Joe Lockhart Wanted to Say Blow Job

In 2007, I was on a panel with Joe Lockhart and Todd Purdum to talk about political news. We talked a lot about how the press’ insistence on covering the Lewinsky scandal–when the bulk of the country was pretty happy with the President regardless of who had given him a blow job–led to the crisis of legitimacy that let blogs arise. (To say nothing of the press’ coverage heading into the Iraq War.)

Purdum, interestingly enough, maintained that "everyone" knew Clinton was a liar, which is why they covered the Lewinsky scandal so breathlessly. When I asked who "everyone" included, he realized he meant just he and his friends on the bus, that the apparent consensus among those on the bus was never really communicated or proven to the rest of us.

At one point I said, sort of in Lockhart’s direction, that they should have just said, "It was a consensual blow job, let’s move on" and that might have ended the issue. [see 49:00 to 51:45]

Marcy Wheeler: So, finally you get to the point where, yes, Clinton did not, was not completely forthcoming about a consensual blow job. The other thing that I think could have happened is that a lot of people said but, fundamentally what happened was a consensual blow job between consenting adults. I think it’s between Bill and Hillary and Monica Lewinsky. And again, that didn’t happen. So those are three things that might have short-circuited the story.

Joe Lockhart: I will say this. I spent two and a half years with great discipline not once using that phrase, and you won’t get it out of me today. I think it, I agree with you, but it’s just, it’s a mental block. You have no idea how many times I wanted to say exactly that from behind the podium. It’s just a goddamn [grimaces face]. I completely agree with that.

I wasn’t really imagining the White House Spokesman saying blow job when I said this–just someone. Some prominent surrogate to go out there to say blow job blow job blow job.

It never happened.

And the DC press corps, I think, is apparently still horrified by the possibility that you can just say it, like that, blow job, and in doing so, expose it for all its tawdry but ultimately minor import. Perhaps just saying it like that would break the spell they were under for two years, break the magic of the Presidential blow job. I don’t know.

At some point, though, we as a country have to be willing and able to weigh what the Village did in the late 90s against the massive illegality of the Bush White House and, finally, realize there are more important things than a blow job, and we need to take those more important things at least as seriously as that magic blow job that captivated the press for so long under Clinton. 

I don’t know whether my efforts today helped or hurt those efforts. Next time I’ll just repeat, endlessly, torture torture torture. It’ll probably cause the same kind of outrage.

image_print
  1. glitterscale says:

    I have to confess that I have often thought that while Clinton only received a blow job during his term, Bush managed to screw all of us during his too terms. I guess “screw” is not a polite word either?

    And the jerk you were “debating” with was so intent that Bushco never get investigated – was he on Bushco payroll during those 8 years?

  2. MadDog says:

    Next time (I really hope that isn’t a big “if”), you might try Pig Latin:

    Lowbay Objay

    An even add a Sarah Palin “wink”. *g*

    • nolo says:

      I liked that one.

      HI-larious — especially with the Palin-esque winkie-wink.

      Lessee — I hope no one else took this euphemism, before me, but howzabout:

      Ms. Lewinsky’s “enhanced, but entirely oral ’suasion” of her target?

      I mean — for chrissake — if “torture” can be called “enhanced interrogation“, then shouldn’t this be “enhanced oral stimualtion” or sum-such?

      BTW — I loved it!

      Your pitch was perfect — and boy did that tool have it cummin‘ (pun completely intended — in the most pedestrian of fashions).

      Okay — I’ll shut up now.

  3. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Excellent: the “spell we’re under”.

    It’s like the therapist’s white elephant in the living room, the emotional issue a patient will do anything not to talk about, which allows it to grow bigger and meaner and nastier. Get it in the open, subject it to daylight, and those fears begin to melt, the air inflating the monster begins to leak, and rationality begins to impose itself on fear.

    That’s the end purpose of all those checks and balances: balancing ego against ambition against the raw pursuit of power. As in theoretical capitalism, the theory is that such paired opposites will lead to better and possibly open government. Like capitalism, it’s a faulty theory that needs a constant push from the people to keep it partly working and to quell the excesses of faulty structure.

    Thanks, again, Dr. Wheeler.

  4. commieatheist says:

    Nice job, Marcy. Shuster also did a good job of destroying Lewis’ bullshit about the “unprecedented nature” of special prosecutors.

    I remember when the Starr report came out, and reading the excerpts about the number and duration and quality of the presidential dick-sucking sessions. The words “blow job” may never have been uttered, but all you had to do was read the damn report to get all of the prurient details, and the Villagers couldn’t get enough of it. Idiots like Chris Matthews were having orgasms on camera talking about it all. Good times.

  5. Leen says:

    I believe you helped calling it like it is. Our congress was more than willing to spend the money and time to investigate Clinton;s indiscretions and “blowjobs” Let’s hope that Olbermann, Maddow, Matthews and others appreciate your willingness and bravery to call it like it is.

    Our congress more willing to investigate “blowjobs” than the CIA and torture. Twisted

    We keep waiting waiting for our elected officials to hold this administration accountable for false pre-war intelligence, an unnecessary and immoral war, torture, outing Plame.

    is it really too much to expect that they focus on the “rule of law” as you so articulately pointed out…the “rule of law”

    some of us have been filling your site and other blogs with the “blowjob” “intelligence snowjob” question , comparison and our elected leaders twisted priorities
    http://www.bradblog.com/index.php?p=2123
    http://crooksandliars.com/susi…..ogressives

  6. TheOtherWA says:

    Why do news people hate the blunt truth? Thanks for telling it like it is, Marcy.

    Hearing the gasps while you continued the discussion was quite funny.

  7. joejoejoe says:

    I’m not sure why it’s OK to throw around double-entendres on TV but not single-entendres (if there is such a thing). David Shuster can make tea bagging jokes and Chris Matthews can talk about nut cutting as a metaphor but you can’t talk about a blow job when you are, in fact, talking about a blow job? ‘Animal House’ was ranked the 36th best film comedy of all-time by the oh-so-respectable AFI and one of it’s best scences was a sham of a trial for Delta House which was called out as a sham by Bluto’s famous “[cough] Blow Job!” remark.

    You did the same, but in real life. Thanks for being a great citizen.

  8. AZ Matt says:

    I like this comment from the DKos post that Teddy put up:

    That Marcy…

    she’s such a cunning lingust.

    The Amber Spyglass, by Philip Pullman, is an atheist’s manifesto.

    by coigue on Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 03:16:43 PM PDT

  9. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Here’s hoping that an unintended consequence of today’s direct language is a few upticks in the fundraising thermometer.

    I’m having fun anticipating how O’Really? and Limbaugh will diss DFH’s coming onto their airwaves and talking dirty. Pot calling the kettle black doesn’t quite capture it. Their collective incitement of hate and fear over the past ten years – as opposed to accurately describing the shiny object that sent them into a years-long tizzy against Bill Clinton – will make responding to their hypocrisy a guilt-free pleasure.

  10. Leen says:

    Know when you are on next they will give you more time and you will swing it around to the deaths of innocents through torture and how this needs to be thoroughly investigated based on the “rule of law” and how this was all done in our name and what this says about our country to others around the world.

    Hope Rachel, Keith or Matthews give you more time. Would really like to see you on Hardball

  11. earlofhuntingdon says:

    For real prurience, let’s get a grip on exactly who saw or reviewed those torture session real time and their tapes after the fact. The guys and gals who authorized each new technique as the suggestion for it bubbled up, to see what worked and to see how much pain a sadistic White House official could gin up with the excuse that s/he was only doing what was necessary to protect us. That’s like Caligula claiming he was only trying to relieve his sister of a bellyache.

