BS: Liberal hate

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: CarolC
Date: 10 May 06 - 05:00 PM

I differ in the notion that conservative Republicans back Bush. They really never have. The most that can be said is that Bush successfully divided Republicans (as nobody before had) into conservatives -- as had always been defined that way, and neo-conservatives which are, in effect, pro-war liberals. :^)

I agree with a lot of this. But I do know several "old school" (paleo) conservatives who backed GW Bush (and still do), because he was on their "team" and they felt he could win. For many people (on both sides, really), that is enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 May 06 - 04:39 PM

BB, isn't it possible that what you and Cohen are assuming is anger and hatred is actually motivation, and that, far from liberals losing the next presidential election, this indicates that there is a substantial number of people in this counrty who are sufficiently fed up with the Bush administration and are eager to throw the bums out? It certainly shows that a lot of people tend to agree with the things Colbert was saying.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 May 06 - 04:11 PM

Ebbie,

I did read to site. I don't agree with all of it, but understand the anger. Now, please let me know why you think that anger is worth losing the election over?

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 May 06 - 03:17 PM

BillD

I made the error of thinking that there were thinking people here. In all but a few cases, I have been proven wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Bill D
Date: 10 May 06 - 02:50 PM

gee, bruce...you need a new career-- interviewing politicians and asking them interesting questions, then TRYING to get them to answer the question you asked, instead of plugging in their favorite answers and changing the subject.

You are working WAY too hard at asking a multi-layer question with embedded referential meanings. Most people, from professional politicians to press sectretaries to opinionated Mudcatters, would rather have a simpler, direct question..."Do you think that Democrats really ARE shooting themselves in the foot?" "Do you think Colbert's respondents represent an accurate cross-section?"...etc.

You began by "inviting comment" and the C&P, and that's what you got. It took you half a dozen posts to clarify the direction you intended. Most folks read these posts FAST, whether you do or not, and you gotta make your intent clear. Even then, you really can't control someone wanting to bounce off at a different angle with THEIR concern about an event.

You remind me of Cris Matthews trying to interview Trent Lott...*grin*

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 May 06 - 02:39 PM

lol, John. Them's fightin' words.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: John Hardly
Date: 10 May 06 - 02:14 PM

"The Democrats lost because Bobby Kennedy was dead, and there was no other peace candidate with acceptance outside of the peace movement. Humphrey , as LBJ's VP, he couldn't credibly run against his own boss's foreign policies, so the "peace" vote was lost--Even at that, Nixon, who had a "secret peace plan", nearly defeated himself, and ended up with fewer votes than he'd gotten in 1960, and was saved by third party canditate George Wallace who pulled conservative voters from the Democrats(sounds funny to say that today)--

Vietnam was the Democrats war, and the party was split because it was a disaster. This time around, it is the Republican party that is split by a war. Oddly enough, the conservative Democrats who stood by LBJ are now the conservative Republicans who now stand by Bush--and, just like then, they feel angry and alienated by their party--

If we use the 1968 election as a bellwether for this next one, the years ahead may be bleak indeed-- "

I agree with much of this. I differ in the notion that conservative Republicans back Bush. They really never have. The most that can be said is that Bush successfully divided Republicans (as nobody before had) into conservatives -- as had always been defined that way, and neo-conservatives which are, in effect, pro-war liberals. :^)

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 May 06 - 01:32 PM

Bruce, have you followed my link? I'd like your ideas on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 May 06 - 12:48 PM

kneejerk- "If I did not like Colbert, I must like Bush. If I write for The Post, I must be a mainstream media warmonger. If I was over a certain age -- which I am -- I am simply out of it, wherever "it" may be. All in all, I was -- I am, and I guess I remain -- the worthy object of ignorant, false and downright idiotic vituperation."


Lockstep- all running together in the same direction, regardless of where it leads to



You are still missing the point.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: M.Ted
Date: 10 May 06 - 12:39 PM

Kneejerking and lockstepping are mutually exclusive, Bruce--you can't march in a lockstep if your knees are jerking--You have been listening to the empty rhetoric the right for so long that you actually think that it means something-it doesn't--

The idea that the Democrats are just hurting themselves by being angry at all things Bush is the last desperate ditch effort of a failed administration to silence it's critics. It is a bit like telling a lynch mob that they are only hurting themselves.

