. . .and re-evaluate their strategy, tactics and temperament.
By John V. Moore
First of all you might be asking yourself "what is an Emo Progressive?"
Well as Motor City Liberal puts it "They're the whining, gloom and doom, 'Obama didn't give us everything we wanted in the first 15 minutes of his Presidency like he promised he would so now we're never gonna vote again' crybabies who are responsible for the mess we're in today. Spend five minutes on Daily Kos. You'll see what I'm talking about."
I'd go on to say that Emo Progressives (EPs) are not necessarily more liberal/progressive than others on the left, including President Obama, who just happen to be more pragmatic. While EPs often expect progressive purity from their political allies, this is not about ideology its about temperament.
A good example of this is Firedog Lake's Jane Hamsher who loves to run around telling folks Obama is not progressive enough and calling his ardent supporters "the dumbest motherf$%kers in the world," while records show an organization she controls actually works for Republicans. If she held herself to the standard that she holds Obama to, she'd be a huge sellout. But just like Republicans, EPs often specialize in hypocrisy.
From a ideological perspective I have a lot in common with those that I identify as EPs, but in politics, ideology is only as good as the strategy and tactics employed to meet these objectives.
Celebrated EP grifter Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee inserted himself into LOCAL Chicago politics by circulating a petition for Illinois voters to pledge not to vote for former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in this year's Mayoral race. Not sure how many folks signed the petition, especially those from Chicago, but Rahm, is now Mayor Emanuel and Green is trying to raise money by bashing Obama over the debt ceiling issue.
Maybe if EPs stopped treating other Democrats and/or progressives as the enemy they might be more effective.
EPs run the risk of marginalizing themselves because they think the world revolves around what they believe and what they want. They don't understand the President's willingness to compromise, because they don't really know what it takes to govern. They are quick to turn potential progressive allies into enemies.
They ignore or belittle the President's impressive list of accomplishments when they claim he hasn't accomplished anything. When you list the accomplishments they tell you why those are nothing to brag about (trust me when I post this on one of my favorite progressive websites I will be asked to list his accomplishments and if I take the bait I will be told why they don't count, it happens all the damned time).
If the EPs and the pragmatic, a.k.a. Obama, progressives can get on the same page the Democratic tickets will be unbeatable in 2012. The debt ceiling debate is exposing some serious cracks on the right, a unified left can exploit the hell out of this. . .that is if we want to take back the House, protect the Senate and re-elect the most progressive and effective President we have seen in recent history.
Each week I keep hearing how they will not support the President, but then I see his poll numbers among Democrats remain strong.
Some EPs threatened to not donate to the President the same week it is revealed the President raised over $80 million for his re-election campaign and the Democratic Party.
Now EP favorite Cenk Uygur is leaving MSNBC because the network is reportedly giving his time slot to Rev. Al Sharpton. EPs are furious, threatening not watch, even though it appears that Sharpton's ratings were stronger than Uygur's. While I have not seen raw numbers I find myself watching Sharpton nightly, I couldn't bring myself to watch more than 15 minutes of Uygur.
Threats not to support or contribute to Obama ring hollow when his polling and donations from Democrats remain high. Boycotting MSNBC because they gave Sharpton Uygur's slot seems silly considering Sharpton is a progressive, who actually stands to have better ratings than Uygaur.
The Democratic Party, the White House, Obama progressives, like myself, and even MSNBC would be foolish to ignore EPs, however, if the they want to remain relevant they need to re-evaluate their strategy, tactics and temperament so that they are not left out in 2012.
If they don't change I encourage the larger Democratic/progressive community to move on without them. The time spent banging our heads against the wall trying to get them to come around will be better used to recruit new folks to the movement.
At some point the poutrage temper tantrums EPs throw will grow old and their effectiveness will fade, if it hasn't already.
Showing posts with label MSNBC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MSNBC. Show all posts
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Considering Maddow, Schultz, O'Donnell and now Uygur are all on MSNBC I can't fathom. . .
. . .a progressive boycott of the channel.
I still encourage folks to avoid MSNBC's State of the Union coverage on Tuesday night by watching C-SPAN's coverage, including the pre and post speech analysis. This is an excellent opportunity to stand with Keith Olbermann. But we need to support Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Lawrence O'Donnell and Cenk Uygur. We should not be biting our nose off to spite our face. There are too few progressive voices on the airwaves, MSNBC gives them a platform and we need to support them.