  12. emptywheel says:

    AZ Matt

    Back in my ultimate days we invented a great new drink called Cunnilingus (in honor of a couple young’uns on the team who didn’t know it had a name). Jamesons, Baileys, a honey rim, and a maraschino cherry.

    It’s very yummy, but only one server in town is willing to let us order it, on account of the honey rim which is very messy. But it’s like eating a warm oatmeal cookie.

    It’s the only hard alcohol I still drink.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      The Jamesons and Baileys sounds interesting, if sweet. Hold the cherry.

      “I thought cunnilingus was an Irish airline until I tried Smirnoff”, was a little ditty I saw scribbled in the loo of the London School of Economics, a take-off of the brand’s advertising theme at the time. My other favorite, written on the back of the same door, was “I thought Hertz Van Rental was a Dutch footballer….”

      I prefer the the writer who coined or borrowed the description of James Bond as a “cunning linguist”, which ranks up there with, “We’re gonna need a bigger boat.”

    • LabDancer says:

      It’s exactly this sort of topic, one that folks can deeply immerse themselves in for anywhere from say 15 minutes to a couple of hours, that makes for its own thread.

      Congratulations on elevation legend status today in the msm cable TV noose universe. One network down, two to go; I hear you only have to watch out for the ones with the beards and the ’staches — the others all daydream about establishing firm grips on a David Brooks inner thigh.

  13. TimO says:

    Next time say it slow and whispery, I want to see Matt’s face turn red. Oh that’s right, he has no shame.

    • MarkH says:

      What could they possibly do to get even with her, start talking about serious stuff, real important stuff? That’s beyond their mete.

      They can’t do “breast”-for-tat. It just wouldn’t come across well on t.v.

      Maybe she could just be subtle and go on the show wearing a corset and talk about women’s lib issues in Afghanistan as compared to The Village. Heh.

      An exposure (how do you write expose-ay) of the truth is often confusing and shocking, even frightening. Sometimes it’s not recognized because we’re simply not used to noticing. But it’s oftentimes crucial to going forward. Like a martial artist you may take a pose and be at one with everything, but until you have some idea of what’s in store you hesitate to take a step, to commit to some uncertainty, to act.

      I think that’s why God invented ‘play’ and ’silliness’. Bloggers get it. The MSM doesn’t.

  14. skdadl says:

    Marcy, I can hardly believe that that featherbrain dared to apologize for you at the end of that clip. Where does the stupidity come from? They can give mass murder, kidnapping, and torture a pass, but say “blowjob” and everyone who does politics on corporate TV suddenly needs a fainting couch and smelling salts?

    I’m still catching up with your incredible production over this weekend, Marcy. We have a bit of a Froomkin situation here, so I’ve been distracted, organizing in the background and writing a bit m’self. But you go, girl. Just do not doubt yourself. You give me such strength to cope with different situations of my own, and I’m sure there are many others who would say the same.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      If featherbrain didn’t work for the MSM, I would have found it hard to imagine she understood what Marcy was talking about. But she has that Babel fish in her ear that explains all and tells her what to say.

  15. Tom in AZ says:

    I thought you were great, Marcy. Hit the fundraiser button as soon as I saw it. The rest of them were too busy cringing to hear rule of law, rule of law.

    • bmaz says:

      Welcome Tom in AZ. Have not seen you here before; can always use more fine folks from the desert. What part of the state you in?

  16. TimO says:

    skdadl, I think she was more worried about an FCC fine than anything. The Bushies had all broadcasters in America spooked with their bullshit fines over the last few years. I mean Jeebus, they covered the tits on Blind Justice for crap sake!

    • skdadl says:

      But it is simply not done, you know? It is totally ignoble to apologize for someone who herself does not feel like apologizing.

      I mean, that is not cricket. That woman should be so ashamed of herself. What she did is not just bad manners but seriously immoral and politically dangerous. She has no right to take over EW’s mind and mouth and speak for her, just none at all. That is a constitutional offence, in any democracy.

      Mind you, mass murder, kidnapping, and torture are more serious offences.

      • TimO says:

        Oh I agree fully! I’m just saying it’s such an absurd reflex because the theocrats had everyone, except Howard Stern, on the run for the last century broadcasting wise.

        The anchor should have kept her mouth shut and not drawn attention to it at all. It’s really absurd.

  17. Slothrop says:

    This will have an amazing effect on your career, Marcy, if what you’re doing around here is a career. You’re now known — not that you weren’t known before, of course — but this puts you on the actual radar.

    The Big Radar. I wish George Carlin were still around. This stuff put him in the big leagues, eventually.

    What a bunch of pussies on-the-air at major networks these days.

    • LabDancer says:

      Like: The Seven Pithy Word Images That Can Cut Through Cable Pundit Crap?

      One down, workin’ on the next one, if this thread means anything.

      • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

        Well, how about the phrase, “… it involved Americans as targets…” Think that’ll get anyone’s attention, or are they still going to obsess on sex?

        Look what turned up at TPM on my latest check-in:

        But Cannistraro cautioned that that DOD program has nothing to do with the secret, unidentified CIA program which Cheney is said to have hid from Congress, and which CIA director Leon Panetta ended last month.

        As for what the program did involve, Cannistraro suggested that it involved Americans as targets, and that it went beyond surveillance, but declined to elaborate. He added that, though Cheney may have directly ordered the CIA to keep Congress in the dark, the veep wasn’t acting alone. “The approval was from the president,” said Cannistraro.

        And yeah, it’s interesting that “…Cannistraro, a former CIA counterterrorism chief…” spoke with TMP Muckraker, evidently late today.

        Which does kind of underscore that Marcy called it correctly over the weekend: what we’ve heard so far ain’t the whole shmeal. Looks like that’s maybe only the tippy-top of an iceberg.

        And if you read that article, it sure as heck looks like Cheney set up a black op outfit that can roam around the globe doing his bidding. Imagine being a CIA station head, and suddenly learning that someone was killed, even an American. And you wouldn’t know that your VP AND Pres had ordered it?! So you’re probably hauling ass to try and deal with that problem, with no flipping clue your own ‘bosses’ had created the problem?

        G*d forbid Congress look into why CIA station chiefs and Ambassadors wouldn’t have a flipping clue what their own country was doing behind their backs, ordered directly out by the Pres and VP, with you completely in the dark left to clean up the mess.

        But maybe I’m just a dolt.
        I guess someone said “blowjob”, so the concept of a functioning international diplomacy effort, that wouldn’t be undercut by some private special ops army, is just pedantic and boring.

        Sorry to interrupt the ‘blowjob’ kerfuffle.
        Wouldn’t want to call things by their real names — shit, that might force us to, y’know, THINK CLEARLY.
        Scary thought.

        • bobash says:

          after reading everything on the subject of the mystery CIA program I could find in the blogosphere since Wed, I’ve concluded the WSJ piece is classic disinformation meant to detract the MSM and the public from the truth, despite EW’s trustworthy defense of Gorman. Maybe Gorman’s being played, maybe Gorman even realizes it, but there’s no fucking way Gorman’s lead …

          secret Central Intelligence Agency initiative terminated by Director Leon Panetta was an attempt to carry out a 2001 presidential authorization to capture or kill al Qaeda operatives, according to former intelligence officials familiar with the matter.

          is the essence of what caused Panetta to see himself on trial. MHO. Perhaps the momentum building for investigations and special prosecutors will finally get traction…

          • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

            Perhaps the momentum building for investigations and special prosecutors will finally get traction…

            Thanks for that comment; I spent plenty of my weekend scouting about, because this whole thing raises more questions than it answers.