Cohen's contention is wrong for a lot of other reasons--for instance, if only 38% of the populace identify themselves as Democrats( and an even smaller number of those as liberals) the 70% disapproval can't very well be "partisan politics", can it? No--the anger isn't coming from Liberal spin doctors--the anger is coming from those who bought the program--

Judging by the all of the anti-Hilary talk, she is the one that the right fear most--and they should fear her, because she can keep the 70% together--

As to Cohen, he's a Washington journalist--this essay was a bone thrown to the Rove team--The press do that, in exchange for access--

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Janie
Date: 10 May 06 - 11:52 AM

Hello? Fellow Liberals & Progressives? I don't participate much in the political discussions here, but I think about this stuff alot, and I vote.

I continue to think Bruce (and Cohen) are raising an issue that is important for the Dems. to address (even if it is a bad example--I don't know--I don't know Colbert or Cohen from Adam--no TV.)

Not all Democrats are liberal Democrats. The majority of those who vote in presidential elections in this country (I think) are pretty moderate. If Democrats in general, and liberal Democrats in particular, do not take care to modulate the differences within our ranks, but instead rip each other apart in the national media and on the trail of the primaries, then the Democratic nominee, and Democratic candidates for Congress, will not garner the swing votes and otherwise third party votes that will be needed to win both the Presidency and Congress. Keep in mind that MOST people in this country who are eligible to vote--DON'T vote.

Keep in mind, also, that we probably all tend to associate with like-minded people. We liberals, therefore, are probably not in a good position to judge how most moderates will perceive the choices.

Also keep in mind that failing to listen and then RESPOND thoughtfully and intelligently to concerns of moderates and moderate conservatives is not likely to influence people to vote as we might like.

Reactionary is reactionary--whether it is reactionary left or reactionary right. When the emotions get behind the wheel of the bus, the bus is liable to wreck. The emotions belong ON the bus--but not in the driver's seat.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 May 06 - 11:29 AM

Here is one answer:

Whence It Came

    "This isn't Vietnam, Mr. Cohen. This is a whole new ballgame, and the stakes are higher by orders of magnitude. It took almost ten years of Vietnam for people to reach the boiling point you are so apparently horrified by (and worthy of note, that rage may have elected Nixon, but also served to stop the killing in Southeast Asia). Should those of us who are angry today wait until 2013 to raise hell?
    "At a minimum, I suggest you head down to your local hardware store and buy a few sheets of 40-grit sandpaper. Apply it liberally - pardon the pun - to any and all parts of your body that may be exposed to the scary anger of the anti-war Left. Toughen up that hide of yours, and greet the coming days with a leathery mien impervious to a few angry emails.
    "Afterwards, you could perhaps figure out why the anger of those who see this war as a crime and this administration as a disaster is so terribly threatening to you. Anger is a gift, after all, one that inspires change. If you don't think we need a change, real change, I can only shake my head.
    "P.S. Another reason for the anger you have absorbed can be laid, frankly, at your own feet. There are enough of us around who can still remember your words from November of 2000: "Given the present bitterness, given the angry irresponsible charges being hurled by both camps, the nation will be in dire need of a conciliator, a likable guy who will make things better and not worse. That man is not Al Gore. That man is George W. Bush."
    "Locate a mirror, Mr. Cohen. Stare deep within it. Know full well that today, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, will recast all your yesterdays as having passed like a comforting dream. Your ability to remain within the safe bubble of the beltway clubhouse, drifting this way and that in some meandering, rudderless fog, has ended."

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 May 06 - 10:55 AM

"Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Janie - PM
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:17 PM

Bruce--It doesn't sound like many here are understanding your question. I HOPE his assessment that we liberals and progressives will do ourselves more damage than good is incorrect. I FEAR, however, that he is right on the money. Seeing that most, though not all, people who have posted here so far have REACTED rather than responded only adds to that fear.

Janie "



In case it is too much to ask that people posting actually try to READ the thread...

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 May 06 - 10:49 AM

freda,

Have you bothered to read this thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: freda underhill
Date: 10 May 06 - 10:46 AM

and here you've neatly summed up the message of the Right, bb! :-)

freda
(not scared)

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 May 06 - 10:34 AM

"Seeing that most, though not all, people who have posted here so far have REACTED rather than responded only adds to that fear."


Be afraid, Janie. Be VERY afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Bobert
Date: 10 May 06 - 10:32 AM

Well, MTed, the Bush folks have always had to have someone else to blame... This is the Karl Rove approach to all failures... I remember during the 1st term that they blamed Clinton for just about everything.. They rode that horse into the ground just as the pigs drove the horses into the ground in "Animal Farm"...

