Live blogging from the rally

Posted By: Peter DavidPosted On:

I’m here and ready to blog. Continues below the cutline.
12:05 Yes that is Peter in the front row the item he is clutching is Fearless Leader from Rocky and Bullwinkle

11:55 Kathleen here. Peter just called. There is no signal on the Mall right now so Blogging is not happening right now. But he is there and the rally starts in about 5 minutes. Enjoy

10:52…due to a technical glitch, I have to write this in reverse order. Sorry. Anyway, at the moment they are running all the segments regarding the rally. On two giant screens.

9:34 AM…Hit the road at 3:30 in the morning. Travel plan worked to perfection. Hit no traffic. May well be a different story coming back, but I’m not rushing the clock at that point. Parked in the copious confines of Union Station and cabbed as close as I could. Am standing front row. If I were any closer I would be on the stage. My thanks to my beloved wife for giving her blessing to this endeavor and lending me her iPad.

10:24…Blogging may present a problem. Server is incredibly slow. Weather is starting to warm…either that or hypothermia is setting in. The woman to my right came in from Pittsburgh while the guy to my left flew in from Seattle. This is amazing.

150 comments on “Live blogging from the rally”

    1. Sorry to post twice in a row. I just want to point out that the rally will be streaming live on Comedy Central’s website. This is good news for people like myself who don’t have Comedy Central as part of a cable package.

  3. The gent flying in from Seattle is indeed amazing, especially as some folks in Seattle have organized what promises to be the largest satellite Rally To Restore Sanity/Fear in the country (over 6000 people have RSVP’d online).
    .
    Wish I could make it, but sadly, money and the need to care for my children intervene. I’m there in spirit, though, and still plugging for rational discussion in the Comments section of the Seattle Times website as Deacon Blues…

    1. Or at least I [i]was[/i] plugging for rational discussion. Apparently, calm reason is a left-wing liberal commie fascist plot of some sort. Real Americans, it would seem, actually [i]prefer[/i] screeching at each other like angry spoiled children.
      .

      .

      2. I’m only sporadically watching, so I haven’t seen a shot of the front row from the stage. But I do see a ahh dome a little bit left of center when they show the stage from a distance. Is that PAD?

  6. I wish the handheld camera guys would stop zooming in on women their age and catch a glimpse of Peter more often.

    2. Speaking as a professional videographer, please don’t deny us one of the few perks of our job.
      .
      By the way, are related to Gary?

  7. I totally just spotted you in the crowd on the live feed for the rally. Didn’t even know you were going to be there until I checked the blog, and confirmed my, “Is that Peter David?” suspicion!

  8. I still have no idea what the point of this rally is. The guys from Myth Busters starting the wave repeatedly? How is this comedy OR politics?

    1. Well they had the biggest sampling that they have ever had to run experiments on so it seems like a good idea. There was much comedy in the banter so I’d say I was amused.

      Kath
      who is signed in as Peter yet again.

  9. I still feel kinda cheated about the first 2.5 hours, but Jon’s speech was worth it. If only they had reduced the entertainment part and put in more discussion and analysis.

  10. Well, Jon pìššëd øff keith Olbermann so it wasn’t a total loss. Seems like a better build up than pay off though. That’s the problem with not explicitly saying what to expect–people expected more than could have been delivered.

    1. “Well, Jon pìššëd øff keith Olbermann so it wasn’t a total loss.”
      .
      I was out most of the day. How did he do that?

      2. According to an article on the CBS News website:

        Olbermann did not take kindly to this: “It wasn’t a big shark but Jon Stewart jumped one just now with the ‘everybody on [24 hour] cable is the same’ naivete,” he wrote on Twitter.

        (I love the image of Jon Stewart saying snything naively…)

  11. From Politico.com

    “…Most of those pouring into the Mall Saturday appeared to be younger than 35, and the signs they carried showed a decidedly left-wing bent: “I hope this isn’t a trap,” “I mášŧûrbáŧë to Christine O’Donnell,” “Communism was a red herring.”

    Most signs fit with the happy-go-lucky ethos of the rally, but others were crude. One sign had Hitler mustaches on pictures of Sarah Palin, Eric Cantor, Glenn Beck and John Boehner. The message said, “Afraid yet?” This is particularly insulting to Cantor, who is Jewish…”

    Classy bunch.

    1. I was at the Rally and there were hundreds, maybe thousands of signs being displayed, and most of them were classy and clever; I saw more signs with a variation of ” is not Hitler!” or “One Hitler was enough!” than signs implying someone was Hitler. I would put the clever to crude ratio of signs at about 100 to 1; my 14 year old daughter had a great time taking pictures of the signs and there was rarely anything crude or offensive that I had to worry about. They were a clever and classy bunch indeed.

    2. The people to either side of me and directly behind me were all in their 40s, 50s or older. (Not that you could tell from the camera man who kept focusing on the nubile 20 year olds. Then again, Comedy Central’s core audience is college age males, so focusing on the attractive girls helped keep them tuned in, I suppose). I saw people far older than me and I saw infants. All ages, all skin colors, all religion. The inclusiveness was astounding.
      .
      Considering that the writer chose to zero in on the handful of signs in poor taste, it sounds to me like he had the direction of the story already written in his head and was simply looking for specifics to plug in. That way those who weren’t there could dismiss the entirety of the rally by saying “classy bunch.”
      .
      PAD

      1. The republicans as hitler sign folks sure got around–made the front of the MSNBC story as well: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39925382/ns/politics-more_politics/
        .
        When a rally is supposed to be about bringing a more civil tone to things you can’t expect people not to notice the occasional crazies. It isn’t like everyone ignored the stupid elements at the tea party rallies. having done so they feel obligated by some sense of journalistic fairness to point out things like the fact that the crowd was mostly white.

    3. “Classy bunch.”
      .
      Somebody’s upset that their teabagger rally was outdone by a couple of comedians.

      1. Which is a ridiculous thing to be upset over, given that a far far more important judge of influence is but a few hours away.

      2. Which is a ridiculous thing to be upset over, given that a far far more important judge of influence is but a few hours away.
        .
        The next episode of “Dancing With the Stars?”
        .
        PAD

      4. “Somebody’s upset that their teabagger rally was outdone by a couple of comedians.”
        .
        Welcome to Fantasy Island!

    4. By pointing out the Communism sign all the author did was point out that they had never seen Clue.
      .
      .
      Which, in itself, should be a Federal crime.

  12. Apparently he tarred all of the cable TV loudmouths with the same brush and Keith realized he was included.

  13. Well, I just read a news report about it. It said Yusef Islam performed. Last I’d heard he couldn’t even enter the country. I hope this means they finally got him off the list of terrorism supporters. (Why do we let the Government get away with that sort of idiocy?)

  14. Looks like it was a lot of fun. I’ll be interested what the final numbers are for the day, although I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the lowest numbers come from Fox News who wouldn’t want to acknowledge the fact that anybody else could draw the same crowds at the Glenn & Sarah Traveling Medicine Show of Ignorance. And no, I won’t be watching Fox news to see if I’m right. If anybody else wants to take one for the team, by all means let us know.

