" as because we have been exposed to it since the debates began.  

by colebiancardi 2008-04-18 12:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable:
As a woman, I was very insulted by the diamonds and pearls question. As a democrat, I have been very outspoken about the quality and tone of discussion. Do you know me? Because I don't know you.
by grasshopper 2008-04-18 12:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable:

I didn't watch the NH debate... It was too early in the process... If I recall correctly, though, your enemy Markos stood up and defended Hillary from the bogus sexist attacks on her during the debate and afterwards...  He had at least a half a dozen front page diaries on the subject and even congratulated her for her NH, saying that he hoped the MSM would learn a lesson from it...

We were ALL outraged... and guess what, the media backed off as a result.  The last month and a half, the media has been very pro-Hillary... SNL skits in her favor, Comedy Central in her favor, Fox News and Rush Limbaugh in her favor, ABC News in her favor, etc.

I don't see where you get the idea the Obama has had an easy ride... everyone and anyone in the media is trying to destroy him at the moment...

...and also destroy the democratic party as a whole...

by LordMike 2008-04-18 02:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable:

the media has been pro-hillary?  Really?  What Media do you watch?

SNL, Comedy Central, Fox News & Rush are not media.  ABC news is pro-hillary?  What you mean is that they are neither pro or anti either candidate.

and yes, Obama has had an easy ride - the media I watch & read (MSNBC, CNN, NYT, Boston Globe) have reported on his issues, but then brushed them off with shrug.

so, yeah.    The media isn't trying to destroy him right now.  Oh no.  They are still in the tank for him.  

by colebiancardi 2008-04-18 04:43PM | 0 recs
Absurd.

Stop watching any ABC programming to prove a point.  Spend your time protesting about something important.

by venavena 2008-04-18 12:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Absurd.

I'd rather protest than stop watching Lost.

by SFValues 2008-04-18 12:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Absurd.

www.eztv.it

Now you never have to watch ABC again.

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

  So much love for ABC on this thread.  I really thought Clinton supporters would at least back us on this, since they seemed so mad about the media anyway.  I was wrong.  I mean come on: "Does your former marine pastor love America?"  You don't have to hate everything associated with Obama to support Clinton.  Very silly.

by cilerder86 2008-04-18 12:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

Seems a little trashy to be harassing the employees of the company considering I doubt that any of them had anything to do with what was asked during the debate. If anyone tried to harass me coming out of work like this, it would make me disrespect them, since the thing they are whining about doesn't have anything to do with me.

by zcflint05 2008-04-18 12:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

I agree that harrassing the employees is inappropriate.  If people want to protest they should make some signs and get some media coverage.

by JustJennifer 2008-04-18 12:49PM | 0 recs
*sigh

Won't it be great when George Stephanopolous does his interview with Mcain and brings out all possible Democrat attacks against him.  In the interest of fairness, I'm sure we can expect him to properly "vet" the Senator so he knows what to expect from the General.  But don't hold your breath guys.  The idea is that Dems are always so weak they can't handle an election against those tough republican hawks.

Because let's be honest our biggest and scariest opponent is the so-called liberal media.  They choose the narrative, they frame the debate, and they decided in a shocking display of elitism, that the biggest concern in the minds of americans is the capital gains tax (4%!!That's how many americans are actually effected).

by Tenafly Viper 2008-04-18 12:36PM | 0 recs
Good God

I find this ridiculous.  No one had a major protest
on any of the Hillary attacks, which were many.

You all are just adding to the wimp factor by doing this.

by Robert Oak 2008-04-18 12:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Good God

Uh.....

by Mostly 2008-04-18 12:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Good God

and if I remember correctly, you and others mocked it because only a few people came on.

and the sexist comments have been going on for several years now with a repeated pattern, on MSNBC.

by colebiancardi 2008-04-18 12:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Good God

Here are a few kind and supportive comments from Obama supporters in the diary that posted that picture:

Re: 150? Hahahahahaha!
Yep, right?

