Good show tonight, but did the Paris story deserve to be number 1? Really?

#5: Missed the 'antire' hour back then and now.

#4: Awwwwe, they should have spoken to the crew on board the Lincoln and their family members:  George wearin his 'guppie piece' (thanks Steve), meant nothing after heading home only to be turned around.  Missioned Accomplished indeed.

#3:  Murdoch?  Huh?  What?  Whatever.  Another one bites the dust-hey!

#2:  Did I mention my friend kids staying the night tonight?  Sorry, Pirates of the Carribean trumphed Countdown-HEY, you tell 6 kids aged 8 and under that Olbermann is more important!

#1:  As your average middle aged American, I am truly tired of hearing about the bbbh, however, I'd rather watch and listen to her on Larry King a million times over, than listen to anything Musto has to say.  He is rude, vulgar and useless.  He is of no substance, and quite frankly, brings Countdown and Keith Olbermann down.  Too bad.

PEACE!

There are 300,000 dead and dismembered Iraqis now under that 'Mission accomplished' banner, so I hardly think the banner itself was the White House's biggest mistake.  Oh but dare I forget, they are just Iraqis.

Please stop with the gimmicky “Whitehouse in Crisis” banners unless you are serious. I also noticed that Jon Dean wasn’t exactly laughing about all these NEW transgressions either.  

I loved the Merdock segement!  Sure seems like Blair’s legacy will be even worse than it already is - can we call him "Merdock's Poodle too?  I think I speak for many when I say that is the kind of reporting we need to hear (as opposed to 2/3rds of the show devoted to soft news about Paris) as you are apparently the only one reporting it.  To me, the vaunted "American Media" has just as many if not more questions to answer when this is all over as the Bushees themselves!

I think on this very day you could probably make the claim that democracy died.  What keith so plolitely refered to as having the 'deck stacked' in the favor of the whitehouse essentially amounts to a complete coup!  I mean sure... we all are holding out whatever hope we can that it will all just be over by January 09, but what in the hell has just happened.  Our justice department has been hijacked by political cronies!  Sure, things 'might' change, but looking at all of who is leading in the primaries, I'm not so sure much will change but the spokesperson delivering the message from below.  I do agree with independent that we must do all we can to get these guys out of there but I don't feel that that allone will win the battle.  The Neocons aren't just going to up and die in '08 and if Hillary is our candidate, they stand a very real chance of re-election.  Although I have absolutely nothing against a lady president and would even prefer one, Hillary is to me just like them.  She was a REPUBLICAN before she married Bill who was himself a centered as you could get.

To avoid another "White in Crisis", I am searching for some guidance and confidently believe I will receive it here. Given that I have personally ruled out former Senator John Edwards as a choice for the Democratic Primary, the republican candidates are absolutely out of the question for various reasons, i.e., their continued and ruthless support of George W. Bush on his reckless course of action in Iraq; in addition, through their own words in both debates, and at numerous other public appearances, each candidate has had not just one, but numerous “Neanderthal moments” (too many other examples to list here) and there is no Independent candidate on the horizon.

Having said that, and in my best attempt to be a realist, I see only two candidates that have an actual chance of winning the Democratic Primary, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.  In further narrowing down the difficult task of confronting reality as it stands now, Senator Clinton will be the Democratic Party’s nominee.

This is where I desperately need help.  Many have posted very enlightening information regarding Senator Clinton, i.e. Chris Eldridge; B A; Bob, Pensacola; C A and Todd to the best of my recollection. I have therefore put together some personal “pros and cons” and would appreciate feedback.

Pros: Closely attached to Bill Clinton; articulate and intelligent; accomplished and respected Senator for New York, superb debater; to some extent a feminist, which for me equates to the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men; early proponent of national health insurance; good foreign affairs knowledge and excellent voting record on civil rights issues.

