Tweet
Last night, I watched Big Ed Schultz rediscover his union roots by broadcasting live from Madison, challenging Barack Obama to come out and stand up for Wisconsin workers and the right to collectively bargain. I’ve been down on Big Ed lately, but that heartfelt advocacy warmed the cockles of my heart.
Then Rachel came on. She said about the proposed law to effectively ban collective bargaining in Wisconsin: “This is about Democrats versus Republicans, nothing else.”
20 times in ten minutes. I counted.
As Rachel herself is so fond of saying: Rinse. Recycle. Repeat. Typical Big Lie propaganda technique. Repeat a big lie often enough, and, after awhile, people will start to believe it. This is the exact same technique the Bush Administration used in the leadup to the conquest of Iraq.
According to Maddow, ALL the Wisconsin battle, and the escalating Ohio battle, is about is a Republican attempt to break the unions, particularly the public sector unions, so they can’t make donations to Democratic candidates. That’s it.
Crap. RULING CORPORATIST CRAP!!! Divide and rule. Rachel played her role last night every bit as well as Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. Partisan piss.
No, this is an attempt to break unions on behalf of corporate interests. Period. It’s in your face class warfare. Deprive public sector workers of collective bargaining rights so the PTB can turn them into complete wage slaves. That’s it! This is not a Democratic vs Republican issue, this is a power issue. Will managers have the power to determine what pay and what benefits employees have, or can employees bind together to collectively bargain for their pay and benefits? And if the corporatist bastards can destroy public sector rights to collective bargaining, can private sector rights be far behind?
Can abolishing weekends be far behind?
No! Besides, two REPUBLICAN Wisconsin State Senators have disappeared themselves as well in order to prevent a quorum so Fascist Governor Walker can’t get his bill passed. This is NOT a Republican vs Democratic issue. This is not a vertical fight, this is horizontal. This is not R v D, not liberal v conservative, not left v right, this is Top v Everyone Else.
It is no coincidence that Governor Walker and his Republican jackbooted thugs gave away tax cuts to capitalists in almost the exact same amount as they are demanding public sector workers now sacrifice, as the protesters themselves have quite accurately pointed out.
This is a working class vs. ruling class issue. Ordinary people vs the Rich. This is in your face class warfare being waged by the wealthy and the powerful, as represented by Governors Walker and Kasich, against the rest of us. It’s quite simple.
And Maddow played the divide and conquer card on behalf of her corporate masters. Oh, no, this isn’t about unions! This is about fundraising sources for the two parties! The two corporatist parties!
I say again, Crap. At least I gave Rachel 10 minutes. My wife saw a rerun of the show, closed her mind on Maddow, and changed the channel immediately.
Rachel Maddow deserved at least that. Actually, tar, feathers, and rails come to my mind.
179 Comments
Personally undecided re: Maddow, but I say again (repeated from another thread):
Reports are that Tea Party activists plan to counter-demonstrate in Wisconsin tomorrow.
Let’s just see how many OFA “Oba-meleons” make a genuine stand there and um, “take it down a notch” for America…
“Mayday, Mayday, May…” (unintelligible — static)
dont watch RM or LO,at all…no more Keif,no more MSGOP
A few Tea Partiers, a couple of dozen, showed up in Columbus yesterday.
They were swamped by thousands of protesters who just ignored them and marched on the Ohio Capitol.
They are insignificant. And most of them, if they were honest with themselves, would side with the workers.
Rachel Maddow is thought of as a progressive because her claim to fame was displaying the truth of the Bush Admin. The fact she is gay, makes progressives think she is “on our side.” which in fact is total crap. She’s a Dem. Period. Nothing more. When she first came on the air, it was refreshing. Now, she sounds like a high school student trying to understand the big bad people in government.
OUCH! And spot on.
The truth is that there is a Dem vs. Rep dynamic in play, but that there is also a lot of truth in looking at this as largely non-partisan money grab from the middle class to the wealthiest. And while there are real policy differences between the Dems and the GOP, they are overshadowed by the fact that both derive the majority of their funding from the same filthy corporate troughs.
I haven’t watched MSNBC in ages, so to anyone who knows, I’m curious who RM’s running OMG topic is now that Palin and Lizzie Cheney have faded from view?
I have stopped watching her show. Too much stammering, repeating of memes when truth would have been more appropriate.
Rachel, whatever happened to DADT and DOMA? Oh, I remember. They’re still the law. What about the tax cuts for billionaires? Oh yeah, they’re okay because Obama wanted it.
I can’t take her any more. Too much shilling and towing of the party line.
A Party owned by Wall Street and the Chamber of Commerce can simultaneously be pro Unions. That’s a given.
This is real dangerous Kabuki the neo-liberals are setting up. We should deny them this ground.
Today Anthony Whiner offered 2 amendments: To cut several hundred million dollars currently going to the Saudis (4Billion to Israel-mum) and a few( 3?)million in subsidies to Mohair farmers.
Fuck the Dems, and their kissin’ cousins across the aisle. We need the people to come together. The Tea partiers exist, but nothing remotely close to what the media would have us believe.
Wall Street is a continued crime scene – where are the progressives on that?!
cannot be simultaneously pro Unions.
Oh God. I can’t stand her, not even for that once a month when I hear she’s done a decent segment. Like others feel around here, she was good at one time, but now that KO is gone, MSNBC is gone too. I can choke down more minutes of Glen beck than her partisan hackery know-nothingness.
I feel bad for you that your wife is hooked.
99% of all Rhodes scholars are political hacks, working to ultimately ensconce the neo-liberal agenda. This particular Dr. dispenses poison on a regular basis.
OK, OhioGringo; I agree. The Democrats and Republicans are bit players in this 3,000 year battle between the haves and have mores. This morning I caught a CNN reporter stating that the “anti government protest in Egypt are still going strong”. The fact that these people are working for $7 a day and being exploited by a truly (text book) fascist state was and will never be brought to light. Misdirection is the game, “and the game is afoot”.
“…so they can’t make donations to Democratic candidates. That’s it.”
Money corrupts completely. Rachel Maddow has sold out to her corporate sponsors. It’s all about money.
Souls for sale. Buy them cheap, especially if they are Democrats. Two for a nickel, and three for a dime. souls for sale.
She ain’t the first and surely will not be the last.
Let the revolution being.
You may mean that it IS a vertical fight: top to bottom; I think the horizontal is Dem………………Republican.
Maddow: I liked her on Air America, not much since. Too meta, as Olbermann got. Her C Street rants were interesting at first, got to seem petty. I saw her on ack…Letterman! and I forget the issue, but she pronounced exactly the meaning and take-away. Crap; she was wrong, IMO. And she never talks about Israel-Palestine.
Meh! Criticizing her is akin to criticizing Obama: heresy!
Wow! it’s truly refreshing to see that most have caught on to the BIG lie,Rachel Maddow is a progressive.She is not,never had been.She is on TV to ensnare the reckless into the Dem versus GOP crap on behalf of the Corporate power GE.
Like OhioGringo pointed out,this is about Corporations & their greed versus us,ordinary workers.
Is it any wonder that Corporate profits are up big time & wages for ordinary folks are down…If the Dem party were so into ordinary workers,what the fuck did they do for ordinary workers during the 2 yrs they held the WH & both houses of congress.
Full disclosure,I stopped rewarding MSNBC with my viewership after I realized Maddow was shilling for the WH & Dem Party leadership.Olberman was also shill for the WH.
Let the revolution begin!!!!!!
This is an excellent article and says exactly the same thing that Noam Chomsky is saying over at Democracy Now, which is that Obama and the democrats want to bust the unions just as much as the repubs do. Maddow is “the big lie” wrapped up in user-friendly lesbianism to seem liberal/progressive to the masses. Glad I’m not the only one who’s not buying it.
