November 3, 2007

"Wee embers were fanned into an inferno by skilled flame-fanners and the professionally offended."

Dick Cavett on Don Imus:
The Imus show had long been an eccentric mix of news, music, sports talk and — thanks to its well-read host — first-rate conversation....

There is really no getting away from the injustice that’s been done. A program enjoyed (and missed) by millions was trashed for the sake of the few. No one who contributed to the denouement of the Imus show and the mindless abuse heaped on him has anything to be proud of.

IN THE COMMENTS: It's all about... Hillary!


Beldar said...

Gosh. I always credited Dick Cavett with better taste than that.

rhhardin said...

He doesn't mention the politics. Hillary was refused any place on the show's guest lists, when Obama was getting on, and she had to beat him in the primary, something that seemed more urgent at the time.

Nappy Wednesday happened exactly one day after a final request feeler was made for a Hillary guest spot, and refused.

The incident was related off-hand on the following Friday by Donald Trump, a few hours before the public flames took off.

If Hillary can't get on, nobody does, was the plan.

Imus's remarks were entirely justified and unremarkable for the show. Justified because if you're going to run your women's basketball team in a trash-talking tattooed gang from the 'hood style, then you're entitled to the consequences ; which is exactly what Imus provided.

Choosing a dysfunctional black lifestyle gets mocked. If you can't say that, what's the point of even going on the air?

Ann Althouse said...

Did they "run [their] women's basketball team in a trash-talking tattooed gang from the 'hood style"?

Anonymous said...

Did he say "nappy headed hos"? Yes, he was wrong, he apologized and the young women about whom he spoke heard his apologies. He's done the time for his crime, he should be back on the air.

Don Imus was brought down by Media Matters, the organization formed by HRC and her sycophants, and funded largely by George Soros.

Media Matters didn't give a hoot about the phrase "nappy headed hos", but saw an opportunity to remove Don Imus from the airwaves for the sin of speaking about HRC in an unkind manner, and for supporting one of her opponents.

It was a political hit.

rhhardin said...

Did they "run [their] women's basketball team in a trash-talking tattooed gang from the 'hood style"?

I have heard so. I don't know myself, not being interested in sports, not having a TV, let alone women's basketball, which doesn't even interest sports fans, apparently.

That is in fact exactly what they were talking about, with Sid Rosenberg (the man who will say anything and is constantly being suspended or fired ; a ritual perhaps that points at what you can't say even though it looks otherwise), saying that they were a rough looking bunch to lead into it.

But I also read of it coming from Rutgers opponents. God knows if I can find it again.

If they're not that way, the Imus comments would make no sense, either seriously or as formula humor. So I'd tend to credit it.

Gedaliya said...

As I predicted here, Imus is coming out of this drama in great shape. His new show is on WABC, which has a mid-dial location and a much larger audience than his previous station, WFAN. He has the 6-10 morning slot, replacing his main competition here in the NYC metro area, Curtis Sliwa and Ron Kuby. He will undoubtedly re-syndicate his show into the major US media markets and I bet will be back on television within the next few weeks.

Imus made millions from his "gaffe." But aside from that, I truly believe Hillary will regret her move against Imus, for he is a vindictive man who believes firmly that "revenge is a dish best served cold."

It will be fascinating to watch him go after Hillary. She made a mistake taking him on, for he has a reach into the heartland that she can only envy. With his millions of listeners, his millions of dollars, and his animating passion for revenge, he will, over the next few months, needle, distract and annoy her relentlessly.

This is going to be very interesting.

rhhardin said...

re trash talking. My Google skills aren't inspired but right away I find this from the NYT

By last season, Stringer had developed an aggressive team that hounded opponents into errors. But she said she sensed in recent days that something was wrong.

so apparently they're not fragile envelopes of fine souls on the court, at least.

Google experts! This is the time to shine!

rhhardin said...