150 is a joke of a "protest" in NYC.

You can get 150 people to the opening of a beer bottle.

Call us when you get into quadruple digits.

Lets see.....Barack draws crowds of 20,000 to 40,000. A Clinton 'protest' in a city of millions draws (drumroll).....150!!!!!!!

Where on God's green earth did they put all those people??? My God, traffic around midtown must've been disatrous!!!!  lol

150-how sad.

I think Hillary fans are making a big mistake by attacking Olbermann. He doesn't take kindly to attempted intimidation and may decide to do to her what he's been effectively doing to Bill-O and Bush. In which case you ain't seen nuthin' yet.

But by all means, go for it. It will be more entertaining for me.

I am all for free speech and everything ...but come on really ? I mean seriously  really I think they should really ask themselves what are they really protesting? I am still shocked it was more then 10 people showed up. Is this getting any media covererage is O'reilly going to show this?

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/11/1521 12/023

by skohayes 2008-04-18 03:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

The woman that asked the idiotic question about the flag pin was actually shocking to me.  The fact that a question like that made it to primetime speaks volumes.  Unlike others, I don't think either of our candidates come out of this looking bad.  Rather, I think ABC looks incredibly foolish for wasting a debate that had the potential to be a defining moment in the campaign on minutia.  They come out of this looking bad, not us.

by thatpurplestuff 2008-04-18 12:42PM | 0 recs
It's about Democrats vs Republicans

The New York Times, WaPo, WSJ, and a dozen other newspapers all panned this debate as an insult to the intelligence of Americans.  The media outside of the US is united in it's ridicule of American journalism after watching that charade.

The right wing noise machine treats Democrats one way - with contempt and a profound lack of respect - and Republicans another way.  That's the issue here.

I have to laugh at Hillary supporters for being so short sighted that they can't see how that debate hurt their candidate.  

by tibbs 2008-04-18 12:52PM | 0 recs
Re: It's about Democrats vs Republicans

lol.  Perhaps if Obama supporters had not been so short-sighted back when Hillary got slammed, demeaned & insulted left & right, we wouldn't be so blaise about the thing now.

pot.kettle.black

I didn't see much of an outroar from Obama supporters about the media's treatment of Hillary.  

by colebiancardi 2008-04-18 12:57PM | 0 recs
Re: It's about Democrats vs Republicans

Are you daft?

I spent YEARS decrying the treatment of the Clintons in the media, and I'm not alone.  But after watching the campaign Hillary's been running, I'm now an Obama supporter.

I was merely trying to point out that Hillary was made a fool in that debate, and you people are too stupid to see it!

Hillary's the one with the already high negatives.  And she thinks and you think that she's the one to beat the Republicans, with the kind of stupid, incompetent campaign she's run????  A campaign that just keeps pushing her negatives higher and higher?  

She can't even beat a jr senator from the midwest with a name that sounds like our two worst enemies! A guy who has never run against a worthy opponent before is whoppin' Hillary's ass.  

Only an idiot would put there faith in Hillary at this point.  If she can't beat Obama, whose campaigning skills she seems to think so little of, then she certainly can't beat McCain!

by tibbs 2008-04-19 10:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

Wow!  One debate with a few nasty questions for Obama and his supporters are up in arms.

FWIW, I sent ABC a "Thank you" for putting Obama on the hotseat for a change.  It was long past time.

by creeper1014 2008-04-18 01:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable

   Wonderful.  And when MSNBC asks Clinton about Vince Foster I assume you will be equally pleased.  I am not finding very much enjoyment in this uneasy alliance of right-wing media outlets and the Clinton campaign.  She has embraced the very thing she used to despise.

by cilerder86 2008-04-18 01:11PM | 0 recs
One More Time - It Was Long Overdue

They've already thrown Vince Foster at Hillary...him and Monica and Marc and the McDougals and every other trumped-up scandal they could think of.  This crap has been thrown at Clinton from the get-go and none of it has stuck.  

