[Donald] Trump took to YouTube on Wednesday to criticize [Rosie] O'Donnell's new show on the Oprah Winfrey Network (OWN). Trump called O'Donnell's show a "complete and total disaster." He also attacked MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell and said that his show was "failing."Trump then tweeted the video, with the message "#trumpvlog Same last name, same bad ratings- @lawrence and @rosie....."
O'Donnell tweeted back and attacked Trump's self-proclaimed wealth. "How many billionaires sell ties and have crappy non reality shows - none - go back to selling snake oil - #bankruptmuch?" O'Donnell tweeted.
How many presidents or presidential contenders do you suppose would tweet something like this?
And to think this schmuck was actually leading the Republican field in the polls at one point. Oh, and here's why Trump lashed out at Lawrence O'Donnell:
It would seem Donald Trump, out of nowhere, decided to take a shot at Lawrence O'Donnell via Twitter today. O'Donnell responded and the two went at it for a bit. Trump then backed away from going on The Last Word when asked to appear. Very funny read.
Also, if you read Trump's Twitter timeline, it reads like the rantings of a raving tinfoil hat lunatic. ...Amazing.
Long before Cain was running for president and getting attention for his 999 plan, the residents of SimCity 4 -- which was released in 2003 -- were living under a system where the default tax rate was 9 percent for commercial taxes, 9 percent for industrial taxes and 9 percent for residential taxes.
Now this may just be a really, really, really freaky coincidence, but if you can compare Cain's cockamamie tax reform plan to something in an eight year old video game, something is amiss. And this doesn't even touch on the subject of how ridiculous the plan actually is. And when Cain is asked specific questions on aspects of his plan, like how the 100% deduction would work for businesses that buy American designed products but are assembled out of the country and contain parts made elsewhere, he'll give answers like, "I have no idea." No idea? Herman Cain has no idea how his plan would work? He's shouting "9-9-9" from the mountaintops any chance he gets, but he doesn't even know how it works.
When you crunch the numbers, it's just another in a long line of Republican tax reform plans that increase taxes for middle class and working poor families while cutting taxes for the top income earners. And by "top" I don't mean breaking six figures. I mean millionaires.
Here's Lawrence O'Donnell, one of the few lead pundits that has actually worked in government, explaining the Obama strategy when it comes to negotiating the debt ceiling increase with a Republican Party that has painted itself into a"If Obama's for it, we're against it" corner on pretty much everything.
Some still don't get it. Like Ed Schultz. Rachel Maddow, while literally raising the white flag in her mocking of the GOP collapse, never mentioned that part of that collapse has to do with the Obama strategy of calling their bluff. But that's okay. They'll catch up eventually.
Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was interviewed by Lawrence O'Donnell and it got a little heated at points. The weirdest thing about the whole interview was Rice arguing the points of the first Gulf War as justification for the second Gulf War. It's amazing.
Michele Bachmann home-schooled her children. There should be a law against the mentally deficient home-schooling their children.
"As a mother of 5 and foster mother to 23, as well as someone who homeschooled her children, Congresswoman Bachmann is a strong supporter of homeschooling and is looking forward to speaking to the group in Iowa," says Bachmann spokesman Doug Sachtleben.
Wow, that's 28 kids who think that Lexington and Concord are in New Hampshire...
Lawrence O'Donnell broke down the amount of times Bill O'Reilly interrupted the President during his Super Bowl Sunday interview. Forty three times in a fourteen minute interview. Wow. He and Fineman then analyze what O'Reilly was after - the interview of the century, only he never let Obama finish a sentence.
I just watched Joan Rivers on Lawrence O'Donnell (no link as of yet) and I will paraphrase it this way:
I think Obama needs to "get to work"; not go to Nantucket while telling Americans to go to the Gulf Coast; while in a recession not send your wife and her forty friends to Europe; I hate the "death tax."
OK, although some of that is fair criticism (the Obamas COULD have vacationed in Louisiana but there are reasons pro and con for that debate), some of Joan's criticism is incorrect and catty (theforty friends in Europe for example). She said she voted for Obama but her rant sounded almost like Fox talking points to me.
When she said she is against the "death tax" I knew she was a victim of right-wing spin. She went down the "I worked hard for my money" path. And that, aside from sounding like a Fox guest, made her sound like the biggest bitch (which is a totally appropriate term for a woman who made a career using that word) in stretched skin. Let me see: she thinks she worked so hard for her millions and wants her daughter to get it all and she's mad that her daughter will have to pay too much in taxes. Is that right? Well, hmmm... if JOAN worked hard for the money then you can't say Melissa worked hard for the money simply by being her daughter. If you think freedom from taxes is correlated to work exerted, then estate taxes aren't the car you should be chasing because the worker is dead and the recipient just sat there inheriting money.