The fact that she “sold out to her corporate sponsors” was never more evident than it was in her reaction to Olbermann’s dismissal. She didn’t speak up on his behalf because it might’ve knocked a car or two off of her gravy train.
“You’re either with us good Democrats, or you’re with the evil Republicans”?
One should never expect anything else from MSDNC.
It’s FOX for the other fans of the national pro wrestling circuit called politics.
.
“American politics is just bread and circuses…but with ever-decreasing amounts of bread.”
Have you noticed that DemocracyNow! is not part of the roster of links at FDL? There’s a huge gap of in links to left thinking sites here.
Have you noticed th links are dynamic, and constantly change? Democracy Now! appears on rotation.
You really need to be better on your facts.
Maybe it’s a matter of context and perspective. I did of course notice – and reject – Rachel’s equation of union-vs-corporate with D-vs-R. But overall, I felt Rachel did quite well tonight (and last night); this was nowhere near as bad as her cricketeering the Tunisian Revolution until #Jan25 happened in Egypt.
There was a lot of good stuff in tonight’s TRMS that’s being taken for granted here. Maybe most people here know all of it already, but it’s a safe bet that most of her audience don’t.
Most fundamentally, Rachel emphasized that this is all about union-busting – and that unions are the only remaining bulwark against corporate power in this country. Trust me, that won’t have been obvious to most of her audience. I wish she hadn’t claimed that the Democratic Party is critically important to the struggle, but even so, she didn’t really obscure the fundamental issue. On the contrary, she reminded us how many things we take for granted have been obtained by labor action – in some cases, at the cost of lives – in the past, and how much of that labor action has taken place in Wisconsin.
And didn’t Rachel herself emphasize this last night? Or am I mixing up two different MSNBC shows?
Rachel also emphasized the link between the Jasmine Revolutions and the Wisconsin protest. And she did well on her map presentation of the spread of the Revolutions – she even mentioned the recent involvement of Djibouti and Morocco. The economic struggle is fundamentally the same around the world. If we’re still better off at the moment than Tunisians or Egyptians, it’s because we’re benefiting from past struggles; we can’t take anything for granted.
And that came through quite clearly on TRMS tonight – and that point, not the R-vs-D thing, was the principal message that most of her viewers will take home.
Educating the public – ourselves included – is a balancing act. We need to become aware of more advanced issues – like the Kabuki aspect of R-vs-D – without overlooking the importance of more basic ones. From an educational point of view, the R-vs-D issue fades into relative insignificance, considering Rachel’s audience, beside her emphasis on the evils of union-busting and the importance of the Jasmine Revolutions – and the connection she drew between these two phenomena.
What I am noticing is that you are ***edited in moderation*** with little to say on the issues at hand. I’m glad you DemNow is neatly hidden in the pile of divisive yahoo sites, though.
MODNOTE: Disagree with the message but refrain from name calling and other insults. Doing so will result in your comment being moderated
I have been reluctant to say this but here goes: I like to watch the wackos on Fox News more than Rachel. They are crazy enough to go off the reservation sometimes. She is so intelligent but has decided to simply cheer for this administration and provide entertainment for the masses. She had an interview with a ventriloquist recently.
how else would she fund her job? they need the money coming in between the 2 parties. Politicians collect money, give it to media to run on and media creates divides, so they get more money. I just wish everyone would turn the corporate media off, they are only for corporations and why wouldn’t they be, that is what they are.
It might be interesting to have a Rachel watch and see how different people interpret her reporting/opinions. My sense is that the net result, the takeaway for those less initiated, will be Dems good, Reps bad, and thus status quo.
Schulz will certainly be reinforcing that meme, every chance he gets.
Really? Who are they? If so, this specific omission was by far the worst defect in Rachel’s presentation tonight.
I appreciated your response. Personally, I thought Rachel did a good job as well. I thought drawing attention to the vast inequity in campaign funding and the source of Republican campaign funds was a plus in her presentation and I agree with her opinion that Republicans feel threatened by Union funding and organising. I was more than a little disappointed to learn that the police union and firefighters union supported the Republicans in the election.
What is amazing to me is that people can watch the same thing and come away with such different POVs.
Sure Maddow was partisan. Commenters above obviously don’t care for that, but so what. The larger point last night and tonight was that all Union money, once unions are busted, won’t be present in elections, and ONLY Republican/Corporate money will be present.
So, how’s that gonna work?
I was hanging with the SEIU in ’08 and in ’09 healthcare actions. You want to call them corporatists? Go ahead, but that’s not true.
“Homework/research Counts. Knowing the issue(s) and being unwavering about the principle to which it belongs is crucial. So does the homework about who potential allies are.” – Kelly Canfield
from which we get eased into this claim:
“The larger point last night and tonight was that all Union money, once unions are busted, won’t be present in elections, and ONLY Republican/Corporate money will be present.”
One would think that Card Check might have been the Dem’s number one priority given that their finances depend on the Unions, as Kelly’s research would have it. Instead Obama visits with the Chamber of Commerce, and the Dems are all mum about it.
“The U.S. Chamber strongly opposes this [Card Check] legislation. There are three problems with Card Check:”
http://www.uschamber.com/issues/labor/employee-free-choice-act-card-check-bill
You blend two issues;
Activism is one thing; that’s where my “homework/research counts” statement comes from.
This post is about Maddow; Opinion Journalism, which is by no means activism. Maddow will never call for action. This should be no surprise to anyone.
I’m no Obama supporter.
Keep trying to twist my words. It reveals your lack of clarity.
You keep dodging the issues, and making wild obscurantist claims. You are a supporter of the Democrat(ic) party. Two years to get Card Check passed – zip, zero, nada.
Look at the way the Rep’s go at things that are important to them…, then draw the correct conclusions regarding Dems and Unions.
and do check out Noam Chomsky on Civil Rights, Obama, Latin America, and the History of the U.S. in the Middle East
~~~Link shortened to preserve margins~~~
I’m not dodging anything.
Here’s how street actions work:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzVZnV1qMfo
When it comes to hand to hand street action, there’s no missling party, no nuance party. There are only bright line affairs, or haven’t you been paying attention to Egypt.
It indeed IS a class war. The first warriors to beat are the Praetorian/Temple/Ceasar guards, and their soldiers. That would be the Kochs and the Tea-diots of the world.
There are plenty that need knocked down, but starting against the biggest guns is where I’ll aim my fire. You can stay a gnat/mosquito. I’ll eat sharks, myself.
Kelly Canfield February 18th, 2011 at 10:19 pm
All I ask is for you to explain this statement, in view of two years of Dem majorities and Card Check:
“The larger point last night and tonight was that all Union money, once unions are busted, won’t be present in elections, and ONLY Republican/Corporate money will be present.”
No less, no more just that claim and the Dem record, hokey?
Can I be any more clear than this:
Democrats suck. I did not vote to return my house member, Diana DeGette this cycle. I wrote in my own name.
I worked like mad to primary the existing CO Dem SEN Michael Bennet, (to elect my guy, Romanoff who is now building water systems in Africa.) It worked on local party lines but OFA came in and over-rode the will of us activists. I will vote against him again in the future.
Further, immediately post the primary cycle, I wrote this:
http://theunconventionalconventionist.blogspot.com/2008/06/george-lucas-is-prophet.html
So quit lecturing me about ANYTHING.
How much more clear must I be?
Kelly Canfield February 18th, 2011 at 10:19 pm
“The first warriors to beat are the Praetorian/Temple/Ceasar guards, and their soldiers.”
You mean: Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Hillary Clinton? – Cesar is a Democrat
Finally something we can agree upon.
How much more clear must I be?
