Memo to ABC: When you invite incompetent, loudmouth, blowhard liars to the dance, you get incompetent, loudmouth blowhard skunk-farting lies stinking up the party. In short, what do you expect when you invite the skunk to your Tea Party? Hmm ... I'm beginning to see ABC's dilemma.
This letter canning Breitbart by ABC News digital division chief is a gem of contained contempt over the presumptuous arrogance of a liar, guttersnipe, and skunk who would deign to claim journalistic equivalence with Georgie Boy & Co.
We have spent the past several days trying to make clear to you your limited role [dumbass wingnut] as a participant [representing the lunatic fringe] in our digital town hall to be streamed on ABCNews.com and Facebook. The post on your blog last Friday created a widespread impression that you would be analyzing the election on ABC News. We made it as clear as possible as quickly as possible [don't you understand English, arrogant prick!] that you had been invited along with numerous others to participate in our digital town hall. Instead of clarifying your role, you posted a blog on Sunday evening in which you continued to claim a bigger role in our coverage. As we are still unable to agree on your role, we feel it best for you not to participate. [In short, get lost asshole. And good riddance!]
|ABC Scrapes the Bottom Searching For "Political |
Most impressive candidate interview: Michael Bennet of Colorado. A true renaissance candidate. If this impressive candidate loses to a Teabagging chauvinistic hack ... Can you say, MEDIEVAL?
Memo to Lawrence O'Donnell: Lost in that longwinded gas attack of his is the fact Blanche Lincoln was (a) polling exactly the same as her final election numbers v. Boozman, while Lt. Governor (hardly an unknown) Halter was super-competitive; (b) the public option was also a poll winner in Arkansas; (c) it was whole series of positions by Lincoln, including a very public and disgraceful objection to raising the liability limits for lawsuits against BP and the Gulf corporate polluters. It was not lost on progressives, Mr. O'Donnell, that Lincoln was the biggest recipient of corporate oil money among Democrats.
The answer to O'Donnell's rant masquerading as a question is, absolutely, progressives would have done it again. Double down. The real question is, would the Clintonite party elders be forward-looking and realistic enough to dump a Democrat who had done practically nothing to advance the Democratic agenda, and support Halter, a candidate whose race would likely be much more competitive and winnable.
By the way, Lawrence, all these pompous predictions based on your vast bureaucratic experience in the Senate — yawn. Your understanding of process and political currents comes off as clunky and kind of rusty. On the bright side, you've got an inside track on the Idiot Punditocracy.