Cons: Closely attached to Bill Clinton (a “con” in the minds of many, not mine); arrogant (at times), polarizing, untraditional First Lady; champions Israel no matter the circumstance (even when Israel has without a doubt acted appallingly);  openly espouses her belief in God (which could hurt her in the general election with some democrats); investments in oil companies; accepts money from corporations that are exporting jobs Overseas.

I would sincerely appreciate the input of those on this blog, which have demonstrated the ability to give constructive, useful and valuable feedback.  For example, I am not looking for “pros” such as: better looking than Rosie O'Donnell; or “cons” such as:  has hips that can breed a moose or stuck with her philandering husband (self respect??), as I’ve heard these idiotic responses (Ann Coulter for example) and find them hateful. I am genuinely seeking legitimate input. Thanks you!!

My choice has always been former Vice President Al Gore, who has not entered the race. I still adamantly believe he is our best hope. In the news today, it was reported he is now the front-runner in New Hampshire. This news certainly delivers an unpleasant and potent message to the democrats who are running. It also speaks volumes about his competence, reputation and popularity. In my opinion, both our country and Gore’s Party are calling for him to enter the race.  

Well, this is one "Olberfan" who would love to see the "White House in Crisis" graphics used every night, thanks very much! And I can't get enough of hearing about how evil Rupe is. But Keith, you were wrong...the most useless part of the show last night was not the part about you and Dan...it was the obligatory Paris Hilton-fest. "Hilarious Hilton stylings"? I don't know how many times we have to post it here before you guys get it, but I guess it's time to do it again...MANY OF US ARE SICK OF PARIS HILTON! Why, why, WHY all the attention wasted on this blond 20something rich-girl bimbo who has done absolutely nothing of note in her life???? Just because Larry King got huge ratings from "the youngsters" for showing her for an hour talking about nothing, you have to have five minutes of her with Michael Musto AGAIN???? I just fail to see the attraction AND the point. And the joke about the Phil Spector murder case was beyond the pale. I guess I just don't see a woman being shot to death as something to joke about.

Please...this story wore out its welcome long ago. What's next...coverage next week of "Paris's First Week Out of Jail"?

I don't want to have to start turning off Countdown five minutes before the paper pitch, but if this garbage keeps going on, I may be forced to...the same way I only turn on MSNBC just as it begins, so as to avoid Chris Matthews and Scuzzball.  

White House in Crisis indeed.  Its getting frustrating to see all of the crap that Dubya & Co. are getting away with, and that NOTHING is being done about it.  No public outcry, no investigations, no special prosecutors, no I-word.

As for the Congress-v-White House subpoena fiasco, even if this thing does end up in the Supreme Court, how do you think THAT'S going to come out, seeing as how Dubya has stacked the Court?

Keith!  Putting the screws old Rupert!  You get 'em, tiger!  He needs his American citizenship stripped and his stateside assets seized and sold to offset the costs of a war he PERSONALLY helped create.  He acquired citizenship ONLY because he HAD to have it to buy some of his stations and papers legally - not because he gives a damn about America.  Rupert Murdoch is probably the only person in the world as evil as Dick.  He is the personification of greed.  Kick him again, Keith!

#1. Ugh...we'll THEY'LL always have Paris. #2. You DO need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows? #3. Rupert is definitely not a Butch Lisa Simpson.  What he is exactly, is anybody's guess. #4. At the time, I figured the 'Mission' was to get us stuck there.  Bartlett is thusly, disingenuous. #5. The Original?  Well, the British burned it down during the War of 1812, but Nixon watering the hallway was my favorite.

Dan Olbermann was good TV?  Are you kidding?  It wasn't any better TV than it is radio.  I was hoping for something fresh and funny.  Thank heaven that Ryan Adams followed them or the entire experience might have been wasted.  Repeatiing the entire segment on Countdown didn't make it any more interesting.  By the way, Paris didn't put me to sleep last night.  Countdown did that.  Time to drop the continual shameless self-promotion and the endless fixation on Paris Hilton.  If you insist on titillation (and I'm not necessarily adverse to that), then at least do some good titillation.

