For many weeks we have seen democrats, the media, and the Morning Joe crew go after republicans saying “What will they actually cut?”
Then republicans started naming cuts and suddenly came the line today on Morning Joe. “They are cutting the things that will hurt us in the long run.”
Even Funnier when talking about Colin Powell, who no matter how much the media wants to pretend the president is on a roll, recognizes that The One™ is not riding high and wants to again be invited to big paying republican speaking gigs, Charles Blow in casual conversation mentioned how Joe Scarborough is not really considered a republican and naming David Frum as another example. Joe insisted that he is still a member of the club and that “regular” republicans are still who they are. He pointed to John McCain’s primary win (neglecting the fact that the conservative vote was split among several candidates) and Blow answered that he had gone right Crazy and had picked “Crazy”.
Not a word, not a peep, wasn’t called on it.
Bill Bennett pegged it weeks ago. Joe you’re a nice guy and all but it is what it is. You are the most conservative host on MSNBC hand down, but that is like being the most chaste lady at the Chicken ranch.
Are you are republican? Sure, but republicans are a conservative party and you are becoming less and less conservative. The idea of crying “cut waste” just makes you sound silly.
For a list of what republicans believe click Barbara’s post here.
That’s from Hot Air. Before we get to just about every other bloggers comment in the world here is what I think is driving this:
#1 Comcast:
I have Comcast, A lot of cities have Comcast, Comcast is buying NBC. That means that every conservative who is giving money to Comcast was paying for Olbermann’s show. Can you say Verizon FIOS? O’Donnell and Maddow and Matthews and Schultz all have their moments but none of them have the reputation for outrageousness that Olbermann did. This is in my opinion a preemptive move because the next time Olbermann said something really stupid and insulting the people who would be sending angry e-mails would be in a position to vote with their wallets and Verizon would happily help them along.
#2 Triangulation:
The very act of removing Olbermann creates a (albeit temporary) split between the far left and MSNBC. Since MSNBC is part of the democratic spin machine (and lets not pretend it is not, the public certainly knows it) the removal of Olbermann is a signal of a more “moderate” tone. Democrats need not actually do anything different. The simple tone that will be quoted on blogs and papers changes at once. Additionally it allows democrats to differentiate themselves between “the Keith Olbermanns of the left” and their own calm moderate selves (HA). I suspect (as I have read NO BLOG on this as I type) the reaction of the Far left will be hyper enough to provide the separation that Democrats desire.
That being said how to replace him? After all one needs to compete with O’Reilly on FOX and you don’t want there to be a mass exodus to Parker and Spitzer on CNN (of course the quality of Parker and Spitzer being what it is helps to lighten that fear). I need to find a person just as partisan, and just as socialist as Olbermann who is pragmatic enough to tailor his message to aid the white house and democrats over the next two years. If I am a democrat worrying about 2012 who is the person I want in that chair ….
#3 Selling the democratic message
…to sell my bill of goods? I want Lawrence O’Donnell. O’Donnell is a true believer, admitting on air that he is a socialist. Don’t think for one moment that Lawrence O’Donnell isn’t the Obama/DNC Choice for the MSNBC 8 p.m. slot. O’Donnell for all his PITAness is one of the most politically astute people on the left. He is a hyper-partisan but is pragmatic enough to give blunt advice to democrats when it comes to political reality. Think of him as Olbermann with self control, insider political experience and brains. He can be on Morning Joe and can sound reasonable. Look at this video again:
here is the money quote:
I Glenn (Greenwald) unlike you, am not a progressive, I am not a liberal, who is so afraid of the word that I have to change my name to “progressive”. Liberals amuse me. I am a socialist. I live to the extreme left of your mere liberals, OK? But I know this about my country: Liberals are 20% of the electorate, conservatives are 41% of the electorate OK. So I don’t pretend that my views which would ban all guns in America make medicare available to all in American, have any chance of happening in the Federal Government. Ok you can sit there and pretend that liberals should run more liberal in conservative districts, the reason, you love the loss of the blue dogs, ..the only way you have a Chairman Barney Frank, there is only one way, that’s by electing Blue Dogs! It’s the only way you have a Speaker Pelosi. all emphasis mine
As Rush Limbaugh has said over and over again, liberals can only win if they hide who they are. O’Donnell gets it. His goal is to help the democratic party seem moderate so that he can get a Chairman Barney Frank and a Speaker Pelosi and advance the agenda that he and the Democratic party shares.
