tagged w/ Lawrence O'Donnell
-
Barack Obama on the failure of the war on drugs. A discussion with NYT Charles M Blow and Neill Franklin, a former narcotics officer, who was for the drug war and is now with LEAP - Law Enforcement Against Prohibition and drug legalization.
http://youtu.be/Gez5Ur-8CCsBarack Obama on the failure of the war on drugs. A discussion with NYT Charles M Blow... more
-
-
After watching the interview, Jon Stewart felt bad for the chair O'Donnell grilled, so The Daily Show offered the chair's lawyer -- a fan -- an opportunity to respond...
http://veracitystew.com/?p=32697After watching the interview, Jon Stewart felt bad for the chair O'Donnell... more
-
-
An audio interview with Lawrence O'Donnell, host of MSNBC's "The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell." http://www.mrmedia.com/?p=1007An audio interview with Lawrence O'Donnell, host of MSNBC's "The Last... more
-
-
-
Things have quickly escalated between the two all week, resulting in a Twitter war, and then finally leading to Trump threatening to sue O'Donnell. Well, Lawrence took to his show on Wednesday night and unleashed on 'The Donald': "Donald Trump could never sue me...I know his big secret."
http://veracitystew.com/2011/10/27/lawrence-odonnell-unleashes-on-donald-trump-video/Things have quickly escalated between the two all week, resulting in a Twitter war,... more
-
-
"The police need to join us in the same way the Egyptian army joined the people in Freedom Square there in Cairo. This is my appeal to the New York Police Department -- to police departments all over the country: You are working class people. You're not paid enough. You have the most dangerous job in the country and these rich bastards on Wall Street, they have ruined your 401Ks, your pension funds, your future, your children's future. Money that should be going to having better law enforcement has gone to needless wars in other lands. So, my appeal to the police is, you are as and we are you. Join us. It's fun. We'll even let you beat on a bongo drum." -- Michael Moore on Lawrence O'Donnell's The very Last Word, Friday, October 14th, 2011
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x625009
"I have to hand it to the Police... Whether they agree or disagree, at least they have been Civil to the Protestors that have not gotten out of Hand!!!""The police need to join us in the same way the Egyptian army joined the people... more
-
-
KB723
-
added this
-
8 months ago
- |
-
Cable news reached a new low when the MSNBC host invoked Vietnam veterans and dead civil rights marchers to insult the GOP candidate
Despite all the hours of Bill O'Reilly that I've watched, the unfortunate experience of hearing Mark Levin at his worst, and listening to Rush Limbaugh for more hours than I can count, I've never been more disgusted by a broadcaster's interview with a presidential candidate than I was Thursday night, when Lawrence O'Donnell repeatedly hectored candidate Herman Cain in a disrespectful way. As a cable news host, he had every right to ask the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza tough questions. Given the opportunity to interview Cain tomorrow, I'd press him about what he means when he says that many black voters are brainwashed into voting for Democrats, confront him about his changing position on the wisdom of assassinating Anwar al-Awlaki, and challenge his factually inaccurate ideological boilerplate about protests against Wall Street banks.
What I'd avoid is the smugness O'Donnell displayed throughout his long conversation with Cain, the focus on creating idiotic gotcha moments rather than drawing out or clarifying Cain's positions -- is there any respectable reason to ask a presidential candidate to respond to a Hank Williams Jr. appearance on Fox & Friends? -- and more than anything else, the several especially objectionable questions O'Donnell posed that were offensive even by the standards of cable news.
Where to begin? It's difficult to choose, but my jaw dropped farthest when O'Donnell demanded, "Mr. Cain, what are you grateful to this nation for? You served in the Navy. They paid for you to go get a graduate degree while you were in the Navy. Are you grateful to the government for doing that? Are you grateful to this government for passing the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act?" In fairness to O'Donnell, Cain said that he was grateful, but I was put off by the bullying inquiry into gratefulness to country, expecting any moment that O'Donnell would start demanding to know why Cain wasn't wearing a flag lapel pin; and when O'Donnell then mentioned the civil rights laws, I thought to myself, Are blacks who grew up in that era and witnessed the epic struggle for equality really supposed to be 'grateful' that the government finally granted the rights that were their due as humans, and that they ought to have had all along?
