home

The Latest In CDS

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 09:03:04 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

WaPo's Colbert King (Yes, I know there is a certain "who?" quality to this post) demonstrates the Beltway still can't get over it. What a pathetic column.

Speaking for me only

< Colo. Governor Suggests Supermax for Gitmo Detainees | The POTUS Weekly Address >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    The Latest In CDS | 39 comments (39 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Some folks always have to find a problem. (5.00 / 10) (#1)
    by Lil on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 09:18:47 AM EST
    In psychology we call a lot of what he wrote as projection. With everything that went on at that inauguration, he notices Clinton? That says more about him than Bill.  I'm a Clinton supporter and although I saw him, I barely remember him. That day was all about Obama entering and Bush leaving. We see what we want to see sometimes in life. Added to that, seeing all our political leaders there, former and current, gave me a great sense of pride in being an American. Our system of passing power is amazing. I felt lucky to be an American that day. I want to call him an idiot right now, but I know I'm not supposed to do that.

    Somedays, it must be (5.00 / 5) (#2)
    by KeysDan on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 09:35:04 AM EST
    difficult to craft a column with deadlines and all.  But even so, Mr. King needs to recognize what President Obama clearly does: that Secretary Clinton and her husband are unique assets of his administration.  Attempts to diminish this special national resource, in this way, just serve to diminish the administration he fervently supports, as well as Mr. King, himself.   Similarly, attempts to portray the vice president, essentially as clownish, do little to burnish his Pulitzer credential.

    The difference being (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 11:25:14 AM EST
    though, that Biden's nationally televised behavior was clownish and embarrassing, as Obama's reaction to it clearly showed.  Bill Clinton did nothing more than silently and decorously play the roles he owns, that of former POTUS and spouse of the incoming SoS.

    Parent
    I sure agree that there is a difference in (none / 0) (#24)
    by KeysDan on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 01:28:40 PM EST
    the depreciatory constructs leveled by Mr. King against the Clintons and Biden.  However, by 'similarly' I intended to register my view that while Biden's attempt to resuscitate this embarrassing happening with humor was impolitic and ill-timed, the criticisms of Mr. King's column did not 'live up to his blue china. '

    Parent
    Wow (5.00 / 6) (#3)
    by andgarden on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 09:37:42 AM EST
    You almost get the impression that he wants to send Bill to Gitmo. He's not allowed to be in the frame when his wife is sworn in to one of the most important offices in America? What a jerk.

    Just imagine what would have been ... (5.00 / 7) (#6)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 09:49:07 AM EST
    said if Bill Clinton HADN'T held the bible.

    For the CDS crowd, Bill Clinton is attempting to undermine the Obama presidency when he appears in public, and when he DOESN'T appear in public.

    In the first case he's "hogging the limelight," and in the second case he's showing "bitterness" and probably doing something nefarious behind the scenes.

    Parent

    Well, this kind of article gets (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 10:05:11 AM EST
    the author a lot more attention than a piece about how fortunate the country is to have Bill Clinton available to mentor the new president in the current condition of the country.

    Ignoring his article would force him, and his employer to rethink the topics and attitude he projects.  If he gets enough attention from this, you can be sure he will continue to publish from the CDS point of view.

    Parent

    Meh (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 10:10:19 AM EST
    I doubt that seriously.

    Parent
    Wow (5.00 / 6) (#4)
    by Steve M on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 09:38:00 AM EST
    Truly a classic of the genre.  At least the columnist has the good sense to realize how "churlish" he is!

    And he is right about one thing - (5.00 / 10) (#5)
    by ruffian on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 09:41:03 AM EST
    He should have kept it to himself.

    Hard to see how holding a bible at a ceremony nobody saw constitutes hogging attention.

    Parent

    And it's all about (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 11:27:21 AM EST
    Bill's "neediness," not Hillary's choice.

    Honestly, the "neediness" is in the columnist's fantasies about Bill Clinton.

    Parent

    Agreed - is the Obama (5.00 / 4) (#23)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 12:50:55 PM EST
    marriage required to be the only collaborative relationship on the planet?  Does anyone really think that Bill would have been holding the bible unless Hillary wanted him to?

