'FAT FREAK PHONY' Libtalkers Spar Over Fate Of Charlie Rangel
*** CONTENT WARNING ***
While the longtime New York Democrat's fate remains uncertain, ethics charges facing Rep Charlie Rangel have liberal commentators taking opposing views. The results are downright nasty.
As fellow libtalkers have long been suspicious of MSNBC's Ed Schultz, his recent call for Rangel's resignation strikes some on the left as overtly partisan.
Why is the longtime representative suddenly in deep trouble? Since when are Democrats so concerned with tax evasion and ethical issues? Does Timmy Geithner ring a bell?
Is this all about clearing the decks before November's elections?
That perceived insincerity may explain why veteran satellite libtalker Lynn Samuels (shown right in image) is seeing red over Big Eddie's demand:
LYNN SAMUELS (28 JULY 2010 HOUR ONE) (3:56): Do you know what that fat f--- freak phony liberal sack of s--- Ed Schultz said? He thinks Charlie Rangel should resign.
This is the new thing in Washington. You know, our Charlie Rangel from New York. Our beloved Charlie Rangel.
So he didn't pay some taxes. You went through the entire House of Representatives, out of 435 I would bet you that 300 of them at the very least didn't pay some form of taxes they were supposed to pay. They're out to get Charlie Rangel.
But that fat f--- freak Ed Schultz says he should resign!
Lessons to be learned here: 1) don't mess with Lynn Samuels and 2) naked, election-year partisanship fools no one.
But it isn't justconservatives such as Rush Limbaugh or Fox News who are openly questioning Obama's curious scheduling: libtalker Rosie O'Donnell, a former co-host of The View, raised her own concerns during Tuesday's satellite radio program:
ROSIE O'DONNELL (1:18:45): I have mixed feelings about that. I don't really think sitting presidents should go do fluffy daytime TV shows. Maybe an hour on Oprah or something. I don't really want to see him on The View. although I'm happy for them, that's a good booking, and Barbara's going to come back that day after her heart surgery...
JANETTE BARBER (executive producer): Good for you to be happy for them.
Whether one supports or opposes Obama, it's hard not to wonder why he's so enthusiastic about appearing on television programs, especially "fluffy daytime TV shows". For some reason, the president is unconcerned with the impact of rampant media overexposure.
NY Journalist: Charlie Rangel Given Softball Interview As He's Provided 'Good Inside Information'
For Rangel, Neighborhood Ties Mean Breezy Interview
You're a columnist for a major metropolitan newspaper about to interview an entrenched lawmaker facing serious ethics charges. Do you A) ask tough, pointed questions, or B) carefully sidestep the issues, focusing on mundane topics instead?
While filling in for libtalker Ed Schultz Friday, New York Daily News columnist Errol Louis sadly chose the latter option, a particularly disappointing selection as his guest was none other than embattled US Rep Charlie Rangel (D-NY).
With the longtime congressman facing disturbing allegations, Louis missed a fantastic opportunity to hold Rangel's feet to the fire. And while a state-run media hack giving a longtime crony a free pass might not seem shocking, what is highly unusual was the columnist's candid admission later in the program that going soft was a result of neighborhood ties and Rangel's past assistance to the paper in the form of "good inside information".
Always nice to help an old friend, isn't it?
From the program:
ERROL LOUIS (HOUR TWO) (29:13): I think what Joe [previous caller] was getting at and a lot of people do feel this way is that there are a lot of people, the progressive media, who will shade stuff, I mean, will shade stuff, there's no question about it. I mean, look, even the Charlie Rangel thing, I could have hammered him with a bunch of questions but, I mean, I didn't do it, I didn't do it.
And I told you all up front, I used to live in Harlem, I like the guy, I know his work, you know, he's been a friend to my show and he's given us a lot of good inside information when we needed it about what was going on in Congress and I'm not in a position to do it. Now not everybody will tell you that and I think that's where people start to think that there could be a bias at work.
You see, the way I think about it, and I tell people this, I teach journalism and I tell my kids this, the goal is not to be unbiased. The goal should be to be fair.
The goal is not to be unbiased? As a columnist, certainly, a point of view is necessary. But ethics apply to everyone in the newsroom, including commentators. Disturbingly, Louis admits here that longtime connections and quid pro quo trump honesty, ethics and integrity.
No wonder New York is in so much trouble these days, protecting friends is clearly more important than good government.
Never one to waste an opportunity to bash the right, Boehlert's reluctance to accuse Breitbart of selective editing should have sent a signal to Schultz to tone down the rhetoric, but the libtalker couldn't stay in control.
