|
|
Post by Outsider on Apr 12, 2016 5:21:57 GMT -5
Worm!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Outsider on Apr 12, 2016 5:34:20 GMT -5
Panama Papers’ Russian Mob Connection The trove of leaked documents has already revealed the billions swirling around Putin. Now a Swiss firm named in the papers appears to have links to Russian organized crime. A Swiss law firm implicated in the Panama Papers also has links to an alleged Russian mafia, The Daily Beast has discovered. www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/12/panama-papers-russian-mob-connection.html |
|
|
|
Post by Outsider on Apr 12, 2016 5:47:40 GMT -5
|
|
newhivemaster
Hive Listener
Hive Master
Posts: 2,660 
Likes: 10,489
|
Post by newhivemaster on Apr 12, 2016 6:52:33 GMT -5
Good morning, Hive!!!
New pic up in the 1000 words thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulnnto on Apr 12, 2016 7:13:51 GMT -5
Our media-just saw a 5 minute story on CBS over a joke that the mayor of NYC told and somehow that reflects poorly on Clinton. As ever, the contempt they have for their viewers can never be overstated.
|
|
newhivemaster
Hive Listener
Hive Master
Posts: 2,660
Likes: 10,489
|
Post by newhivemaster on Apr 12, 2016 7:18:23 GMT -5
Our media-just saw a 5 minute story on CBS over a joke that the mayor of NYC told and somehow that reflects poorly on Clinton. As ever, the contempt they have for their viewers can never be overstated. Both sides do it!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Outsider on Apr 12, 2016 7:42:49 GMT -5
Our media-just saw a 5 minute story on CBS over a joke that the mayor of NYC told and somehow that reflects poorly on Clinton. As ever, the contempt they have for their viewers can never be overstated. Both sides do it!!!!! Yeah, but by and large, the right wing media's contempt for their viewers is justified. CBS is just being lazy. |
|
|
|
Post by Outsider on Apr 12, 2016 7:45:10 GMT -5
Sam Brownback declares war on Kansas: This is how extremists gut a state — and democracy The ultraconservatives take control, with an assist to ALEC and no concern for the people It’s not uncommon to see developments named after what they displace or sometimes destroy. Subdivisions with names like Wild Creek Place likely contain neither a trace of the “wild” nor the remains of a creek. I guess more descriptive names such as Flat Asphalt Junction simply lack the same level of appeal. I’ve come to see the names of Kansas legislative committees in the same manner. Under the legislature’s ultraconservative leadership, committees such as Education (House and Senate), Education Budget (House), Commerce, Labor and Economic Development (House) and Local Government (Senate), to name but a few, seem cruelly named after what the ultraconservatives have marked for displacement or destruction. Gov. Sam Brownback’s march to zero income taxes, combined with legislation designed to weaken public services and wrest control away from local government, are hollowing out the very aspects of government these committees focus on. Public education certainly seems targeted to be greatly supplemented by, if not outright replaced by, private education. We see this in other states as well. For some time now, model legislation from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Americans For Prosperity (AFP) and other libertarian / ultraconservative organizations has been used as the template for bills in states with varying levels of ultraconservative control. Such templates have been developed on everything from taxation and fiscal policy, to energy and the environment, to health and human services. Looking just at education, in 2015 there were 172 measures introduced in 42 states based on ALEC model legislation, according to the Center for Media and Democracy. The general goal being to “… transform public education from a public and accountable institution that serves the public into one that serves private, for-profit interests.” With public education commonly comprising a significant portion of state budgets, this dovetails nicely with ultraconservative legislation focused on drastically shrinking government and reducing taxes. www.salon.com/2016/04/12/sam_brownback_declares_war_on_kansas_this_is_how_extremists_gut_a_state_and_democracy/ |
|
|
|
Post by Outsider on Apr 12, 2016 7:46:55 GMT -5
The Democrats have no soul: The Clintons, neoliberalism, and how the “people’s party” lost its way Republicans never had one. That makes Democrats' betrayals, deceit and crisis of legitimacy that much more serious Looking beyond the daily tussle between Donald J. Trump and the Republican Party, or Bernie Sanders and the Democratic Party, let’s consider the larger historical picture to see what the current election campaign tells us about the state of the two major political parties and their future. Over the last forty years both major political parties have been in a state of terminal decline for a number of reasons, primarily the ideological contradictions each has developed quite in sync with the other, driven by the same economic trends. Both are in a death spiral at the moment, but this being America, where political accountability is not as rapid or conclusive as in Europe, it’s