Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
He was a speechwriter for Tip O’Neill. He did good work in those days.
1 Like
Yes but then the political winds started blowing right and he sailed away like one of Charlotte’s baby spiders.
4 Likes
3 Likes
Knowing history. That was his ace in this clip and also his downfall in the Sanders-is-like-the-Nazis bit last week. Our so woke, but so ignorant-of-history, culture could not appreciate what was a very apt Churchill reference that was only tangentially connected to the Nazi’s. It’s OK if you don’t get the reference but take the time to understand it before going nuclear.
1 Like
9 Likes
Melissa Harris Perry never did quite get the hang of reading from a teleprompter. But she was okay. Better than Chris “Soshsecurty” Matthews.
Alzheimers ward patients? Factory workers on their lunch breaks? People waiting for a plane? Motel guests trying to eat their powdered egg patties in peace?
They won’t miss him either.
That’s why Cenk Uygur didn’t last very long on that network either.
1 Like
A stern reprimand is just a pat on the bum. What he needed was one on the bow, not the stern: i.e. a kick in the balls.
2 Likes
Good thing it doesn’t really exist. At least, outside the minds of the rich people who think they’re victimized because they’re being held accountable for their terribleness.
4 Likes
What would constitute, in your eyes the difference between healthy accountability for detrimental behaviors and destructive cancel culture? How would you apply your proposed framing to this case?
2 Likes
That clock sure stopped a lot when he was arguably Obama’s biggest supporter during 8 years of Republican attacks.
If he’d been a Bernie Bro this whole thread would be VERY different.
After the tenth Democratic presidential debate, the Hardball anchor grilled Elizabeth Warren about one of her lines of attack against Mike Bloomberg during the debate: that a pregnant female employee accused Bloomberg of telling her to “kill it.”
“You believe he’s lying?” Matthews asked Warren of Bloomberg’s denial.
“I believe the woman, which means he’s not telling the truth,” said Warren, who recently had to defend her own credible story of pregnancy discrimination.
“And why would he lie?” Matthews said. “Just to protect himself?”
“Yeah, and why would she lie?” Warren responded pointedly.
“I just wanna make sure you’re clear about this,” Matthews said. Right there on America’s purportedly liberal network, the anchor spoke to a 70-year-old United States senator who is running for president—and a renowned Harvard Law professor, no less—like she couldn’t possibly understand her own words, as if she were a child choosing between a snack now or dessert later.
11 Likes
I’m just wondering, how do you know that people who criticized Matthews’ comment didn’t know world war two history well? Is the fact that they didn’t like Matthews’s (admittedly very passing) comparison of Sanders to the Nazis in itself sufficient to show they don’t understand the full context? Could a person who is informed disagree with you?
I wonder if the responses you’ve gotten here are evidence in support of or against this theory.
7 Likes
ContraPoints can explain it better then I can.
1 Like
Having seen the video, no, Contrapoints does not address how you would apply the difference in this case. It is very light on references to you or Chris Matthews. It is also generally considered poor form to ask someone to watch a nearly 2 hour video to get your response.
1 Like
So you’re just unwilling to listen to any perspective that isn’t your own if it can’t be summed up in a pithy quote… it’s generally speaking a more complicated issue that probably deserves a bit more than 140 characters or whatever the twitter-limit is these days…
4 Likes
I was trying to go in the opposite direction really. Their initial point could be read either uncharitably in a way that was easy to apply (a lot of people complaining about cancel culture when talking about a powerful media figure facing scrutiny are simply calling for avoiding consequences) or more charitably, but in a way that is harder to apply (there are a lot of valid critiques of cancel culture, but most of the ones that come to mind don’t apply in this instance). Rather than reacting to a position that they only took in my head, I asked for clarification. My issue with 2 hour long videos is that they are usually a really poor way to have a conversation. A video of that length is the equivalent of more than 10,000 words, much of which is off the topic in the thread. The same video with a time code for the section they found relevant, or at least hinted at what they found applicable it would be a lot more useful.
1 Like
Derp… my bad… I should rage read more closely!
2 Likes
I disagree on both points. Natalie does go in depth on how to deliberate on statements and actions people make and how to address it. She also goes into depth but how hyper short form discussion drives the conversation in deliberate directions. That fact that it’s long is good. You have think about it in depth. I didn’t find it possible to watch the whole thing at on time. The form leads to deeper consideration which is exactly what we need.
