3/21/09 11:50 PM

Wednesday Links & Open Thread

Latest cable news links [5:59 pm]:

CNN's Black in America reviewed.

CNN circumvents ban.

Where the party at?

Tuesday's numbers.

Why was Red Eye removed?

Adam Housley in Venezuela.

Thursday: John McCain on F&F, Greta. Friday: Coop plays Regis.

Wal-Mart controversy: cablers get results.

The Village Voice unloads on Joe (via Chickaboomer).

FBN goes mobile.

Profile: Connell McShane (via TVN).

USA Today's time warp.

Post-Schieffer speculation.

CNBC ethics conflict (via Chickaboomer)?

Another call to "Draft Lou". Ted Turner disses Dobbs.

More fiddling with weekend F&F?

CNN's weird science?

Larry King ousted.

Q&A: Karl Rove.

Obama Hardball preview.

Pundit diversity. "Even Fox News!"

ICN reborn.

New Murdoch conspiracy theory.

Video: Matthews and Tucker on imbibing.

Foxnews.com critiqued.

Use our valuable bandwidth to post your cable news comments in today's open thread. Standard rules apply.




On The Mark
Drawing on the pundit theme, Maddow and Scarborough would have gotten into fisticuffs on Gregory had they been in the same room. The two are difficult to figure out. Maddow is obviously one of the brightest pundits or analysts on television, right up there with Barone, if not a bit more intuitive, but she is so aggressive over her time and so disrespectful of the time and space of others. Scarborough, who I generally and genuinely like and who has so much to offer, seems to be in the midst of some personality redefinition, crisis or, perhaps, meltdown. He has become as smug, arrogant and condescending as Kristol (perhaps, more justifiably so since he is occassionally correct). The dialogue between the two can be excellent, but the dynamic is so explosive it often gets in the way.
 
One of the more pleasant experiences of this election season has been Eugene Robinson. He is so well-grounded and always so pleasant. I'm not sure he fits in with cable news all that well, although it is amazing how spontaneously he can "call up" relevant facts and perform a complicated analysis. His gentlemanly demeanor and his soft-spokeness has a PBS quality to it. However, I am certainly pleased we have him on cable news.
 
There was no link to the Doocy/Carlson theatre of the absurd, yesterday. I am sure if OW were up and running, we would have had some reference in the WPIW summary. There was, however, a "Media Matters" piece on the episode as well. That is another difficult duo to comprehend. I may be way, way off on this, but neither is Rhodes Scholar material. Doocy is, I think, a fairly decent sort who has a very rigid, far right political perspective. That's well and good. When he pulls a stunt like he did yesterday, deliberately misquoting and mischaracterizing, I always chalk it up to a combination of vacuousness and an unconcious effort to advance his political and philosophical agenda. It really doesn't offend my sensibilities, and I can understand why there are people who seem to like him. Carlson, however, seems to me to be pure evil, a combination of Hillary Clinton and Lorraine Bobbit on steroids. I find her deeply, deeply offensive. Thank goodness for Kilmeade.
April 2, 2008, 9:00:48 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
I'm sorry but I don't let an unreliable source like Media Matters serve as my arbiter of interpreting what people say. Just because they claim Dean wasn't smearing McCain with his "opportunistic" crack doesn't mean he wasn't. I know what the word means. Similarly, the fact that Olbermann parrots the Media Matters approved spin is no evidence that the spin is correct.
 
Of course, MM will do their part to repay Olbermann for repeating their partisan interpretation on air. Today they will obligingly post video of Olbermann's rant, neatly completing the incestuous circle.
 
How odd that Media Matters jumps on any criticism, real or imagined, of the Clinton campaign, and yet there is one "pundit" who seems to be immune from any criticism. Olbermann has called the Clinton campaign "racist", likened their tactics to those of David Duke, and has even used the ultimate insult: comparing them to Karl Rove. And yet while everyone else on MSNBC has been targeted, MM gives Olby a free pass. Never a word of criticism. Why would that be?
April 2, 2008, 9:43:30 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
And yet while everyone else on MSNBC has been targeted, MM gives Olby a free pass. Never a word of criticism. Why would that be?
johnny dollar | Homepage | 04.02.08 - 9:48 am | #  
 
Can you say "logrolling"... :D
April 2, 2008, 9:56:06 AM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
"Media Matters" did not draw my conclusion. I drew the conclusion based upon my view of the clip, compared to the actual quote. When the primary source is so readily available, I find very little need to have anyone else do my thinking. My analysis is perfectly reasonable. You may well draw a different conclusion, and I don't assume that you would draw such conclusion simply because you were trying to show how un-"Media Matters" you can be. As such, your analysis is perfectly reasonable, as well. Different conclusions are not necessarily an indicia of a lack of reason by either party or both parties.
 
