MSNBC host admits to being 'a socialist'

[EmptyTimCup]

On Today's Program

MSNBC host admits to being 'a socialist'

Keith Olbermann got suspended without pay for donating to political candidates, but there has been no action taken so far against host Lawrence O'Donnell for admitting on Morning Joe that he is indeed a socialist. Glenn called this over a year ago - that the masks would start coming off the radical progressives who have been operating in the shadows for decades. Glenn plays the audio of an MSNBC host confirming what most already believed. ( Transcript, Insider Audio, FREE Insider Extreme Clip)

 

[wollybugger]

Socialism is to O'Donnell as ratings are to MSNBC ... all sounds logical to me

 

[vraiblonde]

I think honesty is a wonderful thing. Wish more of them would engage in it.

 

[Larry Gude]

I think honesty is a wonderful thing. Wish more of them would engage in it.

Here, here. This sort of thing is a wonderful time for someone, preferably some well known R, or me if no one else wants the job, to engage Lawrence (stupid name btw) and have a conversation with Lawrence about socialism and why it is good or bad and what Lawrence thinks of it as a governing philosophy. I'm not interested in some dolts who claim to be conservatives going "Ohhhh! O'Donnell is a SOCIALIST!!!" yet not have clue one what that really means or be able to have an intelligent conversation about it as governing policy, pro and con.

Beck, to his credit, can and does talk in some detail about the issues. We need more of it. De-mystifying things like 'socialism' would be a nice step towards being able to defeat it in the public square, through persuasion and debate and we, the people, would do well to understand the issues more thoroughly, the implications, and more public conversation, not less, about scary words would do well to get us on a more better path.

Or something like that.

 

[vraiblonde]

They used to be Socialists. Then when that title began having a negative connotation, they stole the Liberal title. Once they gave liberalism a bad name, they started calling themselves Progressives - I mean, who doesn't like progress, right?

So now that the masses are onto them and realize what Progressivism really means, they have to moveon (ha) to calling themselves something else. So you have to admire O'Donnell for just cutting through the bullchit and calling it what it is.

 

[Larry Gude]

They used to be Socialists. Then when that title began having a negative connotation, they stole the Liberal title. Once they gave liberalism a bad name, they started calling themselves Progressives - I mean, who doesn't like progress, right?

So now that the masses are onto them and realize what Progressivism really means, they have to moveon (ha) to calling themselves something else. So you have to admire O'Donnell for just cutting through the bullchit and calling it what it is.

It is fascinating. Conservatives fight all the time over the name, relgious folks, economic conservatives, traditionalists, TEA people, etc;

"We're the REAL conservatives!"

"No, we are!"

"No, no! WE are FAR more conservative than you lamer candy asses!"

And libs?



"What are we today?"

"Shhhhhh!!!!"

 

[NCalif]

MSNBC host admits to being 'a socialist'

Shocking!

Next step. Have him admit to being a communist.

 

[hvp05]

De-mystifying things like 'socialism' would be a nice step towards being able to defeat it in the public square, through persuasion and debate and we, the people, would do well to understand the issues more thoroughly, the implications, and more public conversation, not less, about scary words would do well to get us on a more better path.

No one else has mentioned what he said after this initial comment, so I will.

He was honest about his views, but the funny part to me was how he used it to deride the Liberal guy. He (O'Donnell) admitted his views will - in the foreseeable future, anyway - not be accepted into the American mainstream because the American core is too conservative. Unlike the Liberals, who believe Americans are all on board with changing America into one big commune; the presence of any opposition is mere chatter and an implicit demand to push HARDER towards the change - err, progress.

At least until we come upon a day like last Tuesday.

 

[itsbob]

It is fascinating. Conservatives fight all the time over the name, relgious folks, economic conservatives, traditionalists, TEA people, etc;

"We're the REAL conservatives!"

"No, we are!"

"No, no! WE are FAR more conservative than you lamer candy asses!"

And libs?



"What are we today?"

"Shhhhhh!!!!"

I'm more humble than thou art..

 

[SamSpade]

It is fascinating. Conservatives fight all the time over the name, relgious folks, economic conservatives, traditionalists, TEA people, etc;

Mainly because the word "conservative" has an equally used meaning in everyday speech, implying modest, frugal, cautious, traditional and so forth. We refer to people being conservative when we refer to their means of dress, their religion, their adherence to custom and the way they speak and spend.

Ironically, it doesn't really have a lot to do with political conservatism, but you can bet you'll hear the terms juxtaposed every single day.

In contrast, no one really does the same thing with liberal, at least not on the same level, which in the every day language means generous, unorthodox and tolerant. We refer to people giving liberally, having a liberal mind about matters or the liberal arts. If you're religious, you might even confuse liberal with "libertine" which means lacking in moral restraint.

All along the different factions want to align with different views on these words without any indication of what political conservatism or liberalism actually means.


