Keith Olbermann, the Kossack Cheerleaders, and Fake President Maddow

[samplegirl]

For eight years, progressives gnashed their teeth as the media and people on the right blindly applauded everything George W. Bush said or did. Chris Matthews would call a speech (yes, read from a teleprompter) "Churchillian." Wingnuts everywhere referred to him as "our president" and demanded that we all support "our president" -- blindly, utterly, completely -- as the heinousness escalated.

We've always felt we were different because we didn't always have to march in lockstep. I felt Obama's speech was lackluster, with more-of-the-same futile gestures towards "post-partisanship" with people who would like to see him dead, empty calls for commissions to talk the BP spill to death while the oil continues to gush into a dying Gulf of Mexico, and finally, because he seemed to not know what else to do, a call to prayer -- perhaps designed to try to get the Dominionist right to like him but instead sounding like a gesture of futility. Over at Balloon Juice, the sense is that the speech was sober, reasoned, and showed leadership. I respect John and Doug and the others for that opinion, even if I disagree with it, because where they're coming from is NOT some kind of blind faith in 11-dimensional chess, but a different interpretation of the speech.

No one was expecting Barack Obama to put on a wetsuit and fix the spill himself. What we were hoping for is the courage to use the spill as a launchpoint for a serious addressing of our dependence on fossil fuels. That doesn't make us Limbaugh dittoheads.

It's no secret that getting progressives to agree on much of anything is like herding cats -- except over at the Great Orange Satan, where any criticism of Barack Obama is met with scorn, troll ratings, and attempts at banning. For many Kossacks, the delusion that Obama is some kind of progressive visionary Superman dies hard -- so hard that trashing two of the most stalwart guardians of progressive values in the media became the order of the day, in diaries like Dear Rachel Maddow and Memo to Keith Olbermann: Go - - - - yourself.

Well, Mr. Olbermann has had quite enough of being trashed for refusing to participate in this kind of blind worship of even Democratic politicians as demigods:

If I can understand people's frustration with seeing a speech by a Democratic president criticized in a venue such as mine, why is it impossible for some people here to accept my frustration about the speech? You don't agree with me, fine. You don't want to watch because you don't agree with me, fine. But to accuse me, after five years of risking what I have to present the truth as I see it, of staging something for effect, is deeply offensive to me and is an indication of what has happened here.

You want Cheerleaders? Hire the Buffalo Jills. You want diaries with conspiracy theories, go nuts. If you want this site the way it was even a year ago, let me know and I'll be back.

Call Olbermann a crybaby if you want. But this is a guy who gets envelopes of white powder and death threats because of the things he says. When Ari Fleischer threatened all of America by ordering them to "Watch what they say, watch what they do", Olbermann was there. Night after night, as people who would turn this country into a right-wing Christian military theocracy that resembles Iran more than what we know of as America, Olbermann exposes them. This is the guy who brought Rachel Maddow out of the swamp of the dying Air America Radio and out where more people could hear the most ferociously smart commentator on American politics we've seen since Edward R. Murrow. For a guy whose ego is reputed to be bigger than Mt. Everest, that's no small thing. But let him criticize Barack Obama, and he's persona non grata among the Freepers of the Left.


http://brilliantatbreakfast.blogspot.com/

[Name removed]

1. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[patrice]

3. Both sides need to learn how to identify authenticity & the fact that, e.g., I can agree with critic

ism of the President almost completely, and still support him, at this time and perhaps all of the way to a possible LOSS in 2012, or, maybe a WIN in 2012.

My problems with folks like Keith O and Rachel M, have to do with the zero sum "thinking" that they trigger at a time when the macro factors are in serious (though perhaps not profound) transition.

In re the future and how people will vote > Everyone NEEDS to learn:

1. how to play their hands quite a bit closer to their chests - FOR THEIR OWN GOOD!!
2. how to play to other peoples' hands, including the President's whenever there is an opportunity;
3. they ARE affecting what opportunities to "play to the President's hand" there will be by bidding wrong and too early, going it alone, and generally telegraphing what they are holding and what they will do with it;
4. and when it all fails, guess who will get the blame once again, so that everyone will feel justified in copping out on the real struggle (not just the one going on in their own heads).

