Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
At L-o-o-o-n-g Last Sir, Have You No Sense of Humor?
Just last night I was telling someone that I couldn't imagine any scenario on God's green earth that would get me to vote for Hillary Clinton. But that was before I watched this clip of Grade A rageaholic and unfunny sports humorist Keith Olbermann, with anger more than sadness, laying into Hitlery for Geraldine Ferraro's sins. See how long you can last through his hilariously self-serious tirade; I crapped out somewhere on minute five:
Link via Wonkette. Nick Gillespie wrote last year about the many (horrifying) moods of Keith Olbermann. UPDATE: YouTube seems to be having server-squirrel issues; try this link.
|3.13.08 @ 8:56AM|#
"Special comments" kind of loose their special-ness after they have been done every night. I used to like his show quite a bit-mostly for the Paul Harvey-esque ADD aspect, but after a while his ego/insecurity got the best of him and Olberman transformed into a fucking monster.
|3.13.08 @ 9:11AM|#
Ah, Reason. No posts on what Ferraro said, but a post
complaining about someone objecting to what Ferraro said.
Wassamatter, baby, can't you take a joke?
|3.13.08 @ 9:13AM|#
Man, I didn't even make it to the 1 minute mark before I started
throwing up in my mouth. And he has the stones to make fun of
O'Really?
To think I used to actually like Olberman. ::shudder:: What a
tool.
|3.13.08 @ 9:14AM|#
Weird, I watched the whole thing, and didn't find it that bad at all. A little too self-serious, but well said and necessary.
|3.13.08 @ 9:16AM|#
Here joe, I'll give you one, even tho' it should be obvious to
anyone.
Someone who's notoriety was solely from her gender and candidacy,
blasting another candidate for not being a white guy?
Now THAT's funny.
|3.13.08 @ 9:16AM|#
All I know is he needs to be fired from Sunday Night Football.
He's so bad he actually makes me not want to watch replays of Devin
Hester because then I have to hear his ridiculously bad commentary
and faux intellectual jokes.
I do not understand what his appeal is at all.
JMR|3.13.08 @ 9:18AM|#
They should lock Keef up with Dennis Miller & have a
bipartisan "ruin football" channel.
JMR
|3.13.08 @ 9:20AM|#
JW: Actually, Ferraro does deserve credit for one thing: in one
of her follow-up she freely admitted that "if my name were Gerard
Ferraro, I never would have been the vice-presidential nominee in
1984." I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone free confess to being a
token before.
I made it past seven minutes of the Olbermann comment, but then I
just couldn't take it anymore, so I skipped the last 2:12.
|3.13.08 @ 9:21AM|#
I thought he might finish up by saying "Marry me, Hillary.
Please." Sadly, it was not to be.
I wonder if he talks to himself in the mirror like this.
|3.13.08 @ 9:24AM|#
Olberman's David Duke reference was a bit extravagent.
Less David Duke than Archie Bunker.
|3.13.08 @ 9:24AM|#
Oh, and joe, there are plenty of places on the Internet where I'm sure you can demonstrate your full measure of piety about the Ferraro comments. This is a thread about something else.
|3.13.08 @ 9:29AM|#
Wah wah wah, liberals are always picking on people for saying
the truth about black folks.
Is that about it, ChrisO?
|3.13.08 @ 9:31AM|#
Keith, YOU'RE the worst person in football. Every week. Except
those weeks where Rae Carruth kills someone. Or Ray Lewis has a
lackey kill someone for him. Or Pacman Jones goes anywhere and
someone coincidentally gets shot to death.
Other than those weeks, Olbermann, it's ALWAYS you.
|3.13.08 @ 9:32AM|#
Olbermann is Ann Coulter's mirror image, just with more
make-up.
Ferraro's statement was idiotic.
Hillary shouldn't ask Ferraro to step down, Hillary should step
down.
There, those are my opinions for the day.
|3.13.08 @ 9:39AM|#
He's too gimmicky on SNF. He'd be better off playing it a little straighter, and taking jokes as they come instead of trying to whip up a vaudville show every week.
Episiarch|3.13.08 @ 9:40AM|#
Don't worry, Cab, I have the feeling that Spitzer is going to be an anchor around Hillary's neck that's just a little too heavy for her to keep her head above the water.
|3.13.08 @ 9:44AM|#
They should lock Keef up with Dennis Miller & have a
bipartisan "ruin football" channel.
JMR
Yeah but I always felt a little sorry for Miller. I usually got the
feeling during commercials he was looking over at the producers and
saying "You sure you really want me here? Okay...it's your
money...."
|3.13.08 @ 9:46AM|#
Ah, Reason. No posts on what Ferraro said, but a post
complaining about someone objecting to what Ferraro
said.
You wanna post about Ferraro, get your own blog.
I hate to say it, but I pretty much agree with Andrew
Sullivan on this. In a nutshell, a big part of Obama's
appeal lies in the possibility of a "post-racial" future and the
rebranding of America that is there because of his race and
upbringing.
|3.13.08 @ 9:49AM|#
I have to give Obama credit, his comeback to this was classic.
