Mr. O'Donnell.

You are a self serving, liberal racist. You have done nothing for your country or your fellow man your entire life. You are a deceitful blood sucking leech. What the heck have you done in your life time that makes you some sort of expert on who has or has not done all that they should have for social change during their life time?

You invite Mr. Cain on your political interest show and instead of talking to him about his presidential campaign, you berate him for not living up to your standard of service during the civil rights movement. Why the hell do you even care what he was or was not doing during that time period? Better yet, what were you doing during the civil rights era? Writing for the Harvard Lampoon!

You sit there and try to portray Mr. Cain as person who has fallen short of meeting some non existent standard throughout his life time. Guess what, MR. Cain did more for his fellow man just by working for the DOD helping invent better navel weapons systems, than you have or will in your lifetime. And lets just clarify this paragraph. Serving as a legislative aid, or a writer for (The West Wing), does not qualify you as a prolific public servant.

You are a sad excuse for an American. You try to stir up controversy that does not exist, just for the sake of your ridiculous political agenda. You do not deserve the freedoms you enjoy in this country. You could learn a lesson from Mr. Cain concerning what being an American citizen is all about.

And before you get all huffy and puffy with me, let me fill you in on my background. I am an active duty Soldier in the US Army. I have served with the best that America has to offer, in some of the worst places on the planet, defending sad creeps like you from terrible people who would love to see you killed just for being born in this country. The sad sad truth is that you enjoy and take for granted, all the freedoms afforded to you by the Constitution, yet you never know the cost that has been paid for you to sit on TV and run your trap. You really truly are undeserving of what you have.

You should be ashamed of your self.

Mr. O'Donnell,

I just watched your "interview" with Herman Cain, and you should really be ashamed of yourself. Who are YOU to set the guidelines for what it takes to be the president? Where were YOU during the Viet Nam war? Your epitomize everything that is wrong with our current leadership, and the media that fawns over them. Elitist, hypocritical, and combative. And kudos to Herman Cain for keeping his composure during your juvenile onslaught of idiotic questions, he is definitely presidential material. As for you, Mr. O'Donnell, please return to whatever rock you crawled out from under, you are a joke, a really bad one.

I didn't realize that my original post went through after I registered as a new user. Now I know!

Shameful.  Mr. Cain should be held up as a role model.  A shining example of what the civil rights movement was all about.  A black man born in a southern city who, by his own hard work and determination, became a successful business man in the greatest nation on earth.  But because he doesn't fit into the liberal template of blame-others, take-from-the-government victimhood, and fall in line behind Sharpton, Jackson, et al., he is torn down and smeared by elitests like O'Donnell.  The liberal Democrat agenda for civil rights over the past 30 years has been an abismal failure.  If people like Herman Cain and Allen West took over the mantle from Sharpton and Jackson, the black community wouldn't need to HOPE to see some real CHANGE.

Dear Mr. O'Donnell and (GREAT) crew:

I wanted to communicate with you about the extraordinary (and much needed) debate you are creating with your approach to Herman Cain.

I thought the interview you did with him was excellent and further, the comments and indeed the discussion about your guests' uncomfortableness (as they expressed it) the next night, not to mention your own admission about participation in the Freedom Rides etc. and what you might have counseled your own children to do WAS EXACTLY ON POINT.

BRAVO!!!  It's about time someone had this discussion, and not only about Cain but about Obama himself (not that I think that the poor man really needs any more controversy right now) but one of the reasons I am holding my nose about voting for him again is what I consider his wholesale abandonment (even though I too worked in DC and understand both politics and political media pressures).  That would start with comments like "take off your slippers" to the BCC.   However, as someone who put their own academic scholarship on the line not to mention dealt with threats from the Klan to force divestment in North Carolina (of the whole university system and all state pension funds) only to deal with a president and early members of his administration (including Cassandra Butts) who essentially "showed up for rallies but didn't do much else (other than put it on their polished, political resumes), I found and still find Obama's attitude towards the issue of discrimination (of all kinds) disturbing.

THAT SAID, the issue here is really the issue of not only race, but standing up for very American values of freedom of character rather than the color of skin, religious preference, gender, disability, etc. and rights demonstrations (including economic) that are part of the national debate right now.

A couple of things in closing.