Watch as Schultz sloppily repeats this baseless accusation:
ED SCHULTZ (21 JULY 2010 HOUR ONE) (04:12): This is damaging. What these righties manufacture hurt black women. That's it! Bottom line!
SCHULTZ (05:30): She [Sherrod] is a first-class, all-American victim, no doubt about it. The tape was doctored.
SCHULTZ (29:00): Was the tape doctored in your professional opinion?
ERIC BOEHLERT, MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: No, I don't think it was doctored, but I think it was completely taken out of context. [elaborates here]
BOEHLERT (30:37): Fox News is dirty on this, Breitbart's dirty on this.
SCHULTZ (34:54): I want our listeners to know, the Ed Schultz show, if I were to pull a stunt like this, because of our connection to NBC News, I would be back in Fargo.
SCHULTZ (HOUR THREE) (44:01): Wait a minute, here's what happened! Everybody responded to what Fox News put on the air! That's what happened, it's that simple! They cook up a story, they manufacture it, they doctor the tape, they go down the road, they throw out, just throw it out there, make accusations, interview Newt Gingrich to throw more fuel on the fire, they praise Vilsack when Vilsack made a rush to judgment decision.
Now he's going to call up Shirley Sherrod and apologize to her via the White House saying what the hell are you doing?! And it's people on both sides, Mr. Gibbs? No, no, no, no. No, no, no, no, no. No, no, no, no, no. Left media did not make this up. This was all cooked up on Hannity, once again doctoring information which he is known for!
Perhaps funniest of all here is Big Eddie's assertion he'd be sent packing to Fargo were he to "pull a stunt like this".
MIKE MALLOY (49:59): Just sitting there, trying to watch this piece of human garbage spew his stuff on FOX, it's worse than I thought! Please, Glenn, get on to the part where you, you know, fulfill your family tradition... (makes extended gunshot sound)
Though this site has long been critical of Beck (long before he became nationally recognized), particularly the tear-filled episodes of personal drama and other cries for help, Malloy's taunts are beyond disgusting and certainly have no place on the radio, much less elsewhere in our society.
Are conservatives now free to behave in the same manner? Didn't think so.
Let's face it: Soros and his lefty friends are sure to ignore the full time hate-fest that is liberal talk radio. And some conservatives will dismiss Malloy & Friends with the idea that few are listening anyway. But a lack of ratings doesn't excuse the auditory cesspool it has become.
Their methods have certainly changed: instead of waiting for a major ('nappy-headed ho's') opportunity, "progressives" are now utilizing even the most mundane comments to build a "case" against Limbaugh. The faux OUTRAGE (!!!!) machine is now running 24/7.
Repeat the smears often enough and they're sure to stick, aren't they?
Listen as libtalkers and guests utilize this sleazy strategy:
STEPHANIE MILLER (14 July 2010 - Hour One) (12:00): (after airing Rush audio reaction to George Steinbrenner's death) See, that’s a reference to the New Black Panther ('whatever' sound effect) whatever huge story that’s on the Fox News (Fox news breaking news sound effect) 24/7.
GUEST KARL FRISCH, MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: He also said the same day that Steinbrenner had fired a lot of white guys. There is nothing that Rush Limbaugh does not see through racially charged tinted glasses.
And yet the media always says well Rush Limbaugh has this to say about health care. Rush Limbaugh has this to say about the war in Afghanistan.
You know, I don’t remember them going to other run-of-the-mill-racists whenever they needed comment. But you know this is not the first time he’s politicized the used of racially charged rhetoric.
RANDI RHODES (14 July 2010 - Hour One) (37:08): This is his death, Rush Limbaugh, this is George Steinbrenner's death! Is there any event that you can't turn into a platform for racism? Rush Limbaugh has ruined more funerals than Fred Phelps ever dreamed of ruining!
I mean, he's much more widely distributed than Fred Phelps' little Westboro Baptist Church out of freaking Kansas that goes to, uh, you know, our soldier's funerals with signs that say God hates the F-word. I mean, really, this is what we've degenerated into and you want to, what, say America's the greatest country in the world.
Note how Frisch in particular uses the phony Steinbrenner flap to marginalize Rush. In the same way it would be crazy to cast Mel Gibson for an upcoming film, why would the media bother to quote a "run-of-the-mill racist" like Limbaugh?
Clearly, the new anti-talk radio strategy is death by a thousand paper cuts rather than a bombshell event. Will it work?
ED SCHULTZ (10:46): Do you think here in late July of 2010, after the 2008 election, almost two years, do you think the Democrats can finally get their freaking heads screwed on right and realize that the lefties put you in office TO DO SOMETHING! TO HELL WITH THE REPUBLICANS! THEY'RE ANTI-AMERICAN! THEY'RE PSYCHO TALKERS! THEY DON'T CARE!