I will admit, having seen Doocy and Carlson in action before, individually and in team and in tandem, I have formed an unfavorable view of their journalistic seriousness and integrity, particularly of Carlson, for the reasons stated in my original post. Did that influence my analysis? Undoubtedly. Much as your view of Olbermann (indisputably lacking in journalistic seriousness and integrity, as well) in a particular, new situation is influenced by your history with Olbermann .... How could it be otherwise for either of us?
 
Lastly, I have never "bought into" the Cox-Dollar-Fox cabal, and I don't buy into the MM-Olbermann conspiracy, either. To raise either is merely a discussion stopper, as is the 10:01 comment from one of your readers.
April 2, 2008, 10:21:17 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike Chimeri
On another note, despite ICN's rebirth, I'm sticking with this site as my primary source.
April 2, 2008, 10:54:30 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
On The Mark, what conversation would we be stopping bymentioning M.M./Countdown logrolling?  
 
The conversation which you raised when wondering aloud why Johnny did not link to what you describe as the "Doocy/Carlson theater of the absurd"? The one wherein you mention M.M's similar take on Steve and Gretchen's remarks and the utterly inevitable Olbermann follow-up of a WPITW later that night?
 
The only remark or reply here that seems to follow no logical course, is the one you made in implying that an accusation of logrolling is equal to a "cabal" theory.
April 2, 2008, 11:09:29 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Damian G.
Anyone else notice how The Daily Voice called Michelle Malkin black?
April 2, 2008, 12:05:54 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike Chimeri
I just call her shrill and irritating. It was worse when she was a fill-in host on "The Factor." But as somebody to the right, I'll defend her against the left.
April 2, 2008, 12:14:49 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike Chimeri
"Foxnews.com critiqued"? More like "bashed."
"Q&A: Rove": "Bush's Brain" [ding!]. Sorry, I *had* to do that.
April 2, 2008, 12:17:59 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
The Village Voice takes a hard look at MSNBC and sees a stealth partisan:  
 
Joe Scarborough.... :D
April 2, 2008, 12:51:46 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Drinkkman
Sometimes I wonder if anyone here even watches Fox or reads Fox.com. This isn't news...its propaganda.
April 2, 2008, 1:39:49 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
Johnny, thanks for the Rove Q & A. It was a great read.
 
I got through the first page of the Voice article and decided that I would wait for the book. Somebody over there doesn't seem to like him.
 
I have the feeling that I know "On The Mark" from somewhere. His tone, style, command of words and ideas brings someone to mind but I just can't grab the memory.
 
Oh well, I'm sure it will come to me when I happen on a blog that makes a connection for me and jogs my memory.
April 2, 2008, 1:46:13 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
> I got through the first page of the Voice article and decided that I would wait for the book.
 
Or the movie. An Oliver Stone production no doubt.
April 2, 2008, 1:48:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike Chimeri
I read the "Even Fox!" link. So, that's who said that Michelle Malkin is black. She has a tan complexion, but is of Filipino descent. And if she's reading this, I'm sorry I was critical of you earlier.
April 2, 2008, 2:03:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
For some strange reason, that article has been quietly rewritten. Now it reads "commenters of color" rather than "black commenters". I wonder why?
April 2, 2008, 2:30:18 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Grammie,
 
That exact thought occurred to me this morning too.
 
I decided it doesn't matter in an environment where clowns can't go to town...so to speak...
April 2, 2008, 2:42:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike Chimeri
"Jim Shank will also be a guest on MSNBC's Countdown tomorrow night."
Oh, no. I'm very proud that the lawsuit against Jim's wife was dropped. But by appearing on "Countdown," he is being used as a propaganda tool. And there's no way around that. Keith Olbermann does not care about either Jim or Debbie Shank. He wants to beat "The O'Reilly Factor" in the ratings, and in order to achieve that, he is faking sympathy. It's the same sympathy he faked toward Craig and Pam Akers, Shawn Hornbeck's parents.
I don't know about Randi Kaye, and not to be superficial, but her headshot does not seem to indicate she's a radical left propagandist/hater.
Honestly, I just don't want Keith Olbermann to claim victory for anything. But if he hasn't done it already, he will do exactly that.
Man, I'm typing more than certain trolls do here. Sorry.
April 2, 2008, 3:46:49 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
Thanks for posting the link to the "Bruise Brother" article from the "Voice," Johnnie. I think it's an important piece. I disagree with much of it, but the lens it provides is unusually good. Of course, like all "Voice" articles, it is a tome.
April 2, 2008, 3:46:59 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
> Man, I'm typing more than certain trolls do here. Sorry.
 
