This Week: Krugman Pushes Back Against False Equivalencies
By Nicole Belle Sunday Oct 12, 2008 12:00pm
Finally, someone pushes back against the media's need to create false equivalencies! Nobel Economics Prize shortlister Paul Krugman tries to make a cogent point about how there are those in the Republican Party who simply cannot accept a Democrat governing:
KRUGMAN: This is also…this is not just about McCain, what he did. The fact of the matter is, for a long time, we’ve had a substantial fraction of the Republican base that just does not regard the Democrats governing as legitimate. Remember, the Clinton years, craziness, right? That they were murderers, drug smugglers, and the imminent prospect of what looks like a Democratic victory would drive a lot of these people crazy even if Sarah Palin wasn’t saying these inflammatory things. It’s going to be very ugly after the election.
Only to have Cokie Roberts try to draw the false equivalency of Democrats not accepting the results of the 2000 and 2004 elections:
ROBERTS: On both sides, that’s true. I also think you’ve had a huge number of Democrats who think the Republicans are illegitimate and that was particularly true after the 2000 election and to some degree, after 2004. And so, you really do have, at the core of each party, people who are not ready to accept the verdict of the election.
Um, Cokie? Not the same thing at all. By all standards, Bill Clinton won the elections. The witch hunt that went after him had nothing to do with the legitimacy of his election...they just threw as much mud as they could to see if something would stick, regardless of truth--Vince Foster, Travelgate, Filegate, Whitewater, Gennifer Flowers/Paula Jones/Monica Lewinsky.
The Democrats who view this administration as illegitimate do so because there is significant (and almost wholly media-ignored evidence) that the election was manipulated for George W. Bush. We don't need to make up scandals that go nowhere...we just need to find some backbone in DC to actually investigate those openly before us.
It's unfortunate, however, that Krugman is not given the opportunity to explain why he rejects such false equivalencies...allowing something other than the standard GOP framing out there.
Krugman also raises an important point that I think all of us should bear in mind even after the election. Assuming that trends stay the way they are in the next three weeks and Obama is elected, our job is far from over. It is not inaccurate to say that much of these slings and arrows pointed towards Obama are the foundation for the work the Republican Party will spend the next 4-8 years to de-legitimize an Obama presidency. At its core, this faction of the GOP believes that Obama does not deserve the presidency -- because he is not like them -- and will stop at nothing to bring him down, just as we saw with Clinton. The particulars are different: birth certificate, secret Muslim beliefs, anti-American pastor, consorting with terrorists, and if we're completely honest, the color of his skin as well. But while the specific allegations are different, the tactic is exactly the same.
Login or Register to post comments.
"Politics is the shadow cast on society by big business."
John Dewey
"The United States effectively has a one-party system, the business party, with two factions, Republicans and Democrats."
Noam Chomsky
Cokie has her head so far up her own that she can't see the damage her words inflict. She is a fool
This is a big problem for this country. In order to heal, you have to accept some truth and move on.
These shills, like cokie, are spinning bull shit and trying to paint both parties with equal use of lies and bull shit. Not quite true.
Then we have the likes of bor, vannity, limpballs, ingraham, reagan, etc who preach the hate and spread unsubstantiated rumors so that we have a HUGE portion of our society believing that they are going to be having a Muslim-terrorist president.
Utter bull shit!!
Way to head off any serious discussion, Cokie.
I believe "off with his head" was an exclamation from an M/P supporter this week.
Lots of stuff like that at O/B rallies this week, right Cokie?
If the repukes do something horrible, immediately bring up some inconsequential thing the democrats did, in order to protect your corporate employers.
These cretins should be put in jail for the damage they have done to this country.
But I still say we need much more Mike Malloy on the Teevee..
Love Mike Malloy.
cokie=partisan Paul=think
Republicans MAY NOT criticize President Obama AT ALL for anything, for the reasons I make clear below in an editorial letter:
"As we all know, every tragic event from the past eight years of George W. Bush's disastrous tenure -- from 9/11 to the current financial crisis -- was caused by the failed previous presidency of Bill Clinton. Republicans have explained this very clearly.
Good to know then that any disasters befalling us under the upcoming eight-year Obama presidency will be attributed by Republicans to the monumental failures of George W. Bush.
President Obama will be off-limits to Republican criticism for another reason, too. It is unpatriotic -- if not treasonable, they have repeatedly told us -- to criticize a commander-in-chief during a time of war, no matter how devastating and unconstitutional his actions may be.
For these reasons alone we must elect Barack Obama president. Eight years of blissful silence from Republicans would help tremendously as we begin our long recovery from the ruinous Bush -- sorry -- Clinton presidency."
Well,
Not quite, everthing bad has been blamed on Clinton by the Republicans.
IF the Republicans were "smart", they would keep blaming Clinton for at least 2 years into Obama's Presidency.
That would make them "appear more credible" than blaming Obama right away, considering Bush presided during 911 and the financial meltdown (but, remember, those were Clinton's fault, NOT Bush's).
Sorry, but your logical argument falls on deaf Republican ears.
Peace.
Pardon me for asking, but aren't they already blaming the not yet elected Obama with this financial meltdown and voter fraud? Why wait? Once president Obama is in the Oval Office, they're ratchet it up to high gear.
She's such a fucking scumbag.
"The particulars are different: birth certificate, secret Muslim beliefs, anti-American pastor, consorting with terrorists, and if we're completely honest, the color of his skin as well. But while the specific allegations are different, the tactic is exactly the same."
And knowing as we do that these contrived issues are being driven by the right wingnut media don't think for one minute that they are more concerned with the issues than they are their future talking points to provide their employment and programming. i remember that they built their followings not by talking about clinton/democraatic policies, but by personal and imagined scandal attacks. it is not "country first" it is "jobs and ratings first" for the overpaid wingnut minority.
Nicole,
I fully agree with the last paragraph of your post. With McCain moving toward near certain defeat, the Republican strategy is shifting to prepare for 2012. The goal is to do all it can to make it difficult or impossible for Obama to govern the country over the next four years. Of course, we are well on our way with the economy tanking and inconceivable debts brought on by eight years of wars, tax cuts and Republican mismanagement. But if they can add racism and various character smears to the mix it will make Obama's job that much more difficult.