SCHULTZ (11:25): How much focus has there been in the mainstream media about jobs being shipped overseas? Well, it's happening on The Ed Show. I don't know about anybody else's on any other network or anywhere else. THAT'S THE STORY! THAT'S WHERE AMERICANS ARE RIGHT NOW!
SCHULTZ (11:51): Look, Democrats, I'm your best friend. I've been across the country. I take thousands of emails. Our team works 16 hours a day. We do a TV and we do a radio show. I'M TRYING TO TELL YOU WHAT THE HELL'S GOING ON! But you sit back, and Harry, you are ball-less! You won't do the nuke option for the American people and shove the Republicans into the ditch! SHOVE THOSE BASTARDS RIGHT INTO THE DIRTHOLE! This is about power! It's about winning! It's about saving American lives! *That's* what this is about! And if I'm too excited or too passionate for you, I'm giving you the finger right now! Because I don't give a damn!
SCHULTZ (13:21): And oh by the way, the stimulus package isn't working. That's what O'Reilly and Ingraham, those two Nazis, are saying over on Fox News.
Libtalker Bill Press Blames 'Spoiled Americans' For Obama's Poll Collapse
IT'S YOUR FAULT
Lefty Meltdown Over WaPo Poll, Libtalker Lashes Out
Are you ready to accept your share of the blame for Obama's collapsing poll numbers? If only "spoiled Americans" would stop nitpicking his amazingly successful run as president, our country would be less child-like, or something like that.
In the face of ominous poll data splashed on the front page of today's Washington Post, libtalkers were in a tough position today. But only ultra-partisan Democratic Party crony Bill Press could manage to blame voters for Obama's failure to thrive.
Here's the former CNN host during today's syndicated radio program:
BILL PRESS (32:49): I think this says more about the American people than it does about President Obama. I think it just shows once again that the American people are spoiled. Basically, spoiled-- as a people, we are too critical. We are quick to rush to judgment, we are too negative, we are too impatient. Especially impatient. We want it all solved yesterday, and if you don't, I don't care who you are -- get out of the way.
And again, basically spoiled. To the point where it makes me wonder if it's even possible to govern today. I gotta tell you, I don't think Abraham Lincoln -- who certainly didn't get everything right the first time -- could govern today. I'm not sure Franklin Roosevelt could govern today, the way we are again. Just about like spoiled children. And it's Americans, and it's the media, and if we don't get instant gratification, then screw you is basically our attitude.
A few more rants like this one could wipe out Bill's party for years to come.
MSNBC Libtalker Blasts Obama: 'Maybe This Just Isn't My Gig'
'MAYBE I'M NOT THE GUY' Schultz Wonders Out Loud If Obama Wants To Be President
MY, how times have changed!
Just six months ago, would a MSNBC host even ponder the idea of Obama as a poor fit for the presidency? Until quite recently, the mere suggestion that he might not seek a second term would be dismissed as right-wing nonsense.
But libtalker Ed Schultz has gone much further than many conservatives in openly questioning Obama's desire to serve in office. From yesterday's syndicated radio show:
SCHULTZ (05:31): Now it pains me, this is not a compliment, it is an observation, Bush just always kept coming at us. And as a liberal, every time I turned around this guy was coming at me. Bush was always uptempo and Bush was always enthusiastic and I did, I guess it is a compliment, I did somewhat say, you know, that guy, he keeps going after it, whether it's conviction or show time or whatever it is, however you want to view it. But President Obama in this commercial that Boehner put out left me with the impression, you know, I wouldn't be surprised if this guy decides on his own he doesn't want to run again.
SCHULTZ (07:07): I have a sense that he's thinking, you know what, maybe this isn't my gig. Maybe this is just a huge pain in the ass. Maybe, maybe I'm not the guy.
Though the remarks were confined to his radio program, it's hard to believe Schultz is sticking his neck out without some level of approval from the suits at MSNBC. Has the left-wing cable talk channel decided to sacrifice the embattled president to save what's left of its own credibility?
Media Matters Smear Machine: We'll Get Rush Limbaugh Soon Enough!
WE'LL GET HIM
'Progressive' Foes: We're Waiting For Next 'Racist' Remark
With a critical election fast approaching, it's no surprise that Rush Limbaugh's "progressive" foes are waiting for an opportunity to take him down once and for all.
After all, it's about more than just partisan politics: the Smear Machine needs money to keep operating and that requires bona fide results. As Media Matters has yet to truly score a major victory (beyond the temporary derailment of Don Imus), capturing the big trophy has become essential for survival. Damaging or destroying Limbaugh's career would be worth millions to the group responsible for pulling it off.
