Wednesday Links and Open Thread

132 thoughts on “Wednesday Links and Open Thread”

  1. So Mika just criticized Phil Mickelson for giving kids in Ohio selling lemonade a $100 bill for a dollar glass of lemonade. Willie says that Phil gives out $100 tips to all kinds of people at golf tournaments, car drivers, etc and so Mika says those people deserve it but the kids should have only gotten a twenty.

    Of course, typical liberal, criticizing someone for spending his own money in ways of his own choosing, and saying how he should have spent his money. Yikes!

    • Hardly unique to liberals. Rightists castigate people for spending their own money on certain video games, subscriptions to certain periodicals, certain medical procedures, donations to certain candidates and causes.

      Mickelson can tip as he choses. As a parent, I would not be pleased at the lavish and gaudy gesture and gratuity, and I would require my son or daughter to return it. But, I fail to see how that controls what Mickelson does.

    • Man that Mika could screw up a kids day! Sure beats Bill Clinton dragging a $100 bill through a trailer court.

      • I was raised around people who would have never considered giving kids any more than a pat on the head, congratulations over their work ethic, and a quarter for good service.

        A hundred dollar bill handed to chikdren would have denoted a braggadocio dandy who couldn’t be trusted.

        • Let’s get the story straight. Phil was in /near their community b/c of a golf tournament. This was NOT where he lived. If someone gave my kid a big $ amount for a lemonade stand (my kids got $20 one time – which I said they had to save some and they could have some) I would control what they could do with the dollars. If you know anything about Phil (which I am guessing you don’t based on your comment about a “braggadocio dandy”) you would know he is that that in any way. It’s up to the parents to help kids know how to handle a windfall such as this. I also think it is wrong to criticize someone who was truly doing a kind thing. Just my opinion.

          • Willie Geist commented that PM does this kind of thing all the time. He’s a very generous person. Maybe $100 is a bit much, but I agree with you that it’s up to the parent to control what the kids do with the money. The little girl in the piece stated she would save it so she could buy a kindle.

          • I hear you and I don’t know him.

            I can’t help but wonder at the psyche behind handing some kids that sort of money.

            I don’t think he meant anything nefarious by it, but it was showy and immature in the sense of an adult understanding of kids.

        • Buzz kill. Kill joy. Debbie Downer. Always has that look on her face that something smells. Snotty.

        • I’ve long considered her a female Tucker Carlson. Not as bright as s/he thinks s/he is. Insecure, and accordingly defensive. Shrill and whiny.

          • That’s interesting because I see Tucker as being very smart, coddled, and filled with an unassailable self-esteem that is to his detriment.

            I imagine that Mika’s brothers are the same as Tucker, but broader in their outlook, and angrier and more competitive.

            Mika is that combination of self-importance and insecurity that comes from being the daughter of an important man who never helped her see anything special and unique about herself that was outside of him.

          • zbig and warren christophoer. so important they got Reagen elected with their incompetent handling of the Iranian hostage crisis, day 437.

          • I have seen one of her brother’s on MJ and he did not show anger or competitiveness in his time there. I actually felt like he presented himself as someone who had thought through his viewpoints, was confident in his thoughts and Mika was reflexively stating her liberal opinions. I came away with, “how the heck did this guy come out of that family?”

          • it is been more than once that i have seen him and i can only watch on the net. msnbc redid there page. now it is much harder to load/watch and they were not saying anything poignant so i stopped watching. but i saw her bro a few times. dad a ton. it is joke to listen to them talk about how great jimmy carter was. sounds like a New York Times board meeting.

  2. The ICN piece is itself silly.

    POV journalism never really caught on at MSNBC nor at Air America not because POV itself is dead. It is very much alive at FOX, which is heavily POV journalism, if we can call it journalism, and POV programming is the hallmark of hate radio. Liberal POV programming works very well in some markets, but that is because in those markets a personality and not a point of view drives it.

    The lesson is that POV journalism doesn’t work in an ideological construct which is not narrow and confined, nor does it work in a highly diverse demographic. The range of rightist thought in America is surprisingly but notably very small. There are few ideological distinctions within the group*. It is a group which enterprising broadcast executives can easily target and to which news entertainers can pander. Not so with centrists and liberals. The ideological range is so large it seems infinite. In part, that is because the demographic is younger, better educated and otherwise far more diverse. That is not necessarily qualitative, but simply in the nature of the ideology and the demographic. That is a challenge for broadcast executives. While FOX and Limbaugh can rely on a group of smug, self-vindicated and vigorous head nodders, the “other side” cannot. Debate and discussion is lively, sometimes acrimonious, and no one expects concensus. The debate and discussion produces, at best, compromise. That’s not well-suited to the limited abilities of television and radio to capture such a nuanced and complex process. Even the results are not easily explained.**

    There will never be a liberal Limbaugh. There will never be a liberal FOX News. It just doesn’t work. That doesn’t mean POV broadcasting fails. It just means some POVs don’t fit into the artificial time constraints of the a Talking Points Memo or a Grapevine.