Here's Donald Trump on the Friday after Nappy Wednesday. Note that ``three days ago'' is Tuesday, one day exactly before Nappy Wednesday.

Note also that Hillary had put Trump up to asking (one infers from the language), and so presumably Trump reported back on Tuesday to team Hillary that her request was refused permanently.

Tank said...

I don't think his comment had anything to do with the substance of Rutgers' team. I doubt if he knew anything about them.

I was actually listening when he made the remark. I think he was showed a picture of the team, and simply reacted to the way they looked - tough, with tatoos, etc.

They said a lot of dopey things on his show just to be edgy, but when I heard that remark, it did startle me. Then...a vast overreaction.

He's coming back Dec 3rd. I'll miss Kuby (not Curtis). The show that replaced him is actually pretty good too.

Tank said...

I have no idea if HRC, or her followers, had anything to do with his demise, but he did always refer to her as "the Devil."

Essentially, my view too. Or as Peggy Noonan once said of her, evil and able.

Bissage said...

I agree with Mr. Cavett.

Those flame-fanning, flim-flamming, fact-flicking, fish-flippers flubbed fully.

[catches breath]


Unknown said...

A Hillary plot? Pablum for the brain dead if that is believed.

Bilby said...

Media Matters was the outfit that started the Imus outrage bandwagon, and since it's a Hillary shill group I have no trouble believing they were doing her bidding. If you need more evidence just look at how quickly they were to spin her debate performance and blame it on Tim Russert.

Clang!Honk!Tweet! said...

Yes, Hillary had many more important things to do than take down one of her more irritating and popular critics.  Why, Media Matters has nothing at all to do with Sen. Clinton, and absolutely none of her friends and supporters had any involvement in the Imus affair.
See! My brain isn't dead!

Latino said...

Clinton aside, isn't anyone bothered by the double standard on speech? Many think Imus should not be permitted to work for what he said. Dog the Bounty Hunter - a show I have never seen - was just taken off the air by A&E because he used the forbidden N-word in a private conversation! So he should not be allowed to make a living for saying a word while others may use it freely because they have the correct skin tone? I thought all this nonsense over words died with Lenny Bruce.

michaele said...

Does George Carlin currently include the "N" word in his riff on words you're not allowed to say?
If not, it's kind of like how the cartoon portayal of Mohammed was sooo unacceptable. It's on disturbingly ridiculous.

Jabba the Tutt said...

Bork became a verb, maybe imus will follow. They're imusing Dog the Bounty Hunter now. I've removed A&E from my favorites list and told A&E that.

Unknown said...

why does the right wing think that supposed left wing groups "do the bidding"? why does the right assign the same lack of ethics that they practice? the left has no lap dog suck-ups like Fox News (sic) and Rush, Sean, Savage, North, Ingram, Coulter etc.

i think that this might exemplify the issue:

media matters is to clinton as
bush is to truth

Latino said...

Right, do. The left has no media voice or support whatsoever.
Go back to your home planet now.

rcocean said...

Interesting Cavett opinion. I wonder if it was ghostwritten. OTOTH, the line about our "Stinking racism" at the end sounds like him. A kind of "don't get me wrong comrades we must continue to struggle against racism" note.

But given that he was always Mr. PC on air it is amazing. But then it was probably motivated by self-interest. Cavett had a radio show, possibly with the same network, Imus was always the favorite pet of Manhattan/DC liberals, and he wants to guest on IMUS, so maybe thats why he wrote/signed it.

What I find humorous is these Celebs make these remarks, are attacked and then always apologize, grovel, and beg for forgiveness. They even go to rehab, or have counseling, But it gets them nowhere. They are never forgiven, They are given boot anyway,and attacked with even more vigor. Its as if contrition is taken as a sign of weakness.

Mutaman said...

"A program enjoyed (and missed) by millions"

Talk about your revisionist history. No one enjoyed or even watched this show as the ratings over the years clearly showed. Imus couldn't even crack the top 20 AM shows in New York.