likely that they will continue in more or less their existing forms for the foreseeable future, further deepening the crisis of legitimacy. Whatever the realities about their loss of credibility, we are not likely to hear an announcement anytime soon that the Democratic or Republican parties are dead, having ceased to serve the respective functions for which they accumulated much legitimacy at different points in the twentieth century. It may seem, with stronger party identification over the last couple of decades, that the parties are stronger than ever, but this would be misleading on several counts. The fact most frequently cited in support of the parties’ strength is increased polarity in Congress, where in recent decades members of each party have moved farther toward the extremes, which means less bipartisan consensus. The electorate has sharply divided, with left and right divisions more pronounced, amidst the now familiar phenomenon of the red state/blue state split which first became prominently visible in the 2000 election. But it would be a mistake to confuse ideological polarity with party loyalty. In Congress, members have no choice but to support the party closest to their ideological leanings, and likewise for the populace at large. Third parties have had a difficult time getting off the ground in America—what should have developed into a breakaway anti-corporate party after the Seattle WTO protests in 1999 and Ralph Nader’s candidacy in 2000 never happened—so the lack of party choice at the national level creates the illusion of strong party support. www.salon.com/2016/04/12/the_democrats_have_no_soul_the_clintons_neoliberalism_and_how_the_peoples_party_lost_its_way/ |
|
|
|
Post by Outsider on Apr 12, 2016 7:48:11 GMT -5
What the hell was NBC thinking? Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter & the legitimization of the crackpot caucus NBC and MSNBC have started inviting some of the more noxious right-wing pundits onto their shows of late. But why? Let us stipulate a couple of obvious points right up front. One, the name of the game in television, even for ostensibly serious news programs, is ratings, ratings, ratings. Nobody cares how sharp and informative your show is, even during the wasteland that is the networks’ schedule on Sunday mornings. If you’re not capturing the eyeballs and the advertising dollars, it does not matter how big a name you are in the journalism racket. You and/or your show will still be gone from the airwaves faster than you can say “David Gregory’s psychologist.” Two, while there is something to the critique of the media paying too much attention to its alleged objectivity at the expense of accuracy, there is nothing inherently wrong with, say, a left-of-center news host or network bringing on a conservative for a conversation, or vice versa. Sure, there is a corporate bias towards an overly studied neutrality, which is why you won’t see Wolf Blitzer hosting representatives of the Communist Party USA or the American Freedom Party. Heck, before this election cycle Bernie Sanders was considered too far to the left to make more than the occasional token appearance on television. (Some of his fans would argue that is still the case, and by some measurements they would be right.) With all of that said, there is no reason why the NBC/MSNBC behemoth should have booked some of the right-wing crackpots they have allowed to pollute their airwaves over the last couple of weeks. Sure, the Republican primary has been contentious, messy, fascinating and newsworthy. Sure, the GOP might be relying on the machinations of a walking puddle of motor oil who literally thinks he was chosen by God to be president in order to save themselves from Donald Trump. And who doesn’t want to talk about that? But does that really justify a steady stream of interviews from the likes of Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck broadcast into homes where children live and people might be trying to eat dinner? It is bad enough that we have to take Donald Trump and Ted Cruz seriously as presidential candidates in the first place, let alone as the last two men standing in the GOP primary. (John Kasich needs 150 percent of the remaining delegates to win – no, really – so he doesn’t really count.) It is depressing enough to see either one of their views getting an airing on the broadcast and cable networks, or anywhere else outside of a public access channel in Pahrump, Nevada. What possible wisdom do the networks think a clown like Beck or a cretinous charlatan like Coulter might have to add to this circus? www.salon.com/2016/04/12/what_the_hell_was_nbc_news_thinking_glenn_beck_ann_coulter_the_legitimization_of_the_crackpot_caucus/ |
|
|
|
Post by Outsider on Apr 12, 2016 7:49:52 GMT -5
