The Atlantic - Latest Comments in What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

DB Cooper — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:44:16 -0000

TNC,

I used Kos' name because he put himself out this week as online guardian of the movement, or whatever. I was going to go with a caveat that it wasn't exactly your point, but rushed the comment.

I think colby begs the question: Why do shows HAVE to identify, categorize, and then equally represent each ideology?

Can't we just live with the fact that a general left/right balance may not accurately show the full spectrum of (reasonable-ish) views on a given subject?

Murphy and Scarborough may have lined up as to this budget, but differ on 100 other topics. And should Grover Norquist be pissed because his views got short shrift?

I'm just having a hard time seeing the problem. It's not like Obama's views lack an effective, high profile advocate.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

tricstmr — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:42:59 -0000

Overall.. I agree with TNC here.. only possibilities that are taken seriously in MSM today are Rachel Maddow and Olbermann.. and they cannot be everywhere...

Of course, the MSM is in decline methinks.. so this complete inability to present real news only tends to drive more and more people to the blogosphere... (especially younger generations..)

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

colby — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:12:04 -0000

"I get your point, TNC, but this also sounds like what I'm hearing from the Republicans, with purity tests, and the ever-shrinking tent."

It doesn't sound anything like that, actually- there's no one saying Meyers, Ford, etc. can't be in the party or hold office or whatever- in fact, this isn't about them at all. It's about NBC, who tries to put together a panel where the two major ideologies can debate, and then invites people who DON'T adhere to one of the ideology and aren't willing to debate it to represent it. That's not saying they should be drummed out of the party or anything, it's just saying they're not the right people in this role.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

reagain — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:34:22 -0000

I was pretty frustrated watching this display on Sunday morning.

When I first heard Scarborough would be on, I was excited because it always warms my heart to see him not be the alpha dog like he is on Morning Joe. But the opposition defintely was weak -- even Ford Jr. played it politically -- "well if it does not work, Obama will be in trouble at the polls". Come on Harold stand up for what you "believe" in! But maybe that's the problem Harold and other Dems are too worried that what they believe in today may not be what they "believe" in to get elected again down the road.

I like Dee Dee but not to defend or debate on econmic theory. I am sure Joe S. and Mike M. were back stage before the show just giddy about the draw of the panel.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Ta-Nehisi Coates — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:40:38 -0000

DB,

No disrespect to Kos, but I didn't mention him.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

anna perez — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 04:12:44 -0000

sometimes liberals just need better flacks. Take it from a former GOP flack. Cable and broadcast "news" shows are the "mighty maw" and must be continually fed. To avoid palette fatigue, new delicacies are always sought. KVH and Joan Walsh are great, and so was Julianne until she snapped so bad and imho gratuitously, with Tavis, on POTUS' nom. accept speech. That said, I'd love to see her back. As for Black (and sometimes Hispanic) conservatives getting so much air time that's just "man bites dog" which is usually at least attention getting, hence Michael Steele.

BTW, Stevie Wonder in Performance at the WH (he received the second Library of Congress Gershwin prize for popular song) finally aired tonight on a PBS station out here in the Bay Area, but guess what--little or no promotion (including relatively cheap web site adv.) Its an abfab show, catch it if you can.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Texas Girl — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 22:23:27 -0000

Link to HuffPo article on MTP ratings, with Face the Nation ratings info as well: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/05/meet-the-press-ratings-lo_n_164375.html. Looks like the viewership is in the 3-4 million range. Is that all political geeks? I don't know how one defines a political geek.

But as for not hearing anyone talking about what happened on Sunday political shows when you show up at work on Monday doesn't surprise me. Many people don't want to bring political discussions into the workplace. That way be dragons.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Dick — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:38:04 -0000

Does anyone actually watch these shows except you politics geeks? I never watch them, and I don't know anyone who does. No one of my acquaintance or that I have run into on a Monday at a client or a meeting or anywhere has ever started a conversation about one of them.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

DB Cooper — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:03:11 -0000

I get your point, TNC, but this also sounds like what I'm hearing from the Republicans, with purity tests, and the ever-shrinking tent.

Maybe it's because I'm an Obama supporter who's NOT a lockstep liberal, so I'm a little sensitive to turning my government/President/"side" over to the likes of Kos.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

rikyrah — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:02:01 -0000

Harold Ford, Jr. is NO friend to this administration. He hated on Obama until the night of the election. Anyone believing that he'd put out an all out defense of this White House is deluding themselves.