Further Cavett bases his entire opinion that the "Ho" assertion was an issolated incident. This kind of racist crap has been commonplace on Imus for the last 20 years.

Anyhow, I hear that the Iman just died of old age, so this is all now irrelevant.

Imus, IIIIIImus,
Am I dead or alive

Bilby said...

Why does the left wing engage in such obvious projection as to claim the right is assigning their ethics to the left? The truth of the matter is these so-called media watchdogs like Media Matters operate on the assumption that "they do it, too" to justify their actions. They rail against the "right wing noise machine" and figure they need their own noise machine to balance it out. Only the most blinded of partisans deny this.

The Sanity Inspector said...

Wee embers were fanned into an inferno by skilled flame-fanners and the professionally offended. Demands were high-handedly demanded. All sorts of people piled on the wounded body. It began to resemble the way certain birds and beasts pile on the ailing pack member and peck or chew it to pieces.

When a man is down, "down with him!".

Trooper York said...

Hooooooooo (Ho)
Youza Hoooooo (Ho)
Youza Hoooooo (Ho)
I said that youza hooooo (Ho)
[Repeat 1x]

You doin ho activities
With ho tendencies
Hos are your friends, hoes are your enemies
With ho energy to do whacha do
Blew whacha blew
Screw whacha screw
Yall professional like DJ Clue, pullin on my coat tail
an why do you think you take a ho to a hotel?
Hotel everybody, even the mayor
Reach up in tha sky for tha hozone laya
Come on playa once a ho always
And hos never close they open like hallways
An heres a ho cake for you whole ho crew
an everybody wants some cuz hoes gotta eat too

Cant turn a ho into a housewife
Hos dont act right
Theres hos on a mission, an hoes on a crackpipe
Hey ho how ya doin, where ya been?
Prolly doin ho stuff cuz there you ho again
Its a ho wide world, that we livin in
feline, feminine, fantastical, women
Not all, just some
You ho who you are
Theres hoes in tha room, theres hoes in tha car
theres hoes on stage, theres hoes by tha bar
hos by near, an hos by far
Ho! (But can i getta ride?!)
NO! (Cmon, nigga why?!)
Cuz youza

You gotta run in your pantyhos
Even your daddy knows
that you suckin down chocolate like daddy-o's
You hos are horrible, horrendous
On taxes ya'll writin off hos as dependents
I see tha ho risin
it aint surprisin
its just a hoasis
with ugly chicks faces
but hos dont feel so sad and blue
cuz most of us niggaz is hos too

(Hos, Ludacris)

Fen said...

isn't anyone bothered by the double standard on speech? Many think Imus should not be permitted to work for what he said. Dog the Bounty Hunter - a show I have never seen - was just taken off the air by A&E because he used the forbidden N-word in a private conversation!

And yet the bigoted expression "redneck" is routinely found in the New York Times and other "enlightened" publications.

Fen said...

the left has no lap dog suck-ups like Fox News (sic) and Rush, Sean, Savage, North, Ingram, Coulter etc.

Dan Rather of CBS News, Foer of The New Republic, AP plagarizing DNC talking point memos verbatim, Rueters using faked photos, Newsweek fake Koran flushing story, liberal MSM execs admission that media support bumps Dem candidates a good 15% in the polls, etc etc.

Brian Doyle said...

Would that be Frank Foer of the Iraq War-supporting, Joe Lieberman-loving New Republic?

Admin said...

The funny thing is that Don Imus is a loud mouth jerk in my opinion and I can't stand his show. I just don't "get" his humor and it seemed offensive just for the sake of being offensive to me. In that context, his nhh's comment was just more of the same. I actually read his book "God's Other Son" and while it started pretty decently by the middle it had gotten so juvenilely repulsive that were it not for a character flaw of mine that makes me feel compelled to finish any book I start it would have been impossible to finish.