Let’s audit the Pentagon: The U.S. military is lighting our tax dollars on fire Fifty thousand bucks to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants!? This madness has to stop This piece originally appeared on TomDispatch. From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades. Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars’ worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represents chump change in the Pentagon’s wastage sweepstakes and in the context of its $600-billion-plus budget, but think of it as indicative of the absurd lengths the Department of Defense will go to when what’s at stake is throwing away taxpayer dollars. Keep in mind that the above examples are just the tip of the tip of a titanic iceberg of military waste. In a recent report I did for the Center for International Policy, I identified 27 recent examples of such wasteful spending totaling over $33 billion. And that was no more than a sampling of everyday life in the twenty-first-century world of the Pentagon. www.salon.com/2016/04/12/lets_audit_the_pentagon_the_u_s_military_is_lighting_our_tax_dollars_on_fire_partner/ |
|
|
|
Post by Outsider on Apr 12, 2016 7:51:11 GMT -5
“There is Kryptonite for Donald Trump”: Rachel Maddow dishes on the ideal way to handle the GOP front-runner Maddow spoke at length on 2016 election coverage with Slate's Isaac Chotiner Rachel Maddow recently sat down for an interview with Slate contributor Isaac Chotiner in which she outlined, among other things, the ideal way to handle a candidate like Republican front-runner Donald Trump. “I think that it is much more valuable to show and explain what he is doing than to host people responding to him or reacting to him,” she said. “I feel like there’s a lot of useless media ink and airtime being wasted on people expressing themselves about Donald Trump, which is essentially just creating more of a cultural dynamic around him rather than helping people understand what he’s doing and see what’s important about it.” Maddow told Chotiner that, ideally, he would be covered using “a documentary approach” instead of a commentary one. That said, she added, “I absolutely hear it when people complain that Trump gets too much time on television, but I do think it can at least be explained, if not excused.” “It’s part of his campaign style to be unpredictable, to not always say the same thing. Yeah, he does have a stump speech. That’s true of any candidate, but in addition to the stump speech repetition and that sort of discipline, his indiscipline, or at least his willingness to say unexpected things and go unexpectedly shocking places at unpredictable times, means that it’s worth it to have a camera there whenever he’s talking.” www.salon.com/2016/04/11/there_is_kryponite_for_donald_trump_rachel_maddow_dishes_on_the_ideal_way_to_handle_the_gop_front_runner/ |
|
|
|
Post by roknsteve on Apr 12, 2016 8:10:54 GMT -5
The Democrats have no soul: The Clintons, neoliberalism, and how the “people’s party” lost its way Republicans never had one. That makes Democrats' betrayals, deceit and crisis of legitimacy that much more serious Looking beyond the daily tussle between Donald J. Trump and the Republican Party, or Bernie Sanders and the Democratic Party, let’s consider the larger historical picture to see what the current election campaign tells us about the state of the two major political parties and their future. Over the last forty years both major political parties have been in a state of terminal decline for a number of reasons, primarily the ideological contradictions each has developed quite in sync with the other, driven by the same economic trends. Both are in a death spiral at the moment, but this being America, where political accountability is not as rapid or conclusive as in Europe, it’s likely that they will continue in more or less their existing forms for the foreseeable future, further deepening the crisis of legitimacy. Whatever the realities about their loss of credibility, we are not likely to hear an announcement anytime soon that the Democratic or Republican parties are dead, having ceased to serve the respective functions for which they accumulated much legitimacy at different points in the twentieth century. It may seem, with stronger party identification over the last couple of decades, that the parties are stronger than ever, but this would be misleading on several counts. The fact most frequently cited in support of the parties’ strength is increased polarity in Congress, where in recent decades members of each party have moved farther toward the extremes, which means less bipartisan consensus. The electorate has sharply divided, with left and right divisions more pronounced, amidst the now familiar phenomenon of the red state/blue state split which first became prominently visible in the 2000 election. But it would be a mistake to confuse ideological polarity with party loyalty. In Congress, members have no choice but to support the party closest to their ideological leanings, and likewise for the populace at large. Third parties have had a difficult time getting off the ground in America—what should have developed into a breakaway anti-corporate party after the Seattle WTO protests in 1999 and Ralph Nader’s candidacy in 2000 never happened—so the lack of party choice at the national level creates the illusion of strong party support. www.salon.com/2016/04/12/the_democrats_have_no_soul_the_clintons_neoliberalism_and_how_the_peoples_party_lost_its_way/ |
|
|
|
Post by roknsteve on Apr 12, 2016 8:22:32 GMT -5
A possible Trump VP is, wait for it, big surprise, Scott Walker! Well, it could have been Ann Coulter.