While none of this is a mystery, this interview of the organization's Karl Frisch by libtalker Stephanie Miller provides unusually candid insight into how they expect to destroy Limbaugh's career:
KARL FRISCH (8:05): You have to wait every couple of weeks for Rush Limbaugh. I don’t know if he goes off his medication or something, but for him to get really down in the dirt racist, it only happens every couple of weeks, whether its bend over and grab her ankles cause his father was black, or calling him (Obama) a Halfican American, or playing Barack the Magic Negro, that stuff doesn’t happen every day.
But it’s as if there’s a little beaker inside of Rush Limbaugh that fills up with racist venom until it just can’t take it anymore and it explodes all over the place.
STEPHANIE MILLER: You’re right his blow-out preventer is faulty in that sense.
As regular Limbaugh listeners know, however, these controversies are almost always manufactured by political enemies, created through the misrepresentation of his words to fit their agenda. So will they actually wait for him to say something controversial, or will the next flap simply be made up?
Libtalkers Unhappy With Portrayals Of Byrd, Questioning Of Kagan
Libtalkers Resort To Petty Gripes, Cheap Tactics
With Obama's approval ratings slipping by the day, his economic policies floundering and liberal stalwarts moving into the afterlife, it's not a fun time for our "progressive" friends.
For their part, liberal talk hosts seem not to have much of a strategy at the moment beyond petty gripes (how DARE Elena Kagan face questions about her background, how DARE anyone mention Robert Byrd's Klan association) and the usual (aren't those Republicans RAAAAAAACIST!!!!) smears.
Here are some of libtalk's lowlights over the past week, including Stacy Taylor on Robert Byrd, plus New York Daily News columnist Errol Lewis and Oregon-based syndicated host Thom Hartmann, both commenting on the Kagan hearings:
STACY TAYLOR (RANDI RHODES SHOW GUEST HOST - 02 JULY 2010) (02:58): I must comment that I am dismayed at the fact that you have forced me into, um, tuning in to the right-wing blowhard machine... These people on the conservative right, who dominate talk radio....and uh...man alive!..if -if you didn't know that Robert Byrd was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, you know, back in the 1950s, you know, before this week, it's been beaten into your head by now!
I mean, it's like, people were waiting for the guy to die just like Ted Kennedy so they could talk about Chappaquidick so they could talk about the Ku Klux Klan! That's all I heard! Robert Byrd - Ku Klux Klan!
And by of course, by uh, by insinuation by extension - guilt by association - that means Democrats; the Democrat Party as they like to call it over there - never could quite figure it out there - the Republic Party and the Democrat Party! So I'm getting all the jargon down...
ERROL LOUIS (ED SCHULTZ SHOW GUEST HOST - WEDNESDAY 30 JUNE 2010) (20:54): Has there ever been a grilling of a conservative nominee to the Supreme Court where somebody asked them, hey are you a conservative? And they said, yeah, I'm a conservative. I don't remember ever hearing that? Anybody else remember, do you remember ever hearing that? We have this habit of falling into these little traps, all these little rhetorical traps. I mean, that's the game, right, at a nomination hearing. ...
Louis plays clip of Lindsey Graham asking Kagan of her political views, Kagan saying she's lifelong Democrat, worked for two Democratic presidents and considers herself "generally progressive" - Louis suggests, in effect, that Kagan do what Dukakis did so masterfully in '88 campaign and scurry from accurate description of himself as liberal
LOUIS (22:28): Wrong answer, wrong answer. Are you a progressive? You're supposed to say, I'm an American. You know, I, you're supposed to say, I'm an American. I, I'm, I vote Democratic, I served in a Democratic administration, draw whatever conclusions. I don't like labels, that's the other acceptable answer, I don't like labels. I don't, I don't subscribe to ideologies or -isms. I am a free thinking, independent, patriotic American. All I want to do is serve my country. That's the answer.
THOM HARTMANN (29 JUNE 2010) (5:12): (sarcastically, regarding Thurgood Marshall's efforts on behalf of racial integration): Oh, my God, Jeff Sessions might have to sit next to a black man on an airplane now! Can you believe it -- Jeff Sessions' kids might have to go to school with black kids!
HARTMANN (6:36): Talk about speakin' to the base. Talk about [a] dog whistle to the racists...What the Republicans did yesterday was all but furl out a KKK banner and show up [in] robes and hoods and say, 'Hey, all you racist guys out there, send us money, get us elected, we're gonna make a good stand here against this woman who had the temerity to clerk for Thurgood Marshall.' See, that's why they keep invoking Thurgood Marshall's name.
HARTMANN (9:34): The Republican party, flailing around, trying to get the racist vote in their base activated, and they're using the Kagan hearings to do it.