            At this point, it’s hard to understand how American government can function without figuring this mess out.

            There are simply too many ‘right hands’ coming out of nowhere to commit mischief, and not enough ‘left hands’ to clean up the messes.

            I have no problem whatsoever with Obama giving the order for the Navy sharpshooters to kill pirates holding a hostage. But to me, that’s where everyone is on the same page, and people can actually do their jobs. This mess is making it look like Cheney set up a situation where a ship’s captain wouldn’t even know who was on his ship, and have no clue why his first mate suddenly went missing. This is just bizarre from an organizational perspective.

  18. phred says:

    Next time I’ll just repeat, endlessly, torture torture torture. It’ll probably cause the same kind of outrage.

    Don’t I wish, but alas the Village sees nothing wrong with torture.

    Forgive me for repeating myself, but I posted this in EPU land a couple threads down and it seemed worth reposting here because it gets to the same point you are making:

    Oh fer cryin’ out loud… We had to put up with endless excruciating reporting during the Clinton Impeachment Follies because the MSM could not get enough of spewing titilating innuendo, wink wink nudge nudge, all over cable (and the broadcast airwaves for that matter) as well as print editions and now these people have the gall to clutch their pearls because someone finally said blowjob?!?! I’m sure it is because of their shock at discovering that they could have had time to cover real news during that period had they simply learned to be more efficient with their verbiage. Just when I think these idiots can’t insult our intelligence any further, they find a way to do so. Kudos to you MSNBC for sheer unmitigated chutzpah.

    • Leen says:

      “Don’t I wish, but alas the Village sees nothing wrong with torture.”

      Bingo. More reaction to the truth about what the Republicans found serious enough to investigate, have a President testify under oath about, lie, and then congress found it important enough to impeach, and as Marcy pointed out and others have they subjected our nation to years of coverage along with the MSM. Pathetic
      Yet when it comes to false WMD intelligence, Niger documents, unnecessary war, torture, tens of thousands dead DEAD, injured, millions displaced, ho hum that’s just life. “Move on, turn the page, next chapter, don’t be about revenge, the blame game” What absolute bullshit and such twisted priorities.

      Blowjobs more important than intelligence snowjobs. Sick Sick sick

  19. Russron says:

    I worry that you’ll be blacklisted as the Village takes it’s sacred cows seriously. They can’t (correctly) define “enhanced interrogation” as torture or admit that a blow job was no big deal and when someone forces them out of their right wing comfort zone–watch out.

    Meanwhile, every vile lie out of Palin’s mouth is worthy of air time. No matter how full of crap it is or how totally nonsensical the sound bite should be.

  20. bobschacht says:

    The fundraiser is up to 1600 people now; it had been stuck for a long time in the 1500s. w00t!

    Maybe you’ll start a trend: calling a spade a spade, or a rose, a rose.
    Other hot button words to add to “blowjob”:
    * torture
    * investigate
    * lie

    Bob in HI

  21. BayStateLibrul says:

    Calling “a blow job a blow job” …
    Wonder if it’ll make the “urban dictionary”?
    Enjoyed the show. Thanks.

  22. AZ Matt says:

    Of Course Wonkette

    Liberal Blogger Uses Vulgar ‘Street Term’ On Television

    Liberal blog lady Marcy Wheeler said a word that we had not heard before, today, while discussing Dick Cheney’s various uncontroversial crimes against Earth: it sounded like, “blow-job.” This term upset the MSNBC anchors so deeply that we Googled it, for a definition, and oh my god you guys!

    • JThomason says:

      I say kudos to Wonkette for giving the most considered spelling of “blow-job” I have seen yet today, hyphenated and all. Seems like she has studied on it.

    • alabama says:

      Well, I just Googled “blowjob” and came up with 36 million hits; then I Googled “torture” and came up with 37 million hits…. What does this tell me? That blowjobs and torture separate but equal…

  23. JClausen says:

    Keep telling them like it is. What I really liked was the shocked silence in which you inserted the “Rule of Law” back in the Rethug’s face. LOL

    This is another first on the way to having your thoughts and analysis presented to the MSM. Bravo! And Good on Ya.

  24. emptywheel says:

    Russron

    It’s an important point, and probably one I should have thought about before I let loose my blow job comment. Thing is I just didn’t imagine the Village finds THE WORD so scary, since they obsessed over THE ACT for years.

    • phred says:

      In all seriousness EW, we as a society need to grow up. A good way to start is to talk about things directly, rather than using endless euphemisms that Disney-fy truly horrendous behavior. Torture is NOT enhanced interrogation, it is anything but that. By using euphemisms we permit ourselves to pretend the world is different than it is. That is exceedingly dangerous as current events make clear.

      It is time we shame the MSM into using the correct terms, in all their embarrassing, hideous, ugly glory, rather than to meekly submit to their obscene rules of polite discourse that makes torture a socially acceptable practice among such genteel people.

    • Mary says:

      It’s like that scarey “torture” word.

      @47 My vote in bmaz’s thread below was enhanced intercourse techniques. Maybe EW can promise MSNBC to refer to it that way in the future? We investigated Clinton’s EITs, now its time for Bush’s and Cheney’s EITs.

  25. behindthefall says:

    Too bad MSNBC can’t afford a bleep machine. ‘The Daily Show’ keeps its in good working order. When is Jon going to call up Marcy? I would LOVE to see THAT interview!

  26. CompLitter says:

    I love it. Who could give a better, more relevant, and more thought-out reason for using the word ”blow job”? You never cease to surprise me. Bravo, again. I like Mad Dog’s pig latin suggestion better though. It shows performatively the childishness of tv’s ”dirty word problem” (”I want to help you with your dirty word problem: there are none.” -Lenny Bruce) by using the phrase childishly.

    And I’ll be serving cunnilingus at my next cocktail party.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      WOW!!
      That has to be among the Mother Of All Interviews.

      Who at Faux News (other than possibly Shep Smith) could even pose this question to a guest:

      @ 01:45 Tweety: “What the hell?!! Cheney had NO Constitutional authority… Why did the damn CIA take orders from Cheney?!”

      For all the bad things written about Tweety, he clearly knows both the issues AND ALSO the United States Constitution.

      And @03:45, Suskind says, “…it was a structure set up to avoid responsibility by the President…

      And @ around 08:15 Tweety poses the key question: does Congress have the guts to investigate?

      Just a final comment: this is Richard Cheney, of FIVE deferments, who never served in the US military, basically using on small part of the military to subvert the diplomatic and business efforts of other Americans. And ‘outing’ CIA agents, in the very same period during which EW’s Ghorbanifar Timeline shows people out of Feith’s little Shop of Horrors planting WMD in Iraq, so they could blame Iran.

      But did someone say ‘blowjob’?

  27. orionATL says:

    ew –

    you did a great job of stating your position and, later, of showing up the sophistry of the republican p.r. guy.

    don’t lose any sleep over having said “blowjob”. it was the appropriate word under the circumstances and one that many other tens of millions of americans would have used.

    it was in fact the perfect word to focus attention on the triviality of the republican “investigation” of clinton

    vs

    an investigation into the multiple grave, consequential (and in some cases illegal) depredations on the u.s. constitution which cheney and bush took in their eight years in power.

  28. Mary says:

    I have to admit, the thing that shocked me was whasizface at the end saying that if Holder decided to investigate over Obama’s objections it would make him into Alberto Gonzales.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      You caught that too?
      Wow, is that ‘cognitive dysfunction’ or what?