You made a ‘larger’ point that makes absolutely no sense, or you weren’t sufficiently clear. Clarify, please:
“The larger point last night and tonight was that all Union money, once unions are busted, won’t be present in elections, and ONLY Republican/Corporate money will be present.”
Something to get you re calibrated, Kelly:
“Democracy Uprising” in the U.S.A.?
Noam Chomsky on Wisconsin’s Resistance to Assault on Public Sector, the Obama-Sanctioned Crackdown on Activists, and the Distorted Legacy of Ronald Reagan
By Noam Chomsky”
“NOAM CHOMSKY: It’s very interesting. The reason why you can’t get Democratic leaders to join is because they agree. They are also trying to destroy the unions. In fact, if you take a look at—take, say, the lame-duck session. The great achievement in the lame-duck session for which Obama is greatly praised by Democratic Party leaders is that they achieved bipartisan agreement on several measures. The most important one was the tax cut…”
http://www.zcommunications.org/democracy-uprising-in-the-u-s-a-by-noam-chomsky
I’d say the shark you should fear most, is the one who pretends to be a goldfish.
~~~ModNote: If you insist on continuing this, navigate to one of your own diaries and continue it there.~~~
It’s also a matter of educating people. I’ve come to believe that (most of) the Democrats are in fact backing the same interests as most of the Republicans, and in practice are often nearly as bad (sometimes, as with Barack Obama and Dianne Feinstein, even worse), but there is still all the difference in the world in the way that they are perceived, and hence in the mindset of someone who votes Democratic versus Republican.
If someone is buying into the Koch/TP/Republican line of bull, then that’s the first thing you have to work on. Once they understand that they’ve been deceived by corporate PR talking points, and they change their minds and now want what the Democrats claim to want, you can then explain to them that the Democrats aren’t always what they pretend to be.
The Republicans are framing this Wisconsin battle as “We have to cut government spending.” Even many avowed liberals are misguided enough to believe that excessive government spending is a major problem, and that it’s the real concern of the Republicans. As usual, Rachel did an excellent job of cutting through those misconceptions. She effectively reframed Wisconsin as a matter of union-busting. I respectfully but vehemently disagree with her as to the extent to which D-vs-R is relevant here, but I am still convinced that her presentation tonight, on balance, did an enormous amount of good in educating a lamentably misinformed electorate.
Actually, I didn’t know that, but thanks for pointing it out. When I decided to quit Kos once and for all, I thought I had found a refuge here at FDL but it has become very plain to me, especially lately, that I was sadly mistaken. I’m also noticing the moderator attempting to bully you, and I’m no more fooled by that than I am by Rachel Maddow’s dem-mongering.
You need to go back to lurking, mod. And it would probably do you a world of good to actually read that article by Mr. Chomsky. Shooting missling because she brings the message is just plain ignorant.
I know what a neo-conservative is, but I somehow missed the neo-liberals and their agenda. Can someone fill me in?
Economic fascism without borders. The ‘soft power’ complement to neo-con militarism.
This column reminds me of when Rachel Maddow was interviewed by our local alternative newspaper, The Valley Advocate: She crossed a picket line, as you’ll read in the last paragraph. She explained that she crossed the line because she didn’t want to become involved in the the business of WAMH, the local radio station whose picket line she crossed:
http://www.valleyadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=11729
Thank you, Lurking Mod. This poster really violates the standards of the Lake — or at least pushes the boundaries awfully far out.
This poster’s constant attack-attack-attack of another individual poster does not move the discussion forward at all.
Thank you for your efforts.
Saw through this harridan months ago too. Problem is, many people still haven’t figured her out.
Wow. I haven’t been around FDL for a while, but since I can’t stomach HuffPo anymore, I thought I come back and take a look.
What is this lurking mod stuff?
No thanks.
Bye.
Thanks. She shows no solidarity with her co-workers, just like when she defended MSNBC when they gave KO a vacation for breaking ad hoc rules. I found this that explains it a bit. A real fair weather friend. yuck. Hope someone returns the favor for her one day.
Did she do another one of her military fluff pieces where she gets into combat fatigues and starts shooting stuff and supporting the pro war nonsense?
“Rachel played her role last night every bit as well as Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. Partisan piss.”
Congratulations. Yeah I realized that about Maddow long time ago. She’s basically the “Glenn Beck” of the left.
I agree with the premise of this diary, it is class warfare and an effort to dismantle the rights of labor.
When people demonize “greedy” unions on Fox, MSNBC, etc., people nod and go yeah, right, greedy unions. It’s incredible to me that Joe Scarborough can fawn over Jack Welch, one of the greediest SOBs in history and then turn around and talk about “greedy” unions who (in his opinion) should pay the same amount as abused workers in the private sector for their healthcare benefits, without being allowed the consideration to even discuss it, as their contract provides.
I’m not the first to point out that some labor contracts, like those involving the elites – i.e. banksters and their bonuses, are sacrosanct, even as they plunge the world into financial chaos because of their deeds. The union contract of the garbage collector or school teacher? Not so much.
But what makes this particular fracas different is the fact that the fight is on a smaller stage. One of my take aways from Wisconsin is that battles will be fought and won at the state level.
When you demonize unions at the state level,and begin stripping away their rights it starts involving people you actually know. Your teacher, your police officer, your sister-in-law, your husband, your neighbor, etc. The “talking tuff” of the Republican paper tigers works much better when you’re kicking a concept, not actual people. I’m not excusing the “fiscally responsible” Democrats here. If anything, I despise them more for allowing right wing memes and tropes to rule without even a cursory effort to fight back with truths about who is really benefiting with “austerity” and privatizing and downsizing and out sourcing and off-shoring and the like.
Go Cheeseheads!
Now why did you have to butt in and sour the conversation? We were having an interesting discussion, and you just had to chime in and spoil it. Why couldn’t you just have let it go?
Correntewire is a great site to visit. It was superb during the Egyptian revolution (kudos to Lambert), and it’s fantastic on keeping up with the Wisconsin protests. They have liveblogging and stay very current (be sure to read below the fold and be sure to read the comments). By reading both FDL and Correntewire, you can really stay current, though I’d say Correntewire doesn’t bother with Tea Party/Sarah Palin and the red v. blue crap so much, thank goodness. Common Dreams is another great site for commentary. I love the posters there. It’s great to have to many sources.
People are inclined to grapple with pieces of issues rather than the big picture. It is indeed class warfare but when you deal with citizens who pay 3.60 a gallon for fuel oil and then taxes, it is reasonable that public workers, beneficiaries of taxes, are scorned. We do not attack the defense budget or foreign policy choices that were absurd and shortsighted when made. The problem, like it or not, is systemic. If we can’t see that and try to do something about it, what happens to Wisconsin public employees doesn’t really matter. They are just the first ones down the drain. The rest of us will soon follow.
Arrrgggh! Now I’m going to have to go find the segment and watch. Thanks for the thoughtful counter-argument, Sebastos.
Wonderful..! I am watching them with pride!
Thank you for that….wisely and well-said…
Fox does not report news, only hysteria…. They are constantly in a state of ALERT, and love to use fear…
Thank you so very much for that! Excellent comment!
My wife’s definitely not hooked. She had been getting disgusted by Rachel for about a year, and now will probably never watch her again.
I guess those cocktail weenies are intoxicating.
Wrong to cross a picket line…
I’m afraid so..
I kinda figured the Kocks wouldn’t be able to get many our unless they paid them; and they might just do that
They keep changing the times Democracy Now! is broadcast on my local Time-Warner system; guess I should link to it more often.
In any case, thanks for letting me know I’m in good company.
She just a sellout like the rest of them. She wants to keep her job.
The worst part is that this passes for “liberal”
Yes!… Go Cheeseheads..!