No apologies! We actually WANT people to type here!
April 2, 2008, 3:56:05 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
I was following a link to KO
 
http://thank-you-keith-olbermann.blogspot.com/2008/04/happy-anniversary-countdown.html
 
and came acroos this:
 
" I think he's really hit a nerve, and hsi detractors are feeling some heat. Has anyone taken a look at Olbermann Watch lately? A complete purge. If you criticize FOX or agree with Olbermann, you're gone. Stalinistic group is Cox, Dollar and the infamous gang of four over there.
On The Mark | 02.08.08 - 3:13 pm | # "
 
Johnny, don't you want to exercise some of those "Stalinistic" tactics and tell On The Mark "you're gone. "
 
He has criticized Fox. So, by his own calumny, you must banish him to the desert.
April 2, 2008, 4:04:50 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Well, if that is the same as the commenter who appears in this very thread, our oh-so-reasonable-appearing OTM appears to be a bit of a dissembler. It's one thing to disagree with what is printed at Olbermann Watch. It's another to outright lie and claim that anyone who disagrees there is banished. I guess I just learned something new about OTM.
April 2, 2008, 4:09:03 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Grammie,
 
You're brilliant!
April 2, 2008, 4:21:33 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
I shouldn't be all that certain that anyone has learned anything about OTM by virtue of the 4:09 post except, perhaps, the reason a number of people left OW preemptively, long before the temporary shutdown, and the poster in question is 20% of the reason.
 
Sorry for the diversion, but I enjoy this site far too much to see it be tranished.
April 2, 2008, 4:22:33 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Well which is it? Did people "leave" OlbyWatch because they didn't like the discussion? Or were they banished in a Stalinist purge?  
 
Do you "despise" Olbermann as much as you do O'Reilly and Hannity, as you said here just recently? Or is your opinion of Olbermann expressed by what you post at the Olby fan site?
 
OTM, you are entitled to hold whatever views and opinions you choose. And as long as you follow the rules you are welcome, encouraged even, to express them here. But sometimes it can be hard to keep things straight. Can you please pick a position and stick to it?
April 2, 2008, 4:37:12 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
but the lens it provides is unusually good. Of course, like all "Voice" articles, it is a tome.
On The Mark | 04.02.08 - 3:51 pm | #  
 
Wouldn't a more unique (as compared to a known Republican...) and therefore "better" revelation into twenty-first century anti-Clihtonism be one that clearly revealed a NEW mindset among ...say.... those MSNBC members of Hill's (and Bill's) own party?
 
There are several to choose from. (At least while Obama is still in the race.)
April 2, 2008, 4:41:10 PM EDT – Like – Reply


On The Mark
Thanks for your remarks, Johnnie. This is an innovative and well run site. I'll check back from time-to-time to see if the 40%'ers have migrated back to OW, and I'll look forward to posting again.
 
Thanks once more.
April 2, 2008, 4:54:54 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
I'll check back from time-to-time to see if the 40%'ers have migrated back to OW, and I'll look forward to posting again.
 
Thanks once more.
On The Mark | 04.02.08 - 4:59 pm |  
 
And what did we 40%'ers do but ask OTM pertinent questions in a non-inflammatory way?
April 2, 2008, 5:02:54 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
My dear OTM,
 
At OW, we more than survived in an atmosphere far more amenable to subterfuge and trolls than this.
 
You won't continue in one that disallows those things and makes posters wholly dependent upon rational argument?
April 2, 2008, 5:10:31 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
" I shouldn't be all that certain that anyone has learned anything about OTM by virtue of the 4:09 post except, perhaps, the reason a number of people left OW preemptively, long before the temporary shutdown, and the poster in question is 20% of the reason."
 
Half of 4:09 are words straight from the horse's mouth. What did you say in that comment at a KO fan site that is not representative of you?
 