But even for someone such as myself whose view of Imus is not kind the aftermath of his comments was scary. The threats of boycotts and such was disappointingly very effective but the threats by politicians was downright troublesome. If Don Imus can be subjected to such abuse how can the average person expect to be able to speak freely?

But in light of all the above, I hope that the previous comments about Don Imus being the petty, vengeful sort are true. I would love for him to bedevil the opportunist who were so quick to attack him for political reasons.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Where is LUCY today?

Trumpit said...

Ron Hardin,

Thanks for sharing! You brightened up my day! How delightful your enlightening comments were! You apparently like black dogs from your photo, so it's inconceivable that you have a racist bone in your white body. No, I would definitely say that you like black dogs. Some of your best friends are black dogs. I like your white outfit, and cool white hat, too! You like white; that's obvious from your lily white wardrobe. You're one cool white dude! You're quite white, right, and alright!

William said...

Did any of Ward Churchill's supporters rally to the cause of Imus? Doesn't this also have a chilling effect on free speech? People have as many inappropriate thoughts about race as they do about sex. We handle this tension with humor--not always sucessfully. Letting Al Sharpton censor Don Imus is like letting the Legion of Decency censor Lenny Bruce.

Maxine Weiss said...

I don't send anyone email. Not my closest friends, not my soulmates.

My missives are usually written in my own hand---a beautiful cursive, on my monogrammed, freesia-scented stationery.

I don't care whether it's the digital age or not. Email is not a very classic, or romantic way of communication, and I won't be manipulated into doing it.

I've made all types of arrangements, agreements, appointments, right on these comments sections of people's blogs.

Plus, you have plenty of witnesses when you work within the comments.

It baffles me why Althouse is requiring a personal email---which I will never do!...not in this lifetime!!!

Love, Maxine

Jeff Faria said...

"But I also read of it coming from Rutgers opponents. God knows if I can find it again."

There seems to be evidence that the Rutgers' Women's Basketball Team talked its share of trash. For instance:

Rutgers brought attitude, and second-ranked Tennessee showed some of its own.... "It was fun. It was a competitive game," [Tennessee player Shyra] Ely said. "They did challenge us and they might talk trash here and there, but that gets us going. They can talk trash all they want, but we're going to perform..." "I wouldn't say trash talking, but we're players. We compete. We're going to talk ... whether that's to get another player out of the game mentally. That's all it comes down to," [Rutgers' Dawn] McCullough said. "They did the same thing. We both talked. We just all competed tonight."

This was back in December 2003. Apparently they can dish it out, but at least from Imus, they cannot take it.

Trumpit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Trumpit said...

"People have as many inappropriate thoughts about race as they do about sex."

I think you're talking about yourself. Please stay 1,000 yards away from me at all times. Or, do I have to get a restraining order?

Your syphilitic brain can think whatever trash it wants to, but when you act on your disgusting thoughts, that's when problems arise. Commenting on this blog is an action, and action speaks louder than words or mere thoughts.

Jim O said...

If you missed it, scroll up and read what "Bilby" has to say. If you haven't gotten that, you haven't gotten the joke.

To make a long story short: Hillary took out Imus. I'm sure Imus (who is nobody's conservative by the way, he just hates her) knows that. I'm looking forward to hear what he has to say about her, now that he's escaped.

Trumpit said...

"Choosing a dysfunctional black lifestyle gets mocked. If you can't say that, what's the point of even going on the air?"

So, Hardin, you agree wholeheartedly with the nappy-headed hos comment, do you? Thank you for sharing, again. Let me know where you live, so I can burn a cross on your lawn. It will add cachet to your otherwise meaningless and dreary life.

rhhardin said...

So, Hardin, you agree wholeheartedly with the nappy-headed hos comment

They're entitled to the consequences of their actions ; depriving them of consequences infantilizes them.

Infantilized is more or less the state black leaders want their flock in.

blake said...