Then came the 2nd term with scandals and failing policies under every rock and since they had worn out poor 'ol Clinton, Bush revived his daddy's ol' stratergy of making, ahhhhh, Intellegent people (intellectuals) the new boogie man de joir and that's seems to be the evolving stategy for the Bush folks...

Even the skit with Bush playin' to be a dumb as is really is was kinda a pea-ender-the-shell reverse psychology attack on intellectuals... Yeah, Bush was sayin' to his base, "This is what them intellectuals think I'm like... Hahahah..." Very clever, if all yer tryin' to do is entertain folks who really aren't thet bright...

Daddy Bush taught his boys well...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 May 06 - 10:31 AM

MTed,

I DO NOT CARE about what Colbert said, or did not say. IT DOES NOT MATTER.


I DO NOT CARE what percentage of the people emailing Cohen thought what. IT DOES NOT MATTER.



I WAS TRYING TO DISCUSS THE PREMISE, PRESENTED BY COHEN, THAT
"But the message in this case truly is the medium. The e-mails pulse in my queue, emanating raw hatred. This spells trouble -- not for Bush or, in 2008, the next GOP presidential candidate, but for Democrats. The anger festering on the Democratic left will be taken out on the Democratic middle. (Watch out, Hillary!) I have seen this anger before -- back in the Vietnam War era. That's when the antiwar wing of the Democratic Party helped elect Richard Nixon. In this way, they managed to prolong the very war they so hated.

The hatred is back. I know it's only words now appearing on my computer screen, but the words are so angry, so roiled with rage, that they are the functional equivalent of rocks once so furiously hurled during antiwar demonstrations. I can appreciate some of it. Institution after institution failed America -- the presidency, Congress and the press. They all endorsed a war to rid Iraq of what it did not have. Now, though, that gullibility is being matched by war critics who are so hyped on their own sanctimony that they will obliterate distinctions, punishing their friends for apostasy and, by so doing, aiding their enemies. If that's going to be the case, then Iraq is a war its critics will lose twice -- once because they couldn't stop it and once more at the polls."


Is this really such a subtle point? Or are SOME of the Liberals here SO kneejerk and lockstep that they cannot understand?

Amos has an excelent thread about people's opinion of Bush- THIS IS
NOT IT.


As for " you are trying to leverage people into agreeing with"

I DO NOT CARE if you agree with me or not- I WANT TO KNOW ***OTHER'S*** OPINIONS ON THE THREAD TOPIC- "war critics who are so hyped on their own sanctimony that they will obliterate distinctions, punishing their friends for apostasy and, by so doing, aiding their enemies."


I think I can make a good guess at many people's opinions on Bush, any criticism of him, and any attempt to keep discorse on a polite level. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THE THREAD TOPIC- NOR HAVE MANY OF YOU MADE THE ATTEMPT TO PARTICIPATE IN DISCUSSION.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Peace
Date: 10 May 06 - 10:28 AM

The failure and corruption M.Ted speaks about has been rampant in Washington for decades. And it hasn't seemed to matter which group was pulling the strings. It has certainly hit new levels under Bush (the national debt comes to mind), but the process has been going on for a heckuva long time. The buck stopped on Truman's desk. It seems to have been stopping there ever since.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: M.Ted
Date: 10 May 06 - 10:19 AM

You can't tell people what to say, Bruce-you have a point of your own that you are trying to leverage people into agreeing with--ain't gonna happen-you're trying to make a point about liberals--wake up and smell the coffee!
This is all about failure, corruption, and incompetence in the Bush administration--Liberals have nothing to do with the President's failure. In fact, as some have pointed out, they've played along with along with the Bushman, way too much--

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 May 06 - 07:34 AM

Ron,

Read Janie's post. YOU have missed the entire intent of this thread.

"Do you have a transcript for what Colbert said at the correspondents' dinner? If not, you are just operating on what Cohen said--which makes your thread premise perilously close to hearsay. As BIll has pointed out, "liberal hate" is your own formulation--not Cohen's words.

As such, it is (unsurprisingly) intellectually dishonest on your part."

Intellectually dishonest to want to know what people think about the premise that the Democrats will tear themselves apart, rather than take the easy win in the next election?