I admit I like seeing the playing field leveled a tad.  While I don't think this evens things up by any stretch of the imagination it made up for some of the nastiness she has faced.  

Now, since Obama and his supporters have a new-found appreciation of what it's like to be the target of unfounded attacks can we all go on from here debating the substance of these elections for a change?

by creeper1014 2008-04-18 04:01PM | 0 recs
Something Cool is Going on in Theological

institutions.

In the Wake of Rev. Wright scandal the theological community is coming together.  This weekend people from institutions such as Union, Princeton Seminary, NY Seminary, and others will be going into Philly to speak to voters at Churches who have welcomed us.

This fall we will be standing up for Dr. Wright.  Here at Princeton Seminary (and dept. of religious studies) we will be inviting him to speak.  Stand by him.  And send a message the America's Theological Community does not stand for attack on Black Liberation Theology, nor good clergyman.  Were planning for a crowd of over 1,000, as soon as Dr. Wright accepts, and we are going to alert main-line clergy across the country the the nation's premier Theological Institution is standing by Dr. Wright.  We are also planning on reaching out to the MSM and sending out our best theologians to speak on behalf of Dr. Wright when the 527 start to attack him.  We feel like our friends and mentors have been attacked.  As one Professor of Theology put it: This is our Civil Right Movement.

by CardBoard 2008-04-18 01:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Something Cool is Going on in Theological

I have enjoyed the insight you have provided into the theological ramifications of the Wright 'controversy.'  It is good to see values-based activism alive and well in the often overlooked and fundamentally vital pastoral sector of the national community.  Thanks and please keep up the good work, I read your comments and diaries on this subject with enthusiasm.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-04-18 03:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Something Cool is Going on in Theological

Thanks Shaun...after Tuesday I'll be posting a diary about our efforts.  This is the first real gathering we've had of people in the Theological community for Obama.  I think it will be quite exciting.

by CardBoard 2008-04-18 03:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Something Cool is Going on in Theological

I look forward to it.  It's refreshing to see faith-based discussions discussed in the context of progressive Democratic politics.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-04-18 05:10PM | 0 recs
Fort Courage

Where was the pompously and self-congratulatorily named "Courage Campaign" when Hillary was being hammered in the previous debates, and when she was treated like crap in general by the media? Nowhere. This phony "independent" group is only getting all hot and bothered now, despite the eyewash in the quoted statement about even-handed outrage, because their Golden Child candidate is finally getting a taste of the scrutiny and unfairness that Hillary has had to deal with since day one.

In addition, these "Captains Courageous" encouraging everyone to harass innocent ABC employees who had nothing to do with the debate in any way is in keeping with the bullying tactics employed by this front group of Obama thugs. When Hillary kicked Mr. Perfect's ass in the CA primary, this "independent group" launched a campaign of harassment, distortion, and misinformation claiming that the ballots in LA County for independents who insisted on voting in the Democratic primary were so difficult to understand as to constitute "disenfranchisement" of these voters. Their real goal was to call into question the legitimacy of Hillary's win. When it turned out that the overwhelming majority of such voters had filled out their ballots correctly (not surprizingly, since the Elections Board, various Obama spokespersons, and the "Braveheart Campaign" itself had widely publicized the instructions), these Beverly Hills Bullies refused to relent. They set up an "online petition" and threatened to sue the local officials, who were only doing their jobs to the best of their abilities in not counting the few ballots that were filled out incorrectly, out of the millions cast in LA County. Finally, just to get these Obama-bot pests to leave them alone, the officials agreed to "count" some of the incorrectly completed ballots, even though it was not clear in all cases who the voters intended to vote for, or which party primary they intended to participate in, and even though it was not fair to some of the candidates because, the way the ballots were set up, they couldn't get any of the additional votes. The balllots eventually "counted" made no difference whatsoever, and did not affect the delegate distriubution in any way. Nevertheless, this wholly-owned Obama subsidary crowed shrilly and endlessly about the great "victory" for democracry they had won over its nefarious enemies--ie hardworking election officials just trying to follow the law and do their job. And, because there ended up being more ballots for Hillary than for Obama (a fact they had no way of knowing when they began their campaign of PR and disinformation), the Fearless Ones over at the "Campaign" told anyone who questioned their motives to "STFU." Needless to say, Fort Courage has nothing to say about the millions of loyal, Democratic voters in MI and FL left out of the process entirely.

