PDA

View Full Version : Watch Morning Joe at 6am on MSNBC




AlexK
12-17-2007, 01:29 AM
Joe Scarborough will probably be one of the first to report on this story on TV. He did last time, after Nov 5th. Wonder what his reaction will be.

joshdvm
12-17-2007, 01:39 AM
Joe Scarborough will probably be one of the first to report on this story on TV. He did last time, after Nov 5th. Wonder what his reaction will be.

It sure as hell better not be 'so, when do you decide to throw in the towel...'
:p

xao
12-17-2007, 01:42 AM
Don't forget to call in to Cspan if you're up!

austin4paul
12-17-2007, 02:08 AM
It sure as hell better not be 'so, when do you decide to throw in the towel...'
:p

ROFL!

islather
12-17-2007, 02:12 AM
Does morning joe have a live stream?

spacebetween
12-17-2007, 02:20 AM
He was an a-hole last time.

xao
12-17-2007, 02:35 AM
Does morning joe have a live stream?

Try the msnbc website.

reaver
12-17-2007, 02:49 AM
I think I saw Joe Jr. donate yesterday so I think Joe Sr. knows about the grand total. I'll tune in to see a show just like the 11/6 episode.
Joe: You know my son wanted me to be sure I mentioned Ron Pauls money haul. (like it isn't real news)
Guy: Yeah but thats Ron Paul, he has no trouble raising money.
Girl: Offensive comment about Ron Paul supporters.
Joe: You don't want them to email you
Girl: Offensive apology.
Guy: So lets talk about that steroid thing thats almost a week old.

derdy
12-17-2007, 02:51 AM
He was an a-hole last time.

yeah, i agree. i caugh the youtube and the show basically started off with him sounding tired and saying that Ron Paul supporters have been flooding the email asking why they haven't picked up on the story yet. He said it in such a way, that made it sound like they really wouldn't have covered it unless we bothered them! :rolleyes:

user
12-17-2007, 02:53 AM
Yeah, but on the other hand the phone interview after the brothel thing went very well.

HammerDR
12-17-2007, 03:01 AM
Scarborough is a good guy..

..just because he's not 100% Pro-Paul doesn't mean you need to hate him. He was part of the Republican takeover of Congress that had strong small-government roots (which, unfortunately, was stifled by the RNC and Newt). He analyzes events in a very common-sense manner and is entitled to being wrong from time to time.

reaver
12-17-2007, 03:08 AM
no no no... I hate him because he is an Alabama fan. :D
If he had gone to Auburn he might have been president one day.

GunnyFreedom
12-17-2007, 03:22 AM
He was an a-hole last time.

Hmmmm... less-so than what appeared on the surface methinks. I just re-watched the segment on YouTube a couple hours ago, and i got the distinct impression that the 'positives' were delivered very straight, and the 'negatives' were delivered very tongue-in-cheek. Maybe too subtle to pick up on first blush, but I definitely caught something there that makes me think he was less of an a-- than it would appear on the surface.

I can only speculate as to why the delivery was made the way it was. Maybe he had to say bad things to please the bosses, but made an effort that thinking people would be able to discern truth from satire? Maybe he figured at that point in time the public perception of "media as enemy" would help Paul more than someone coming out to show himself friendly? I dunno, and really can't do more than speculate.

But I still think the Nov 6th Scarborough segment was WAY more positive than it looked like on the surface. Lemme go find the link... give it a CLOSE look and tell me if you see what I am seeing here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKbeelRzYmk

Like...how the guy sitting across from Joe (later) makes it clear he likes Paul a LOT, but at the beginning of the segment, he has this affectation of, "so what? Ron Paul bringing in money isn't news, he always brings in money"

And Joe (while superficially linking Guy Fawkes and terrorism) clearly makes the "V for Vendetta" connection.

Seriously, it LOOKS to me like they literally presented both the MSM "Paul-haters" case AND the truth, and the subtle undertones of the conversation had me thinking they preferred the truth over the MSM position.

It's....different than most punditry, WAY different. But you'd have to know I guess that Joe's personal hero is Ronald Reagan -- and Joe made a point to inform us that RP talks more like Reagan than any other Republican in the race.

The hacker and terrorists stuff they raise sound more like a /snark/ to me, or an excuse to the powers that be to let them mention "Ron Paul is like Ronald Reagan" without undue interference from the powers than be.

