Sorry, I love that line. Anyway, dig Santelli asserting that he can call you out, but you can't call him out. Also Notice his man's attempts to change the subject...
I can't watch this clip at work, but I saw Santelli on the Today Show earlier this week. He spoke his piece about his view and when the person (sorry I can't remember who it was) that was his "counterpoint" was trying to speak, Santelli kept shouting over him. That's a mark of an insecure and weak person.
i think it is interesting how the Obama Administration keeps calling out the real blowhards-- this santelli guy, rush limbaugh. It's like "Speak your piece, but i'm gonna have something to say when you're done."
I guess this means no more drive-bys for the Limbaughesque cable commentators-- which is good in my book.
Perhaps Santelli exercised some of that 'poor judgment and lack of responsibility' that he was railing against last week. In other words, maybe he should have thought twice before going off on a tirade on national TV, if he was concerned about the effects on family and neighbors.
I think Santelli and all of these financial hacks arguments smack of desperation to spread the blame.
RE: Santelli's actual beef - who said life was fair? Fairness has nothing to do with what we need to do right now. If life was fair the entire financial sector (including Mr. Santelli) would have been stripped naked and tarred and feathered in October of last year. They would have all had their personal fortunes ransacked to pay for their malfeasance. Instead, middle class people have to bear a great deal of the burden for what very, very wealthy 'educated' financial wizards did.
Also, who wants to live in a neighborhood full of abandoned houses? Does he ever think of that?
He's a whiny little girl, and no, I don't believe his kids are scared to go to school.
Also, who wants to live in a neighborhood full of abandoned houses? Does he ever think of that?
Of course he doesn't think of that. Story in our local paper this week about neighborhoods that had NEVER experienced anything like this, being filled more and more with abandoned houses. It's not just about property values, but the value and safety of the neighborhood. It's happening to not just the ' regular poor areas' that everyone's accustomed to having vacant properties. BECAUSE it is expanding into so-called middle-class neighborhoods, THAT is why this is being seen as a crisis. But, Santelli just doesn't understand that.
I think I have to fall on Santelli's side here. There is a substantive difference between making a fair (although overheated/hyperbolic/misguided) criticism of the public policies of the current administration and having the direct personal assistant of the President single you out for vituperation. It seems a bit out of line on the part of Gibbs -- he could have responded more generally to the criticism without targeting a private citizen repeatedly.
Santelli's a complete clown. It's not like he went on his rant in his neighborhood tavern or in the car with his wife. HE's the guy who "took a stand" and "spoke for America" on national TV. Now he's shocked - shocked to find that he's a public figure?
John, "private citizens" don't usually get time to air their personal policy views on national TV. And when they do, ala Joe the Opportunist, they get treated like the big boys and girls.
Fair enough, but keep in mind that the tables can be turned very quickly. I remember when many of the left howled after the GOP did background checks on Graeme Frost, the child spokesperson that Pelosi & Co. pimped around on television when Bush vetoed S-CHIP. It seemed wrong for the administration to do that then in the same manner as it is now, even if Santelli is not as sympathetic of a figure.
Comparing the Santelli incident to the Graeme Frost one is silly. The repugs dug into Frost's background and tried to smear him with a bunch of lies.
Gibbs' comments were totally in response to Santelli's on-air rant. Santelli was glad to be on every network as the "voice of america" but when Gibbs pointed out that he had no idea what he was talking about, he went all scared girly!
Actually, for the sake of the argument, all the information that they released about Frost turned out to be true. It appears as though the word "smear" has transmogrified into meaning "any political attack that doesn't fit my political interests." Seemingly, when the object such a political attack does not hold your political views, then they suddenly change into an appropriate object of public scrutiny. How interesting the human min -- and its delusions -- are.
It's real simple - if you're a 'reporter' and you go off on the hustings then you have put yourself in a different category and you might could get your butt whacked.
Here's a piece no one cared about. Meh, whatever, probably the most enjoyable article I did during my stint at TIME. Premiered a month before I got laid-off. The nail in the coffin? Ya think?
Here's me going after Al. I didn't so much have a problem with him, as I had a problem with media acting like this dude was the go-to guy for everything black.
This was my first real story at time. I was writing for the Business section, a real change of direction for me. At any rate, it's about Wal-Mart's attempts to colonize the inner-city. As much as I enjoyed this piece, I mostly enjoyed going out to Chicago, which is a beautiful, beautiful city.