      That attempt at a forced analogy damaged his cred with any rational viewer. I only wish Marcy had a moment to ask him, “Oh, so you think Holder asks post-op patients to sign legal documents when they’re still under anaesthesia? Really?! Do tell…”

    • Loo Hoo. says:

      And that he thought the idea that Panetta didn’t know about this problem until recently was GOOD for his team. His smiley face was sickening.

  29. freepatriot says:

    And, while we’re at it, can we do something about Buchanan soliciting the murder of Levi Johnston, and MSNBC’s comedic stylings on that front?

    Jon Stewart has to be drooling over that meatball

    apologized for saying blowjob, and then advocate murder without notice

    I’m watching hardball right now, and they played the tape AGAIN

    without comment

  30. CanuckStuckinMuck says:

    EW!
    I think I’m getting way too jaded for the FCC’s well-being. If I hadn’t been pointed to your interview because you said blowjob, I never would have given it a second thought, having heard it on TV. I’ll rephrase that. I guess I’m just too grown up for my own good, as the FCC would have it!
    Keep fighting the good fight, Marcy

    • cinnamonape says:

      FCC can’t touch Marcy or MSNBC…it’s CABLE…not broadcast. Furthermore it likely would fall under “the serious news coverage” waiver.

  31. bobschacht says:

    Nolo @ 47,
    Nah, it would have to be ”Alternative Penile Stimulation technique,” but I don’t know if you can say that on Family TeeVee, and whether or not it is enhanced, well, I imagine you’d have to contend with Hillary about that. *g*

    Bob in HI

  32. MadDog says:

    This one over at Wonkette made me laugh out loud:

    It’s “receptive oral copulation of a male sexual organ,” Marcy. Is that so hard to remember? Now you have to live with the fact that you made thousands of sweet old ladies across the country all say “Oh, my!” in unison.

    • skdadl says:

      Unfair to sweet li’l ole ladies! I’m a sweet li’l ole lady, and blowjobs don’t bother me.

      It looked to me as though the featherbrain who was bothered was quite a young lady, eckshully, but age and sex probably don’t really matter here at all, either way. What matters is that some people buy into the phony proprieties of the corporate media, who are always happy to sell out truth, beauty, and goodness if their smarmy lying manners will earn them a few extra bucks.

  33. freepatriot says:

    EVERYBODY wants to say BLOWJOB

    most of these repressed tradmed guys are only used to saying it in the whorehouse

    thas all

    which causes me to wonder, how exactly did vitter place his order …

    it ain’t easy bein me

  34. JThomason says:

    Godweiser’s comments at Huffington Post re EW’s comments:

    The woman’s points were spot on. The snake oil salesman arguing with her with a fatuous “this will harm the United States” argument that the Republicans tend to trot out when they are in danger of prosecution is as thinly amusing as it is sophistic and obvious.

    The real harm to the United States is justice is avoided, as it was with Watergate, for example, and there is no legal consequence for what they have done in the last administration. Then it will provide a precedent for the next bunch, years down the road, much the way Bush built up on the excesses of his predecessors and expanded what his boys could get away with.

    I do not think that we should use a ‘Watergate’ solution where we ‘keep walking’ because it would be ‘too painful’ for the country to face the problem head on and correct the error. If Americans are so weak and snivelling that, truly, they couldn’t handle an investigation and trials, then we probably deserve what’s coming next, which will probably be worse than Bush, as Bush’s acts will have been validated as quasi-legal and thus provide new frontiers for the future tyrants to push.

    I do not propose to leave that legacy to my children or theirs. We should be addressing this head on, and avoid the mistakes of the Nixon era.

    I don’t think we can paint the big picture frequently enough.

  35. manys says:

    I have no doubt that in 15 years we’ll see plenty of the currently-political saying, “yeah, we should have called it torture.”

  36. Valley Girl says:

    Marcy- you just engendered a “paradigm shift” imho.

    In 1962, Thomas Kuhn wrote The Structure of Scientific Revolution, and fathered, defined and popularized the concept of “paradigm shift” (p.10). Kuhn argues that scientific advancement is not evolutionary, but rather is a “series of peaceful interludes punctuated by intellectually violent revolutions”, and in those revolutions “one conceptual world view is replaced by another”.

    Think of a Paradigm Shift as a change from one way of thinking to another. It’s a revolution, a transformation, a sort of metamorphosis. It just does not happen, but rather it is driven by agents of change.

    http://www.taketheleap.com/define.html

  37. Funnydiva2002 says:

    OT: Jonathan Alter on KO. The man is an ass. Complete villager!
    Feh!
    FunnyWheelieDiva

  38. stryder says:

    I knew it was going to get messy when Lewis stated right off that the atty gen was part of the executive branch.

  39. JThomason says:

    Lewis’s concern around the expanding power of the executive struck me as a tad disingenuous, had that text book Rovian flare.

  40. dirac says:

    Emptywheel,

    Why can’t they say your name? You’ve been conspicuously referred to as “MSNBC Guest” by more than one source.

  41. rincewind says:

    Well, now that Marcy’s moved the verbal Overton window a few degrees closer to truth, who’s going to say “LIES” on national TV?

    p.s. Am I the only one who missed an important nugget in the NYT Cheney/CIA article — that Addington was the door-keeper for who was read in to the program and who was left out?

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      p.s. Am I the only one who missed an important nugget in the NYT Cheney/CIA article — that Addington was the door-keeper for who was read in to the program and who was left out?

      Not sure whether I quite registered that, but Addington was one of 3 people who helped Dick Cheney ‘vet’ (aka, “compromise the political futures of) GOP electeds in 2000 when he was ostensibly acting on behalf of GWBush to find a VP. Liz Cheney was another; Cheney’s friend as far back as high school was the third.

      In the book, ‘Angler’, Gellman reports about how Addington was really the doorkeeper for a lot of things, which perhaps freed up Scooter to spend more time buttering Judy-Judy’s toast while spilling national security secrets.

  42. gmoke says:

    I kept waiting for somebody, anybody during the Clinton debacle to bring up Lenny Bruce’s great routine called “Blah blah blah,” about his bust in San Francisco for saying “cocksucker” on stage. Throughout the routine, he doesn’t use that term but says “Blah blah blah.” In front of the judge, the arresting officer says, “Blah blah blah.” The judge says, “He said what?!” “Blah blah blah.” “Blah blah blah.” “Blah blah blah.”

    It’s a great routine and certainly apt. Once, during those days, I got a chance to ask Paul Krassner about the lack of reference to Lenny’s routine. He said that the comics didn’t know the history. I’m not so sure. I’m thinking they just didn’t have the guts.

    Good for you, Marcy, to speak plainly when you had the platform.

  43. allan says:

    The enormous distraction of the executive branch caused by Ken Starr’s witchhunt investigation and the impeachment in the mid- to late-nineties played right into al Quaeda’s hand.
    This was the elephant in the room that the 9/11 Commission didn’t want to acknowledge when
    it described Clinton’s attempts to go after bin Laden.

  44. MadDog says:

    OT – Siobhan Gorman of the WSJ has a new article up on the canceled CIA Targeted Assassination program:

    CIA Plan Envisioned Hit Teams Killing al Qaeda Leaders

    A secret Central Intelligence Agency initiative axed by Director Leon Panetta examined how to assassinate members of al Qaeda with hit teams on the ground, according to current and former national-security officials familiar with the matter.