|
|
|
|
Post by roknsteve on Apr 12, 2016 9:00:56 GMT -5
Our media-just saw a 5 minute story on CBS over a joke that the mayor of NYC told and somehow that reflects poorly on Clinton. As ever, the contempt they have for their viewers can never be overstated. Oh that's nothing new, Hillary gives poor answers to questions and makes poor statements in speeches every day. And since this is a free country, if Hillary is the nominee I'm writing in Bernie Sanders in November. Oh, I'll vote for most of the other Dem candidates except Doris Matsui who is a Pelosi drone. |
|
|
|
Post by phillippatUK on Apr 12, 2016 9:19:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by roknsteve on Apr 12, 2016 9:32:23 GMT -5
Members of the Republican party of just starting to realize that Fox News has helped to destroy their party. Also, Rush
Beck, Coulter, O'Reilly etc. If and when the party splits I would hope the moderates would start a new and real conservative
party. And let the extremists go wherever and do whatever.
|
|
|
|
Post by foggyisback on Apr 12, 2016 9:37:38 GMT -5
Our media-just saw a 5 minute story on CBS over a joke that the mayor of NYC told and somehow that reflects poorly on Clinton. As ever, the contempt they have for their viewers can never be overstated. Oh that's nothing new, Hillary gives poor answers to questions and makes poor statements in speeches every day. And since this is a free country, if Hillary is the nominee I'm writing in Bernie Sanders in November. Oh, I'll vote for most of the other Dem candidates except Doris Matsui who is a Pelosi drone. Look, the joke such as it was was diBlasio talking about being on "CP Time" which is A -A slang for "colored people's time", i.e., blahs generally showing up 10-15 minutes late for anything. If you see the video and her role in it you can easily tell that IT WAS COMPLETELY SCRIPTED. I laughed and was not offended in the least. Heck, BDB's married to a blah woman. But you're gonna go off on Hil for this? Really??This intrinsic and pervasive Hillary Hate you have is quite tiring. Either up your meds or find something meaningful to yell at her about. Or better yet just keep it under your hat. |
|
|
|
Post by roknsteve on Apr 12, 2016 9:42:12 GMT -5
You hit the Jackpot Phillipat. Because I'm not blinded by both parties propaganda I can see that both parties are Right leaning. We really need 2 new parties in America. The 2 we have now just play Good Cop/Bad Cop and then reverse it when necessary. And we've now got a Congress that does no work except get rich with the help of Lobbyists. Most people won't admit to any of that but it's all true. |
|
|
|
Post by roknsteve on Apr 12, 2016 9:47:05 GMT -5
Did I Go Off? On Hillary Clinton???
I don't have to go off on Hillary. She does it all by herself everyday by pandering to every minority and every segment of America.
|
|
|
|
Post by kbanginmotown on Apr 12, 2016 9:47:35 GMT -5
“There is Kryptonite for Donald Trump”: Rachel Maddow dishes on the ideal way to handle the GOP front-runner Maddow spoke at length on 2016 election coverage with Slate's Isaac Chotiner Rachel Maddow recently sat down for an interview with Slate contributor Isaac Chotiner in which she outlined, among other things, the ideal way to handle a candidate like Republican front-runner Donald Trump. “I think that it is much more valuable to show and explain what he is doing than to host people responding to him or reacting to him,” she said. “I feel like there’s a lot of useless media ink and airtime being wasted on people expressing themselves about Donald Trump, which is essentially just creating more of a cultural dynamic around him rather than helping people understand what he’s doing and see what’s important about it.” Maddow told Chotiner that, ideally, he would be covered using “a documentary approach” instead of a commentary one. That said, she added, “I absolutely hear it when people complain that Trump gets too much time on television, but I do think it can at least be explained, if not excused.” “It’s part of his campaign style to be unpredictable, to not always say the same thing. Yeah, he does have a stump speech. That’s true of any candidate, but in addition to the stump speech repetition and that sort of discipline, his indiscipline, or at least his willingness to say unexpected things and go unexpectedly shocking places at unpredictable times, means that it’s worth it to have a camera there whenever he’s talking.” www.salon.com/2016/04/11/there_is_kryponite_for_donald_trump_rachel_maddow_dishes_on_the_ideal_way_to_handle_the_gop_front_runner/Great link, outsider! I enjoyed reading this article yesterday. My favorite part: "Maddow replied that it’s difficult to ask a candidate as evasive as Trump difficult questions, which is why she enjoyed his town-hall with her MSNBC colleague Chris Matthews. “He’s a guy [Matthews] who is completely willing to jump in not just at a time when other people might hold back, but jump in repeatedly as a way of turning the conversation into a constructive place when it has stalled or when he can predict where you’re going,” she said. “That impatience on his part makes him seem like this kinetic guy who’s very different than everybody else on TV, but that apparently is the Kryptonite for interviewing Trump.”I'm not finding it now, but somewhere else, Rachel says: Matthews is so quick, he even interrupts himself.  