    Parent
    Ouch (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Radiowalla on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 10:21:11 AM EST
    This is nearly as bad as   Steve Clemon's drooling piece about Maureen Dowd's cocktail party

    Will someone please call Bob Somerby and tell him to start a file on Colbert King?  

    Great idea! (none / 0) (#34)
    by BernieO on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 05:32:05 PM EST
    I thought Colbert's column was actually insulting to Obama, implying that he is a being manipulated by the Clintons. Given how the Obama camp controls the staging of events, it is much more reasonable to assume that the Clintons were in the front row because Obama wanted to put the emphasis on diplomacy. He also went to the State Department for Hillary's roll out to signal his priority on diplomacy. Does King think Obama was manipulated into that?

    Parent
    It's called "order of precedence" (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by DaveOinSF on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 10:31:52 AM EST
    WaPo knows little of protocol.

    Thanks! (none / 0) (#26)
    by ding7777 on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 01:37:10 PM EST


    Parent
    What a petty, petty man (5.00 / 4) (#12)
    by Anne on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 10:34:19 AM EST
    that he could object to the seating arrangements at the Prayer Breakfast and construe Hillary's proud husband holding the Bible as she was sworn in as him hogging the limelight.

    The response to him should be, "Columns like this, that reveal the depth, irrationality and utter pettiness of your negative feelings about the Clintons, should cause your editor to immediately inform you that any future columns on either Clinton will be returned with a bright red line through it and the equally bright red notation to find another subject."

    He seems much more suited for the snarky and mean gossip reporting of TMZ.

    THe man's (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 11:28:24 AM EST
    email address is at the end of his column, Anne.  Send that thought to him.  I just sent him mine.


    Parent
    Good suggestion (none / 0) (#35)
    by BernieO on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 05:36:36 PM EST
    I left a critical comment and I see he is getting a lot of them, but an email is a great idea. I will do it now.

    Parent
    You got that right! (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by denise k on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 11:28:28 AM EST
    His main complaint against Hillary is that Bill is both her husband and an ex-President.  His complaint against Bill is that he is married to the Secretary of State and an ex-President.  No matter what happens (short of divorce) these are the facts, so there is no getting around this moron's complaints.  Talk about Catch 22!

    Parent
    Mr. King: With all due respect (5.00 / 5) (#13)
    by rise hillary rise on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 10:35:41 AM EST
    please STFU. this is just ridiculous. can you say "double standard. How is holding the bible for one's wife (which she prob asked him to do) constitute hogging the spotlight. name me one married pol who had someone other than a spouse do it.

    as far as the seating arrangement, IIRC as SOS, Hillary is "first among equals" in the cabinet and by protocol she gets that chair. would anyone think of asking another married pol to leave his/her spouse at home? (a few I might want to, but..)

    sigh. CDS will NEVER stop.

    The real comment should be (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 12:42:17 PM EST
    how much Bill has given up so that his wife could become Secretary of State.  But no, all the media will talk about is the mythical conflict between Hillary's being secretary of state and Bill's having established a foundation that takes money from wherever to combat AIDs, poverty and malaria.


    Parent
    At least it wasn't the Koran. (none / 0) (#14)
    by oculus on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 10:39:46 AM EST
    Meanwhile, when I told my travel companions about Jill Biden's comments and that, perhaps, this explained the long delay in announcing Obama's VP choice, they went in to a tirade about how Obama is entitled to pick anyone one he likes for VP and it is quite understandable he didn't want to be saddled with Bill and Hillary's baggage.  Sheesh.

    Parent
    Oh for crying out loud - there isn't any NEWS (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by allimom99 on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 11:02:05 AM EST
    to report today? What a load of cr*p. I'll be glad to see this clown 'changing' his tune when he realizes how smart it was for Obama to avail himself of these thoughtful people. TMZ undeed.

    Parent
    What I Thought (none / 0) (#27)
    by daring grace on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 01:38:43 PM EST
    This King piece epitomizes what I thought about the Clinton "baggage" issue:

    That there may have been some actual "baggage", legitimate concerns related, for example, to the Clinton Foundation's funding sources, but that more than that there would be (and see, there is) the kinds of 'baggage' commentators and media pundits fashion out of their own fevered attachments to Clinton demonization.