    The goal was to assemble teams of CIA and special-operations forces “and put bullets in [the al Qaeda leaders’] heads,” one former intelligence official said…

    …Had it become fully developed, the CIA’s aborted plan would have been a covert-action program. At the outset, the potential operation wouldn’t have been limited to particular countries. The use of hit teams was in accordance with the authority granted by the 2001 order, said a former national-security official familiar with it…

        • bmaz says:

          Well that is a nice tight consistent story hitting all sources, kind of in a coordinated and convenient fashion, with a bow attached. That sounds reasonable after all; let’s move on now

          • Rayne says:

            Yes, I was thinking the very same thing.

            Looks just like a press release made the rounds about a new product.

            Here’s a typical example of a corporation’s press release becoming “news”; note the dispersion from an overseas PR outlet first, then a North American PR outlet, and then it gets picked up by other organizations which are supposed to be news outlets, not PR firms.

            If I use the same analysis — the kind of analysis I do as a consultant in competitive intelligence — the originating source of this new push looks like the AP’s Pamela Hess. The story gets a new tweak later in the day and a little more pick up and push, since it doesn’t appear to get the same kind of traffic the previous example I used received during the day.

            Convenient.

        • nolo says:

          IMHO, the NYT’s Scott Shane has added some new meat, here.

          It comes at the end, but it lists the CIA staffers that informed Hayden:

          . . .In the spring of 2008, C.I.A director Michael V. Hayden and top aides were told about one aspect of these plans that involved gathering sensitive information in a foreign country, according to a former senior intelligence official.

          Mr. Hayden ordered that the operation be scaled back and that Congress be notified if the plans became more fully developed, the official said.

          Two of Mr. Hayden’s aides who were briefed on the program were Steven R. Kappes and Michael J. Sulick, who remained at the agency to work for Mr. Panetta. . .

          Note that Hayden (supposedly) only learned of the scope and continuing nature of the kill squad idea, in Spring 2008.

          Interesting. Note that the agency was into means and methods for securing “sensitive information” in a foreign country.

          My take? If you read only one panel of tonight’s triptych, read the NYT’s.

          Namaste

          • freepatriot says:

            I guess being on the West Coast with its time delay sucks…or is that blows?

            it would, but …

            I generally figure shit out about 48 hours before the rest of the planet catches up

            so that lag time gives y’all a chance to catch up

            Marcy is about the only person I’ve seen who “gets it” as quickly as I do. That’s why I been a devoted follower since about a day after novakula’s article appeared

            jes so ya know …


            PS: and the weather doesn’t suck or blow on my happy half acre of the left coast, it’s all good, all the time. that kinda makes the lag time more digestable too

    • behindthefall says:

      Not that I’m convinced this is the program that caused Panetta such concern, but the CIA and the Army have had a hard time telling who’s an AQ leader and who’s not, even after imprisonment, torture, and interrogation. Who’d trust them to make that call out in the field? And under which circumstance would they be more likely to get it right: face-to-face or by video from 20,000 feet? (No, one-on-one confrontations are probably not what scared Panetta.)

      • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

        Well maybe I’m just nuts, but if you were supposed to be doing counterintelligence in the military, how would you know who to kill? Ditto CIA?

        Sure looks like a lot of opportunities to lose good ‘assets’ and good info because your right hand is killing the guy your left hand was counting on for info and translation.

        But if no one got a blowjob, I suppose none of it matters.

        • esseff44 says:

          Well maybe I’m just nuts, but if you were supposed to be doing counterintelligence in the military, how would you know who to kill? Ditto CIA?

          That bothers me too. Looking at the how often they make mistakes in just the cases we know about is sobering. Look at all the so-called ‘high value’ detainees who turn out to be clerks or message carriers or travel agents who had little or no information about AQ or their missions other that some vague jihadist appeal. Tracking and keeping tabs on is one thing. Assassination is another. Then, there are those like Kit Bond who think there’s nothing wrong with it and is upset with Panetta for cancelling the program. That’s the problem when a large part of the world’s population are all regarded as terrorists or potential terrorists. Apply the label and all their human rights disappear. They apply it with the attitude of ‘kill them all and let God sort them out.’

      • JThomason says:

        The uncertainty of culpability of the victims is the tell that these programs were, like the war on terror, fabrications for the sake of consolidating tyrannical power through the arbitrary exercise of a will to kill. If there were a real threat, ff there were actual definition and concern for facts at that point a threshold of reasonableness may have been met. But Bush and Cheney have demonstrated no concern for information beyond their own projections of power and their justifications are mired in propaganda and attempts to manipulate perception.

        It is a dark unenlightened method which has always informed tyrannical leaders because the purposes are not to confront reality but instead to collect power. When will the understanding that Bush and Cheney misused the occurrence of 9/11 and its consequent emotions as an excuse to escape the rigors of reasonable inquiry. It simply is no excuse especially when the exploitation of the situation increasingly appears calculated to loose the bonds of law for the mere pleasure of being unbound. Talk about your literary antecedents. If it weren’t so damn banal it would be totally Col Kurtz.

    • Wahrheit says:

      Confuse, obfuscate, conflate, deny, and lie. Only ‘Merica-haters would ask questions about a program that was out to get ‘em some Obama, er, I mean Osama.

  45. steve35660 says:

    Here’s my response:

    “http://www.catfishwrapper.wordpress.com/”

    It’s really not bad. You should give it a read.

  46. randiego says:

    wait a sec… lemme get this straight

    1) marcy was on TV
    2) marcy said “blowjob” while making a huge point about the state of our media and politics
    3) shuster apologized for use of “blowjob”, but never addressed the larger point?

    Is that about it? Oh fer fuck’s sake… that’s a pretty nice summary of the state of our media.

  47. ratfood says:

    Just a reminder, Clinton wasn’t impeached for receiving a blowjob, he was impeached for committing perjury. Granted he was ambushed by Starr and the question never should have been asked but when it was, Clinton the lawyer, knowing that he was under oath should have answered truthfully. Doing so might have might have spared us all a lot of needless angst…

    Or not, Starr and his congressional backers were feeling pressure to justify the tens of millions of tax dollars they’d already squandered on the fruitless Whitewater investigation. If they hadn’t managed to pin him with Lewinsky they probably would have continued trying until something stuck. We will never know.

    • PJEvans says:

      It wasn’t perjury, it was merely lying. Perjury, I understand, requires, lying about something material to the case.
      The blow job wasn’t material to the Whitewater investigation, which is what Starr was supposed to be doing (not investigating what the President might have been doing with a consenting adult who was not his spouse).

        • PJEvans says:

          Yeah, he’s got some hangups when it comes to sex. I think a lot of Republican men do; they’re obsessed by sex, and possibly by the idea that people actually might enjoy it. (And the idea of not doing it in missionary position probably would create an uproar if it were brought up in their presence ….)

      • demi says:

        PJ, I was crazy busy this w/e. I will write you.
        And. I just don’t think it was that big a deal to hear Marcy say Blow Job on MSNBC. Watched the clip. Just not that big a wow, especially in that context.
        You Guys! What?
        It wasn’t that slow a news day, imho.

      • ratfood says:

        It wasn’t relevant to the case but lying while under oath (about anything) is perjury. From the wiki entry on the Lewinsky scandal. (emphasis mine)

        Direct link to the section on the perjury charge.

        The news of this extra-marital affair and the resulting investigation eventually led to the impeachment of President Clinton in 1998 by the U.S. House of Representatives and his subsequent acquittal on all impeachment charges (of perjury and obstruction of justice) in a 21-day Senate trial.

        Also, it didn’t pertain to the Whitewater case, it was the Paula Jones case.

    • bmaz says:

      Jonathan Karl is a moron to ask the title question unless the employment discipline at CIA was the result of some kind of a no prosecution agreement with the DOJ. I didn’t see any evidence of that.

