Randi on Dobbs >>>video . Her last time. She's done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_IZav0N29c

She left crying. Fuck these people, Randi... Don't do anymore of these panels.

"fuck this"

She did not appreciate them laughing at her.

She was FURIOUS... they laughed at her after they quit taping. watch the last few seconds and you can see them starting to laugh at her.

,...so the hell what!!! At least she's still HUMAN!!!

She did wonderfully. I was grateful to actually get to see that (I've been so busy)!!!

:toast: Here's to you, girl!!! :toast: Here's to you!!!

when lou asked her about fair democrat money distribution (I forget the xact question), and she gave a solid No.
She's trying too hard to defend something imperfect as everything usually is.

but how they laughed at her, the 3 fucks, that was shameful and unforgiving. very much the ole boys club kind of dismissive laughter.

I don't blame her for being upset at all but I hope this doesn't make her give up on tv - she is Really good at it.

Lou was late and she got stuck with those good ole boys and they were picking at her before the taping...

and the laughing was the last straw. Fuck em Randi.

did not listen to her radio show, but yes, that does put quite a different flavor to it all.

lousy bastards.
still hope she changes her mind and not give up.

They do this to her on purpose... and I can imagine getting laughed at like that would make anyone want to punch somebody.

Randi's personality doesn't take well to criticism, but Lou said something about the redistribution of wealth, and Randi said, NO, the Dems don't redistribute wealth! Sorry Randi, but that's exactly what the tax system does. I'm not saying that's wrong, but it does. If our tax system wasn't about wealth distribution, everyone would pay the exact same % of their income.

Gee Randi, you picked the wrong words. It was a mistake, and yes, you make them too. Get pissed, then get over it.

much different from the percentage paid by the upper 20%.

In term of percentage the bottom 20% and the top 20% have a flat tax - and Dobbs knows this and still screwed Randi.

"picked the wrong words" is correct but Dobbs knew where she was going and chose to mock her.

Come on, Papau, you know better. All economic systems are designed to redistribute wealth. The Dems HAVE to do it, because that's how capitlism works. It's a prima facie mistake. There is no economic system that does not redistribute wealth.

Socialism in theory redistributes evenly in a completely lateral, or horizontal fashion. (Human nature being what it is, that is pretty hard to accomplish.) Capitalism redistributes both verticaly and horizonatally, assuming that the gov't has vigilence to assure a fair playing field, through business regulations.

So, she's wrong in principle and in practice.
The Professor

redistribution of income.

And since the only place to get money to run the gov is from those with money, those without money are getting a "redistribution". Indeed those with less money are getting a redistribution from those with more money, even if a "flat tax" - 'cause you can't get blood from a stone and you can't get money (or even much money) from those with no (or even a little) money.

But I read the topic as a "flat tax" question - is the system "progressive".

And as you know the rich (defined as the top 20%) rate of taxation (defined as total taxes of all kinds paid divided by all income of all types that is not gov. transfer income) is equal to or a shade under the rate for the poor (defined as the lowest 20%) - indeed post 1981 the rate the rich pay being above the rate the poor pay only occurred post the Clinton 93 tax increase. I have not reviewed Bush 43 data, but I suspect the rich are again paying at a lesser rate than the poor.

And every investment income tax rate reduction or elimination makes it worse. Obviously time for the "fair tax" meaning a sales tax. <last line is sarcasm>

I agree she is "wrong in principle and in practice" if the debate is limited to simple total dollars transferred.

I do not think the tax discussion should be so limited; I do not think she was thinking in terms of a total dollars concept; and I do think she used the "wrong words" -but they were "wrong" only because while Dobbs (I believe)knew what she meant, he choose to belittle her rather than restate her words to make the idea clear.

The Rich pay less taxes (as a % of income) than the middle class, when all taxes (ssi, medicare, sales, property, AND income) are factored in. Don't fall for the rw bs. Income is redistributed to the rich in this country, mainly from borrowing against the future and giving big pork to companies, who pass the profits on to their executives and major shareholders (example, Cheney and Halliburton). Although the rich pay more in an absolute dollar sense, as a percentage it is much lower.

good article on subject:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/04/10/ING0UC4LLO1.DTL

Sure, the government "redistributes wealth" -- every time it builds a road, it's "redistributing wealth". When employees at OSHA, the FDA, or the FBI cash their paychecks, the government is "redistributing wealth".