I love Keith and will support his next endeavor, but let me remind everyone what he said about President Obama on December 7th 2010:
If you piece together the reports/speculation of what lead to his exit from MSNBC it would appear that according to some Keith wanted out, he wanted his freedom. That is an important point to consider when we evaluate our anger at MSNBC, WHICH STILL HAS A PROGRESSIVE PRIME TIME BLOCK!
Also, lets be honest while many respect Keith, it is obvious that Keith was not popular with his colleagues. That is something he needs to work on. It is not grounds for firing but it is something management has to consider when it comes to attracting/retaining talent for the other shows/day parts.
I don't raise this point to call out Keith, quite the opposite, I want him to be successful and to the extent his temperament/personality impacts his career he would be well served to do something about it.
Keith is a smart man who has constantly shown on air humility by acknowledging his on air mistakes. I hope that as he embarks on his next step he considers any off air mistakes he might have made and corrects them.
I am not happy Keith is off of MSNBC, but there are some great people still there who do not need to be punished as a result of it.
I still encourage folks to avoid MSNBC's State of the Union coverage on Tuesday night by watching C-SPAN's coverage, including the pre and post speech analysis. This is an excellent opportunity to stand with Keith Olbermann. But we need to support Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Lawrence O'Donnell and Cenk Uygur. We should not be biting our nose off to spite our face. There are too few progressive voices on the airwaves, MSNBC gives them a platform and we need to support them.
I love Keith and will support his next endeavor, but let me remind everyone what he said about President Obama on December 7th 2010:
"It is not disloyalty to remind him that we are not bound to an individual. We are bound to principles. If the individual changes, or fails often and needlessly, then we get a new man. Or woman. None of that is disloyalty. It is self-defense."Progressive media is bigger than Keith, supporting MSNBC's primetime line-up is not betrayal of him.
If you piece together the reports/speculation of what lead to his exit from MSNBC it would appear that according to some Keith wanted out, he wanted his freedom. That is an important point to consider when we evaluate our anger at MSNBC, WHICH STILL HAS A PROGRESSIVE PRIME TIME BLOCK!
Also, lets be honest while many respect Keith, it is obvious that Keith was not popular with his colleagues. That is something he needs to work on. It is not grounds for firing but it is something management has to consider when it comes to attracting/retaining talent for the other shows/day parts.
I don't raise this point to call out Keith, quite the opposite, I want him to be successful and to the extent his temperament/personality impacts his career he would be well served to do something about it.
Keith is a smart man who has constantly shown on air humility by acknowledging his on air mistakes. I hope that as he embarks on his next step he considers any off air mistakes he might have made and corrects them.
I am not happy Keith is off of MSNBC, but there are some great people still there who do not need to be punished as a result of it.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Why Jimmy Carter was right, Joe Scarborough is a miserable a-hole and Mika Brzezinski is an ignorant sycophant
Joe Scarborough is spitting mad at former President Jimmy Carter for his comment that much of the opposition to President Barack Obama is rooted in racism. Earlier this week on a couple of episodes of MSNBC’s MORNING JOE, Scarborough expressed his displeasure towards our nation’s 39th president for giving his own frank assessment, an assessment that is shared by many folks in this country.
Scarborough is being dishonest when he frames the controversy as Carter and many on the left accusing anyone who opposes the president as racist. No one said that, THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
By introducing this deceiving frame it is easy for Scarborough, and others, to paint those of us who share Carter’s view as playing the race card.
“I don’t know what America Jimmy Carter lives in, because he doesn’t live in the America where I live,” Scarborough said on the September 16, edition of his show. “There is desperation out there on the hard left and they just can’t figure out why people in the people of America are
upset at this guy.”
In making this statement Joe ignores the role that the anger whipped up towards Obama during tea parties and town hall meetings has played in his dropping approval ratings. These events are important when it comes to understanding Carter’s statement because the rhetoric and images coming from them had both subtle and not so subtle racial as well as violent undertones.
Whether it’s the poster that had Obama dressed up as a witch doctor, the birther movement, the numerous signs calling him a Muslim or the lady who held up the poster that referred to the president as the “lying African,” it is hard to deny the influence that some who oppose him are influenced by bigotry.