    The article is more than silly. It’s absurd.

    *Hence the discomfort with which rightists deal when a Rand Paul enters the picture.
    **People far smarter than Scarborough, Limbaugh and O’Reilly, than Mitchell, O’Donnell and Baier are often baffled by the fact that someone who is much drawn to the policies of a Ted Kennedy, can also argue for the policies of a Bill Clinton.

    • This is meme driven tripe deigned more to insult your opposition and pat yourself on the back rather than to say anything worthwhile.

      You would think that at some point that would taste as empty as Puffed Wheat in your mouth.

      You aren’t saying anything that should please you in your trope that liberals and even centrists are now either well educated sophisticates or members of a struggling and aggrejved underclass which the elite champions. Those aren’t the dynamics that trend for an alliance that is mitigated by some natural safeguards on either side of the pole.

  3. Gosh, what a “stunning development”! What a “blockbuster”. A DA directs a law enforcement operation. Perfectly legal. One or more of the police officers involved in the operation goes beyond the scope of the operation and beyond the scope of his authority and a suspect ends up dead. Now the same DA is prosecuting the errant officers. What an immense conflict of interest? What a glaring abuse of prosecutorial authority! Sometimes, your outrage gets very tiresome, Ms. Kelly. Go back to interviewing the Duggars. As journalism it may have been poor, but it wasn’t so patently silly.

  4. MSNBC is still the boring, predictable, liberal preachy infused programming, and by gar, they have the ratings to prove it. I’d sign in and give him an atta-Spud comment if he didn’t have a restraining order against me.

    • Your personal intolerance of liberal thought and ideology is duly noted for the record.

      The programming at MSNBC is largely boring, to be sure. Chris Kornacki is a notable exception.

      And, the program is no less boring even when it is noted that the pure partisan/ideological programming at FOX, with its most virulent example being Sean Hannity is 101 Dullsville Drive, Tedious, Tennessee.

      • Hannity is a one-trick pony. He occasionally has a show where he makes a salient and enlightening point, but otherwise it’s as predictable as rain in Seattle.

        MSNBC is even worse. Its an absolute horror show in its revelation of the closed-minded trope driven tripe that passes for discourse among our elite chattering class.

        Kornacki harks back to a time when journos were people who seemed have some basic understanding and affection for the country and its denizens that wasnt based primarily upon aspirations for changing it.

    • I just read that you have a personal intolerance of liberal thought and ideology. It was duly noted. And that by someone who has a personal intolerance of rightist thought and ideology. Ironic?

      • You are correct. The difference between Hayes and Maddow is purely stylistic with a slightly different topical emphasis. And, Sharpton and O’Donnell are not that different than Hayes and Maddow.

        I will give FOX some credit. While Hannity is nothing but a partisan shill, O’Reilly does sometimes pleasantly surprise us with some unique points of view that are not strictly along partisan or political lines. Baier leans pretty fair right, but he does occasionally do straight news of a non-political nature, and Kelly is very much into human interest outrage stories. Shep is better than anyone at MSNBC. Can’t speak about Greta. Last time I watched her, long ago, she was busy chasing after missing white girls, Michael Jackson’s family, John Bolton and Sarah Palin. Perhaps, that’s changed. There is certainly much more variety.

  5. Hello FACEBOOK my old friend
    I’ve come for questions once again
    Hey, this is Chris, I’m getting scared
    No one dared
    Disturb the sound of silence

  6. I’m thinking the end for MSNBC will come in a sudden crushing of a giant Monty Pythonish foot. Andrew Lack’s foot.

  7. Man on the street interview
    INTERVIEWER: How bad did liberal troll leeches hurt Bill O’Reilly?
    GUY: Huh?

    • Hurt what? His career? He works at FOX. What harm did you expect?

      His reputation? Outside of the 3% of Americans who watch him, he doesn’t have a reputation that could be harmed any more.

      And, why would you call his daughter a “liberal troll leech”?

      • He didn’t call O’Reilly’s daughter that. He is talking about a media that is increasingly proving that the term “drive-by media” is an apt one.

        You know the same folks who can’t articulate the facts that family dynamics in a divorce case are as complex as can be and that accusations often dissolve into nothingness with a settlement. Who can’t distinguish sworn testimony or cross -examined testimony from hearsay. Who can’t even point out the nuances between the emotions in finding you’ve been betrayed by your spouse from a pattern of domestic violence.