It was something to the effect of "yeah, if you were running for
President your first choice would be to be a black man whose middle
name is Hussain." I am not an Obama fan but that is a great
comeback.
Oberman was actually really good when he was a sportscenter anchor.
But his success went right to his head and he quickly became a
parody of himself. He is now insufferable even when he does
football.
|3.13.08 @ 9:52AM|#
Not reporting on an event, but reporting on the aftermath of
said event is what used to be called "missing a news cycle" but can
now be referred to as "meta."
Post-irony America. I love it! Am I being sarcastic? I don't even
know any more...
|3.13.08 @ 9:56AM|#
RC,
Right, because we've never had young charismatic presidents with
middling experience. But you're right it's the black thing. Look at
all the young white voters that voted for Al Sharpton in the last
primary.
|3.13.08 @ 10:01AM|#
Olberman is horrifying?!?
Well then I guess Welch must never leave his house in fear of
running into far scarier bogeymen. I'm trying to conjure up
anything Olbermann's ever done that remotely touches O'Reilly in
terms of any nasty schoolyard bullying of his guests, and I'm
coming up blank. Have I missed something? Does this guy really give
libertarians the vapors? If so, you guys are bigger pussies than I
thought.
|3.13.08 @ 10:02AM|#
So what if it is RC. A big part of McCain's appeal is that he was a POW and a war hero. You could just as plausably say "if McCain hadn't been shot down over Vietnam, he wouldn't be where he is today." Yeah, but who cares. You could say that about anything. If Einstein hadn't been so damned smart he would just been a patent clerk. Obama's success is the result of who he is and part of who he is is black just like part of who McCain is is being a war hero and part of who Hillary is is being a women. It was a stupid thing of Ferraro to say.
|3.13.08 @ 10:06AM|#
Olberman is horrifying?!?
Well then I guess Welch must never leave his house in fear of
running into far scarier bogeymen. I'm trying to conjure up
anything Olbermann's ever done that remotely touches O'Reilly in
terms of any nasty schoolyard bullying of his guests, and I'm
coming up blank. Have I missed something? Does this guy really give
libertarians the vapors? If so, you guys are bigger pussies than I
thought.
Just because O'Reilly's an asshat doesn't mean Olbermann isn't one
too. It's not like there's a finite amount of idiocy possible at
any one time.
|3.13.08 @ 10:08AM|#
RC,
I don't think anyone is going to deny that there are benefits that
accrue to Obama because of his family's background and his
experience as a sorta-black guy, but to claim that it has been a
net plus for him is ridiculous, nevermind claiming that it is the
only reason he is where he is.
A white guy with his talent and message would have won this
nomination a month ago.
|3.13.08 @ 10:09AM|#
Whose death has Olberman called for, Cab?
Have you got one of those funhouse mirrors?
|3.13.08 @ 10:15AM|#
Personally, I find Olbermann quite funny. A king of hyperbole
and patently biased, to be sure, but quite funny.
As for Ferraro's comments, she must be on drugs. All things being
equal, if Barack Obama were a white woman (without the middle name
of Hussein), he'd (she'd?) be cleaning Hillary's clock.
|3.13.08 @ 10:16AM|#
Wah wah wah, liberals are always picking on people for
saying the truth about black folks.
Is that about it, ChrisO?
Uh, no. I was just pointing out that the thread is about
Olbermann.
Since there hasn't been another thread on H&R about Ferraro and
her silly comments, I guess there's nowhere else here for you to
demonstrate your anti-racist bona fides on the matter. We were all
very concerned about that.
To me, the most interesting angle of the Ferraro story is how
Hillary apparently thinks she can win the presidency without any
black folks voting for her. Doubtful.
Matt Welch|3.13.08 @ 10:17AM|#
Well then I guess Welch must never leave his house in fear
of running into far scarier bogeymen.
There's a difference between "horrifying" and "terrifying."
|3.13.08 @ 10:18AM|#
Olbermann and Reilly are cut from the same cloth. They're self-serious, overwrought showmen. One appeals to the right, the other to the left, so they have different styles.
First Little Pig|3.13.08 @ 10:19AM|#
Joe,
Personally I think Obama's blackishness is exactly why he is the
front runner and I have zero problem with that. I suspect that
there are white guys with his talent but they could never carry the
message quite the same way -- in fact an Ivy-league WASP
politician, regardless of his left-leaning bone-a-fides would come
across as a smarmy insincere pandering schmuck.
|3.13.08 @ 10:19AM|#
Cab,
Olberman himself laughs at them. Funny, Coulter doesn't usually
leave any such ambiguity about what should be done.
Ferraro's comments only make sense to someone already primed to see
any successful black person as being undeserving, a token-case who
took what rightfully belongs to a white person.