Once Obama wins, the left, progressives, sane conservatives and any other patriotic American(TM) who wants to see the country recover from the last eight years, will need to come together to reject the ugliness that McCain/Palin have stirred up.
...can be found here. (John Walcott, McClatchy Washington Bureau Chief.)
Favorite lines:
"Relying on The Times, or McClatchy or any other news source, for all the truth is dumb, but it's infinitely preferable to the pernicious philosophical notions that there is no such thing as truth, that truth is relative, or that, as some journalists seem to believe, it can be found midway between the two opposing poles of any argument...Does the truth lie halfway between say, slavery and abolition, or between segregation and civil rights, or between communism and democracy? If you quote Dietrich Bonhoeffer or Winston Churchill, in other words, must you then give equal time and credence to Hitler and Joseph Goebbels? If you write an article that's critical of John McCain, are you then obligated to devote an identical number of words to criticism of Barack Obama, and vice versa?"
and the Fairness Doctrine, plus regulation of the cable & airwaves is necessary. Efforts to reinstate the FD will cause the Cons to scream "Censorship!" but these are PUBLICLY owned.
Investors may have gotten the communications started, but it is the consumers that have provided the most money for their success. It is time for the corporations to give back to the country.
I sincerely hope you are not holdng your breath until that occcurs!
Gawd, thanks for reminding me. I was turning blue.
If there isn't a criminal investigation of the Bush crime family launched within 30 days of the inauguration, it won't matter what Obama does as president, the people will know they've been had .
Just like South Africa, we should have a truth and reconciliation council. Until Bushco sits in front of that council, they should not be allowed to participate or profit from society. Decency demands it.
After CR goes off on one of her increasingly irrelevant and incorrect "setting the record straight" speeches, Krugman simply says "I reject that equivalence." CR ignobly ingnores him and continues looking straight ahead until George pulls her fat out of the fire.
remember that guy with the monkey, who when the cameras turned on him he tried to hid the fact that he is a fuckin racist pos?
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Palin_supporter...
people on this site were giving him kudos for knowing what he was doing was wrong
horseshit...
plaster this man's picture all over america
find out his name
destroy his life
It's so nice to revisit the 14th century!
For fear of sounding like I've been hiding in a cave (actually I think McCain has my address)... I have not seen the negativity the press keeps describing as "both sides". I have not been to any rallies since I don't think Rick Perry will allow any Obama rallies in the state (J/K), or I missed any that occurred in my area since Ike hit, and I don't watch 24/7 news pundits rehash the clips and out-takes of who said (OMG) what at the rallies. I have seen the clips of the Palin comments AT the rallies for McCain, I have seen the clips of the two presidential candidates and the recent Biden remarks on not needing to be lectured...... The difference in tone between both parties is very evident. One is questioning the validity of the policies.... the other is questioning the validity of the person. Guess which is which. The republican party sends out storm troopers to incite the crowds into distrusting the Obama candidacy by questioning his values, morals, religion, ethics, patriotism, citizenry, race, and tag the relevance with "America has a right to know what his values are". McCain's camp even uses his wife to question Obama's vote not to fund the troops.... you know... the vote that sent a cold chill down her back??? Where did she get chilly when her husband also voted NO... And then the foolish woman questions/blames the troops diagnosed with PTSD... (that hasn't picked up much in the MSM has it). The bald face lying, denying anything and everything, including disregarding actual video footage that proves they are lying.... It not only beats all... it goes back every 10 minutes and slaps me again and again at the depths that party will go to in order to be in power!!! McCain seemed to have found religion when he corrected the rally members, even getting booed.... but he was out there the next day with the same redundant crap about Ayers. Wed. should be interesting. We will all see just what McCain cares about, his integrity, and his soul. Can we please cancel the next 2 weeks and just get this thing over!!?? I ready for the final count and to start watching bush start packing!!!!
This is the Repubs way of placing the poison pill. If they can't have unadulterated power, noone else will either.... which would be a good thing... if it didn't rely on hate and fear.
You obviously live in Texas, and we've been written off as a "red" state, so we're spared some of the more disgusting McCain ads (still have those goofy Cornyn ones, though). There are a lot of McCain/Palin signs up in my neighborhood (but only in the last 2 weeks and except for local races it's usually only republicans who put up signs for elections anyway), but there are a helluva lot more Obama or Obama/Biden bumperstickers around. It's much easier to pull up a lawn sign than take a bumper sticker off--and they know if they put on a McCain sticker it would come off on 11/5. Buck up--early voting starts soon!
Cokie Roberts just doesn't want to worry her silly little head that she might be off any Washington Cocktail Party lists. Cokie implies the fact that voting machine manipulation and orchestrated long minority voter lines can be equated to accusations of murder and of consorting with terrorists, because to Cokie, they are just equal examples of stubborn party loyalists.
That reasoning, Cokie, is unequivocally and patently ridiculous. The former are examples of actual material evidence that has been substantiated by independent sources. The later are examples of pure Repub nut-job propaganda, and have been time-and-time again, refuted by independent sources.
Cokie Roberts is just a worn out shrill for the Washington consensus and the Corporate Media Elite.
Oh hey, she's a punk too.
Whether tis nobler in the mind...
Cokie has a short memory. Regarding any misgivings over Bush's election in 2000, all had disappeared by Oct. 2001. Those on the left, such as myself, did not approve necessarily of Bush's actions as president, but we did accept him as being president.
Bush's 90% approval during late 2001 belies Cokie's words.
I NEVER accepted him. I knew he was a stupid punk liar, killer and thief from way back, and that he was INSTALLED in the presidency by his crime family.
The theft was repeated in 2004.
You are 100% correct!!!
I was feverishly looking for product support jobs in Germany, Spain and Canada in 2004 and after the Supreme Court completely failed it's responsibillty in 2001 I was henceforth driven bug-FUCK! by what continued to transpire.. You were easily impressed?
pv2k
I have to echo BigIslandDave's sentiments. I never accepted Bush as a legitimate president. It had nothing to do with his views. It had to do with the illegitimate manner in which he ascended to the presidency. The newsish shows said to get over it. I never did. I never will.