Neo-Con in America is Neo-liberal in the rest of the world.
they are the same. They are both intent on allowing corporations to grow endlessly like metastasizing cancers on the body of the world…undifferentiated growth is cancer and that’s the corporate paradigm.
Did you know that if a corporate executive passes up a chance to make money for his (nearly always a he) company he can be sued?
To be fair and in full disclosure, I watched the first 15 minutes and changed the channel. My main point is that for the first ten minutes Rachel repeated and repeated that the events in Madison are a Dem v Rep issue and that’s it! Nothing else. It struck my as a classic Big Lie propaganda technique.
And I suppose that since I see little difference in the leadership of the two corporatist parties, I probably shouldn’t have even used the Republican label to describe the two governors, but instead have just called them Corporatists, which is more accurate.
The fact remains that two Republican State Senators DID leave in support of the unions, which by itself shows that this is NOT a Dem v Rep issue, contrary to what Maddow said. Besides, do you really think there are no Republicans in the ranks of the police and firefighters’ unions who are occupying the state capitol in Madison?
Well said.
Apparently not enough. He took Obama’s ego to task one or tow too many times. but yeah, it was still “look at how stupid the republicans are” and then you could go over to Fox ( not that I ever sully my beautiful mind with Fox) and just change the words around and come up with the same thing: division.
One of the things I’ve noticed here lately is MSNBC host showing a lot of Beck. If I wanted to watch Beck, I would change the channel and go direct for the insanity
I don’t know their names, but will try to look them up. I heard it on NPR radio yesterday.
Crooks and Liars supports the Maddow report. Praising how she “nails it”….Ever wonder why there is no real support for progressives? It’s because very few blogs, and very few television infonews shows, are the least bit. Like the AOLPost. Arianna “I’d do anything for a buck darlink” Huffington, only started that blog because there was a demand for it, not that she ever was/is a progressive. But people think she is. Crooks and Liars, calls themselves liberals and progressives, but the reality is, they are nothing more than Dem shills pretending. Same with Maddow. They bribed a gay woman with lotsa cash to join the gang.
You are partially right, it is a power struggle of the people vs. greedy corporations who wish to exploit their employees and reap the resultingly boosted profits. But which party stands with which side? The answer to this question denies your premise: that this is not a partisan issue. It’s not partisan in theory, but the Republicans are such sell-outs to corporate greed, and so indifferent to the plight of the working class, that it becomes partisan as a result of the Republicans’ abandonment of the people, and of their populist duties.
So yes, it is Democrats vs. Republicans because Democrats typically fight for the rights of labor, whereas Republicans ever more completely are hired goons to corporate interests. And that’s what they’re doing in Washington now, and that’s why the union debate is split down party lines. Try naming 1 Republican on the people’s side in the union debate. It is what it is, bro. Conservatives survive by denying the obvious evils of their party through pseudo-logic, obfuscation, and repetition of lies; and I would have to say that you “have played your role” with great gusto today.. Unfortunately your arguments fall flat because Republicans have no credibility in the union debate. They are just monsters out to kill the middle class so their ruling elite can be that more elite.
I thought Rachel’s story of the long history of WI in the labor movement was alone worth the watch but I do take your point. There has been diddly squat leadership from the national party. If we’d shoved EFCA down their throats we’d have shown them the willingness to fight. Democrats have once again been caught with their pants down totally unprepared for this orchestrated attack on unions everywhere. You think they can’t be dumber and they surpass themselves every year.
Only two things are likely to turn this around — Republican extremism going so far that even FOX can’t hide it or a new labor movement, a new movement for the middle class. I’m convinced it cannot come from Washington. If it can’t happen Egypt style through a broadly based intergenerational grassroots movement it’s not going to happen. But it’s going to take more than netroots and suburban keyboarding. We have to become engaged with those small town teachers and snow plow drivers.
In honor of WI we need a BEER PARTY but in deference to family values and the grass roots let it be a ROOT BEER PARTY!
Also, with regard to Maddow, she DOES do a lot of verbal repetition to drive home an idea. But as you were steaming at the content of her repeated phrase, did you happen to notice that inbetween all the repetitions she was actually making the case to support her statement? She provides ample evidence for ANY such claims she makes. In fact, Rachel’s strong suit as a pundit IS how thoroughly researched and fact-driven she is. The facts beget the conclusions, and she is masterful at demonstrating that. If you want to deny her conclusion, you must address the arguments she made toward that conclusion. I think I made the case pretty well myself above. When you look at how the politicians are lining up on the issue, the Republicans are lining up on the anti-union side, and the democrats are rallying in favor of the unions. This split has existed since the inception of unions, but you are trying to deny it like it’s imaginary or made up by Maddow. In THEORY it is a non-partisan issue, but in PRACTICE, because the Replicans are fraudulent, elitist villains standing with the corporate greedmongers, there exists a de facto partisan split. Maddow identifying what exists in actuality, rather than what exists in rhetoric or theory, is what makes her a vital asset to the political dialogue.
But in practice, I have to look at the Democrat who represents me and I can’t even find anything about unions on her web site. Unions are unmentionable. The most vital labor struggle in decades going on on next door in WI and she’s off to Fargo. In practice, the Democrats defeated EFCA. They had the majority, only they could defeat it and they did.
I wonder too if the only way to fight this fight is to fight it as a non-partisan issue. The national Democrats will not lead the way. Big Ed had to shame even Pelosi into a comment. Obama says he doesn’t want to villify public employees (scorn? ignore? OK?).
So the fight has to be a movement. We need a movement that will probably mainly work within the party but it needs to be able to stand alone as force in and of itself. Think of the civil rights movement. It was above party. It was a moral movement. It was mainly carried by liberal Democrats but as today it was blocked by obstructionists in southern states. We’d never have won that fight if we’d stopped and said mercy me, we can’t stand for that, we will lose a Senate seat in Virginia.
Allow me to suggest three little rules. The first two can, on occasion,be bent, but the third is a definite no, no:
Don’t eat at a place called Moms
Don’t play cards with a guy named ‘Doc’
And never, never, ever cross a picket line
“Democrats typically fight..”
At one time people would believe that and be right. Not anymore. This isn’t the evil Republicans/evil conservatives anymore. Sure they are evil. So are the Dems who still pretend to give a shit, while crapping continually on the people that elect them. Dem politicians have done just as much to destroy the middle class as Reps have. Clinton waged war on those on welfare, just as Reagan did. Clinton brought in NAFTA and deregulated industries. Wasn’t he a Dem? If you are going to shill for the Dems, you have to be at least a little bit honest in your argument.
Bet you are one of those Dem shills that honestly thinks Obomba won the Presidency on 5 and 10 dollar donations too. Dems get just as much $$$$$ from their corporate owners as the Repubs do.
I was just about to write “never trust a Rhodes scholar” when I saw your comment. Yes, neo liberal hacks nurtured and then planted in government and media to continue the shock doctrine.
And I never liked her style. Far too sarcastic and condescending. Sarcasm is a pedestrian form of humor that uses belittling of another human being as its source of mirth. Turn off MSDLC except for a little Rattigan.
A friend who is in Madison emailed me this morning to admit grudgingly, he said, that the Dems in Wisconsin are strong. He is elated since he’s a life-long Dem with a long history of union activism, and has just plain given up on Dems at the national level. In Wisconsin, it is pretty much a partisan issue, though rumors of two Republicans leaving the state are around. Nice to have that confirmed if it’s so.
The civil rights movement was propelled strongly by social gospel theology in the churches; seems harder today for most issues, though One Nation Working Together is trying to brind them into a movement for justice and freedom and prosperity.