Tony Snow is a joke. Rupert Murdoch is the real press secretary of this administration, and just as crooked.

Hi, re the Newscorp story: If we condemn Ann Coulter for saying John Edwards should die in a terrorist attack, then Dennis Potter (RIP) can't say that he wants to shoot Rupert Murdoch. Nobody should be shooting anybody on either side. My 2 bits.

Just though of something-  Dick Cheney went on duck hunting trips with Justice Scalia.  Doesn't that make him a part of the JUDICIAL branch??

Another example of The Nexus of Politics and Terror.  Rush Olbermann's theory is proven once again as The White House gets bad news this week, there is another "terrorist plot" stopped in London today.  Oh my goodness!  Thank God for Rush Olbermann for exposing this blatant nexus that distracts people from the real stories!

Good Friday (YAHOO!!!) morning, everyone. Ahhh...COUNTDOWN last night w/Richard Wolffe AND John Dean was a great educational experience as usual. BRAVO yet again to Keith!!

OK...I doubt seriously that anyone in Congress reads this blog, but last night, John Dean mentioned the "I" word for the second time in consecutive nights. JOHN DEAN...as in NIXON & WATERGATE John Dean...Now, if anyone knows about impeachable executives and their "inner workings", it's John Dean. He basically called out Speaker Nancy Pelosi to put impeachment back "on the table." I guess if Congress won't listen to John Dean, we're all just beating our heads against a wall. BTW, in CONSERVATIVES WITHOUT CONSCIENCE, Mr. Dean says that as far as evil, vindictiveness, sneakiness, etc., President Nixon was NOTHING compared to our current crop at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. EEEKKK!

I loved Richard Wolffe's comment that the banner on the aircraft carrier should've said "Under New Management"! Too stinkin' funny...too bad the new "managers" flunked Management 101.

I can't wait to see "part deux" of the Rupert Murdoch report tonight! So, Tony Blair basically caved into him, too. That may help explain A LITTLE why he thinks our president is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

If you have the opportunity, you should listen to the daily podcast of Dan and Keith's ESPN show. Even if you're not into sports (I grew up with a sports-obsessed father, so I came to know a lot about sports almost by osmosis), you get to hear a whole other side of Keith that's not often heard on COUNTDOWN.

Slightly off topic as far as last night's show, but I watched the Democratic candidates debate last night at Howard University. You did get to hear them address issues that haven't been previously addressed in other debates, but towards the end, in the efforts to cover as many issues as possible, the time the candidates had to answer questions had to be cut back, so the last 15 or 20 minutes was each one basically repeating what the others said. The candidate who received the most consistent enthusiastic positive feedback from the audience was DENNIS KUCINICH. If you listen to NPR's "Wait...Wait...Don't Tell Me," you also know that Mr. Kucinich does a hell of a Donald Duck impersonation. He may need to break into that on the campaign trail. Mike Gravel (Mr. "Stare into the You-Tube camera" guy) still gives me the willies, but I agree with him about the "success" of the war on drugs. Senator Clinton received a standing ovation when she said something along the lines of if 25-30% of new HIV/AIDS cases were among Caucasian women instead of African-American women, there would be investigations and research galore. The reception that the Republican candidates receive there in September should be a hoot - maybe even 2 hoots.

Paris Hilton ... who gives a crap. Would you please just stop giving this bonehead air time.

KO and Michael were a hoot last night,however, stop it, this woman doesnot deserve anymore real time, get it! I would much rather see Jonathan Turley on the show than Ms. Hilton claiming she knows the Bible, whatever verion she reads, backwards and forwards and is now a rhodes scholar witht he subject. I think we tend to get off track with certain people jjust to avoid the real news, whatever it may be. Sometimes,it is hard to read between the lines due to all the press certain people receive. What is important is uncovering the wrongdoings of our government, Cheney and stories or people of interest. Keith, for awhile, you were covering a great story on the Walter REid Hospital and the neglect our unsung heroes go through, albeit, the emotional or physical strife they have received. So, whatever happened to the story, is there a happy ending, is the building being regutted, are the patients receiving better treatment? Huh? Peace, Denise !