Coates, I feel ya. You want liberals on economics, I want Black folk like Ron Daniels, Ron Walters, Marian Wright Edelman, Julianna Malveaux - There is someone you could get on an Economics panel. I believe her PhD in Econ from MIT qualifies her far more than anyone on that panel today at Meet The Press. These shows are done in Washington, DC, and as I've said before, you can find a qualified Black in ANY subject area you want within an hour of D.C. They aren't even looking.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

batondor — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:49:03 -0000

We watched "This Week" on ABC... and while it's not often the case, this week I can recommend it wholeheartedly... Peter Orzak is particularly impressive - he almost had Stephanopolus in rethorical knots - if not tears - as George basically begged and badgered him for a scoop or sound bite to spin into the synthesis of the interview. The panel was also "interesting", especially when Katrina Van De Heuvel referred to Karl Rove as "Mister Rove" and the other three-quarters of W's brain meekly responded "call me Karl". The substance, of course, was fairly standard except for the fact that the tag team confrontation between Past and Present was fairly positive for the future, in my opinion... the chasm to be traversed notwithstanding.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Texas Girl — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:10:06 -0000

In a moment of great national unity and patriotism, people wanted to know what they could and should do to help the country. President Bush told people that the best way they could help the country was to go shopping. And the people listened and did as they were asked. It was an insane response from the President. And people were stupid to follow his request. But people wanted to help, so they did.

Now is that the whole reason the whole financial system has gone to hell in a handbasket? No, of course not. But it kind of sums up the attitude of the previous administration. They sort of told people, "Y'all don't worry your pretty little heads about this economy thing. Just keep spending. We want you to own a house. Or two. And a couple of cars. Or better yet, big SUVs. And what house is complete without a big screen TV? Go ahead. It's okay. The market always goes up. Housing values always go up. Don't worry." And people listened and did as they were essentially told to do.

Should they have been more frugal? Sure. But everyone was doing it. It even seemed like the government was encouraging it. And housing values always go up, right? So off to the races they went....

But back to TNC's original post about the lack of progressives on TV political yak-fests. I think another element is that the MSM has heard the conservative description of them as "librul media" for a long time, and thus work hard so as not to appear "librul." When in doubt, invite a conservative onto the show rather than one of those scary leftists who might say something that Rush will get upset about on Monday.

I think they err on the side of the right, and after so many years of behaving this way it's become habit. I think it'll take a bit of shoving, shouting, cajoling and working the refs to get more and more people on the left side of the spectrum invited on the show.

Eventually someone will dip their toe in the water and invite two or three left-leaning folks onto a roundtable. If it goes well they might remember that for the next week. And after several times of doing that they might realize they can invite people from the left onto the show without the sky falling. But for now, they're timid and cowed.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Byrk — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 19:12:59 -0000

And one of the biggest impressions I had from my travels and work was "Where the fuck are all these people getting all the money to pay for the shit they buy? Where do they get the money for these giant TVs, or these giant SUVs? Or these giant houses?"

They borrowed for it, and the worst of it happened when the Republicans were in firm control of Congress and the Presidency. We were screwed by 2006 and the only thing left at that point was the pain. You can't act like the Republicans weren't in control and had every opportunity to stop this. Instead, we had Alan Greenspan on TV telling everyone that borrowing this money is fine, go ahead and grab that ARM and the housing market isn't completely overpriced. Then we had George Bush going on TV telling everyone to spend because that's the patriotic thing to do. The result was heavy debt spending, people were just doing as they were told.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Tom Traubert — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:52:19 -0000

@elizabeth | March 1, 2009 4:27 PM

You said:

(and I'll add that David Gregory is incredibly rude to women -- interrupting them when they talk or ignoring them altogether).

The View From Here - David Gregory's Blog

Here's his blog. He takes comments.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Tony Comstock — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:12:00 -0000

since the day of Jimmy Carter

Can you imagine how different our world might be if the rescue mission had been a success? Did you read Bowden's article in the Atlantic a few years back?

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Tony Comstock — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:04:53 -0000

I'm sorry Citizen E, but you push me too far.

The whole "the irresponsible poor (brown) people and the government bureaucrats who made us lend money to them did this to us" is bullshit. Complete and utter bullshit.

But in the last 15 years my work has taken me all over this country, into all different sorts of communities and into the lives of all sorts of different people.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

CitizenE — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:01:53 -0000

One last for Tony C. I am frightened to death that Obama's policies won't work, though for different reasons than you. I think the hole we're in is one people of my generation have known was coming since the days of Jimmy Carter--think little, think globally, act locally. A hole which has been forestalled by huge investments in military adventurism, class warfare economic policies, an an incredibly costly anti-environmental, anti-scientific stubborness, a short sighted lobbying interest view on the cost of health care for our entire society. How we don't enact a pay as you go for all wars in which we have not been invaded admendment to the Constitution amazes me for the pure criminality of our mission in Iraq.

I seriously fear that no matter how much we throw in the hole, we may never be able to keep up with what right now at least seems to be an ever increasingly bottomless pit. And like you, I think Shit Creek Without a Paddle--my own version of the Golden Years--with perhaps my kids--probably just a little younger than you--bearing the weight may not provide the opportunity to invest in said paddle.

However, what else is there to do? I do think that for the most part Obama's economic plan is better than the alternative, and that I hear him when he says we should not throw out the good for the perfect.