This Am. Prospect is live-blooging events in Madison.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=live_coverage_of_wisconsin_protests
There is in every human enterprise a degree of corruption. There is nothing and no one which and who does not ultimately have a price. To think otherwise would suggest a tenuous connection to the world as it really is. A small amount of money corrupts a little and is expected, but unlimited money corrupts, subverts, perverts and destroys everything decent and honest it touches. Case in point the United States in which we now live: a rapidly evolving fascist state in abject denial
Regarding Maddow and Arianna, Maddow was fairly bought and paid for and she has a W-2 to prove it.
And Arianna sold the progressives down the river for 350 million. She’s a traitor, but certainly not a piker.
Hail, hail the gang is now all here.
and are exempt from govenor assholes proposed law.COULD THERE BE a more naked statement about what our overlords want for and from us? police stay and load up, schoolteachers, you better go.
I also appreciate your thoughtful support of RM, but as much as she talked about it being union busting, it sounds like she left out Andrew Cuomo who is also going the route of picking on state workers. And what about the president’s freezing salaries of government workers that amounts to a tax increase? They aren’t attacking collective bargaining in a blatant manner, but they aren’t helping the workers either and are contributing to the “government bad” and “we all need to sacrifice” meme that are big fat lies. Also her emphasis on Demrats v. Repugs keeps people corralled in electoral party politics instead of helping a movement.
I started out years ago thinking NPR was good and the Jim Lehrer Show was giving me liberal opinions. Ha. Ha. Ha. Now I listen to Dave Marsh, Lynn Samuels and Mike Feder on Sirius Left and watch Democracy Now. I took a “Nation” cruise. Then let my subscription lapse in the 2008 primaries and now read “Counterpunch” and “Left Business Observer”. So you may be right that for newbies to political junky world, she might be useful in their journey to the left. But we may not have the time for them to get their learnin’. So diaries like this are important.
Gee, what nonsense:
– “…Maddow played the divide and conquer card on behalf of her corporate masters.”
Democrats are 100% behind the unions and the GOPer tools are 100% behind breaking the unions.
D’oh.
“can private sector rights be far behind?” What rights? Private sector workers now have only 6% Union coverage. Public employees have 36% covered.
Americans act and act furiously when something effects them directly! The GOP has now taken off the velvet glove in many of these States and in Congress. No more are they attempting to pass cleverly constructed laws to gut rights. Now it’s a brutal frontal assault and the Unions and their members are reacting at last. The same thing needs to be done to the Corporatist wing of the Dem. party. Ted Rall is right ONLY Rebellion and then Revolution will change things. The Corporatist wing s of both so called parties have the power and the money and they are gutting the economy and at the same time they are gutting our rights. America is being reduced to just another colony of the Int’l Corporatist elite, complete with a 2 class system Masters and Servants / Slaves.
I think many of the comments are totally off base. While I agree that it is a class warfare issue, Rachel’s point about Union contributions/spending in elections was well made, and yet to be rebutted by any of these stammering posts.
Plus the fact that I’ve yet to see any Democrats NOT backing the Wisconsin Dems or the Unions.
If you want me to believe a rich v. poor issue, then show me some rich Democrats siding/acting against the poor. I don’t see any.
In this instance, ALL the GOP is in for breaking the Unions, and ALL the Dems are for protecting their rights. The parties are mirroring the classes in this instance (which often isn’t the case).
So I think the diarist is dead wrong in this case.
Sorry, I’m with Rachel on this one (and I often am).
I’m not sure if that was a tongue-in-cheek comment — or not?
But in any case — I thought I would refresh people’s memories when it comes to the ‘lack of support’ — current Democrats (Note: while in power) give to unions.
DSCC: Unions, Netroots are “Special Interests in Washington”
By: Michael Whitney Thursday June 10, 2010 4:07 pm
“…Senator Robert Menendez, leader of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, sent out a memo deriding labor unions who supported Bill Halter as “special interests in Washington.” The DSCC’s website also featured an article slamming labor unions for supporting Halter…”
http://workinprogress.firedoglake.com/tag/bob-menendez/
The term “Use & Abuse” comes to mind.
No one is disputing that Dems are in the right here…but what people who watch corporate Faux News will ever believe that the demons aka Democrats are actually on their side here?
So by changing the framing to more generalized terms and leaving the political label out of it once you simplify the message (bigger picture) you’re left with Rich Ruling Class Corporate Elite versus Everyman commoner working class stiff…you’re apt to keep the us mere commoners united..otherwise you lose a portion of the population once you frame it as battle between political parties…that’s exactly what the Corporations and ruling class elites want, the corporations like Faux who’ve fueled all hatred of anything just because their is a D label associated with it. Leave that label out and politics out of it and you might better convince and unite more of the masses to work together to defeat these people. That’s the point here.
Agreed.
Republicans this time are playing the “bad” cops and the Dems are playing the “good” cop — but when the Corporate agenda is jeopardy the Corporate hacks from both sides of the aisle — get into line. As we have seen time and time again.
“…you lose a portion of the population once you frame it as battle between political parties…that’s exactly what the Corporations and ruling class elites want,…”
Your message right there — I was in agreement with.
Wow, I thought this was an OPEN forum. With few rules and oversight.
I wasn’t aware that the moderator’s role was to decide who should and shouldn’t argue over what points. That’s kind of what a thread is all about. It evolves with the discussion.
Too much caffeine this morning?
Put down the tv remote folk and start listening to Mike Malloy and Thom Hartmen.
The tube is good for advertising and getting people to these blogs and real left radio shows. I never would have heard of Adam Greene or Jane Hamsher if not for Racheal bringing her on.
Mike Malloy: a definite yes — Thom Hartmann: nah — total AIPAC apologist, never will hear a bad word said about our Zionists in government — shuts down callers immediately! Brings on Daniel Pipes and David Horowitz to walk all over him — but Steve Walt, even Juan Cole on the I-Lobby? Nah!
As for Rachel Maddow (sigh) — I laughed my socks off at the time when she said this on her show:
http://media.eyeblast.org/newsbusters/static/2008/12/Maddow%2012-5-08%20Hr1Seg1.mp3
Rachel didn’t know what the “Saban Center for Middle East Policy is? The Center that just happens to be located at the Brooking Institute? Didn’t know that the Saban was the Haim Saban who is one of, if not THE biggest $$$ power brokers when it comes to the Democratic Party’s pro-Israel policy?
I mean “come on”…!
I strongly recommend that you watch the entire episode.
No doubt there are, but they’re misguided at best. Whether a politician is Republican or Democratic doesn’t make as much difference as is generally thought, but whether a voter is Republican or Democratic makes all the difference in the world.
The Republican Party openly and blatantly proclaims a reactionary ideology, and the sheer number of people who still accept that ideology remains a major problem in this country. IMO, it is a potentially catastrophic mistake to pull our punches about the evils of Republican ideology in order to gain votes short-term from people who accept it. The USA and the world would be immensely better off if the Republican Party were discredited so badly that it had no support and ceased to exist – not because that would (in and of itself) lead to any enormous improvement in the behavior of politicians, but because it would imply a quantum leap in the enlightenment level of voters.
Events like the Republican union-busting effort in Wisconsin are helping to bring about that enlightenment. One of the protest signs I saw on MSNBC read:
Wisconsin needs to be working on recalls for every politician (D or R, but most of them are in fact Repugs) who supported this union-busting effort.
Yeah, I don’t know what organization replaces the Churches but in the northern midwest you do still have some of that social Gospel in Lutheran and some Catholic Churches. The Catholics have of course been skillfully manipulated. That’s a problem in Minnesota and Wisconsin where there are millions and millions of Germans, Poles, etc. who were once union members and small farmers but now are all too ready to fall for the white guys are victims message of Rush etc. They just can’t figure out that they’re being manipulated in a class war which the national Democrats refuse to fight.
