*news
*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by NetRunner.

Adding video to channels (News) - requested by NetRunner.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by dystopianfuturetoday.

Does this not play for anyone else?

I even disabled Adblock, but only this plays for a second.

[Edit] Never mind, it plays now.
[Edit Edit] Nope, just the ad played--now nothing. Ah, well.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

Does this not play for anyone else?
I even disabled Adblock, but only this plays for a second.
[Edit] Never mind, it plays now.
[Edit Edit] Nope, just the ad played--now nothing. Ah, well.


Click on it to go to the msnbc website, it should play there. If not, click "ad preferences" and select the other one (with ABP you shouldn't get any ads anyway).

>> ^TheGenk:

>> ^Boise_Lib:
Does this not play for anyone else?
I even disabled Adblock, but only this plays for a second.
[Edit] Never mind, it plays now.
[Edit Edit] Nope, just the ad played--now nothing. Ah, well.

Click on it to go to the msnbc website, it should play there. If not, click "ad preferences" and select the other one (with ABP you shouldn't get any ads anyway).


Thanks, I watched on msnbc.

Enjoyed the vid, but I have to say I really stopped watching most of Maddow's stuff lately, she seems to try to perpetuate the myth that there is actually a divide between Republicans and Democrats. It reminds me of when Cenk Uygur was on MSNBC last year, after a while you could literally see him transform into someone trying to barrack for the Dem's (for reasons he later detailed when he left the network).

Yes I know she points out some bad points about the Democrats too, but overall her discussion seems to be pretty twisted away from the reality of the present political climate and more towards, 'let's get people to believe that the bad stuff is happening because of the GOP and the de facto good guys must therefore be ..... '. It's not always explicit that it's the Democrats she wants you to support, but it's pretty damn obvious.

I do like her as a reporter, if there was one reporter I wished had greater freedom of expression it would be her, I just wish she had the balls (figuratively) to do what Cenk did.

An idiot propagandist like Maddow is only possible with an ignorant, uneducated generation, which we have thanks to government schools.

Anti-immigration law? Try anti-illegal invasion law.

Pushing "real democracy" in a Republic which doesn't reocognize direct democracy?

And why exactly are "progressives" suprised that the other side is trying to win?

No dirty tricks are needed are to oust liberals. The Kenyawaiian would only get 41% of the vote if the election were held yesterday. Real unions are fine, they face hostile management and sink companies when their demands are outrageous. Government unions collude with taxocrats in office to a$$fk taxpayers.

This must be *blocked

This video has been flagged as having an embed that is Region Blocked to not function in certain geographical locations - declared blocked by ctrlaltbleach.

>> ^ghark:

Enjoyed the vid, but I have to say I really stopped watching most of Maddow's stuff lately, she seems to try to perpetuate the myth that there is actually a divide between Republicans and Democrats.

I think there's a myth that it's a myth there's a divide between Democrats and Republicans.

Like, where's all the Democratic legislation that's trying to disenfranchise Republican voter demographics?

Are Democrats going out and saying that taxing the rich is "class warfare" and therefore a taboo topic for discussion?

Are Democrats trying to destroy Social Security and Medicare?

Are the Democrats saying national healthcare is a secret plot to commit genocide?

I'm all for trying to rearrange American politics so it doesn't have this huge right-wing corporatist tilt, but spreading this myth that there's no difference between the parties doesn't help.

Part of convincing more politicians to move to the left and stand up to corporations would be to reward the ones who take a stand with your support. Withdrawing it (and encouraging others to do the same) because you're disappointed with their ability to deliver doesn't help tilt things back to the left. On the contrary, it helps ensure that the tilt to the right continues.

As an aside, I haven't seen Cenk promote that bogus myth. He's a lot harder on Democrats than Maddow (or Olbermann), but I've never seen him promote the "voting is meaningless" lie. I hope what he's been saying is some form of "voting against Republicans isn't enough -- we need to pressure the Democrats to move left too!"

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^ghark:
Enjoyed the vid, but I have to say I really stopped watching most of Maddow's stuff lately, she seems to try to perpetuate the myth that there is actually a divide between Republicans and Democrats.
I think there's a myth that it's a myth there's a divide between Democrats and Republicans.
Like, where's all the Democratic legislation that's trying to disenfranchise Republican voter demographics?
Are Democrats going out and saying that taxing the rich is "class warfare" and therefore a taboo topic for discussion?
Are Democrats trying to destroy Social Security and Medicare?
Are the Democrats saying national healthcare is a secret plot to commit genocide?
I'm all for trying to rearrange American politics so it doesn't have this huge right-wing corporatist tilt, but spreading this myth that there's no difference between the parties doesn't help.
Part of convincing more politicians to move to the left and stand up to corporations would be to reward the ones who take a stand with your support. Withdrawing it (and encouraging others to do the same) because you're disappointed with their ability to deliver doesn't help tilt things back to the left. On the contrary, it helps ensure that the tilt to the right continues.
As an aside, I haven't seen Cenk promote that bogus myth. He's a lot harder on Democrats than Maddow (or Olbermann), but I've never seen him promote the "voting is meaningless" lie. I hope what he's been saying is some form of "voting against Republicans isn't enough -- we need to pressure the Democrats to move left too!"