The exchange was also notable because O'Donnell got his facts wrong. As Cain would politely point out, "Let's get the record straight, I didn't serve in the Navy, I was a civil servant. I started working for the Department of the Navy as a mathematician and ballistics analyst." The tenor of the interview is perhaps best understood by looking at how O'Donnell responded to being correctedCable news reached a new low when the MSNBC host invoked Vietnam veterans and dead... more
-
-
We’re standing at a crossroads, and where we go from here will decide the future trajectory of the United States of America. The future of this country’s economic health is being written even as we speak, and it’s going to be a battle; a battle of the people against the corporate and monied interests that have hijacked, or attempted to hijack, this nation’s democracy, through corporate influence, lobbying and the buying off of our elected officials.
http://veracitystew.com/2011/09/29/occupy-wall-street-why-the-revolution-will-not-be-privatized-video/We’re standing at a crossroads, and where we go from here will decide the future... more
-
-
The video images of unarmed and penned female protesters being intentionally maced by NYPD Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna during last week's "Occupy Wall Street" demonstrations have caused a growing public demand for an investigation, and now that a second video has surfaced showing the same officer "getting trigger-happy with the spray, just moments after the first incident," the police commission has no choice but to act...or will they?
http://veracitystew.com/2011/09/28/nypd-under-fire-for-macing-after-second-video-surfaces-video/The video images of unarmed and penned female protesters being intentionally maced by... more
-
-
MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell on Monday condemned the “unprovoked police brutality” that occurred at the “Occupy Wall Street” protest over the weekend.
Video recordings showed female protesters being rounded up in an orange-colored mesh pen by police and subsequently sprayed with mace without any provocation, and other protesters being dragged across the street by police.
“The reason that man is being assaulted by the police is because of what he has in his hand,” O’Donnell said, while showing a video clip of a man with a video camera being tackled by police. “He’s holding a professional grade video camera. Since the Rodney King beating was caught on an amateur video camera, American police officers have known video cameras are their worst enemy. They will do anything they can to stop you from legally videotaping how they handle their responsibility to serve and protect you.”
“Everything those cops did this weekend to those protesters they’ve done to someone else when no video camera was rolling,” he later added.
See the full videos on MSNBC http://thelastword.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/26/7978720-rewriting-police-vs-protestersMSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell on Monday condemned the “unprovoked police... more
-
-
-
Lawrence answers Trump's letter
By The Last Word Staff - Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:29 PM EDT.
A special delivery arrived in the mail from Donald Trump. MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell has details along with a response in the Rewrite.
.Lawrence answers Trump's letter
By The Last Word Staff - Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:29... more
-
-
Lawrence O'Donnell called Bill O'Reilly out on his Thursday show, telling his Fox News timeslot rival that, since he had been involved in a very embarrassing sex scandal of his own, he should refrain from criticizing Anthony Weiner for his handling of his Twitter photo debacle.
O'Reilly settled a sexual harassment lawsuit with one of his former producers in 2004. The lawsuit became notorious for its lurid details.
O'Donnell joked that it was the seeming destiny of every white man in the country to eventually have his own TV show and his own sex scandal. He said he was thankful that, for now, he himself could only claim the former, but that, since O'Reilly has had both, it was "really, really uncool" for him to criticize Weiner's somewhat flat-footed response to the growing controversy surrounding the picture that he has not categorically denied is of him. O'Reilly has done so repeatedly, though he has focused on Weiner's handling of the scandal, and not on the picture itself.
"You really don't want to tread into this territory," O'Donnell said. He then held up a copy of the lawsuit filed against O'Reilly, but said he was going to "take the high road" and not read out some of the more infamous sections of the suit. But he warned O'Reilly that, if he continued to discuss the Weiner issue, he would treat his audience to some of the seamier passages.
"Don't make me go there," O'Donnell concluded.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/03/lawrence-odonnell-reminds_n_870785.htmlLawrence O'Donnell called Bill O'Reilly out on his Thursday show, telling... more
-
-
Lawrence O'Donnell did a wonderful job April 13th making it clear that much of the country, many of the American voters do not believe that we are all in this together. They do not believe that those who fall on bad luck and have nowhere to turn should get help. They believe in individualism and think that we are all on our own. They are so delusional and it's hard to understand where they are coming from because not all Republicans could possibly have escaped hardships for sure. How can they think we are all on our own?
What would we do without our infrastructure? How would we survive without the help of our government to provide all the necessities that keep us safe and secure? How could we afford to get an education and educate our children? How would we travel if roads were not available? Who would we call if someone was threatening our wellbeing? Where would we go if we feel violently ill or have been injured? What if any one of us was to lose our income, how would we feed our children and keep a roof over their heads until we find another place where we can earn a living wage?