[Berry Cool]

16. Keith and Rachel are not zero-sum thinkers.

Don't blame them for triggering zero-sum thinking. Only people who do zero-sum thinking can be triggered into it, and they trigger themselves. They alone are responsible for how they process what they hear.

[highplainsdem]

4. K&R

[samplegirl]

5. Seems to me...

the democrats need to invent one those farm & ranch teams!

[treestar]

6. If the speech had not been "lackluster" than it would have been

just a speech and no action.

The cheerleader term I believe is frowned upon here.

You know I'm getting tired of this. Yes we don't march in lockstep and don't cheerlead and criticize at the first opportunity no matter what it may do. Then don't complain about not getting anything done. Don't complain about how the Rs get what THEY want while we never do. We chose instead the luxury of never marching in lockstep and never giving the POTUS elected from our party an inch. If that's what we chose, then we can quit complaining about the Rs getting their way while we don't.

[On the Road]

65. That is an Interesting Observation

I don't disagree with the criticisms of Obama, they just don't enrage me they way they seem to do a lot of people.

What's more important is for Obama to pursue the rest of his platform. That's what I want from him.

And as you point out, the lack of support from his base does have an impact on that.

[Joe Fields]

75. Why should we give ANY POTUS an inch, be they R or D?

Obama has renigged on 90 percent of what he campaigned on, and has sided with big business interests, to the detriment of the working class people. Fuck anyone who does that. But I will say one thing: He does look good.

[Child_Of_Isis]

7. I was surprised to see so many at DU turn against him.

Especially after so much he has done. To disagree is one thing, but to totally denounce him, definitely surprised me.

[jp11]

14. I'm surprised daily at how a portion of members here will side with this

or that, attack this or defend that and so on, sometimes without even seeming to read or attempt to understand the why/details. I doubt I will ever stop being surprised what people here agree with or don't.

[pezDispenser]

44. yea its alot of work

increasing our troop levels to Iraq/Afghanistan to the highst ever
pushing so hard for a public option
lets not forget all that work he did to get Guantanamo closed within a year

At what point does this guy show up for work?

[lbrtbell]

59. I used to be a staunch KO supporter, but no more

He's been getting on my nerves ever since he joined Twitter. Childish arguing with haters despite multiple pleas from people to stop feeding trolls...showing utter ignorance by failing to understand simple questions, including one of mine which I had to explain about three times before his "Ivy League educated" mind finally grasped it...and now this.

I don't care if he criticized Obama's speech. I've disagreed with him on a number of issues over the years, long before I started posting at DU.

But his whiny DKos post is the last straw for me. Average people on DKos, DU, or any other forum gets trashed every single day, and we manage to survive it. He acted like a bratty 13-year-old girl on a Miley Cyrus forum, acting like a drama queen after getting flamed by another poster.

If he hasn't matured in 51 years, it's not going to happen. I have better things to do than waste my time tuning in to some overgrown child who overreacts to the criticism of ONE person (who apologized to him, no less).

When someone can't accept an apology, it says far more about that person, than it does about the person who offended him/her in the first place.

[dgibby]

69. I don't do twitter, so can't comment on that,

but I am willing to cut Keith some slack. This has been a bad time for him, losing both parents with in such a short time, the stress of having his father in ICU for months, watching him suffer,having to make the decision to let him go, etc.

Grief can be very debilitating, and manifests itself in a myraid of ways. Some people can't stop crying, some get angry, some slip into depression. Some even get furious at the person who died for leaving them. It's very complicated.

The way you're describing Keith's behavior on Twitter suggests to me that he is expressing his grief through anger. On the other hand, he does have a reputation for being thin skinned, so it could be that, or maybe it's a little bit of both. Whatever it is, I'm still willing to cut him some slack.

[geek tragedy]

8. What's funny is that anyone who disagrees with Maddow or Olbermann

get smeared by their fanpeople on the Interwebs.

For instance, the "Dear Rachel Maddow" diary was extremely respectful towards Maddow. But, the author lied their ass off and said it was a "Fuck you" to her.

[izzybeans]

9. Olberman cheerleads himself.

and Fake President Maddow...wtf was that about?

It's not about cheerleading, its about responding to the actual words in the speech, not made up ones. Not the speech you wanted to give in your fantasy world, or wish someone else would give in your fantasy world. I thought my wife said it best, "why must they posture just to pretend they are objective. They undermined their own objectivity by canning their response before hand and providing an entire post speech commentary completely disconnected from the actual words of the speech." It was the inverse of Tweety's churchillian comments really. He wanted his leg to tickle before the speech so he peed himself just to prep for it.