This a piece I did about the cops just outside our nation capitol, in Prince George's County, a few years back. I wanted to offer a counter to the dumb, conventional wisdom that if you paint your police force black, you could eradicate police brutality. In fact, Prince George's--one of the richest, blackest counties in the country--also had one of the most brutal police force's in the country.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
There is one word that best describes someone who can dish it out but can't take it: chickensh*t.
Wow. How gutless can a guy get? So much for all that "speaking truth to power" stuff.
I can't watch this clip at work, but I saw Santelli on the Today Show earlier this week. He spoke his piece about his view and when the person (sorry I can't remember who it was) that was his "counterpoint" was trying to speak, Santelli kept shouting over him. That's a mark of an insecure and weak person.
i think it is interesting how the Obama Administration keeps calling out the real blowhards-- this santelli guy, rush limbaugh. It's like "Speak your piece, but i'm gonna have something to say when you're done."
I guess this means no more drive-bys for the Limbaughesque cable commentators-- which is good in my book.
"Keep my name out ya mouth, Gibbs!"
Santelli, you are a wuss! if you wanna play in the Big League you will get hit. Love how Gibbs smacked him.
Perhaps Santelli exercised some of that 'poor judgment and lack of responsibility' that he was railing against last week. In other words, maybe he should have thought twice before going off on a tirade on national TV, if he was concerned about the effects on family and neighbors.
I think Santelli and all of these financial hacks arguments smack of desperation to spread the blame.
RE: Santelli's actual beef - who said life was fair? Fairness has nothing to do with what we need to do right now. If life was fair the entire financial sector (including Mr. Santelli) would have been stripped naked and tarred and feathered in October of last year. They would have all had their personal fortunes ransacked to pay for their malfeasance. Instead, middle class people have to bear a great deal of the burden for what very, very wealthy 'educated' financial wizards did.
Also, who wants to live in a neighborhood full of abandoned houses? Does he ever think of that?
He's a whiny little girl, and no, I don't believe his kids are scared to go to school.
Also, who wants to live in a neighborhood full of abandoned houses? Does he ever think of that?
Of course he doesn't think of that. Story in our local paper this week about neighborhoods that had NEVER experienced anything like this, being filled more and more with abandoned houses. It's not just about property values, but the value and safety of the neighborhood. It's happening to not just the ' regular poor areas' that everyone's accustomed to having vacant properties. BECAUSE it is expanding into so-called middle-class neighborhoods, THAT is why this is being seen as a crisis. But, Santelli just doesn't understand that.
You all should be much less hard on Santelli. In my work environment, I have CNBC on every day. For the last 10 years or so.
He has stood up to right-wing fools for a decade.
He stood up to them? He told Chris Matthews that he voted for McCain.
I think I have to fall on Santelli's side here. There is a substantive difference between making a fair (although overheated/hyperbolic/misguided) criticism of the public policies of the current administration and having the direct personal assistant of the President single you out for vituperation. It seems a bit out of line on the part of Gibbs -- he could have responded more generally to the criticism without targeting a private citizen repeatedly.
Santelli's a complete clown. It's not like he went on his rant in his neighborhood tavern or in the car with his wife. HE's the guy who "took a stand" and "spoke for America" on national TV. Now he's shocked - shocked to find that he's a public figure?
John, "private citizens" don't usually get time to air their personal policy views on national TV. And when they do, ala Joe the Opportunist, they get treated like the big boys and girls.
Fair enough, but keep in mind that the tables can be turned very quickly. I remember when many of the left howled after the GOP did background checks on Graeme Frost, the child spokesperson that Pelosi & Co. pimped around on television when Bush vetoed S-CHIP. It seemed wrong for the administration to do that then in the same manner as it is now, even if Santelli is not as sympathetic of a figure.
In all fairness to Gibbs, he was actually asked by the reporter about Santelli (most clips start AFTER that happened)
At least with Gibbs, he actually answers the questions asked...unlike the parade of liars that fronted for the Bush Admin.
Comparing the Santelli incident to the Graeme Frost one is silly. The repugs dug into Frost's background and tried to smear him with a bunch of lies.
Gibbs' comments were totally in response to Santelli's on-air rant. Santelli was glad to be on every network as the "voice of america" but when Gibbs pointed out that he had no idea what he was talking about, he went all scared girly!
Actually, for the sake of the argument, all the information that they released about Frost turned out to be true. It appears as though the word "smear" has transmogrified into meaning "any political attack that doesn't fit my political interests." Seemingly, when the object such a political attack does not hold your political views, then they suddenly change into an appropriate object of public scrutiny. How interesting the human min -- and its delusions -- are.
It's real simple - if you're a 'reporter' and you go off on the hustings then you have put yourself in a different category and you might could get your butt whacked.