Print
Email Friend
Add to Favorites
del.icio.us
Digg It!
Slashdot It!
I AM FREAKIN' APPALLED!!
If you are a Republican and seeking audio for your talking points or otherwise just want to watch the Liberal talk Intelligentsia pull a national melt down.
Must be easy to run off at the mouth about running a campaign when all YOU have to do is spout off from (and sitting on) your cushy well-paid backseat!!
Let's see how she feels if Obama goes down in flames to the Republican machine because Randi has decided in advance that HILLARY HAS ALREADY LOST!!! Let's see how self-congratulating she is then!
Now THAT is DEMOCRACY-- Randi Rhodes appointing the candidate-- right? No-- that is demagoguery! Oh wait, maybe I have this "principle" thing she is claiming is her higher ground figured wrong. It's only a principled position if it's hers.
How sad.
Randi Rhodes Crucifies Clinton for the Republican Party!!
|
Posted By: CLB Posted on: Mar. 10, 2008 at 2:00 PM  50 Comments
|
5.0 / 5
Based on 1 ratings.
|
Comments:
|
Mar. 10, 2008 at 02:57:48 PM
|
|
| Cynthia, You know I now favor Obama in this race. You know my reasons. I'm sure sure you'll agree that many of them are rational and well thought out. But my Obama leaning does not keep me from saying that you are absolutely right. Friday, and again today, Randi is having a meltdown. What I just wrote in another thread holds equally true for her: you cannot break the legs of the Democratic nominee, whether that be Clinton or Obama, and expect that not to help John McCain in the race to the finish line. Even if both Obama and Clinton were fatally flawed candidates, that doesn't change my perception that a McCain is much more flawed than both put together. Neither Clinton or Obama voted to confirm Alito or Roberts as SCOTUS justices. McCain, of course, voted for both. Maybe neither of the two Democrats left standing will be particularly passionate about disengaging from our occupation of Iraq, but they do so a lot quicker than McCain. They are also much less likely to address our failures in Iraq, and now Afghanistan, with a new and improved conflict in Iran. Fewer US soldiers and humans in general will die in the Middle East with a Democrat in office than with John McCain. Recognizing this, isn't what Randi is doing to Clinton right now just as bad as Clinton inferring that McCain's experience makes him a better POTUS than Obama, if the American public were foolish enough not to choose her? I like Randi Rhodes. I think she delivers exceptional news and content during her three hour radio show . . . most of the time. But this will not be the first time that she has had a meltdown, abused her audience, and sounded more like a right-wing talker than a reasonable voice on the left. She states today that she is not a journalist, but simply an entertainer and a media employee. Bulls***. That is a weak dodge of responsibility. She fact-checks what she says, and she (in better moments) tells her audience not to believe her but to check the facts for themselves. She's on the public airwaves and she says she's speaking the truth. That to me makes her a journalist. Too bad today she decided to abdicate that responsibility, and instead become a demagogue. |
||
|
Mar. 10, 2008 at 03:19:15 PM
|
|
| Randi Rhodes probably likes to go down ROCKY ROAD!! Who gives a s*** what this clown says? If she was a meteoroligist and said we were getting rain ,i would make a tee time to play golf.Dont pay any attention to the Obama Bandwagon morons, they will soon go into hiding....
|
||
|
Mar. 10, 2008 at 04:08:22 PM
|
|
[This is a reply to comment by www.MoronInCharge.com on Mar. 10, 2008 at 02:57:48 PM]
www.MoronInCharge.com
Mar. 10, 2008 at 02:57:48 PM Cynthia, You know I now favor Obama in this race. You know my reasons. I'm sure sure you'll agree that many of them are rational and well thought out. But my Obama leaning does not keep me from saying that you are absolutely... View this Comment Well, I don't support either candidate and it's nice to not get bashed by an Obama supporter for somehow not getting "it" in this case. And may I say, "it" is getting worse. Randi's self-righteous behavior has either been caught by or spread to more who are increasingly abusing others for not going along with the Obama parade. Sigh. The tide is turning from them being the champions of good behavior. Now that some are angry at not being handed the mantle of the nomination, they are abusing those who just aren't "smart" enough to "get it". That, in case anyone is paying attention, is abuse and flies in the face of that so-called good behavior! So, We (so to speak) are becoming Them! |
||
|
|
Mar. 10, 2008 at 04:44:46 PM
|
|
| Additionally, now listening to Jeff Farias who said he "admires" Randi for coming out with the negative information she believes will be released against Hillary, just floors me. I had to turn off her show. Now I have turned off his so I can write a few words here that sadly, will not be broadcast. "Rovian tactics". "More of the same". "Just like Bush". Cruel and unfair words. And frankly, just plain factually wrong. I am so offended by the winger liberals in my own party. In my own medium. Just for the record, Hillary is not just like Bush. She could not steal the super-delegate votes unless she put a gun to their temples. How likely is that. has conspiracy theorizing finally become the substitue for rational thinking in this party. There are now those who claim it was her intention to destroy Obama, damaging him in an either me or you tactic in her McCain comparison that would cripple him and force super-delegates to vote for her instead. This reminds me of the joke that if a Republican could walk on water he'd be lauded as the Messiah but if it were Bill Clinton, he would be blamed for getting the floor wet! Hillary can do NOTHING right because people's thinking has simply been first, so clouded by their judgment of her actions as intentionally ruthless, and then compounded by the effect of crowd thinking enforcing their own "correctness" that it is becoming a kind of lynch mob mentality. If she were accused of a crime, right now she could not get a fair hearing anywhere in this country. I think talk hosts who know they are influential and yet feel they have no duty to neutrality when stakes are this high-- sacrifice the process outcome because it may not suit their particular partisan interests-- are sacrificing the very Democracy for which they claim to fight. It is interfering with a presidential election. Is it even legal to broadcast such partisan positions without being a registered 527? |