You don’t see national Democrats OPPOSING them but how many do you really see BACKING them. If my Senators have said a word I didn’t hear it and our local media is covering the story like crazy. The national Dems are terrified of LEADERHIP. They sit back and watch to see which way the wind is going to blow. That’s why you see Jesse Jackson on Big Ed who I am surprised to say was remarkably articulate and free from his old bombast. But give me a break, where is everyone else?
And people wonder why the left can’t stay organized. I read all this puffed-up self-righteousness about Rachel Maddow — are you people out of your fucking gourds? Who has done more than Rachel to advance the banners of the left? And you gutless whiners who want to slime her for abandoning Olbermann — why don’t ask Olbermann about that, MORONS? He’ll be the first to set your deluded asses straight. And all this horseshit about “the real point” being between the haves and have-nots without political labels and how we have to organize to defeat these people. HEY, MORONS! There’s already a whole organization set up to achieve those ends. It’s called the DEMOCRATIC PARTY. Is it perfect? NO! Is anything perfect? NO! Is its figurehead in the tank? Most probably! BUT, where exists a better set of the tools and framework required? NOWHERE! WISE UP, YOU FUCKING IDIOTS.
Relax, it’s not the end of the world.
“…a whole organization set up to achieve those ends. It’s called the DEMOCRATIC PARTY…”
You sound like a fanatic football fan — with an allegiance to a team/a brand until you die — regardless of fact that its ‘players change teams’ all the time, and the ‘game’ itself evolving over time.
‘evolves’ over time.
“Who has done more than Rachel to advance the banners of the left?” Um, let’s see. Eugene Debs, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, Lyndon Johnson, and Richard Nixon for starters if you do a realistic comparison. Oh, you want someone living? Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinich, Marcy Kaptor, Elijah Cummings, Pete Defazio, and more.
You want a media personality? That’s easy. Amy Goodman, Cenk Uighur, Keith Olbermann.
Where’s a better set of the tools and framework required? Working people themselves, of course. Yes, they need to throw out a lot of their sycophantic leadership, but it can be done. But your Democratic Party is hopelessly bought and paid for by Corporate America. I don’t think it can be revived, and so on that point I disagree with you.
We need an entire new movement, and, I think, a different political party. And reasonable people can disagree on that point without screaming and frothing at the mouth or the keyboard.
I find you an incredibly rude poster.
“the Democrats defeated EFCA. They had the majority, only they could defeat it and they did.”
No more calls folks, we have a winner.
Nice post Gringo
Maddow has her moments, but she’s more or less, just a partisan cheerleader for the Dems
I came to that conclusion last year during the healthcare debacle, when she, or, one of her producers posted something on MSNBC about the Public Option and FDL’s support of it as being the far left fringe position (I really think, iirc, they actually used the word “fringe”)
That told me all I needed to know about her/their pov
We needed a new movement soon as the tea party started to rise and anchor themselves into the fabric of American politics. The longer we wait, the farther out of reach it becomes.
I am pleasantly surprised to see that so many Pups are running out of patience with Rachel.
Since Obama’s election she seems to rely more and more on White House talking points, only slightly dressed up with some empty lefty rhetoric.
Maybe it was the novelty factor that made her seem so appealing when she first started appearing on MSNBC. Anyway, that has worn off.
RM comes across to me as shallow and a bit of a flake as well as a DLC type mouthpiece. IMHO
I kind of feel the same way about Bill Maher. The other night he said “I’m not thrilled with Obama’s budget, but it’s better than what the GOP Tea Party’s budget” That’s what we’ve been reduced to “Hey, Obama sucks, but look over there, it’s Sarah Palin/Michelle Bachman/Rand Paul, etc.” Tepid criticism of Obama followed by a knee-jerk defense is all I see pretty much anywhere, anymore.
Since when have Democrats been on “our” side? All I’ve seen is a part with slightly less corporate whores than the other party.
One problem with most of your examples: THEY’RE DEAD. The rest are debatable at best and shows that you’re grasping at straws. Olbermann spawned Maddow, on TV anyway, and I think even he might disagree with you. Kucinich has nowhere near the sway she does. And who, besides you and a few faithful, even know who Marcy Kaptor, Elijah Cummings, and Pete Defazio are? Your pissing water.
Working people — better tools and framework. DREAM ON, Sonny. It would take decades to produce an organization as influential and entrenched as the Dems. As far as an “entire new movement”, well, what’s your strategy? Other than a BIG FAT WHINE? Let’s hear it. Show me your pony, I might hop on. Otherwise, you got nothing.
I find your whole premise about Maddow rude, buster. And I’ll take her over you anyday.
In my neck of the woods, the becksters, organized state-wide online, show at regular anti-war demonstrations. Their motto is ‘We Surround Them.’ Their numbers are embarrassing, and they never manage to live up to that motto. But they are LOUD, which is annoying. I’ve never looked to closely at why they bother with anti-war demos, but, whatever…
I found the annoying clip of Rachel on Letterman; IMO she parroted the company line on Julian Assange and the ‘banality’ of the leaked documents. Stupid or calculating? It starts about 8:10. Too big for her britches, and Letterman was hilariously sycophantic.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/late-show-rachel-maddow
Any half-witted asshole can stand off at a distance and tear somebody down. Let’s see some better examples before we go tarnishing our betters.
“Any half-witted asshole can stand off at a distance and tear somebody down.”
It’s good to see you recognize yourself.
“Let’s see some better examples before we go tarnishing our betters.”
You first.
NPR humping dire austerity, further shared sacrifice FROM all of us, Linda Wortheimer (SP) Weekend Edition Saturday.
I’m still waiting for my individual $100K average of shared sacrifice from the $800B tax cuts for the wealthy. Oh wait, I have to make it into a tax bracket first.
“Shallow” seems harsh. I think she is intelligent and well educated – and that her heart is generally in the right place. But she also seems immature and maybe a little flighty.
Enlighten me. Where did you get that figure?
Thanks for reminding why I laugh at their fund-raising pleas.
It’s that kind of reporting that made me give up on NPR as source of news.
Just gain 600 extra pounds or have 7 or 8 kids at once and get on reality TV. Then you’ll be on Easy Street.
…That’s the problem — most of us here are not half-witted — and have not fallen into the trap of bitching for the sake of bitching when the likes of Palin, or Beck is dangled day in and night out in front of our faces.
Maddow often provides that fake and fluff news, except she’s trying come across as the “sophisticated ‘moderate’ entertainer” vs. the bats*it Glen Beck “low-information voter entertainer”. She’s smart — no doubt about it — so is Beck in a sick kinda way, but bottom line “they’re entertainers after all”! For those of us who are switched on — can see right through her. She obviously likes to dabble in the “leftist speak” — here and there — but it’s quite obvious she’s only allowed to do for so long — and is never allowed to hammer on — and touch on certain subjects that will offend the corporate agenda media, or special interests that dominate the Democratic Party.
Maddow’s style is slick, quick, and definitely filtered entertainment news, providing little substance and most of the time leaving out huge chunks of the real story.
I wonder where she will go once her shelf-life expires on MSNBC?
Well, gosh, you sure showed me. I guess I’ll go and give up all independent thought and become a good little Obamabot.
Glenn Beck of the left? Really? Ridiculous. Love her or hate her (and I love her), you would be hard set to find any Maddow editorial that wasn’t supported by exhaustive research and clever argument. Beck is a rhetorical clown who makes it up as he goes along. His attacks on George Souris alone testify to that. His claim that Obama is racist. His money making exploits at Tea Bagger Rallies, pushing Goldline and survival rations. His fear mongering and faux patriotism. And you seriously can’t see the difference?
Okay, genius.
Since you obviously have nothing of import to contribute, I’ll elaborate.
