Monday Links and Open Thread

77 thoughts on “Monday Links and Open Thread”

  1. W. Kamau Bellis a boiling racist. Another example of the Left’s attempt to pit one group against another.

        • My husband has been reading to me about the Punic Wars, and those guys ran and then dropped flies when announcing the results of various battles.

          • fun reading. i have not read Roman civil war history for a while. i have a bunch to re-read on my kindle cloud. you can never remember it all. thnx for the hint

          • I got Robert Graves’ the Greek Myths for next.

            That would be a good choice for you to read to your bevy of beauties.

  2. Now talking about rigged elections is unpatriotic and now calling folks unpatriotic is not an epithet used by tyrants and scoundrels.

    As the Cable Game pointed out that sure wasn’t the case when we were being regaled by Keith Olbermann and company about imaginary corporate-political ties that linked Diebolt voting machines to the Republican Party.

    Such was the case as well with the supposed machinations of Ohio election officials to rig things and of typifying any attempt to safeguard the vote as being Republicans trying to disenfranchise certain voters.

    Stelter sure isn’t concerned about such theories when they’re about Republicans.

      • If they weren’t using the excuse that “Trump is so erratic and dangerous” it would be something else.

        It it were Ryan, Cruz, or Bush running they’d be telling themselves of the importance of ushering in the first female president. Insisting that they must guard the human rights issue of gay marriage, coed bathrooms and locker rooms. Raising the call of the protection of minorities from institutional racism, etc. All of these issues expressed in the most dire, alarmist, portentious, and pejorative rhetoric imaginable.

        You have only to read the NYT piece to see what they’ve turned a two-bit hustler into over their dissent about the application of existing immigration law, the efficacy of a wall on the southern border, a brief moratorium on Muslim immigration (until a Trump Administration can get a handle on things), deporting illegal immigrants, and candidate Trump telling other govts that he’s not taking any protections off the table.

        Is Trump a poseur? Yes. Are these promises something he’ll mitigate to the nines after being elected? Doubtlessly. Is he about as presidential as Bo Deedle? Oh, yeah….but regardless of this flawed candidate, the media can’t trust the process. They can’t trust us. They have to save us from ourselves.

        Partly, as the writer admits, because Hillary is such a poor candidate, but mostly because they think that the rest of us are dumb shites.

        Once they’ve rationalized their ideas and wants as being the absolutist gold standard, they’ll never stop insisting on their way, just as would be the case for any priest, physician, judge who broke faith in this manner.

        This is just a public declaration of a war they’ve been waging for awhile now. It’s not on candidates, it’s on anyone who will not acquiesce to their agenda.

        • i hate them both. the election is simply disgusting and there is absolutely no way to determine which would do the most harm, but the USA will be much worse off than today when this election’s winner leaves office. it is like you all baked a suicide pact in a cake and now have to eat it.

    • Stelter a hypocrite……….he wont call out Van Jones who joined a group called No More Stolen Elections right before the 2004 election….will he call out John Lewis who questioned the results after 2004?…..will he call out Democrat, John Conyers who went to OHIO to question the results of 2004?…..of course he won’t……when he calls his own CNN Van Jones unpatriotic he can say something…..until then he should STFU he’s making a fool of himself.

      Of course he talks to the racist Fox Haters on Twitter so he’s already proved himself to not have much common sense.

      • i get the feeling that most racist con posters on Fox are liberals pretending to be racist cons. they do uit so badly it is comical.

    • I see this as another 1992….lots of people will make up their minds at the polls and a lot of new voters won’t be counted.

      My roommate won’t be included in any poll…..he’s never even been registered before…..he did so ONLY to vote for Trump……now will he or people like him show up in Nov? That I don’t know.

      I worked the polls in the 92 general….I saw tons of people stand there and just think before they voted…….you don’t see that most years…..in fact I haven’t seen anything like it since.

      In 1992 a Oct poll found Clinton had dropped to 48%, with Bush at 35%, and Perot at 8%
      and yet Perot drew 19% on Election Day….IMHO Trump is Perot……but I could be wrong……I was 100% sure Mondale was going to win.

      • i would say you have a firm grip on “wrong”. i used to experience a lot of anecdotal in clients. i always had a questionnaire per year beginning on start. had a lot of deke questions just like polling because we know people enough to discern from what they like to think about their business and what it is. all i really wanted was their highest volume seller and their highest profit seller. of course then i researched their ADI, sales records, plotted zips, ages, marriage status, employment type, plus i called 20 past customers minimum p/mo forever. not once have i met an owner that knew what was most important to their customers. trust me, different products have different behavior triggers, and what one thinks is not important. it is what one does.
        long and the short, we can make a model error. we can design a lousy survey, but voting behavior is no secret. we got ya. pointing to error data points does not negate the fact that we can predict voting behavior, as Chris would say, pretty dawgun well. citing an un-named oct 92 poll not withstanding. unless events change behavior the cake is baked. take a nap.

  3. Well diggity! I agree with someone from Mediaite. Why is it that journalists always think they are so much smarter than the rest of us?

    • Because Mommy told them they were so precious when they were little, and they still believe it to this day.

  4. POlitico with an item of interest to many here:

    Ron Fournier returning to Detroit. By Hadas Gold, 08/08/2016 11:51 AM EDT
    “The Atlantic’s senior political columnist and longtime-D.C. scribe Ron Fournier is leaving the magazine to go back to his hometown and help run Crain’s Detroit Business.”