I watched MSNBC during the Bush year's because it had the air of more objectivity to it. It turns out it may have just been a broken clock I was looking at precisely at the two times a day it was correct.

But its easy to sit and throw flames when you are nothing but a speechifier with no skin in the game like all cable fake news pundits and us on the web. Obama through $20 billion at their asses the next day and they were too busy petting themselves to fucking put any of it into perspective last night. Instead it was about "aw some people on the pornoweb don't agree with me so I'm leaving!!!" Or "another rightwing wack job thinks I'm biased. Nuewssss at 11!!!!!" They do nothing different than what we do on this board, which is just provide commentary. If they start referring to Faux news as the "site that can't be named" then we will have come full circle. I wish they used their platform in ways that weren't so interchangeable with some random internet posting.

I gave up on anyone (except Rachel Maddow, who I wish would drop the he said she said shit and give us meaningful research on subjects she's fully capable of leading on) at MSNBC being anything but a contrarian a long time ago. I've gone back to searching for what the experts are saying about contemporary issues in writing. They drop the ball each time the bitch and moan about Obama when they could be digging up interesting fixes to problems, explaining complex issues so we can judge them for ourselves. Instead, its all electioneering all the time. "Whoa! He's too calm to be presidential!" "What! he's too emotional to be presidential!!" "What will we ever do now!!!"

[Bette Noir]

11. I'd vote for Fake President Maddow any day of the week,

and if you think you're smarter than my Keithie, bring it.

[izzybeans]

12. Is it a contest?

I'd vote for real President Maddow not the fake one. It's beneath her.

I could give a rip about Olbermann or how smart you think he may or may not be. It's immaterial...but I think he's a smart guy. That doesn't mean I can't also believe that there are plenty of people here or on any other progressive board who are interchangeable with him. So, sure he's a smart guy but you could read any half decent rant on here on air and it would fit right in.

None of this means I will ever march in lock step with our favored telescreen channel, ever. Same with any politician. What I didn't like was the utter disconnected response from the speech, which was pretty stark in its brevity in comparison to what the talking heads are focusing on. The f'n President of the United States basically admitted that our calamities have outpaced our technological capacity to fix them, so he convened people who now better than we to focus on what to do next. When a president tells a nation to get to work and asks people to pray that our congress has the political courage to act boldly, that's a big f'n deal. Now Olbermann is pissing and moaning about being called on his completely tone deaf response.

My take on Maddow's fake speech, take it or leave it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[Berry Cool]

18. You won't "march in lock step with our favored telescreen channel"

yet you WILL march in lockstep with the president...just like the Bushies.

Amazing.

[izzybeans]

19. Comprehension fail.

Nice work. Before casting your judgments, read the words. I's actually a simple process. Giving my opinion about Obama's speech isn't marching in lock step, but if you want lock step, go frog march your orders to fall in line elsewhere.

good day.

[Ignis]

49. "I's actually a simple process. " A rogue AI?!?

[dionysus]

70. see, you're supposed to march in lock step AGAINST the dems. get with the program

[roguevalley]

25. K&R

[sabrina 1]

50. So would I, but I would settle for Obama removing

several of his advisers and replacing them with people as smart as Rachel and Keith.

Who, eg, advised him to lift the ban on Offshore Drilling? And slam the 'left' and environmentalists as he did it? Whoever it was should be fired as it was probably one of the worst pieces of advice ever given to a president. That is assuming that Obama did not come up the idea himself, which I doubt as he was very much against lifting the ban when he slammed McCain for promising to do so.

[Vattel]

66. izzybeans seems to be smarter than KO,

but sorry izzybeans: that's not saying much.

[Berry Cool]

17. "No skin in the game"? Are you kidding? Did YOU have white powder delivered to YOU?

YOU, and the rest of us on DU, are the people with "no skin in the game"--not Olbermann & Maddow. You damn well BET they have skin in the game. And they DID listen to the speech, and they DID think about it. The mere fact that their opinions disagreed with yours doesn't mean they failed to do those things. Deal with it.

[izzybeans]

20. .

Sensitive. Sensitive.