  15. I just watched the Reason.com video of the rally. I’d hoped to see you, but I didn’t. (They didn’t have any shots of the stage or anything. They just talked to people in the crowd, mostly the stupid ones.)
    .
    They did have a lady wearing Hulk fists, though. So that sort of relates to you.

    1. Oh, heavens no. The Beck shindig drew half a million people, if you can believe Fox N–
      .
      BWWAHAHAHAHAAAA…
      .
      Yeah, I knew I’d never get through that sentence with a straight face.
      .
      PAD

    2. Actually, the national park service, who you know, doesn’t have an interest in lying, put the Beck rally at 300k+. MSNBC are the folks that said 500k+. I never heard fox numbers.
      .
      Regardless, Id have more interest in attending Yesterdays rally, if I could have. It sounded like hëll of a time.

      2. .
        “MSNBC are the folks that said 500k+.”
        .
        News to me. Every time I turned them on they were reporting the numbers an the air as well below that figure.

    3. Perhaps of interest, NPR’s On the Media program once did a piece about the “art and artifice” of counting crowds at these DC rallies.
      .
      http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/2010/09/03/04
      .
      Among other things, the piece points out that a few years back, Congress has directed the park service from issuing crowd estimate numbers, opening the door for multiple parties to come up with multiple numbers. And then we just sorta see which sticks in the media and the public consciousness.

  17. So, when will we get a picture of PAD at the rally? It sounds like he was pretty prominent in the crowd, so I’d think someone has a shot from this with him.

  18. I was at the rally with my girlfriend and her roommate.

    The crowd was…the biggest, densest one I have ever experienced. It was like filing into the Smithsonian Metro after 4th of July fireworks, only the breadth was several city blocks.

    The sound system was so lousy we didn’t hear much of what John Stewart and Stephen Colbert were saying. Most of the rally experience, for those of us not up near the stage, was in seeing the other attendees’ costumes and signs.

    After escaping from the mosh pit, we spotted a couple of guys dressed as zombies and carrying around a sign that read: “What do we want? BRAINS! When do we want it? BRAINS!”

    In the mosh pit, we spotted at least two guys dressed as Waldo. It was remarkably apropos.

      1. This was the slogan from one of the Cheapass Games releases — THE GREAT BRAIN ROBBERY, if I recall. Glad to see some folks still remember them…

  20. Ah, so I WAS right. I said to the wife, “That looks like Peter David in the front row.”
    “Nahhhh,” she said.
    Yay for me!

  21. airphotoslive.com has a comparison of the Beck and Stewart crowds.

    Also, DC Metro has a comparison of ridership between the two events.

    They’re not conclusive bits of evidence, but they’re not easily waved away, either.

    1. I think he remembers Yusuf stating explicitly and repeatedly that all he was doing, in that specific context, was explaining where the thinking for the fatwa came from. But he also said, repeatedly (although apparently not repeatedly enough for some) that he did not endorse or support the taking of a human life for any reason, and that he was completely against any death sentence on Rushdie. Period, end of story. Well…the end of story for anyone who doesn’t have an axe to grind.
      .
      PAD

      1. Except that’s bûllšhìŧ. Yusuf’s story keeps changing but as, Salmon Rushdie himself remarked when Yusuf appeared at some green Party event:
        .
        However much Cat Stevens/Yusuf Islam may wish to rewrite his past, he was neither misunderstood nor misquoted over his views on the Khomeini fatwa against The Satanic Verses (Seven, April 29). In an article in The New York Times on May 22, 1989, Craig R Whitney reported Stevens/Islam saying on a British television programme “that rather than go to a demonstration to burn an effigy of the author Salman Rushdie, ‘I would have hoped that it’d be the real thing’.”
        .
        He added that “if Mr Rushdie turned up at his doorstep looking for help, ‘I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like. I’d try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is’.”
        .
        In a subsequent interview with The New York Times, Mr Whitney added, Stevens/Islam, who had seen a preview of the programme, said that he “stood by his comments”.
        .
        Let’s have no more rubbish about how “green” and innocent this man was.
        .
        of course, one may wish to think of Mr. Rushdie as one of those people with an axe to grind, what with that whole death sentence thing and all.
        .
        Here’s another account of Yusuf threatening someone with death–http://www.city-journal.org/html/11_4_our_islamic.html
        .
        Another quote: In Islam there is a line between let’s say freedom and the line which is then transgressed into immorality and irresponsibility and I think as far as this writer is concerned, unfortunately, he has been irresponsible with his freedom of speech. Salman Rushdie or indeed any writer who abuses the prophet, or indeed any prophet, under Islamic law, the sentence for that is actually death. It’s got to be seen as a deterrent, so that other people should not commit the same mistake again.
        .
        His appearance on the show Hypotheticals is one that he now characterizes as “a joke”.
        .
        Robertson: You don’t think that this man deserves to die?
        Y. Islam: Who, Salman Rushdie?
        Robertson: Yes.
        Y. Islam: Yes, yes.
        Robertson: And do you have a duty to be his executioner?
        Y. Islam: Uh, no, not necessarily, unless we were in an Islamic state and I was ordered by a judge or by the authority to carry out such an act – perhaps, yes.
        [Some minutes later, Robertson on the subject of a protest where an effigy of the author is to be burned]
        Robertson: Would you be part of that protest, Yusuf Islam, would you go to a demonstration where you knew that an effigy was going to be burned?
        Y. Islam: I would have hoped that it’d be the real thing
        .
        The New York Times also reports this statement from the program:” [If Rushdie turned up at my doorstep looking for help] I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like. I’d try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is”
        .
        Having seen the first part of the video it sure doesn’t look like he’s joking. Certainly he is dead serious when he says that he thinks Rushdie deserves to die, a statement he now denies making. Which is a lie.
        .
        he will probably also deny calling Judaism a so-called religion but whatever. It’s obvious that he is or was a fanatical creep who, if he has become wise enough to reconsider his words ought to also develop enough integrity to acknowledge his previous dreadful statements. Unless he fears for his life should he do so.

      2. Except that’s bûllšhìŧ.
        .
        Can’t be. I read it on Wikipedia, and I hear that it’s even more accurate than the Encyclopedia Britannica.
        .
        PAD

      3. I stand corrected! 🙂
        .
        Mr Rushdie responded to TAFKACS’ appearance:”I’ve always liked Stewart and Colbert but what on earth was Cat Yusuf Stevens Islam doing on that stage? If he’s a “good Muslim” like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar then I’m the Great Pumpkin. Happy Halloween.”
        .
        Another of Mr Islam’s greatest hits from writer Andrew Anthony–Andrew Anthony: “He told me in 1997, eight years after saying on TV that Rushdie should be lynched, that he was in favour of stoning women to death for adultery. He also reconfirmed his position on Rushdie. He set up the Islamia school in Brent, which is currently undergoing council-backed expansion. Its mission statement three years ago explicitly stated that its aim was to bring about the submission of the individual, the community and the world at large to Islam. For this aim it now receives state funding. Its an incubator of the most bonkers religious extremism and segregation, and is particularly strong on the public erasure of women. Why do people go to such lengths to ignore these aspects of Yusuf Islam’s character and philosophy?”