1.  Take a look at what we are trying to do in Charlotte.  

2.  Technically, (and I believe it was Dr. Harris who made this mistake but nobody corrected her, so technically all of you did), THERE WAS a coded debate about whether white people running for president were active in the Civil Rights Movement DURING THE LAST PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.  I don't remember the date of the debate, but it was a Democratic Debate between Edwards, Obama and Clinton, where Clinton lost because of her response..and it was very coded language that everyone familiar with the issues in a real and tangible way understood.  So it is not just African Americans or men who deal with issues of "standing aside" in the wash of history.  Civil Rights, Vietnam, gay rights, women's rights and of course, the RIGHTS OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES which I wish you would pay attention to.  IT IS CRITICAL.

Otherwise, GOOD ON YA!  Excellent foray into a very charged and difficult debate that still needs to be had.

Mr O'Donnell: You need to examine your conscience, vis a vis your violation of the Fifth Commandment of God.....

a.]Have you ever procured, desired, or hastened the death of anyone?

b.]Have you ever borne hatred?

c.]Have you ever oppressed anyone?

d.]Have you ever desired revenge?

e.]Have you ever not forgiven?

f.]Have you ever refused to speak to others?

g.]Have you ever used provoking language?

h.]Have you ever threatened or struck others?

i.]Have you ever made others fall out?

When you go to Confession, you should, however, begin by accusing yourself of committing the Mortal sin of anger[which led you to violate the Fifth Commandment].

News Flash : Drowning in ignorance, hate, selfishness, lies and fascism . . . the Right-Wing Republicon S.S. TEATANIC sank into oblivion in 2011/2012.

History will show that they were sunk by their own evil deeds.

I found that I couldn't watch the entire interview and I thought Lawrence blew it on the interview.  An old adage of political discourse is, "never ask a question you don't know the answer to."  Lawrence, who usually is so completely in command of the facts, didn't prep enough for this interview.  He lost it on the question of Herman's Navy experience. Whether or not he thought he understood the quote in Mr. Cain's book, he or his staff should have done more background work.  Lawrence compounded that mistake with his impromptu Vietnam draft question.  I had to skip ahead.  I could watch no more. 

Mr. O'Donnell should have stuck with more familiar material, and picked apart the civil rights question of where was Mr. Cain (high school or college) during the height of the movement.

Mr. O'Donnell what a great revealing interview! Your questioning of Mr. Cain was most professional and ethical. Thank you for unmasking not only Mr. Cain but all the other candidates who appear on your show. As an African American I myself would have asked Mr. Cain the very same questions and more!!!!

First, I wanted to say thank to those serving our country. I recognize, honor and respect the many men and women and the sacrifices they make. I do wish to respectfully point out, the same reason some on this forum have expressed anger at Mr. O'Donnell, is the same point he was trying to make.

Mr. Cain has enjoys many of freedoms, rights and opportunities he has today in part due to the sacrifices of men and women made during the Civil Rights Movement. The same movement that he benefited from, but that he chose not to participate in.

Asking him, if in looking back he might has chosen a different path, is a fair question.

I would have preferred Herman Cain would have expressed why he had chosen one way or another. Why I may have agreed with his decision, I would have respected his right to express his position.

The problem I had was that Mr. Cain did not do this. He instead contradicted himself. For example, Mr. Cain said he probably would have participated in the Civil Rights movement, if he had been in college, because college kids were conducting the sit-ins. OK, fair enough. However, Mr. O'Donnell pointed he was in college, not in high school, at that height of the movement. Then he went on to express that Mr. O'Donnell should not expect every black college student to be involved in the movement.

Today he seemed to say it was America that gave him the opportunity. It was the America post civil-rights movement that led to those opportunities.

In my opinion, Mr. Cain does not seem to recognize or respect the sacrifices that were made by the individuals willing to make those sacrifices, and at the same times benefits from them. That is upsetting.

(I sent the following in an email to the show. I don't know whether it shows up on this page or not, so I've copied it below).

Dear Mr. O’Donnell,

While I am a long-time liberal and Democrat who shares many of your beliefs, based upon your interview with Herman Cain “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell” should be hypocrisy. Your tenor was partisan, dripping with ad-hominem attacks that at times left you looking no better than the right-wing pundits you make fun of daily. Not that your counterparts on Fox News don’t deserve mockery, but for someone who claims a comparatively higher moral ground you abandoned it faster than kitchen counter cockroaches when the lights get turned on. I tuned into your show because you had a Republican candidate willing to discuss his alternative platform with a potentially hostile audience. You certainly delivered on the hostile part. You let us know before every commercial break that you were going to get him, “Grrrr.”

