Skip to main content

The following is a copy of an e-mail I sent to Stu Rothenberg, editor of the Rothenberg Political Report in response to his disastrous analysis of the CT-SEN primary, which you can find here:

Mr. Rothenberg,

   I find it extremely offensive that you call Ned Lamont supporters in your recent review ("What happens after Lieberman loses?") of the CT-SEN primary "crazies" and "bomb-throwers." Simply because Americans support a particular candidate does not make them crazy and by making this claim, you are furthering the "partisanship and bitterness" that you so readily disdain. Maybe it is because when Republicans throw bombs or talk crazy, as most do, it does not bother you. But how dare a Democrat be tough and stand up to Republicans on a foolish, and ill-conceived strategic blunder that is Iraq. Maybe you can actually try to be an objective analyst and objectively analyze this race, without injecting your bombastic rhetoric that demonizes and villainizes voters. I think you owe them an apology, publicly. And if you dismiss this letter as some sort of extremist rhetoric, I dare say that you are just as closed-minded and unfair as those you try to admonish.

Someone should tell Rothenberg that he is a hack, and has no place in objective analysis.

Originally posted to ahf8 on Thu Aug 03, 2006 at 05:08 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Fair hack? (0+ / 0-)

    What a strange title!

    Rothenburg could be considered a "fair" hack, too.

    Get used to statements by those who-know-more-than-we-do that we are elitists (Broder), vemonous lambs (Brooks), or crazies (Rothenberg).  

    They KNOW more than we do and we don't seem to recognize this.

    The wise are driven by reason; ordinary minds, by experience; the stupid, by necessity, and brutes by instinct. Cicero

    by MoDem on Thu Aug 03, 2006 at 05:16:12 PM PDT

  •  Looks like a bad link to the analysis (0+ / 0-)

    I clicked & got "page cannot be displayed," twice--you might check that out.

    May I bow to Necessity not/ To her hirelings (W. S. Merwin)

    by Uncle Cosmo on Thu Aug 03, 2006 at 05:17:26 PM PDT

  •  It was pretty... (0+ / 0-)

    fair analysis until the last two paragraphs when he seems to have gone off the deep end.

  •  They are all so elitist and know it all (0+ / 0-)

    You know, I can sort of understand extremely smart people getting frustrated at the general public for simply not understanding how they see things.  But I only understand it for those who are actually smart, successful, and know what they're talking about.  I've never seen a group of people who acted so better than thou, smarter than though, and who yet simply were such failures.  I think that sums up the conservative movement to a tee.  A bunch of elitist, better than thou, failures who are extremely unaccomplished.

  •  Ah, it's so simple. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steve Singiser

    Because if Lieberman is obsolete, it renders Stu obsolete as well.

    If I were to send Mr. Rothenberg a reply, it would consist of one sentence: "Who, exactly, are these "crazies" of whom you speak?" Frankly, he deserves no more of my time.

  •  Disappointing, To Say The Least... (0+ / 0-)

    It is hard to stomach a respected analyst so breezily parroting right-wing talking points.

    The only way I respect this analysis is if I see him call the Club for Growth "extremist crazies" within the Republican Party.

    Then, at least, he is an elitist snob, instead of a right-wing shill.

    "It. Is. About. Winning."

    by Steve Singiser on Thu Aug 03, 2006 at 05:39:16 PM PDT

  •  This won't go down well with the hackocracy. (0+ / 0-)

    As I wrote this morning, two themes have been prepared for the corporate media: "hijackers" or "paper tigers." Which goes with what result is obvious.

    Fuck 'em. Fun and games are over.

    •  when the conservatives took over the GOP (0+ / 0-)

      they called them hijackers, too. They didn't care, though, because they controlled a major political party.

      When we win and take over the Democratic party the label of hijackers won't matter, either.

      eyes on the prize.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site