You, sir, have a problem with comprehension.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: michaelr
Date: 10 May 06 - 02:33 AM

Hey Bobert -- I don't disagree with any of what you said except "the Dems ain't that dumb". I need to see proof that they ain't, cos I think they is.

As for Colbert's performance, maybe the Brits are right in saying Americans don't get irony...

I say he's a American hero.

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: M.Ted
Date: 10 May 06 - 12:45 AM

When a president's popularity is down in the Nixon numbers, his party pays the price--and Bush's party knows it. The next election, and the one after, will be a referendum on Bush--political pundits are bandying the term "Perfect Storm" about--there is anger out there, lot's and lots of it--

Janie brought up the inevitable comparison between the current administration and the fascists--remember what happened to them?

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Ron Davies
Date: 10 May 06 - 12:13 AM

BB--

Do you have a transcript for what Colbert said at the correspondents' dinner? If not, you are just operating on what Cohen said--which makes your thread premise perilously close to hearsay. As BIll has pointed out, "liberal hate" is your own formulation--not Cohen's words.

As such, it is (unsurprisingly) intellectually dishonest on your part.

I have watched Colbert's show several times. Have you? His MO is an (excellent) parody of a "conservative" fire-eater. By exaggerating the Bushite attitude, he lampoons it--often deftly.

You have no way of knowing if those who criticized Cohen's column will eventually vote Democratic or sit the next election out--and that is a far more significant question than real or imagined "rudeness". Cohen has to write columns. Columnists exaggerate--is this a revelation for you?

I read the column. It was pretty feeble--didn't have the horsepower to leap to Cohen's conclusions. Well, even columnists have bad days. But as has been pointed out, he did get response--and they always like that.

Possible subtexts: As other posters have suggested, Cohen didn't like Colbert's skewering of the press. Also, Cohen wants to be sure Bush invites him to the dinner next year. Mission accomplished.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Bobert
Date: 09 May 06 - 10:29 PM

Yeah, AR...

Everyone allready knew that Bush was a regular guy... So why go to extremenes to point out his regular-ness???

These is some difficult times than need a cut above "regular guys"...

Bad move on Bush's handler's parts....

That is what I have been sayin'... Bush suffers from not enough opinions... But that is very much his, or his daddy's, doin'... In ore ways than one...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 09 May 06 - 10:17 PM

Come on, folks, Bruce is just mad that his beloved leader was stupid enough to participate in something like that and was obviously clueless about the stuff Colbert had thrown at him. Nor do I find Cohen particularly liberal, that's Bruce's touch again. Don't let him draw you into this non-issue. Bush once again made bewildering, willing fool of himself at a time when he desperately needs to show people he's serious. It was incomprehensible that Bush would dare come up with something this bizarre as his way of reaching out to America in a time when the country is about to lynch him for killing 2400+ innocent Americans with many, many more on the way. There's nothing wrong with hate provided you know what you're hating.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Janie
Date: 09 May 06 - 10:12 PM

Regardless of the likely bias of the sample of those who e-mailed, Cohen is drawing attention to what could be a very real problem for the Democrats if we are not mindful of it. It has happened enough times before! And those who bother to blog and e-mail political sites are also more likely to vote!

And this current Administration and their ilk are as dangerous as Hitler, IMHO. I know that is pretty extreme, but all the evidence points clearly in a rigorously fascist direction. If you have not read Charlie Savage's article in "The Boston Globe" revealing Bush's incredible end-runs around Congressional law (and the constitition) with his unprecedented use of signing statements, read it now, or catch today's edition of "Fresh Air on NPR.

Even if a more progressive Republican regime were voted in, they still have to account to the neo-cons, and would only slow this country's slide in that direction, not halt or reverse it.

Given the number of votes that progressive third parties like Bobert's "Greens" and progressive independents will draw away from the Dems., it is particularly important that Dems. understand even during the primaries that we are all on the same team.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: M.Ted
Date: 09 May 06 - 10:02 PM

Sorry, Bruce, I forgot--I think that Cohen is being sanctimonious, and and a bit dishonest--those columnists love it when they get a box full of email--I think Colbert is funny--even when he makes fun of my side--and I think most of the people who wrote him just think Colbert is funny, and thought he was a jerk for busting on him--

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Bobert
Date: 09 May 06 - 08:45 PM

Well, they won't run Hillary, michael... Even thje Dems recognize that she is too much an inside the beltway'er...Insdide the beltway'ers just don't win the White House these days... I'm seein' an Edwards/Warner ticket, maybe Edwards/Richardson to pick up a couple Sotheast states....