edit: "“Pathological liars should all go to Chris Matthews for interviews,” Chotiner replied." |
|
|
|
Post by forgottenlord on Apr 12, 2016 10:15:02 GMT -5
Let’s audit the Pentagon: The U.S. military is lighting our tax dollars on fire Fifty thousand bucks to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants!? This madness has to stop This piece originally appeared on TomDispatch. From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades. Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars’ worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represents chump change in the Pentagon’s wastage sweepstakes and in the context of its $600-billion-plus budget, but think of it as indicative of the absurd lengths the Department of Defense will go to when what’s at stake is throwing away taxpayer dollars. Keep in mind that the above examples are just the tip of the tip of a titanic iceberg of military waste. In a recent report I did for the Center for International Policy, I identified 27 recent examples of such wasteful spending totaling over $33 billion. And that was no more than a sampling of everyday life in the twenty-first-century world of the Pentagon. www.salon.com/2016/04/12/lets_audit_the_pentagon_the_u_s_military_is_lighting_our_tax_dollars_on_fire_partner/On the list of waste, that 50K stands out as really not bothering me. Basically, they hired a researcher for 3-6 months to investigate it and he concluded *very* early in the process that it was a waste of time. When you consider the issues they've had with IEDs, it makes sense they'd be wondering if there's a way to detect bombs in that region |
|
jarais
Hive Attuned
Forever Larva Millennial
jetski diplomat
Posts: 1,251 
Likes: 5,050
|
Post by jarais on Apr 12, 2016 10:53:03 GMT -5
One of the hardest things for me was explaining Ferguson to mystified foreigners watching the live feeds as closely as many Americans were. |
|
newhivemaster
Hive Listener
Hive Master
Posts: 2,660
Likes: 10,489
|
Post by newhivemaster on Apr 12, 2016 11:10:09 GMT -5
Yeah, but by and large, the right wing media's contempt for their viewers is justified. CBS is just being lazy. You missed the sarcasm. BSDI!!! is a swamp meme denoting laziness in the media. |
|
|
|
Post by foggyisback on Apr 12, 2016 11:13:13 GMT -5
Did I Go Off? On Hillary Clinton??? I don't have to go off on Hillary. She does it all by herself everyday by pandering to every minority and every segment of America. Dude, you just hate her. Irrationally IMO. She's not the perfect candidate (no one is) but she's not Trump the ICD either. Support Bernie or whomever, but give us something other than "she wears her pantsuits too tight." |
|
|
|
Post by foggyisback on Apr 12, 2016 11:15:20 GMT -5
“There is Kryptonite for Donald Trump”: Rachel Maddow dishes on the ideal way to handle the GOP front-runner Maddow spoke at length on 2016 election coverage with Slate's Isaac Chotiner Rachel Maddow recently sat down for an interview with Slate contributor Isaac Chotiner in which she outlined, among other things, the ideal way to handle a candidate like Republican front-runner Donald Trump. “I think that it is much more valuable to show and explain what he is doing than to host people responding to him or reacting to him,” she said. “I feel like there’s a lot of useless media ink and airtime being wasted on people expressing themselves about Donald Trump, which is essentially just creating more of a cultural dynamic around him rather than helping people understand what he’s doing and see what’s important about it.” Maddow told Chotiner that, ideally, he would be covered using “a documentary approach” instead of a commentary one. That said, she added, “I absolutely hear it when people complain that Trump gets too much time on television, but I do think it can at least be explained, if not excused.” “It’s part of his campaign style to be unpredictable, to not always say the same thing. Yeah, he does have a stump speech. That’s true of any candidate, but in addition to the stump speech repetition and that sort of discipline, his indiscipline, or at least