    Parent

    Actually (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by daring grace on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 01:34:18 PM EST
    This longtime Obama supporter saw the Clintons sitting in the pew with the Obamas and the Bidens as a win/win for all, underscoring that the primaries are over and now these very effective leaders are working together to heal this country after the nightmare of the last 8 years.

    As to King's dictating who should hold the bible...wow, in a week as momentous as this one this guy really couldn't come up with anything more substantive to write than this???

    Example: The smackdown (none / 0) (#29)
    by Cream City on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 02:03:57 PM EST
    to the "pro-lifers" (ugh, aren't we all?) on the day after they marched on Washington, on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade this week, calling on the new administration to continue the conservative war on women.

    The next day, the new administration lifted the ban on funding for family planning overseas.  I am far from alone in having been very worried about the contradictory signals sent in the campaign by Obama on such an issue -- and, as a foreign relations issue as well, perhaps a sign of SOS Clinton's influence.  So I am less (yes, just less -- the test is what we do here, and that test is still to be taken) worried now.  And it would seem that such a step on Day Two by the first Dem Prez in this millennium, and on Day One of Clinton as SOS, would be worth a column.

    But no, let's waste print and paper on what's going on in this guy's head, instead of what's ahead for the world.

    Parent

    If only CDs were terminal . . . (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by Pieter B on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 03:25:16 PM EST
    Hillary Clinton made the front row because the man seated to her right used to be president.

    Not only CDS, but sexist into the bargain. Hillary Clinton made the front row because she is going to be a vital part of the Obama administration, and it's a show of the unity that his followers admire -- except when it includes the Clintons, apparently.

    Even if asked by the first family or planners to occupy the front pew, the Clintons should have had the good grace not to horn in. It was not their hour.

    "Even if asked by the first family or planners"? Dude, your medication needs adjustment. Of course they were there by invitation, and it would have been extremely rude to refuse.

    Holy Cannoli (none / 0) (#11)
    by talesoftwokitties on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 10:33:42 AM EST
    I wondered whensomeone would bring up the Clinton's seated in the front row of the Prayer Service.  

    seating arrangements (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by christinep on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 03:41:20 PM EST
    In addition to SOS status/protocol, ahem....A Former President would always be seated nearby when in attendance.  I thought that with the WaPo's Sally Quinn society connections, understanding of simple protocol would be a given. As you suggest, it is more than bemusing.

    Parent
    I'm sure there wouldn't have been (none / 0) (#20)
    by ChrisO on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 12:27:48 PM EST
    any nasty speculation if Hillary had asked Chelsea to hold the Bible.

    Just rumors of dynastic ambitions. (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by Fabian on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 12:35:27 PM EST
    Not even Chelsea can escape CDS.

    It's not about the Clintons.  It's about the Clintonphobes.

    Parent

    And rumours about (none / 0) (#28)
    by starsandstripes on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 01:49:25 PM EST
    discord in the Clinton marriage too. That article was just pathetic.

    Parent
    Geez. (none / 0) (#30)
    by Fabian on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 03:08:08 PM EST
    Marital problems?  

    That's only on the cover of some tabloid or other at least every month.  If it isn't George & Laura, then it's Hillary and Bill....and so on.  It's beyond stale.

    Parent

    Caroline and Edward (none / 0) (#31)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 03:22:34 PM EST


    Parent
    If not next, the Obamas can't (none / 0) (#36)
    by oldpro on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 06:15:52 PM EST
    be far behind.

    Just wait...

    Parent

    It's inevitable. (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Fabian on Sun Jan 25, 2009 at 05:06:17 AM EST
    Not the discord, but the tabloid headlines.  If I spent more than a couple minutes a week scanning magazine covers, I could probably predict them accurately.

    I blame Alan Moore.  There's a scene in Watchmen where Ozymandias watches/analyzes news coverage and commercials(!) for trends to take advantage of.  I'd always assumed commercials tried to drive public opinion, not reacted to it.  

    Parent

    Edwin, actually, (none / 0) (#38)
    by Anne on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 07:00:14 PM EST
    but since he has been invisible throughout the whole Caroline-for-Senate debacle, most people probably don't even realize she has a husband.

    Parent
    Beyond pathetic. (none / 0) (#37)
    by oldpro on Sat Jan 24, 2009 at 06:18:23 PM EST


    The Latest In CDS | 39 comments (39 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment