Audiences Will Be Granted Sparingly, To the Right Kind of People

Future Senator/Queen Sharron Angle allows that she might possibly speak with the “lamestream media” after the election.

“And I’m hoping that as we get into this once I get elected senator,” Angle continued, “that they will be much more civil and we will have a very civil discourse.”

Angle’s big beef isn’t with Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, it’s with TV stations in her local markets. It was local reporters, not national press, who were crass enough to chase her into parking lots and impertinently ask questions. Apparently Angle thinks that something will change when she becomes Senator, and that she’ll have some power to assert over local media.

This is laughably naive. For starters, political coverage just isn’t that important to local TV stations. Local TV lives or dies based on its performance during ratings sweeps, when news directors comb their cities for anything that fucks and/or bleeds. Politics is a sideshow that leads the newscast on days when there wasn’t a five-car pileup on I-80. Plus, running after Sharron Angle, or having an interview where she walks out in a huff, is better TV than the usual boring political interview topics like water rights or agricultural subsidy payments.

The other thing Angle apparently doesn’t get is that she’s going to be putting millions into the pockets of these TV stations in six years no matter how well they treat her. There aren’t enough TV stations in Nevada for Angle to start compiling an enemies list of affiliates who won’t get her campaign cash in 2016.

If this teatard beats Harry Reid, it’s going to be painful, but watching her become a local media punching bag for 6 long years will provide at least a little bit of consolation.

54 replies
  1. 1
    Daddy-O says:

    Not ENOUGH consolation…good God, this woman is a walking disaster.

    Just try to imagine the holds she’s going to place…

  2. 2
    debbie says:

    So why isn’t Reid pushing this: that if she won’t speak to media, she must be hiding something? It’s one thing to say over and over that she’s risky — why doesn’t he use this as a concrete example?

  3. 3
    West of the Cascades says:

    And getting Harry Reid replaced as majority leader is another consolation. Besides being unable to turn a 59 and 60 vote majority into stronger bills (or ANY action on some bills), Reid is a disaster for the environment because he’s in the pockets of the mining and ranching industries.

    I’m hoping for every close senatorial race to break for the Democrats, except Nevada, so we can dump Reid, get Durbin or Schumer to run the asylum, and guarantee Jon Stewart has adequate source material from Sen. Angle for the next 6 years (not to mention the glee of the local TV stations in Nevada).

  4. 4
    Kryptik says:

    @West of the Cascades:

    Christ, as much as I have come to despise Harry Reid, losing him is not worth Angle as a senator, I’m sorry. It’ll be an absolute disgrace if he loses, simply because she’s done almost literally everything she can to discount herself as anyone worth putting in power, and yet she’s still slated to win. What the fuck kind of election is that?

  5. 5
    Ash Can says:

    Fifty bucks says she resigns eight months into her term anyway because the national media has been too mean to her and has made her a nervous wreck.

  6. 6
    Moses2317 says:

    Yes, I really don’t understand how folks are planning to vote for candidates who refuse to even talk to the media or to reveal what they believe in. Sharon Angle is similar on this front to Ron Johnson in Wisconsin, who has announced that he will reveal his positions after the election. This means that either he has no clue about the issues he is asking us to entrust him with voting on, or his views are too unpopular to tell the voters about until after they are stuck with him for six years. Either way, it is ridiculous that they might get away with this.


    Winning Progressive

  7. 7
    Kryptik says:

    @Ash Can:

    Or she could always do what reasonable conservatives do, seems like:

    Quit halfway through to run for presnit/vice presnit.

  8. 8
    NonyNony says:

    @West of the Cascades:

    You haven’t been watching the Senate Dems long enough. While it’s true that Dick Durbin is next in line for the job if Reid loses, I am confident that the Democrats will find another moderate/conservative Dem to replace Reid with. It’s what they do.

  9. 9
    Kryptik says:

    @NonyNony:

    Ben Nelson for Senate Minority Leader!!

    Seriously, I fucking wouldn’t even discount it. Things are that fucking stupid. And that’s only because Blanche Lincoln is dead in the water. I’m sure she’d be prime candidate #1 for the leadership seat if she survived reelection.

  10. 10
    Bullsmith says:

    I have to admit I feel sorry for Nevada voters. I wonder if there was a “Leave seat vacant” option on the ballot if it would win. I could see Reid losing to a bag of used toilet paper at this point, but I still can’t wrap my head around the idea of Senator Sharron Angle.

  11. 11
    Atlliberal says:

    @Bullsmith: There is a “None of the above” option on the Nevada ballot. I think it may do better this time than it ever has.

  12. 12
    El Cid says:

    Why should politicians, particularly far right wing ones, subject themselves to uncontrolled independent media when electorally they appear not to need to?

  13. 13
    jrg says:

    @debbie: Because “if you haven’t done anything wrong, you have nothing to hide” only applies to cops kicking down your door, not the media… It’s a small government thing.

  14. 14
    ChrisS says:

    @Kryptik:
    Nah, they need a moderate dem that’s in a weak democratic state instead of stronghold. Can’t take political risks that could jeopardize your senate leader, dontcha know.

  15. 15
    FlipYrWhig says:

    I thought Tom Coburn would be a national laughingstock after he said that lesbians had taken over the girls’ bathrooms in Oklahoma public schools. By the time six years had passed, he had become one of the most reasonable-seeming members of the Republican Senate caucus. I’m no longer confident that ridiculous people actually do get beaten up by the media, national or local.

  16. 16

    @Moses2317: So then why the hell is Wisconsin prepared to vote Johnson in?

  17. 17
    Shalimar says:

    @El Cid: I think this is part of what Republicans figured out after Nixon, and we have been paying the price for it since. Most of the general public doesn’t apply any ethical standard to politicians. There is very little they can’t do, as long as they never admit it and never apologize for it. If the politician refuses to show any shame, then all you will ever find is a he said/media said situation.

  18. 18

    @NonyNony: If Reid loses, it’s either going to be Durbin or Schumer.

  19. 19
    Morbo says:

    Apparently Angle thinks that something will change when she becomes Senator, and that she’ll have some power to assert over local media.

    I don’t think this is the right rationale. I think she expects to go on the Sunday morning talk shows where she’ll get proper deference from the twits who host them.

  20. 20
    Kryptik says:

    @Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle:

    Because apparently America hates Democrats, since, you know, ‘Democrats hate America’. And that impulse is more important than wondering where the fuck the economy is going or ensuring civil liberties are kept intact. Nope, nosiree, fuck the Democrats, long and hard, because that’s the American Way now.

    Oh, and apparently Raul Grijalva is in trouble now too. Probably because he’s one of those damn illegosympathizers, don’t you know.

    @Morbo:

    And that’s hardly an unreasonable expectation. Fuck, Dick Armey is given lovefests every time he’s on, and McCain is still treated as the ur-expert on everything. The only thing missing these days are the ritualized coffee and doughnut presentations for the Republicans, and the public floggings for anyone not appropriately deferent to our Galtian, Tea party geniuses.

  21. 21
    Mr Furious says:

    Angle will do all her appearances on FOX News and call it a day. End of story. Local Nevada FOX outlets will get some scraps, and others will be reduced to running footage of her from Hannity and Fox and Friends.

    They won’t let her anywhere NEAR a Sunday morning show—even on FOX. She’s a fucking moron, and the GOP higher-ups are aware of it.

  22. 22

    @FlipYrWhig: The TradMed is owned(well run anyway) by Republicans. And just look at supposed Democrats like Russert and Tweety. They both ended up as tools of Republicans, whether by choice or not.

  23. 23
    SteveinSC says:

    The Titanic 2010:

    Progressives: “Iceberg off the starboard bow”
    American People: “Hard a’starboard”

  24. 24
    lol says:

    @NonyNony:

    Even if you get Durbin or Schumer or Franken or Sanders as Majority Leader, they’re still going to have to deal with the filibuster and the good sized portion of their caucus that’s utterly afraid to change the rules. They’re still going to have to deal with conservadems and unlike the House, the Senate Dem caucus is going to become more conservative on a whole come January.

    Reid’s done an amazing job given the circumstances even if people won’t give him credit.

  25. 25

    Hey! What’s wrong with you guys? You know that politicians are protected by the Freedom From the Press clause in the Constitution.

  26. 26
    Bullsmith says:

    @El Cid:

    What is this “uncontrolled independent media” you speak of?

  27. 27
    Mr Furious says:

    @Morbo:

    I think she expects to go on the Sunday morning talk shows where she’ll get proper deference from the twits who host them.

    Just wait, the non-FOX Sunday hosts will suddenly decide to do what they should have been doing all along—push back on this bullshit—now that it’s too late.

    There’ll be a honeymoon period where they all rub their chins and review how far to the right the country just shifted, but then they’ll poke holes in the GOP narrative on occasion. They can feel good about themselves for zinging the likes of Angle or O’Donnell (God forbid).

  28. 28

    @Kryptik: If Raul Grijalva loses, we are really screwed. So screwed that I hope it means Hoyer won’t have enough mangy Blue Dogs to vote for him for Minority Leader. On the bright side, it means a lot of work leading up to 2012 and more seats the teabaggers will lose then.

  29. 29
    SteveinSC says:

    @lol:

    Reid’s done an amazing job given the circumstances even if people won’t give him credit.

    Oh, Jesus Christ, give us a fucking break. This spineless pansy is only matched by the cowards in the White House. The idea of bipartisanship and compromise only works when you have a partner who has the country’s interest at heart. The Republicans (remember No to everything) are fucking political terrorists. We are facing some of the greatest challenges to democracy in America: corporations buying elections, SA-like thuggery and disruptions of the political process, obstructionism to bring down a POTUS. Reid should have shit-canned the fucking 60 vote rules in the Senate and move legislation provided by the House (nobly representing the desires of the American people) into law.

    Reid=flaming asshole.

  30. 30
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @SteveinSC:

    Reid should have shit-canned the fucking 60 vote rules in the Senate and move legislation provided by the House (nobly representing the desires of the American people) into law.

    You are suggesting that the Senate Majority Leader can just change the rules when he chooses?

  31. 31
    Origuy says:

    At the beginning of each session of Congress, the House and Senate approve the rules under which they will operate for the next two years. I believe approval only requires a majority vote. So in January, the Senate has an opportunity to change its rules.

  32. 32
    WyldPirate says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    You are suggesting that the Senate Majority Leader can just change the rules when he chooses?

    He didn’t–and hasn’t–ever seemed to want to. Moreover, I saw him say on Maddow the other day that these are the rules we have to “work with” in reference to filibuster/cloture.

    They can change the rules at the start of every Congress. He made no effort to do so. He wouldn’t make the effort if he were to get re-elected. Why? Because he doesn’t want to, he is a piss-poor excuse for a leader and like the vast majority of congresscritters, he doesn’t have the country’s best interest at heart.

  33. 33

    @Origuy:

    So in January, the Senate has an opportunity to change its rules.

    After the election, assuming that we keep at least 51 senators, perhaps we should stage a telephone campaign to the offices of the Democratic senators in support of changing these rules.

    Somebody who is smarter about this than I am, please look into the details and see what specifically we should agitate for.

    Okay?

  34. 34
    WyldPirate says:

    @SteveinSC:

    Reid=flaming asshole.

    This. There are reasons why he is hated in his own state. I imagine that this is high on the list along with him being a fucking pansy.

  35. 35
    evinfuilt says:

    Most of the general public doesn’t apply any ethical standard to politicians.

    @Shalimar:

    When the media and comedians pound day and night that all politicians are corrupt, lie all the time and are pure sleaze. What do you expect the country to do when someone points out that their specific politician lies, is corrupt and absolutely oozes sleaziness.

    This is the expected result.

  36. 36
    John D. says:

    @SteveinSC:

    Reid should have shit-canned the fucking 60 vote rules in the Senate and move legislation provided by the House (nobly representing the desires of the American people) into law.

    So, Reid should have acted in response to unprecedented obstructionism in the Senate before it happened? Neat trick. Have you forgotten that the Dems use the filibuster to protect us from bad legislation?

    Reid should have certainly forced the assholes to actually filibuster – to make them fucking well stand up there, 24/7, and DO IT. Tossing out the filibuster? Bad, bad, bad idea. Did you ever think that might actually be a goal of the Republicans? Get rid of the filibuster without having any of the blame attach to them?

    Of course, you have all the answers and I’m just a moron. Please, continue to enlighten us.

  37. 37
    Sentient Puddle says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    You are suggesting that the Senate Majority Leader can just change the rules when he chooses?

    Evidently.

    Once one understands what can and can’t be done in the Senate as dictated by the rules, one begins to understand that Reid had a fucking impossible job. If someone understands this and still hates his guts for not being able to do something impossible, well, their prerogative. Me, I see him getting something done through all of it, and end up thinking he’s sort of under-appreciated.

  38. 38
    Sentient Puddle says:

    @WyldPirate:

    He wouldn’t make the effort if he were to get re-elected. Why? Because he doesn’t want to,

    Now here you’re just projecting and making yourself look stupid.