      4. So let’s see if I’ve got this right:
        .
        A guy who I’ve never heard of has a lot of hearsay things to say about stuff that Yusuf purportedly said twelve years ago, which run completely contrary to his public statements now, which would likely mean that over time he has come to realize the stupidity and harshness of the previous position, but instead is being interpreted to mean that he’s secretly planning to destroy us all in the name of Islam.
        .
        Meanwhile his presence on stage constituted ten minutes of a three hour program and he was one of over two dozen guests present, but instead he’s being shifted to the focal point of the entire discussion in order to underscore fear of Muslims.
        .
        Hard to believe that anyone could conclude that political discourse nowadays is characterized by fear and irrationality.
        .
        PAD

      5. My link above actually has the video- a video that Yusef has tried to scrub clean- that is what the first montage is stating…

        follow along and you shall see the interview……but my masters at Fox News could have tweaked the video so you never know.

      6. I consider the Salmon Rushdie ordeal to be one of the single most important freedom of speech events of the last few decades, the reverberations of which are still being felt.
        .
        Yusuf islam played a part, an appalling, disgraceful part in that ordeal. His denials do not in any way mitigate that. Indeed, lying about what he said only makes him a dishonest coward in addition to a hate monger.
        .
        One can certainly disregard hearsay evidence, even though those purported statements are completely consistent with what we can see Yusuf saying with our own eyes. And one can certainly choose to disregard his past offenses completely as the mere foolish statements of youth, youth being defined as a man 40 years of age.
        .
        My own personal opinion is that any artist who supports the murder of another artists for practicing their art deserves to be shunned. Especially when their later response is not an apology but a lie.
        .
        which run completely contrary to his public statements now, which would likely mean that over time he has come to realize the stupidity and harshness of the previous position, but instead is being interpreted to mean that he’s secretly planning to destroy us all in the name of Islam.
        .
        I am unaware of anyone claiming that Yusuf has the desire or power to “destroy us all in the name of Islam”.
        .
        If indeed he has come to realize the stupidity and harshness of his previous positions he would probably apologize for them, not lie about never having had them. The statements are on the record and easy to find, denying them is stupid. perhaps he thinks his fans will gladly cover for him. Until he either apologizes or explains his statements in a way that does not require the rest of us to deny the truth there is no reason to believe he has changed his views.
        .
        Meanwhile his presence on stage constituted ten minutes of a three hour program and he was one of over two dozen guests present, but instead he’s being shifted to the focal point of the entire discussion in order to underscore fear of Muslims.
        .
        Underscore a fear of Muslims? Only if you think Yusuf’s hate filled rants are indicative of Muslims as a whole. One should not fear Muslims…only those who would advocate the killing of artists for their art. Muslims like Yusuf Islam. I don’t see any of Yusuf’s critics having problems with Salmon Rushdie or Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, so are you sure this is all motivated by anti-Muslim animus.
        .
        I’m glad you had a good time. Looked a bit dull on TV but so would the chapel Hill Halloween celebration–some things are just better to be at than to watch. nevertheless, having a proponent of religious based murder at a Rally to Restore Sanity seems a bit nuts…of course, maybe he was there for the And/Or Fear portion.
        .
        Sorry if it seems like the controversy is tainting the fun but that’s what happens when one associates with fanatics. If Glenn Beck had some musical guest who advocated shooting George Tiller it would be worthy of comment.

      7. of course, maybe he was there for the And/Or Fear portion.
        .
        He sang (part of) a song about a ‘peace train’… before being interrupted by Colbert for Ozzy Osbourne, who of course came out to sing Crazy Train.
        .
        It goes back and forth for a bit, with each ‘side’ interrupting the other, before Yusuf and Ozzy walk off stage with their arms around each other’s shoulders and waving to the crowd.

      8. Oh yeah, I saw what he did. And don’t forget, The O’Jays came out at the end to make it Love train, because if you add Peace and Crazy you get Love.

  23. http://www.dailygut.com/?i=4795

    “….So the real title of the event shouldn’t have been “The Rally to Restore Sanity,” but “The Rally to Ignore Insanity.”

    Because, that was the message. The teapartiers are reacting to alarming stuff: the insane spending, the bottomless deficit, weird appointments, political arrogance -it’s real anxiety over real trouble for future offspring.

    Stewart’s rally says, “Ignore that. Check out Cat Stevens!” With a load of flashy entertainment and outsized personalities – they are the band playing on the TItanic – enjoying the applause as we see the shadow of the iceberg.

    1. I think the rally was aimed more at those who see the shadow of an ice cube tray a hundred miles off to port and claim it’s an iceberg in our path.
      .
      PAD

      1. Oh my, yes.

        When I do watch the News, it’s the BBC news.

        Of course, Stewart and Colbert; despite their fake-news status.

    2. The teapartiers are reacting to alarming stuff:
      .
      Not to mention missing birth certificates, Muslims hiding in every shadow, and the illusion that putting the GOP back in power will solve all the world’s ills.

    3. “The teapartiers are reacting to alarming stuff: the insane spending, the bottomless deficit, weird appointments, political arrogance -it’s real anxiety over real trouble for future offspring.”
      .
      I agree that the Tea Party is reacting to alarming stimulus.
      .
      However, I assert that their response is somewhat insane.
      .
      How do we reign in irresponsible spending? By spending more (continuing the Bush tax cuts.)
      .
      How do we reduce the deficit? By borrowing more money from China (the acknowledged source of the funding for continuing the Bush tax cuts.)
      .
      How do we protest appointments? With hyperbole (the end of America.)
      .
      How do we combat political arrogance? With candidates who don’t just act like they know better than the rest of us, but who come right out and say it (granted, a refreshing if somewhat bizzare form of transparancy.)
      .
      I may be wrong, but I don’t think they were saying that the Tea Party’s worries were a sign of insanity. Just their ways of dealing with them.
      .
      Theno

      1. How do we reign in irresponsible spending? By spending more (continuing the Bush tax cuts.)
        .
        While tax cuts may bring in less revenue, I think it’s a mistake to think of them as increasing spending. It’s money that is not taken in, not money going out. Small point perhaps, but let us not allow the government to think of our income as their money, to be “spent” by allowing us to keep it. Tax cuts are reduced revenue, not increased spending, though the effects may be the same. On the larger point, yes, if one is for less taxes it behooves them to explain how this will not make deficits worse
        .
        How do we protest appointments? With hyperbole (the end of America.)
        .
        That kind of nonsensical hyperbole has been around for several election cycles now. Mush as I have distaste for how some people talk about the president it amuses me to see some of them being the very same people who simply ran out of ways to disparage the previous one, Chimpy Bushitler McCokesnort.
        .
        How do we combat political arrogance? With candidates who don’t just act like they know better than the rest of us, but who come right out and say it
        .
        Do you really think the newest batch of candidates is more arrogant than the current officeholders? hard to imagine, though I can’t say I’ve kept up with every race, so I don’t know what you are dealing with.
        .
        Whatever the brains and motivations of the tea party people, I have to give a tip o’ the hat to them on managing to defy expectations and the snark of all those folks who dismissed them early on. Whatever happens tonight I predict a lot of those early mockers will be very busy trying to emulate their success in the next election cycle. If the TPs are as dumb as portrayed it is all the more an illustration of how easy it can be to affect politics…and it makes one wonder why so many smarter people don’t try.
        .
        (My own theory is that A-a lot of “smart” folks are not nearly as smart as they imagine themselves to be and B-it takes a level of commitment and work that many are just not willing to give. It may be that a movement that claims to champion individualism over government largesse will attract a good number of the kind of people who are willing to do the heavy lifting required.)

