They must be up to something...why else would Tucker have Ed Schultz and Eugene Robinson on talking about everything BUT this?

It will be interesting to see if the MSM buries this story until the big event.

Posted at September 5, 2007 3:43 PM in response to Staging Nuke for Iran?

Nice montage.

Funny how I can get this calibre of excellent journalism off the internet but I tune in to Scarborough Country and he has 3 talking heads debating/discussing Paris Hilton's jail sentence. Oh, and tomorrow Larry King is going to have Howie Mandel on.

And to think we make fun of Fox News.

God save us.

Posted at May 7, 2007 7:28 PM in response to TPMtv Guide: Monday, May 7

From the White House release: "He admitted the matter could have been handled much better, and he apologized for the disruption to the lives of the U.S. Attorneys involved, as well as for the lack of clarity in his initial responses."

Wait a second, he's only apologizing for "the lack of clarity in his initial responses?"

Is that it? Just his "initial responses"?

What about the lack of clarity in his opinion columns, press briefings and prior appearances before lawmakers?

He revealed himself to be nothing more than a puppet for this administration. How can any American have faith in our judicial system with this level of incompetence at the helm?

Posted at April 19, 2007 4:37 PM in response to Reader poll: the end?

The right wingers have another sticker on their SUVs right next to the "God Bless America" and "Support out Troops" stickers.

It says "Freedom Isn't Free".

Now, we know what the hell they're talking about.

They don't give a crap about our troops recovering in dicrepit conditions as long as the media gives them their pictures of bald Britney Spears going after the paparazzi with an umbrella.

I had to shut the damned TV off tonight because on ABC World "News", Charlie Gibson is telling me it's important for me to worry about Britney, Lindsay or Anna Nicole being a role model for my daughter rather than report on some poor soldier sitting in a rat infested room at Walter Reed.

Our media sucks.

Posted at February 23, 2007 4:36 PM in response to Walter Reed: Is The Worst Yet to Come?

Bill Donahue, who catapulted this story, was clear from the beginning that Edward's should fire the bloggers.

Since Donahue was the most vocal critic of these bloggers, whatever subordinate conservative bloggers wanted is irrelevant.

But liberal bloggers were the ones who wanted, no, demanded, the Edward's campaign keep the bloggers on staff.

I don't know whether Melissa accepted the potential consequences of her rhetoric, although she did resign.

Based upon Amanda's post on this website, she remains defiant and unapologetic and portrays herself as a victim of a right wing smear campaign. That doesn't sound like accepting the consequences to me.

Posted at February 21, 2007 4:36 PM in response to Your Blog Will Come Back to Haunt You

Thanks, Katha.

I couldn't have said it better myself, although I tried. And no one reads my part-time blog anyway.

I was a bit harsher with Amanda than I probably should have been but I'm refuse to hold fellow liberals to a different standard than I do the right wingers.

I can't stand it when Anne Coulter uses provocative language and then acts like a victim when she's called out on it. I can't stand it when Amanda does it either.

Posted at February 21, 2007 3:54 PM in response to Your Blog Will Come Back to Haunt You

The only issues Edward's should be coming out fighting on are Iraq, health insurance, war profiteering, fiscal responsibility, global warming, etc., etc., etc.

Defending the hiring of a foul-mouthed blogger with serious objections to a religious institution doesn't even come close to the issues of importance facing this nation that a presidential candidate should be focused on.

Bloggers are quick to claim their level influence on the national political discourse. So they shouldn't act surprised when their words come back to bite them in the ass.

Amanda isn't the first staffer of a future presidential candidate to come under scrutiny. I've seen McCain's staffers also named and critiqued on this very website. I've also seen right wing bloggers criticized on this and other left wing blogs. If, when, a Republican candidate hires one of them, the left wing blogosphere is going to be ALL over it.

Posted at February 20, 2007 2:49 AM in response to Blogging populism and the political establishment

As if my being confused would have any bearing on the conversation whatsoever.

Rationally and civilly criticizing a church doctrine or belief is radically different than using rash sarcasm, vulgarity, and insults to make a point.

When you mock a person's beliefs, you're not trying to make them see the larger context, you're trying to piss them off.

I don't begrudge Amanda's right to piss people off. But she shouldn't act surprised when she succeeds.

And we shouldn't be pretending she was the poor victim of some right wing smear job.

Posted at February 20, 2007 2:26 AM in response to Blogging populism and the political establishment

Well, you're not doing yourself any favors by comparing Amanda to one of the Salem witches.

Does she float?

Posted at February 19, 2007 5:52 PM in response to Blogging populism and the political establishment

What a load of crap.

First of all, it contradicts Amanda's own statement that it wasn't her intent to offend anyone's personal beliefs. If what you say is accurate, of course it was her intention to offend, or as she puts it, mock, "certain beliefs of some Christians".

As to this ridiculous statement: "Now, I don't know why any Christian who doesn't actually endorse the imposition of hardline religious right doctrine on secular society would be in any way offended at what Amanda says, because she's not talking about you."

Based upon that stupid logic, I would have to be gay and/or a woman to be offended by religious beliefs that "support second-class status for gay people and forced pregnancy for women".

Of course, we don't have to be the target of the attack to be offended by it. Otherwise why would Donahue's attacks on Amanda offend so many? He didn't attack everyone else "personally". He attacked what Amanda and Melissa wrote.

Posted at February 19, 2007 5:49 PM in response to Blogging populism and the political establishment