No one will be watching MSNBC after the election ever since it morphed into fox-lite. Once they don't have Trump to run 24/7 it is done.

K & R Insightful truth thread.

because he expected it to be profitable or even self-sustaining. He had enough money that he did not need that. He started it to influence US politics in a way that helped his empire as a whole. The value of Republicans to his empire as a whole more than justified his subsidizing Fox News. while it lost money. MSNBC can lose money every day and Comcast/GE will be just fine. It's worth it to them to keep it going to influence politics to the advantage of their empires, even if viewership is low and they can't sell ads to anyone but Comcast, GE and NBC.

but when i do, its fox or morning joe

that about says it all

to see if CNN, Fox, MSNBC are playing the same commercials from the same sponsors since they all pushing the same narrative more or less in order to mold their viewing audience into their corpo fascist psycho daydream scenario for the masses.

Man, I don't have a TV and don't watch it
but I do have some sunglasses and some gum plus the internet....

Carry on and keep reporting but realize how TV is really affecting you....subconsciously and physically because it is and that's a scientific fact.

expect a monday surprise

If you mean Andrea Mitchell, who happens to be married to a man with the surname Greenspan, but does not use that name, then you are being rude.

And don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Ms. Mitchell, but as a woman who likewise did not adopt my husband's surname upon marriage I find this highly offensive.

without so much as making disclosure at the start of every show. This is the same network that fired Maria Shriver for being married to Arnold.

When Bill Clinton and your husband cause the economic collapse of several nations and you sit on TV shilling for Hillary and Bubba, I may use your married name, too. Until then, I am not sure why you are taking this personally.

If I am being rude to anyone, it's to Mrs. Greenspan, whom I doubt reads here. You, on the other hand, are being rude to me and I do read here, especially when a post is addressed to me.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

DON'T HAVE a married name. You need to understand that. It would be like me making up some stupid nickname for you and insisting on using it all the time.

And even if I were to go on TV and shill for Satan himself, you're not entitled to dump a name on me that I never use.

Her name is Andrea Mitchell. You don't have to like her, but you owe her the decency of using her correct name.

justify my making the disclosure they owe the public, but fail to make.

I don't owe her or her husband shit. No one in any country collapsed by her husband's policies owes him anything good. And I don't owe her highly unethical shilling without disclosure shit, either.

I call you by some name *I* choose? Rather than your real name? I'm currently thinking of something sufficiently nasty that it would get this post hidden, so I'll refrain.

But you don't come across as reasonable or thoughtful if you (along with far too many here) persist in using a name that is not hers.

So I think every time I come across people here calling her Mrs. Greenspan I'll just query who they are talking about.

And she's also NOT Mrs. Mitchell. That would be her mother. Her name at birth was Andrea Mitchell, so these days the correct usage would be Ms. Mitchell. If you want to be a jerk, you can of course call her Miss Mitchell, although "miss" tends to designate a young, unmarried woman.

Then it's okay if I call you by some name *I* choose?

so obviously you are posting about your imaginary friends.

On Mon Apr 11, 2016, 03:12 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

There is no Mrs. Greenspan,
http://www.democraticunderground.com...280&pid=171315

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Suggesting a rational, long term poster has imaginary friends is sickening.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Apr 11, 2016, 03:18 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sickening? Really? Come on, grow a bit thicker of a skin alerter.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: its a snark.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Pretending Andrea Mitchell isn't married to Alan Greenspan is imaginary. She is.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I think that every single post on this discussion board that attacks an individual poster is completely counterproductive to the dialogue. Title is fine, imaginary friends comment is just garbage snark and these kinds of posts should be erased from these boards completely.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Admins--please check the alerter and consider removing their alerting privileges. This was a spurious alert to substitute for conversation within the thread. Anyone who calls a professional newswoman, even one they don't like, by their husband's name SOLELY to score a dig is a sexist embarrassment to themselves.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

You are using her husband's name, not her actual name, to score points. And it is sexist, given that insisting on using her husband's name is a clear throw back to an era when women became their husband's property. It's not very long ago that married women couldn't get credit cards in their own name, even after a divorce. So insisting on address Ms. Mitchell by her husband's name is suggesting she has no independent existence.

it's about who she is and where plenty of influence comes from. Just enlightening those who don't know why whatever she reports is so skewed.

I also did not adopt my spouse's name. But it was completely innocuous and with no intent to deceive.

It's deliberately calling her by a name that is not hers.

And the intent is to demean her, as if she has no independent will.

I am not a fan of hers, and since I don't own a TV and therefore almost never see the main stream media, I don't see whatever it is she says anywhere, but no matter what she says, there's no reason to call her by a name that is not hers.