For Dan Bartlett to give such a milquetoast apology---golly gee Wally we shoulda took down that pesky banner---is an obscenity.  3450 soldier deaths added to the 150 fallen at that time deserves a fullout, prostrate, beg for forgiveness.  The gall of this administration and its minions is breathtaking.

Keith/Countdown: I loved your piece last night on Murdock and the explanation as to why O'Reilly endlessly targets NBC. I always thought it was personal with Bill, but apparently not. They are nasty, nasty people.

To anyone here who may want to get back to me. What were your thoughts on the Immigration Bill not passing? Anyone care to comment? I'm a little saddened by it.

When is Tony Blair leaving office? hmmm another foiled terrorist BS. Don't think that this country and England are not in it together. Also I laugh when I see this crap. The People in Our White House, are in trouble and sent an SOS to England. Got to keep everyone in fear and mad, so they can continue with their lied about wars. If someone can't see this then I feel really sorry for them.

Pat in Boston,
    I thought that no bill is better than a very flawed bill.  Reid is a very bright man(you wouldnt think so by his demeanor) he was in a win win position.  He played it well.
    P. S.  I want Bush to go ungently into that goodnight.

Pat, Great news about the immigration bill. If you can't secure the borders nothing else matters. Also without it we have 30 million less democrat voters !

I think you have O'Reilly wrong, for I see it just the opposite. Keith is relentless in his pursuit of O'Reilly even to the point of making himself look silly. He needs to face it, O'Reily has 1000 times as many viewers and it is obvious Keith is jealous.

As to the White House in crisis, again I say there is no crisis in the White House. The crisis is in the democratic controlled Congress. Never has their poll numbers been so low. It would help if they had some ideas to put forth. All we hear is Bush lied. sorry but that dog don't hunt.

I only wish Rupert Murdoch had the stellar reputation of George Soros. Are you kidding me ? You liberals need to look in the mirror and stop embarassing yourselves with your stupidity.

And finally, Todd of New Orleans - given up that law license yet? Obviously you can't find a job or you wouldn't be on here 24/7. I suggest ask the democrat committee for a job. I'm sure you can deliver some of the subpoenas for Leahy. LOL

Keith, I want to work for you.  
It appears to me, that you, sir, are the last bastion of hope for any sanctity and verity in the 4th estate.  
Why doesn't anyone else in the press have the proverbial balls to stand up and tell the truth?  

Wow! Lots of great dialog already. This is wonderful!!

Pam, San Pedro CA, I posted some thoughts about Senator Clinton a couple of weeks back. I admire her, but I don't think she is "electable" because she seems to be such a divisive figure. There doesn't seem to be too much middle ground when it comes to her; people either love her or hate her. I think Republicans are literally salivating at the opportunity to draw out the big dirty political guns if she gets the nomination. I think her stance on the Iraq war will hurt her with the more left-leaning members of the Democratic party. At least as far as the Iraq issue, Senator Obama seems to have the most "clean slate" as far as that goes. Senator Obama, it seems to me, also has that (for lack of a better term) "fresh air" kind of environment around him. While he will get pummeled by the media, the right wing, etc., he doesn't come in with the ammount of "baggage" that Senator Clinton does. A candidate in a general election has to have a more broad appeal; I think Senator Obama has more of a chance at that than Senator Clinton.  That opinion and 50 cents won't buy a small coffee, but there it is.

Buzz, I LOVED your question about if since Dictator-wanne-be Cheney hunts with Scalia if Cheney is in the Judicial Branch!! Perhaps, if Scalia had shot Cheney in the face and called him "my friend." :) But, given Cheney's current "logic," your assumption would make sense. Once again, VERY FUNNY!

