After the New York Times uncovered a proposed plan to attack President Obama, conservative billionaire Joe Ricketts is now funding an anti-Obama film. MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell explains in the Rewrite.
Rewriting Joe Ricketts... Again.
-
Fri Jun 1, 2012 5:52 AM EDT
Leave a Comment:
If you haven't noticed, MSNBC, the Obama economy is slipping further down the toilet bowl, with the latest round of economic news yesterday and today, but you don't want to have a discussion about that on this blog, do you? Instead it is one after another senstional non consequential tidbit after another. You believe that is the way to rally the Obama/Democrat Party Lean Left base, but I believe its increasingly evident that they are getting a bit inpatient waiting for you all down at the bottom dwelling cable new network to get on the stick and start dealing with the serious issues of this election year.
Gosh Mr. Longey... despite your wishful thinking, we are in no way devastated by the downturn of the economy and the effect it has on the public's opinion of President Obama, however misguided it may be. We are however, appropriately concerned by this aspect and the ominous portent it holds for America and Americans. Particularly should it lead to the Republicans being able to get their hands around the throats of our great country again. The American people have found it very hard to recover from the last attack on Americans by the Republican Party.
This is why those of us on the left, perhaps the last bastion of critical thought in this country are so perplexed by the willingness of the American voting public to hand the hanging rope back to the executioner. The fact is, the Republicans are more adept at pandering to the lowest common denominator, They understand the power of fear mongering and dis-information. No doubt you are very familiar with their techniques as you've employed some of their talking points in your diatribe. You'll find them ineffective here.
Try prying your knuckles from the ground as you walk, and use your digits instead to scratch your fuzzy head. It might stimulate the firing of neurons thereby possibly initiating the activity of some synapses which might, and I emphasize the word might, enable you to see reality and enhance your ability to think clearly. Until then, you'll probably be unable to comprehend our reluctance to engage you in debate. We see it very much as akin to explaining the theory of relativity to a chimp.
Amazingly humerous political rant, but not one fact or figure offered to support your view of the Republican Party's so called "attack on the Americans". I think you might mean the Housing Bubble popping in 2007-2008 and the crashing Wall Street house of cards caused by excessive leverage and lack of a market regulation on credit default swaps and other derivatives. Perhaps you need to examine the fact that both Political Parties had a long history of pushing for the ever increasing home ownership, while the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan who stayed too long at the job had pushed the new alternative mortgages and fought back in the end of the Clinton Administration the attempts of Republicans and Democrats both who were attempting to get a handle on the trillions of dollars in credit default swaps and other derivatives being traded under the table, but on no descernable market that could be regulated.
I fully understand, thought, you relunctance to enter debate with me...its easier to throw of sensational charges then it is to defend you assumptions, isn't it, Larry!
As much as I hate not taking my own sage advice about ignoring your attempts at seeming rational in the face of all evidence to the opposite, in my moment of weakness I will give one last breath of life into your lonely and wistfully sad existence in this forum..
Mr. Longey? Try to avoid starting almost every post about how you find another's thoughts humorous. It shows only as a last ditch attempt to bolster your own non-existent argument by dismissing your opponents thoughts as "humorous". It shows an obvious weakness of intellect. Anything said after that is discounted by the reader. You have obviously tried but failed to gain a reputation as an "B" list debater. In your failing, you've sentenced yourself deep into the "C" list. In my questionable yet sympathetic addressing of your reply, I know I'm probably only encouraging your pedestrian affectations. Shame on me. Chalk it up as a mercy killing. Goodbye Mr. Longey. I hope you get better.
Hey Lawrence, bet you those 69, people know that Congress had nothing to do with them getting work. So I look at as 69,000 more votes for Obama....drop the mic!!!!!!
Now is the time for people to unite and boycott the CUBS. The one thing right wingers respect is money. You start taking it away and all of a sudden they will talk to you. The same boycott should be imposed on Trump. If they decide to tell the truth about Obama maybe it can be relaxed. But why should you continue to put money in the pockets of the likes of Ricketts and Trump ??