But that's not what conservatives mean by it. The phrase hardly makes sense that way. When they say it, it's really a code word for "The government gives *MY* money to people on welfare."

Our tax system isn't about "redistributing wealth" the way they mean it. It's not about ripping money from one person and handing to another person just to make everyone the same. To say it is shows an astonishing ignorance of what taxes are for: maintaining a system of opportunity. That's why we collect taxes, so we can create an environment where everyone has the opportunity to achieve and be their best.

Someone who is doing well one day may be out of a job the next. Someone who starts off poor may use student loans to get a college education and pay back far more in taxes than he ever took out. This isn't about individual wealth, it's about the common good, and any time someone says government "redistributes wealth", you can bet he doesn't think he's part of any community at all.

(Sorry for the rant, but this phrase always bugs me!)

with their message, but this time, Randi just made a mistake in her words.

I don't hold it against her. Everyone does that sometimes! She needs to remember that, and not get so flustered.

who else has been?

n/t

You have a simplistic mind. Have you given this much thought, or are you qualified by education to state that "the tax system is about wealth distribution"? The tax system, including the progressive tax system (like in all civilized countries), is about the people funding their government to do its duties. Some of it may be welfare, and that is where the hate-monger nutjob talkers (from where you most likely get this simplistic nonsense) latch on to, because they don't like welfare and use it to distort the functions of government. Expenditures on things like welfare pale in comparison to the $6-9 billion allocation and other hidden costs of the war considering that the war yields us nothing but illwill.

People who make more pay more tax because the tax is levied as a percentage. Even the percentages for low income people may be lower because there isn't an sense in putting them in the poor house by taking their living money, because that would just reduce the tax base and make condition worse off for everyone. It is wealth distribution when the tax revenues from the "rich", however you define them, are made out into checks for the "poor", however you define them. It is wealth distribution when they take your land and give it to someone else, and when they throw you in jail and let the panhandlers move into your house.

Otherwise it is taxation.

The idea that those who benefit the most from society should give a higher percentage back to society has nothing whatsoever to do with the redistribution of wealth, and that is the concept our system is based upon, not redistribution.

Some redistribution does happen in the government, but most tax money is used to fuel corporate profits, most of the wealth is redistributed right back to the wealthy.

When dobbs asked patronizingly, "The Democrats don't redistribute wealth?", if she had just clarified with something like "No, not in the manner of these Repubs..." or something equally as less than the "solid No" you mentioned, she would've had a stronger argument.

Really, though, I think she did great -- good examples, such as the story about Feingold and Specter.

For a moment there, having no idea what this clip was about, I thought they were going to jump all over her about the "They doth protest too much" and "these gay closeted Republicans" comments she made -- that they were going to get on her for being too broad sweeping and hyperbole on that one. Actually, in retrospect, she's lucky they didn't -- they could've hammered her on that one.


Edit: darned spelling

calling Lou Dobbs a gentleman. I think he just made it onto her shit list.

I hope she does more TV but no more of these gang bang panels... that's not fair to her.

she did great and she got alot of points out there..

she was fantastic...

fly

catch her show if you can.. She explains what happened.

I think Lou is no longer her friend.

prolly not, but have to ask.

faux "gentlemen" acts.

Dobbs in a Conservative at heart.

Maybe I'm stupid, but I just watched this and I didn't see anything for her to get so upset about. It seemed like, for a change, they were all pretty much in agreement. I've seen her get through way worse than this. What am I missing?

Finger seizure?

My computer was stuttering.

This one is my favorite.
:hi:

Maybe I'm stupid, but I just watched this and I didn't see anything for her to get so upset about. It seemed like, for a change, they were all pretty much in agreement. I've seen her get through way worse than this. What am I missing?

:hi:

...and start spouting crap???? x(

HUH?

WHAT PLANET ARE YOU ON?!

I just sat there thinking, jeeze... if the dems did vote in a block, the Republicans would jump all over it screaming about how the Dems were "playing politics" and then turn around and vote out the filibuster. Granted, I get pissed about how the Libermans and Byrds vote... but even if the Dems were all on the same page, the Republicans wouldn't let them get away with it for long - and they'd have the propoganda pushers at CNN, MSNBC, and Fox doing their bidding.

I'm not a big fan of the Dems in Congress, but dammit, there are some good people like Feingold who speak out. There are Dems who consistently vote in OUR interest, not big money interest (like my senators Mikulski & Sarbanes, my rep Cardin). They just don't get covered by the media!