"revenge is a dish best served cold."

So...revenge is gazpacho?

John Stodder said...

Media Matters was the outfit that started the Imus outrage bandwagon, and since it's a Hillary shill group...

What's the proof behind this oft-repeated assertion? It seems almost an article of faith among the right that Hillary's camp runs MMA. At what point, if that were true, does MMA become a campaign finance law violation? Or is this just a talking point with no basis in fact? MMA seems like an odious left-wing group more aligned with the Kossites than with the Clintonistas.

OTOH, the "gotcha game" isn't always wrong. MMA might've been waiting for their moment to pounce on Imus, and they clearly have an agenda that keeps them silent when someone on their side of the ideological fence says something offensive or false.

But it's not as if that unfunny, insulting, race-baiting, narcissistic (albeit "well read!") old creep Imus wasn't riding for it.

MMA's successful hit on Imus has been diminished in retrospect by the sophistry and deception of their attack on Limbaugh. Keep your pants on Luckyoldson, I'm no fan of Limbaugh. But reading what he said about "phony soldiers" vs. what MMA said he said, it was clearly a fraudulent attack that ended up making Limbaugh's enemies look like idiots for embracing it.

(Harry Reid's humiliating capitulation to Limbaugh ended any debate on that matter, by the way, so please, don't restart one. It's boring and it's so over.)

sweeper said...

"They're entitled to the consequences of their actions; depriving them of consequences infantilizes them."

I don't even know where to begin. You already say you don't watch sports or even have a TV, yet you feel free to mis-categorize these athletes based on your own, misguided, perception. Through this all, the University, athletic department, and most importantly of all, the students /athletes themselves were above reproach. Truly man, you need to figure out, from where this attitude comes.

k said...

Hardin: Sid Rosenberg hadn't been on the show as a regular for years. I think you're referring to Bernard McGuirk, or maybe you don't really know what you're talking about, were not a regular listener, and pretty much ate up what Media Matters had to say.

Kurmudge said...

John Stodder, anything one believes is a matter of how one weights the evidence. But there is a lot of good circumstantial evidence that Media Matters indeed has very strong supportive ties to Hillary. Here is John Perazzo's analysis, take it for what you think it's worth, but consider the points before you dismiss it.

Anonymous said...

God damnned feminist radicals have nothing better to do than ruin the whole world

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Right from the Hillary's! mouth. She started or supported Media Matters [or so she bragged to the Yearly Kos Convention at 2:45 on this YouTube].

Unknown said...

Speaking of women being trashed...

Clinton presses for White House papers

By JESSICA MINTZ, Associated Press Writer Fri Nov 2, 6:00 PM ET

REDMOND, Wash. - Former President Clinton said Friday that a letter he wrote to the National Archives was to expedite release of his papers, not slow the process or hide anything as rivals are suggesting in criticism of his wife.

Hillary Rodham Clinton was quizzed during this week's Democratic presidential debate as to why correspondence between her and her husband from their White House years remained bottled up at the National Archives. Barack Obama said that was a problem for her as a candidate after "we have just gone through one of the most secretive administrations in our history."

One issue is whether Bill Clinton had sent a letter to the Archives asking that the communications not be released until 2012, and whether Hillary Clinton would lift any ban, a question raised by debate moderator Tim Russert.

"She was incidental to the letter, it was done five years ago, it was a letter to speed up presidential releases, not to slow them down," the former president told reporters Friday. "And she didn't even, didn't know what he was talking about. And now that I've described to you what the letter said, you can readily understand why she didn't know what he was talking about."

Russert's question "was breathtakingly misleading," Bill Clinton said.

In response, Barbara L. Levin, spokeswoman for NBC, said: "Tim's question was entirely on the mark."

Clinton said that under the presidential documents law, he is not required to release any material until 2012.

"Unlike previous presidents, I have already released one million pages of documents, about half of which affect Hillary — the records of the health care task force," Clinton said.