Now, early in Joan's career she did work hard. And I am sure she puts hours into her current career. But excuuuuussse me, but earning millions while insulting clothes and hair does not, in my opinion, equal hard work that should be free of any taxes when given to her daughter -- who did even less hard work while doing the same lame-ass job simply because she's your kid.
You make millions of dollars, spend a huge chunk of that on your face and then you want to whine to me that your no-talent daughter has to pay taxes on the chunk you've left her? Hey, Joan: GROW UP.
Jane Hamsher and Adam Green are NOT "The Base". Nor are they "The Far Left".
No, when Obama does something and some people in the Democratic party get mad, "THE Base" is not mad at him. No, when Obama does something and some people in the Democratic party get mad, "THE Far Left" is not mad at him.
As Desert Crone (a regular reader here at Broadway Carl's) and I have discussed many times, Jane Hamsher and Adam Green are NOT the base. Let me say it one more time because I really mean it: they are NOT the base.
How do I know they are not the base? Because they fall in the 15 to 20% of Democrats that consistently find something to be mad about. That is not a base. If it were, we'd be an inverted pyramid and we'd topple over in a hiccup. A base is a large number of supporters who consistently see the policies and leadership as progressive -- meaning forward-moving -- and accept that sometimes a seemingly weak play is necessary in order to get a larger accomplishment secured. A real base pays more attention to the overall and long-term needs rather than the microcosm of creating anger and fear. In fact, the numbers in the Jane Hamsher/Adam Green faction of the Democratic party are even smaller than the number of people who think Sarah Palin didn't go FUBAR in her Tucson video. Also, they are in the same 15% of Democrats who are NOT enthusiastic about voting in 2012 (h/t Desert Crone) -- so tell me how THEY are "THE Base"...
I feel the need to state this bluntly because Lawrence O'Donnell seems to think that these two characters somehow represent "The Base" [note: I am not going to provide any links to back this up for two reasons. One is there are too many. Two, I think my head would explode if I had to listen to or even look at either JH or AG. But you can find any damn episode of The Last Word and probably see one or both of them presented as "The Base"] although I think Lawrence knows better. Lawrence also knows a great deal about creating great television.
I also feel the need to declare this fact about them NOT being "The Far Left" because Chris Matthews referred to the 15% of Democrats who think Obama is "too quick to give in" as "the FAR left". No, Chris. I am the far left. There isn't a political ideology test I could take that wouldn't consider me far left and I am not in that 15% that thinks he is too quick to give in.
So to Lawrence I say, you DO know how to make good television and you also know how to present the truth in a better way than by having those two on your show as much as you do. They represent the 15-percenters yet you give them 50 or 75% of the space in their segments. That's a gross misrepresentation of their role, affect and relevance in the Democratic party. Sure, you need opposition, but dole it out in proportion, will ya? And PLEASE don't associate the word "base" with them when they are on your show.
And Chris, for someone who takes umbrage with people saying the "Democrat party" and pronouncing Cheney incorrectly (yes, we all know you say it the right way but because you keep telling us that, I stubbornly refuse to do it) then you should understand that a label, an identifier, matters. Get it straight: 15% is NOT the far left. They are the "angry left". They are the "whiny left". They are the "never-get-an-orgasm-and-by-god-they're-gonna-take-out-their-blue-balls-out-on-the-world left".
Lawrence O'Donnell shows once again why he needs a show. He is beholden to no one as he spars with Joe "Cheney Apologist" Scarborough over Cheney's comment that President Obama is "dithering" in Afghanistan, as if his administration didn't dither for the last eight fucking years.
Absolutely amazing. These are the kind of people making the loud noises at town hall meetings. People who would most likely benefit from health care reform, yet are scared out of their minds by disinformation and misinformation.
I have to say I feel sorry for people like Katy Abram, in a small business family who has a health insurance plan with a $5,000 deductible, with a sick son who needs surgery, and she doesn't realize that her family could probably get better a health insurance plan and be more financially sound with the passage of a public option.
But I have to say it also pisses me off after hearing this interview that this person is freaking out about something she self-admittedly knows nothing about. She was never interested in politics until now, she doesn't know what her family's yearly income is, she doesn't know that her parents will soon benefit from Medicare and Social Security, but doesn't like socialism and probably couldn't define it if asked. And yet she shows up to a town hall meeting to yell at a Senator with decades of experience when she doesn't even know what she's yelling about. Just another dittohead talking about the Founders and the Constitution.