And that crack by Dobbs about Dems and distributing wealth was just not funny, given that it came after "the rich get richer, and the poor get richer".

I understand why Randi never wants to return. It's not possible to have a serious dialog on tv with people who know what they're talking about, even on Lou Dobb's program.

I thought she did good and held her own. I hope she doesn't let these numb nuts get to her.
:mad:

It seemed like a collaborative effort to intimidate her and weaken her position.

No more gang bang panels....

Randi CAN hold her own, when the odds aren't stacked against her.

She has got to be able to stand up to that. The pouty face at the end made her look like a loser. If she going to do that she better stay off national TV.

That's not fair to Randi unless you've seen her last 10 TV appearances....

She got ambushed today before and after the taping.

on air that made me notice a concerted effort to get her....I wasn't paying close attention, though....reading stuff here

but....can you imagine if a MAN cried about being ganged up on? it's a rough world out there in gasbag land, and she should know very well by now how the game's played



also....she's a VERY heavy disher, isn't she?

sounds like she can't take it

I know it's not fair to be ganged up on, but I think I remember her saying that the pugs redistribute the wealth to the WEALTHY, or did I just imagine she said that, cause it was such an obvious response?

so there

I think she's just getting to the end of her rope, aren't well all?!?!?!

and represent

I do get tired of the SOS all the time, and can only wonder what it's like for people in REALLY repressive situations

hope I don't find out in my lifetime

wait a minute....I already AM

to the laughter at the end. Yeah, they laughed at her comment and yeah she didn't get to defend it, but that's the nature of the beast on these taped segments with limited time. I thought it mostly a civil discussion, not like the screamfests on Tweety's and some of the Faux shows. Also that's the way men operate - and being a women I've overreacted to this type of male behaviour, but you gotta get over it.

Hell I bet Randi has reduced some callers to tears - and I'm not talking about the wingnut callers - but some liberal callers who were on her side but perhaps not that articulate or not on their point.

Randi needs to chill and she needs to go back on Dobbs. I think Randi sometimes gets off the point herself on Dobbs show on what is being discussed or a bit too obscure. We know what's she talking about but many times a TV audience who isn't "inside baseball" like her listeners don't.

Man, that was no reason to cry. I thought she was tougher than that.

just to let ya know.
It's a healthy reaction to frustration, fear, disapointment, bla bla bla.

Wish those 'tough' fuckers ruling our lives would spend more time crying.

Even if I hadn't read this thread before seeing it, I would have thought she did very well.

That idiotic, condescending laughter came off exactly as it was... a low blow from a bunch of assholes who were freaked out by this lovely lady who does her homework and clearly knew more than they did. When men with too little cajones and too little brains and too much ego meet their match or their better, they condescend. They showed their true colors.

I saw no tears. Good. That was a fear for a sec. Glad she maintained her composure to the end. I wouldn't have been able to... Randi is a pro.

and we ladies know exactly what those are...

the "talk to me and die motherfucker" kinda tears.

Rage on Randi!

In my theatre days I worked for a really great director. He was gay and I swear he knew exactly how women felt! He would use all that stuff to get great performances out of us.

The democrats have a few good standouts, but I've had it with quite a few of them voting lock stock and barrel with republicans. Aren't they supposed to be an opposing party.

senate.gov
house.gov

Theres no excuse for you to make statements such as "few good standouts" when in fact its a few BAD standouts.

Lou did a fine job, and all three of them were offered ample opportunity to express themselves. The laughter at the end wasn't insulting, derisive, or abusive...it was in clearly in response to what seemed like an outrageous statment that Randi made about Democrats not redistributing wealth. I think she meant it differently than it came out...I'm sure that she meant bottom-to-top redsitribution, while they were thinking top-to-bottom. Any negative feelings she might have had about that were misguided, in that there was a bit of a misunderstanding involved. I think that's very clear from an objective analysis of what was said, and of the reactions.

DT

Randi don't get sensitive. Brush it off

We need you out there.

They weren't ganging up on her that I could see. All of them, including Dobbs, were generally down on the Republican's choice of issues to push at this time.

I actually thought that, for the most part, Randi did pretty good.

But why would she cry over the fact they giggled at her stupid comment about Democrats not redistributing wealth?

