AJ39

Use a thesaurus! posted 07/20/2008 at 23:22:56

Hasselbeck (whom I don't agree with politically at all!) was rolling her eyes "instead of listening"? The person who wasn't listening was Whoopi. She was so dismissive, so much on a high horse, so convinced that she and she alone knew THE TRUTH THAT I WAS REALLY SICK AND TIRED OF HER.

And where was Barbara Walters? Too intiminidated to tell Whoop8i to shut up.

Normally I would be on Whoopi's side, but her all-knowing, self-righteous attitude really pissed me off. posted 07/18/2008 at 03:55:18

I agree that SEXISM likely plays a bigger role in the public's attitude toward Michelle Obama than does racism, although racism cannot be discounted. This country apparently does not like strong women who are successful in their own right. Witness Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton. Contrast that with Cindy McCain and Laura Bush. I am not putting down Cindy or Laura. I think they are quite remarkable in their own right, but they have made a career out of not appearing "too out there." They "know their place." America likes this in their women and some Americans especially want an "uppity black woman" to know her place. They really do want women to stay home and bake cookies or borrow/steal cookies recipes.

It is going to be so exciting and such a teaching moment to have Michelle Obama as First Lady. I can't wait. posted 07/19/2008 at 00:22:01

I think, on balance, the Founders would be pleased. Pleased, yes thrilled, that their grand idea - that men could rule themselves - survived and thrived and became a concept that other countries tried and that the concept of self-rule and equality has expanded to non-white men and to women, however imperfectly executed. I think the Founders would applaud. And Ben Franklin would be pleased that it is American ingenuity, as much as anything, that has kept America prosperous.

Yes, there are many things that they also would be disappointed in. George Washington would be disappointed that we did not heed his warning about our treatment of Native Americans. Madison and Washington would be disappointed that political parties have gotten in the way of good policy-making. They warned against this. And we could go on.

But overal their grand experiment and trust in self-rule has worked, and they would want us to keep working toward a more perfect union.

Bless them! posted 07/05/2008 at 23:18:12

It's same-o, same-o. Did Gail Sheehy actually get paid to write this unsourced rehash? posted 06/30/2008 at 23:48:35

Well, for one thing they both proved themselves to be poor vote getters. And did you watch Richardson on the stump and in debates? I couldn't figure out how he ever racked up such an impressive resume. Besides as Energy Secretary he threw the Asian scientest to the wolves.

Biden, on the other hand, did well in debates. Very knowledgeable and even succinct, proving he can make a course correction. However he got no credit for either. posted 06/30/2008 at 17:00:18

I don't think we'll have to take that risk cuz Al's not going to take it.

Mr. Gore has been right about many important things, but would you trust someone who picked Joe Lieberman as his running mate? I wouldn't! posted 06/30/2008 at 12:17:22

Maureen Dowd was over-the-top in her vitrol toward Hillary. Sometimes she's really funny and witty, but often she just sounds bitter and mean, very mean. I thought she was funnier until she began appearing on TV talk shows.

She's so mannered. Really spoils the effect.

And if the NYT is going to criticize Kristol and Dowd (deservedly), why let Frank Rich off-the hook. I 've ceased reading him. posted 06/23/2008 at 23:59:45

Even before I read so many votes for Gwen Ifill, she was my choice. Solid, professional, calm and rational. She would be balanced and would do Russert's memory proud. Rachael Maddow doesn't have quite enough experience yet. Andrea Mitchell is a hack. Well, that might be too harsh, but I don't think she's nearly as objective as Ifill. posted 06/21/2008 at 01:31:36

Christianne Amanpour is too valuable where she is. Or I could see her as a replacement for Katie Couric. Somehow MTP format doesn't seem to fit for her, but I certainly would be happy with her, However I'm really astonished that someone thinks she is a warmonger. Not within a mile! posted 06/21/2008 at 01:22:37

I don't think Olbermann is a joke, but I agree 100% that he would be WRONG for the job of moderating MTP. I don't believe in his false modesty. He's incredibly arrogant and smug, but I do think he was smart to get ahead of the Post story.

I hope NBC will find a "fair and balanced" moderator. This would most decidedly exclude both Matthews and Olbermann. posted 06/20/2008 at 13:56:25

It doesn't appear that KO will get the boot anytime soon. I'm not even sure that I want him to; but I'd sure like to see him be a little more "fair and balanced." He's become like the commentators he so loves to tweak. His comment about Katie Curic was really over-the-top. I've never been a fan of Katie's but she hardly deserves to be on KO's worst person in the world list just because she holds some different views than Keith.

KO has gotten smug and self-satisfied and altogether too uncritical of himself and his network. It's not the formula for continued success, let alone respect. posted 06/13/2008 at 00:49:27

If you don't think sexism is still an issue, look at the nasty comments. Can't you disagree without name-calling, and insulting other people? posted 06/11/2008 at 19:04:24

As a Clinton supporter, I will get over it. Now is the time for Hillary to be gracious, to acknowledge Barak Obama's historic win, and to bow out. I'll give her until Friday until I turn critical of her. But I hope I won't have to. posted 06/04/2008 at 16:31:14

Don't insult Siam! It is one of my chief hopes that the Democrats will pick up a majority in the Senate sufficient for them to throw Lieberman out of their caucus. At the very least, out of the committe chair. He still chairs Homeland Security or some like committee, doesn't he? Good Grief! posted 06/04/2008 at 21:17:38

I agree totally! especially with your view about the moderators/hosts of these shows. They are paid big bucks to sit there like bumps on a log most of the time, while the opposing sides add only heat, no light. Occasionally, they prod, but not for substance, only for more heat. Remember how Jon Stewart reacted when Tucker Carlson tried to make him say something controversial. He didn't walk off but he refused to play the game or, as he put it, "be your monkey."

Let CNN and MSNBC, et al. take a page from "The Daily Show," and, horrors, from the FOX anchor. posted 03/22/2008 at 13:20:37

Richardson has always talked out of both sides of his mouth, whether it's about superdelegates or which baseball team he likes. He can never just make a straighforward comment. He's like the proverbial politician who, when asked his favorite color, says, "plaid." I have never been able to figure out how he acquired such a good, wide-ranging resume. posted 03/21/2008 at 12:49:59