Snortin' Cokie's words are nonsense to begin with, but his approval rating after 9/11 had more to do with the fact that the country wanted to come together as one than it did with forgiving and forgetting the illegitimacy of Bush's installment. It was simply a fact that he was the president, and in an attack, we all wanted desperately to unite as Americans.
In true Bushevik fashion, he squandered that ubiquitous sentiment as well.
I have never accpeted Bush as a legitimate president. I still don't. I never will.
Karen is absolutely right, the 90% figure was Americans uniting as they felt under attack. Nothing more. It was not they accepted Bush suddenly. They united as Americans. Then Bush drove the coutry back to blue and red states, 50.1 (to Cheney, a clear mandate to use torture and conquer the world)/49.9, or something like that.
Bush also squandered a wonderful opportunity to tap into the world's good will post-attack. Instead, now 5,500,000,000 people hate your guts. (Strong, I know, but... there it is.)
What is Roberts doing on TV? If I had been sneering at Biden about his use of "Bosniak", when it was clear from my blathering that I just didn't know the difference between Bosniaks and Bosnians, I'd be too embarrassed ever to get in front of a camera again. And I'm just some blog blatherer, not a professional journalist who is expected to have at least the first clue about world issues.
"Off with Cokie's head"? or "Cokie is a liar terrorist!". Well maybe like her other side of the coin quip, those are just a little extreme. I'd still like to bitch slap her for her absolutely ridiculous comparisons! One good, sound slap! (sexism not included*)
Paul Krugman was for the bailout before he was against it... 'nuff said.
Honestly, does anyone really know what's going on??? Perhaps those that executed this financial attack, but few others.
The world's leaders have been meeting for days, and all I hear is a deafening SILENCE.
My gut is against the bailout, and the other shenanigans they seem to be tacking on now, ad hoc; willy-nilly.
What's your answer to the problem Dateline?
He was for an effective bailout, not the one we got.
"The victory would send Barack Obama to the White House and give him larger Democratic majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate — and perhaps a filibuster-proof margin there.
That could mark a historic realignment of the country's politics on a scale with 1932 or 1980, when the out party was given power it held for a generation, and used it to transform government's role in American society."
Bush marks the end of Reagan style conservatism. Obama will be the dawn of progressive politics in America like we haven't seen since FDR.
Here is the original link of that quote.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20081012/pl...
ironicly, it's the tactics that are different, but the strategy that is the same.
funny to me..
that you can barely hear Krugman say "I reject the equivalence."
When he makes his comment originally (in this clip), you can see that she's exactly the type he's talking about, so she's thinking of how to negate his accurate point. Kudos to Paul Krugman for not letting it stand.
who will really push back against this type of crap. Why is that so hard to find? No offense to Krugman, but he hardly "pushed back." I had to rewind three times just to hear him say he rejected the equivalence. And then he himself said something like "but that's another discussion" or "we can discuss that later." Who is out there who will go on these shows and say "Cokie, you fool, there are important and vital differences between these two things & they are not comparable. And the media does a huge disservice to the TRUTH when it tried to present them as equal. Everything in politics is not equal between the two sides. Sometimes one side is right and the other is wrong."
Please don't put the Monica Lewinsky garbage in there like it was nothing. Bill Clinton put his slanted c**k above everything else in what he did - including his wife and family let alone the nation. You want to have affairs? You wanna play hide the cigar? Fine. But wait a few years until your real responsibilities are over with and the only people you hurt are those in your immediate family. Doing what he did at the very LEAST (if caught) would have been a major distraction as the leader of the so-called free world and he knew that risk (I'm sure it helped him to "completion"). Clinton was wrong - morally and occupationally. One only need to look at this action (and how many more WEREN'T potentially uncovered?) to see where Clinton's priorities lay - himself and himself only.
A completely selfish act which could have possibly put the nation at danger (whether the Pugs were right or wrong in what they tried to get him on). He knew the risks, he knew the media and he knew the appetite of the hoi polloi reading/watching the news (i.e. gossip-voyeurs). He took that risk and got his rocks off. Endangering the nation for a 30 second "high". To me? An apt summary of politicians nowadays - all self and nothing for the people to whom they are supposed to be responsible (held accountable).
Clinton should never be forgiven for that lapse in judgment in terms of his Presidency. This is the most important position in the United States of America and yet the liberal folk out there seem to say "What's the big deal?", "What a witch hunt!". Oy Vey! Effin Pshaw. Nonsense. The ass couldn't even wait until his term ended to continue his escapades.
One big playground for one big ego. Self over the whole. Self over the whole.
And don't even get me started on the shame of Rwanda or the former Yugo.
Seriously.
How did a BJ jeopardise our national security? It may have been wrong, but it certainly was overplayed by the republicans and the media..
Krugman is talking about how Repugnants refuse to acknowledge legitimate results that put Dems in office; Dems refuse only to acknowledge illegitimate elections that Bush stole. Some repubs are already starting to say that if Obama wins, it was stolen (yeah, all the pollsters are just making shit up.
Say what you want about Clinton's mistakes, he was elected fair and square, and frankly, the sex issue, which has nothing to do with how he governed, was brought up by these rabid anti-democrats who couldn't stand the fact that a democrat beat them.
That's the point, Brando.
I didn't miss the point at all. I was responding to the paragraph and the "true or not" nonsense. You missed MY point in making excuses. The sex issue had a lot to do with how he governed. Again, take a breath and re-read.
That's the point ronnyg.
But it did have a lot to do with how he was viewed by the media. I think he governed mostly independent of how the media viewed him. I am not making excuses for his libido and believe if he had been more responsible, Gore would have been elected with millions more votes than Bush.
Lessee....that would include JFK, LBJ, Eisenhower, Roosevelt, Jefferson and that's just off the top of my head.
Also completely out of the running: Giuliani, Gingrich, Fred Thompson, John Edwards, and JOHN MCCAIN, Martin Luther King, the list is endless. Power is an aphrodisiac and there was a time that we didn't really care about our President's private dealings.
Brando, please comment now on Bush's ego. Would you? I'd like your fair and balanced opinion.
Why you are so interested in others sex activity is beyond me. Didn’t god give you your own life to lead? Bill Clinton turned down more sex than a hundred men ever had. He was the most powerful man in the world. 99% of all fertile women, in his presence, unconsciously wanted his baby juice. He slipped up. What's the big deal - in the big picture? Why do you value this incident over the overwhelming god the man had done for this country. Nobody's perfect, sweetheart.