If your intention was to reveal Mr. Cain as a rich fat cat totally out of touch with 99% of America - evidenced by his outrageous statements that “blacks have been brainwashed by Democrats” and that “the poor and unemployed only having themselves to blame” - it was undermined by your smug demeanor. Cain nailed you when he asked if you stayed up late to come up with these convoluted questions, and I paraphrase: “Are you
ready to apologize for what you said to America’s poor and unemployed?” You’re kidding, right? That’s a reporters’ question? The last time I heard a loaded question like that was when my wife asked me if her new dress made her look thinner. There is no good answer to that; no intelligent discussion to follow from it. You couldn’t think of a smarter way to get to the issues broiling amongst the masses occupying Wall Street?

While I started out on your side, by the third commercial break I was with Mr. Cain when he captured the higher road from you saying, “I was hoping to discuss more
substantive matters, like my 9-9-9 plan.” I was hoping for that, too. Where were the questions about his jobs plan, his health care plan, his deregulation plans? Where were the follow-up questions on his revamping of the tax code? You had one good follow-up about the inherent regressive nature of a flat tax. But when he said, “Crunch the numbers on 9-9-9 and you’ll find that by eliminating the payroll tax the regressive nature of a flat tax to the poor would be ameliorated,” you had nothing to add or ask. How about what he’d do for those people who weren’t employed and paying the payroll tax? Would he extend benefits to those people as in Obama’s jobs plan? If not, then what is your plan?

Instead you wanted to skewer him for his involvement, or lack thereof, in the Civil Rights Movement fifty years ago; or his Vietnam War service record, which he had a splendid answer to and you brushed aside. Contrary to your shows’ claim of “civil discourse” your smirking interview added little to the substance of the national debate. Make no mistake Mr. O’Donnell, the people’s movement occupying Wall Street is not
only directed at Wall Street, banks, corporate America and it’s bought politicians from Congress to The White House; it is also directed at big media and journalists on the left and right for partisan reporting that fuels the conflict and churns the waters like an unregulated power plant spilling toxic waste into an already burning river.

You and your counterparts on Fox are part of the problem. I can’t really blame you though, because the conglomerates who own the media design the narratives in their “news” shows to generate conflict, not consensus. Why? Because conflict and slogans and angry sound bites sell the soap and adult diapers that pay your salary and their bonuses. The moment corporations discovered that news could be turned into entertainment, rather than a tool to educate and inform the people they filled it with conflict between the left and right, where no consensus will ever be reached; just the constant stoking of fear. “Stay tuned; disaster to come!” They want the never ending redundant breaking news story. This sorry state of journalism mixed with entertainment was tracked historically in movies from “A Face in The Crowd” to “Network” to “Broadcast News” wherein Albert Brooks character tells Holly Hunter that William Hurt, the good looking anchorman who manufactures a tear during a story, “…is the devil.”

Edward R. Murrow must be turning over in his grave! When he urged corporations who fund TV and radio to contribute time to public education through TV, he did not mean it was to be used to sell more and more products by creating crisis and repeating the mindless headlines over and over in twenty minute news cycles that have no new breaking news at all. I quote from Mr. Murrow’s speech in 1958:

Let us have a little competition. Not only in selling soap, cigarettes and automobiles, but in informing a troubled, apprehensive but receptive public. Why should not each of the 20 or 30 big corporations which dominate radio and television decide that they will give up one or two of their regularly scheduled programs each year, turn the time over
to the networks and say in effect: "This is a tiny tithe, just a little bit of our profits. On this particular night we aren't going to try to sell cigarettes or automobiles; this is merely a gesture to indicate our belief in the importance of ideas."

“Ideas,” he said, not just “Gotcha!” moments. And, if you’ll note he also said “20 or 30 big corporations that dominate radio and television.” This is the seismic shift
in TV since 1958. The power over the air waves (and cable) shifted from advertisers to the six conglomerates. There is no real competition anymore. Your “stories” further the greed and political agenda of media titans from Sumner Redstone to Rupert Murdoch. That’s not reporting. That’s the dumbing down of America.