Either way, while Joe did indeed say a lot of bizarre stuff relating to Nov 5th, I simply didn't get that intense negative that a lot of others got from it. In fact, I cam away with the impression that ALL THREE of them really like Ron Paul (especially the guy sitting across from Joe) and that they would eventually be big allies of ours within the MSM.

Look again, try to be objective, and tell me if you see what I'm seeing here...

GunnyFreedom
12-17-2007, 03:33 AM
yeah, i agree. i caugh the youtube and the show basically started off with him sounding tired and saying that Ron Paul supporters have been flooding the email asking why they haven't picked up on the story yet. He said it in such a way, that made it sound like they really wouldn't have covered it unless we bothered them! :rolleyes:

Which...again...is almost like he's trying to help us. Cause nobody amongst the whole of the MSM WILL cover us unless we bug the crap outta them. Chances are at 6AM Joe didn't have 1000 RP e-mails on his blackberry, and if he did, he would not have seen them they would have ben screened by his handlers. I actually took that as him encouraging US to 'bug the crap' out of the rest of the media to make them cover us.

See my earlier post on this. He's NOT acting like a normal pundit. He's quite obviously projecting two contradictory images of what's going on, and it appears to me anyway that the image he favors, is the one which we know and love.

I've seen this sort of thing before, not really in the MSM mind you, but in person. There is an almost.....subliminal....effort to favor the good image and to discredit the bad image, even as he is projecting BOTH images.

I have seen enough of that sort behavior in the flesh, to think that there HAS to be an name for it, but I cannot for the life of me imagine what it would be. But I have never, or at least ALMOST never seen that behavior amongst the MSM. The people who act like that are usually intellectuals, who like to engage in highly speculative theoretical discourse. I'm not trying to say that Joe Scarborough is "extra smart" or any such thing, but that manner of acting *is* a learned behavior, and he *did* spend a lot of time in congress where he would have been exposed to it. *shrug*

rs3515
12-17-2007, 03:45 AM
Joe was not at all an a-hole on 11/27. Was an awesome all-around interview ... fun and lighthearted, and they were having fun with the conversation.

The whole "throw in the towel" comment I'm sure was a planted question ... she didn't even seem comfortable asking it. Joe immediately jumped on her about it as though he's made to look like the person defending Ron Paul (which is good since it is Joe's show).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBevBb7aZJw

GunnyFreedom
12-17-2007, 03:45 AM
See? even when the guy in Washington DC said we did it "in the name of a terrorist" while Joe did not say, "hey, that's wrong!" instead he made like agreement but *immediately* brought up the movie "V For Vendetta" (in such a way as to appear to be agreeing with the guy) *but* anybody who had actually SEEN the movie (as Joe apparently had...) would not have thought we should be frightened...he said that part 'tongue in cheek,' (it appears to me) but then moved on in a more serious vein and made it clear that he was glad to see "republicans talking more like republicans again"

I wish I could describe it better, because I see people acting like this a lot. It is, however, VERY uncommon behavior amongst the MSM.

AlexK
12-17-2007, 06:35 AM
They mentioned the Tea Party half an hour ago but said that $5.2 million was raised. WTF? Where the hell are they getting their numbers from? Are they pulling them straight out of their asses? The official number is $6m. How can you mess that up? What's so confusing about it?

user
12-17-2007, 06:37 AM
They mentioned the Tea Party half an hour ago but said that $5.2 million was raised. WTF? Where the hell are they getting their numbers from? Are they pulling them straight out of their asses? The official number is $6m. How can you mess that up? What's so confusing about it?
They may be getting it from the most recent post on ronpaul2008.com. :(

We're discussing it in another thread.

pickfair
12-17-2007, 06:38 AM
They will keep downplaying the figures as long as the campaign doesn't release the official information.

rezster
12-17-2007, 07:20 AM
They mentioned the Tea Party half an hour ago but said that $5.2 million was raised. WTF? Where the hell are they getting their numbers from? Are they pulling them straight out of their asses? The official number is $6m. How can you mess that up? What's so confusing about it?

I saw it, "News You Can't Use" was up as the graphic for this segment. Celion Dion last show at Ceasar's Palace and Joe Namath graduating from Alabama U were the other topics of discussion.