Episiarch|3.13.08 @ 10:20AM|#
Hyperbolberman is a complete spazz. How anyone can watch him and not have a seizure is beyond me.
|3.13.08 @ 10:21AM|#
First Little Pig,
George W. Bush is "an Ivy-League WASP politician" with a gift for
gab, and he managed.
|3.13.08 @ 10:22AM|#
There is a reason why O'Reily and Oberman hate each other so much; because they are just the liberal and populist conservative models of the same person. Only someone who is completly unself aware could honestly think that one is better or worse than the other.
|3.13.08 @ 10:22AM|#
I admire the way ChrisO can made opposition to racism sound like a character flaw.
|3.13.08 @ 10:24AM|#
"Ferraro's comments only make sense to someone already primed to
see any successful black person as being undeserving, a token-case
who took what rightfully belongs to a white person."
Pretty much yes. It is especially gauling coming from Ferraro
someone whose only claim to fame really was being a token. I am so
sure she would have been Mondale's running mate if she had been
male. Her gender had nothing to do with it I am sure.
|3.13.08 @ 10:29AM|#
I admire the way ChrisO can made opposition to racism sound
like a character flaw.
I admire the way joe can completely and hysterically
mischaracterize a person's comments.
|3.13.08 @ 10:32AM|#
C'mon joe, Coulter attempts humor, we both know that.
Anyway, I'm not here to stick up for Coulter. I just think
Olbermann is a prick.
|3.13.08 @ 10:34AM|#
At the risk of proving myself completely un-self aware, I'd say that while Olbermann and O'Reilly are both self-serious blowhards, Olbermann is not half the bullying, idiotic jerk that O'Reilly is. I've never seen Olbermann scream at a guest or have a guest's microphone turned off.
|3.13.08 @ 10:34AM|#
Mischaracterize, ChrisO? Here are the phrases you used instead
of "denounce Ferraro's race-bating:"
demonstrate your full measure of piety about the Ferraro
comments.
demonstrate your anti-racist bona fides on the matter
If you don't want to get called out for it, don't do it.
|3.13.08 @ 10:35AM|#
I think the country is up for having a black president but large sections of the Democratic Party, as evidenced by Ferraro's comments, apparently aren't.
Colin|3.13.08 @ 10:37AM|#
He's utterly ridiculous, but the only thing that bothered me was
when he mocked Silent Cal.
If we only had a Calvin Coolidge again.
|3.13.08 @ 10:40AM|#
John, Ferraro will be lucky to get a seat at the convention
after this.
You might have noticed, it's only Limbaugh, Buchanan, and othe
GOPers defending her on this.
|3.13.08 @ 10:42AM|#
I don't know, what should society do to the "worst person in
the world?"
I think we should revive the Athenian practice of ostracism. Every year,
the person who gets the most vote are banished from the country and
forbidden to meddle in politics under pain of death.
Sure, it's not very libertarian but I think it might be fun.
By the way, I nominate "(Why didn't) Reason (do) (should do) an
article on _________." as a drink trigger. (Or is it already a part
of the "For a magazine called Reason..." rule?)
(I'm not jumping on joe, I've just noticed a lot of it lately,
especially the sock puppet attack in yesterday's Balko thread.)
|3.13.08 @ 10:44AM|#
So, after that segment, what are the odds that Keith went back to his dressing room and had himself a good cry?
|3.13.08 @ 10:45AM|#
If you're saying: "What G.F. said is groundless, untrue, and
totally false but I support her right to express an honest
opinion." I can dig that. It's a legit, logical position.
If you're saying: "What G.F. said exaggerates reality. There is
some modicum of truth to her assertion, but it was politically
unwise to say it out loud." I can dig that too. It's a sane
position. I think many Dem. pols and media agree.
But if you're saying: "The opinion GF expressed is totally immoral,
insulting, unethical, improper, unacceptable, etc." I think you're
a goofball. Would we say: "Any man who disagrees with or criticizes
GF's comments is sexist?" Of course not.
dhex|3.13.08 @ 10:58AM|#
So, after that segment, what are the odds that Keith went
back to his dressing room and had himself a good cry?
with or without masturbating?
4-1 on the former
2-1 on the latter
some guy|3.13.08 @ 11:01AM|#
I think the country is up for having a black
president
You're not allowed to notice he's black.
alan|3.13.08 @ 11:03AM|#
People, people, can't we get along, all of us?
Ferraro is an Mid-Atlantic, Archie Bunker kind of racist, and
Olbermann is a prick. These are not mutually exclusive.
As far as Obama, his race is an advantage with many voters and a
disadvantage to many more other voters, and personally, given the
historical imbalance, I would prefer to live in a world where it is
an advantage than the latter. Of course, being a libertarian, I'd
rather it to be a non factor.
Full disclosure, I pretty much pass for white except through those
special sun glasses they issue to cops.
|3.13.08 @ 11:06AM|#
Tommy_G--None of the above.
I'm saying Olberman is a ginormous, self important tool who
actually does obviously believe what his toadies tell him about
himself ("fiercely sincere, sir") and the "furor" surrounding
Ferraro, a washed up hack who's claim to fame was making the
unfortunate choice of teaming up with someone who was, at best,
aftertaste, was political soap opera. And badly done at that.
And, I'm saying that with a giant run-on sentence.
|3.13.08 @ 11:07AM|#
Actually, when I first heard that Ferraro had said this (that
is, after I tried to figure out how she was actually relevant) I
thought how remarkably stupid it was. How can she believe this
would help Hillary? (that's what she was trying to do, wasn't
it?)