I also see that you didn't answer Johnnies' question as to which comment you meant. I also would like to know if you are accusing me and others as being party to a Stalinistic purge or are you accusing me and others as being so poisonous as to drive people away in droves? Or are you so magnificently nuanced that I can't understand you at all?
April 2, 2008, 5:16:37 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Kirk
JD,
Your reply to "On the Mark" was fantastic!
April 2, 2008, 6:05:08 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olbysucks
I have the feeling that I know "On The Mark" from somewhere.  
 
posted by Grammie
 
Very familiar and very transparent.
April 2, 2008, 6:30:30 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike Chimeri
It's this back and forth with trolls that kept me away from OlbyWatch before it was retooled. In my experiences with trolls and online/chat room bullies, I've just learned to ignore them and resume the conversation as if they didn't speak. But that's just me.
April 2, 2008, 7:30:17 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
But that's just me.
Mike Chimeri | Homepage | 04.02.08 - 7:35 pm | #  
 
Noted... So go ahead...type more than certain trolls do here...we'll answer....
April 2, 2008, 7:48:19 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olbysucks
I've just learned to ignore them and resume the conversation as if they didn't speak. But that's just me.
Mike Chimeri | Homepage | 04.02.08 - 7:35 pm | #  
 
Apparently not becaus you claimed the trolls "kept you away."
April 2, 2008, 7:53:55 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike Chimeri
Olbysucks, I meant here, Townhall, the old ICN, and in those chat rooms that I don't go to anymore. I e-mailed Bob Cox last Thursday to apply for commenting at the new OlbyWatch.
April 2, 2008, 8:40:30 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
Mike C, how long has it been since you commented at OW. I don't remember seeing your name there or did you use a different "user name"?
 
I was rushed to leave for Little League and forgot to ask On The Mark what user name (s) he used at OW. How convenient for him that he not only made his melodramatic exit directly after Johnny asked him some pertinent questions but without addressing those questions in the slightest.
 
Why do I have the feeling that he will scrap "On The Mark" here and sidle back in under a new name?
April 2, 2008, 9:59:54 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike Chimeri
I never did, Grammie. I avoided commenting because of all the trolls and the subsequent fights that broke out.
April 2, 2008, 10:08:55 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Missy
Did anyone actually read the Village Voice piece on Scarborough? Wow - is this author ever verbose! He must be getting paid by the word.
 
It looks like it has to do with Scarborough doing some Hillary-bashing. But from what I've seen of these MSNBC people, they ALL hate her. I never thought I'd defend her, but she is getting a raw deal by the media.
 
But if anyone wants to pare down the Village Voice article to a mere 1,000 words or so, please do so for the rest of us. I can hardly stay awake after reading the first 20% of the article, which goes on for SEVERAL more pages. I hope the author gets to the point soon.!
April 2, 2008, 11:01:41 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Republican Killa
[message deleted for rules violations: language, personal attacks]

Edited By Siteowner
April 3, 2008, 12:02:25 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike Chimeri
"[message deleted for rules violations: language, personal attacks]
Edited By Siteowner"
 
At least you can do *that* here. That seemed to be one of the things that the old OlbyWatch couldn't do, at least not right away. There'd be comments from trolls loaded with foul language and the usual far-left buzzwords ("neocons," etc.).
Well, I'm off to the Thursday thread.
April 3, 2008, 12:37:28 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Well we have no rule against buzzwords. But we do have rules against comments that are nothing but vulgar language and calling other posters names. So those messages get nuked.
April 3, 2008, 12:54:07 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Mike Chimeri
Excellent.  
April 3, 2008, 2:23:44 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Missy
J$, I have a feeling "Republican Killa" will be keeping you busy. What else can we expect with a name like that?
April 3, 2008, 9:48:51 AM EDT – Like – Reply


olbysucks
RK is here to do nothing more than disrupt and spew hate. She did the same thing at OW under several different names. A pathetic existance for sure.
April 3, 2008, 2:43:31 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olbysucks
One of repb killa's fav talking heads chucked off the air for spewing hate! Adios Randi Rhoads!
April 3, 2008, 2:49:48 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Richard
What school did you go to, Two-Cents?
 
Never heard Randi Rhodes in my life, olbysucks. Way to assume.
April 3, 2008, 5:27:50 PM EDT – Like – Reply


olbysucks
Thanks, dick!
 
On another note, how long before obama repudiates hanoi jane?
April 3, 2008, 6:09:36 PM EDT – Like – Reply