She isn't even correct. Ofcourse Democrats redistribute wealth. That is precisely what the tax code does. Democrats ran the House for 40 years and the Senate for much of that time - the tax code Democrats presided over during that time absolutely DID redistribute wealth. When Democrats, as they most certainly should, write and pass tax legislation that makes the richest of Americans pay a higher percentage of taxes - that is redistributing the wealth. There is no reason to run from that statement. The tax code Republicans have overseen for years now ALSO redistributes wealth.

She cried over the fact people snickered over this? Geeze, buck up. You can't start bawling when a panel laughs at something you say. Randi should have just clarified her comments and rephrased her point.

In my opinion, her argument about illegal immigration being about oil was sort of conspiratorial gibberish. So thankfully no one laughed at that one or she might have been crying through most of the segment instead of just the very end.

that everytime she's on the dobbs, there isnt an equal distribution of left/right? I know its not fair on these shows, but once in awhile you would think they would do a 2 on 2. Hell, its like they cant find any other progressives. Sheeesh!

:sarcasm: Ed barely spoke.

And she said it better than he could have.

If it weren't for Randi mopping the floor with Fergo the Virgo, the discussion was just a grating cacophony. Not that I trust him completely, but Ed's levelheaded presentation of the Democratic position is what we need to get new converts.

I didn't hear her show yesterday and don't know if she mentioned it, but she & Ed were on the LARRY KING show last month with Hugh Hewitt and Ben Ferguson, guest hosted by John Roberts. After that on her show she described how the GOP talkers (and Roberts, I think) were laughing & making fun of her, discussing ways they could mock her during the show. So after yesterday's show, I can see how she took it personally.

It was a reaction that had been ACCUMULATING over the past month. I totally understand her feeling that way, and everybody needs to know a little history of her other appearance on CNN to understand. Here's the only link on DU that I could find on it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1175528&mesg_id=1176238

I hope Randi will use her anger to change this kind of situation and I don't blame her for being done with Lou Dobbs, but I hope she will still be on TV again, because she speaks the truth & SHE ROCKS!

I have been trying to convey that what happened yesterday has been building up. She feels like they are intentionally booking her to make fun of her now. And I tend to agree.

She does great on TV... The Cspan show with Janet Parshall was GREAT. But CNN seems to be setting her up.

He reacted to her the same way as John Roberts.

It reminds me of the typical rightwing reaction to hearing the facts - when you can't refute the facts, get personal by making fun of, belittling, dismissing or smearing your opponent.

Regardless of that, I've tried not to miss her whenever she's "on the TEE-vee", as she calls it, because the startling truth coming out of her mouth is like a breath of fresh air!

Love ya, Randi!!

that with his disgusting man-boobs, unpleasantly affeminate voice, and disgusting personality.



Not to mention his mildly mentally-challenged face:



So chicken-shit neocon sissies like Hugh Hewitt should know better than bullying women around, looking for ways to make fun and humiliate them on air.

He's only about 23 years old, fer cryin' out loud! But anyway, who knows how HH was off the air - sounds like all three were ganging up against her, but I forget if Randi mentioned names. He still gives me the creeps no matter what, like most of them do, just by virtue of their beliefs & tactics, if nothing else!

That hobbit from hell known as Ben Ferguson?



He's another aberration of nature that shouldn't go around making fun of women.

I really don't care for Dobbs all that much. I can't take all this endless ranting about the Mexican horde that's supposedly destroying America.

Dobbs may be speaking honestly from his heart - but that doesn't make what he is saying particularly appealing to me. The guy strikes me as a fairly hardcore xenophobe. I've never really understood why he is so popular here.

But as to why the ratio of left to right isn't fair when she is on. I can't say for sure - maybe because Dobbs is a conservative?

Still, going on the show is her choice. Crying over something like that is pretty bad. I didn't see where she was treated particularly badly at all. Make a foolish comment, mistatement or not, and people are going to laugh at ya. She's gotta be tougher than this if she is going to keep doing these sorts of programs.

All in all though, I really didn't think she did too bad. She just needs to buck up a little.

no disrespect, but don't you think we need Less of it ? Look where 'Toughness' has got us.
Genuine human emotions under stress is Not a bad thing nor a sign of weakness.

Isn't it about time?

Randi's on TV a lot.. Today, she couldn't deal. So the fuck what.

She's human and she's fucking PISSED.


could be time for me to leave this thread before I get anymore pissed.

"no disrespect, but don't you think we need Less of it ? Look where 'Toughness' has got us."

I'm sorry, but your just wrong.