Then I heard her this morning. In the interview she came right out
and said she realized that the only reason she ever got the veep
nod was because she was a woman. I can see how that kind of thing
might color one's outlook.
Frankly, if there is one refreshing thing I see in Obama's
candidacy is how far beyond identity politics he's gotten.
To me, the most interesting angle of the Ferraro story is how Hillary apparently thinks she can win the presidency without any black folks voting for her. Doubtful.
Well, for the last forty years or so the Dems have seen blacks as
rightfully owned by them. What are they going to do, after all,
vote Republican?
Except this year I see a distinct possibility that if Hillary wins
the nom a lot of blacks are just going to stay home on election
day.
|3.13.08 @ 11:13AM|#
stephen the goldberger | March 13, 2008, 10:54am | #
but ferraro's right...
You mean when she said this:
"I think it's more realistic for a woman than it is for an
African-American," said Ms. Ferraro. "There is a certain amount of
racism that exists in the United States - whether it's conscious or
not it's true."
|3.13.08 @ 11:13AM|#
A white guy with his talent and message would have won this
nomination a month ago.
Except the white guy with his talent and message is, roughly, John
Edwards.
So what if it is RC.
My point, exactly. Some unquantifiable but significant part of
Obama's appeal is there only because he is black. So what?
As far as Obama, his race is an advantage with many voters and
a disadvantage to many more other voters,
I'm not so sure his race is a net loss to him. Certainly not in a
Dem primary. In a general election? Who knows? If he handles it
right, can get his stupid wife to shut up about her life of
victimization as a Harvard Law School grad, and truly embody
transcending race, then I think it can be a net plus.
dr_dog|3.13.08 @ 11:17AM|#
I have never watched Olbermann before. Is his verbiage always so ostentatiously garrulous?
|3.13.08 @ 11:19AM|#
If you don't want to get called out for it, don't do
it.
Those statements of mine that you quoted, joe? They were making fun
of you, not stating my position on the Ferraro comments. You're
just too damn easy. Since you've now basically called me a racist,
let me state my position for the record:
--you're right, in one respect, in that a white guy with Obama's
political talent would have cleaned Hillary's clock months ago.
She's a terribly untalented politician. Race has been issue in the
campaign, but Obama's not the guy who has raised it.
--Obama's blackness undoubtedly makes him stand out in a sea of
glib white guys, but he has been notable for not bringing his race
into the discussion. Indeed, his background (Hawaii, Singapore,
Kenya) is so exotic that he is effectively the Tiger Woods of
politics. The guy who can truly get beyond all the race stuff. It
may be that Michelle Obama has been more willing to drag race into
the campaign, but Barack has a legitimate claim to be a 'uniter not
a divider'. That said, I'd never for anyone of any color/gender
pushing the tired socialist nostrums that he and Hillary do.
--Hillary, in contrast, seems (from my somewhat limited viewing) to
regularly highlight the fact that she has girl parts, and to put
that forward as a reason to vote for her. Perhaps you could say
that Ferraro (and by extension the Clinton campaign) are
projecting.
--Make no mistake about it. Hillary is pursuing a 21st Century
version of the Southern Strategy, though perhaps its focus on the
Rust Belt requires a new name. The Deer Hunter Strategy?
|3.13.08 @ 11:25AM|#
As many others have said, Obama's appeal is at least in part because he affords us the opportunity to finally have a black president. What Ferraro said was not entirely inaccurate, even if it was politically stupid. I for one, would like to get past the point where mentioning that someone is black (or that it gives that person some sort of advantage/disadvantage) instantly makes you a racist.
stephen the goldberger|3.13.08 @ 11:25AM|#
She's right that Obama would not be the current front runner for
the nomination if he weren't half-black. He wouldn't pull almost
90% of the african american vote, or get them to come out in record
numbers if he weren't half-black for example.
Also there are many white Obama supporters with liberal guilt who
are voting for him because he's half-black. They deny it but every
so often they'll let out a little clue as to their true motive. A
statement like "It makes me proud of how far we've come to see
Obama run and be a legimate candidate for president."
She shouldn't have said it and it was stupid and worst of all to
liberals, politically incorrect. But factually correct
nevertheless.
alan|3.13.08 @ 11:28AM|#
I'm not so sure his race is a net loss to him. Certainly not
in a Dem primary. In a general election?
Yep, I agree about the Dem. The general election I feel will be a
different story. Though if he had Colin Powell(unfortunately,
lacking General Ike's judgment)'s resume rather than the thin one
in his possession, it would be a different story.
|3.13.08 @ 11:31AM|#
Except the white guy with his talent and message is,
roughly, John Edwards.
Edwards was good, but not anywhere close to as good as Obama. And
you simply haven't been paying attention if you think they're
messages are equivalent.
Those statements of mine that you quoted, joe? They were making
fun of you, not stating my position on the Ferraro comments.
Yes, ChrisO, and that's what I called you out for:
Once again, joe | March 13, 2008, 9:29am | #
Wah wah wah, liberals are always picking on people for saying the
truth about black folks.