Here’s the premise, as has been interminably repeated in the comments of this post: the Democratic party and Rachel Maddow are corrupt, therefore both should be abandoned. That cover it?
This is a completely fucking ludicrous position for several reasons:
1) it is not entirely corrupt (Dennis Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, Sherrod Brown, etc.);
2) even if IS corrupt, it fosters the same egalitarian message it always has, which makes it much easier to manipulate even the most corrupt among it toward progressive ends;
3) the best way to reform a system is from the inside out, not from the outside in, which more often than not leads to greater destruction than reform;
4) to piss and moan about Rachel Maddow, one of the outspoken leaders of progressive liberalism, because she isn’t perfect, makes about as much sense as calling Walter Cronkite a traitor because it took him eight years to discover the truth about Viet Nam;
5) has anybody in whole post thought about what their objective is? Other than to bitch and whine like a bunch of children? What is the objective? Tell me so I will know.
~~~Mod Note: Disagree without being disagreeable. In other words, argue your point without insulting others~~~
I know this might be asking too much (or is it ~redacted~ in your world?), but could you please tell me who on televsion provides more substance and “chunks” than Rachel Maddow?
I would be forever grateful.
~~Redacted by editor; racist innuendo should be avoided at risk of moderation.~~
Genius? Why thank you, I apppreciate the compliment.
Nothing of import to contribute? What, responding to a ~~~Edited by Moderator. Do not insult other commenters~~~who likes to make stuff up and call people names because his TV sweetheart got dissed is not contributing? My bad.
I can’t respond to the rest since I didn’t read anything after the word “elaborate”.
I didn’t say there was ‘anybody’ — that’s why many of us call it the “Corporate Media”.. Entertaining parading as news to try and affect your thinking, to define your box.
When you watch news programs in Canada (e.g. 5th Estate) and Europe (e.g. Newsnight) you would see the vast difference in what you are literally ‘fed’ here in the US — by the likes of Maddow, even Maher. I guess the nearest was Bill Moyers (however, he was often far too nice)– and he’s gone.
Well, gosh, I guess I did show you. Because if you really did think independently, you’d know that I was talking about the method of execution for achieving an objective, rather that partisanship.
I guess allowances must be made for the ~~~Edited by Moderator. Do not insult other commenters.~~~
~~~Mod Note: Everybody dial back the heat~~~
I understand. It kind of fits your whole approach: Read ~~~Edited by Moderator~~~
Entertainment… In fact didn’t Bill Moyers talk about the Corporate Media before he retired — that “Corporate media colludes with democracy’s demise” poof and then he was gone.
I stand with you in your defence of Maddow. I remember a time when 70% of Americans believed Saddam Hussein played a role in the 9-11 attacks and that there were Weapons of Mass Destruction. Even now according to a research paper done by the Center for American Progress 91% of Talk Radio is far rightwing. There’s a hell of a lot of misinformation out there and at this date there are very few examples of good leftish opinion in America. Her essential objective in this piece was to bring home the inequities in campaign funding and how important union funds are to the Democratic Party and how it poses a threat to Republicans. Was that a lie? Not in my book. The figures are there for all to see and Rachel delivered them with wit, humour…..and facts.
So, the best we have is not good enough, so let’s trash her. That the game plan?
Amy Goodman
PS the next time you belittle someone, you might want to proofread your comment first
Odd. for some reason I haven’t got a ‘Reply’ link to post:
It’s not trashing her — The way I see it — is we are “calling her out” when she’s obviously enabling and playing the ‘corporate game’ — simples really.
Gee, I missed a letter. I’m ashamed all over. Thank you for your diligence, Amy. I’ll sleep much better now.
“~~~Edited by Moderator. Do not insult other commenters~~~”
Sure no problem.
For some reason, after seeing the OP use “HEY, MORONS!” and “WISE UP, YOU FUCKING IDIOTS” @ February 19th, 2011 at 12:24
I didn’t think the words pompous, emotionally, disturbed, or idiot would present a problem.
~~~Mod Note: The original comments were not directed at specific individuals. It may be a trivial distinction, but it is a distinction~~~
“~~~Mod Note: The original comments were not directed at specific individuals. It may be a trivial distinction, but it is a distinction~~~”
Cool, I understand.
My most humble and abject apologies, esteemed sir. It sounded like you were engaged in a tribalistic defense of Rachel Maddow and the Democratic Party, instead of offering anything substantial to the conversation.
And what is the corporate game she is playing, simples? She has exposed the Koch Bros., Dick Armey, Rick Scott, most of the John Ensign scandal, etc., etc., etc.
What is this insidious corporate game she is playing, praytell?
And what about the Democrats? Are they Angels then? So, when Obama gave a huge tax-break to the rich — did she go after and research the lobbyists and individuals that definitely existed that were able to pay-off the Democrats?
Yeah, because nobody had any idea those people existed until Rachel Maddow had a show about it. I’m sure glad there are people around to tell me how evil the Koch brothers are. Two seconds with Google surely couldn’t have done the same thing for a small fraction of her salary.
Yes, that is exactly one of my points. By framing the Wisconsin Capitol protests as a Democrat v Republican issue, Maddow misses the point and aids the corporatists by instantly alienating a lot of voters and viewers right off the bat.
I say again, this is a class issue, first and foremost. I’m glad the Wisconsin Democrats have, so far, stood firmly behind the working people of their state.
But I don’t see Barack Obama in Madison. Harry Truman would have been right there. A modern day Andrew Jackson would have said no state can deprive working people of their rights and threatened to send in the army and hang Walker from the nearest tree.
All Obama can say is that it SEEMS Governor Walker is intent on union-busting. Seems? It’s in our face. But Obama is not on the workers’ side. He’s on Wall Street’s side. If the Democratic Party wants to prove they are really on the side of ordinary Americans, they should expel Obama from the Party. Now.
While I don’t believe Rachel Maddow is a ‘corporate team player’, I do think she soft-peddles some material suggesting that Democrats, Obama, etc are pretty lousy, and perhaps in some ways worse than Republicans.
But there’s also this: her line of attack is aimed at Republicans, and if she were to give that up by playing the ‘everybody’s the worst ever’ angle, the initial premise of her show is meaningless.
And let’s face it: The Democrats are corrupt, spineless, and actively working against their so-called constituency…
But they are NOT howl-at-the-Moon crazy. Therein lies so much of the difference, enough to make a show out of, in fact…
Hey!
You are so right. We essentially have elected lobbyists.
But I think Rachel’s GOP vs DEM point was that just like ACORN was swift boated because they registered low income/ minority voters that overwhelmingly vote democratic, the GOP want’s to break up the unions because they are a fantastic organizing and financial force for DEMs.
Gravy sucking corporations wanting to further trample workers- well that’s just a given. Corporate greed is just insatiable. I caught a repeat of The Colbert Report yesterday. He had a guest on that was saying that small businesses that create 60% of the jobs have been struggling because corporate America has decided that they will start paying their invoices in 60, 90, or 120 days instead of the standard 30. So these small business do not have the cash flow to add more workers. There isn’t any aspect of enriching themselves- that corporations overlook. And they do not care who they step on- NATCH!
Their ideas are not dead. And please don’t call me sonny unless you’re in your seventies. I’m in my early fifties.
And it won’t take decades to change things for the better. I think you underestimate my people, the American people.
As for my “pony,” that is an Obamabot reference straight from several other partisan Democratic Party websites and talking points. As for my strategy, Welsh Terrier puts it quite well right here on FDL. Please click on the link:
http://my.firedoglake.com/welshterrier2/2011/02/19/wisconsin-it-aint-no-revolution-yet/
“I understand. It kind of fits your whole approach: Read ~~~Edited by Moderator~~~”
You understand? Thanks for the chuckle.