When you cry like that you look weak. People do not look to sobbing weaklings as authority figures or leaders.

Crying because a few guests laughed at your obviously wrong comments makes you look like a baby.

Hey, I'm not saying I'd do any better. It is tough to get out there on national TV and do this stuff. But if Randi can't hack shows like Dobbs without crying when things get rough, she really ought to avoid these types of programs and let others who can represent the left without crying take a shot at it.

Human nature is what it is. People look to those who demonstrate strength and toughness for authority and leadership. If Randi wants to have any positive influence by being on these debate shows, she can't break down crying because some guests chuckled at a silly comment she made.

cry more, war less.

Listen to her own words.. on her show today.

at the "Democrats don't redistribute wealth" line. I don't listen to her very often, but I generally do agree with her and I thought it was a stupid comment to make. I laughed at it, too!

Who were the 3 men? Or 2 and Dobbs,not sure. I didn't see it and wasn't able to listen to her this afternoon.

and hope it happens again. And again. And again. Until it just rolls off her back. That sort of needling is par for the course in those political panel discussions. On a show like McLaughlin's, it would've happened in the first minute. And every minute thereafter.

She is usually really good on these panels. On that she basically did fine, and it didn;t seem any worse than most of those confrontational panels.

I hate to say it, but if Randy wants to be taken seriously, she can't pull any "They picked on me because I'm a woman shit."

I tend to agree with what Jamesd Mtume sid about there being too little dioferene between Democrats and Republicans these days. (For too long.) He was on target when he criticized Rndi's excuse that the Democrats can't take stands because they are a minority.

"It's true they can't control the agenda but they CAN control their votes," he replied.

That's how it came off.


She said she's tired of being pitted against unreasonable people who don't want to discuss things.

"She said she's tired of being pitted against unreasonable people who don't want to discuss things."

Oh good grief. That's politics. These shows aren't designed for reasonable, intellectual conversation. They are about throwing out your talking points and seeing who's argument can appear most reasonable and appealing by the end of the segment.

I've seen guests on these political programs all the time, from both left and right, treated far worse than she was.

If Randi is gonna do these types of shows, she is just going to have to toughen up. You can't go crying because someone laughed at your comments.

against my sometime 'unpopular' opinions in a room full of men.
that's the laugh.

I don't think Randi is claiming it, but I know it when I hear it.

I thought she came off whiny. None of theese people on there seemed like right wing wackos. Personally I thought James Mtume was tight on the money with what he was saying. They were wrong to laugh at her, but she has to be a professional. I'm glad the crying didn't happen on TV. She already looked pouty enough, to have a national TV audience see her cry would be a complete embarassment to herself and Air America Radio.

on it. The "Redistribution of wealth" comment was wrong, plain and simple---she could have responded that the Dems don't resdistribute the wealth to take money from the middle class to give to the upper class. She could have said that the hippocritical RW Christians shouldn't be so eager to cut funds from programs that help the lower class, that isn't what the New Testament in the Bible teaches. And that for all of the RW Christians to stand by while the poor get poorer while the rich are getting richer is not good family values, nor is it good for the American family. I could go on and on about this. Randi misspoke and then missed and opportunity for a ripe comeback. Crying, wasn't the way to handle it, shoving their "chuckles" down their throats was.

I give her credit to be in lion's den, but Randi has held her own a number of times, I would cry too if I was to sit there with some stupid dumb fucks. She sounded pissed, I don't blame her.

Crush 'em with that big old brain of yours Randi. Nobody can stop you Randi, nobody can keep you on the mat. Get back up and make the perverted freaks spit chicklets!!!

YEEAAAARRRRGH!

(well, that's what I'd tell her anyway -if she asked me)

and gets back in there fighting.
she really does a great job and says so much of value.

I wish I could give her a hug.

I agree. Randi made a mistake with her 'NO'. But a small one and eminently forgivable.

Randi needs to hang in there. She's as tough as nails and has forgotten more than most people ever knew. Yeah, the 3 on 1 seemed unfair .... until you stop to realize that Randi can hold her own, even with those odds.

If she cried (I didn't see that, but understand she related it on her radio show) that doesn't bother me one damned bit. She's one of the scrapiest fighters we've **ever** had.

I want to have her baby.

I'll carry her bags wherever she wants me to.

replay or share this video. I'll keep trying.

Dems may not control the votes, but they don't fight back when important issues are on the table.

