Keith Olbermann wishes Rachel all the best for this Sunday morning. Really he does. |
|
| By: newtonusr Saturday August 15, 2009 6:57 pm | |
Yes, Olbermann has himself a gigantic ego, as he has so testified. But suggestions that he’s off somewhere weeping because Rachel Maddow has ‘bested’ him by getting the Meet The Press/spank the crap out of TheDickArmey™ call for this Sunday?
Not so much. Have a look-see.
Doesn’t look like pique to me.
About MyFDL
MyFDL is the community site of progressive political blog Firedoglake. Anyone can participate by writing a diary, commenting on others’ diaries, or joining groups to find other people in your area. Content posted to MyFDL is the opinion of the author alone, and should not be attributed to Firedoglake.
News. Community. Activism.
Firedoglake is a member-supported organization.
Help us continue our work for as little as $45/year.
Tweet
36 Comments
Damn, I wish I could watch that, but unfortunately I’ll be on the road.
Agreed that kind of smile reminds me of my Dad when I graduated!
Meat the Press is afraid of Keith! I hope Keith reads this Diary:)
I hope Rachel takes a moment to study Dick Armey’s debate style. The last time I saw him on tv he made it personal and insulted the intelligence of the woman arguing another point of view. If you know it’s coming, it won’t set you back.
Rachel has to know that he’ll be gunning for her.
They’ll all be gunning for her-Coburn (isn’t he in that Sandford Sex Cult LOL), the dick and I forget who the, oh Saint Daschle of the Lobby. Gregory is not a stand up guy. I don’t think she can count on any support from him.
Armey is the penultimate passive-aggressive asshole. This isn’t some cable show – this is a slugfest. If he goes Joan Walsh on what ‘many’ consider to be THE Sunday morning show, he will drown before he even gets in the pool.
He will await an accusation and decry the tone of “Liberal discourse” while dismissing her as a small fish in a big pond. He doesn’t dare attack her on orientation.
But Rachel knows this play. She has, no doubt seen and studied the Joan Walsh piece, the Dellums (confused by how Liberals think) piece, and the rest of Armey’s quiver.
This girl is ready. I cannot wait.
Surprise ,surprise.Meet the Press is at the bottom of the barrel.Sure MTP execs aren’t that clever,trying to get”libruls”to watch their show by putting Maddow on.I will stand my ground,any programming featuring David Gregory I won’t reward.
Rachel should drive ratings and if we like what we see the whole show can change look at what Keith did to MSNBC his liberal coverage changed their ratings and now we got Rachel and Ed.
I believe that was his debacle with Joan Walsh, where he said that he would never be married to a woman like her, though she didn’t ask, for whatever sexist/misogynist reasons.
I hope Rachel cleans the floor with this fool’s drool and snot!!
What is the reason that my posts are being screened for “moderator approval”?! It has never happened before, and it is making FDL seem like a gatekeeper site…is that what’s going on? If so, please advise and I will know never to visit again…
Do we know Rachel will be matched up with only Armey? Daschle and Coburn are also slated so it could be 4-person round table, no?
Daschle is a good guy, and he will be flattered to be in the company of Rachel. Coburn is an idiot, on the other hand, who will be crushed like a bug!
I think the other woman was Joan Walsh of Salon. I thought she had no trouble making him look exceedingly stupid.
newton linked that interview in #7. I’m pretty sure Armey is drunk in that clip, which may be another reason to jettison him.
Martin Law in the USA – Coming Right Now
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/7254
Daschle is a DLC shill turned corporate lobbyist. He was an exceptionally weak majority leader like Reid. The president was ill advised to follow Daschle’s advice about laying back and letting Congress come up with a health care plan. Daschle does not play offense. His tiny little voice doesn’t help his weak though reasonable sounding rhetoric. Rachel will have to play the lead. So, no, I would not put “good” in the same sentence as the soft compromised Daschle.
Perhaps Daschle’s voice became weakened in the aftermath of Cheney’s targeted assassination attempt on him via anthrax direct to his office, and the subsequent assassination of the patsy Fort Dietrich scientist claimed to have been responsible for it.
Charlie Rangel will also be on the panel. And yes, Dick lived up to his name when he insulted Joan Walsh on Hardball but, like that ignorant, beedie eyed Joe Scarborough, I think Dick Armey will find tha Rahcel is no slouch when it comes to politics. Unlike the “foxnews actresses” a Keith calls them, Rachel is a Rhode Scholar and will politely pound them into the ground!
Yeh, the anthrax attack didn’t help. But he was already compromised with a airline industry lobbyist wife whose industry got bailed out on 9/14/01. And he hardly chose an altruistic path after being defeated in his Senate race. He became a health care industry lobbyist and tax evader. He should not be on TV at all. Wife cheaters are put in stocks, but corporate cheats get special spots on stupid Sunday morning shows designed primarily to sell drugs and stuff loaded with high fructose corn syrup.