And here on DU I'm sure everyone is quite aware of how Andrea Mitchell's husband is, so calling her by his name isn't necessary. And it's still rude.

intent several times and not once did I say the intent was to demean her. It's a disclosure that, ethically, she and her network should be making EVERY time she is on air talking politics.

As far as all DUers knowing, I have several times seen people posting who did NOT know she is Alan Greenspan's wife, so you are mistaken about that as well. And more people read DU than post here. Even those who know may not have it at the forefront of their minds every time something is posted about her where it is relevant.

Obviously, this is some kind of huge issue for you, given you equate being called by your husband's name with calling me a name nasty enough to get you a hide,* but that does not mean Andrea Mitchell feels the same way as you do. That is merely your assumption.That someone uses the same professional name throughout their career does not necessarily mean they would be offended being called by their husband's last name while they are still married to each other. I do not accept that I am being rude to her simply because you don't want your husband's name used for you.

Also, I'd love to know how I am being rude to someone who does not know I exist, let alone which name I am using for her. If she complains to me about which name I am calling her, I will consider her complaints, including whether or not I've been rude to her. If I have, though, it's not even in the same universe as her unethical behavior in failing to disclose.

Similarly, if I call you by your husband's last name, I'll give your comments about that great consideration. However, your outrage and name calling of me over my calling someone who will never see my posts by her husband's last name when you don't know her or know if she actually would mind is starting to seem way over the top.

*Reply 9

despicable, causing incredible suffering to people in several nations, including this one. That she does not disclose her connection to him at the start of every show is beyond dishonest.

Hillary used her maiden name Rodham when she was defending Arkansas utility companies against residential customers. That was in 1977, the same year that her husband became Arkansas's attorney general. At that time, very few people in the state would have made the connection between "Rodham" and "Clinton". If she had adopted "Clinton" at the time, though, that would have attracted attention. And how would it have looked for the newly sworn-in attorney general, who was elected to represent the interests of the people of Arkansas, to have a wife who was essentially arguing against the interests of the people in court?

For some background, see here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128079222

I never yelled at my kids in that manner.... and as you can probably tell, I am a yeller But she outdid me on my worst day.

Total and complete lack of professionalism.
As is the entire staff of the Mute Sanders Nothing But Clinton network (credit to Tim Black).

I always find her loud. I've suspected that she may have a degree of hearing loss.

Mute Sanders Nothing But Clinton is a great name for MSNBC--indeed for all msm.

MSNBC. They don't want a conversation with them, they are only looking for a gotcha moment.

It's pretty pathetic that Bernie gets treated better on faux than he does on msnbc. Never thought I'd live to see the day when that would happen.

For years I have been arguing that Msnbc is not the same as Fox.

So much for that.

Tucker Carlson and Scarborough Country in the afternoon, until the last show at night. I don't remember who hosted it.

Olberman was the first non-Republican they hired, which in 2003. I watched them transition, in a very calculated way, to neoliberal Democrat (with chameleon Matthews transitioning right along with the network, from declaring that he had voted for Dimson twice, emphasizing twice, to having a tingle go up his leg for Obama in 2008. That was a big clue. The next came with the firings of Olberman and Cenk for being critical of Obama and Olberman also for his Worst Person in the World segment, in which he almost always named a Republican.

Between Fox and MSNBC, they seek control of the political narrative, making certain it veers only from far right to center right.

I also saw an interview with Donahue in which he said that he always had to have opposition on the show-and he counted as two people. So, let's say Donahue was talking with one other liberal. He had to have on 3 conservatives for "balance."

There are many, and even some here at DU. You have to pay them to say nice things about her. Or they're just that uninformed. Losers the lot of them.

I have never, not once, endorsed media bias against anyone. Quite the contrary. I am always pointing out how media slants.

I have never said that I want Hillary in prison, either. To the contrary, I have posted any number of times that I wish her a long, happy healthy life outside public office.

Imputing pleasure of media hit jobs to those who want Bernie to be the nominee sucks big time, as does putting anyone who wants Bernie as the nominee in the same class as people who want to see Hillary in prison. "Nice" smearing techniques there.


As far as Obama opining on an ongoing investigation, I did see that segment. I would not have described it was you did.

BTW, this is the Bernie Sanders Group. Only those who do want Bernie to be the nominee should be posting here.

...did not mean for my post to reflect you, merrily. I have enjoyed your posts and did/do not think my comment includes you. I will delete my comment...

So I can garden and be obnoxious at the same time.

Love,
Your Imaginary Friend
Dorkzilla, Countess of Munstead

Small wonder I adore you.