When they say something that's Meaningful and TRUE?

because they are just plain stupid and bored and reading anything more then a few lines on the bottom of a news bar via tv , takes to much of thier time?

Id wager its all 3 but ill throw in another,
Ignorance.

Whatever happened to the Talon News Agency?

No kidding!

Some times it takes a village idiot to point out the obvious. Stopped clock Politico gets it right for once.

Thank you! Finally somebody who sees the obvious weakness in praising that partisan hackery just because they say something with which they can agree. Maybe a broken clock is right twice a day but that doesn't mean that it's not broken and therefore useless.

Folks started going to them because the quality of Crooks and Liars has declined tremendously. C&L used to post frequently, broke stories, had a lot of conributors, and posted videos that were informative and interesting. Now C&L posts stories 24 hours to days after the news is all over the blogs and MSM and half th time the video postings do not function.

barkleyg @ 11:

Frederick @ 10:

Some times it takes a village idiot to point out the obvious. Stopped clock Politico gets it right for once.

Broken clocks are right TWICE a day. One more right story, and they will be equal to a broken clock!

Unless they are digital!

Mccain/Lieberman 08

Okay lay down ur' bets.

Politico?

Not on my list of things to look at regularly. Sounds like more inside the beltway wanking.

I guess any new blog site becomes a reliable resource for anyone interested in politics if they show responsible reporting and insightful analysis. The analysis of the viability Hillary Clinton's campaign as largely a media fabrication seems spot on, an important observation, and newsworthy. Evidently the fact that it isn't favorable to Hillary is what gives John Amato pause. Maybe he would be wise to get used to it.

eh...what? talk about the important issues, not this s***

The Real Hussein @ 22:

eh...what? talk about the important issues, not this s***

Okay then the fact the Cons have been out hustling everyone since 01.

Go ahead your floor.

You have on one hand Republicans that are sleazy, immoral, wicked, sinful, crooked, wasteful, uncaring, thieves, killers and plain outright evil, not all of them are all of the above but a lot are, and a lot go along for the ride with the scum.

Then you have a reasonably nice, honest Democrat politician who has a chance to run for the President job, with a nice head of hair for his age and hes proud of it, so the RW media machine goes to town on his haircut and the MSM and some Liberals join in. Pathetic.

At least we have Obama going strong and heading for the WH, IMO Edwards would be a suitable candidate for some position in an Obama Administration, I bet hes in the mood for some payback on the Repugs, lots of stones need lifting and exposing to the light of day.

P.D. @ 23:

Watching and reading so-called experts is a crapshot. Before 2006 elections, Scarbough, Tucker all of them were saying, "Don't worry, They'll never take back the House and Senate." then the Repugs got blown out of the water. I even heard Kate O'Brian state that Santorum would hold on to his seat. What a crock.

who was that moron virulently defending Bear Stearns on TV the tuesday before their friday stock price crash !

Friar Tuck @ 21:

Hail to the Chimp @ 14:

When the quality of Crooks and Liars declined tremendously folks went to other sites.

At least here i have found, one is not slurred names at due to ones own viewpoint when it comes to Hillary or obama.
least yet ive found such. Hence why i left another blog. The hate there was to much, friends became evil and slur words over religion were tossed about like a sack of grain, adding up and up and up. I dont or wont come here to make friends, but at least have my voice heard without a backlash that was wicked and nothing done by the blog owner to stop the infighting in its tracts!

I came here during 2004 after hurrican katrina, i should have stayed. Glad iam back and things here look abit more controlled and less hatefull and simple minded as well.

Danke Crooks & Liars.

late 2007 the Hilbots were busy banning accounts of anti HRC people at DKos under false pretenses.
been banned twice there now, not going back for more of their narrow minded rose tinted view on the world.
Tough if they cant take the truth on news and political matters, they isolate themselves into a box.

I'll consider Politico seriously, along with ABC News, when they start talking seriously about John McCain. So far, he's had a free ride. He is not a maverick (he clearly follows Bush and Cheney) and if he continues to support the killing of US troops in Iraq, he will not be a hero.

A: Its not.

JC @ 9:

I think they started out as the new drudge. I thought the haircut piece was beyond ridiculous.

However, since then they have done some solid reporting. I don't know how much is slanted right in commentary, but a lot of the articles I have seen have been dead on.

hey, weren't they the one biggest factor in taking down rudy giuliani? at first i thought they were just another vast-right wing vehicle, but at this point it seems they are a legit investigative reporting outfit.

ferrofluid @ 26:

You have on one hand Republicans that are sleazy, immoral, wicked, sinful, crooked, wasteful, uncaring, thieves, killers and plain outright evil, not all of them are all of the above but a lot are, and a lot go along for the ride with the scum.