      2. “While tax cuts may bring in less revenue, I think it’s a mistake to think of them as increasing spending. It’s money that is not taken in, not money going out. Small point perhaps, but let us not allow the government to think of our income as their money, to be “spent” by allowing us to keep it. Tax cuts are reduced revenue, not increased spending, though the effects may be the same.”
        .
        Actually, the mistake is to think of them as less money in rather than money out. When a company issues a coupon, that money is considered an operating expense, not a reduction in income.
        .
        If we assume that we citizens are as consumers, “purchasing” the service of government functions (such as military, infrastructure, lesislation, etc.) then the base taxes represent the cost of that service. A tax cut, therefore, would represent a coupon or rebate issued by the company.
        .
        In other words, a tax cut affects net, not gross. From an accounting standpoint, issuing a tax cut is the same kind of expense as opening a building and paying a staff.
        .
        I do agree that hyperbole has been a part of American politics for many election cycles. And, as I mentioned a few weeks ago, my main complaint has drifted away from the Tea Party itself, and to the way they are portrayed in the media. So, maybe the hyperbole issue isn’t valid.
        .
        I do honestly think that the current batch, specifically the Tea Party candidates, are more arrogant than many incumbants. But, I have to admit that this is the first year I’ve really paid attention to other state races for Senate and House. And, I also have to admit that any good politician has to be at least a little arrogant, to think that they can do the job better than anyone else (just as I believe that any good writer has to be at least a little arrogant, to think that their stories deserve to be read.)
        .
        Theno

    1. You mean as sixty years of history almost guarantees will happen? That’s how Americans are. Democrats come in and pass ground-breaking legislation and policies and introduce social programs, Americans freak, hand Congress back over to the Republicans who then screw things up, and in the meantime the voters come to embrace and defend most of the stuff that the Democrats did.
      .
      I look forward to it. The party of “no” is now going to have to try and govern rather than simply stop others from doing so. They’re like dogs chasing cars; once they have it in their teeth, they won’t know what to do with it. Should be amusing.
      .
      PAD

      1. It’s a wonder the Democrats wasted so much money trying to thwart this genius plan!

      2. It’s a wonder the Democrats wasted so much money trying to thwart this genius plan!
        .
        Nobody has said that the Democrats have ever learned from history, either.
        .
        But it will be curious to see how the electorate feels in 2 years. The GOP has basically said they’re going to spend it trying to undo the health care bill and bank regulations.
        .
        I’m sure that will go over well.

      3. Doesn’t seem to be hurting their chances this time. remember when people were predicting that the healthcare vote would be a deal clincher by the elections? It was, just not the way they thought. The way the Democrats around here were running from their votes on it you would think they owed it money.
        .
        It took what, 40 years for the Democrats to lose congress. It took 12 for the Republicans to lose it back. It’s taken only 4 for the Democrats to screw up so badly they lose it yet again. Either the trendline indicates that the Republicans should hand it back in just 2 years or the current congress has simply set the bar on making people hate them. A good argument could be made for both sides.
        .
        (all this assumes that the polls are correct about what it about to happen. One should keep in mind the old bit about chickens and hatching. Admittedly, EVERYTHING, from the polls to the dismal turnout at rallies the last few days, to the lack of Democrat “victory” parties, the the president planning on basking in the glow of the results in another country entirely (though Hillary–smart woman–already got out while the getting was good) would indicate that the Democrats are in for a drubbing. But again, it ain’t over till it’s over. Me, I’m gonna be up all night with popcorn, either to watch Keith Olbermann’s head explode like a scene from SCANNERS or to see all the pollsters falling on swords. Win-win!)
        .
        At least the internet has allowed liberals the opportunity to go through most of the stages of grief ahead of time. In 1994 they were absolutely gobsmacked. Didn’t see it coming.

      4. Just in case there isn’t a liveblog I’m predicting 62 seat pickup in the house but only 6 in the Senate for the GOP.

      5. .
        “Just in case there isn’t a liveblog I’m predicting 62 seat pickup in the house but only 6 in the Senate for the GOP.”
        .
        I don’t think that the flip will be quite that big. The interesting news I’m seeing in some areas around here and hearing about in other states is that the turnout this morning was a bit bigger than they anticipated that it would be and those larger crowds are in Democratic heavy areas. This may indicate that the “enthusiasm gap” wasn’t as great as the experts predicted.
        .
        Plus you know that internal polling data must not have been looking all that great this week since Fox News and the Republicans have really started cranking out the fake voter fraud stories.
        .
        I do think Harry is toast though.

      7. the turnout this morning was a bit bigger than they anticipated that it would be and those larger crowds are in Democratic heavy areas
        .
        I’m sure we’ll read plenty about voter challenges as a result, too. After all, a certain group said last week that they were going to use the tried and true tactic yet again.

      9. .
        And the Delaware Tea Party just cost the Republicans both the House and the Senate seats in that state.
        .
        The GOP can thank Palin for that debacle. Wonder how much fun the backstage area at Fox News is gonna be this week when Palin and Rove are in close proximity to each other.

      10. Should they take control of the House, the Republicans can kill the Affordable Care Act merely by starving it of funding.
        .
        I’m not looking forward to this. I’m too young for Medicare, too rich for Medicaid, live in a state that allows insurers to cherry-pick applicants, and I have a preexisting condition. I’ve had my applications for private health insurance rejected three times by three different insurers.
        .
        I need the Affordable Care Act. I can’t be the only American in this boat.

      1. looks like that idiot Grayson will have to go back to trolling on usenet.
        .
        Not a tsunami thus far but it looks like it will be hard for the GOP not to take the house. Awful lot of D incumbents trailing in the early returns.

  28. Yeah, she never quite clicked. Given the political atmosphere, an opponent who lied about his military service and wads of money you’d think she had a shot. Never did think she had much charisma in the ring.

  29. .
    God… Christine O’Donnell just can’t help not to sound like an idiot. She got stomped into the ground and she’s talking about the list of demands she gave Coons in her “concession” call.
    .
    “I lost. Now take up my promises and do what I said I would do if I won.”
    .
    Any bets on how long it takes for Fox News to toss her a contract?

    1. Any bets on how long it takes for Fox News to toss her a contract?
      .
      There’s probably already one sitting on her desk.
      .
      I’ll be fine with the GOP taking the House as long as most of the ridiculous teabaggers like O’Donnell, who’s an absolute nutjob, lose.
      .
      Regardless, I expect the Tea Party to claim plenty of victory tonight, even with O’Donnell (and possibly others) losing. And yet, nothing has fundamentally changed, unless I missed something and all the Tea Party members ran as third parties. But even then, they’ll still simply vote Republican when the time comes.