        As it stands we can’t have any more faith in the honesty of our media than we can in an agenda driven guy with a law degree who did divorce cases and who is well aware of such things.

        • But, of course, it is not hearsay, is it? The daughter claims she saw O’Reilly choking her mother/his then wife and dragging her down the stairs by her neck. She didn’t say “My mother told me that ….,” which would be hearsay, although possibly subject to one of the many exceptions. The fact that this was not hearsay but direct evidence from an eyewitness, doesn’t necessarily make it true of even credible, of course. But, a likely scenario is that the then wife and O’Reilly got into a rather loud argument, perhaps the wife even verbally abused and shoved O’Reilly, that O’Reilly, a large man known to have a violent and ungovernable temper, then responded in kind, that a young woman with a strong bond to her mother witnessed this, perhaps seeing even more to it than there was, innocently embellished the story and the judge, considering this with other testimony presented took the somewhat unusual step of modifying the custody order and we have what we have. O’Reilly has denied he did this. And, that’s the state of things. The case is resolved. Under New York’s typical absurd rush to seal files of the powerful and of celebrities, we’re not likely to know anymore. That’s not really the media’s fault.

          O’Reilly, it would seem, admitted his daughter said these things by denying the truth of the statements.

          You raise some experiential issues. I’d say, based on my experience, there is some truth in what she said. These situations do end to get nasty. I’ve seen, as you have seen, clips of O’Reilly letting his emotions get the best of him.

          If O’Reilly were an NFL players, he might even be suspended for a game based on this. Nothing will happen to him at FOX, and if he worked at another cable or broadcast network, nothing would likely happen there.

          So, worse than boys being boys, perhaps a warning to other women who might seek a relationship with him, but less than a felony, it would seem. Nothing more, nothing less. And resolved. The ex-wife must be pleased with the outcome.

          • I’m sure she is pleased with the outcome. She won.

            I have no difficulty imagining that a 65 year old man with a weeknight TV program hired most of his parental duties out.

            I have no problem believing that O’Reilly may have drug his wife down the stairs by her neck. In the context of my husband cheating on me I’d be very likely to drag him down something or another by a different part of his anatomy.

            We can pretend the parental habits of single dads with high powered jobs are generally something other than I expect them to be and we can pretend the emotional reaction to adultery is as well…in order to make the domineering and too old for teenagers OReilly something between Attila the Hun and Al Bundy and utterly unsuitable for making the most commonsensical pronouncement on domestic violence and deadbeat dads.

            You’re more than disposed to do that and there’s is a clear case to made via the contretemps between O’Reilly and wife.

            Have at it. Disappear anything that looks like a sense of perspective, fair play, and worldly experience along the way.

            It’s what we now. Its what’s demanded that we do.

        • You are, of course, correct, as even a first-year law student could tell you. If the leaked stories are taken as accurate, someone else relayed in court what the daughter was claimed to have said. She wasn’t under oath, and wasn’t there in court testifying in person. You don’t have to be Prof Kingsfield to recognize such a textbook example of hearsay. And in a divorce case no less, where even testimony under oath has been known to, um, shade the truth. But these days the accusation becomes the truth, with each subsequent example of such backfiring dismissed by the congenitally dishonest.

          • Well, no ….

            Technically, it was not a divorce case. The divorce was in 2011. The decree incorporated by reference and approved a joint custody agreement. The instant matter was on a motion to modify custody. The bases of such an action are different than for a divorce, and are two-fold: (1) changed circumstances and (2) the best interest of the child or children. The changed circumstances were based upon O’Reilly’s having hired the children’s therapist as his own full-time employee to discharge his parental duties and for other on-going violations of the custody agreement by O’Reilly. The mother won, and the custody was modified, so the changed circumstances were established as well as the best interest of the children no longer being joint custody with O’Reilly.

            The evidence which came out was in the form of a report from a COURT-APPOINTED forensic examiner who, in the discharge of his duties, interviewed the MINOR daughter. The examiner was under oath. It does not appear that there was an objection to the testimony and the admission of the report. Even if there had been, it is axiomatic than any decent attorney can find an applicable exception to the hearsay rule. Its great strength and power is more of screenplay creation than a courtroom reality. In family law cases that is pretty simple. A minor’s utterances and declarations to court-appointed investigators are admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule, even, apparently, in overly-protectively New York, in some cases subject to corroboration, and in other cases as merely probative to be weighed with other evidence. This would have made it in.

            Kingsfield was a contracts professor, not procedure or trail tactics. He’d (and his model, likely Bull Warren) probably have sought out the advice of the latter.

            All that aside, I have to wonder why O’Reilly made any response to the allegations at all. The response rather establishes that the allegations of abuse were, in fact, made in a closed proceeding and tends to give them some credence because of that. The response is also rather impugning the honesty of the daughter, at least indirectly. It would have been better left unsaid. If there had been no response I doubt that this would now be a subject of discussion. It would have died on the vine.