You can go to jail for leading a boycott for politial gain, fool! But go ahead and see what happens. I serioudly doubt that you have the ability to orgainize anything effective, just as your amateur president Obama doesn't have the ability to organize his executive branch and develop policies that get the economy up and running and the debt level down.
A history lesson for Grandpa (I think he was guarding the asylum back then):
Martin Luther King and others organized a boycott for political gain... At Woolworth's...
And even William F. Buckley, Jr. said he didn't have a quarrel with that action.
You alternate between blasting the President's organizational ability and hollering about conspiracies and how he's co-opted the media... Well, here's a little recycled bit of verse for you... Those "wasted years" mine did put a keen edge on my creative abilities...
In Memory of Ogden Nash
We raise up a glass to Barack H. Obama,
The hole in the ocean was plugged; likewise Osama.
Boycotting over a civil rights issue of racial injustice is not quite the same thing as boycotting a commercial establishment because one is not happy with someone's political views, Cab Driver. Do I have to theach you everything?
As a teacher you're an utter failure, but that's because you lack the requisite honesty and humility (look back a few days for that correction I just appended to the pseudo-intellectual crapola you tried to pass off on Don Mclean's "Jester," aka Bob Dylan). And judging from the final product of your lesson plans, you're also intellectually lazy.
There wasn't a lot of difference between racial injustice and economic injustice in Dr. King's day. Which is what this one is about...
Now smoke on this one...
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/06/01/493870/corporate-profits-skyrocket/?mobile=nc
Despite massive profit gains, however, corporations are adding more jobs overseas than they are in the United States and paying one of the lowest effective tax rates in the developed world.
Well, judging from your syntax above, some of my lessons here may have hit home. I'll overlook that typo because I miss 'em from time to time myself. Of course Occam's razor suggests you might've been drunk while writing some of those more disjointed rants.
Pseudo-intellectual crapolla on Bob Dylan? For my saying he was a folk artist, and not a rock artist? Give me a break!
Are you aware that General Motors and General Electric, the two large corporations that Obama has a claim to ties with are the ones adding those jobs overseas, and that GM and GE both paid 0 taxes last year in the US, while paying them overseas?
You do know that we have the highest corporation tax rates in the developed world, don't you? Do you think that, and the threats that Obama and the Dems keep making to raise the rates even higher might cause US Corporations doing business in the global economy to put a good portion of their eggs in overseas baskets, Cab Driver?
Oh, I see....we want to do what is FAIR first...like get even more than the 50% of wage earners in the country paying zero taxes for the mostly social spending programs promised by the big, bennificial federal government under Obama and the Dems. All on more and more borrowed money, of course...while we prattle on about a "millionaire's tax" that would only raise $4.7 billion in a year, or the amount the federal government spends in just 11 hours. How do you say Voodoo Economics?
Well, Cab Driver....I checked out you silliness you posted on the Folk or Rock issue on Dylan. And responded with a stern dressing down which you will undoubtedly ignore. Geeese...what a mensch! You can't even let a statement on music go without making it part of your cause celebre to follow me on the blog with pitiful attempts for put downs...what a sick puppy, you broken down alcoholic! Better give it up your compulsion mission, its going to eventually drive you back to the bottle, if it hasn't all ready.
I didn't make it an issue, you did with your nonsense that focussed on about 10% of the "Tambourine Man's" musical career...
I watched Dylan in concert twice, silly, the first was right after "Blood on the Tracks" was released (my guess is you've never listened to the lyrics of "Idiot Wind," because it would cause too many self-identification issues), arguably his best album... That one is hard core rock-and-role, the same as "Like a Rolling Stone" and "Positively 4th Street," a place you ought to visit since it would be an improvement on your current environment.
The album came out around '73, and the next one featured "Hurricane," a song about racial profiling and injustice, a topic you've defended here repeatedly. Google that subject up...