Who's willing to take bets on whether she's ever read the Constitution?
Someone should tell Joe Scarborough that the election is over.
Speaking of Sarah Palin this morning, and how she didn't know her geography, Scarborough squeezed this nugget of wisdom out of his ass: "This plays in her favor."
Not knowing what countries are involved in NAFTA and not knowing Africa is a continent is apparently an advantage to being one step away from the Presidency of the United States, according to Scarborough.
Now we all know what he meant. He meant that politically, it shows she's "just like us" and by "us" I mean all the uneducated wingnuts that make up her base; that she's got that... how do the French say it... "I don't know what"; that she's the type of person you'd like to have a beer with or maybe a lap dance from, but Joe, Joe, Joe, can you for once in your life think about the greater good instead of instinctively going to that deep, dark place that asks how this can be politically advantageous?
I mean, for fuck's sake, she could have gotten to the position of sitting Vice President without knowing that Africa is made up of 53 countries! I think that's a bit of a problem, Joe. I don't care that she galvanizes the extreme right wing base and you think that that's a plus. How did that work this time around? I want my elected officials to be smarter than I am, or at least smarter than a grade school student, or at least smarter than my dog!
And on another note to be fair, if these leaks from anonymous McCain campaign sources are false, then what does it say about the leakers or the Republican party in general that they are eating each other from the inside just two days after the election? They obviously were close enough to realize what type of person she is and don't want her anywhere near the leadership for a future run.
Either way, whether she's a dingbat or whether it's character assassination, and I believe it's the former judging by the few interviews she gave and the VP debate, it's not good for the remnants of the Republican party.
More right wing wingnuttery - this time it's Pat Buchanan and the forlorn Mika Brzezinski in defense of Sarah Palin yet again. How can they think it's a good thing for the Republican Party to have Palin as its leader? And they're all upset about the constant Palin attacks after the race is over, as if it's some entity other than the GOP and the McCain camp who's trashing Palin. They're self destructing and refuse to see it.
David Sirota writes about the Punditocracy and the MSM insisting it's a two way race for the Democratic ticket:
For those of you who think the Democratic presidential nomination fight is just a two-way race between Obama and Clinton, check out this brand new poll from the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Yup, that's right - it shows the Nevada caucus race a three-way, dead heat with John Edwards right in the mix.
He then goes on to rip Lawrence O'Donnell's ridiculous post demanding Edwards get out of the race and mentioning the Reuters article last week headlined "Corporate Elite Fear Candidate Edwards"detailing how Wall Street moneymen and K Street lobbyists are frightened about Edwards populist, power-challenging message against greed and corruption.
...Let me conclude by saying I have no idea if the Review-Journal poll is accurate and/or whether Edwards will win Nevada (or any other state). Unlike most reporters, I don't spend my time covering the horse race, nor judging the candidates' viability only on the grounds of how much corporate cash they've been able to vacuum in. I spend my time trying to figure out which of these candidates represent the most fundamental form of change. One of the ways to judge that is to see who these candidates make uncomfortable. And by that measure, here's what I know: Edwards is generating hostility from precisely the kinds of people who are likely to be most averse to real, systemic change. And that speaks very well for the former senator from North Carolina.
I just read a post by Lawrence O'Donnell (at Huffington Post no less!) calling John Edwards a loser and that he should get out of the way for the "black man."
Read these words of pundit wisdom:
If John Edwards stays in the race, he might, in the end, become nothing other than the Southern white man who stood in the way of the black man. And for that, he would deserve a lifetime of liberal condemnation. Maybe Edwards is already not a factor in the campaign because Edwards voters would split evenly between Senators Obama and Clinton if Edwards dropped out. But we'll never know unless Edwards does the right thing and gets out of the way of the only two candidates who have a chance to get the nomination.
I'm wondering if Lawrence O'Donnell was asking Hillary Clinton to make way for the Obama train after Iowa. What a schmuck.
It looks like the readers are fighting back in the comment section.
"best thing to happen is more and more establishment commenters and pundits telling americans that can't handle having a choice, ordaining the frontrunners. inciting backlash.this is a brilliant reverse psychology ploy to catapult edwards to the nomination. well played o'donnell"
"I think it's worth examining Mr. O'Donnell's personal motivations in writing this piece, as his conclusions do not follow from the current facts."
Jane Smiley, also writing for HuffPo has a bit of a rebuttal:Shut Up, Larry
(H/T to Bob Cesca for bringing attention to the O'Donnell post.)
ShareThis