So many questions to which the people who call themselves Republicans or Libertarians have no answers to. How can they be so fooled? How can they be so misled? Please watch this amazing broadcast of The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell and hear him tell us what we already knew. That there really are two Americas and one is going to destroy the other by its sheer ignorance. thinkingblue
PS: Excellent Essay by Paul Krugman
April 17, 2011
Let’s Not Be Civil
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Last week, President Obama offered a spirited defense of his party’s values — in effect, of the legacy of the New Deal and the Great Society. Immediately thereafter, as always happens when Democrats take a stand, the civility police came out in force. The president, we were told, was being too partisan; he needs to treat his opponents with respect; he should have lunch with them, and work out a consensus.
That’s a bad idea. Equally important, it’s an undemocratic idea.
Let’s review the story so far.
Two weeks ago, House Republicans released their big budget proposal, selling it to credulous pundits as a statement of necessity, not ideology — a document telling America What Must Be Done.
But it was, in fact, a deeply partisan document, which you might have guessed from the opening sentence: “Where the president has failed, House Republicans will lead.” It hyped the danger of deficits, yet even on its own (not at all credible) accounting, spending cuts were used mainly to pay for tax cuts rather than deficit reduction. The transparent and obvious goal was to use deficit fears to impose a vision of small government and low taxes, especially on the wealthy.
So the House budget proposal revealed a yawning gap between the two parties’ priorities. And it revealed a deep difference in views about how the world works.
When the proposal was released, it was praised as a “wonk-approved” plan that had been run by the experts. But the “experts” in question, it turned out, were at the Heritage Foundation, and few people outside the hard right found their conclusions credible. In the words of the consulting firm Macroeconomic Advisers — which makes its living telling businesses what they need to know, not telling politicians what they want to hear — the Heritage analysis was “both flawed and contrived.” Basically, Heritage went all in on the much-refuted claim that cutting taxes on the wealthy produces miraculous economic results, including a surge in revenue that actually reduces the deficit.
By the way, Heritage is always like this. Whenever there’s something the G.O.P. doesn’t like — say, environmental protection — Heritage can be counted on to produce a report, based on no economic model anyone else recognizes, claiming that this policy would cause huge job losses. Correspondingly, whenever there’s something Republicans want, like tax cuts for the wealthy or for corporations, Heritage can be counted on to claim that this policy would yield immense economic benefits.
The point is that the two parties don’t just live in different moral universes, they also live in different intellectual universes, with Republicans in particular having a stable of supposed experts who reliably endorse whatever they propose.
So when pundits call on the parties to sit down together and talk, the obvious question is, what are they supposed to talk about? Where’s the common ground?
Eventually, of course, America must choose between these differing visions. And we have a way of doing that. It’s called democracy.
Now, Republicans claim that last year’s midterms gave them a mandate for the vision embodied in their budget. But last year the G.O.P. ran against what it called the “massive Medicare cuts” contained in the health reform law. How, then, can the election have provided a mandate for a plan that not only would preserve all of those cuts, but would go on, over time, to dismantle Medicare completely?
For what it’s worth, polls suggest that the public’s priorities are nothing like those embodied in the Republican budget. Large majorities support higher, not lower, taxes on the wealthy. Large majorities — including a majority of Republicans — also oppose major changes to Medicare. Of course, the poll that matters is the one on Election Day. But that’s all the more reason to make the 2012 election a clear choice between visions.
Which brings me to those calls for a bipartisan solution. Sorry to be cynical, but right now “bipartisan” is usually code for assembling some conservative Democrats and ultraconservative Republicans — all of them with close ties to the wealthy, and many who are wealthy themselves — and having them proclaim that low taxes on high incomes and drastic cuts in social insurance are the only possible solution.
This would be a corrupt, undemocratic way to make decisions about the shape of our society even if those involved really were wise men with a deep grasp of the issues. It’s much worse when many of those at the table are the sort of people who solicit and believe the kind of policy analyses that the Heritage Foundation supplies.
So let’s not be civil. Instead, let’s have a frank discussion of our differences. In particular, if Democrats believe that Republicans are talking cruel nonsense, they should say so — and take their case to the voters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/18/opinion/18krugman.html?_r=2Lawrence O'Donnell did a wonderful job April 13th making it clear that much of... more
-
-
The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell and UNICEF teamed up to provide school desks to children in Malawi through the groundbreaking project, "K.I.N.D.: Kids in Need of Desks."
http://on.msnbc.com/gT1NrvThe Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell and UNICEF teamed up to provide school... more
-
-
Lawrence O'Donnell got into an angry argument with a Republican congressman over the impending government shutdown.
On his Thursday show, O'Donnell and Rep. Tom Graves of Georgia argued about who was to blame for the shutdown, and O'Donnell pressed Graves about the so-called "riders" in the bill that many say are the sticking point between the Democrats and the Republicans.