I love it when you're reduced to name calling because it exposes you for the maladjusted bloviate you are. If you're going to dis' sober alcoholics please include Bush 43 (who, like Glenn Beck, quit a "fifth too late" IMO), but then you have to also include Martin Sheen, Dick Van Dyke, Robin Williams, Ann Richards, Betty Ford, Harold Hughes, and some others I know (some in person) who've led distinguished and exemplary lives but maintain a level of anonymity for some very worthwhile reasons.
You need to find an easier poker game. You long ago exceeded your credibility limit on this one. I can be every bit as nasty as you are, and I don't have to make up facts to do so.
Huge blow to the central theme of the Obama campaign today, as Bill Clinton being interviewed by CNN stated that Mitt Romney's career at Bain Capital was sterling...and that Bain was a succussful private equity firm and the attacks that the Obama campaign are mounting on it and Romney ought to stop...his words, not mine.
Clinton also went on to say that with Romney's business world experience and his Governorship of Massachusetts serve to more than qualify him to hold the Presidency of the United States. One could almost read in that message the slap at Obama's lack of credentials, and this from someone who was a former Governor before he ran for President,
Grandpa, you've taken to giving Clinton some credibility? And Clinton's credentials in business are? Shoot, two months ago you were ripping on him for NAFTA,...
My take: this is just old Billy Jeff ("I did not have sex with that woman") schmoozing and trying to get back in the limelight because he knows Obama is not nearly the flawed president he was. Worse, Hillary has done her damndest to make Obama a success. Payback for Monica, perhaps?
Cabdriver Confession: I'd almost forgotten what a Clinton hater I was in the 90's...
I've sort of forgiven him, but I might've become a Democrat a lot sooner if he hadn't come along...
Seems like every Democrat Party political office holder and former political office holder that the Obama campaign has enlisted as surrogates has come out against the Obama attack line on Romney's business credentials and government credentials. I guess even they are wondering when he will stop finding blame with others and get on a course of correction for his own stupid blunders with economic policy and energy policy to date, hmmm? Even San Franciscoite Sen. Diane Feinstein, a woman of some consequence unlike her colleagues Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi from the California delegation to Congress, has come out against the attack Romney on Blain Capital and his Governorship experience in Massachisetts, Cab Driver. Must make even you wonder what you are missing here, hmmm?
Think that the "Nick Hanauer" segment should be mandantory viewing...puts the recent hysterical reaction of the 1%-ters in a better perspective. I find it inconceivable that a group of privileged individuals have managed to carve out this little niche wherein they feel entitled to special tax dispensation. Mr Hanauer's clear and concise talk (6 minutes) lays waste not only to their erroneous claim of "job creator", but their special tax status as well. But hey, the toadies out there swimming in the pink koolade will never learn until its to late.
The only people in our country with "special tax status" are the 50% of wage earners who pay no taxes at all, fool!
Uh, Grandpa, did you see where the judge revoked Zimmerman's bail?
Didn't think so...
And exactly what does that have to do with this subject? Do you have a hard-on for that issue, Cab Driver?
We will see what occurs when they get to court, won't we, though!
(a honk of my horn to Bill Maher):
Grandpa's "New Rule": He's the only one allowed to speak off the designated topic that he's selected--which, BTW, was Joe Ricketts, and not Romney's pain-in-the-Bain record the Etch-a-Sketch crowd wants us to forget.
Didn't they have those "King Baby" exercises for narcissistically inclined sorts back when you were guiding the asylum? They had 'em at the rehab I worked at. Embarrassed me a couple of times, but I managed to work through my issues.
Apparently not, as your pesonality disorder show through with every thing you post on this blog, including your obsessive compulsion to follow me around on this blog!