Is that about it, ChrisO?
I know you were making fun of me, Chris. For the horrible crime of
denouncing someone for making a racist statement. Nobody's confused
here.
Whoops, I spoke too soon: Since you've now basically called me
a racist... Nope, but I hope you're getting a nice, warm
feeling from pretending I did.
alan|3.13.08 @ 11:31AM|#
blargh, a deletion and a copy&paste managed to screw up all three paragraphs above, no time to correct now. The gist is still present, at least.
|3.13.08 @ 11:32AM|#
Marcvs,
Why don't you wish we could "get past" the point where any
successful black person is assumed, by some, to be a token with no
merit of his own?
You're ok with people still saying that, but want us to "get past"
finding it objectionable? That's odd.
|3.13.08 @ 11:34AM|#
s. the g.,
He wouldn't pull almost 90% of the african american vote, or
get them to come out in record numbers if he weren't half-black for
example.
Nor would he lose the white vote in Mississippi 3:1 to Hillary
freaking Clinton.
|3.13.08 @ 11:36AM|#
If being black is such a huge advantage to a politician running for President, why aren't Angela Davis, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Carolyn Moseley-Braun on my Presidents of the United States placemat?
Neu Mejican|3.13.08 @ 11:38AM|#
So if Ferraro is right (she's not), Dems had to choose between
showing that they were
not racist,
not sexist,
not anti-hispanic,
not anti-short-guy-with-tall-hot-wife,
not anti-crazy-old-coot
to narrow things down to the choice between showing they are not
racist or showing that they are not sexist. Because showing that
you are not something is what Democrats are all about. Is that
about it?
Imangine the conundrum this would have posed had Condoleeza Rice
been the Republican candidate.
|3.13.08 @ 11:38AM|#
"He wouldn't pull almost 90% of the african american vote, or
get them to come out in record numbers if he weren't half-black for
example."
I don't know about that. Bill Clinton sure pulled in the black
vote. I think part of this is the bitter pill the Clinton's are
swallowing. After being the first "black President" and the like,
Bill Clinton sees black voters turn on his wife for one of their
own in an act of what I am sure he and Hillary feel is rank
tribalism. It has to drive them nuts.
Also, like most things Hillary does, there is a method to this
madness. Obama's appeal is that he is not Jessee Jackson or Al
Sharpton. He is not an "angry black candidate". What Hillary is
doing is trying to bate Obama into becoming and angry black
candidate.
|3.13.08 @ 11:44AM|#
Hillary was pulling a huge chunk of the black vote before Iowa.
The same order of magnitude that Obama is winning it now.
What Hillary is doing is trying to bate Obama into becoming and
angry black candidate.
Hillary's campaign is good at fighting strategically, not just
tactically. Think of the charge that Obama stole his "just words?"
line from his own campaign manager. Clinton lost that fight - she
might as well have accused him of stealing lines from his
speechwriter. In a tactical sense, she lost that argument.
But those were some damn good lines, a very strong comeback to her
"just words/just a speech" line of attack, and he can't use them
anymore. She traded pieces for position.
lunestadoublestrength|3.13.08 @ 11:44AM|#
Having trouble sleeping at night? Does stress keep you awake.
Now, Lunesta brings you double strength Obama addition of our
popular sleep aid.
One Obama tab will give you that warmed over Hubert Humphrey meets
Adlai Stevenson rhetoric that will help put your mind at
rest*
* does not work on liberals. May cause cult like side effects if
you are of the liberal disposition.
Obama, a bore.
|3.13.08 @ 11:45AM|#
You might have noticed, it's only Limbaugh, Buchanan, and
othe GOPers defending her on this.
What are you talking about, Joe? NOBODY is defending her on this,
at least publicly. Rush spent most of yesterday's show nailing her
to the wall for this. High comedy gold coming for him, of
course.
And sure, Obama is getting an overwhelming majority of the black
vote. That's to be expected, but it doesn't explain how he's won
quite a few landslide victories in states where blacks make up a
tiny, tiny fraction of the population.
Kolohe|3.13.08 @ 11:46AM|#
I generally like Olbermann. And I basically agree with the
thesis of what he's trying to say here. However, it's at least 4
min too long, and probably about 6 min too long - thus neither
funny, nor biting, nor effective.
And while Olbermann's schtick is 'left wing', it is a mistake to
classify him as the opposite of O'Reily based on that. Dobbs and
O'Reily are complements in that one is a left wing populist and the
other is a right wing populist. Olbermann is an anti-populist (from
the left) who obviously doesn't like O'Reily - and yes sees himself
as the O'Reily antidote to formulate his show.
But Olbermann's central organizing principle is anti-Bush. This is
both the source of the strength of the show and the reason for
successful ratings. I predict his show will implode in both content
and ratings as soon as the 22nd amendment kicks in, esp in the
continued likelihood of an Obama presidency.
|3.13.08 @ 11:48AM|#
"Except the white guy with his talent and message is, roughly,
John Edwards."
No, John Edwards comes off as slick, whereas Obama comes off as
sincere.
Flyover Country|3.13.08 @ 11:53AM|#
Obama is just the right amount of black.