If a person is subject to blackmail, they are not allowed into the political arena. EVERY politician is hiding something, or you’d never even hear their name in the primaries.
Lawrence O’Donnell was filling in for Tweety on Hardball last night, having a conversation with a writer for Slate. each of them stated emphatically that they had direct personal knowledge of John Edwards affair, and that he was the father of her baby, this while he was among the leading candidates for President – yet the conspiracy of silence they shared with other reporters remained intact, until now.
This isn’t about respecting a mans privacy or protecting Elizabeth. This is about protecting the system employed by the oligarchs who OWN THE MEDIA and require that only men and women of low moral character with skeletons to hide can enter the political arena at the outset. Imagine if he had been elected, how beholden he would be to those who hold the evidence (Israel).
Warrantless wiretaps weren’t used for national security – they were used for political blackmail. All those lines terminate in Tel Aviv. Why do you think so many elected officials are ultimately outed in sex-related stings?
How long is the list? Please!
Google sexpionage.
Rachel has gotten the best of ”Dick” and Coburn already and they are really on the defensive !! GO RACHEL !!!!
You know, I’d be willing to go further–imagine if Rielle Hunter is actually a CIA plant? Who was the candidate who presented the greatest threat to the oligarchy? John Edwards. That guy has brought big money down, over and over again. He was the only guy with the cojones to take the system head on.
Instead of blowing his head off (JFK), or setting him up politically (Nixon, Carter), they hired the chick to submarine him. Just like out of a Bugs Bunny cartoon. And, it worked.
Of course, if you mention this, people look at you like you’re absolutely nuts. The spooks count on that.
I most admit that Gregory is doing a good job of ”calling out” Coburn and Armey on their bullshit and making them answer.
No doubt. But that means he needs to move out of the way and let brave people take his place. Yes, most Americans would be hiding under their beds — they need not be on TV then.
Rachel has a talent that I haven’t seen in DC — she is brave, yet polite. Myself? When I need to GET someone, I cannot be that polite. But Rachel makes it look effortless.
Starts in six minutes here. Cannot wait!
From which platform could Lawrence O’Donnell have outed John Edwards back then plunger? He had no show, he wasn’t even a fill-in host yet @ MSNBC. I don’t even remember him being on that much except for maybe an afternoon segment here or there against some republican strategist. What, was he supposed to blurt out what he thought he knew in a segment while being asked about Clinton v Obama?
Every time Dick Armey opens his mouth, Rachel lets him finish, then she destroys his argument, succinctly or shows him to be a liar.
Did Dick Armey’s neck ever fit inside his shirt?
Take two coming up. A discussion with Rachel…
Isn’t he repulsive?
O’Donnell took a somewhat intemperate swing at Edwards at HuffPo during the primaries, January 11, 2008: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..81045.html
Your prediction was right on. Rachel came loaded for thug; Armey just came loaded. She overwhelmed him with facts and left him no wiggle room, as exemplified by his darting eyes and inane responses.
That seldom seen adherence to the facts in DC actually gave Daschle the backbone to get the jump on Coburn, as well. The entire first segment was dominated by Rachel. I actually wished they could continue uninterrupted because Rachel was on a roll, but then how would the war contractors and drug mavens get their message out?
I thought Maddow was exceptional and an obvious winner of the day. She destroyed Armey.
This is my theory of what happened to JRE too. Perhaps I’ve read too much of John Perkins, but in his sequel to “Confessions of an Economic Hitman”, he talked about the sexpionage.
Also I was wrong about Daschle. He was strong and clear and had some really good metaphors and excellent facts. Having Rachel there helped him take on the guy whose name he couldn’t remember.
I found it interesting, as always, how Gregory lets the conservatives interrupt and talk on and on, but the Democrats and liberals are on their own.
Last October 13th, when her MSNBC show was very young, she had David Frum as a guest (I posted this within minutes of air), and almost right away he tried to throw the interview into chaos by joining the angry tone of the McCain campaign’s rhetoric with the rhetoric of the Left, and he singled her show out for “it’s heavy sarcasm and it’s disregard for a lot of the substantive issues that really are important.“
Instead of allowing the interview to veer off into a spitball fight Frum craved, she batted down the accusations and refuted his charges time and time again throughout, and managed to keep the interview about the McCain campaign’s furious attempts to smear Obama and threaten the country into NOT voting for him. She didn’t rattle at all.
Seeing this interview, conducted when she was new at the hour-format, settled it for me. For all the policy biases which she may feel deeply, and unaccustomed to being attacked personally, she is a very cool customer.