||
|
|
Mar. 10, 2008 at 04:50:59 PM
|
|
[This is a reply to comment by CLB on Mar. 10, 2008 at 04:44:46 PM]
CLB
Mar. 10, 2008 at 04:44:46 PM Additionally, now listening to Jeff Farias who said he "admires" Randi for coming out with the negative information she believes will be released against Hillary, just floors me. I had to turn off her show. Now I have turned off his so I... View this Comment Oh and BTW, I am directing that last comment to Rhodes. Jeff does a pretty good job of trying to stay neutral I think...but he has his hands full. Randi I think though has made a serious error in judgment. I don't remember giving her authority to destroy either candidate before the end of the process. And frankly, I would rather have John McCain win the fight then have Randi Rhodes throw it for the Democrats (God hope she is far less influential than that) because then we will have gone from Bush the Decider to Rhodes the Decider. |
||
|
Mar. 10, 2008 at 04:51:50 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| The Democratic Party is certainly breaking. But that's my opinion and as we know opinions are nothing but unresearched half-truths if they reflect negatively on Barack Obama or the Democratic Party. Keep fighting the good fight, CLB. You can't make everyone happy, but watch out for these radical Obamamaniacs. They're out for blood and they don't discriminate between Republican attacks and Democratic dissent. |
||
|
|
Mar. 10, 2008 at 05:01:54 PM
|
|
| Cynthia, not to sound like Lib & Con (a former member of this site), but I do see both sides of this. Randi thinks Clinton will get creamed in the general election when the Saudi connections to the Bill Clinton Presidential Library become widely known. Well, that's just one of her many objections to Hillary Clinton. And Randi has a national audience, and the ability to sway voters who are still in the game to vote for "her man." I think she can do that in a much less offensive way to her fans and audience at large (it's never a good idea to imply that everyone in your entire listening audience are morons). But I can't blame her from using the influence she has to reach the remaining voters in the states still in play, so that a disastrous brokered convention can be avoided, and the candidate she perceives as less qualified is not nominated. BTW, I am turned off by the Clinton's implication that there is a strong likelihood for a Clinton-Obama ticket. Not because of the presumption of the underdog to see herself at the top of the ticket, or putting forth the idea that Obama would actually be content to be her VP. No, what gets me riled is the idea that she gets something for nothing: a bump from Obama fans thinking that a Clinton-Obama ticket would be just peachy in either order. It's like Dr. Evil stealing Austin Powers mojo. If she is going to ride into office on her experience, then let it be for that, and not for the false promise of something she knows full well she cannot deliver. Making that kind of suggestion is little more than lying to the voters. |
||
|
Mar. 10, 2008 at 05:17:53 PM
|
|
| I can't comment on her show because I didn't listen to it, but I don't think any radio pesonality should be able to trash one candidate - they need to provide each with equal time. Senator Clinton has received a bad deal all the way around, while Senator Obama has received a walk in the sun. An election isn't a personality contest - it's a period of time where we, the voters, should be able to learn whether or not a particular candidate is going to be able to lead the county. Senator Obama has proven he can lead the people, but that is not nearly the same as leading a country - especially one that is as screwed up as this one. Seems we've already learned what public sentiment does in this country to seek change - zip... What is worrying is the fact that people are so bitter so soon - what are they going to like 8 months from now? P.
|
||
|
|
Mar. 10, 2008 at 05:21:19 PM
|
|
[This is a reply to comment by Bob Toad on Mar. 10, 2008 at 04:51:50 PM]
Bob Toad
Mar. 10, 2008 at 04:51:50 PM The Democratic Party is certainly breaking. But that's my opinion and as we know opinions are nothing but unresearched half-truths if they reflect negatively on Barack Obama or the Democratic Party. Keep fighting the good fight, CLB. You... View this Comment I hope you're still not trying to cast me as a rabid Obamamaniac Bob. Just because someone thinks that Obama is a better candidate (more electable in the general election), doesn't make them stupid, blind, hypnotized, or irrational. But you seem to toss that out as a general label for anybody that doesn't agree with you. Sorry, but you are wrong about Obama's "present" votes in the IL Senate implying that he was afraid to take a position. Research that yourself if you don't believe me. [link:www.msnbc.msn.com] [link:www.npr.org] [link:www.nytimes.com] But as much as my distaste for Clinton is growing every day as her tactics become more and more desperate and dirty, I have made it clear that I will be voting for her if she gets the nomination. Save the stereotyping for the closed-minded fools that say it's the Obama-Way (or the Clinton-Way), or the highway. |
||
News flash Randhi-- this "news" is also avaialbel in the Citizen's United (read Switboat Vet backers) film Hillary" The Movie, about which I warned months ago.
That being said, it is fair to report information. BUT to come out claiming that you have the right to attack and destroy Hillary Clinton because you claim her campaign tactics against Obama equate her to Bush, that by your reckoning she has already lost and is positioning herself to destroy the party by presuming to somehow get super delegates to vote for her (I guess it will be the gun she will be holding to their heads) you have the right to DERAIL HER CAMPAIGN in the name of Truth and Justice (or some other self-aggrandizing messianic calling)!
God, I am so pissed. How dare she presume to deny me my own choice?!
What a freakin' hypocrite!!
Report Abuse