Then you have a reasonably nice, honest Democrat politician who has a chance to run for the President job, with a nice head of hair for his age and hes proud of it, so the RW media machine goes to town on his haircut and the MSM and some Liberals join in. Pathetic.

At least we have Obama going strong and heading for the WH, IMO Edwards would be a suitable candidate for some position in an Obama Administration, I bet hes in the mood for some payback on the Repugs, lots of stones need lifting and exposing to the light of day.

The "Obama Administration"? That's about as likely as the McGovern, Dukakis, Mondale, Gore, Kerry Adminstrations were.

Wishful thinkin.

ferrofluid @ 30:

Friar Tuck @ 21:

Hail to the Chimp @ 14:

When the quality of Crooks and Liars declined tremendously folks went to other sites.

At least here i have found, one is not slurred names at due to ones own viewpoint when it comes to Hillary or obama.
least yet ive found such. Hence why i left another blog. The hate there was to much, friends became evil and slur words over religion were tossed about like a sack of grain, adding up and up and up. I dont or wont come here to make friends, but at least have my voice heard without a backlash that was wicked and nothing done by the blog owner to stop the infighting in its tracts!

I came here during 2004 after hurrican katrina, i should have stayed. Glad iam back and things here look abit more controlled and less hatefull and simple minded as well.

Danke Crooks & Liars.

late 2007 the Hilbots were busy banning accounts of anti HRC people at DKos under false pretenses.
been banned twice there now, not going back for more of their narrow minded rose tinted view on the world.
Tough if they cant take the truth on news and political matters, they isolate themselves into a box.

Some "liberal" sites have gone right apeshiite. I used to listen to Taylor Marsh online. Not since the primaries started. Good grief for an Obama hater. It is beyond just "electioneering" and bordering on complete hate for Obama. But then, she's basically came right out and said to vote for Hillary because she's a woman and no other reason. And the teen cheerleaders swarmed.

JohnnyTYPICAL WHITE PERSON2Bad @ 38:

ferrofluid @ 26:

You have on one hand Republicans that are sleazy, immoral, wicked, sinful, crooked, wasteful, uncaring, thieves, killers and plain outright evil, not all of them are all of the above but a lot are, and a lot go along for the ride with the scum.

Then you have a reasonably nice, honest Democrat politician who has a chance to run for the President job, with a nice head of hair for his age and hes proud of it, so the RW media machine goes to town on his haircut and the MSM and some Liberals join in. Pathetic.

At least we have Obama going strong and heading for the WH, IMO Edwards would be a suitable candidate for some position in an Obama Administration, I bet hes in the mood for some payback on the Repugs, lots of stones need lifting and exposing to the light of day.

The "Obama Administration"? That's about as likely as the McGovern, Dukakis, Mondale, Gore, Kerry Adminstrations were.

Wishful thinkin.

a majority of Americans are and will disagree with that come nov 08.
its time for some realistic modern politics with a return to civil and human rights and change.
300 million Americans deserve and demand equal rights.

JohnnyTYPICAL WHITE PERSON2Bad @ 38:

The "Obama Administration"? That's about as likely as the McGovern, Dukakis, Mondale, Gore, Kerry Adminstrations were.

Wishful thinkin.

its time to consign the Republicans and their 'me and nobody else' policies to the dustbin of history.

In response to another poster on another thread earlier today I linked to the (admittedly off topic) politico story on the fact that clinton hardly has a chance to legitimately get the nomination. I certainly don't consider them the authoritative source for anything. Similarly, I don't consider C&L or any other site the authority for anything.

I read what variety of sources I can find, some regularly (like C&L) and others extremely rarely (like Politico) and with varying degrees of skepticism. But, clock analogies aside, if I think a text is worth linking to or otherwise passing on, I will do so, even if I am not in total agreement with the source on all matters all the time. Referencing a post or article is not the same as uncritically endorsing everything else posted at a certain site or authored by a particular source.

It could have something to do with having the weight of CBS behind them. They also seemed to have enough money to sponsor primary debates before most had even heard of them.

brendan @ 47:

ConcernedCanuck @ 37:

Hail to the Chimp @ 14:

When the quality of Crooks and Liars declined tremendously folks went to other sites.

Huh? Hope THAT is sarcasm.

As a long-time lurker here at C & L, I wouldn't say that the quality has declined. I would say, however, that the quality of the comments have declined and that is very unfortunate. I've always enjoyed the conversations that take place here, but lately they have been ugly and divisive. It seems to be a reflection of the Democratic Party currently.

As far as Politico goes, this was an interesting piece that I read from them (linked to by TPM).