I'm guessing from your judgmental attitude that you must be a perfect human in every way.
How's that going for you?
Cokie Roberts says when Bush stole the election(s) is just a Democratic tit for tat? She must be on more drugs than her name suggests.
Why is Cokie dressed like the commander of an Imperial Death Star?
Too. Damn. Funny!
Krugman's slaming the Republicans almost had her in the floor grasping for breath as if Darth Cheney were choking her from afar.
I was wondering when someone would notice this. Is their part of their normal WARdrobe? (emphasis added)
Nicole, I don't think that Krugman is really talking about the validity of elections. He's saying that a large percentage of the political right believe that ANY liberal or moderate American government is illegitimate, regardless of how the election was conducted or the margin of victory. This is the crowd that Palin is speaking to when she implies that Obama is something other than an American.
These are the people who think they OWN the flag, and that they OWN 9-11. A few years ago, Jon Stewart ran a piece about a lady who was outraged because of something or other that liberals had done. Why was she outraged? Because it was done on a Tuesday, and 9-11 was on a Tuesday. These people OWN Tuesday as well - and the rest of us just don't get it. Of course Obama's 'lipstick on a pig' remark was aimed at Sarah Palin, for wasn't Palin's 'pitbull in lipstick' line the first time that any of us had ever heard of 'lipstick'? Didn't Sarah herself invent lipstick? The far-right believes that it OWNS the word 'lipstick' just as it OWNS patriotism, the U.S. military, Jesus, morality, our history and the colors red, white and blue.
I thought that Bush stole the election in 2000, but I also know enough to know that an election that ends that close is going to be stolen by one side or another: they were just better at it than we were. Watch the movie 'Recount': James Baker just out-maneuvered the Gore people. I was upset by what happened in 2000, but I immediately began thinking about 2004 - as did almost all Democrats.
Now imagine if Gore had pulled out a win from the Florida Recount. I have no doubt that the first day that Congress was in session in 2001 would be the same day that Tom DeLay would initiate impeachment proceedings against Gore. On what charges? On whatever they could think of or make up, but basically the charge of just being a Democratic President. Forget Lewinsky, Clinton was impeached for BEING a Democrat, just as Gray Davis was recalled in California for being a Democratic Governor. Conservatives were gathering the signatures to recall Davis even as he was defeating a conservative Republican and earning re-election - that should say it all.
joeedugan
The point of the post is that Cokie Roberts somehow equates those who think all liberals mark and illegitimate presence in government and those who believe George Bush did not legitimately win his election.
Of course Krugman was not talking about the stolen election. But Cokie Roberts was.
I thought that Bush stole the election in 2000, but I also know enough to know that an election that ends that close is going to be stolen by one side or another: they were just better at it than we were.
Come on now. Just because you got burgled doesn't mean you're a burglar. Just because a lot of burglaries occur doesn't mean we're all burglars at heart.
I agree that the Gore folks were tactically inept, but I see no reason to think they were equally likely to try to steal the election. If you have additional information, please share it.
I accepted Reagan's election in disbelief - an actor? I accepted Bush Sr. election in disgust see willie horton. Clinton was elected convincingly and they attacked him because they hated him or were greedy and they are bullys and thugs - that's the difference. Bush jr was elected and no I did not fully accept it because he lost. Bush jr won his second and I accepted it with fear which has been born out beyond my feeble imagination.
signed "core" liberal
Any sort of re-organizing of the American political scene in the event of an Obama victory will require us citizens to continue to play an active role. I see recapturing the White House as a start, not an end unto itself. The morons in the media won't give Obama much of a honeymoon at all, and the a.m. radio hate mongers are already doing whatever they can to question the legitimacy of an Obama administration.
Often, the natural tendency of liberals seems to be to pick apart the policies and programs of Democrats who tend to be more pragmatic and less idealistic. Maybe after four or eight years of Democratic control of both the White House and Congress, that sort of thing is acceptable. However, if Obama wins, every rightwing crackpot and symp in America will begin screaming at the top of their lungs. What we need to do is question their own legitimacy as a side dish to the main course of us getting America heading in the right direction.
One thing we need to do, in my opinion, is to do whatever we can to taint Palin as a loser and a criminal, should Obama win. Contrary to the Nixon situation, we need to keep kicking Palin around as much as possible so that her brand is irreparably sullied.
The fact that she has had a national stage to display herself upon is a real tragedy. She should be treated like David Duke. People who care about progressive issues should supply the material but, her own party should be the one to renounce her. Until Palin's positions are demonstrated to be so far outside of the mainstream individual Republican's position, she will continue to be a major voice in their party.
She looked like an uptight conservative old windbag 20 years ago back when she was young. Who does she think she is sitting there with her top button buttoned, Maggie Thatcher?
Cokie Roberts will lose here meme when we indict Kathering Harris and Kenneth Blackwell for their involvement in rigging Florida and Ohio both in 2000 and 2004.
But here's something even more interesting: Ten top newspapers endorse Obama.
Finally, I believe people can see the dire differences between these two men and what they stand for and how they conduct themsleves in public. Never was it made any clearer than watching the near-riots precisely caused and incited by Sarah Palin and John McCain this past week on the trail. Even people in their bases are becoming frightened of these two radical nutjobs.
When you can't feel safe at a public event DUE TO THE INCITEMENT TO VIOLENCE COMING DIRECTLY FROM THE STAGE OF THE EVENT, you know it's time to run for cover. Their events have become "terror incitement rallies".
If this is how they would govern, they can kiss this election good-bye. And what's even more illustrative of how little respect McCain has at this point - even from his own base - was when he finally called for some decency, some civility from his audience. What did they do to him? They booed him. Folks, this tell us immediately that John McCain was not able to control his own base. What the hell would he do if it involved people who don't exactly think much of him? How would he handle a real public american crisis? I think we saw it, sadly, this week by his impotent and fully clueless reaction to having his own people not respect him enough to listen to his wishes.
McCain is a very old man whose carcinoma is now affecting his brain. He is flanked by an ethically-challenged, totally inept, inexperienced woman who can't control her own family and her Governorship in Alaska - no less this country. When McCain dies, then what? We have Palin, this serial abuser of power, to run this country?