I live in California; there isn't much in any state budget that is wasteful--our educational system that once was the flower of the world, let alone the nation and is the basis for any sound modern economy is not a luxury. I live in a state where Republicans have for years held that educational system hostage to cut taxes and devil take the hindmost. That's the alternative out there right now.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

colby — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:52:25 -0000

You mean like lowering top income tax rates and rates on capital gains generates more revenue?"

Sure- or spending your way out of a depression.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Citizen E — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:41:12 -0000

"that was 15+ years ago and we hadn't gone through an national orgy of consumption"--

Yes, that's the conservative meme often backed by anecdotal evidence such as your own experiences. However, the fact is in the last 8 years 90% of the wealth our whole nation generated wound up in the hands of 10% of our populace. And our so called spending orgy, not the least of which being the housing boom, kept the economy with its nose above water during that time. Rather than irresponsible poor and middle class people causing our economic meltdown, we have had tax, wage, and trade policies that have literally made working for a living a losing money proposition. That is the upshot of conservative fiscal policy; even as it has bled over into Democratic party economic philosophies as well. That is, "I don wanna pay taxes" is our national mantra. There would have been a filibuster if Obama had raised taxes on people down to $100,000/year incomes. That's just the way things are.

But one thing is clear, if one wants to look at merely government deficits, then while one can see that the Reagan trickle down and deregunomic perspective have been the co2 emissions of global economic meltdowns, not the poor person who was told by an unregulated real estate and banking industry that for no money down she could move her kids into a neighborhood with good schools, and like all good American dreaming families be participating in an ownership society from which the whole economy would benefit and she would be making an excellent investment that might, if played correctly, indeed catapult her out of financial difficulty.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Tony Comstock — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:31:59 -0000

But macroeconomics often ARE counterintuitive.

You mean like lowering top income tax rates and rates on capital gains generates more revenue?

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

colby — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:27:05 -0000

"but spending EVEN MORE money we don't have does not feel like change "

Well, to be fair, MORE is, by definition, change. ;)

But I understand what you're saying, his plan seems counterinuitive. But macroeconomics often ARE counterintuitive. Moreover, at this point, all we can do is hope he's right...

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Tony Comstock — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:19:56 -0000

See?!? Y'all got me so upset I can't even close my goddam blockquote tag!

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

Tony Comstock — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:17:48 -0000

Two liberals and two conservatives arguing their talking points over issues on which they have little or no expertise.

Almost as much fun as a blog!

And look. I'm not mad at TNC or colby or even Obama. And I fugging hate hate hate to hit a GOP talking point, but spending EVEN MORE money we don't have does not feel like change and does not make me hopeful. It makes me upset.

But unlike the GOP, I am not hoping for Obama to fail. Hell, on the eve of the Iraq invasion I wasn't hoping for GWB to fail and I fucking *hate* GWB and his crew. Hated them from the day they took office because it was so fucking obvious they were going to fuck up every godamn thing they touched.

I want everything to go back to 1997, except I want Michele to be sucking the president's dick instead of some starstruck intern. 1997 was good times and I think everyone, conservative and liberal alike can get behind that. If BHO told me pay a little now and I'll get you there, I'd be ready to pony up.

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

colby — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:11:25 -0000

"I'm just trying to figure out what the liberal perspective is"

The liberal perspective on what? The budget? It seems pretty clear that the perspective is, "A balanced budget is important, but other things are MORE important (the stimulus, health care, etc.)" That's really been the liberal view for decades.

Or are you looking for the liberal perspective on shared sacrifice? 'Cause there, the perspective is also pretty obvious- "Everyone's going to have to pitch in, but raising taxes on the middle class or letting a lot of people lose houses will do more harm then good."

Of course, my activities DON'T actually have anything to do with what the liberal perspective might be, so I'm still confused as to why it's stuck in your teeth. But nevertheless, these have been pretty consistent, clearly stated liberal perspectives for a long time now. Which is not to say they're RIGHT, but that's not what you asked...

Re: What Liberals Hate About The MSM

CitizenE — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:11:16 -0000

Tony C, once again, I think that in regard to economics, we have to look at things practically rather than philosophically. I would not want this kind of deficit spending to go on after our current crisis is past, and what's more although I think there are not all that much savings to be found, I believe wasteful programs, not the least of which in our military, should be excised where and whenever it is possible. Like you and like Jeffrey Sachs, sooner or later, I believe Americans will have to confront the fact that we have a big government and that whining about it is not nearly so effective as paying for it. What's more I believe we need to create real product and have a middle and lower class that earns enough to buy the products that keep the economy afloat--that is equitable tax, trade, and wage policies that move the economy from the bottom up. I believe that is pretty much in line with the left of America right now. I can't think of a single person who knows me who would consider my philosophy anything other than leftist.

However, it's all subject to real change on the ground. We talk football a lot on this post--ok, the Pittsburgh Steelers are a team that wins with a defensive philosophy. But with the game on the line, they have to win with inspired offensive play. The great foolishness of the right is that they have a philosphy rooted in the 19th century--free markets blah blah blah, which is why they paint Obama has having an equally 19th century--socialism blah blah blah--perspective.