    2. I dunno…don’t you think the GOP would rather she just ride off on her broomstick?
      .
      Judging from the way democrats on TV want to talk about the senate I’m guessing the House is officially a lost cause for them.

      1. In the end, the Dems could lose both and it wouldn’t matter a whole lot unless the GOP suddenly thinks they can pass everything (and override a presidential veto) with a simple majority.
        .
        Hmm, Rand Paul won (*shudder*) and declared, “Tonight, there’s a Tea Party tidal wave and we’re sending a message to them.” I guess that includes any GOP candidate who he gives the thumbs up but not the likes of a loser like O’Donnell.

      2. .
        “I dunno…don’t you think the GOP would rather she just ride off on her broomstick?”
        .
        Not really. She’ll play victim, blame the media coverage for her loss, say stupid things and be embraced by the Right. Basically, she’ll be Palin 2.0.
        .
        “Judging from the way democrats on TV want to talk about the senate I’m guessing the House is officially a lost cause for them.”
        .
        Not unexpected, but it still looks like it may be a slimmer margin of victory than the Republicans projected they would win. High end projections I’m hearing are around 58 pick ups with low end projections being around 35 pick ups.

      4. In the end, the Dems could lose both and it wouldn’t matter a whole lot unless the GOP suddenly thinks they can pass everything (and override a presidential veto) with a simple majority.
        .
        If you assume that Obama has no plans to do anything legislatively for the next two years, yeah, it won’t matter at all.
        .
        If he does have plans, well, I’m thinking it might have some major implications.

      5. .
        Obama is screwed anyhow insofar as anything he wants to do now. And, honestly, he only has himself to blame.

      6. The North Carolina state house just went the the republicans for the first time in something like 100 years. I don’t know if that is something that is happening elsewhere.
        .
        I see barney Frank survived but the fact that this was even in question…

  30. MN looks to be a pretty good for the Democrats. Other than Michele Bachmann retaining her seat The Dems are picking-up pretty much everything else and unfortunatly the fraud allegations have already started. Hopefully this election will be decided this year.

      1. Man, talk about an about-face. When I wrote the above, The Governor race was about 50% to 37% in favor of Mark Dayton (D). now there is going to be a recount because it ended up being a less then 1% difference. Oberstar was being declared the winner in his race (unofficially).
        .
        Looks like we will have a June finish after all.

      2. Talk about an about-face. The Gov race was around 52% to 38% in favor of the Dem (Mark Dayton) When I wrote the above. Now they are going to have a recount because the win was by a less than 1% margin.
        .
        Oberstar was being declared the winner (unofficially)and ended up losing by less than 2%. Probably a recount in the making there also.

    1. .
      And so he did…
      .
      Surprised me. I actually thought he was toast this time. Early reports I’m seeing show a huge Hispanic turnout in his favor (cue Fox News and its parrots claiming that the illegals voted him into reelection) which is the only part of his victory that doesn’t surprise me. Angle seemed like she did everything she could think of to piss them off in the last few weeks.
      .

  33. .
    On the House side it looks like the Tea Party candidates that were promoted the most were a bust. And while Alaska has yet to be called it looks like Miller will be added to the “bust” list.
    .
    And Palin’s “star power” and “coattails” for this election year weren’t anything like her most ardent supporters declared them to be. Can’t wait to see how both she and they spin it to be something other than the fact that she ain’t all that and never will be outside of the tiny cult that worships her.

  34. .
    Eh… Time for bed.
    .
    Welcome to Gridlock County, USA.
    .
    Gonna be a “fun” 2011.

  35. House Republican Leader John Boehner: “I think it’s important for us to lay the groundwork before we begin to repeal this monstrosity (the health care bill) and replace with it commonsense reforms that will bring down the cost of health care in America.”
    .
    I’d laugh if this statement wasn’t so insulting to my intelligence. The GOP isn’t about reform, it isn’t about providing affordable health care, and is sure as hëll isn’t about common sense.

    1. One might wonder, if the GOP had any worthwhile ideas, commonsense or not, regarding the state of health care, why didn’t they pitch any when the debates were raging last year? Back when they were opposing even their own previously presented ideas?
      .
      Nobody anywhere has yet to explain to me what is so bad about the bill. I’ve heard the arguments that it didn’t go far enough, I get that. But, what in it needs to be repealed?
      .
      For months, the only things that I’ve heard people complain need to be taken out of the bill are things that aren’t in it in the first place. (Like Death Panels, assigned doctors, depriving small clinics of funding, health care to illegal immigrants, “Obamacare” as a health plan one has to have either instead of or in addition to their previous health coverage, etc.)
      .
      Theno

    2. It’s going to give Obama something to push back with in 2012. He’s going to say, “In the first two years of my presidency, we accomplished all these things,” and he’s going to lay out everything that they did that was productive and useful and swallowed by the white noise of the RWHM (Right Wing Howler Monkeys). And then he’s going to say, “And since 2010, nothing’s gotten done and some of the things designed to benefit you have been undone. Now what changed?”
      .
      Any number of Democrat presidents have had to deal with this exact sequence of events. Most of them wind up being reelected and fondly remembered.
      .
      PAD

      1. Last week the Onion had this article: “Democrats If we’re gonna lose, let’s go down running away from every legislative accomplishment we’ve made” http://www.theonion.com/articles/democrats-if-were-gonna-lose-lets-go-down-running,18333/ The Democrats have had some impressive achievements, from financial reform to the health care bill (and even those who claim it must be gotten rid of tend to single out parts that they’d keep) to averting (if not fully fixing) the financial crisis we were in at the end of Bush’s term. And yet, during the midterms they largely ran against George W. instead of with Obama, against what Republicans had done to the country instead of what Obama’s done to fix what they did.

        Maybe with the Republicans in control of the House they’ll be more clearly shown as the Party of No, but it’d be nice if Democrats could speak up on what they’re for instead of just going back to what they’re against.

      2. The problem for Obama is that things will either get better or they will not.
        .
        If they get better he may be re-elected but so will the republican house and potentially the senate–the 2012 senate races are in far friendlier territory than yesterdays were (Which is why, two long years ago, there were democrats confidently predicting gains in the 2010 election. On paper it seemed possible.) And that’s without some expected retirements on the Democrat side (nothing like being in the minority party to convince people to spend more time with their families).
        .
        If things get worse he will have potential trouble being re-elected. Yes, he can blame the House for all his troubles but I don’t know that it will be any more effective than blaming GW Bush was yesterday.
        .
        I would not consider what Clinton did after his 1994 drubbing (which does not look so bad now) simply claiming that nothing got accomplished. And indeed, republicans lost just a few house seats and and added two more to their majority in the senate.
        .
        It would be a disaster, in my opinion, for him to basically sit on his hands and tell people in 2010 that the choice was either go back to the situation they hated so much in 2010–Obama and a democratic majority in both houses– or continue to have Obama and a gridlocked do nothing congress. They might choose option C.