his willingness to say unexpected things and go unexpectedly shocking places at unpredictable times, means that it’s worth it to have a camera there whenever he’s talking.” www.salon.com/2016/04/11/there_is_kryponite_for_donald_trump_rachel_maddow_dishes_on_the_ideal_way_to_handle_the_gop_front_runner/Great link, outsider! I enjoyed reading this article yesterday. My favorite part: "Maddow replied that it’s difficult to ask a candidate as evasive as Trump difficult questions, which is why she enjoyed his town-hall with her MSNBC colleague Chris Matthews. “He’s a guy [Matthews] who is completely willing to jump in not just at a time when other people might hold back, but jump in repeatedly as a way of turning the conversation into a constructive place when it has stalled or when he can predict where you’re going,” she said. “That impatience on his part makes him seem like this kinetic guy who’s very different than everybody else on TV, but that apparently is the Kryptonite for interviewing Trump.”I'm not finding it now, but somewhere else, Rachel says: Matthews is so quick, he even interrupts himself. edit: "“Pathological liars should all go to Chris Matthews for interviews,” Chotiner replied." Fine line between steering the conversation and being rude. |
|
jarais
Hive Attuned
Forever Larva Millennial
jetski diplomat
Posts: 1,251
Likes: 5,050
|
Post by jarais on Apr 12, 2016 11:22:40 GMT -5
Did I Go Off? On Hillary Clinton??? I don't have to go off on Hillary. She does it all by herself everyday by pandering to every minority and every segment of America. Pandering to every minority and segment? More like accepting and acknowledging that they exist. |
|
|
|
Post by LA_Randy on Apr 12, 2016 13:07:23 GMT -5
“There is Kryptonite for Donald Trump”: Rachel Maddow dishes on the ideal way to handle the GOP front-runner Maddow spoke at length on 2016 election coverage with Slate's Isaac Chotiner Rachel Maddow recently sat down for an interview with Slate contributor Isaac Chotiner in which she outlined, among other things, the ideal way to handle a candidate like Republican front-runner Donald Trump. “I think that it is much more valuable to show and explain what he is doing than to host people responding to him or reacting to him,” she said. “I feel like there’s a lot of useless media ink and airtime being wasted on people expressing themselves about Donald Trump, which is essentially just creating more of a cultural dynamic around him rather than helping people understand what he’s doing and see what’s important about it.” Maddow told Chotiner that, ideally, he would be covered using “a documentary approach” instead of a commentary one. That said, she added, “I absolutely hear it when people complain that Trump gets too much time on television, but I do think it can at least be explained, if not excused.” “It’s part of his campaign style to be unpredictable, to not always say the same thing. Yeah, he does have a stump speech. That’s true of any candidate, but in addition to the stump speech repetition and that sort of discipline, his indiscipline, or at least his willingness to say unexpected things and go unexpectedly shocking places at unpredictable times, means that it’s worth it to have a camera there whenever he’s talking.” www.salon.com/2016/04/11/there_is_kryponite_for_donald_trump_rachel_maddow_dishes_on_the_ideal_way_to_handle_the_gop_front_runner/Great link, outsider! I enjoyed reading this article yesterday. My favorite part: "Maddow replied that it’s difficult to ask a candidate as evasive as Trump difficult questions, which is why she enjoyed his town-hall with her MSNBC colleague Chris Matthews. “He’s a guy [Matthews] who is completely willing to jump in not just at a time when other people might hold back, but jump in repeatedly as a way of turning the conversation into a constructive place when it has stalled or when he can predict where you’re going,” she said. “That impatience on his part makes him seem like this kinetic guy who’s very different than everybody else on TV, but that apparently is the Kryptonite for interviewing Trump.”I'm not finding it now, but somewhere else, Rachel says: Matthews is so quick, he even interrupts himself. edit: "“Pathological liars should all go to Chris Matthews for interviews,” Chotiner replied." Chris's tingles must have felt like a gas powered vibrator when Trump sat down with him. |
|
jarais
Hive Attuned
Forever Larva Millennial
jetski diplomat
Posts: 1,251
Likes: 5,050
|
Post by jarais on Apr 12, 2016 13:42:09 GMT -5
Tweet of the day  |
|
newhivemaster
Hive Listener
Hive Master
Posts: 2,660
Likes: 10,489
|
Post by newhivemaster on Apr 12, 2016 14:03:40 GMT -5
Tweet of the day Neither did the GOP sitting on their thumbs for 6 years. |
|