I'm talking about decision-making. I want to see what they sound like when they actually have to lead something.

I want Rachel Maddow to run for office. She'd be great. I hope she sounds like that on the stump, on the congressional floor, and when she crafts legislation. That's what I want. I want someone like her to get out of this stupid little commentary game and do something. She has talent, smarts, guts, etc. She is better than this. Someone like her shouldn't be reduced to pretendsies. Keith Olbermann reads teleprompters for a living, always has.

[laughingliberal]

38. I consider the press important. I believe Thomas Jefferson did too.

Those who believe in and work for the public's right to know are vital to a democracy.

[newspeak]

22. actually, I listened to O's speech

but not to Maddow or KO about the speech. I cringed at the AQ moment-here we go again, terror, terror, terror. I thought the speech was just another speech-not one where you wanted to stand up a yell, "hell, yeah", let's get moving-roll up our sleeves and start working now on green energy and energy independence. And, the "god bless us everyone" at the end-I had thoughts of *. That's my perception of the speech-didn't have to listen to Maddow or KO. So flame away!

It was funny, Stewart had a clip of President Ford on last night-showing a calendar-telling the public about each month when congress didn't pass bills for energy independence. And, I thought, since Ford we've been attempting to change our energy ways-I think Carter was the most effective, then Reagan dismantled all of it for his little oil buddies. Of course, we all know that the Bush family are oil men-so no progress there.

But just like health care-years and years go by and nothing big is ever accomplished--just maintaining the status quo. If we do not grow (that means innovation, social evolution) as a country, we will stagnate and die.

[izzybeans]

24. That was a pretty telling bit on Stewart. It makes the entire country

(mostly the leadership, but us for going along) look foolish. I hope Obama gets that and he better do more than pray that Congress does something soon on the climate bill and energy. That's for damned sure.

[elocs]

10. Calling people "cheerleaders" or "haters" who want a pony is intellectually lazy.

Those labels are used dismissively here at DU to shut people up without specifically addressing issues or differences.

The irony is that both sides may have the same root. The "cheerleaders" are great admirers of Obama and desperately want him to succeed and are hyper-defensive toward those they believe are overly critical of Obama.

Likewise, those who are accused of being Obama "haters" or who "expect a pony" may likely be those who also greatly admire Obama, but whose hopes and expectations of what he might do are unreasonable or they perceived him to be what they wanted him to be rather than what he really is and always has been. They are disappointed and often people become critical of those they perceive as having let them down.

Either way it would be nice if we could get away from dismissing one another using the extreme labels and find common ground to come together and make things better.

[KoKo]

13. There's a long list of folks who stood up against George Bush who have been trashed ...

by many on the Left who we thought supported a new Progressive Movement. The Movement we thought we created turned on those they originally supported and are now trying to crush those people.

I won't go into the list but folks who've been here for a long time will know the names. The Helen Thomas "incident" is one of the latest but the Olbermann/Maddow fracus is the the current.

Some will not be happy until the last person who speaks out for Progressive's views are silenced. Or, not even Progressive views...but the truth against Democratic Establishment's views.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

26. What she said -

I like truth and moral consistency. Which is why I still watch folks like Jon, Rachel, Amy, and Keith and still find they opinions and perspectives of interest.

Truth and moral consitency reign supreme -- over Party, over personality.

[theFrankFactor]

35. +1 Careful! You'll make us a stronger, more effective party!

[dflprincess]

40. It's more the centrists, not the left that trashes anyone

who doesn't blindly go along with anything this administration does.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

55. LOL. Certain self proclaimed members of the left demand lockstep as much as anyone.

They just demand it to their vision of what a true liberal is. Want proof? Watch someone post something about capitalism. You'll have a swarm of people calling that person a corporatist or a fascist in no time. Or go to the IP forum where the slightest suggestion that the issue is complicated gets you labelled a Zionist or some such nonsense.

Even with this issue! I like Keith and I said as much the night he reacted to the speech (which I thought was so so). But I think Keith is acting like a jackass here...NOT because he is leaving Kos, but because he is writing a GBCW post to do it. GBCW posts are pointless pleas for attention.

But i say that and people assume I must hate Olbermann because he didn't like Obamas speech.