      3. .
        “It’s going to give Obama something to push back with in 2012. He’s going to say, “In the first two years of my presidency, we accomplished all these things,” and he’s going to lay out everything that they did that was productive and useful and swallowed by the white noise of the RWHM (Right Wing Howler Monkeys). And then he’s going to say, “And since 2010, nothing’s gotten done and some of the things designed to benefit you have been undone. Now what changed?””
        .
        No, he’ll do what he’s been doing only more of it, he’ll act even more thin skinned on matters, he’ll act like he has even less sense of priorities than before, he’ll fail to form a coherent message and he’ll wait until the last second to do what he should be doing on any given issue which will by then be too little too late.
        .
        The man can campaign his ášš off. What he can’t seem to do is govern worth a dámņ.

      4. He’ll act even more thin skinned on matters
        .
        Obama’s press conference showed what seemed to me to be some genuine humility and self reflection. He has been thin skinned in the last two years and it has hurt him. he’s smart enough to make the adjustment.

      5. .
        I missed it since I was out all morning. He may get his act together, but I’m not counting on it based on reports of one good performance the day after the election losses. I don’t think we’ll know one way or the other until March or April of next year. By then everyone’s acts will have been dropped and we’ll see how the various sides are actually going to be behaving running up to 2012.

  36. Thenodrin says:
    One might wonder, if the GOP had any worthwhile ideas, commonsense or not, regarding the state of health care, why didn’t they pitch any when the debates were raging last year? Back when they were opposing even their own previously presented ideas?
    .
    The GOP had many ideas. They were not what the Dems wanted. and gee the media wasnt real quick to report it either.
    .
    http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/Summary_of_Republican_Alternative_Health_Care_plan_Updated_11-04-09.pdf

    1. .
      Pat, you’re rewriting history here.
      .
      The media, gee, did report on it. They reported several things about it as a matter of fact. They reported, for example, that the Republicans wouldn’t explain anything about their proposals when asked. All they did was roll out a talking points paper and answered questions about details by repeating the talking points. There were no details and there was no plan.
      .
      “We’re going to reduce costs!”
      “How?”
      “By cutting costs!”
      “How are you going to cut costs?”
      “By reducing costs!”
      .
      Rinse and repeat for dámņëd near every proposal.
      .
      They reported on the fact that some of what’s on that list did get into versions of the bill and variations of a few of the things on that list made it to the final bill. They also reported on the fact that whenever the Democrats put large amounts of the things the Republicans claimed had to be in the bill to get their votes on it the Republicans (most of ’em) turned around and voted “No” across the board. The Republicans might actually have gotten more of what they claim they wanted in the bill if they hadn’t acted like upset children having a tantrum at every vote.
      .
      The media also reported on the whining that the Republicans were doing because they weren’t getting their way 100%. Of course, the Democrats didn’t get their way 100% on the bill either. That’s called the reality of Washington and every other place where compromise comes into play as well.

      2. .
        Pat, the thing is that your not showing us ideas here. You’re showing us a GOP talking point.
        .
        Let’s look at the economy for a second. I’m an elected official and I come out and say, “I think we need to lower unemployment to no more than 2%, eliminate the deficit and cut taxes on an overburdened population.”
        .
        Is that an idea or a talking point?
        .
        Well, it could be an idea if I had anything to back it up insofar as a plan or some kind of blueprint for how I was going to do that. But if all I offer to back it up with is a two sentence talking point that’s as devoid of an actual idea as the original statement then it’s not really an idea.
        .
        Even the garbage on the bottom of that thing about how their plan compares to the plan being put forward by the Democrats is just so many numbers that the pulled out of their áššëš and slapped on there. They had no plan, they had no blueprint and they had no way of actually coming up with facts and figures. They just made it up and whenever they were pressed on the issue they spit out circular talking points or ducked the question entirely.
        .
        They did not have a single, workable or worthwhile idea.
        .
        All they did was yell that things needed to be done and then vote “NO!” whenever they had the chance. And the fact that Obama and the Democrats had so much ready made ammunition handed to them in the last 20 months and still couldn’t do anything more than fire blanks and wound themselves underscores just how poorly they’re able to be the party in power anymore and why they deserved to lose so much more than they actually did last night.
        .
        So, no, a sheet of talking points and BS numbers do not qualify as “ideas” in any meaningful way.

    2. Thank you for the link, Pat. Although, you kinda proved my point rather than yours.
      .
      I didn’t ask if the Republicans had ANY worthwhile ideas. I asked if the Republicans had any WORTHWHILE ideas. A subtle distinction, and one I admit doesn’t convey well in print.
      .
      Looking over the link you provided, I see a lot of promises, but no actual plan. Reduce premiums, how? Universal access, how? Promote healthier lifestyles, how? Curbing defensive medicine, how? What state programs? Etc.
      .
      There are a few specifics, such as letting parents cover their children. Although, I notice that it appears to be mandatory rather than optional (could be a facet of the lack of detail), which is the claim many make about the current bill allowing parents to cover their children to age 26. That is, the criticism is that the bill forces parents to cover children, when it is strictly optional, and not enforced should the child have access to health care through their work.
      .
      And, I have to laugh at the “across state lines” bit. It would be great if we could. But, the insurance companies oppose that. I work in health care, and a big thing the lobbiests oppose is allowing health care providers to cross state lines. It’ll never happen. NO ONE, Democrat or Republican, is going to vote for it. Oh, they’ll talk about it, and parade it around, but vote for it? Not a chance.
      .
      Health insurance companies get government subsidies to protect them from catastrophy. So, if there is a flu outbreak, or an earthquake, or a tornado, or a hurricane, or whatever and they have to pay out a lot of premiums, they get money from the government to help absorb that cost.
      .
      Selling across state lines means that the cost is spread out more. And, unless there is a Year of Disaster where bad things happen in nearly every state at once, the insurance companies would be unable to show a catastrophic loss. This is why many home owner insurance companies de-regulated themselves after Katrina. Nothing bad had happened in the north or mid west areas, and so their expected subsidy was not granted.
      .
      And, then there will be the public cry of “taking jobs away.” People in both houses, on both sides of the aisle, will hear the anguish as this or that state gives better incentives for health care providers to move to their area. Or, is this part of the state programs vaguely referenced?
      .
      So, yes, there are ideas. Are they fleshed out? Practical? Possible? In any way thought through past a 5 minute brainstorming session?
      .
      Oh, and that isn’t even counting the blatent lie in the little chart at the end. The projected tax increases over 10 years is a max of $455 billion, not $729 billion. As I mentioned above, the republican plan does create job loses. And, the $500 billion supposedly cut from medicare are being cut and put INTO MEDICARE in other areas. (If I take $5 from your pocket, and put it in your hand, how much money did you lose?)
      .
      Theno

      1. Thenodrin says:
        .
        I didn’t ask if the Republicans had ANY worthwhile ideas. I asked if the Republicans had any WORTHWHILE ideas. A subtle distinction, and one I admit doesn’t convey well in print.
        .
        Here is what you actually asked, Theno.
        .
        One might wonder, if the GOP had any worthwhile ideas, commonsense or not, regarding the state of health care, why didn’t they pitch any when the debates were raging last year? Back when they were opposing even their own previously presented ideas?
        .
        See the part about commonsense or not? I think you were very clear in asking your question. I showed you a pitch and its up to the beholder to decide if its commonsense or not.