Just watch some of her interviews if you want to really have nightmares tonight...just watch the total idiocy of her responses. Maybe we can all fly "up into the airspace where Putin rears his head"??
Rick Davis who has ties to Oleg Deripaska, one of Russia's most ruthless oligarchs might know. Perhaps secessionist sarah can ask his advice?
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/...
We all know now this truth: Palin is Bush in Drag and John McCain is an exact clone of George W. Bush.
Actally, Sarah Palin even makes George Bush look somewhat intelligent and that's really stretching things.
"Both Party's do it", "They're both responsible" and "They're both just as bad" has been an historically inaccurate observation that has helped Republicans narrowly win some of the most critical elections of our time.
I can't believe I heard Alec Baldwin...ALEC BALDWIN...pulling that one out of his ass on Real Time with Bill Maher a couple of weeks ago when he repeated a Republican lie/spin by inaccurately blaming Barney Frank for preventing the Republican controlled Congress of 1995-2006 from tightening regulation on Fannie/Freddie.
Naturally, one of the most notorious "Both Partys are just as bad" election result contributors, Bill Maher, joined in with that wildy inaccurate observation about "both Partys" and they all had a wonderful time.
So...guess which video clip from the Bill Maher show wound up on Bill O'Reilly's Faux News Channel Comedy Show as a testimonial to Bill-O's sound judgement on these matters of "equality" in disastrous results? You guessed it; Bill Maher and ALEC BALDWIN whooping it up about how it really doesn't matter which Party is in control because "Both Partys are just as bad"!
Americans generally also do that when talking about issues of military attack and invasion, saying both the Vietnamese and the Americans were equally culpable for the US attack on Vietnam, that both the Iraqis and the Americans are equally culpable for the 1991-present attack on Iraq, and of course that both Israelis and Palestinians are equally culpable in the continued Israeli dispossession of and attacks on Palestinians. In all those cases, one side and one side only is the aggressor, with the aggressor's casualties far lower than those of the other side, yet the misrepresentation persists.
.
Frau Farbissina
Are the Cokie Roberts of the world duplicitous, or just dumb? Do they know they are using rancid rationales, or do they honestly not understand the notion of false equivalencies?
One thing that the blogistan has proved is that there are thousands of us commoners in America who have a better grasp of political reality than pundits such as Roberts and David Broder and Howard Kurtz--just read the comments posted on columns by the latter two on the WaPo website.
The media live in their own peculiar bubble.
She's a corpoRat fellation specialist. She has NO throat muscles, and swallows everything that lands in her mouth. Interesting that shew got to toss out the false equivalency AFTER PK had made his apt and apposite point.
Cokie's always been a corpoRat cum guzzler. Her acclaim derives mainly from her being able to guzzle CorpoRat more corpoRat cum more gracefully than anyone previously in her position.
The outfit Cokie's wearing looks better with the hat in white
http://images.allmoviephoto.com/2002_Austin_P...
Cokie Roberts looked like a toss-up of either a totally "dried up old crone" or a "human sphincter Muscle. Take your pick.
Has Cokie Roberts always been a right-wing apologist? If not, when did this happen? I (think I) remember her being perfectly reasonable at one point in her punditry career. Or did I dream that up?
To my mind, Clinton's impeachment was the first time that I observed Cokie clearly siding with the right. She seemed to take Bill Clinton's misbehavior extremely personally, though whether it was as a wife, a mother or a Boggs (being the daughter of Congressional 'Royalty' she may see herself as a guardian of Capitol - and American - morality) is something of which I can only speculate.
They'll try to associate him with drugs, prostitutes, and financial mismanagement, like they do with black mayors. And they'll fabricate and propagate smears and probably plant evidence to make their lies look true, like cops do to blacks.
A real equivalent of Democrats doing what Republicans are doing now would be if Democrats were going around implying that John McCain might be a communist sympathizer because he was a POW in Vietnam.
"Who is the "real" John McCain? How do we know what his relationship with his captors was all those years ago?"
Imagine if Joe Biden were going around saying shit like that?
"What Will You Do If The Election Is Stolen?".
You should read the comments only if you have not eaten recently. Disgusting doesn't put a patch on it...
Reagan was elected with similar circumstances: Our economy was doing poorly, Americans were being held hostage in the Middle East, and energy policy was being reconsidered. Ronald Reagan came to power claiming that Government was bad, unfair and non productive. People ate it up and elected him. Corporate America took hold and began dismantling government while building right wing conservative, corporate funded think tanks. Corporate/Republicanism (CR) functions for one singular purpose: maximize profits.
When Clinton was President, he was willing to work within CR's constraints and yet was able to help improve the lives of millions of Americans. CR sought Clinton's ouster because they saw this redistribution as stolen profit that had to be recovered.
CR is comprised of an imbalanced blending of people with similar concerns and life events with corporate egocentricity. Until the individuals that comprise the bulk of this voracious animal see themselves as having similar goals and aspirations and agree that the profits should not float disproportionately to those in charge, we will continue to see the erosion of the middle class. I believe that Barack Obama feels that way and that John McCain doesn't. Obama wants America to do better, McCain wants CR to have more profits.
...the souless Beltway Boy boys yesterday, trying to draw equivalences between what the McCain-Palin campaign is doing and what the Obama-Biden ticket is doing--in terms of negative campaigning. THEY ARE THE SAME. Sure. Sure. And the color of the sky in BB world is what?
... why isn't he blaming Clinton's penis?
*
She's the biggest throat poker of them all.
There is no equivalent! George Bush received less votes than Al Gore in 2000. No wonder the Democrats think it is not legitimate, especially after all the shenanigans that went on in Florida. Republicans had a witch hunt for Clinton. There has been no witch hunt for Bush, though, there should be.
Send your thanks to Nancy and Harry for not doing the people's job (snark)
There was a time when reporters at least faked objectivity, those time have gone.
There was a time when reporters did their homework, formulated opinions based on facts and let the facts support their opinions.
There was a time when reporters informed the public of the facts and let people decide for themselves, those times are gone.
In the face over an array of facts, certain reporters continue to express opinions that are clearly biased which helps no one.
The failure of reporters to continue to remind people who writes and passes laws, the power and limitations of the President and who is truly responsible and accountable for situations, does not serve the press, the public or America.
OK, my family is not rich, but has always been "connected" enough to these conservative cricles, the kind where I have no doubt Cokie hangs. I have heard the grown-ups chatting in privileged livimg rooms in privileged neighbourhoods. The women sound like mouthpieces for their rich, white, banker husbands, and repeat everything their racist husbands say in Executive boardrooms. When I listen to her, it makes my skin crawl. They have a way of sounding reasonable, while spewing filth.
In any other country but ours, what happened in FL in 2000 and OH in 2004 would have brought thousands of people into the streets calling for an overthrow of the elected regime. And, to be fair, in my lifetime I have no doubt that the 1960 election was stolen in IL and TX by JFK, not that he was not a better President than Nixon later was. Nixon deserves credit for not contesting that election, just as Al Gore deserves credit, and John Kerry deserves credit for putting their country first.
The best we can do this year is hope that someone wins by landslide because the doubts on legitimacy are not what we need in a time of crisis at home and abroad.
Or does that outfit Cokie is wearing make her look like a female guard at the gulag?
She thought about wearing camo but the Imperial olive green was a a compromise--the camo would have been over the top even for a repub.
You forgot one of the reichwing's Clinton "scandals," the original Troopergate. Two troopers claimed to have escorted Paula Jones to Clinton's hotel room, but did not enter. So they really had no idea of what passed. Later one of them admitted lying in telling the story, because Richard Mellon Scaife was giving the substantial cheques for their story.
)O(
The Repubs should clean their own doorstep first before they take on someone else's. They are barren of any policies that appeal to the broader populace. They are aging white people.
Why is Cokie wearing a Mao suit?
Does she and Kim Jong II go to the same tailor?
)O(
This is the same Cokie Roberts who thinks that it's elitist for Obama to spend his vacation visiting his friends and his grandmother, but it's NOT elitist to vacation at Myrtle Beach with other affluent people.
Finally, reality is allowed on the national news programs. I am so glad statements about the trash the Republican party has been shoveling for the longest time is being laid out in a nice little pile so that even the Republicans can deal with the stink. I remember when Kenneth Starr, wonder boy with a cigar, was doing everything he could to crack the Clinton whitehouse. And look it where it got us. Kenneth's little report was so vile they had to take it out of the public shelves in libraries. The man has issues with sex. Perhaps psychotherapy is in order.
Oh and Cokie, perhaps you should go back and study the elections. I still feel pain in my heart for the damage done to all those people who stood in the rain, who took off work when they could not afford it, who stood when they could not stand, FOR HOURS only to be told they were in the wrong polling place. Oh the mendacity. It was disgraceful.
Surely no one is surprised by anything she says? She's incapable of honesty and integrity. Or patriotism. But then neither is stephanopolous, or he'd make sure that someone as dishonest as her, didn't have a platform on the show.
We already put up with 8 years of clinton attacks and now 8 years of bush criminal activities so now the dark side is going to start with their shit again if obama wins. The only ones again to suffer will be we the people. So how about if we the people take over? No I mean what if we the people really TAKE OVER? They talk about weathermen what if we bring them back? I would love nothing better. You fucks are getting to damn arrogant you think you have nothing to be afraid of are you sure will you bet your life on it. How about a good ole civil war. How about burning the whole house down. Your either with us or against us. Sound familiar?
Looks like her assimilation into the BORG is almost complete.
Resistance is Senile
Tell Cokie that after the 2000 election the reason most Democrats were "not ready to accept" the ruling of the SUPREME COURT in CHOOSING OUR PRESIDENT
is because IT IS AN UNLAWFUL WAY TO SEAT A PRESIDENT.
ALL WE WANTED WAS TO COUNT THE VOTES!!!!!!
If they would have counted them AL GORE would be president
and Wall Street would NOT BE BROKE.
I don't think Cokie's comments were that unforgivable. But the Chomsky quote is right on- we have one business party with 2 factions (Dem and Repub). Business has captured almost all governmental and other power , dictating the national agenda and solutions to that agenda via the mass media. We don't even get 3rd party representation on the stage of political debate. The interests of most people, and the natural world, get further marginalized by a hyper-active capitalism that takes no prisoners. But we know that. How to fix it ?
There has to be a Congress not beholden to corporate power, and there are many good proposals on reducing undue influence. But how to get them implemented ?
Beats me. Maybe it takes a collapse- economic, environmental, whatever, to loosen the existing reins of power. One thing you don't hear is how McCain or Obama are going to curb presidential power. At least, I haven't heard that.
regardless of who wins, there will be even more polarization and division in this country.
if obama gets in, a major effort will be needed to provide security for him, and to prevent a resurgence of reich wing domestic terrorism.
i think this country may well be coming apart economically, militarily, politically, constitutionally, and socially.
every time i start to get optimistic, right wing pin head captures the news with some inflammatory behavior.
Every single recount proved that Bush won the 2000 election. Even the one conducted by the NY Times.
BTW, Obama really does have ties to Ayers. I don't believe he agrees with the radical, but he is lying about his ties. And, his pastor is a radical. Facts are facts.
In the aftermath of the election, the first independent recount was conducted by The Miami Herald and USA Today. Counting only "undervotes" (when the vote is not detected by machine), and not considering "overvotes" (when a ballot ends up with more than one indication of a vote, for example both a punch-out and hand-written name, even if both indicating the same candidate)[35] Bush would have won in all legally requested recount scenarios. If overvotes where the intent of the voter was clear were counted, using any consistent standard for 'clear intent of the voter', Gore would have won. This was not requested by either side at the time; the independent recount therefore led to a greater awareness of the issue of 'overvotes'.
Under the recount rules initially requested by Gore, Bush would have won, and under the rules requested by Bush, Gore would have won.[36]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_pr...
[edit]
You know, I have ties to mass murderers too, John Wayne Gacy worked in Chicago and I have been to Chicago as well. So I must be "tied" to mass murders
No... there was only one recount in Florida, and Gore was only 200 some odd votes behind Bush when the Supreme Court stepped in an shut down the process for fear of compromising the Constitution. The came in like a thief in the night and stole it for Bush, and their explanation was "there was not enough time left."
Read up!
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/politics/recount/
New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, CNN and AP. It determined that George W. Bush still would have won under either legally possible recount scenario which could have occurred:
Cokie, aka Cookey, Roberts shows her extreme right-wing views once again. Sure, the Democrats demonize the Republicans the same way and to the same extent as the Republicans demonize us.
If you watched the Democratic National Convention, you would have seen that the Democratic speakers criticized the Republicans based on policy and actual failures resulting from bad policies, like Iraq, Katrina, the economy, etc. If you watched the Republican National Convention, you would hear the speakers say that the Democrats are America-hating terrorists who also hate God, marriage, and babies.
Ms. Roberts thinks that this kind of hatred exists in both parties so everything is on par. But reality indicates that the hatred belongs almost exclusively on the Republican side of the aisle.
Whatever... I watched the video... what's the big deal?
So, half the nation is not going to let it go after the election... regardless of what the outcome is... so what? Is this any different than any other election? Are people afraid of what black people might do if OB doesn't ge in?? Typical racist mentality.
Same goes for Mccain... we may see some minor skurmishes and stupid stunts in the news afterwards, but this nation will move on. The sun will rise... and the nation will heal and learn to get along.. People always assume that the sky will fall, but this is never the case. This nation is great for many reasons, and the fact a black man made it this far in a presidential campaign speaks volumes. I voted for Obama already, because I think he is more educated and more qualified to lead the nation out of this crisis we are in, because he has generated so much support under him to form a solid base that will follow him anywhere... this is a good thing, and it's what you need in ordert o implement change. But will I be surprised, or mad if he doesn't get elected... no. Another problem we need to look at in future elections is the role of religion in politics. I want a president who is agnostic, and does not try to curry favor from any one religious group, which seemingly shuts out any other equally respectable religious groups. This is one of the problems with choosing one person to represent ALL Americans... it's a tough choice, and this year is no exception for many people. It was easy for me, but I can see where it would be tough for other people who live in different cultural areas around the country.
A friend of mine is losing their house. On November 3 it becomes official and she and her husband get to vote on November 4. Don't tell them that life goes on and the sun comes up tomorrow. Don't insult the millions of Americans who have lost everything because of Bushco's misguided policies.
We shouldn't "let it go". We have to take a stand and that is what this election is all about. If Obama doesn't win the election, then we have to continue to fight and protest on behalf of a better America where all of us can be proud of a country that treats all of its citizens equally.
I'm sorry for your friend's condition...
but, are you inciting the same sort of violence that the Mccain campaign is now backing away from? Are you suggesting that... dare I say it... another Civil War is necessary? I don't think so.
Think of the logistics.. I would agree that Bush hijacked us and our economy, and misused vulnerable people in an irresponsible way, but to suggest that I meant to "insult the millions of Americans who have lost everything because of Bushco's misguided policies"... I think your argument is rather tenuous. If every American has the same pessimistic vision as you, then I'd get a little worried... or is that what Bush wants? I'd like to think that we are not heading toward a self-fulfilling prophecy of "Idiocracy." If we were to learn anything from the hippie revolution, it would have been how to organize and avoid complacency.. I would agree with you there.
By the way... don't worry.. I think Obama is a lock.
What you said was insulting to many who have been victimized by Bushco. In effect you were implying, "just get over it." Sound familiar? I think we are both looking for the same result, but I am not so laissez faire to assume that if McCain wins, all will be right with our country. Before Bush's took the White House again in 2004, I confided my anxieties to my wife that if he were to be President again, our three children would be left with a huge financial debt. She told me she had more faith in our country, but she now admits she was wrong and I think millions of people agree with her. So, I am not so complacent that another four (?eight) years of Corporate driven policy will benefit the majority of Americans. If others are content with that notion then we have more problems than I imagined.
There's no doubt we could be sliding into a slippery slope of "Idiocracy" where Darwinian law applies, and stupidity becomes an enculturated behavior. But the only thinkg we can do is continue to fight and teach people in schools, assuming anti-science doesn't take over our schools and push scientists out. We are trully at a turning point in this country.
The "just get over it" comment was perhaps poorly chosen, I agree... but your counter argument subverts or undermines your potential to work out of any problems you may have. If you believe you are incompetent, then you have already lost. Don't give up... fight with the rest of us to take this nation back.
"This is one of the problems with choosing one person to represent ALL Americans... it's a tough choice, and this year is no exception for many people.....but I can see where it would be tough for other people who live in different cultural areas around the country."
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Bush has declared an imperial Presidency and the Democratic "Leaders" let him get away with it. If it weren't for that sad truth, you may have more faith in the government as envisioned by the founding fathers....And I can't see how it might be a "tough choice" for people who have a brain.
Ahh, but you are making the mistake by assuming that all people have "brains" to think with. Most people have brians, but choose not to use them. So yes, it would be a tough choice, because there are still people out there that are passing out flyers explaining the tautological argument that Obama is a Muslim.
They pick it up from the internet, make a flyer with the smear email, read it, pass it around to everyone they know, and are known as the person who is trying to save the Democracy from a terrorist insider. This is quite powerful, and effective in communities where people are susceptible to believe this sort of trash. So, it's the social conditions that are set up in certain cultural areas that allow for negative campaigning, and smears to work. We are slipping into a degenerative slippery slope in this country... and that's why I will have a job as a scientist in this country, until creationsism takes over and anti-science pushes me out of my job. What can you do but fight for everything at every waking moment in your life? Never let your guard down is the lesson, and always fight for what you have, because complacency is our worst enemy.
Fair enough. Maybe I shouldn't be so generous in my assumptions about others. But, if most people don't think with their brains, they surely think with their stomachs. When people start to notice that some of life's "luxuries" are slipping away, they will start to realize that they have been played. As it is, millions of Americans are starting to put two and two together, and are realizing that Bushco is not here to help them improve their lot in life. When the day comes that people's anger is released it will be uglier than you or I can imagine.
"When the day comes that people's anger is released it will be uglier than you or I can imagine."
No, I pretty aware of the current circumstance in the world right now, and I can probably anticipate that you mean someone's going to set off a nuke or two again... well, given the tensions in the world right now, it is not inconceivable. Or, did you mean that the current racial tensions that exist now in America, which were only laying dormant to make us misrecognize the fact that is still exists, will lead to another Civil war? This too, I can pretty much anticipate, imagine, and find the logistics abstruse. This is of course, assuming that most people are rational.