Good morning, Pat in Boston. Just a quickie question before I address my thoughts about the immigration bill...did you get to see Keith when he was in Boston? If so, how was it? OK...back to the immigration bill. I think I said in one of my first posts in this forum that it seemed like NO ONE on either side of the political fence cared for this immigration bill. Hard-liner Republicans kept crying "amnesty," and Democrats thought the bill would drive down wages, etc. While some compromise is necessary for any work to get done in Congress or anywhere else, you can't compromise legislation to a point where it's unpalletable to everyone. Plus, I think you need to figure in Republicans trying to distance themselves from a very unpopular administration - especially Republicans who are looking to get re-elected. So, I wasn't surprised at all to hear about the "death" of the immigration bill. BTW, I accidently flipped to the last few minutes of Rush Limbaugh's show yesterday, and someone called in saying that "amnesty" should also be given to persons suspected of drunken driving manslaughter in July 1969, those connected with shady land deals in Arkansas, New Jersey, and Illinois, and those connected to suspicious suicides in DC parks. Classy, huh?! I quickly put in my Enya CD, felt a whole lot better, and made my way home.

I just thought of a question I had last night that I'm sure you all can help me with. Didn't Fred Fielding work for Nixon? I think I remember hearing that when he was appointed to his current post after the November 2006 elections because the White House figured the subpoenas would be buzzing around them like flies around cow plops.

I still say Murdock looks like Pruneface in the Dick Tracy cartoons.  Both evil.

Interesting on how Murdock "bought" Tony Blair.  No wonder Blair became yet another loyal Bushie.  Is there anyone who can't be bought anymore?

Pam:  I still like Dennis Kucinich.  Yeah, I know he's got no chance because he's not a media pretty boy, but for me it's ideas that count and he has them.  I also would like to see President Gore.  He may be wise to bide his time to enter the campaign circus.  This is the first time I've seen the presidential race start so early.  What a waste.

Remember folks, it's Friday.  The day when the political heat causes some officials to decide it's time to-spend-more-time-with-their-family.  Also, it's garbage day - I'll be doing my normal Friday duty of checking out the BushCo trash to see what juicy tidbits they are trying to hide under the moldy leftovers and banana peels.

Musto must go. That Ann Coulter clone reflects badly on you.

For those who want more:

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/progressreport/

A concise synopsis of the first year of the BushCo Supreme Court and how much worse things could get for us if they keep overturning previous rulings.

They've already said buh-bye to equal pay for equal work, Brown v. Board of Education, limited Congressional authority over campaign funding, and have begun to chip away at the reproductive rights of women.

Loyal Olberfans ?  Both of them ?  LOL

Pam,

Here are my 2cents on Sen. Clinton. I will not vote for her. It has nothing to do with her husband (who did great things and awful things as president). My issue with the Sen. is her lack on sencerity (sp?). I believe she lied to 60 Minutes about her husband's extra-marital activites to help get him elected. I don't trust her to be truthful while trying to get herself elected. She's more wooden than Gore (seen her clap to music at a rally?). Just don't feel I can trust her positions.

BTW, I am pretty middle of the road politically. I lean more to the right than left, but both parties disgust me. I abstained last general election out of disgust with both cantidates.

Having said all that about Clinton, I'm not sure anyone else in the race is better (either party).

Keith/Countdown: You are so right.  Paris Hilton is not only boring, but nauseating.  SO STOP DEVOTING TIME TO THE TWIT!  Please.  

Hey guys.  I didn't take time to read any of the comments, yet.  I just got done reading an article on truthout.org.  Scary stuff.  It's about Bush and his so called religion.  It's actually a must read for all of us who like our freedom of speech, religion, etc.  You can find it at
www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062907J.shtml.  

Pam: This is a tough one for me because at this point you know the kind of candidate I am looking for and unfortunately such a candidate is not out there (yet). But regarding Hillary, if she were to be elected, this is what you can expect: a very tightly run ship in the White House (very tight); some advice from Bill will be welcomed but it will be limited (Hillary is her own woman even as it relates to Bill and if elected it will give her the oppontunity to remind him now and then how he screwed his administration so sit down and shut up; superficial requests for input from others and the American people (she already knows what she wants to do and how and does have to a degree, similar to Bush, a my way or the highway frame of reference); improved but tough foreign relations (she will spend some time visiting enemies made by Bush as well as our friends but she won't take shit off folks that threaten peace); a big big push for national health care, big push; quick and decisive firings for anyone who on the staff does not perform at the highest level or who is caught lying or who speaks out of turn with the press (she will not tolerate incompetence on her staff or among those on her cabinet and will abhor leaks); a difficult time with republican congressional members as they are going to hate having her in office because she is a Clinton and a woman (they will fight her on every turn and the general election campaign will set that tone as it will be very very nasty); intelligence (yes, she is an intelligent woman so the days of incompetnece due to a lack of intelligence will be over when she takes the oath of office); media bashing (because she would be the first woman President and a Clinton she will be under the micro-scope by the press and there will be horrendous bashing from folks like Fox Noise); fiestiness (if there is such a word - she will be very fiesty); well written speeches and fairly well delivered speeches (it is going to be an adjustment for the American people to have a woman give the State of the Union address but she'll do ok); a desire to help Israel maintain security but on a lukewarm basis (not a fanatical posotion and she will try to appeal to the Palestinian people); education will see a slight but not much improvement (she is like an Algebra teacher I had in school and just can't understand why kids can't comprehend the formulas after putting them on the board one time and taking 10 minutes to explain); more female appointments to high positions that she will give more an ear too then their male counterparts (she dislikes other women but she dislikes men even more, and that was before Flowers and Monica); No calls whatsoever to GW to ask where things were stored in the White House (she hates the guy) she'll have Bill call papa Bush; a four year term (she won't win re-election); a draw down of troops in Iraq with an American presence remaining in friendlier middle eastern countries (she is not going to pull out of the region altogether); a confrontation with Iran (most likely bombing runs against their Nuclear facilities); no dogs running around the white or viewed on the White House lawn (she'll make Bill keep his dog(s) out of the picture s she does not want to be bothered with them, she is not a pet person); nothing new on immigration (no one in Washington really knows what to do but most likely she'll push for some kind of amnesty for those illegals already here); Anything else you want to know Pam, smile.              

One reason we find ourselves in the middle of a civil war in Iraq is that the mainstream media literally repeated the Bush administration talking points as "news" in the months before the invasion.  They covered what the pro-war faction SAID (e.g., the Condi Rice remark about the "mushroom" cloud") but did nothing to illuminate the truth value of their statements.  That's how we end up with, what?  40% of Americans still thinking Iraq was connected to 9/11?  While nobody talks about the Saudi connection to 9/11?  Michael Moore is still consistently mocked as an extremist for asking some tough questions in his film about the financial and political relationships between Bush and the Saudis, as well as Bush and the government in Afghanistan.  So to my mind, shining a bright light on Rupert Murdoch's so-called "journalism" is an act of patriotism.  While those of us not in the business might see the FOX/NBC sparring as a kind of rivalry, the only way to hold Murdoch and the various parts of his empire accountable is to start questioning and challenging their version(s) of reality.  Countdown's series is a start.  

it doesn't hurt to remember that the Fox employee who "called" the 2000 election for Bush was a blood relative of the candidate.  And had any mainstream television network, broadcast or cable, behaved as advocates for the democracy, and not neutral observers of a spat between two political parties, perhaps the Supreme Court would have declined to decide the 2000 election--or come down on the side of the radical idea of actually counting the votes.

No matter how we look at it, a skeptical mainstream news media--not captive to corporate interests or in cozy relationship to those in power--would be a great asset in saving the democracy.  