      • esseff44 says:

        If they have been held accountable and punished, then it seems any investigation would take that into account. It’s not a question of double jeopardy. Prosecutors still have discretion and so do courts. They are not going to violate states secrets in the process, either.

        Question: If the 1947 law requiring Congress be kept informed of CIA plans and activities is not adhered to, what are the consequences? Are there any teeth in the law? Who has the responsibility for enforcement? Assuming Cheney did give orders not to inform Congress, is there anyway to hold him accountable since he is no longer in office? Rule of Law is a nice mantra, but laws have to be enforceable or they will be ignored. Dick Cheney was a specialist in finding ways to sidestep any law he did not like and dare anyone to find a way to hold him accountable.

        • bmaz says:

          To the best of my knowledge, there is no penalty provision for violation of that portion of the 1947 Nat Sec Act. That would make it illegal, but not necessarily a specified crime. There are other crimes possible I suppose such as misleading Congress etc., but not out of the act itself. Caveat: that is just my recollection I didn’t go look it up again.

  48. SouthernDragon says:

    Way to go, Marcy. Only the reichwingnuts‘ heads blew up when you said blow job. No great loss. Clinton’s blow job. Simple fact.

  49. laserda says:

    Marcy, I’ve had a bloggy crush on you for years… but now it’s true love.

    If I ever get the chance to meet you, I am so buying your beer.

  50. puravida says:

    Why is the MSM all atwitter? I mean, they blew Bush nonstop for eight years. And now “blowjob” is all wardrobe malfuctioney?

    Fuck that. Marcy, you deserve your own show. I, for one, would like to see actual journalists on teevee. Might even start watching again.

  51. Wahrheit says:

    We get shock at the use of the phrase “blow job” from one of the networks that will peddle their erectile dyfunction snake oils all day long while my 11 year old daughter is watching? Really?

    • bobschacht says:

      Yeah, this is SO weird. Erectile dysfunction, which no one would have dared to utter on national TV a few years ago, is now so commonplace that millions of Dads all over the country now have to prepare to respond to their prepubescent daughters who innocently ask, “Daddy, what is erectile dysfunction?” But yet national TV correspondents cringe at the words “blow job.” Go figure.

      Bob in HI

  52. oddball says:

    Marcy,
    Are you going to the worlds largest garage sale tomorrow?

    If so, I will buy you a drink.

    I smiled for hours at work after your moment of levity.

  53. Slothrop says:

    George Carlin on the subject of words and television:


    With my deepest respect & appreciation,
    Slothie

  54. plunger says:

    The shock value alone brought home the fact that you can say the word torture repeatedly until you’re desensitized to its actual meaning – but just pop out with one “blow job” comment, and the system of phony on-air decorum simply implodes.

    Hey Beavis, she said blow job!”

  55. smapdi says:

    GOOD JOB MARCY
    (I mean to shout)
    I could say a bunch of stuff that wouldnt be appropriate on a family blog.
    I am amazed that you didnt stick something in the gob of that skillet faced moron on the splitscreen.
    I love the little circular argument he spent all day devising – We have to not investigate the secretive agency because the secretive agency is apparently keeping secrets from its new director.
    Fuck that skillet faced moron. Here’s $25 Marcy. Buy a bottle of something.

  56. bgrothus says:

    Yes, the crime of the century was Lying about the lil’ ol’ cunnilingus. Can Marcy say cunnilingus on tee vee? Prolly notsomuch.

    You remember that late 90s movie with 007? I don’t recall the name, but I went to see it with my nephew who was about 12 or 13, I think. In one of the very first bits of dialog, the female says to him after he gets off the phone (IIRC), “You’re such a cunning linguist.” I was the only person in the theater who laughed out loud.

    I call bullshit on these sorry fools. How long is the FCC list now? Do we have the list? Shouldn’t they give it to all their “guests” if there are now so many words off limits? Cocksucker. . .I mean really.

    Mary, I’m with you. The comment at the end about Holder/Gonzo was way off the beam.

    • Funnydiva2002 says:

      Uh. Fellatio, dood. As in, Clinton got fellated.
      Marcy was right, blowjob is the better word. Less confusing, less elitist.
      FunnyWheelieDiva

    • ratfood says:

      Sorry to piddle on your cultural frame of reference but the cunning linguist line was around long before any ’90s movie.

      Lenny Bruce was jailed and effectively blacklisted for saying “cocksucker” on stage in the ’60s. He later pointed out the ironic nature of the trial in a bit, using the euphemism “blah blah blah.” As memory serves it went something like this.

      “Judge: He said BLAH BLAH BLAH?
      Prosecutor: That’s right, BLAH BLAH BLAH! BLAH BLAH BLAH… BLAH BLAH BLAH!
      Bruce: “And that was when it hit me… they really got off on saying BLAH BLAH BLAH!”

      • demi says:

        All the people on the Debate Squad in college (yes, before any 90’s movie) had that bumper sticker. I dated a few. They received better than they gave. Ego or something. Ha!

    • bobschacht says:

      Um, not to be tedious, but I thought that what Monica did was fellatio, not cunnilingus.

      Now, to do a cocktail drink in honor of fellatio, um…
      O forget it. I was about to suggest something really graphic…

      Bob in HI

  57. worldwidehappiness says:

    JOURNALIST JOB INTERVIEW

    Editor: What would you do about a presidential blow job?

    Prospective Journalist: Exaggerate it, harp on about it for as long as possible, condemn it.

    Editor: What would you do about presidential orders for war, torture, imprisonment without trial, and illegally spying on Americans.

    Prospective Journalist: Make excuses, hide it, diminish its importance, praise it, glorify it, divert attention away from it.

    Editor: Congratulations! You’ve got the job!

  58. bgrothus says:

    Also, remember that old SNL skit with the Civil War family? Cunnel Anal and Cunnel Lingus?

  59. siri says:

    You rocked, Marcy. You made us all so proud! I was PROUD to know ye, read you regularly (even when I don’t understand the fine legal points being made) and to have even on occasion invoked direct responses from you.
    You did what you do what you’ve always done; laid it all out on the table in REALITY, where we here at The Lake like to live and the other side likes to avoid.
    You’re the best and I hope and pray that the rest of America gets more exposure to you on msm as time goes on!
    Thank you for ALL you do.
    Please tell us you DID NOT apologize. If you did, i honor your decision to do so, but JEBUS! i HOPE you didn’t.

    • ratfood says:

      We need people like Marcy on TV. For that reason I think it will be quite regrettable if they are less likely to interview her in the future and I consider that a real possibility. Candor is all well and good but in this case it overshadowed the important part of her message.

      • demi says:

        You make a good point. And, maybe I was wrong. Maybe it was a big deal. We’ll see. Live and learn, I guess.

      • siri says:

        That is because so many issues have been camoflaged that actual candor is a “rare bird” in our political discourse today.
        I believe we need more candor, and have since the “blow job trials” happened.
        It’s high time to get the honest truth in current phraseology out there now.
        I, personally, am sick to death of the common practice of “walking on eggs” around the POINT.
        sorry for the references, but seriously!
        It’s far and way overdue to be calling a loon a loon, openly so that we can get to the major points that need to be made.
        Marcy just dropped the egg today, and I am PROUDA her for doing so.

  60. emptywheel says:

    MadDog

    I’m not positive, but I think you missed the best article I’ve read so far:

    From the Guardian

    While I haven’t read all the links you’ve put up, this one is one of the few that includes a claim that the activity continued, but under JSOC, not CIA, and they did carry out an embarrassing assassination in Kenya.