In terms of Democratic legislation that disenfranchises Republican voter demographics, I think that's really the point, it isn't there.

In terms of public remonstration that taxation is 'class warfare' I think they've made their public opinion clear, they think taxes on the rich should be raised (so they appear to be on the other side of the fence to the GOP), however what they say and what they do are two different things, I think this is a good example of them playing a pretty standard political game. There is plenty of public voice (even here! See QM) saying the 'taxocrats' are all about raising taxes - but in reality the complete opposite is true, the wealthy are enjoying some of the lowest tax rates in US history. So I would say no, they are not trying to stifle discussion on raising taxes, rather that their words become rather meaningless when looking at their results. Did the Dems not enjoy a filibuster-proof 60 seat senate majority after the elections, I would love to know if they achieved anything meaningful during that period, I really honestly would.

In terms of social security, I give you this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-debt-talks-obama-offers-social-security-cuts/2011/07/06/gIQA2sFO1H_story.html
In terms of Medicare, the debt ceiling negotiations results in the reduction of physicians medicare reimbursements, and further reductions may happen down the road once the super committee has finished their work. But in those 'negotiations' they ended the tax break on the wealthy right? Unfortunately not.

In terms of genocide plots etc, their role is to keep a voter base so that wouldn't be smart, however once again, what matters are results.

As far as convincing politicians to move left, I really wish that were possible, but in 2010 three and a half billion dollars was spent by lobbyists alone, there's just no way you can get your voice to make a difference when you're up against that - and lobbyist money is just the tip of the iceberg, many politicians receive far more money in contributions from other sources, take a look at Harry Reid for example:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00009922
There's a video that's just been posted on the sift of Dick Durbin decrying BoA's new credit/debit card fee's, however this 'voice of reason' has taken over 9 million in contributions in the past 4 years from all manner of sources (including pro-israel). What does this mean? It means he votes yes for bills like H.R. 3080 and H.R. 3079 that will ship US jobs overseas and reduce working conditions in those countries affected (Korea, Panama and Columbia), in addition to supporting a government that is involved in the active killing of journalists that try to expose the brutality of the regime in place (in Columbia).

You just.... can't compete with the influence that that amount of money brings, I'm sorry.

Cenk changed on MSNBC, that was quite clear, and he even explained why that was in his interview after he left - he was being pressured to fall in line and not go too heavy on the Democrats. in fact I think the video you posted 7 months ago is the best demonstration of that, and ironically I commented on it back then too:
http://videosift.com/video/Cenk-to-Wisconsin-Progressives-No-Compromise

Some of his quotes from the clip:
"the war that the Republicans want to start"
"they are coming after you" (referring to the GOP)
"I have a bold proposal tonight, that we fight back" (the 'we' meaning we Democrats)
"Thank god so far the Democrats aren't going to give in to his threats"
"They always reject the word compromise" (GOP again)

and the Pièce de résistance comes at 4:10,
"I have this crazy new idea, how about two can play at that game, how about WE don't compromise either" (this is clearly setup to mean the Dem's)

Did he not just try to get people to buy into the idea that it's us (the Dem's!) vs the GOP (them!).

He had the balls to reject a nice offer from MSNBC and go back to his show where he can speak his mind rather than try to persuade people it's us vs them on the mainstream media.

If you listen to him since he's left, he's gone back to his old, relatively unbiased nature, for example in his recent interview with Al Gore, when Al says that he still has hope in Obama to make 'change' Cenk goes out of his way to say that he is quite clearly 'less hopeful' than Al that Obama will bring about change, i.e. he's pretty much back to his old pre-MSNBC self.

So I think it's safe to draw the conclusion that the mainstream media (MSNBC) used Cenk to try to perpetuate the myth that it's 'us vs. them', because since leaving he has been far more candid. This is the exact same type of thing I see In Rachel unfortunately, and that's why I wish I could see her with her own independent show, she would be awesome on the RNN for example.

Anyway, you already know all this, you're the one posting some of the video's that bought me to the conclusion I did, so I would be interested to hear why you disagree with my position.

>> ^ghark:

Anyway, you already know all this, you're the one posting some of the video's that bought me to the conclusion I did, so I would be interested to hear why you disagree with my position.


I agree with the points you made in this comment, just not your original one.

My only disagreement is that I think going around saying it's a "myth that there is actually a divide between Republicans and Democrats" doesn't help if what you want is to advance a progressive policy agenda. All that message does is demoralize liberals, and get them to disengage from the political process.

I don't mind Cenk coming down hard on Democrats for being idiots and sellouts. I think that's healthy and necessary, so long as it doesn't have the net effect of promoting the idea amongst liberals that Democrats are "just as bad" as Republicans -- they're not, not even close.

And while I really have not spent a lot of time listening to Cenk, I haven't heard him equate them, either.

On the other hand, I hear lots of right-wing people equate them, and then launch into how this means you should adopt their "small" government agendas, since politicians all suck, but Republicans are better because they make realize governments suck.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by jonny.