I am actually amused by the observation Vrai made which we have all seen - the reluctance on the part of liberals to own up to the name, preferring some new euphemism instead. And when that euphemism becomes tainted, they will move on to another one.

Maybe conservatives should cultivate another name on the same order. Maybe not everyone wants to be considered culturally conservative (which isn't the same as political conservatism). Maybe they should just call themselves "patriots" so as to piss off liberals.

 

[bcp]

At one point in history, it would have been ok for the government to scoop communists up if they were trying to impose their view on the country.
However, with the PC crowd in power for the last 40 years, its not possible to speak out against these people without being branded as some right wing nut, racist etc...

once again, political correctness opens yet another hole in the security of this country.

My personal feelings? I say that once they admit to being communist, give them 30 days to leave the country or kill them.

 

[SamSpade]

At least until we come upon a day like last Tuesday.

They won't. The myopia of the Democratic Party is so astonishing, it would make outstanding comedy in a movie.

There's a story about the famous chess player Nimzovich that George Will related back in the 2004 election. When he lost first place to Samisch, he jumped on the table and proclaimed "How could I lose to this idiot?". In 2004, Kerry was simply incredulous at the possibility that the public would prefer Bush to him. If I could have spoken to his face, I might have said that about half the country would have preferred a dead cat to him but Bush was the candidate most likely to win.

Repeatedly this past week we have heard more polite versions of the same endless mantra - the American voter is too stupid, too disconnected, too uninformed, too hysterical to cast an intelligent vote. (Lest we vaunt the American voter too much, I might remind the Democrats that they frequently rely on EXPLOITING this situation for their benefit). Pelosi and Reid are unapologetic; they believe they did the right thing and they are proud of what they've done. They're actually celebrating their defeat, using language to marginalize one of the largest shifts in the Congress ever to happen (and an historic shift in state legislatures).

They have all sorts of reasons for it, but absolutely none of them are that the voters didn't want them in office. Funny, I thought the ballot box was intended to do exactly that - show whom the voters wanted in office. They dispute that it had anything to do with anything they have done in the last two years, overlooking the mobs of angry town hall attendants and the Scott Brown win in Massachusetts.

Because they simply can't see what the rest of us clearly see - the country does not want what they want. The nation elected a black man because they bought into his charisma in a time when they seriously needed some. The Democrats then, and still do, interpret that to mean an embrace of all that they propose, and it's just not so.

Personally I am glad they are this myopic. It just means a second wave will come in 2012, when more Democrats will retire and more will be vulnerable. If their honest game plan is "more of the same", I can't wait.

 

[EmptyTimCup]

My personal feelings? I say that once they admit to being communist, give them 30 days to leave the country or kill them.

Can I be your Spotter .......

 

[DipStick]

You guys are idiots. It's been a well known fact, for a long time, that LOD is a socialist. He even said he was back in 2005.

 

[DipStick]

On Today's Program

MSNBC host admits to being 'a socialist'

Keith Olbermann got suspended without pay for donating to political candidates, but there has been no action taken so far against host Lawrence O'Donnell for admitting on Morning Joe that he is indeed a socialist. Glenn called this over a year ago - that the masks would start coming off the radical progressives who have been operating in the shadows for decades. Glenn plays the audio of an MSNBC host confirming what most already believed. ( Transcript, Insider Audio, FREE Insider Extreme Clip)

Beck is wrong because LOD didn't out himself as a socialist. It's common knowledge among his viewers and supporters that he is a socialist.

And you'd be surprised at what he said after that comment. He said Conservatives outpopulate Liberals 2:1 and the fact that the Democratic Party is adopting his own views is the reason they lost the election.

 

[hvp05]

They won't. The myopia of the Democratic Party is so astonishing, it would make outstanding comedy in a movie.

I think I was speaking more towards the voters (including moderate Dems) over the die-hards.

Beck is wrong because LOD didn't out himself as a socialist. It's common knowledge among his viewers and supporters that he is a socialist.

Big difference. Kind of like how Olbie and Madcow are purported to be "journalists" despite their leanings being blatently obvious?

And you'd be surprised at what he said after that comment.

Now YOU get to be the idiot because I pointed that out some 20 hours ago...

No one else has mentioned what he said after this initial comment, so I will.

He was honest about his views, but the funny part to me was how he used it to deride the Liberal guy. He (O'Donnell) admitted his views will - in the foreseeable future, anyway - not be accepted into the American mainstream because the American core is too conservative.

 

[DipStick]

Big difference. Kind of like how Olbie and Madcow are purported to be "journalists" despite their leanings being blatently obvious?

Nobody calls Maddow or Olbermann journalists. And they'll point out very quickly that they are commentators.

 

[DipStick]

I will take this time to make a confession. I am a socialist.

(Not really, I HATE Welfare programs)