Larry - No.  I am just good enough at it to be wired everywhere and other needs keep me attached to my laptop.  Thanks for your concern.  Something relevant to add?  No?  Then enjoy your Friday afternoon in Charleston before I forget you are usually civil.  None of the rest of the usual suspects cares to defend Cheney.  Why don't you address that before wasting your time worrying about my billable hours.

"As to the White House in crisis, again I say there is no crisis in the White House. The crisis is in the democratic controlled Congress.  It would help if they had some ideas to put forth. All we hear is Bush lied. sorry but that dog don't hunt."

Wow, so seven years ago when all the Republican Congress could do was say "Clinton lied, he has to go", was that wrong, too?  Surely you don't have a double standard!

Bush didn't just lie, he sent American troops off to die for nothing, ignored the Geneva Convention, did away with that pesky Habeas Corpus, turned the Justice Department into a wing of the Republican Party, signed laws passed by Congress and simultaneously issued signing statements saying "these laws don't apply to me", authorized unwarranted domestic spying, vetoed stem-cell research based on his voodoo religious beliefs, and generally completely subverted every part of the Constitution that didn't have to do with the Right to Bear Arms.

Looks like an all out war is being declared on Mr. Murdock.  The NYT spent at least two days on him. My guess is cable news like Fox exposes the propaganda network of the liberal media so they are going to try and discredit Murdock.  They can’t fight the substance so they go after the man.

Larry,

Do the math.  Your apparent glee at bad numbers for Congress is both naive and short-sighted.   I would respect your opinions more if you appeared to care more about the country and less about your team "winning."  

First, it is silly to call this a "Democratic Congress"
since the Democrats have a majority in the Senate only if Joe Liebermann chooses to vote with the Democrats, instead of his pro-war allies in the Bush adminstration. A simple majority will not allow any Congress to override a Presidential veto. It takes 60 votes.  Note that the filibuster (that they tried to eliminate when they were in power) is now the Republicans' best friend.

Second, many people of both parties are disgusted with Congress because in spite of the 2006 elections, we are still stuck in Iraq because the Republican president is determined to maintain a permanent occupation of Iraq, and there is not, as yet, a strong enough coalition between Democrats and Republicans to agree on how to get out.  In the end, the party holding the Presidency will pay for Iraq because the next election will be about the presidency.

Third, once again, I will remind you that American democracy is not the Super Bowl, where one team wins and the other loses.  If the Republicans have handed their party over to those who would gut our liberties, destroy our military readiness, sink the next generation into endless debt, and trash the Constitution, we all lose.  If the Democrats can't find a way to end the war in Iraq that protects the national interest, we all lose.  If the next president--of either party--continues to sell out the people in favor of big corporations and special interests, we all lose.  

And if people put their loyalty to a political party ahead of loyalty to the principles in the Constitution, they deserve to lose.

Independent! Independent! Calling Independent!

Krista, in answer to your "did I see Keith" question when he was in Boston. Yes and no. I was initially invited to attend the ACLU reception he was speaking at, but I got bumped at the last minute by more important people at the firm I'm employed at (I'm not a lawyer, and I was pretty disappointed). I did see him at Fenway Park (at least I'm pretty sure it was him), but I didn't approach him (combination of nervousness and not wanting to bother him). The attorneys from my office who did attend the ACLU affair did meet and speak with him after the reception in the bar and they told me he was great. I was told he was very, very friendly and personable. They liked him a great deal actually. (and 1 of them is a conservative!!) And since they don't know I contribute to his blog, there was no reason whatsoever for them to lie about their impression of him. I guess he made a good one. Not surprising.

Larry: You indeed make me sad with your comments. Very sad. Reminds me of when Democrats lost the south simply because LBJ did the moral, right thing -he passed Civil Rights Legislation. What does that tell you about progess in this country? I guess votes are more important than the future of millions of people. I heard more anger and hate (nothing new)over the immigration bill then I have ever heard over the Iraq war. A war we're waging against people who did not attack us.