I hope that people of any political persuasion will not endorse political tactics that re-litigate the humanity of people of color. It appears that since President Obama has been elected civil and political rules of engagement have been tossed aside. People have a right to their political views but do not have the right to couch then in racism, sexism or any other "ism" that destroys humanity. There has been an uptick in racial hatred since the President entered office. When I have spoken to people about why they do not want President Obama in office the responses range from a shrug of the shoulders to "I just do not like him". There have been few political reasons for the disapproval. Many of the president's policies were supported by both parties until he adopted them. Mitch McConnell's declared mission to make President Obama a one-term president has no connection to any plans to govern or to improve the country. The declared mission of the Republican Party is personal, about Barak Obama the human being not the president. Likewise Mr. Romney's declared mission to get 50.1 % of the vote has no connection to helping the nation but rather simply to win. sounds To say, "It's our turn" (a statement made my the Romney's during the primaries) sounds entitled. To say I'm better than you is not a statement of concern about the country and thus not a good enough reason to become president. Joe Ricketts' mission is racist and bigoted as well. Since the first plan to reintroduce Rev. Wright did not work, he now wants to invoke the President's father who he met once as a child. All of these are personal, racist and bigoted attacks on the upbringing of a child Barak Obama who, like you and I, had no control over how he was conceived or who his parent's were. Since when have the families of politicians become fair game? No other president has had to live through this treatment. President Obama's predecessors of both parties have had presumed privilege concerning their ethnicity and by extension their birthright and family lineage. It is sad that our politics is so vicious, personal and inhumane in it's tone and effect. There are those who will support the tactics of people like Mr. Rickett's without regard to the destructive fallout from his plans. It's frightening to be a person of color in our society but it does not have to be if people would focus on politics, their informed opinions and not the personal mission of a few people who seem to be motivated by hatred and offended that an African American had the audacity to get into the White House. There's a lot of energy directed towards a personal agenda to unseat the President and so little real political plans to help the country. Mr. Ricketts ideas do nothing to help. It is up to the voters to decide not to be manipulated by vicious, personal hatred, to sort out the issues and above all to vote.
Have you anything you want to add on the anti-Mormonism bigotted statements about Romney, or the the ridiculousness of the attacks on his character because he is a successful business man with a family net worth of over $200 million? As if the Democrats didn't have their share of wealth individuals holding office, such as Franklin Delano Rooseveldt, John F. Kennedy (also a Catholic that had to bear the slings and arrows over that issue), and lately Al Gore and John Kerry.
Eloquently stated Starlily2!
Mr Longey has doubled down on his ignorance of facts regarding the Sherman Act. Either that, or he is outright lying... which is a Republican tactic used frequently because of lack of a sustainable argument. He has quite aptly proven that he will spare no attempt to obfuscate the facts if he thinks it might benefit his bloviational regurgitation of rethuglican talking points. He'd be best ignored. It's not wise to encourage the antics of a sub-par zero by acknowledging him.
The Sherman Act? Really. That anti trust legislation passed in 1890 which was sponsored by a Republican Senator from Ohio who was head of the Senate Finance Committee and signed into law by trust buster Republican Theodore Rooseveldt?
Most notably applied to The Railroads (before the National Government reoraganization and subsidizing with tax dollars of AmTrack), Standard Oil, and Ma Bell. And how do you want to apply the Sherman Act today, and how exactly are the Republicans in Congress hindering that? I didn't realize that was on Obama or Harry Reids agenda, Larry! So just WTF are you talking about?
You see, dimwit, I had a major in Public Administration with minors in Economics and Industrial Administration, and acutally worked developing labor programs for rehabilitating veterans from the 1980s thru mid 2000s in the New England States of Massachusetts and Rhode island, so I actually know what I'm talking bout. But you feel free to prattle on in your MSNBC pap sucking ignorance, fool!
Little man, one need only look up the Sherman Act and court rulings regarding how it applies to non-commercial boycotts to understand the absurdity and frailty of your argument. But go ahead... keep assuring everyone that you know what you're talking about. I'll just grab a box of pop-corn and enjoy the show.
:::smack... chomp... smack::::