But take it to the bank... No Hillary... Even the dumbass Dems ain't that dumb... They won't evn have her on the ticket at all... No Edwards/Clinton... Heck, why do the Dems need a Senator from New York on the ticket??? They don't... They need to bust the Southern Strategy if thay have any chance to win and that means stack the ticket with Southerners... The blue states are going Dem anyway so why Clinton???

Politics 101...

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: michaelr
Date: 09 May 06 - 07:19 PM

...the next election is the Democrats to lose

Yep, and they will if they run Hillary.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 May 06 - 07:08 PM

I saw the clip of Colbert's routine. It wasn't much different from dozens of similar comedy routines I've heard in which Bush is the subject. What made it a double-barrelled snort is that Bush had to sit there and listen to it. If Cohen thinks it was "rude," well he has a right to his opinion.

Do I hate Bush, BB? You make a lot of assumptions about people. No, I don't hate Bush. I think he's closed-minded, agenda-driven (the agenda fed to him by his puppet-masters), and generally incompetent. He's a lousy president and history will judge him as one of the worst. I can give you a whole litany of reasons, both domestic and foreign, why that's the case, but you already know them, even though you are not willing to accept the obvious. But do I hate him? No. I can't think of anyone I actually hate.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Bill D
Date: 09 May 06 - 05:59 PM

My take on the REACTION to Cohen's comments is that it was a VERY heavily biased sample ....mostly of those who LOVE seeing Bush skewered and have a pretty strange notion of 'humor'. I do NOT think it represents a good sample of your average Liberals. Most liberals were probably more amused to see Bush actually have to sit & listen to what so many are coming to believe, than they were at the actual routine.


Oh....I would MUCH rather have seen Jon Stewart do the roast for similar, but 'funny' remarks.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 May 06 - 05:41 PM

Oh, I forgot - I also wanted to note thata great many of the responses that came from any given blogosphere in all likelihood had not read the columns or even seen the Press Awards show but had read ONLY the blog's take on it. Which is another reason that mot much value is put on such 'opinion'.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: CarolC
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:53 PM

and all the undecideds

They wouldn't get this "undecided" (me). McCain and Lieberman are far too beholden to the corporate and other special interests who gave us the debacle in Iraq to get my vote. I would probably have voted for McCain in 2000 if he had gotten the nomination, but he has let me down and now I don't trust him.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Amos
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:51 PM

Bruce:

We don't seem to have any concrete data on the reaction to Cohen's remarks.

He refers to a lot of email he hasn't read as being full of hate, which seems...premature, to say the least. I woudl think he would want to read it before he characterized it in sweeping, emoitional terms.

Such being the case, I imagine ther eis a bell curve of reactions -- a small number agreeing fully, a small number disagreeing vehemently, and a large number agreeing or disagreeing mildly.

Maybe he should submit it to the Supreme Court...from what I saw of Justice Scalia, he was laughing heartily at Colbert's "Sicilian" gestures.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:51 PM

I'd like to note that I thought that dubya inviting his 'double' to stand beside him and speak out loud his (ostensible) thoughts was a brave thing to do. I've seen the double on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno many times and his portrayal of dubya is unflattering- and yes, rude.

What do I think of the reaction to Cohen's columns?   A couple of thoughts, I guess. As Cohen said, it appeared that most of the nasty stuff came from the same blogospheres. (A good many of them may have been Jerry Springer fans, too!)

If a website mocks a person or an event and urges its readers to blanket the person with emails the response can inundate the address. Which is why many people - candidates, politicians of all stripes, newspeople - don't pay much attention to blanket emails, giving far more weight to individuals writing their own thoughts.

I sometimes lose track of the fact that the numbers of readers in the world of the internet are mindbogglingly huge. If only three people, say, in each town or city of the Western Hemisphere read any given column and wrote the author, the response would be overwhelming.

I dunno. I tend to think of the 'far right' as being the illiterate, (I say 'illiterate' by the way, because in my opinion one of the hallmarks of liberal thinking is the desire to see all people be able to read and think and communicate. So there.), rude, hate-spewing, one-size-fits-all, black versus white crowd. I may be wrong. We do know that there is a lot of hate in the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:44 PM

I expected all the lockstep liberals to jump on the title, and pay no attention to the post at all. Amos surprised me- Bobert and Don did not.