He is MUCH more dangerous to the right than Olbermann, and when the far left understands that they will come back and embrace him.
This may be a feel good moment on the right but O’Donnell will hurt us more on MSNBC that Olbermann ever did. He will not just speak to the true believers, he will put a moderate face on and persuade people ( who want to be persuaded ) that the democratic agenda is something it is not. For democrats this is all about 2012.
The Cable Gamer can’t help but think that two big events in the news: The FCC’s approval of Comcast’s takeover of NBCU, and Jeff Immelt’s ascension as the Obama administration’s favorite corporate stooge, have something to do with this.
This would actually be a really smart move in an economic sense. It would grab the far left who would migrate out of spite giving them the chance to shift the 8 p.m. audience numbers. But in the sense of helping elect democrats in 2012, it would be a bad move so it will not happen.
Considering his sins during the primary season of 2008, including his blatant sexism and over the top critiques of Hillary Clinton, with no actions except to be banned from some broadcasts and replaced by David Gregory, I can’t imagine what grievous sin he committed that caused it to happen now.
Taylor Taylor Taylor those actions helped The One. Now his actions hurt The One. Get with the program.
Oh, and “NBC executives said one term of his settlement will keep him from moving to another network for an extended period of time,” the Times’ Bill Carter adds.
I have told you this before: I am reliably informed that he is an OK guy in person, and the TV person is an act. He sure as hell acts different when he fills in for Warren Olney on the “Which Way L.A.?” radio show.
Remember Danny DeVito in Taxi? He made a good living pretending to be a pain.
I fell asleep on the couch last night and work up at 5 a.m. Much to my youngest’s dismay I don’t see Fitchburg schools listed as canceled but I did turn on Way Too Early with Willie Geist and I see they have discovered Eric Fuller now that he has apologized.
That delay resulted in this post which resulted in my single best day since the blog opened, so I guess I should thank the MSNBC crew for delaying.
I presume Morning Joe will have it as well, but the focus is likely going to be another Palin derangement syndrome day.
(I think the battle hymn song is over the top, I think it enters Palin cult territory. I’m sure they are very nice people but I thought it was shall we say…amusing. )
As you might recall Morning Joe went so over the top at the start of Friday’s show than I turned it off and watched the stooges all morning.
When the Eric Fuller statement came out and the left jumped all over it I was sure he would be the lead story on Monday, that was until he decided to publicly threaten a tea party person during the taping of ABC’s town hall on the Tuscon shootings.
Now I’m not a news director but I’d think that the irony of a shooting victim of Jared Zeitgeist Longhner threatening a tea party member, being arrested and involuntarily committed might actually be a story of interest that might bring discussion.
It would be interesting to see how they deal with this story, wouldn’t it? They have dealt with it all right. They’ve dealt it right out of the deck.
I have not seen a single mention of the event, not even a one liner in the base news segment. I’ve been watching since 6:04 and not a peep. Not a word.
Does anyone actually believe that if the roles had been reversed and the tea party person had been arrested it would have been the top story? How can these people actually justify this omission and is there anyone other than naive old me who expected better of them, that is actually surprised?
Let’s not pretend that the MSM is populated by “journalists” The MSM’s making Eric Fuller an unperson proves that it is now only populated by “journolist“.
Update: Nope not a word although I missed the “what have we learned today” segment but an inclusion there would be pretty lame. I’ve learned that MSNBC would rather protect their niche market than report news. I’ve also learned that Joe Scarborough was damn lucky not to be there to get a part of the blame today. Finally i’ve learned that an Instalanche is a great way to start the day. If you are a Glenn Reynolds fan who missed him on my show Saturday Night you can listen to it here. If you are one of those national advertisers that Glenn said is missing out on the 50,000 watts of my radio show, the ad rates are here.
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 