He spoke to reporters after delivering remarks to Microsoft Corp. employees about corporate giving in connection with his book, "Giving."

Unknown said...

Is TC gay?

Unknown said...

Bilby asks: "Why does the left wing engage in such obvious projection as to claim the right is assigning their ethics to the left?"

Because we hate America and everything it stands for?

Anonymous said...

Trumpit said..."Choosing a dysfunctional black lifestyle gets mocked..." And all of you commen-
tators think the same ( pro or con,
liberal or conservative ). Well, you're all a pack of jackasses.
Me, I spent nearly 20 years as a defense attorney ( Criminal jury trials, Family Court judge trials...) in the 'hoods of the south Bronx, Mount Vernon,Yonkers, White Plains...
So let me educate you smart-ass bleeding-heart liberals, whether you CALL yourselves feminists,
pragmatists, good ole boys,conser- vatives,liberals, faggots, les- bians... You're all a pack of smart-ass selfish fools, egotists who know nothing of what you blather on so self-righteously about.
A "dysfunctional black lifestyle"
it may be to us. But to those who live it ? How would they know the differance with all the femi- nists,gays,lesbians...-and the other people whose lives depend on the maintenance of the status quo/
"dysfunctional black lifestyle" in
order to maintain their privileged life-styles- living and behaving as if its normal for a black woman
living on welfare to have 17 children, all by different fathers
or for black men to spend half or more of their lives behind bars.
It is those -such as that old goat [U.S. District Court Judge] Leonard Sand or the NAACP's attorney Michael Sussman or those ninnies in NOW or any other kinds of social engineers who never learned about the law of unintended consequences/
that good intentions often produce bad results- who are more responsible for the maintenance of that crap that I dealt with every- day for nearly 20 years. All of whom live upper-class life-styles (miles away from "da 'hood") while they bleed the U.S. Treasury and keep enough black people in ignorance and dependancy to bleed U.S. taxpayers (state and local as well) ever more every day.
Its not just "dysfunctional black" people who need a kick in the ass. ALL the WHITE...people who are complicit in this lunacy are just as much/more to blame -most particularly the feminists, women who dont know their fannies from their elbows, their boom-booms from their kitties... It is these foolish women who thereby continue to doom ALL women to permanent lives of irrelevance, servitude and worse -as well as hastening the extinction of the human race.


Unknown said...

When Bill Clinton communicates with his library he is corresponding with himself through the mandarin he placed in charge. Spare me the kabuki theater of telling yourself to hurry up while privately dragging anchor.

Unknown said...

You're full of usual...and if you're saying Clinton is lying...provide any source of evidence you feel relevant.

First of all, there's NO obligation to release anything until 2012, and why not check out Bush's record relating to releasing damn near anything to anybody.

Unknown said...

Tom sounds like a really nice Republican.

John Stodder said...

First of all, there's NO obligation to release anything until 2012...

Bill Clinton has fogged your brain, LOS, by changing the subject on you without your noticing it.

The legal obligations upon the Clintons are completely irrelevant to the issue. Bill can throw a tantrum all he wants, he can say he's released more papers than Kimberly-Clark, but the issue won't go away until the press and her opponents have access to all her WH records. She can refuse, but then she will be attacked for being evasive. "I'm under no legal obligation" is not a defense to that charge.

Presidential candidates are under no legal obligation to release their tax returns publicly either. But most of them do, and the ones that don't get called on it by their opponents.

This is the Clinton technique: Giving an answer to a question you didn't ask and pretending that's the answer to the question you did ask. Nobody's saying she's breaking the law. They're saying if she wants to be president, she needs to open up the files.

Steven said...

Ah, Luckyoldson. What would we do around here without you and your ignorant ranting?

I'm still waiting for you to explain what "David Korish" [sic] has to do with the Ruby Ridge incident, which happened a year earlier than and over a thousand miles away from the Waco siege. Come on, take your time. I'm sure you can eventually type in another half-assed, ignorant, self-righteous answer, if you put forth enough effort.