[Berry Cool]

15. K&R n/t

[jonnyblitz]

21. K & r, nt

[D23MIURG23]

23. I find a lot of pieces like this mildly self-contradictory.

The force of this article seems to be criticizing a certain segment of the left for employing overheated rhetoric and exaggerated disapproval in a knee-jerk defense of their favored authority. He does this by calling them all freepers, and talking about how much better his preferred authority is. If the main substance of your article is related to tone, you should probably try to take the high road in that department.

[Skinner]

27. I think it's hilarious that Olbermann is letting people on the intertubes get to him.

Keith, you don't get it: People complain about you because you are worth complaining about. The only thing worse than having people on the Internet whine about you is having them not care.

[Number23]

28. A lesson that I'm sure you know all too well.

[Radical Activist]

32. It's bizarre that he let it bother him that much.

A guy with millions of viewers each night should be able to suck it up and be happy that most liberals are still fans.

[ShamelessHussy]

45. until you start getting mailed packets of white powder, then it's not so funny anymore

and who would want to associate with folks (online or not) who are attacking you?

why did you create DU? sick of not being able to go anywhere online that wasn't full of reTHUGs?

get it?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

54. Nobody on Kos mailed him any powder. One commenter was a dick to him

I find it ludicrous that he bravely faces nutjobs sending him powder but is cut to the quick by some random poster. Good lord, I've been called worse.

[bleever]

52. Damn you, Skinner!

And I hope you and KO and the (mostly) rest of us will be laughing about this shortly.

Some foul ball into the seats can whack a good fan for no reason, but we don't give up the game, even if we do take a harder look at the parks we attend.

[Skittles]

57. but

it is very bad when Keith speaks the truth and is slammed by people who believe in blind worship - the very same people who not long ago could not even begin to understand the blind worship of bush

[Number23]

29. The Dear Rachel blog wasn't really that bad

I think it gave Maddow the respect that she deserves. She's pretty cool in my book, not that I've seen that much of her.

[WeDidIt]

30. Thin skinned

Olbermann needs to thicken his skin. He let one comment from an anonymous poster push him into a GBCW.

What a whiny asshole.

[Radical Activist]

31. Come down from your cross.

No one is being martyred. It looks like more than half the threads about Obama on DU are usually attacking him. No one is being forced to march in lock step. I didn't even notice comments personally attacking Rachel and Keith on DU. I did notice many comments condemning those who attacked Rachel and Keith.

Obama used the speech to call for seriously addressing our dependence on fossil fuels. So I'm not sure what your criticism is unless you want it done with more drama like Rachel did.

[theFrankFactor]

37. Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time

Yeah but that was weeks ago! PATHETIC!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energ...

[William Z. Foster]

39. no one attacks Obama

I don't see anyone attacking Obama. Some self-appointed "defenders of Obama" are attacked once in a while, but even that is rare.

People have specific criticisms to make about specific decisions and actions, and those are usually well supported and well reasoned. You may disagree with them, of course.

If it seems to some people that there is "too much criticism" of the administration, that could be for one of two reasons. Either there are some people looking for any excuse to criticize the administration, as you and others claim, or perhaps there actually have been a lot of decisions by the administration that are at odds with what people here stand for.

I think that for the most part the critics of the administration are consistent - they are still opposed to the exact same things they were opposed to under the last administration, and are expressing their opposition the exact same way and for the same reasons. You may not oppose those things that they oppose, you may not agree with the critics, but they are being consistent. The inconsistency lies with those who opposed certain things when the last administration did them, but now defend and support those same things when this administration does them.

Therefore, the logical conclusion is that this administration is in fact doing many things that people here oppose, have always opposed, and this is why there is criticism here of the administration, and it is not the case that people are merely looking for things in order to be able to criticize the administration.

[laughingliberal]

48. Well said. Thank you. nt

[Radical Activist]

71. You must be thinking of another board.

I criticize Obama on issues when it's warranted.

You left out a third group with a different set of behaviors.

1) Ignore anything positive or progressive he does on an issue.
2) Exaggerate the failings.
3) Make the worst assumptions about Obama's motivations or future actions based on little or no solid information.

That's the behavior that gets so tiring, and it describes a number of posts I've seen from you. It describes the most vocal Obama critics on this board. It doesn't seem objective or issue-based to me. It looks like the approach of people who are stuck in a rut and still use the same attack mode they had with Bush.