  8. Love Zucker twisting the tail of Morning Joe as he will resent it. Be interested in Joe’s response.

  9. What MSNBC “stars” will do when they get the pink slips in mass:
    1) Chris Hayes back to the THE NATION as Katrina’s coffee fetcher.
    2) LOD finishes his script: WEST WING, The New Addition.
    3) Rev. Al off to wherever racial tensions need a stir.
    4) Big Ed with a commercial endorsement lined up for BEANO.
    5) Rachel Maddow, like a barber, a bartender always has a trade.
    6) Joe Scarbourgh runs for President… Finally.

  10. Megan nails the ironic hypocrisy that is official Baltimore. imagine if CBS did an all black cast Baltimore series that had the actors act as officials have. oh, the howls. the accusations. the marches. lololol. liberalism is for fools.

    • This was a very interesting one for me. Rudy’s not a particularly likable or sympathetic sort, but he is fascinating. And, his political judgment seems to have improved recently after his acknowledgement that it would be impossible for him to get the Republican nomination now because of his stance on social issues.

      Thanks for posting.

      • A fascinating and fearless man. A sort of emblem for everything you’d imagine from a city boy who made good, From his ability to make NYC seem like a small town, to his facing death threats routinely while going after organized crime, to his battles with a semi-celebrity ex-wife, he’s the quintessential regular guy, who of course, isn’t.

        • I’d ad that he would likely have moved onto other, bigger things, but was handicapped by not so much a lack of charisma, but a type of charisma that doesn’t sell out of the Tri-State Area. A problem similar to that which Christie faces ….

  11. FNC’s White House Correspondent Kevin Corke keeps showing he was a great pick for the job. Classy reporter.

  12. fox business will soon beat MSLSD every day. fox news in the political season will then go to 4 or 5 times the MS and Commie News Net and the lefty response. those are old dying people and soon they will be gone and only us ____________s will be left and MSLSD and the hugochaveznewsnet will rein supreme forever. then every man woman and child can be proud to be as poor as those in Cuba, arriba los pobres del el mundo!!!! because down is up!

    for 3 pts, fill in the blank nicer than i would. i knew u could.

  13. Today’s most popular links:
    5 new best friend (tie)
    4 Legal controversies (tie)
    3 moved that far from
    2 lucky day
    And the most popular link in today’s links…
    1 Concha: Greg Gutfeld Sunday night show faces major hurdles.

  14. in the news today, the American markets made retirees gleeful worldwide.

    in celebration and thanks some people ate very well.

    a simple chino salad to go with Shanghai salt and pepper shrimp,
    tofu if you are a veggie or belong to a christian or Jewish cult that
    bans shellfish.

    remove seed and skin from cucumbers in an amount you will eat with others.
    rice, or white vinegar.
    brown sugar.
    sesame oil.
    chopped garlic.
    grated fresh ginger.

    some people use salt.

    pour over chopped small pieces of cuke. refrigerate and stir every 20
    mins or so. serve with chop sticks so it goes slower.

    es yummy

    Shanghai salt and pepper shrimp.
    red, white and black powdered peppers. SMALL amount of white flour.
    mix. dredge your shrimp and fry in Sesame oil in a wok WITH SHELL AND
    PREFERABLY HEAD ON. fry very hot until crispy, the shell, feet, tail and head are
    delicious and healthy. Google Chitosan.

    shrimp dip
    few drops sesame oil, teaspoon fresh ginger, tblsp Serachi sauce with garlic and a few drops of soy sauce. mix.
    dip shrimp, eat whole.

  15. Have been watching Maria Bartiromo and Stuart Varney while getting ready for work in the morning this past week. They are good shows. My only complaint about the FBN new lineup is Kennedy’s show being moved to the earlier time period. But, the changes are good overall.

  16. I suppose it takes a while for MSNBC’s ratings decline to be factored into their ad rates. I recall it took FNC quite a while to raise their rates after their ratings soared.

    • both are 7 day 24 hour stations and buys are made in many different ways. while Fixed position and prime rotation buys likely command a fair rate there are many other hours in the day. if buyers know the good stuff is bought out they know their lower priced rotation spots will be pushed into poorer times sometimes lowering that rate. like all things it becomes a mini max problem. last time i saw fox in a hotel i still saw PI, or per inquiry spots. those are spots 3rd in line behind paid spots and promos. the price paid for the spot depends on how many 800 calls it generates. so like all things in the skinny, if your good you get more, if you are poor in ratings you sell specific utility, there is always a sucker born every minute. most media buyers are ex-interns with little experience.

Comments are closed.