Unknown said...

I think it wonderful that the right wing projects to such an extent. Of course we missed their "moral outrage" when Georgie Jr. sealed all of Georgie Seniors stuff so daddy's dirty linen wouldn't be shown the light of day. remember that?

The right wing on here reads like an advertisement for mass production. .. you know, the the factory that made 2 products, a mouth and an ass and they sold them to republicans because they were interchangeable....

if this is the extent of the right wing thought product on this board (the posts in this thread i mean) then i've come to the right place....although the fish in a barrel analogy is coming to the surface.

dick said...


The difference is that Georgie was not campaigning on all the executive experience he got in his father's administration. If Hillary got all this supposed "executive experience" while Bubba was president, then show us what it was so we can accept that you have even a clue about how to be a decision maker. That is why there is all this call for releasing the records. The same as with Kerry releasing his military records. He was campaigning on what he did then, so prove that he did and settle the issue.

That they want to wait until after the candidacy is settled and the major primaries are over is really cheating the rest of the candidates. What she is saying to them is that she has all this experience and they will just have to take her word for it. Sorry but taking the word of someone who has been on every side of every issue is not the answer to the question that was asked.

Pastafarian said...

Sheesh. All of this newsprint, all of this blogging, and furious typing, because someone I've never heard speak for even one second said nappy headed hoes.

Such a waste of time.

John Stodder said...

I think it wonderful that the right wing projects to such an extent. Of course we missed their "moral outrage" when Georgie Jr. sealed all of Georgie Seniors stuff so daddy's dirty linen wouldn't be shown the light of day. remember that?

What??? John Edwards and Barack Obama are "right wing?"

Your statement about the "Georgies" evidently made you feel all warm and toasty inside, but it's irrelevant. The subject is not whether the public has a legal right to see HRC's WH papers before 2012. We obviously don't. The question is whether voters can conclude she is being evasive by not seeing to their prompt release. Of course they can, and Obama and Edwards are clearly counting on that.

Even Pavlov's dogs didn't start drooling til they heard the bell. But I guess to the conceited "do," the answer to every question is "youdidn'tsayanythingwhenBushdidit." And that's how we know he's real intelligent-like.

The Homer-Simpson allusion in his pseudonym is apt.

Unknown said...

Georgie and Georgie are not irrelevant. Shrub covered up for his dad. You know it and you just don't like it when someone exposes your lack of thought process.

and little upright dick, hillary isn't campaigning on executive experience that she got in the white house. that is the typical rightwing bullshit that rush et al assign to her and hope to make it stick.

but we can talk about georgie jr's vast executive experience....that's a hoot. lol. the guy who put the me back in idiot.

John Stodder said...

All right, "do." Let me explain it in very simple terms. Read it slowly, and if you don't get it the first time, read it again.

Barack Obama raised the issue of Hillary's White House files. He is a Democrat. He thinks Senator Clinton is being evasive about them. He is making a campaign issue about it.

If Hillary responded the way you think she should, citing "Georgie and Georgie," that would be a bad campaign tactic.

Why is that?

Because it would make Obama's point. It would be continuing the evasion. Obama believes the public should see these records so her tenure can be judged by the voters in the upcoming primaries.

This issue came up on a Democratic candidate debate, which is part of the Democratic nominating process. Right-wingers are mostly not involved in it. That's why your "Georgie and Georgie" comment is irrelevant.

I'm not bothering to challenge whether Bush covered up records for his father. I don't know if it's true or not, but it doesn't matter for purposes of this discussion. Nor does Bush's lack of experience going into the White House. Bush is almost finished being president.

However, you are wrong in saying Hillary and her supporters haven't raised the issue of her White House experience in her campaign. You can see for yourself by clicking on this link from her website:

And this story in the LA Times indicates the message is working:

So that's why Obama wants to see those records. He wants to undermine her reputation by finding out if she made any mistakes when she worked there.