    Also, it suggests there may be a domestic aspect.

    • MadDog says:

      Actually, I did throw up a comment to the Guardian article, but it was back a couple of posts.

      You were busy at the time, so I don’t blame you for missing it back then. LOL!

      And I do agree with you that it was the best of the bunch. Isn’t it interesting that a non-US media outlet has the best info?

      I guess the overseas US Intel folks feel more comfortable spilling the beans as they’re out of reach of the DC crew.

      • emptywheel says:

        They may have gone furthest out on a limb–being from a culture where “blowjob” is considered timid. Or maybe the whole “it’s just a assassination squad” in spite of the fact that it’s clear we’ve GOT assassination squads stunk more here.

          • ratfood says:

            Good point, the word “Dick” has been spoken on TV countless times without repercussions and Mr. Cheney is the personification of obscenity, IMO.

            • siri says:

              yeppers rf.
              i always love reading your comments.
              and NOT cause you agree w/ me either.
              cause you are relevant and articulate.
              imho

          • newtonusr says:

            I immediately thought “over getting his joint copped” when I saw it.
            What the heck would Tamryn have made of that?

          • Twain says:

            THe Rs were just jealous of Clinton – he didn’t have to go to a mens’ room for his blowjob.

        • MadDog says:

          Our Puritan heritage makes us so much more repressed than our English cousins.

          I guess that’s one of the reasons the Brits were happy to see US go.

          Party poopers who can’t handle a good blowjob and wouldn’t know what to do with it if it hit them in the face. *g*

  61. esseff44 says:

    What do we know about this ‘embarrassing assassination in Kenya?’ Is this a new revelation or an old story? Who was assassinated that could have been considered AQ?

  62. AZ Matt says:

    Just checking over DKos and Teddy’s little Blowjob post has garned some 436 comments so far.

  63. Twain says:

    Thanks, Marcy for making my day – or perhaps my year. This was the Lake at it’s best and you are now famous coast to coast. May you have many more chances for complete candor – we love it.

  64. ondelette says:

    Dropping by to congratulate you. The longer the media idiots keep talking about what you said, the more and more apparent it is to all watching that they don’t call it like anyone sees it.
    Way.to.go!

  65. NMvoiceofreason says:

    JSOC was the operational arm of the death squads. CIA did the targeting. Integration was done at OVP.

    Too bad that five years chasing a blowjob white lie is more important than government sanctioned death squads operating throughout the world contrary to US and International law. And thank God the statute of limitations on capital crimes runs out at the end of your term – NOT!!!!!!

  66. bobschacht says:

    I’ve been having browser problems today, so I’ve not read all of the comments.
    But for those interested in accountability, I recommend Anderson Cooper’s interview with Obama shown today on Anderson Cooper 360. I’ve been looking for the video I saw on the show on CNN, which was an outdoor shot (not the 2 minute interview about the stimulus package.) In it, IIRC, Obama talks about the cruelty that humans due to each other, and I wanted to shout at the TV, What about the torture, and it is still going on!!! If anyone can help me find the video or the transcript, I’d appreciate it, because it sounded like he was supporting taking action against such cruelty. But of course, he mentioned no particulars about American responsibility for such cruelty.

    Bob in HI

  67. JThomason says:

    Some would say of course that oral sex is a sterile hedonistic practice, but Robert Anton Wilson has suggested that Finnegan’s Wake was inspired but just such a thing. Anyway I am not sure what my point is.

  68. Batocchio says:

    I should know better, but I was a bit surprised they were scandalized. Don’t late-night comics say “blow job”? Has the press never said it? I don’t know if Shuster talked to you afterwards, but I can understand that he’d be concerned about complaints from puritans – I just hope he’d also say you were right on, off-camera if nothing else.

    Also – the argument that Panetta not being told about the program is somehow a reason not to investigate, or reflects badly on Panetta, is just idiotic.

    Anyway, please keep plugging away, Marcy.

    • fatster says:

      The press never said it? Shucks, certain members (pun intended) of the so-called “main-stream” press give it all the time.

  69. klynn says:

    Oh my EW, that was quite the interview. Sushter had a look on his face that said, “Crap, I lost the bet with my producer that she would not drop an ‘f’ bomb or the like!”

    You were so serious when you said it that it came off in a non-offensive manner.

    EW, you are a national treasure.

  70. Petrocelli says:

    Cross posted in the comments of Teddy’s DKos Diary:

    So the talking heads apologized on Marcy’s behalf but said nothing about the blatant lies by that Dickhead Matt Lewis of ClownHall ?

    This is why the MSM is struggling to stay afloat … their mock outrage is a cover for their absence of real journalism and the public is looking to the Blogosphere for real reporting.

    Thanks Marcy, I hope Rachel has you on her show soon !

  71. JThomason says:

    You know all this Obama hand-wringing is exhausting. What’s so hard about doing the right thing.

  72. jhaygood says:

    Clearly Marcy next time you should use the the appropriate euphemism – Monica gave Bill an “enhanced interrogation”.

  73. commieatheist says:

    Watching the clip again, I just noticed that Shuster said you would have the last word and that Republican dweeb cut you off anyway. Asshole.

  74. zgveritas says:

    Marcy,

    I think you blew your shot at the Pulitzer today. No pun intended.

    Hope not. It sure would have been a nice feather in your hat considering all the work you have done.

    • Petrocelli says:

      If one word can take away the Pulitzer from the smartest Blogger on the Planet, it’s not worth the Tin it was made from !

  75. Desidero says:

    Uh, can I just say that I enjoy blowjobs and didn’t realize they were de facto “tawdry” or somehow disgusting or much distinguishable from normal sexual behavior. Presumably the big issue about Bill’s blowjob was not that he got a blowjob, but that it wasn’t from his wife, but frankly I think that’s a matter for them to worry about, not me – people in their marriages have different needs and they have to figure out the specifics of what lets their marriage go on.

    Part of the humor of Animal House was its setting in the relatively sexually repressed early 60’s. What’s sad is to realize that we’re not much less sexually repressed in 2009. I remember an interview with George Harrison talking about the word “fuck” and noting it’s just a word and then repeating it for about 2 columns worth to support the idea that the shock and awe is soon gone. But 40 years later someone’s apologizing for the use of the common expression “blowjob”, like if we had to apologize for saying “underwear”. Every day is Beavis & Butthead day in America.

    • Desidero says:

      And as DailyHowler noted, 40 minutes of Rachel Maddow going on and on about Ensign’s affair and only giving Richard Clarke 5 minutes shows our skewed priorities. Okay, Sanford is a weird idiot and Spitzer’s case affected his legal actions as DA & Governor, but all these others – Larry Craig, Ensign, Bristol Palin, John Edwards, whomever, prove you’re a liberal and leave them alone, whatever the good salacious reason why it’s okay to pile on.

  76. klynn says:

    Marcy,

    Rachel worked in a comment in her Palin piece that was just for you, and she had a big smile on her face when she said it.

    “Who knows what Sara Palin will do now or what untold millions she’ll make on her book deal or…professional conservative show-job.”

  77. oldoilfieldhand says:

    Marcy, you are my hero! Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, where are you? Don’t pass on this great opportunity to raise the bar on what the media has been refusing to discuss! I heard about the comment rearding something the MSM would rather went unsaid for another 13 years way over here in Asia, and all I can say is THANK YOU MARCY!
    Keep “calling em’ like you see ‘em”!

  78. Leen says:

    Keep hearing that the “assassination” hit squad was not “up and running” Jane Mayer said this again on Countdown last night. If the CIA hid the program from Congress and Panetta.

