Ah, jeez. Guy gets a book published, and the next thing you know, he's wearing a tie and sitting down during diavlogs. Can a kneejerk instinct to use liberal as a pejorative be far behind?

Quoting bjkeefe: Ah, jeez. Guy gets a book published, and the next thing you know, he's wearing a tie and sitting down during diavlogs.

LOL, I was trying to put my finger on why Reihan seemed so much less Jim Carrey-esque than usual; I think the sitting down thing is the source. Happily, though, his eyebrows remain in full expressive force, as does his signature ability to diavlog with eyes closed.

I was a little subdued in part because I was in the office next to Jim Hoge's. I was explicitly told by my friend Dan to "not go crazy," as it would lead to my being tossed out of the Council of Foreign Relations by the scruff of my neck. Given my long history with the Council, this was not nearly as implausible as it might sound, and so I was self-policing. Also, I was really tired! As for the tie, I only recently learned how to tie a tie, so I've been wearing a lot of ties to revel in my new tie-tying prowess. This is, as my father would say, "a true fact."

mark schmitt's assertion that only plutocrats feel strongly about free trade shows that perhaps he should diversify his portfolio of friends in terms of ideology. there are many whose passion for trade is conditional upon the idea that it is the route to alleviating world poverty (even if it does cause problems for the bottom half of americans).

Reihan, You learned to tie the tie just in the nick of time. I saw you on Hardball today, discussing healthcare! I only heard your first sound bite, but it was very impressive. You almost had me believing for a second that somewhere there lives and breathes a Republican elected official who agrees with you. The other dude on the program, the Democrat, Barnacle or somebody, was looking at you as if wondering your planet of origin, but maybe he always has a WTF look on his face. I love his accent though -- Middle Massachusetts working class, circa 1920.

Quoting Wonderment:
The other dude on the program, the Democrat, Barnacle or somebody, was looking at you as if wondering your planet of origin, but maybe he always has a WTF look on his face. I love his accent though -- Middle Massachusetts working class, circa 1920.

Barnicle http://www.bostonphoenix.com/archive...LE_STEALS.html the former plagiarist is working class to the same extent that Matthews (voice of the people of working class white Pennsylvanians) or Russert (blue collar Buffalonian) are or were.

Quoting graz: Barnicle http://www.bostonphoenix.com/archive...LE_STEALS.html the former plagiarist is working class to the same extent that Matthews (voice of the people of working class white Pennsylvanians) or Russert (blue collar Buffalonian) are or were.

a Barnicle moment

Pathetic and typical of the (mostly) all boys clown club at MSNBC. Reihan would be viewed with equal oddity and disdain. Even if his claims for a new-style Republican party are more wishful thinking than reality.

Quoting graz: Pathetic and typical of the (mostly) all boys clown club at MSNBC. Reihan would be viewed with equal oddity and disdain. Even if his claims for a new-style Republican party are more wishful thinking than reality.

I hadn't seen that clip for awhile, and now that it's almost over, I realize, even factoring in how widely despised she was going in, how very, very sexist it all was. And Obama and race were treated with kid gloves. Great job tonight, Reihan. I couldn't be that cool in the limelight to save my life!

I hadn't seen that clip for awhile, and now that it's almost over, I realize, even factoring in how widely despised she was going in, how very, very sexist it all was.

Yep. The "likeability" thing was outrageous. The clip is classic locker room hooting, sneering and snarling to intimidate and humiliate females. Hillary is the one who brushed it all off her shoulders.

Quoting Wonderment: Yep. The "likeability" thing was outrageous. The clip is classic locker room hooting, sneering and snarling to intimidate and humiliate females.

Hillary is the one who brushed it all off her shoulders.

That same crew -- Barnicle, Scarborough, and Willie Geist -- are no kinder to Obama. Those remarks (in the video) are clearly sexist, but this is just a part of the larger problem of conservative bias in the media. These guys will sabatoge any Democrat, not just Hillary. The particulars are, of course, different, but the motive is the same: to elect McCain and to discredit the Democratic Party. That some clown show is now busy sabatoging Obama. Tune in their program on MSNBC tomorrow morning at 6:00 AM ET and watch 3 hours of non-stop Obama bashing over Wes Clark's perfectly obvious comments about John McCain's military service. They do the same thing every morning: attack whatever Democrat is within reach with the RNC talking points of the day. And they will keep it up until election day. Does anyone remember what the media was like in the 1990s? The 20 month Monica Lewinsky show? Hillary is not uniquely a victim. She's not particularly a victim because she's a woman. She's a victim, first and

Tune in their program on MSNBC tomorrow morning at 6:00 AM ET and watch 3 hours of non-stop Obama bashing over Wes Clark's perfectly obvious comments about John McCain's military service.

I haven't been up at 6 a.m. since my kids were in diapers about 20 years ago, but I take your point, Twin. Still, I think Look is right to note that they would never yuck it up with race the way they do with gender. It's the Don Imus lesson: You can call 'em hos, but you can't call 'em nappy-headed.

Quoting Wonderment: Still, I think Look is right to note that they would never yuck it up with race the way they do with gender. It's the Don Imus lesson: You can call 'em hos, but you can't call 'em nappy-headed.

Absolutely, I totally agree with that. But that doesn't change the bottom line: they are going to attack Obama relentlessly anyway, using every tool at their disposal. You're right that this doesn't include open racism. But the tool isn't what's important. It's the project that matters. The project is to defeat Democrats. First it was Hillary, now it's Obama. Different tools for different jobs, but they will get the job done. The goal never changes: Use the media platform in the service of the Republican Party.

Quoting Wonderment: I haven't been up at 6 a.m. since my kids were in diapers about 20 years ago, but I take your point, Twin.

God you're lucky. :-)

Could you provide a link (or a reference) to the law review article on cities & partisan politics that was mentioned in the "beef with the Constitution" section. Thanx.

Quoting razib: mark schmitt's assertion that only plutocrats feel strongly about free trade shows that perhaps he should diversify his portfolio of friends in terms of ideology. there are many whose passion for trade is conditional upon the idea that it is the route to alleviating world poverty (even if it does cause problems for the bottom half of americans).

I agree -- I am in favor of free trade, too, and I'm the farthest thing from a plutocrat. I accept that there will be some hardships for some Americans, but I believe the greater global good makes it worth the pain. I do have a problem with the lack of consideration given to the immediate effects on American blue-collar workers, though. It's probably a futile wish, given the realities of frequent elections and the desire to show quick accomplishments, but I always want politicians to plan for better transitions. I also have a problem with some of the one-sidedness. In particular, it does not seem right to let other countries get away with the amount of abuse to labor and the damage to the environment that most free trade agreements end up permitting. Not

Quoting Reihan: I was a little subdued in part because ...

Thanks for checking in, Reihan. I hope you know I was just teasing.

not going too crazy, no. i was disappointed when i saw reihan was sitting down for this one, but the performance was transcendent nonetheless. i like the cut of your jib, sir.

Mark Schmitt was so absurd in his statements on the death penalty I could not bring myself to listen to the remaining segments. First he states his MAIN reason for voting against Pataki was his stance on the death penalty then he follows up with that in Texas this issue would be meaningless to him?? I am sure there are some anti-death penalty democrats down in Texas. Why would that no longer be a major factor in his voting decision? The backbends, cartwheels and flips some democrats are doing to try and justify Obama's ever changing stances are becoming ridiculous.