      2. .
        Yep. A pitch devoid of anything but talking points, filled with bogus figures and dated from November 4th of last year. Boy, it took them almost the whole year just to come up with a page of talking points.
        .
        I’m impressed. They really took the idea of proposing ideas in the debate seriously.

      3. To be fair to Pat, his link did go to GOP “ideas.”
        .
        Defining “idea” as the initial undeveloped spark, of course. The same way that I may have an “idea” that in order to avert hunger I plan to eat something.
        .
        Completely ignoring any thought to a plan of what to eat. Or, do I have the necessary ingredients? Or, is it a food that I may be allergic to? Perhaps it is a food that I find distasteful, but do not have an exit stragety that describes the pros and cons of eating the food anyway versus continuing to go hungry.
        .
        So, with me agreeing that there are ideas listed in the document, do you have any thoughts concerning the chart at the bottom of the document?
        .
        Theno

  37. “Any number of Democrat presidents have had to deal with this exact sequence of events. Most of them wind up being reelected and fondly remembered.”
    .
    Seeing as how Clinton was the first Democrat since FDR to be re-elected to two full terms and none obviously have since, which Democrat presidents are you talking about when you talk about “most of them” exactly?

  38. “You mean as sixty years of history almost guarantees will happen? That’s how Americans are. Democrats come in and pass ground-breaking legislation and policies and introduce social programs, Americans freak, hand Congress back over to the Republicans who then screw things up, and in the meantime the voters come to embrace and defend most of the stuff that the Democrats did.”
    .
    WHERE do you get this talking point from? It bears absolutely no resemblance to reality or American history.
    Thanks to FDR-Truman’s 20 year stranglehold on the Presidency and the belief that they had saved the little guy with the New Deal and won World War II, Democrats controlled the House for a remarkable FORTY STRAIGHT YEARS. In that time, they were the “Part of No” against Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford Reagan and Bush 41.
    .
    More importantly:
    .
    In the 1960s the Civil Rights Act and Great Society programs were passed, and Americans freaked…by re-electing a Democratic Congress.
    .
    Under Nixon, the “Philadelphia Plan” – basically affirmative action – which set goals for hiring minorities on federally funded projects. Nixon also signed the National Environmental Protection Act, signed the Clean Water Act and created Earth Day. under his SAdministration came the Roe v. Wade ruling on abortion. How did Americans freak out? By re-electing a Democratic Congress.
    .
    Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to millions of illegals and made MLK Day a reality? people freaked out…by re-electing a Democratic Congress.
    .
    Bush 41 signed the Americans With Disabilities act into law. And people responded to this RINO by freaking out..and re-electing a Democratic Congress.
    .
    Which shows how historic the drubbing the Clinton Democrats received in 1994 especially historic, a result of incredible overreaching. And now Obama has done the same thing. it doesn’t happen that often.
    .
    “I look forward to it. The party of “no” is now going to have to try and govern rather than simply stop others from doing so. They’re like dogs chasing cars; once they have it in their teeth, they won’t know what to do with it.”
    .
    Pretty much sums up the Obama campaign/Administration. he has been so tone deaf it’s painful.

    1. WHERE do you get this talking point from?
      .
      Not Fox, so that’s probably what confused you.
      .
      I was referring to Lyndon Johnson having a 68-32 majority in the Senate and a 295-140 majority in the House. Two years and one civil rights act later, the GOP picked up four Senate seats, 47 House seats, and swept statehouses across the country.
      .
      Then there was Truman. The Dems had a 57-38 majority in the Senate and a 243-190 House majority. After the midterms, there were GOP majorities of 51-45 in the Senate and 246-188 in the House.
      .
      And then there was FDR who saw his party lose eighty House seats and a half dozen Senate seats in 1938.
      .
      All these presidents are remembered as great presidents, and their legacies of social change and various programs–which caused much upset at the time–live on.
      .
      PAD

  39. One can only imagine how progressives would react if a republican were to enact some of FDR’s initial policies–suspending ant-trust laws (part of the NIRA, ultimately declared unconstitutional by unanimous Supreme Court decision), Ceasing private property (all gold became US government property), a 40% cuts to veterans’ benefits, cuts to federal salaries, military and naval budgets (while Hitler was arming germany), reducing spending on research and education…
    .
    Mind you, some of this, maybe even much of it was good and needed. But just imagine the squeals. But when it’s the “right” party doing it it’s amazing what people will rationalize. ultimately, of course, that sort of thinking allows one to tolerate things that should have been obviously wrong–as great as FDR was, the internment of Americans of Japanese decent removes him from the level of greatness, imo. I know, I know, just one little thing…other than that, how was the play Mrs Lincoln?

    2. .
      “… a 40% cuts to veterans’ benefits, cuts to federal salaries, military and naval budgets”
      .
      Yeah, well that’s not far from what happens as SOP every few years anyhow and the only stink that gets raised about it small and often unnoticed.

    3. But when it’s the “right” party doing it it’s amazing what people will rationalize
      .
      See: post-9/11 climate regarding patriotism, the Iraq War, and Muslims.
      .
      For the good and bad of FDR, one would certainly hope that some of those things will never be an issue again (such as internment camps), because nobody else in power will ever attempt such moves.

      1. Hëll, see right now–we still have 100k soldiers in Iraq, more American deaths in Afghanistan than ever, lots of politicians on both sides who throw around terms like un-American and enemies when describing their opponents on the other side and Bill Maher is openly and apologetically contemptuous of Muslims.
        .
        I would hope you are correct that we will never see anything like the internment camps again. It’s one good thing about partisanship–you figure that half the people would oppose such a thing just because of who it came from and at least a few of the folks on his or her side would do so just because it’s the right thing to do. But Obama could throw all of Fox news into jail tomorrow and there would be people who would accept it, just because they put their feelings over any principles they may have.

      2. That is perhaps my biggest beef with the current conservative establishment. W. normalized torture and openly admits to authorizing it. (And, yes, waterboarding is torture.) But because *he* did it (and not, say, Gore) not only did Republicans — the party of “morality” and “law and order” — accept it, they began arguing *for* it as a positive good.
        .
        The modern Republican establishment is, frankly, depraved and their greatest sin may be the debasing of the fundamental character of America.

    1. .
      But… but… Craig…
      .
      Fox News read it on the internet so it must be true. And of course, once Fox News, Beck and Rush said it’s true the $200 million a day figure must be true.
      .
      I like the bit about the 34 warships as well. You really do have to be a drooling idiot to believe stuff like this.

      1. I don’t know what should make republicans happier–Olbermann getting himself in trouble or Nancy Pelosi trying to stay on as the face of the Democratic party in the House.
        .
        If democrats think it’s a good idea to have pelosi and reid front and center for the next two years…what was the definition of insanity again?