Actually, I did want a discussion. IMO, the next election is the Democrats to lose- they will find some way to insure that most people vote for the Republican ( whoever that is). But IF they won, they might have to actually deal with the problems of government, and I would be interested in what they plan to do- Hold to the path of Left Correctnes, or actually deal with the real world.

As I stated, a centrist party/(McCain/Lieberman)would get half the Republicans, half the Democrats, and all the undecideds- and walk away with the election.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Janie
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:37 PM

But own up, Bruce--if you weren't anticipating a reasonable discussion, then what WERE you looking for:O)

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:32 PM

MTed,

And YOUR take on the REACTION to COHEN'S comments?







Janie,

I knew it was to much to ask for a reasonable discussion. But even in the face of virtual impossibility, some hope still persists.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: M.Ted
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:27 PM

Colbert's fans are younger people, who watch cable, get most of their news from the internet, and don't subscribe, or pay a lot of attention, to newspapers.   For that reason, even George W. Bush probably enjoys seeing Colbert do his routine more than Cohen does--

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Peace
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:21 PM

Liberals, Conservatives, same thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Janie
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:17 PM

Bruce--It doesn't sound like many here are understanding your question. I HOPE his assessment that we liberals and progressives will do ourselves more damage than good is incorrect. I FEAR, however, that he is right on the money. Seeing that most, though not all, people who have posted here so far have REACTED rather than responded only adds to that fear.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: CarolC
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:05 PM

Most, though, were in what we shall call disagreement.

This is hardly the same thing as spewing hate. Cohen seems to be trying to give the impression that "most" of them were hateful without admitting that he can't back up the claim that they were hateful. I think Cohen definitely has an ax to grind.

Good point, Metchosin. Cohen was probably pissed off with Colbert for taking the press to task, which I though he did quite well (while at the same time being very funny).

I suspect that Cohen is still pissed off about that. And my guess is that this is the reason for both of his columns.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 May 06 - 04:04 PM

Metchosin,

And your take on the REACTION to Cohen's comments?

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Metchosin
Date: 09 May 06 - 03:58 PM

Watching Stephen Colbert, my impression was his performance was not so much a roasting of Bush, Bush was just the prop, but a direct attempt to skewer the American news media. Well done. That some of are now squealing on the spit, liberal and conservative alike, is of no surprise, its about time they squirmed.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 May 06 - 03:57 PM

Ebbie,

And your take on the REACTION to Cohen?

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 May 06 - 03:51 PM

"Rude?" Well, BB, politics can get pretty rude. See Karl Rove.

And your trying to dismiss what I wrote by characterizing me as "you are part of the lockstep crowd" is a shining example of exactly what I'm taking about. Pure political rhetoric which often contains little more that ad hominem attacks.

Those who have something solid to say don't have to resort to that sort of thing.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 May 06 - 03:50 PM

Barbed commentary at the Press Awards is par for the course. Bush, et al, knew that, going in. (Besides which I suspect that dubya missed the significance of quite a bit of Colbert's jousting.)

I thought that Colbert, funny or not, was swinging as hard as he dared and connecting as often as he could. In my opinion, he gave those present a number of points to think about.

And as for being funny- Colbert may be a funny man but most of his stuff was funny only in being shocking. Even I cringed a little from time to time.

I think that Colbert made his political position abundantly clear.   If you noticed, upon leaving the podium he nodded to Bush, bowed to Ms. Bush and kissed Helen Thomas.

What I liked best about the evening is that it reminded me that we still have a country where this kind of thing can still happen. Long may his ilk wave, so to speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 May 06 - 03:50 PM

"Usually, the subject line said it all. Some were friendly and agreed that Colbert had not been funny. Most, though, were in what we shall call disagreement. Fine. I said the man wasn't funny and not funny has a bullying quality to it; others (including some of my friends) said he was funny. But because I held such a view, my attentive critics were convinced I had a political agenda. I was -- as was most of the press, I found out -- George W. Bush's lap dog. If this is the case, Bush had better check his lap."

Subject: RE: BS: Liberal hate
From: CarolC
Date: 09 May 06 - 03:45 PM

I should rephrase this...

But if he attends a "roast" (as the "roastee"), he should expect to get "roasted".

It should read...

But if Bush attends a "roast" (as the "roastee"), he should expect to get "roasted".