Truly great stories, fiction or non-fiction, inform and inspire. They can be described in Hegelian terms: starting with a thesis, exploring the antithesis, bringing us to a synthesis; in other words a beginning, middle, and an end. Where Mr. Murrow urged
corporations to use the power of television to look dispassionately and honestly at issues, entertainers look to create conflict, without a dispassionate look at both sides of an issue. Again, I quote from Edward R. Murrow:

“I am entirely persuaded that the American public is more reasonable, restrained and more mature than most of our industry's program planners believe. Their fear of controversy is not warranted by the evidence. I have reason to know, as do many of you, that when the evidence on a controversial subject is fairly and calmly presented, the public recognizes it for what it is--an effort to illuminate rather than to agitate.”

I doubt you can review your own interview with Mr. Cain and maintain you were not out to agitate him and prove him wrong. If you believe you’re better than those crazy right wingers who care not a whit for the downtrodden, then be the better journalist and attract those on the right with intelligent discourse. I throw it back to you Ed.

For if the premise upon which our pluralistic society rests, which as I understand it is that if the people are given sufficient undiluted information, they will then somehow, even after long, sober second thoughts, reach the right decision--if that premise

News Flash : Drowning in ignorance, hate, selfishness, lies and fascism . . . the Right-Wing Republicon S.S. TEATANIC sank into oblivion in 2011/2012.

History will show that they were sunk by their own evil deeds.

(the last paragraph to my previous entry starting with the last Edward Murrrow quote)

For if the premise upon which our pluralistic society rests, which as I understand it is that if the people are given sufficient undiluted information, they will then somehow, even after long, sober second thoughts, reach the right decision--if that premise is
wrong, then not only the corporate image but the corporations are done for.

That’s what is happening in the movements occupying Wall Street and now other major cities. That is the revolution of rich vs. poor fomenting just below the surface. We have to be better than our opponents, doing our best to bring them and us into consensus; for with consensus comes action, and we desperately need action, not “Trumped” up headlines designed to divide and polarize. Don’t be hypocritical. Give up
the cult of personalities and embrace the real principles and trust that the American public is smarter than you give them credit for being.

October 8, 2011

Lawrence - you perfectly exposed Cain's lie that he was in high school during the Civil Rights movement and THAT's why he didn't participate - because he was too young (or busy caring for "sick relative")­. The fact is that Cain graduated from the SAME college Dr. Martin Luther King went to in the year that Dr. King was assassinat­­ed because he was STILL leading the Civil Rights movement!

The "birther," Cain, used a devious trick - which he knew would be eaten up by his historical­­ly illiterate supporters - that the Civil Rights Movement was already over by the time he finished High School. You merely cut through Cain's bogus excuses and the revisionis­­t history that he chose to include in his own book. THAT's a completely fair tact to take. If Cain didn't like it, he shouldn't have falsely portrayed history.

I enjoyed the frank discussion. Professor Harris-Perry reflected my sentiments but Rev. Sharpton was spot on in pointing out that Mr. Cain should expect tough questions on his views. I commend Lawrence for acknowledging the negative and positive response to the interview. I love the show on most nights.

I also commend Lawrence for bringing to light as to who Herman Cain really is and what he actually stands for, and it is my opinion that he would be disastrious to this country if he became President. We need to have more investigative interviews with cain to expose his real reason to try to become President.

Let's just stick to the facts. The character assassinations are for lesser humans.

What is wrong with asking a declared (no less) candidate for the US Presidency questions about their past. It happens every day. Why would Mr Cain be treated any differently?

I believe that this segment on Mr O'Donnell's show on Friday, October 7th, was the beginning of a true, no-holds barred discussion of the role that race plays in American politics.

Let's stop the tip-toeing around. Let's hold everyone to the same standard. Except for Mr George W Bush, of course. He managed to hide his abominable behaviour and so-called military 'service' because too many reporters were willing participants in the deceit.

The stench is coming from all directions at the moment. Not just the politicians. Not just the bankers. Not just the Supreme Court. Not just the citizens.

A total house cleaning seems to be in order here.