[dionysus]

72. "no one attacks Obama"

[William Z. Foster]

77. I believe you

I think it is possible that you do actually think that people are "attacking Obama."

[NoPasaran]

33. When did "heinousness" become a word?

Someone should be in jail for that crime.

[frustrated_lefty]

34. I'd bet he's received a lot of hate mail

which sucks when the other side has already sent fake anthrax. I'd get tired of it, too.

[GeorgeGist]

36. Frankly folks ...

Jon Stewart, Steven Colbert and their staffs blow them all away.

Their simple secret is critical thinking that makes you laugh.

[Kermitt Gribble]

41. K&R! n/t

[20score]

42. Thanks for posting this. These "Freepers of the Left" are not helping.

Their fealty to a person instead of ideals and ideas, hurts all the causes they say they support. How much better would the healthcare bill be if these people were thinking instead of cheer-leading? Same with financial reform, Afghanistan, the PATRIOT ACT, etc.

They are exhibiting some truly terrible qualities.

[KonaKane]

43. What exactly is a "Freeper of the Left"?

That term makes absolutely no sense.

[ShamelessHussy]

47. a zealot

every group has them, especially in politics.

[KonaKane]

73. Sounds just like baiting language

because some here may not always agree. I don't see it as a particularly great way to refer to your "fellows" on a Democratic forum.

[ShamelessHussy]

78. i think it is fair to say that about some...

and it is true, especially in political groups.

so, please don't make it out like i am calling out du'ers, or du in general... shoot this is my favorite hangout online, because i love the people on here!

happy friday

[Skittles]

58. oh yes it does

people exhibiting the same kind of blind worship on the left as freeper trash

[JVS]

64. Wouldn't that make them the Freepers of the "center-left"?

[Ignis]

74. I agree with everything except the "left" there.

[DeSwiss]

46. K&R!!!

EXACTLY!

[Waiting For Everyman]

51. Keith rocks. That's the best they've got to "smear" him with?

That's a credit to KO then, and leaves "the lame" all over his wannabe detractors. Liliputians! LOL.

[winstars]

53. LOSTA GOOD POINTS!!!!

Dig the KO brought us Rachel from the dying Air America... TRUE TRUE TRUE!!! That alone gives my man the get out of jail card,period... The other night, after my Prez spoke, I was like 'SAY WHAT,' then Tweety and KO and Rachel flipped out, more than I thought they should and then proceeded to I CHANGE THE CHANNEL TO DISCOVERY or "CAKE BOSS" and everything was cool... Like the prez says, some people don't watch cable 24/7, I actually sort of do but know when to chill the fuck out. Fellow brother and sister DU'ers, please try to remember that even the most contrary thing this administration says or does that we would want to be 'more progressive or at least somewhat more progressive' would be 100000000% worse with the pugs in charge. (Christie Whitman anyone???)

KO rocks even on a bad night (and there are some) but he is fighting the good fight, imperfectly at time but still on our side!!!!!!!!!!


Tweety: His thing is like what time is it???? OK, that's my position TODAY!!!!


Rachel for President!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (or at least for mod of MTP instead of the Rovian dancer/bad french speaker/never heard of the follow up question/JohnKing looking motherfucker (yes, Gregory is soooooooooooo bad that he now LOOKS LIKE JOHN KING OPPOSED TO THE OLD WAY OF JOHN KING LOOKING LIKE DAVID GREGORY.))

[Skittles]

56. a sizeable segment of DU participates in blind worship

I can only imagine what it is like for people speaking the truth in the media these days as I see how they are treated here

[Hubert Flottz]

60. I love it when the very first response busts a freeper...

LMAO! K&R

[earth mom]

61. Freepers of the left....

That's not going to sit well around here.

[cleveramerican]

62. no one would ever confuse me with a cheerleader

In republican circles I would never give voice to the small bitches I have with the President.
But here among friends... I feel perfectly free to let them fly.

I always thought it was a good thing to think critically about one's own positions.

[Enthusiast]

63. I will continue to watch Olbermann

& Maddow every evening.

[Catherina]

67. Too late to recommend but +1 n/t

[depakid]

68. Well said

It's impossible for any reasonable and observant person not to have noticed this. Moreover, if ever there was a phenomena that would be more likely to draw support away from the President and the Democratic party (other than catering to and adopting Republican policies) I can't think of one.

[JHB]

76. Bravo!