When you roll over like a Kerry, people don't respect you.

maybe that's what rattled Randi, I dunno. It would me. No getting away with that, dems have not opposed too many damn bad repug bills.

just can't get away from that.

she is use to different treatment. Other times she has been on she was given more time and deference than other panelists. He'd be almost tender and always respectful toward her.

Perhaps that made this harder to take.

This is one reason I think Rachel Maddow from AAR does such a superb job on tv panels. She is VERY smart and has all the points to argue at her fingertips no matter the subject, but she says everything with good humor and with a smile. She never is whiny or pouty and SHE is the one laughing at the wackos, not the reverse.

This is NOT saying that Randi is not smart or extemely capable, but sometimes she can be abrasive and Rachel never is. They both need to be carrying the message on tv.

And it's a damn shame that she's stuck at 11pm est on The Situation, which is opposite Stewart/Colbert so she's not attracting her core audience.

Welcome to DU!

that her 2 hour XM radio show is 7-9 AM, though I listen everyday and I imagine of lot of DUers and other liberals with XM now have her on instead of the early morning tv shows. There are not many attractive, super-intelligent, and genial liberal women on tv and radio and she needs to represent our viewpoint a lot more.

I would love to see her moved to a better time slot on XM, too.

not because she doesn't know her stuff, but because she's set up and she plays along.

I didn't see the clip. I heard a few minutes of Randi on the way home today and she's in a really foul mood, for sure.

But these shows are a set up and if she doesn't know that going in she's going to get hurt.

Personally, I don't like Rachel half as much because she's too "nice." Randi is real and I love that. It amazes me that they allow her on TV at all because she's so real. I respect that but weak fakers who play for ratings are threatened by her, because they know she can see right through them.

I'd like to see her plainly calmly say "You're mistaken." Period. If her word is not respected by the other talking heads, she should trust that her professional delivery and personal strength will make people consider what she's saying, even if they don't agree with her right at that instant.

You've got to go on and try to say what you want to say and not worry about if it gets heard or validated.

Corporate owned MSM whores....they 'act' like they're on your side for a few days/weeks just to set you up for a huge smack-down. Tweety does it all the time and now we know Dobbs does too. I always wondered why Randi LOVED Lou Dobbs. IMCPO, the man is nothing but a WH shill, but she always talked of how she loved him (and Brian Lamb too? :puke:) NOW Randi knows NONE of those whores are her friend...NONE of them. Maybe Olbermann, but that's it. The rest of those bastards are setting her up just to knock her down. Why else would she be put on these shows with 2-3 repukes against just her? It's all bullshit and now I hope Randi has her eyes OPEN. Lou is an ass. Lou has always been an ass. Lou always be be an ASS!

BTW, I thought Randi was AWESOME.

Go to the 5:33 mark when Randi says "There is a huge difference between these parties."
Then watch the body language of the men at that statement. When she says it Giordano an Mtume both tighten up. Mtume shoots a look at Dobbs. Dobbs goes from having a relaxed and open body language to gathering in his shoulders and putting his hand up to his chin, a clear bodily expression of skepticism. This body language continues as Randi makes excellent points about those differences, particularly about Feingold standing up to Specter and Specter not even really believing in what he's doing, but doing it anyway to follow Republican party lines. She just countered their major talking point very effectively and so they need to gang up on her to get back on the track they want.

Dobbs says: "I get the partisan drift." Hmm, I didn't hear him say that about the other two's arguments, just Randi's.

Then, they all go to counter her.

Mtume even says: "Lou, take control."

They have their talking point about the parties being no different and the need for a third option and they all go after her BECAUSE she just poked boulder size holes in it.

Absolutely agree with you about Dobbs. He has been, is, and will be a WH shill and I just hope more people realize that now.

As an earlier poster wrote the bit about pemex and humans for oil in Mexico sounded ill-thought. Don't cite it unless you can back it up concisely. And tarring Republicans as closeted gays sounded like a right-wing tactic of inuendo (even though she meant it in a progressive sense.) She's given a rare opportunity as a progressive person to have a slot on a mainstream news show. The fact that her bruised ego about their laughing is more important to her than the views she has a chance (however limited) to espouse makes me question her motives.

Now, I hope when she can get her feet under her again, she'll carefully watch the tape and see where she scored and where she left herself open to snickers. Saying "Democrats don't redistribute wealth" or that they redistribute it more fairly is great on a radio talk show where you're in control; a room full of conservative men where somebody else gets the last word may not be the best platform for that piece of information.