I read that through HuffPost links, or was it realclearpolitics? Can't remember now which one. No matter, interesting article.
After watching a campaign that was a "shoo in" and a lock on the candidacy basically implode, I have to wonder why anyone still supports her. Honestly, I know Obama has question marks. But has he ever tossed his fellow Dems under the bus by saying the opposing party's candidate is a better candidate? I have never in my life seen that before. And not once, but twice.
As for comments on here? Most are very reasonable people that agree to disagree. Some can get downright rude (and I'm in that boat sometimes).

ferrofluid @ 28:

P.D. @ 23:

Watching and reading so-called experts is a crapshot. Before 2006 elections, Scarbough, Tucker all of them were saying, "Don't worry, They'll never take back the House and Senate." then the Repugs got blown out of the water. I even heard Kate O'Brian state that Santorum would hold on to his seat. What a crock.

who was that moron virulently defending Bear Stearns on TV the tuesday before their friday stock price crash !

cramer of cnbc.

brendan @ 47:

As far as Politico goes, this was an interesting piece that I read from them (linked to by TPM).

I agree.

ConcernedCanuck @ 39:

party-of-one @ 20:

I guess any new blog site becomes a reliable resource for anyone interested in politics if they show responsible reporting and insightful analysis. The analysis of the viability Hillary Clinton's campaign as largely a media fabrication seems spot on, an important observation, and newsworthy. Evidently the fact that it isn't favorable to Hillary is what gives John Amato pause. Maybe he would be wise to get used to it.

Why do people STILL come out with these lines? C&L has NEVER endorsed either candidate that I remember. Yet posters STILL come on and point out the Obama bias, or Hillary bias on almost a daily basis. In an earlier thread, I asked if anyone knew the numbers for crack use in the US. Starting to think it is very high.

That's correct. I have not come out and endorsed anyone. I'd rather go after the Republicans and the media when they deserve it. I've received many emails thanking C&L for not taking sides. All are welcome here...I'm also trying to elect more and better Democratic candidates via our Blue America PAC.

I've read and commented on C&L since its beginnings. IMHO John has done a great job by NOT inserting his opinion very much and letting the comments speak for themselves and fight it out in a polite way. And his blog did go through a hellish process to weed out the flames.

I've never heard of the Politico. That might be because I only have time to check out C&L, Think Progress, Firedog Lake, Raw Story, TBogg and Buzzflash. Those are my rounds.

Guess I need to go check out the Politico and see what it's about. Sounds lame.

Right up there with 'Open Left' - don't read either. I did notice during at least one democratic debate constant referral to politico.com.

Love your site. But Politico is an awesome and up to minute site that is a must read for us junkies. I link to it and praise it on my blog often. And the folks there are real journalists that present the news square on. I know some on my (our) side hate to admit that, but it is the truth.

Also, the haircut did not force Edwards from the race. He just ran a poor campaign. And I was one of his backers.

Politico's first mention was by bu$h at a presser.
Something like,

bu$h: Whur ya frum?
Reporter: Politico
bu$h: Poe lit ick co? Poe lit ick co!

Sounded like an inside deal, a setup, like the Gannon/Guckert thing.

People with opinions other than my own, often can make valid points. but winning my trust is an entirely different matter. I'm left of Ghandi and way off the charts against authority. I always wonder what someone is trying to sell me, and why. (But I can also be as fickle as the next guy, especially if caught unawares.)

Plus I have an overriding belief that most people are plain stooopid. You know, how we can all behave like sheep, if we're not careful. So I don't trust anyone that much. I do come here every day, if that says anything.

a better question is why is it so hard to believe that the politico -- or any news outlet of any kind -- can change for the better?

there's little doubt they got off to a rocky start in choosing the drudge strategy. but since that time, they have been critical and insightful across the board. in fact, they are still one of the only 'name brand' outlets to examine the democrat 'tight race' narrative / myth as little more than a ploy by the msm to keep itself busy. (in other words, they criticized the media itself.)

the signal-to-noise ratio on many blogs that started as simply anti-bush is out of whack. like others have noted, i am personally tired of any blog that 'screams' at me. noquarter, which was so notable for its insight into matters of national security, the war and the valerie plame affair, has degenerated into nothing more than a yay-hillary / boo-obama shriekfest; the comments / commenters reflect that level of discourse. (and it's not a matter of support or not for any candidate, but the sheer rancorous volume i find literally repellent.)

is the politico perfect? no. but at least they have stopped shrieking as much as they used to, and have started to add some very insightful, very timely pieces to boot. some blogs, it seems, have gone the exact opposite way.

Real Clear politics is anoother one of these mistakenly "center" sites. If you look at some of the timing with their polls in relation to formulating their averages as well as article selections, the bias shines.