Re: Except there's no "us".

1

That article's really stupid.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 7:20 AM
horizontal rule
2

Let me be the first to say that the article is rather stupid.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 7:23 AM
horizontal rule
3

And a different Perspective: this Article is stupid.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 7:24 AM
horizontal rule
4

But soylent green is corporations are people, too!


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 7:40 AM
horizontal rule
5

As long as it is "Us vs. something" everybody is a Republican.


Posted by: Earnest O'Nest | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 8:07 AM
horizontal rule
6

||
On a boat!

(ACORN videographer/liar O'Keefe in more wacky gotcha journalism hijinks.)
|>


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 8:31 AM
horizontal rule
7

6: When a lady shows up at a dude's place and sees a bunch of dildos, it's impossible for her to control herself, so you can see where he thought that might work.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 8:42 AM
horizontal rule
8

I love that the whole thing was premised on him going "Dude. She totally wants me."

Next up: O'Keefe tries to ice Larry King.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 8:44 AM
horizontal rule
9

6: this man will be a federal legislator in max 8 years.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 8:51 AM
horizontal rule
10

Anything I might be able to add would be a mere gloss on #5

Agonism

When the Proletariat is no longer an abstraction, all that is solid melts into air.

Sed in media res...


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 8:52 AM
horizontal rule
11

5 FTW!


Posted by: Rah | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:12 AM
horizontal rule
12

To 6 again, now that I've read the document with the "plan" that was leaked to CNN, I can't figure out what the point of this exercise was supposed to be. It's clearly meant to be super-sleazy, rapey behavior. Are they trying to see how far the reporter will put up with this in order to get the story? Will she tolerate the pawings of a terrifying sociopath in order to get some scoop on something about how racist Republicans are, which will be so awesome because it will reveal how racist CNN is? I don't get it.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:18 AM
horizontal rule
13

12: I am not sure the thinking went further than "I am so cool" and "Bitches be sluts."


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:25 AM
horizontal rule
14

Every time O'Keefe does anything, I am forced to confront the fact that we somehow reside on different planets.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:26 AM
horizontal rule
15

Tabloid journalism-- attention is money, and a famous woman in trouble brings attention. I think that the economics is no different than the stalkers with cameras anywhere.

It may not be the only operational mode for these guys, but why listen to what they say, they're attention whores.


Posted by: lw | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:26 AM
horizontal rule
16

I can't figure out what the point of this exercise was supposed to be.

"Abbie has been trying to seduce me." Yeah, sure she has, dude.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:33 AM
horizontal rule
17

16: "Abbie has been trying to seduce me." Yeah, sure she has, dude.

Well, giving him the benefit of the doubt (because, I'm a liberal, dammit!), he may mean this in the sense that she was trying to seduce him emotionally, so he would open up to her. I think reporters generally try to do that.


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:36 AM
horizontal rule
18

Us vs. The Corporations indeed.

Call me old fashioned, but I'd strike out "corporations" and substitute "malefactors of great wealth." I think hating on corporations tends to depersonalize the conflict.

And has anyone noticed that the Ritholtz piece is really stupid?


Posted by: politicalfootball | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:42 AM
horizontal rule
19

6 & following: "James should have a more sleazy persona than normal." Good luck with that.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:43 AM
horizontal rule
20

Every time O'Keefe does anything, I am forced to confront the fact that we somehow do not reside on different planets. How I wish we did and I never had to encounter his remarkable sleaziness.


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:51 AM
horizontal rule
21

17: EVERY JOURNALIST WHO IS NOT TOO STUPID OR TOO FULL OF HIMSELF TO NOTICE WHAT IS GOING ON KNOWS THAT WHAT HE DOES IS MORALLY INDEFENSIBLE.


Posted by: OPINIONATED JANET MALCOLM | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 9:52 AM
horizontal rule
22

20: And yet the major news outlets in the US stand today as willing co-conspirators in his most notorious hit job (ACORN)--for many the only official "lesson learned" being that they were late to the party. And I suspect they will never revisit it (just as the NY Times never acknowledged its role in the original sin of Jeff Gerth's "Whitewater" coverage). For instance in this NY Times editorial from August on the government *finally* enforcing some provisions of the motor voter law (I actually agree with the editorial) they cheer how it could also reduce the impact of advocacy organizations whose role in registering voters caused such a furor in 2008 (gee, you already helped kill it--such a messy organization, so unlike us), and conclude,

When advocacy groups sued Ohio and Missouri to force their public assistance offices into complying, huge groups of new voters surged onto the rolls -- more than 100,000 in Ohio, and more than 200,000 in Missouri. Nationwide enforcement by the Justice Department could add millions more. The more people who have access to the ballot, the better the country will be.
while convenently neglecting to mention that it was ACORN who sued.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 10:16 AM
horizontal rule
23

7: How many is a bunch?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 3:39 PM
horizontal rule
24

When I imagined it, I didn't count them. They were arranged like flowers in a vase, and all of them looked previously used.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 3:49 PM
horizontal rule
25

If they looked like flowers, I should say they were previously used and then some.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 4:23 PM
horizontal rule
26

And you don't bring me flowers, anymore.


Posted by: Barbra Streisand | Link to this comment | 09-29-10 6:32 PM
horizontal rule