“I actually worry about the fact that he brought this up,” Joe’s resident sycophant Mika also chimed in. “It may not just be wrong Joe, it may be irresponsible.”
Oh Mika you can such a dunce at times (more often than not unfortunately).
There DEFINITELY is some irresponsible behavior going on out there, but its not coming from Carter or others who have raised concerns about the new ugly tone that has been present since last summer. It is the behavior of Joe, Mika and others in the media who pretend that this is normal and acceptable political discourse and trivialize those who are concerned about it as being irresponsible and playing the race card.
Obama is not only the first African American president, he is the first president who is subjected to folks showing up at his event with guns, he is the first president who was treated like a sexual predator when he spoke to our nation’s students, he is the first president to be called heckled as a liar by a Congressman during a joint session of Congress.
What might contribute to these other “firsts?” Race? Nawwwwwwwww (sarcasm)
Joe, Mika and others will claim this is nothing new and President George W. Bush was subjected to protests and regularly disrespected by those of us on the left. While that observation is true, there needs to be some distinctions made.
The left never brought guns to Bush events and were often relegated to First Amendment zones. Reports are that Obama has received more threats to his life than any other president in American history, AND HE IS ONLY NINE MONTHS INTO HIS FIRST TERM!
Whenever Move.Org, CODE PINK and other left leaning organizations offended the right the Democratic establishment at times overreacted and distanced itself from them, however the tea party movement, while resembling the lynch mobs of the Jim Crow era, is embraced by GOP party leaders.
Joe and Mika can marginalize Jimmy Carter all they want but it doesn’t change the fact that what he said was right. I just hope as a country we wake up, realize its time for us to be part of the solution and have an honest and ongoing dialogue on race, instead of being part of the problem by trivializing the issue and calling those who raise it irresponsible.
Joe and Mika embrace an unrepentant bigot like Pat Buchanan as a regular contributor to their show, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised that they have no interest in being part of the solution.
Cartoon credit: Britt Springfield Journal Register
Scarborough is being dishonest when he frames the controversy as Carter and many on the left accusing anyone who opposes the president as racist. No one said that, THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
By introducing this deceiving frame it is easy for Scarborough, and others, to paint those of us who share Carter’s view as playing the race card.
“I don’t know what America Jimmy Carter lives in, because he doesn’t live in the America where I live,” Scarborough said on the September 16, edition of his show. “There is desperation out there on the hard left and they just can’t figure out why people in the people of America are
upset at this guy.”In making this statement Joe ignores the role that the anger whipped up towards Obama during tea parties and town hall meetings has played in his dropping approval ratings. These events are important when it comes to understanding Carter’s statement because the rhetoric and images coming from them had both subtle and not so subtle racial as well as violent undertones.
Whether it’s the poster that had Obama dressed up as a witch doctor, the birther movement, the numerous signs calling him a Muslim or the lady who held up the poster that referred to the president as the “lying African,” it is hard to deny the influence that some who oppose him are influenced by bigotry.
“I actually worry about the fact that he brought this up,” Joe’s resident sycophant Mika also chimed in. “It may not just be wrong Joe, it may be irresponsible.”
Oh Mika you can such a dunce at times (more often than not unfortunately).
There DEFINITELY is some irresponsible behavior going on out there, but its not coming from Carter or others who have raised concerns about the new ugly tone that has been present since last summer. It is the behavior of Joe, Mika and others in the media who pretend that this is normal and acceptable political discourse and trivialize those who are concerned about it as being irresponsible and playing the race card.
Obama is not only the first African American president, he is the first president who is subjected to folks showing up at his event with guns, he is the first president who was treated like a sexual predator when he spoke to our nation’s students, he is the first president to be called heckled as a liar by a Congressman during a joint session of Congress.
What might contribute to these other “firsts?” Race? Nawwwwwwwww (sarcasm)
Joe, Mika and others will claim this is nothing new and President George W. Bush was subjected to protests and regularly disrespected by those of us on the left. While that observation is true, there needs to be some distinctions made.
The left never brought guns to Bush events and were often relegated to First Amendment zones. Reports are that Obama has received more threats to his life than any other president in American history, AND HE IS ONLY NINE MONTHS INTO HIS FIRST TERM!
Whenever Move.Org, CODE PINK and other left leaning organizations offended the right the Democratic establishment at times overreacted and distanced itself from them, however the tea party movement, while resembling the lynch mobs of the Jim Crow era, is embraced by GOP party leaders.
Joe and Mika can marginalize Jimmy Carter all they want but it doesn’t change the fact that what he said was right. I just hope as a country we wake up, realize its time for us to be part of the solution and have an honest and ongoing dialogue on race, instead of being part of the problem by trivializing the issue and calling those who raise it irresponsible.
Joe and Mika embrace an unrepentant bigot like Pat Buchanan as a regular contributor to their show, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised that they have no interest in being part of the solution.
Cartoon credit: Britt Springfield Journal Register
Monday, August 24, 2009
FORGET GLENN BECK: the UPS Store has temporarily halted buying ads on Fox News Channel as a whole
While I'm definitely thrilled to see the success of Color of Change's threatened boycott of companies that advertise on FOX NEWS CHANNEL (FNC) during the Glenn Beck Show, I'm more excited by this line from the Associated Press article on the effort:
-snip-
"This is a good illustration of that conundrum," said Rich Hallabran, spokesman for UPS Stores, which he said has temporarily halted buying ads on Fox News Channel as a whole.
-snip-
Now does this mean that the UPS Store will stop advertising on FNC completely? Who knows. But what it does mean is that the boycott on Beck is making advertisers really evaluate where they advertise and hopefully this is the beginning of a new era in broadcast advertising, a new era in which personalities are not rewarded for spreading lies and hate.
I do feel that the AP and others do the public a disservice when they group MSNBC's Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman with FNC's Beck and Sean Hannity because the reason for the backlash is not liberal/progressive vs. conservative, its about responsible rhetoric vs. irresponsible rhetoric.
By drawing this comparison we are being led to believe that they all do the same thing, they don't. Folks like Beck, Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Lou Dobbs are not problems because they represent a conservative point of view, they are problems because they use misinformation and outright lies to divide us. I am no fan of MSNBC's MORNING JOE, but while Joe Scarborough has not entirely avoided misinforming, this show for the most part is responsible when it comes to dealing with some of our most divisive issues of our time.
-snip-
"This is a good illustration of that conundrum," said Rich Hallabran, spokesman for UPS Stores, which he said has temporarily halted buying ads on Fox News Channel as a whole.
-snip-
Now does this mean that the UPS Store will stop advertising on FNC completely? Who knows. But what it does mean is that the boycott on Beck is making advertisers really evaluate where they advertise and hopefully this is the beginning of a new era in broadcast advertising, a new era in which personalities are not rewarded for spreading lies and hate.
I do feel that the AP and others do the public a disservice when they group MSNBC's Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman with FNC's Beck and Sean Hannity because the reason for the backlash is not liberal/progressive vs. conservative, its about responsible rhetoric vs. irresponsible rhetoric.
By drawing this comparison we are being led to believe that they all do the same thing, they don't. Folks like Beck, Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Lou Dobbs are not problems because they represent a conservative point of view, they are problems because they use misinformation and outright lies to divide us. I am no fan of MSNBC's MORNING JOE, but while Joe Scarborough has not entirely avoided misinforming, this show for the most part is responsible when it comes to dealing with some of our most divisive issues of our time.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Friday, February 06, 2009
Tom Colburn just doesn't get it. . .
. . . just now on MSNBC he said government jobs don't create wealth. Is this man an idiot or what?
Just now in a discussion with Contessa Brewer and Carlos Watson he pushed back on creating more government jobs because they don't create wealth. Well we got news for Sen. Colburn. We you create jobs, you create customers who then spend money and patronize businesses. Doing so allows those business owners to keep their staffs employed, maybe hire new staff and possibly turn a profit, thus "creating wealth."
Just now in a discussion with Contessa Brewer and Carlos Watson he pushed back on creating more government jobs because they don't create wealth. Well we got news for Sen. Colburn. We you create jobs, you create customers who then spend money and patronize businesses. Doing so allows those business owners to keep their staffs employed, maybe hire new staff and possibly turn a profit, thus "creating wealth."
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Countdown with Keith Olbermann: The Blatherings of Blago
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)