I think Rachel has been doing an excellent job on this, and I really get tired of “shill” thrown around like poo.
And when I read some of the other progressive blogs, I am thankful that our mods here rebuke those who call other commenters nasty things. I don’t find it bullying at all. It ain’t that difficult to avoid name calling — even of those we dislike.
Don’t let the door hit ya…
Yeah, I know it’s ultimately a ‘show’ to peck at the Republicans — It’s just so frustratingly shallow.
Al Jazeera towers above the rest. News for adults, it’s amazing.
Agreed.
The moderators intervene when one commenter calls another commenter a nasty name, instead of replying to the substance. I don’t really understand why that is offensive to the commenters on this thread.
Spend a little time on some of the other blogs — Plum Line comes to mind — and you’ll find that half of the comments are derision and name calling of other commenters.
I just keep reminding myself that very few of us could see what the elections on ’08 would bring us, and that the disappointment is a tangible thing. I give Rachel the same credit.
~redacted~ That really sounds derogatory and smacks heavily of racism to me.
This conversation with you is over.
~~Term has been redacted by editor, should be good to move on.~~
I frankly think this entire diary and comments should be deleted in its entirety.
That what I thought
I agree that although “Most Democrats are essentially just Republicans in disguise” is true, and is an important truth, introducing it too early and emphasizing it too much can just confuse the issues. Most of Rachel’s audience isn’t ready for that.
On specific issues, she does criticize Democrats aggressively where appropriate. For example, I learned from her show that Obama had actually escalated Predator drone attacks in Pakistan from Bush-administration levels. And, with Chris Hayes as guest host, I learned that Obama – whom they labeled “Deporter in Chief” – had escalated deportations of illegal aliens from Bush-administration levels. If Rachel is a “shill” for Obama and the corporate Democrats, she’s an abysmally poor one. In fact, part of the personal background here is that when I figured out in November 2010 that something was fundamentally wrong with the Obama administration, and decided to become active on FDL, the information that convinced me of that came largely from Rachel Maddow!
The whole thing is starting to remind me of debates about whether it’s appropriate for revolutionaries to make the removal of the top-level dictator their primary initial aim (as in Tunisia and Egypt), and to hail that as a major success when it is accomplished. That strategy gets criticized as naive, since many other things need to be done in order to achieve truly lasting and meaningful social change. But I think the revolutionaries know that, and they’re right to concentrate on Ben Ali or Mubarak first and foremost. Similarly, when you’re addressing an audience that doesn’t even understand that union-busting is a much more important issue than budget deficits, trying to equate Democrats with Republicans is likely just to confuse the issue. Rachel is right to put first things first.
After your response, I went back to read the thread, and see no evidence of ‘nasty’ name-calling by either party.
I stand by my criticism of the moderator getting involved.
Heated debate is not necessarily undesirable. It make some examine their stance, and points out their illogic in many cases.
Your analysis is better.
Thanks.
Dear moderator,
I am in a quandary. You had to stick your nose in earlier when two members were in a heated debate, but nothing nasty, and with this comment: upperatmos February 19th, 2011 at 12:24 pm
“HEY, MORONS! There’s already a whole organization set up to achieve those ends. It’s called the DEMOCRATIC PARTY. Is it perfect? NO! Is anything perfect? NO! Is its figurehead in the tank? Most probably! BUT, where exists a better set of the tools and framework required? NOWHERE! WISE UP, YOU FUCKING IDIOTS”
It doesn’t meet your threshold? Your explanation doesn’t pass muster.
If you can’t be consistent, perhaps you should just let the children talk amongst themselves.
why?people are just thinking out loud….so what….i like Janes
delivery much better than Rachels,so i dont bother with RM on a nightly basis anymore….so what
Why can’t we get these peeps banned faster?
I disagree vehemently. While I’ve defended Rachel (in this instance) and tried to emphasize light over heat, I think the diary’s criticisms are of a legitimate kind, and while overblown, have a grain of truth in them. In fact, I hope Rachel, or someone from her show, will read this diary and all the comments, and have the insight to see past the heat to the light. The segment on Wisconsin could have been improved, in my opinion, by focusing more exclusively on union-busting, and deemphasizing the role of the Democratic Party.
Wow! Am I glad I missed that little party.
chicken!…………….g
Agreed. I just discovered the moderator on FDL. I’m mixed but lean in favour of it. After continual fights in YouTube forums where the argument is lost and verbal abuse, name calling, bigotry and ignorance abound ad infinitum. I don’t mind having a few rules. Very civilised.
I would have to go with OhioGringo on this one. Whether it is intentional or not, I find that Rachel gets on a point and she’s like a dog with a bone. She repeats the point over and over again in 10 different ways as if we are all morons out here and can’t get what she’s trying to say. That’s why I gave up watching her, in fact, all of MSNBC once the canned Olberman. This Union busting is all to divert attention from the real crooks on Wall Street. This is what really happened to the American people.
Between June 2007 and November 2008 Americans lost more than a quarter of their net worth. By early November 2008, a broad U.S. stock index, the S&P 500, was down 45 percent from its 2007 high. Housing prices had dropped 20% from their 2006 peak, with futures markets signaling a 30-35% potential drop. Total home equity in the United States, which was valued at $13 trillion at its peak in 2006, had dropped to $8.8 trillion by mid-2008 and was still falling in late 2008. Total retirement assets, Americans’ second-largest household asset, dropped by 22 percent, from $10.3 trillion in 2006 to $8 trillion in mid-2008. During the same period, savings and investment assets (apart from retirement savings) lost $1.2 trillion and pension assets lost $1.3 trillion. Taken together, these losses total a staggering $8.3 trillion. Members of USA minority groups received a disproportionate number of subprime mortgages, and so have experienced a disproportionate level of the resulting foreclosures.
The corporate crooks on Wall Street are running scared and have got to divert our attention elsewhere. That’s what all pickpockets, scam artists and ponzi schemers do.
Hadn’t heard about the invoicing. Thanks.
*cluck, cluck*
Except Rachel is “paid” by corporate media — I’m not.
So when I see:
– Democratic Party support of Blanche Lincoln (anti-union)
– Dropping and running away from the Employee Free Choice Act
– Using the extension of Unemployment benefit as a hand-wringing exercise.
Most intelligent Democrats would use this as “a connect the dots exercise” — Rachel is too bright to not know what is going on and to realize time is running out.
I would add: I recommended this diary. I often recommend diaries that I largely disagree with. Recommendation doesn’t mean “This is the truth”; it means “We all need to think about this.”
The spectacle of American entrainment-news media is one thing I do not miss living abroad. The news where I live is more just straight up information without partisan BS mixed in or major superstar anchors. Though it still does not report from the perspective of the working class.
So, the only American news media I watch now is Democracy Now. The rest I read. Commondreams.org is a great site, though it hovers somewhere just left of Democrats. The articles posted there are rarely fluff pieces for either party, though some do repeat the idea that Obama and Democrats are naive or weak and need to wise up rather than being part of the problem knowingly. http://libcom.org/ is good from a grassroots organizing perspective left of pro-Democratic unions. I tend to follow certain individuals or news topics from people involved (like bloggers in Egypt) more than specific sites.
Also found Al Jazeera English to be quite good, at least in their coverage of events in the middle east. Was surprised by some of the commentary and questions (asked to officials) by the anchors. Things you never hear from US 2-party entertainment-media, including Maddow.
The Dems take money for corporate America just like the GOP and the gladly take money from Wall St…The Dems are corrupt just the GOP..sorry RM! Dump the Dems and start a new movement or at least call out the current Dems for being corrupt
There are 178 (179) comments on this post!!
This is an “event” at FDL. Good job, OhioGringo.