Obama is not a right winger. He is also considered very intelligent, so his "thought process" is probably pretty good.

Got it?

dick said...


Then where could she possibly have gotten all this executive experience that she is talking about. She told us she ran the healthcare initiative in his first term and that was so bad even the democrats who controlled Congress and the Senate at the time wouldn't vote for it. What other executive experience does she have? How are we to know that she can make decisions? She runs and hides like a little baby from all the hateful people who are disrespecting her. Is that a good sign of an executive? You think that if she says something it is by definition true. I don't agree. If she has executive experience, then roll it on out and show us that she does. If she doesn't, then don't keep campaigning that she does.

And the bit about releasing it after the initial and major primaries are over is a good sign that she has been lying through her teeth all this time about what she did then. If she weren't then she should be happy to prove it and shut up all these mean men who disrespect her and pile on.

On another note, how can we expect her to handle the leaders of the other countries if she cannot even stand to have the guys who are campaigning against her call her on what she says. Do you think that these leaders will pull their punches because she is a woman? Maggie Thatcher she ain't but Maggie gave as good as she got. I just don't see Hillary doing this and that is why I want to see what she is basing all her decision making ability on. She can't point to her legislative career since she has been on almost every side of every issue there. Her only other option is either the White House or the time when Bubba was governor of Arkansas and her only leadership role there resulted in the educational standings of Arkansas to drop 2 levels while they had big tax increases to cover her initiatives so I can't see her using that one. YMMV may vary but I think she has a lot to prove and I don't think she can do it.

skaus said...

To get back to the original topic, the Clintons, who owe their first co-Presidency to Don Imus, immediately shunned him once they got what thery wanted. Much like Mort Sahl was shunned by the Kennedys.

Imus gave a speech smack dab in the middle of the Lewinsky situation (the kanoodleing, not the scandal) that was right on the money. if you find a shot of the daggers that Hillary was shooting the I-man, you know that this was a hit job. why was Media Matters monitoring the Imus show, except to do the dirty work for the H-Woman?

Fen said...

How are we to know that she can make decisions?

Hillary was very good at trashing the women her husband harassed/assualted. I'm sure those skills will translate.

Unknown said...

this is all the typical squalid republican bullshit....

fen...please let me know the names of all those women Hillary assualted...if she didn't then Bill's behavior - most of it alleged - has to do with Hillary. Surely your wife stands behind you even when you say stupid things.

As to executive experience...I'm watching the early news on CNBC before work now...watching the Citi boss demise...the great executive experience...then I think of Rudy...and New York and laugh a big laugh and then I think of Rudy and Bernie Kerik and laugh and laugh and then I think of Fred Thompson and Law and Order and laugh and laugh...oh then I think of Noun Verb 911 and Rudy and laugh and laugh.

Yes. I'll take Hillary's executive experience over these two nar' do wells.

The obvious Rupukican tactic this time out will be "hey vote for me by default" as you all try and pin bullshit on Hillary yet have nothing positive to offer or can offer on your side.

Fen said...

fen...please let me know the names of all those women Hillary assualted

Strawman. I said she "trashed the women Bill harassed/assaulted". Names are Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Monica Lewinkisy.

But I agree with you re her candidacy: if I had to vote Democrat... its obvious Hillary is the only adult in the room. Her corruption would protect us - she can't loot the US Treasury if Al Queda nukes it. Kinda a deal with Devil.

Parker Smith said...

I remember when Imus had a strict policy of always referring to Bill Clinton as "big butt Bill 'Bubba' Clinton and his psychotically ambitious wife, Hillary".

Then 'Bubba' came on the show, obviously incredibly well prepped, and charmed Imus' socks off.

I have the feeling Imus has since strongly regretted ever warming up to either of the Clintons - but it shows how good Bill can be in the one-on-one.