Tweet
Purity. LOL
I guess that’s about right.
This show expose ground-breaking re-run reeks so badly of a PR stunt by the Obama administration that it smells like PURE bullshit.Mainstream news media no longer has any credibility. They have shown themselves to be tools of whatever message the Pentagon wants to put out. That’s why the latest fear campaign is internet vulnerability. Once people are afraid to talk here, ALL we’ll have is muted, stale, token reports to go by. That’s why hacks like Rachel have to at least appear to be progressive champions…five years too late and a trove of wikileaks documents too short.
When I wrote the above in a reply the other day after being accused of purity for criticizing Rachel Maddow’s “Hubris” report, I had no idea Glenn Greenwald was going to write this today.
From the article: Finally, American citizens will now be able to hear what journalism has for too long so vindictively denied them: a vibrant debate between Gibbs and Axelrod on how great Obama really is.
What’s he talking about? MSNBC has hired both Robert Gibbs AND David Axelrod to work in the company of the great, progressive, Rachel Maddow-Newly Unchained With Her Leash Payed Out Just-so.
Lookout! We’re going to get to the bottom of a lot of stuff here folks…well, at least we’ll get to the bottom of some barrel. Rachel’s new lead-in should be “Where Hard-Hitting Journalism, and Liberal Populism come together to Move the Needle of Political Discourse in the Appropriate Direction.”
I can’t wait for MSNBC to tell us about how Anonymous supposedly fingered the Chinese for hacking our infrastructure. The really great thing about reporting something about Anonymous is one can say with a straight face, the source was Anonymous. Who’s going to deny it, some Anonymous person? How convenient!
Ever feel like Jon Lovitz is writing this shit? Yeah, That’s the ticket.
18 Comments
Sorry I can’t be around to reply until tomorrow if this post garners any comments. The coincidence of Rachel’s big “feather ruffling” program and the hiring of these two paid propagandists at the same time is just too telling to leave unmentioned.
Gibbs and Axelrod. It just keeps getting funnier, hotdog.
I’m with you on Maddow; those who claim her journalism is good now didn’t make their cases on that post, imo.
Critics used to say she didn’t cover I/P stories, either, but she sure loved her some Richard Engel.
Rec’d.
… going to line up on this comment wd with a X 2
… thank you hotdog … liking what you say and how you say it ;->
I used to love me some Rachel Maddow, too. It’s been obvious for a few years she’s sold her soul to the devil.
Unfortunately, so has most MSM reporters. As a matter of fact, I can’t think of any that have not. Money and power have no equal……………yet.
Our time will come. PEACE
Thanks Wendy. I don’t watch TV, even when I’m stuck in an airport and the piped in hogwash is thrust in my face at every gate. I’ve just been noticing a lot of undeserved democrat horn blowing, daily KOS “spill-over if you will,” here at FDL. That, plus the “designer protest” you wrote about the other day is starting to rile me.
I’ve got to say I have the same opinion of you, shootthatarrow. I don’t write much, but after being chided the other day by the same person who accused me of purity, and I paraphrase, “until Jimbo and hotdog get their own liberal shows on TV, Rachel’s pablum will have to satiate the public’s desire for progressive reporting,” I was moved to at least step it up a notch from commenting. Thanks to FDL for giving us this platform.
Thanks for commenting mtquinn, at the risk of seeming to be tasteless and offensive, I’ll quote Eddie Murphy: “If you’re starving and somebody throws you a cracker…”
I’m thinking through a post about why we should love the revolving door and continuity; hope it gels. Satire gone wrong…sucks, lol.
But in the meantime, I’ll link again to Maddow on Letterman giving her sacred opinion that the only good thing Wikileaks brought was spotlighting the hole in Penatgon IT security. The drivel about her never getting memos from management about what not to report is funny, too.
That thread over yonder was good, imo, we were able to see that the Sunday event was in fact presaged by my gripes about the designer one. Imo, of course. In the end, I’ve concluded that corporate funding of environmentalists causes the NGOs to pull their punches, as evidenced by McKibben’s early books calling out capitalism’s inherent need for consumerism, materialism, and financial growth for its own sake. Larger subject, but until we get to the root causes, we’re spinning our wheels, I think.
“spotlighting the hole in Pentagon IT security”
Echos of Lamo.
http://www.darkreading.com/insider-threat/167801100/security/attacks-breaches/227500592/index.html
The US and Israeli “security apparati” remind me of Wile E. Coyote, except ALL of our faces are going to get blasted in the blowback. Watching the MSM perpetrate the pentagon’s message control and trying to figure out what kind of hair-brained offensive scheme they’ve cooked up/under-estimated to antagonize the rest of the world is an exercise of morbid fascination. A famous quote I think is attributed to Confucious comes to mind: A man who points a finger has three pointing back. Those evil Chinese, fucking with infrastructure! How could they?
Thanks for these diaries. The word ‘truthiness’ does spring to mind. As soon as it’s safe to change the meme, the meme will be changed. Either that, or as I prefer to think, an act of desperation as the ship goes down. (I just hope they finally remember it’s supposed to be women and children first.)
Thanks. My sentiments exactly. haven’t been bothered with, for, or about Maddow for years now.
Women and children, heh. Depends on the zone in question: The people who give us assassination by drone might happen to see them this way if they aren’t members of the proper tribe.
I very much enjoyed the cutting edge of your biting remarks. I wish I could summon up some of those “blogs smarts” you demonstrated when I write here. It is not an easy task, to be annoyed with a situation, and yet able to take it on in an intelligent manner. Good on you!
As far as those other sites that cater to the St. Obama fanfare, I often think of taking a shot at having a new identity at the sites. “BigMeanBankingGuy” or “ILoveMeCivilianCasualties.” And then I would post 24/7, under teh respective user ID’s, about how great Obama has been for my bottom line, or how at first I was afraid that Obama would be too scaredy cat to continue the wars, but it’s been so nice that he has continued them and even expanded them.
That’s a great idea! How about posing as a drone pilot with carpal tunnel syndrome getting a purple heart from Obama? or a Health Insurance CEO talking about his new yacht? or an Exxon-Mobile employee all excited about the challenge of drilling miles below the ocean and not destroying the gulf of Mexico as a real nail-biting thrill?
The possibilities are endless and the sarcasm could be written so dryly as to qualify for The Onion. You should definitely go for it.
There’s a simple explanation for this. I had to point out the very same point to two local right-wing radio hosts. They go on, and on, and on, and on, about how management at their station never tell them what to do or say
But they don’t have to
The reason these guys get promoted, and kept on the air, is because they’re cheerleaders for whatever right-wing view the station owners and management wants brainwashed into the minds of their listeners
To broaden this point
Conversely, when there’s a ideologically p.o.v. the management wants to go away, the hosts get terminated or marginalized. Cases in point – Phil Donahue, and Jesse Ventura
I don’t think Maddow’s a total puppet but, I think she knows where the line is
My kingdom for an edit button ;-)
The bottom of a barrel of kabuki hypocrisy, perhaps?
Good post, Hotdog. Recc’d.
Meep Meep.
US builds Acme Threat Machine; carelessly deploys. Oops; chickens come home to…threaten.
@ john in sacramento: sorry, even the cautionary tales wouldn’t have been adequate, imo. I’m guessing there were some contract stipulations and quiet talks.