The problem with this country is, people tend to see their country (i.e. America) from their own perspectives... and never venture to view the country from another person's view. This is changing rapidly amongst the youth in this country who get it. And this is the only way we can ever get past the biases of the past racial problems we've had. Black people have been tenacious, and are courteously awaiting non-blacks to catch up with the times, but the Mccain campaign is fueling racial tensions again for political gain, because these people are vulnerable and susceptible to buy into it. Therefore, I think that there is nothing to worry about as far as riots in the streets is concerned. Black people are actually much more acute to the non-violent movment that I would argue is still in existence. I have hope that someday, we can all get along. A country is much stronger united, than it is divided. In these trying times, we must be united.
Assuming that trends stay the way they are in the next three weeks and Obama is elected, our job is far from over.
Yup, the GOP Noise Machine isn't going to turn itself off anytime soon.
:-(
Please. All this commentary about cokie being a big throat poker and swallowing cum so gracefully and all is kinda' making me like her a bit more than I want to...
Krugman should have just looked at her and said. "Cokie, you're a fucking idiot." Her comparison would be laughable if it weren't on television.
I think Krugman was about to say that, you could see it on Steph's face.
"Assuming that trends stay the way they are in the next three weeks and Obama is elected, our job is far from over."
The guy may be immeasurably better than McCain. He may even be one of the most competent Americans of our day. But he's a politician and he will be surrounded by politicians friend and foe. There shouldn't be a day that goes by in a Obama presidency in which we aren't simultaneously covering his ass and on his ass. A delicate balance that needs a lot of wise activism. Too much to be done to accept compromise and B.S. if we want the country back.
Cokie Roberts, what a shamful dim witted twit. She talks because she loves the sound of her voice
... that some people weren't ready to accept the "verdict" of the election. That the 2000 election was decided by the Supreme Court and not the counting of the votes is a valid complaint -- and, as Krugman tried to point out, significantly different from Republicans not accepting any Democratic President regardless of margin or method of electoral victory.
"Um, Cokie? Not the same thing at all. By all standards, Bill Clinton won the elections. The witch hunt that went after him had nothing to do with the legitimacy of his election...they just threw as much mud as they could to see if something would stick, regardless of truth--Vince Foster, Travelgate, Filegate, Whitewater, Gennifer Flowers/Paula Jones/Monica Lewinsky."
But, you know, this is precisely the game the GOPS have been playing. In the preceding entry, about Rick Davis saying McShame was in a Vietcong prison during the Martin Luther King years, so "he was deprived of his civil rights, too," the alleged equivalence is: McShame POW = African-American second class citizenship. No way is there any comparison at all. What they are obviously relying on is the truth of H. L. Menken's observation that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people. What I find impossible to understand is, how can 40% of the electorate still be backing the flyboy from Arizona?
Cokie Roberts is exactly what Sarah Palin would have been, had Palin actually worked as a "journalist": a shallow, intellectually dishonest, dim-witted, deceitful and manipulative, partisan hack. A propagandist for the bad guys. A pseudo-intellectual habitual liar, whose own mind is the target of most of her lies. A GOPer political operative, who is devoid of any intelligent capacity for subltety. A short-sighted fool, who cannot summon from within herself even that miniscule degree of forethought that would enable her to realize that she could be a more effective propagandist by adopting the simple expedient of disguising her true intentions. The shabbiness of Cokie Roberts' mind is truly a match and partner for her equally shabby ethical predilictions as a so-called "journalist". Watching her ever-clumsey attempts to disinform and manipulate is like watching the Keystone Kops tripping over their own feet.
Oh well...at least, her multiple and absolutely heroic incompetencies in the skills of her chosen work as professional, lying propagandist make it easy to know her for what she is.
you mean nobel prize WINNER paul krugman.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7667190.stm
zing.
Sadly, I have to agree with Krugman's prediction about the aftermath of this election. The hardcore right wing Republican base will try to do to Obama what was done to Clinton during the 90's (although Clinton made himself and easy target). According to every poll that’s out there, Barack Obama is headed for victory on November 4th. While the McCain/Palin ticket thrashes about, resorting to Joe McCarthy-like tactics, Obama has led his organization to run one of the smartest, most effective campaigns in U. S. history. Even staunchly Republican pundits admit to seeing the writing on the wall. But anything can happen in these last couple of weeks. What will happen in this country if we wake up on November 5th and turn on the television to see replays of Barack Obama’s late night concession speech? How will our democracy and our citizenry be viewed by a world that had been expecting to see an enlightened America emerge from this contest? How will African-Americans and other people of color feel when they start hearing reports of voter fraud and disenfranchisement in key states? How will the Congress, which will be overwhelmingly democratic, feel about a President-elect who ran such a divisive campaign and his running mate who spent the last two months slurring so-called Washington “insiders”? What kind of turmoil and gridlock will this government be thrown into by this “maverick” who constantly claimed he could “reach across the aisle” but clearly hates everyone who sits there?
Cokie makes a great rodeo clown. Kind of like Sarah Palin.
Cokie Roberts hasn't offered any political insight in years. She is really nothing more than a Washington D.C. socialite who tries to straddle a centrist position so she can stay on the A-list at Washington parties. I think that's why she appears on NPR on Mondays; just so we can get the dish about the what she did over the weekend. Where does her knowledge lie? Not in politics. Can anyone think of anything important that she has brought to the table in the past 10 years? What does she do anyway?
I believe that there is a huge underground and quiet bunch that will vote for McCain. These are people who are not vocal regarding blame, religion or race issues. They are your friends and neighbors. Because they do not display signs on their lawns or make proclamations or wear buttons or contribute to blogs or call into talk shows, they will be treated with disdain should McCain win. I doubt it will happen, but, if it does, no Democrat would believe it was so, because they thoroughly believed that if they believed and HOPED it would happen then it would. Obama fans are vocal and pushy and believe it is their right to win. God (oops, did I say that?) help us all if he loses. They will not accept defeat. If McCain loses, I predict he will quietly evaporate. Not so with Obama. Frankly, both Obama and McCain are poor choices. Shame on us all!
Login or Register to post comments.