The "riders" are policy items attached to the overall budget that try to strip funding from certain programs. It is widely believed that it is these riders, not any argument about spending, that are what is holding up a deal between the two parties. Perhaps the key rider concerns the funding of Planned Parenthood.
O'Donnell asked Graves, "Can you vote for a bill that does not completely defund Planned Parenthood?" Graves was cagey, only saying that he wants to vote for a bill that "maximizes the savings for the American people." O'Donnell asked him repeatedly, but Graves would only say that he did not "intend" to vote for a bill that funded Planned Parenthood.
"You are willing to stop payment for the troops in order to stop any funding for Planned Parenthood," O'Donnell said. Graves objected to this, saying that the House had voted to fund the troops only that day. O'Donnell said the measure in question was nothing but a political ploy, not a serious bill.
O'Donnell then asked Graves about a bill that he said would allow the House to pass measures into law without the approval of the Senate, or even the president. O'Donnell called it an "absurdist, unconstitutional cartoon" and asked Graves how he could have voted for it. Graves said he was glad O'Donnell had mentioned the Constitution, because "nowhere in the Constitution does it say, fund Planned Parenthood." This got O'Donnell really mad. "You should be ashamed of yourself," he shouted. "Your insane bill says that the House of Representatives can pass a bill and it becomes law without the signature of the president."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/08/lawrence-odonnell-government-shutdown-2011-yells-at-congressman_n_846574.htmlLawrence O'Donnell got into an angry argument with a Republican congressman over... more
-
-
Planned Parenthood accounts for .0083% of the entire federal budget. Yet, its funding nearly drove the government into a full blown shutdown. MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell tells you about one woman who relies on Planned Parenthood for health care and a Republican senator who stretches the truth about it in the Rewrite.Planned Parenthood accounts for .0083% of the entire federal budget. Yet, its funding... more
-
-
Exclusive Inverview with Lawrence O`Donnell
Wednesday night on MSNBC's "The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell," Lawrence spoke with Ian Murphy, editor-in-chief of BuffaloBeast.com. Murphy is the prank caller who managed to get on the phone with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker by pretending to be conservative billionaire David Koch.
According to O'Donnell, in order to reach Governor Walker, Murphy "worked on a voice, worked up a story, and called the office."
When O'Donnell asked if Murphy was scared during the conversation that Walker would realize what was going on, Murphy responded, "No. Just getting on the line with him was a feat in itself...and I think he's just oblivious, generally, so it didn't surprise me."
O'Donnell asked Murphy why he thinks Walker is taking such a firm stance on the collective bargaining issue. "Profit for himself and...people he associates with," answered Murphy.
Governor Walker has publicly responded to the phone call since it occurred.
http://www.myvidster.com/video/1146559/Wisconsin_Governor_Scott_Walkers_Prank_Caller_Ian_Murphy_Appears_On_MSNBCs_The_Last_Word_With_Lawrence_ODonnell_VIDEO
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/24/governor-walker-prank-call-msnbc_n_827494.htmlExclusive Inverview with Lawrence O`Donnell
Wednesday night on MSNBC's... more
-
-
Lawrence O'Donnell took a page out of his former colleague Keith Olbermann's book when he delivered a scathing condemnation of Bill O'Reilly on his Monday show. Among other things, O'Donnell called his time slot rival a "joke" and a serial liar.
O'Donnell's takedown was prompted by a comment O'Reilly made in a recent broadcast, where he said there were "strains of anti-Americanism" on MSNBC. O'Donnell said this was an example of O'Reilly's ease with falsehoods.
"He has by now figured out exactly what his audience wants to hear, and that's what he delivers," he said. "And when that requires lying, O'Reilly can do it without blinking because he's discovered that there's a lot of money to be made in those lies."
O'Donnell said that he saw in O'Reilly "a very, very, very rich man who has grown phenomenally rich by playing a character on TV that the most gullible audience in the history of television falls for."
He also said that he saw:
"dozens of guys I grew up with who were just like him. Overbearing, argumentative, Irish guys who think they know everything and can back up nothing. Those guys have always been a joke to me, which is why O'Reilly almost never has the capacity to outrage me, because he is just a joke to me most of the time."
The audience, O'Donnell concluded, should not be fooled by O'Reilly's "faux-Irish tough guy style."Lawrence O'Donnell took a page out of his former colleague Keith Olbermann's... more
-
-
One of the best 'Rewrites' I've seen thus far.
-
-
bambuu
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