Nice to see you again Larry - SC.

For somebody who claims to care about victims of violence, There is no excuse for the joke about the victim in the Phil Spector case. Will he lead by example and name himself The Worst Person in the World?

About Fred Fielding:  He was a deputy to John Dean in Nixon's White House;  he was WH counsel in Reagan's administration; and probably had some experience with that administration in relation to Iran/Contra, although I did not check on that;  he also served on the 9/11 Commission.  

I've thought a lot about the Nixon administration over the past few months.  Clearly, Cheney and Rumsfeld were products of that "imperial presidency" nonsense that Nixon and his henchmen believed in.  I used to believe that the country had put that idea aside with Nixon, but clearly (to paraphrase JRR Tolkein) that evil idea only went into the shadows to grow again under Bush.  That's something to bear in mind as we strive to restore the Constitution;  the Roves and Griffens and  Goodlings will still be out there, waiting for the next Republican president with a taste for the "unitary executive" theory.  I don't pose that as a gloomy thought, but rather, thinking back to the discussions of Watergate a few weeks ago, I wish I had known then that the problem wasn't entirely Nixon, the man;  it was how the president saw his relationship to power, and the country.  

i'm in agreement. paris gotta go. and musto too. he's not provocative, just smarmy. and if anybody missed the dem forum on PBS last nite with tavis smiley, you missed some good info, and i'm still liking richardson, although kucinich is really spot on. gravel is right on a lot of things, but hes an unelectable flake. dodd-edwards-biden, all kinda the same to me. i dont like hilary. too manipulative, and an opportunist... and the republicans want her to be the nominee so they can relive the 90s and continue to bash clinton, since they got nothin to go on now. and obama, just not the right guy right now. maybe he needs a little more time in the senate.

A certain LARGE headed MSNBC host,(who says "HAW" frequently)should also rank in the worst person trio.
Any show which books Coulter (and you know who they are...cough-Chris-Joe-cough), deserve not only being humiliated, they and their sponsors should hear loud and clear from descent Americans..."ENOUGH!"

MUSTO is must see TV,
I'd like a frank discussion between Keith and Michael, over the OBVIOUS weight gain of Ann Coulter...she's blown up like a poison dart...easily 20-25 pounds. Maybe ahlziemers has made that aging actress forget to purge after her binging.

Barbinalbany,

My fear for Obama is more time in the Senate. The longer one is there the more they devolve.

scotty boy in NV - anytime you want to see the "substance" of Fox Noise ripped to shreds, I suggest Media Matters for America. If I were you (thank God I'm not), I'd bring a barf bag along. What you read there will undoubtedly set your Republican guts (what little there are) to churning.

Did anybody see what Coulter told O'riley last night? She said that she hopes Edwards get killed by terorists. Does that make any sence anymore? Does even get what she said? she HOPES he get killed during an terrorist attack means that has do be another terrorist attach in the USA right. And she hopes for that? O' Riley didn't do anything, are guy's in the media so taken by her that none of them put her in her place? Now you can get fired for maken racial remakes but saying that she hopes we have another terrorist attack so Edwards get killed is ok? I been watching all day for somebody to say anything about it. But either you all missed it or you agree with her. Which one is it here?

Timmy, Milwaukee WI (Sent Friday, June 29, 2007 4:08 PM)  Please Timmy boy, Media matters is a progressive propaganda site.  People like you can no longer discriminate between propaganda and real news.


I just visited the site, and you know what?  The only criticism of MSNBC was that Hardball allowed Coulter on.  By far the majority was about Fox news.   I do however commend them - in their action page they state  “You can join Media Matters for America in the fight against conservative misinformation in the media.” At least they’re not claiming to fight liberal progressive misinformation which unfortunately is much more ubiquitous.  .    

Scott Henderson, your misinformation is far more ubiquitous than any you will ever find anywhere else...in fact, at the rate you post, you may have Fixed News beat.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):