    How in the hell have they all ready come to the conclusion that this “program” was not “up and running” if so much about the plans for this program were NOT shared with congress and Panetta?

    Bush quit Al Queda hunt?
    Liz “baby” Cheney
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#31897681

  79. DrZen says:

    I’m a bit late to the party, but you’re killing it, Marcy. Damn, I hope I never do anything to get you on my case. You are relentless, a straight arrow for America.

  80. marg says:

    If enough people say “blowjob” often enough on TV and in print, it will go the way of “sucks,” which is getting more respectable all the time despite its origin in, well, blowjobs.

  81. Mary says:

    From that Guardian article @150 – I especially liked the references to the difficulties faced in getting top al-Qaeda operatives if they are in “friendly” countries that just won’t “cooperate.”

    Jeez freakin louise. So it’s a program to creep into Canada and assassinate Arars or creep into Germany and kill the Kurnaz-s and el-Masris? And while they leave the “embarassing” killing in Kenya (dead men don’t blush) hanging, IIRC wasn’t there another “embarassing” Latin American killing that Risen referenced in State of Denial?

    Who the hell picks “embarassing” as the right adjective to apply to extra-judicial killing?

  82. Mary says:

    Couple other quick points –

    All the anonymous leaks of the placatory info about “hey, it was JUST a program to kill al-Qaeda leaders” (you know, like all those Chinese Uighurs and the guy who was tortured by al-Qaeda and other “worst of the worst” guys at GITMO) walk that Nat Sec Act line of leaks to domestic press to influence domestic political opinion

    US person surveillance – was that done by CIA or was it also something that the CIA was targeting and military executing – was the military surveillance of Quakers part of a CIA program and that was just the top layer?

    US person – just surveillance, or subterfuge to get US persons out of country and disappear them or disappear them doemestically, with or without miltiary involvement.

    Military assassinations – again, does no one even blink at the effect of this kind of crap on our ability to credibly negotiate SOFA agreements? The takeaway is – “Hey, you friendlies – we send out military assassination squads into your population based on the current irritablility status of Dick Cheney’s bowel syndrome. We aren’t particularly careful, don’t mind killing bystander witnesses and get our targets wrong all the time. How about an agreement that you won’t prosecute us for anything our military does, cuz we can be relied upon to prosecute ourselves for bad stuff, what with being the good guys and all. As a matter of fact, look at our multiple prosecutions for published torture murder cases – why, we even gave one guy a 60 day home and church detention! And some were REPRIMANDED! More might have been reprimanded, but instead we passed a general amnesty for good-guy war crimes and we classsify any that might not be covered by the amnesty and our President encourages our Patriot war criminals to rest assured, they won’t be investigated. Now, about that SOFA …

  83. Mary says:

    EPU’d and nothing to tie any of this with the Kenya observation in the Guardian piece, but in Kenya you have had lots of political assassinations (in a country where the US does “take sides”) and you have also had Somalian Members of Parliament being assassinated at huge rates, with many seeking refuge (and sometimes finding the opposite) in Kenya.

    And then there were the killings of the Kenyan human rights activists who were also working with the UN Special Rapporteur on Human rights (Alston) and with Kenyan authorities investigating “extra-judicial” killings.

    Oscar Kamau Kingara – an outspoken critic of the government’s alleged practice of extra-judicial killings – was murdered along with a colleague.


    A UN report last week called for Kenya’s top policeman and the attorney general to resign for failing to address police impunity

    Two cars blocked Mr Kingara’s car and then “two men emerged from the two cars and sprayed the vehicle with bullets”, eyewitness Jackson Oyelo told AFP news agency.

    It’s not likely, but the way Dick Cheney ran things I guess it would be kind of awkward if you were told you were going to be assassinating, oh, say, a “supporter” of the Mungiki terrorists and it turns out that you read the next day he’s a human rights activist who had just met with the UN Special Rapporteur who investigates things like — your assassination of a human rights activist.

  84. Mary says:

    More baseless musings –

    What if as the CIA you were really involved in propping up Kibaki in Kenya and keeping Odinga out (lets say for some good reasons, although devil and deep blue sea come to mind). Let’s say you were so involved in the Kenya politics and Somali politics and the terrorist group overlays that you were planning some assassinations in Kenya, either assisting US military or assisting/acting through other means.

    And lets say you had all kinds of warrantless powers to use against American citizens at whim, with no oversight, and there was this American citizen who might have some ties to Odinga. Maybe a purported cousin or something. If the CIA under Cheney’s auspices was involved with the US military and the NSA in surveillance of the Obama family and Obama ended up being CIC and President — who is going to want to run to Panetta’s office to fess up on that one?

  85. kieranmullen says:

    Al Gore Lies Abouot Iraq’s WMD

    Video of former Vice President Al Gore misleading the public about Iraqs Weapons Of Mass Destruction capabilities.

    Fear mongering was used throughout the eight year reign of the Clinton Administration so the Democrats set the stage for both 911 and the Iraq war long before George W. Bush even took office

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a6d_1247512392

    • Rayne says:

      kieran, give it a rest. You’ve spammed other threads across the FDL site with this crap. Do you honestly believe for a moment that we’d have gone to war in Iraq if Gore had been president?

      And every time the Clinton administration pointed to al Qaeda as a threat, the Republican majority whined Clinton was “wagging the dog” — to the point where Clinton could not respond to the bombing of the Cole in a timely fashion.

      Clinton’s SecState Madeline Albright warned the Bush administration that terrorism was going to be its biggest threat, and they blew her off. Richard Clarke, who’d also worked for Clinton, also explained the threat to senior members of the Bush administration and they blew him off, too.

      Just give us all a break from your bullshit charges of fearmongering.

    • freepatriot says:

      Fear mongering was used throughout the eight year reign of the Clinton Administration

      it was used, but it didn’t work

      I’ve never been afraid of a blowjob

      and I was leary of buying land in Arkansas before I ever heard of Bill Clinton

  86. 4jkb4ia says:

    I really thought I could start catching up over the All-Star break but it is not happening. I suppose I will repeat part of schedule:

    7:50 pm: Finds Home Run Derby on mlb.com. Is very excited.
    8:20 pm: Visits Balloon Juice to relate the exploits of Albert Pujols.
    9 pm: Husband comes home
    9:30 pm: “emptywheel was on TV!”
    10:30 pm: Husband makes big fuss over remembering “balloon-juice.com” as I close the site
    10:35 pm: “OK, what I don’t want you to know is that she said “blowjob” and MSNBC had to apologize. I am not shocked.” Husband accepts this with equanimity. Husband has walked out on “Jersey Boys” because of gratuitous language. I suppose I should also say that this sort of thing is forbidden by the Mishna Berura.

  87. 4jkb4ia says:

    And 9:45 pm: “I wish they would have Mary on, but she is only a lowly commenter so they probably can’t contact her.” I would pay money to see Mary destroy these folks.

  88. Raoul says:

    The Bush/Cheney “Unjust War”. Gotta love it. Two and a half years after taking control of both House and Senate, the Dems continue to fund “unjust war”. Obama still keeps 100,000 plus troops in Iraq and has INCREASED troops and started a new offensive in Afghanistan

    Why are Americans still fighting, killing and dying in “unjust wars”?

  89. jurassicpork says:

    I’m sure, Marcy, as MSNBC hastily pointed out, you are apologetic for using the phrase blow job. I’m sure you’re whipping yourself on the back with a cat-o-nine tails.

    It’s Janet Jackson’s fucking nipple all over again.