I'm not kidding. Jackson and Sharpton were seen as representing
black interests more than all Democratic constituencies interests.
That was threatening to white Democrats. Obama has very
successfully distanced himself from that perception. Hillary
Clinton tried to create that perception unsuccessfully.
|3.13.08 @ 11:55AM|#
Stretch,
Pat Buchanan has been going to the matt for her on MSNBC all week.
"She just told the truth." He got quite animated last night on that
show that follows Olberman.
I don't know about Limbaugh, though. I shouldn't have assumed.
|3.13.08 @ 11:59AM|#
Pat Buchanan has been going to the matt for her on MSNBC all
week. "She just told the truth." He got quite animated last night
on that show that follows Olberman.
Good ole Pat. There's a man who has no fear of being labeled a
racist...
|3.13.08 @ 12:01PM|#
joe,
You have too much time on your hands if you're following Pat
Buchanan on MSNBC all week.
|3.13.08 @ 12:17PM|#
Obviously airtime is not exactly a precious commodity at MSNBC,
if the producers are willing give the talent gobs of time to do
crap like this.
I'm another who enjoyed Olbermann on ESPN, but on MSNBC he's got
every bit as much shtick going as O'Reilly does. They're both
shameless airtime hogs.
Frankly, both MSNBC and Fox News need to up the babe factor and
lower the angry-white-guy quotient if they want me to watch more
often. Yes, I'm shallow.
|3.13.08 @ 12:23PM|#
Dude, Ramesh defended her in the WaPo.
If race is so important, why isn't the current race between
Richardson and Obama?
Obama's race probably helped him with some people and hurt him with
others. Saying his race helped him is as idiotic as saying JFK's
Catholicism is a net positive.
|3.13.08 @ 1:00PM|#
If some of Obama's appeal comes from "transcending race,"
wouldn't that automatically mean race was a negative for him?
You don't see John McCain getting support because he "transcends
veteran status," or George Dubya because he "transcends a folksy
rural bearing."
|3.13.08 @ 1:25PM|#
If race is so important, why isn't the current race between
Richardson and Obama?
What race is Richardson?
|3.13.08 @ 1:27PM|#
Blacks vote 90% Democratic, about 80%-90% of those are voting
Obama. Without their near-monolithic support, he'd have been
finished months ago. But he gets to be the candidate who "transends
race."
This exemplifies the old joke that in Washington, a gaffe is when
somebody accidently tells the truth. Seriously, if Obama was white,
there'd still be this cult built around a freshman senator from
Illinois?
I don't find this particular clip horrifying, and I managed to make
to it the three minute mark before I started laughing.
|3.13.08 @ 1:28PM|#
Richardson is Latino, but as Mark Steyn pointed out, the Dems have no use for a Latino named "Bill Richardson."
|3.13.08 @ 1:30PM|#
Seriously, if Obama was white, there'd still be this cult
built around a freshman senator from Illinois?
Yes, just with a slightly different cast of characters. Just like
there was a groundswell of support for the inexperiences Senator
from Massachusetts in 1960, and for the inexperienced Governor from
Georgia in 1976, and for the inexperienced Governor from Arkansas
in 1992.
|3.13.08 @ 1:34PM|#
There was never a cult built up around Clinton or Carter, and Kennedy didn't become a cult figure until after he was killed.
|3.13.08 @ 1:38PM|#
So Richardson is white. And he doesn't look or sound
particularly Hispanic. Having lived in Texas, I know a lot of
people who are Hispanic, but you would never know it without
learning a lot about them.
In February 2004 Obama was pretty much an unknown, even in
Illinois. Then the guy who was running away with the Democratic
nomination was revealed to be a wife beater. What has Obama done to
deserve his meteoric rise besides getting lucky?
|3.13.08 @ 1:43PM|#
You don't see John McCain getting support because he "transcends
veteran status," or George Dubya because he "transcends a folksy
rural bearing."
Joe,
If the country had a 300 year history of enslaving veterens or
killing each other over rural urban relations, McCain and Bush
might be popular because they transend those particular issues.
Most reasonable people would love nothing better than and end to
race conflict in this country and would be perfectly willing to
vote for a black man to be President if they thought doing so would
do it. Sadly, it won't but don't think that most people wouldn't
vote for President if it would.
|3.13.08 @ 1:46PM|#
joe - with respect to your comment "For the horrible crime of
denouncing someone for making a racist statement."
What is it that GF said that was racist? Certainly it was
politically stupid... and insensitive... but what about it was
"racist"?
Since there is no way to prove, or disprove, whether Obama would,
or would not, be where he is because of his color, her statement
was simply her opinion. Your opinion is that Obama WOULD be where
he is, even if he was white.
Does that make you a racist?
CB
(just trying to understand your mindset that says anyone who says
anything about a black is a racist. Am I a racist because I noted
that the exit polls in Georgia showed a near-block vote of blacks
for Obama. Making that observation makes me a racist? Eh?)
|3.13.08 @ 1:52PM|#
Richard,
And there isn't a cult around Obama, either.