Mr. O'Donnel, if your friends, editors and colleagues are commending your interview with Mr. Cain, be wary because they are lying. Your interview was sophomoric, poorly prepared and agenda driven. Had you tried this at any community college journalism class you would have failed. You demeaned yourself, your profession and your party, unless you genuinely wanted Mr. Cain to appear Presidential. As others have noted you came across as arrogant and exhibited hypocrisy. I recommend you avoid questions regarding service to your country as you alienate many who have served. I seem to recall that you avoided the draft in the Viet Nam era with a educational deferment and you never considered volunteering. I know you pride yourself with your intellect but you took a "stupid pill" on this one; and Mr. Cain left the interview on the morale high ground. Hopefully you will do better next time.

You and your rabid ilk at MSNBC should be thrown off the air. The likes of the rantings of saliva spitting Chris Matthews, Stupid and dishonest Al Sharpton, Ed 'what's his name' who called laura Ingrahm a name I won't repeat and the others are all 'mad dogs' who pretend to be know it alls! O'Donnell the self proclaimed Socialist, should be fired. He is nothing but a pathetic hack for the Left as are all on MSNBC. I would be ashamed to say I worked for MSNBC! never watch it anymore and haven't for over a year and will continue to not watch it in the future!

WOW!!! Way to go Lawrence. NOT!!! I think I read somewhere that you had 640,000 viewers while O'reilley had 3.1 million the night you did the interview with Mr. Cain. I ask where were your tough questions of the current occupant of the White House during the 2008 campaign?And who the hell are you Mr. Whiteness to ever ask a black man about his civil rights agenda? You are a pompous as$hole Mr. O'donnell. With interviews like this it is no wonder MSNBC is last in all the ratings. Pathetic. Thanks for making it crystal clear why I will cancel my Comcast Cable service. I thought Reverend Al was bad but you are right their with him!!!!

Dear Lawrence,

I enjoyed your interview with Mr.Cain.

Today, thanks to your question, we know, that it was his choice and not his age that prevented him from participating in the civil rights movement. We now know, that he made no contribution to the civil rights and voting rights acts of the 60s. Americans can therefore now vote for him on the basis of his life as a successful entrepreneur and the values that he proclaims his allegiance to.

Again, we now know that his 999 plan is built on very shaky ground. It does not state the income it will generate for the country nor does it specify the post tax income of the American people, whose votes he solicits. He should at the minimum put out a calculator for the poorest of this country so that we know whether they will take home more or less than what they do today. I found no plan and no calculator on his website.

For someone who aspires to be the Commander in Chief, whose orders could put thousands of Americans in harms way, the choices he made when faced with the draft are very relevant. America is still paying the human price for wars promoted and abetted by by someone who avoided draft four times - former Vice President, Dick Cheney.

Finally, to my fellow commentators who have posted angry comments on this blog:

Imagine how powerful Mr. Cain's answers could have been to these questions! He could have articulated his reasons for sitting out the civil rights movement. He could have added much needed depth to his 999 plan and finally articulated his vision for being Commander in Chief!

Often, in life as in politics it is what you do and say when the going gets difficult that gets you success!

I agree with the panel... I think all running for president should have to answer the same line of questioning.

Lawrence, next time try to make some small effort at objectivity. It would give you so much more credibility with the listeners. You appeared desperate to smear this man at all costs and it made you look very small, indeed ignorant. There's a difference between trying to ascertain a candidate's position and asking insulting gotcha questions. It was transparent what you were trying to do and I couldn't help thinking you looked like an immature junior high school kid interviewing an adult. Your hatred was palpable and the entire interview was repulsive. Instead of persuading anyone to your liberal ideology, you ended up making an utter fool of yourself. Why anyone would watch or read anything coming from such a vile and ignorant person is beyond me. They should fire you immediately and replace you with a grown adult.

Danny we are on completely opposite sides of the political fence, but I admire your approach at discourse.  Most people talk about having civil discourse, but few people practice it.  The art of "demonization"  must stop by all if we are to ever get there and I believe we will with people like you who desire to be civil in their differing viewpoints.  Mr O'donnell could have retrieved the information he desired in a more civil way had he not had an agenda other than simply getting the answers to important questions.  I am a retired Marine Corps officer and seldom  have I seen military personnel express hatred toward those who didn't spend time in the Armed Forces.  It was my privilege to serve but I don't feel any animosity towards those who haven't done the same.  It takes more than military service to make this country great and we should be thankful for all who contribute.

Were you in the USA military...and if not, WHY ??