Getting the Pemex business mentioned on mainstream TV was a coup, IMO. Nobody else is talking about it. And none of them had an answer to it.

I think she's enough of a celebrity now to start to demand a better mix of people if she is going to participate.

I thought Randi acted like a petulant teenager, and not a professional. I have been mildly disturbed by her manner before, but was ashamed to have her representing my party yesterday.

If she was being harassed in the Green Room, she shouldn't have taken the bait. Because when she was on the air, I doubt that she persuaded any viewers that Dems have better ideas or better solutions or more merit.

She was sour, and dour, and sarcastic, and whiny and rude.

And she was wrong. I would have laughed at her statement, too, about redistribution of wealth. I wonder what she thinks Lyndon Johnson's Great Society was about?

The moment a group of men can nail the woman as a "whiny female" all influence is lost. They may well have driven her to that point. But there are plenty of women who wouldn't take that bait. Janeane Garafolo for one!

She's not a politician she's a radio host.

....the radio hosts that appear on these kinds of broadcasts represent the views of their listeners. That's why they're chosen. Randi represents the view of her Democratic-progressive listeners to everyone watching her on Lou Dobbs, especially those who are not Democratic-progressive. If she can't do it right, she oughta refuse the gig.

Randi is fantastic on these shows. Rather than some long winded people who take forever to make a point, she talks fast and gets the most in (while maintaining an eloquent dialog).

She's up there fighting the enemy..... there not going to be pleasant.....but we appreciate her!

I agree with what James was saying. "The two parties are one and the same" and I don't think he meant that literally like, Dems and repubs stand for the same thing. But he is right. The Dems have voted over and over again against our best interest. Only a few have stood up and spoken against this admin and set the ball rolling for legislation and investigation. Only a few! The rest of them have let us down. They are as complicit and selfserving as the Repukes and the Murderers in the WH.
That is what I took from James' statement.

Even though we are a minority our Dem leadership has failed to be a strong united voice.

It's pathetic and we should ALL be pissed!

her frustration but I think she stayed calm, made her articulate points, and did a wonderful job of showcasing herself and the voice of AAR. She has so much invested in a dem win in nov, that she cannot admit the traitorous behavior of a large number of dems in facilitating all the crap--nafta, confirmation of nazis, tax cuts for the wealthy, soc.sec drug boondoggle, bankruptcy bills, etc.

But in the end she is right. If we go for a 3rd party, we will just divide the vote and lose. We must first gain the majority and that can't be done by constantly saying both parties are the same----that's just what the thugs want. They want everyone to throw up their hands and STFU.

ONE Republican and over 130 Democrats did NOT support the invasion of Iraq. That's the ball Randi dropped yesterday when the idiot sitting next to her was spewing his "no difference" bullshit.

Otherwise Randi did an excellent job IMHO.

I was babbling

Randi said on her show that the reason she was so upset was because everyone there concluded that democrats are the same as republicans and she's tired of being paired with weekend DJ's and part time radio show hosts, and being ganged up on.

She said people who think that way are just so scared to vote democrat that they are ready to just give up on the whole American experiment altogether.

She went on a huge rant on her show about how anyone could think democrats would be acting the way republicans are, if they were in power now, and she's absolutely right.

We are the minority yes. But our Dem leadership can still control their own votes.

As far as all the weekend DJ stuff. That's just bullshit. She could be on the same panel with Mike Malloy and Al Franken and they'd all have different takes on the same issue that was discussed on this video. What would she say then? Those guys who were on the panel with her were not speaking rightwing bullshit.

I really like Randi and I listen to her almost every day, and most of the time I agree with what she say's.
But if more of us would STOP making stupid excuses for the Dem leadership maybe, just maybe we'd see our party get a goddamn backbone and speak out.

I'm actually disappointed because she has such potential. If she'd go back and organize her response for next time, come up with getting three impactful and pronounced differences out in the short period of time necessary during this type of debate, she'd be great at delivering it.

I don't see what the big deal was.

Mr. Olbermann rarely has an interview with more than one person, but when he does, he firmly establishes the rules of civility at the beginning and nobody messes with him.

and I just don't see what the big stink was all about. What did she expect going into this thing anyway? The deck was definitely stacked against her, but she made some great points, and I think overall did a very respectable job for the Dems.

She should be proud of what she did, it's not easy being put in that position on live television.

You were great, Randi!