Whats the matter, you don't remember the Place called Hope?
|3.13.08 @ 1:56PM|#
Cracker's Boy,
After he's done this well in the primary contest, proven himself to
be the most inspiring orator of his generation, and defeated the
prohibitive favorite for the nomination - in other words, after
proving himself to be a very effective campaigner - Ferraro still
assumes that he has been given his frontrunner status on a silver
platter just because he's black.
To look at Barack Obama's performance in this race and see nothing
but a black guy getting all the breaks - you know, that preference
for black politicians that has characterized presidential politics
for so long NOT - demonstrates an inability to see anything BUT
race.
some guy|3.13.08 @ 1:58PM|#
a gaffe is when somebody accidently tells the
truth
Obama isn't black.
Hillary isn't a woman.
Romney isn't a Mormon.
McCain isn't an angry white guy.
There. Let's keep our heads up our asses and keep pretending.
Heaven forbid someone might be offended.
|3.13.08 @ 1:58PM|#
Does that make you a racist? No.
just trying to understand your mindset that says anyone who
says anything about a black is a racist. No, you're not. If
you were, you might have noticed that I've said a great deal about
him. So have his supporters.
You are trying very, very hard NOT to understand the point, and it
shows with idiotic statements like the above.
|3.13.08 @ 1:59PM|#
Am I a racist because I noted that the exit polls in Georgia
showed a near-block vote of blacks for Obama. Making that
observation makes me a racist? Eh?
No, of course not. What a silly question.
|3.13.08 @ 2:01PM|#
I love the racist mindset in this:
Obama isn't black.
Hillary isn't a woman.
Romney isn't a Mormon.
McCain isn't an angry white guy.
There. Let's keep our heads up our asses and keep pretending.
Heaven forbid someone might be offended.
To this writer, "Obama is black" is functionally equivalent to
"Obama has been handed this election merely because of his race,
irrespective of his merits as a candidate."
Simply to observe that someone is black, in other words, is to
impute all the rest of that baggage to him.
|3.13.08 @ 2:02PM|#
Re: Olbermann v. O'Reilly--
I've watched about equal amounts of both and enjoy neither. But am
I correct in perceiving that O'Reilly devotes much more time to
arguing with guests who disagree with him?
|3.13.08 @ 2:02PM|#
anon | March 13, 2008, 2:00pm | #
you're a minority opinion, joe.
Only in certain bubbles. Not in mainstream America.
|3.13.08 @ 2:10PM|#
No, there's no cult around Obama at all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghSJsEVf0pU
|3.13.08 @ 2:11PM|#
"the most inspiring orator of his generation"
Wow. Certainly no room for discussion there.
But that aside, do you believe that ability trumps all other
attibutes? That the man at the top of, say General Motors, is the
absolute best in the entire world at being the top dog at GM? Or is
it perhaps possible that the guy at the top may have had a little
luck getting there. Perhaps there are two people on Earth equally
qualified, but the top dog is the one that, I don't know, wore a
red tie to his interview, and the panel liked his red tie.
I don't believe that Obama got anything given to him on a silver
platter, because of his race. He's worked like a dog to be where he
is. But I do believe that, all other things being equal... ALL
other things being equal, Obama wouldn't be there if he was white;
that the party backs him, because his color WILL attract a greater
percentage of a demographic of voters than the same white guy
would. And the Democrats need to win this election.
Call me a racist. I'm white, so I must be, right?
CB
|3.13.08 @ 2:33PM|#
Cracker's Boy,
No, I certainly don't think that everyone is in their position
purely on merit. Nor do I think that oratory is the most important
consideration in picking a candidate.
Nonetheless, Obama is winning this race largely because of his
ideas, and his ability to express them in a compelling way.
Call me a racist. I'm white, so I must be, right?
I'm white too, dumbass. Knock of the pity party, Captain
Victim.
Neu Mejican|3.13.08 @ 2:42PM|#
ALL other things being equal, Obama wouldn't be there if he
was white
So, we have an nice demonstration of the fallacy of Cēterīs paribus
thinking.
|3.13.08 @ 2:43PM|#
his color WILL attract a greater percentage of a demographic
of voters than the same white guy would. And the Democrats need to
win this election.
And his color will repel a greater percentage of a larger
demographic than the same white guy would. Everyone focuses on the
people voting for Obama because he's a (half)black guy, but
ignoring the proportion that aren't voting for him because he's a
black guy with a Muslim name. So, what's your point?
Obama has run a very good campaign that no one thought he would
win. He's made it this far because he had a superior ground game
and Hillary fucked up because her sense of entitlement blinded her
to doing anything after Super Tuesday.
If Hillary had a halfway competent team and worked as hard as
Obama, this campaign would be over. Instead, she had the classic
dillusion of being born on third, thinking she hit a triple, while
Obama was hitting singles and moving runners over with bunts and
steals. This has nothing to do with Obama being black. He did a
better job, start to finish, of running a presidential campaign
than the competition. End of story.
|3.13.08 @ 2:47PM|#
If Obama's race is such an overwhelming benefit, then why
weren't any of Ferraro's defenders saying so in January?