    • Is that a step up or down?

      I ask in order to confirm or shoot down my suspicion that this guy has been having a mental breakdown.

      • He speaks highly of how Bill & Hil were so nice to him back in Arkansas. And I think he wanted to support Hillary with all he had. But, he also has a conscience and couldn’t square his conscience with her constant lying. The timing of his book about his autistic son, I believe made him think long and hard about who he really is. i.e. – time to get a new job. Just my opinion.

    • Not a huge fan or follower of Mr. Fournier.

      But a brief perusal of opinions (blogs) and comments (comment sections) seems to suggest more Dems are wishing him ‘good riddance’ than the reverse.

      • Doesn’t surprise me. Many appearances on FOX. Very critical of Obama and Hillary on occasion.

        • Tough on Obama and Clinton at times and made appearances on Kurtz and Wallace.

          All it takes to pique liberals.

          • Of course using Karl Rove as a source (way back when) and once considering volunteering to work on the McCain campaign didn’t dissuade those “piqued liberals.” 😊

            Not familiar with the Washington Monthly (which may lean left) — but Steve Benen did quite a hit piece on Ron back in 2008.

            Apparently the journalism awards that Mr. Fournier has won was not persuasive.

          • Why in the world would any media member hesitate to use an insider like Rove as a source? Or David Axelrod? Or James Carville?

            These people are freaking journalists looking for information, not partisan laymen engaging in insult fests on blogboards.

            McCain ran a lot of campaigns. Which one? Pre-Obama, McCain couldn’t have gotten bad press from the media if someone demanded it at gunpoint.

            He was their Maverick and Profile in Courage Award Winner for his work on campaign finance reform, and their hero for his disdain and insults toward Christian conservatives.

          • It was the 2008 campaign and would this not raise a flag with a Dem about possible pro McCain bias going forward.

            As for Rove, it wasn’t just using him as a source that was the objection. It was telling Rove to “Keep up the good fight” that some objected to as once again showing bias on Ron’s part. I don’t quite get the complaint, so I can’t say whether the attacks on him are justified.
            http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16198.html

            Remember the whole point of my post was to mention why some Dems don’t like him — not to defend him or attack him.

          • Saying “Some Dems” don’t like him is fine. I get that there are Bluebloggers and their followers who supect ideological subversion if someone engages in pleasantries on a bus with a passenger thought to be Republican, let alone the heresy of being cordial to Rove.

            McCain had to beat other Republican challengers in 2008, as did the rather unknown candidate Obama. There certainly would have been a fair amount of time for any media member to have safely continued to consider McCain to be golly-gee-swell before running up against the upcoming media meme of turning Obama’s campaign into the Civil Rights Era of the 60s.

  5. Has Roger been reported to actually have laid a hand on someone or just accused of creeping out some people?

    • ‘Spin around, honey, let me look at you.’

      ‘Come here and give me a hug.’

      ‘Do you lift weights? Bet you look great in a bikini.’

      Jakeho gets more lascivious than this.

      If it wasn’t for their knowing the media would give this two seconds of coverage if it were them, heads of tv news programming on other networks would be praying this stuff about Ailes went away.

      • The problem with this is the woman who has herself in a bondage pose on the cover of her book is now alleging that these comments were so grievously wounding that she has to file a harassment suit. Unfortunately the harassment claim she filed at Fox News named several other people…but not Roger Ailes. This has a whiff of retroactive outrage about it. It may well be that she didn’t care about those comments and laughed them off at the time. Now, with a bandwagon to join and sidelined over her book, she can refashion those old comments in a fresh, new harassment suit.

        • The outrage does feel retroactive.

          I took Tanteros’ bondage cover as being both eye-catching to young male consumers and making an ironic point that feminism also binds and gags women via a strict adherence to an ideology that doesn’t always comport with biology.

          • Why is there a part of me that thinks Ann Coulter or Laura Ingraham complaining about harassment makes about as much sense?

            Rush Limbaugh used the “tarantula” nickname for Andrea for a reason. As you mention CC, this seems retroactive.

            (BTW, I don’t mean to suggest ‘strong agressive’ women never have a cause to complain — e,g,, Harry Reasoner and Barbara Walters. But in this case it seems a fishy.)

        • Why would she file a complaint with the person who was doing the harassing….that’s why companies have departments (usually Human Relations) to investigate stuff like this.
          If she submitted any of these complaints in writing then there will be a paper trail.

          • “Why would she file a complaint with the person who was doing the harassing?”

            According to Gabe Sherman’s column, “Andrea Tantaros says that she complained multiple times to senior Fox executives about Ailes’s inappropriate sexual behavior toward her.”

          • Ah, I see.

            Regardless, if she was smart she would have documented her allegations and could produce them to her lawyer. Likewise, there should be a paper trail at Fox in regards to her formal complaints.

            What made this confusing was her revelation of sexual harassment getting conflated with her suspension which was apparently over her book (her not allowing Fox to approve the cover and title and so forth).

            I would imagine there is “guilt” on both sides.

  6. Today’s most popular links:
    5 abandon neutrality
    4 unpatriotic
    3 another twitter spat
    2 Tantaros sidelined
    And the most popular link in today’s links…
    1 CNN host objects to ‘rich white guy’ carrying US flag.

Comments are closed.