      2. If Olbermann’s reprimand is over not reporting the donations, not in having made them in the first place, how exactly does that make NBC so much more ethical than other ‘news’ organizations?

      3. Anyway, it’s ridiculous. Everyone knows where Olbermann stands. Yes it’s a bit embarrassing after all the big deal he made out of Newscorp, Fox’s parent company, giving money tot he republicans (Because GE, MSNBC’s parent company never would do such a thing. never, ever.). But it isn’t like he took money from a politician to give him good press. Olbermann scarcely qualifies as a journalist, I see no harm in his putting his money where his mouth is.

      4. how exactly does that make NBC so much more ethical than other ‘news’ organizations?
        .
        Well, for one, MSNBC doesn’t employ half the potential 2012 GOP presidential candidate field, where one can be paid to prove you don’t know jack from squat (see: shady numbers above). Not only that, it’s well known that these individuals are going to hold out as long as possible before declaring and thus having to quit their job and all the free airtime that comes with it.
        .
        But no, no qualms about ethics there.

      5. .
        “If Olbermann’s reprimand is over not reporting the donations, not in having made them in the first place, how exactly does that make NBC so much more ethical than other ‘news’ organizations?”
        .
        I think (from other things I’ve read on MSNBC’s rules) that the process of reporting what you want to donate to your boss is so that they can check the who, what, where, how much and issues around any conflicts and then tell you yes you can or no you can’t. It’s not simply that you say you’re going to do it and then you do it.
        .
        Lots of places have rules like that. I work at such a place as a matter of fact.
        .
        Still, there is a bit of irony in this given his take on the NPR/Williams flap. He was very big on pointing out that when you work for someone else and they have certain rules in your contract that you have to follow…
        .
        You get the idea.
        .
        “Not only that, it’s well known that these individuals are going to hold out as long as possible before declaring and thus having to quit their job and all the free airtime that comes with it.”
        .
        Craig, it goes beyond even that little bit of follish garbage. Back at the start of the year someone floated the idea of having radio talker and MSNBC TV host Ed Schultz run in his state as a Dem. Mind you, Schultz never said he wanted to, actually said he wasn’t going to and was not the one who said it in the first place, but the talkers on the Right went ape over this and talked about how MSNBC had to can him on the spot over this obvious conflict with his job and asked how he could report on anything now without questions being raised.
        .
        Many of these talkers were Fox News clowns who work with people on the Fox News payroll that talk about their maybe, kinda, might be shot at running in 2012 or other elections.
        .
        Fox News has no standards. That’s just the way it is.

      6. It’s not quite like the draft Ed Schultz movement was from thing air with no involvment from mr. Schultz though:
        .
        http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/01/ed_schultz_aske.php
        .
        n an interview on MSNBC, where he hosts a nightly program, Schultz said he got a call from state Rep. Merle Boucher (D), the House Min. Leader, asking him to consider a bid. Schultz said he had worked hard to get where he was in his career, but he refused to rule out a bid.
        .
        “I’m flattered. I’m honored. I can’t say that I’m even considering it right now,” Schultz said. “I’m in a different place right now. So we’re a long way from any kind of consideration.”
        .
        Since the republican won by a 76% to 22% margin I think Mr Schultz made a wise choice.
        .
        Who were the Fox people who urged his ousting before he even announced he wanted to run? That would be very stupid but I can’t find a source.

      7. If democrats think it’s a good idea to have pelosi and reid front and center for the next two years…what was the definition of insanity again?
        .
        Curious. I was thinking the exact same thing of those people who voted back into power the same people whose policies led to our current straits, yet expect different results. (Hëll, Boehner himself said the GOP wasn’t going to change a thing since last time, and none of the bunch have yet to mutter so much as a half-hearted mea culpa for their mistakes.)
        .
        I would like to see Reid replaced, but would be happy to see Pelosi remain leader. It really doesn’t matter who the minority leader is: The Repubs would demonize him or her regardless of how “moderate” he or she is. At least with Pelosi, the Dems have someone whose response to being attacked by the GOP isn’t to cry “Not in the face! Not in the face!”

      8. .
        “Who were the Fox people who urged his ousting before he even announced he wanted to run? That would be very stupid but I can’t find a source.”
        .
        Hannity and Beck for two. I believe there were comments on the Fox News morning show but I don’t remember if it was a host or a guest. I was channel surfing that morning on the XM so I’m doubly screwed trying to ID that one.
        .
        “It’s not quite like the draft Ed Schultz movement was from thing air with no involvment from mr. Schultz though:”
        .
        Yeah, but he went on to clearly state on his TV and radio shows that he was not running.
        .
        “”I am not running. What do you want me to say?” Schultz told listeners Thursday on his radio show, saying the GOP was just worried he would claim a win if he did: “They know I’d kick some ášš.””
        .
        http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/01/07/nrsc-threatens-msnbc-with-legal-action-over-schultz/
        .
        On Fox you can play coy about whether or not you’re going to run and then get tons of air time essentially campaigning right up until you officially announce.

  41. I actually find Olbermann to be the most vile hater of all the pundits on the air of either stripe, but if this is simply because he made donations, i find the punishement thoroughly unjustified. As do other conservatives, even those who appear on Fox News and write for The weekly Standard like Bill Kristol, who said:
    “First, he donated money to candidates he liked. He didn’t take money, or favors, in a way that influenced his reporting.
    .
    Second, he’s not a reporter. It’s an opinion show. If Olbermann wants to …put his money where his mouth is, more power to him.
    .
    Third, GE, the corporate parent of MSNBC, gives money to political organizations. GE executives and, I’m sure, NBC executives give money. Why can’t Olbermann?”
    .
    If it’s because he didn’t disclose and broke a company rule by not doing so, then as jerry says karma is biting him on the ášš.
    .
    As for the ethics of having people who might run for office…I just don’t see it. We’ve has a couple local anchors eventually run for office locally. As long as they are offering analysis and reporting opinions and not doing hard news stories at 6PM on Bret Baier’s show and determining which stories get covered and HAVE NOT DECLARED, then why, really, should they be denied a forum to express their views? Jerry Springer was a serious prospect at one point, for heaven’s sakes and there are those who want to draft Beck to run for President. How do you determine how ethical it is to keep someone on the air and allow them to express their views? because they MIGHT run? That could get really sticky if you’re going to deny someone the opportunity to express their views because they MIGHT run for office. As soon as rumors were swirling about Al Franken running, should MSNBC no longer have given him free air time? What should the litmus test be? what standard or tool should we use to determine – besides a crystal ball?

  42. Not to be a self aggrandizing weenie about this…but I did predict a 62 seat pickup in the house and a 6 seat pickup in the Senate for the GOP. The result was 6 in the senate and at least 60 in the house, with another 2 or 3 likely to go Republican after recounts and military ballots counted.
    .
    What I’m saying is PRAISE ME! PRAISE ME! I GOT ONE RIGHT! 35+ years of making election predictions and getting them right less often than a chimpanzee with a dartboard and I finally nailed one! Booyah! In your FACE Stuart Rothenberg!

Comments are closed.