We see the same dynamic here. The same partisanship for Obama masqeurading as some "independent," "good government" concern for overall fairness. And the same bully-boy thuggishness.

by freemansfarm 2008-04-18 01:18PM | 0 recs
Sad and embarrassing.

They are laughing at all the whining and the gop are loving this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zhkq11UEx cw

by gotalife 2008-04-18 01:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

The right wing noise machine has been bullying the media for years, and have gotten their way as a result.  It's about time we do the same!

The travesty wasn't so much the hit jobs on Obama, remember, Hillary was hit, too.  It was the fact that the entire debate consisted of right wing talking points.  There was not one question related to ANYTHING democrats care about... no Iraq, no healthcare, etc.  It was not so much a hit job on Obama, but a hit job on Democrats as a whole!

The Clinton supporters should be just as outraged.  

by LordMike 2008-04-18 01:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

Please step back from reality.  It only hurts our heads.

Remember these things:

1) It is only whining if BO supporters do it

  1. The debate was a good thing because now HRC can call BO a wimp.
  2. The MSM media irrationally hates, hates, hates HRC, so the only true outrage can be expressed by HRC and her supporters.
  3. It doesn't matter if the journalists asking the questions were fed their lines by right-wingers, its a right-wing world so get used to it.
  4. BO has run the dirtiest campaign since, well, ever.  As an example, look at the way he dug the knife into HRC on the Tuzla issue during the debate (he did this little nostril flare thing that is a CLEAR sign of disrespect).
  5. Obviously, the game has changed completely.  After HRC's 40 pt blowout in PA, the entire Democratic community will force BO to drop out because he will so obviously be unelectable.
  6. Did I mention that BO is a wimp?  That's the main thing to take away.

by Fluffy Puff Marshmallow 2008-04-18 01:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

"It was not so much a hit job on Obama, but a hit job on Democrats as a whole! The Clinton supporters should be just as outraged."--LordMike

The essential difference between Hillary and Obama, is that Hillary walked into the ABC debate never expecting a free ride or white glove treatment. She came prepared to hold her own, she fought back as best she could. Obama, so used to seeing Hillary treated like dirt, laid back like a lazy happy lion only expecting to swat flies. Yes, Hillary was "hit too" but she withstood the assault. Barack, on the other hand, looked like someone had slapped him, he could not believe that his MSM supporters would do this do him. So yes, Hillary was equally assaulted, but she came prepared, Barack did not. Too bad. Tell him to be better prepared next time.  

by superetendar 2008-04-18 01:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Holding ABC Accountable: Protest In Los Angele

Could I suggest to the big brains who run the Democratic Party that in future elections ABC, NBC, and all commercial networks be excluded from debates?  Let PBS-NPR run the show in the future.

by Bob H 2008-04-19 02:39AM | 0 recs
Let people get away with misogynist crap

Too bad they didn't do this from the beginning, when websites like "cunt" were being formed, and Hillary was being called a bitch, and other Presidential candidates were laughing it off.

Man, f*ck Obama and his weak minded followers.

OBAMA IS THE DEMOCRATIC VERSION OF BUSH, and his followers are Bushbots 2.0.

BUt it's cool..through away the election in November.

I know I'm doing everything it takes to see him lose; he's creating more and more independents every day he stays in the race.

Never thought I'd see the day when so called progressives turn into left-wing nutters..but I guess I was underestimating human potential for non-deserving hero worship.

Obama's support is the mirror image of Bush's.

If you dont' think so, I'm not sure how you figured out how to log on to the Internet.

by destardi 2008-04-19 08:48AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------