When he was just another also-ran, nobody was claiming that his
race would propel him to the nomination, but now that he's won,
it's so obvious that his race is responsible?
This is nothing but looking a black man's success and proclaiming
that he hasn't earned it. And, as always, it's only done after the
fact.
Neu Mejican|3.13.08 @ 2:47PM|#
So Richardson is white. And he doesn't look or sound
particularly Hispanic.
If Hispanics are white, then Richardson is white.
If not, then he's not.
It all depends on whose definitions you are using...one of the core
difficulties in maintaining racist attitudes is the nosology (if
you will).
Bill Richardson trivia: born in Pasadena, California to María Luisa
López-Collada Márquez (born 1914) and William Blaine Richardson Jr.
(1891-1972).
Just before Richardson was born, his mother was sent to California,
where her husband's sister lived, to give birth because, as
Richardson explained, "My father had a complex about not having
been born in the United States." Three of his four grandparents
were Mexican citizens, and he identifies himself as Hispanic
He lived and worked in Mexico City for decades.
So, he is about as Hispanic as you can get.
|3.13.08 @ 3:05PM|#
"Nonetheless, Obama is winning this race largely because of his
ideas, and his ability to express them in a compelling way."
And also because of the Clintons' screwups.
the fez|3.13.08 @ 3:20PM|#
Anyone who thinks Richardson doesn't look Hispanic is a bit of an idiot on the subject of ethnicity.
|3.13.08 @ 3:23PM|#
But Obama needs to get off his ass and turn the momentum around.
A new Strategic Vision poll shows Hillary leading 56 to 38 in
Pennsylvania.
The poll also found that more Obama supporters would not support
Hillary if she gets the nomination than Hillary supporters who
would not support Obama if he gets the nomination. Hillary's dirty
campaigning is causing her to lose alot of the Democrat base.
There's also the assumption that if she wins the nomination, it
will only be by stealing it. I believe she'll have a harder time
defeating McCain than Obama would. Electoral vote analyses have
also born this out.
Paul|3.13.08 @ 3:42PM|#
Ah, Reason. No posts on what Ferraro said, but a post
complaining about someone objecting to what Ferraro
said.
I thought this was a thread about Olbermann? Did I miss
something?
Paul|3.13.08 @ 3:45PM|#
It all depends on whose definitions you are using...one of
the core difficulties in maintaining racist attitudes is the
nosology (if you will).
Right, like when Seattle PD, to avoid racial profiling, began
racially profiling every stop.
stephen the goldberger|3.13.08 @ 3:46PM|#
Well obviously Obama success isn't entirely attributable to his
race. But I consider his race to be a plus for him, and I think
it's helped him in this campaign. He's had a metoric rise the likes
of which I've never seen before, and he managed to overtake a very
strong candidate with all the right people in her corner.
I think many people's desires to have a half-black president is at
least partly responsible, and since his margin is so small, I'd say
its a necessary condition for his current success.
|3.13.08 @ 5:12PM|#
The interviewer should have asked Ferraro an inane question like, "Would you be supporting Hillary if she weren't a woman?"
|3.13.08 @ 5:31PM|#
I saw "Mark Steyn" somewhere in this thread, and thats all I need to know this degenerated into shit at some point.
|3.13.08 @ 5:59PM|#
I've never been much for P.C., and I've long subscribed to the
"ego trip's Big Book of Racism" school of thought; that is,
everyone's racist, it's simply a matter of degrees. Ferraro's
comments set off all sorts of alarms in my head.
Hillary Clinton, I think would make a fine president (although
there are several ways in which I disagree with her policies). She
reminds me of Jordan or Bird in that she's a great (OK, maybe just
good) player, but she has a nasty competitive streak and ends up
often "playing dirty." Maybe she's more like Karl Malone, but I
digress. I admit that I haven't paid super-close attention to the
campaign, but it seems as if the Clinton camp is playing noticeably
dirtier pool than the Obama camp.
Although I don't agree with many of Obama's policies (nor
McCain's), the underhanded politics the Clinton camp are using
pretty much ensure that I won't vote for Clinton under any
circumstances.
Full disclosure: I'm African-American and voted for Bednarik 4
years ago simply because I was disgusted at both the Republican and
Democratic campaigns for prez.
Also: yes, I feel the democrats have long taken the
African-American vote for granted, and now I feel extra sh*t-upon
by HRC and many of her supporters. Bob Johnson sucks, by the way.
Have you seen BET? There's a reason, Aaron MacGruder hates the guy.
Okay, you can probably tell by all the nonsensical ramblings that I
have a lot of pent-up frustration, not just with HRC but with
American politics in general.
|3.13.08 @ 7:06PM|#
Here's hoping Ferraro's comments cause people to do as much
soul-searching as finger-pointing.
Olbermann may have been a bit long-winded, but I think he brought
up some valid points (I even saw Bill O'Reilly bring up some valid
points a couple times, FWIW).
Brian White|3.14.08 @ 1:57AM|#
to paraphrase the old ad, "I can't believe I watched the whole
thing..."
Hilariously bad, idiotic to the point of lunacy. Thanks for the
link, Reason!
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245