[lbo-talk] Liberal rage...

[Carl Remick]

>From: "sean.andrews" <cultstud76 at gmail.com>
>
>...that's the beauty of 21st century capitalism: there's a niche market for 
>everything, even liberal rage.  I say better this than 9/11 conspiracy 
>theories.  Though it seems pretty genuine, Olberman has been filling this 
>role for several months, particularly as an opponent to O'Reilly.  You can 
>find dozens of clips like this on the Crooks and Liars webpage.  
>Unfortunately, here he seems to get a bit too sanctimonious, something 
>which he usually avoids--I almost gagged when he ended with "Good night and 
>good luck."

I think highly of Keith Olbermann's characteristic eloquence, but I agree 
this latest commentary verged on bombastic, and the Murrow signoff (has 
Olbermann ever done that before?) was indeed pompous.


>Still, it is always nice to see some measure of criticism emanating from 
>the idiot box, even if it reifies a lot of other things (like Clinton being 
>a stand up guy) that most leftists wouldn't care for.

Yes, I can't quite share the excitement over Bill Clinton as a truth-seeking 
anti-FOX missile.  I thought Clinton looked ill and tired and sounded 
shrill, like some querulous old man, in his encounter with Chris Wallace.  
As usual, the only thing that gets Bill really steamed up is when he 
perceives an assault on his (wholly illusory) historic stature; in office or 
now, Clinton has never shown the slightest concern with the public interest 
in any way that matters.

That said, there seemed to be something more bugging Bill than just 
Wallace's (fairly mild) questioning.  Bill's latest gambit for sucking up to 
billionaires, the "Clinton Global Initiative," took place just before the 
Wallace interview; I wonder if the star of that plutocratic powwow, Richard 
Branson, failed to give Bill a pat on the head or something.

Carl