  39. 39
    Bob L says:

    @Ash Can: I’m backing Ash up on this bet. This an’t about the office for Angle, its about the celebrity. That’s why she has her hissies with press, it’s gets her attention. We’re in the Palin era of celebrity bimbo politician.

  40. 40
    piratedan says:

    well based on Reid’s interview with Maddow a couple of days ago, he’s still talking “bipartisanship” after having a couple of discussions with Mr. Mitchy. Perhaps he’s an altrustic, trusting soul who is basing these thoughts after many years of working with Republicans on issues that matter to the country. Unfortunately, he hasn’t realised that the Repubs have been infused with the soul of a spiteful teenage social climber. Apparently they will string Sir Harry along (should he be re-elected) like a lovesick teenager and leave him all alone at the prom, with a white sportcoat and a pink carnation.

  41. 41
    Bob L says:

    and another thing; she could careless about how voters in general feel. She doesn’t have supporters or want supporters in a conventional political sense, she has fan bois. The fact that plenty of people loath her is a plus as far as she is concerned because her fan bois thinks that makes them some special elite. She’s not trying to be Ronald Regan, she’s trying to be Brittany Speers.

  42. 42
    Moses2317 says:

    @Linda Featheringill: Yes, I think this a great idea. I don’t think we want them to entirely end the filibuster, but we could at least push for an elimination of holds and a requirement that any filibuster be a real one – i.e., that the filibustering Senators have to stay on the Senate floor and talk the entire time.

    I am going to look into this once we know the results of the election.


    Winning Progressive

  43. 43
    West of the Cascades says:

    @John D.: This: “Reid should have certainly forced the assholes to actually filibuster – to make them fucking well stand up there, 24/7, and DO IT.”

    I have been waiting two years to see piss dribble down Mitch McConnell’s pantlegs as he entered his tenth hour of reading out of the telephone book. It would make great television, too. Chuck Schumer might have the balls to put a box of Depends on the table and make the Republicans actually filibuster. Durbin might, too.

    That’s why I’ll shed no tears if Reid loses (provided the Democratic candidates do well in enough other Senate elections).

  44. 44
    Moses2317 says:

    @Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle: I’d say for three reasons:

    1. The conservative misinformation machine has been quite effective.

    2. The rest of the media no longer calls bullshit, but instead just parrots Republican talking points without caring that they have no relation to reality.

    3. Progressives have spent too much of the past year engaging in a circular firing squad rather than fighting the tea party Republicans and their corporate sugar daddies.


    Winning Progressive

  45. 45
    Sentient Puddle says:

    @Moses2317: I think we need to get into the guts of the mechanics for any good reform. For instance…

    Holds are more a procedural exploit than anything, owing to the fact that nobody wants to sit around a day prior to the cloture vote and another 30 hours after a successful vote. Drastically reduce those measures of time or allow a sort of not-quite-unanimous consent rule to bypass this (say, 75 Senators agree). The latter may be kicking the problem down the road, though.

    For “real” filibusters, they almost never were in the style of Mr. Smith, and nobody should expect going to something like that. I’d say something from a different angle. For instance, the current rule is that you need 60 affirmative votes to break a filibuster. Rejigger it so that you need 41 votes to sustain a filibuster (putting the onus on the minority). Alternatively, I’m a fan of Harkin’s proposal, where the target for cloture starts moving down as time goes on, all the way down to 51 votes.

    In any case, I think we need to be thinking about filibuster reform in these sorts of terms. Calling up our senators and screaming “END THE FUCKING FILIBUSTER!” won’t do any good.

  46. 46
    Nerull says:

    @SteveinSC:

    Should he get you a pony while he’s at it?

  47. 47
    Moses2317 says:

    @Sentient Puddle: I entirely agree with you, and have to admit that I have been too focused on the elections to dig into the mechanics of the filibuster and holds.

    If folks are interested in looking into this after election day and making a push for reform, shoot me an e-mail at:

    winningprogressive@gmail.com

  48. 48
    NobodySpecial says:

    I’ll take consolation in Senate Majority Leader Durbin if he shows up better at that job than Senate Majority Whip Durbin. Otherwise, it’s replacing one pair of moobs for another.

  49. 49
    mds says:

    Apparently Angle thinks that something will change when she becomes Senator, and that she’ll have some power to assert over local media.

    She’ll be able to better afford to hire goons who are active military, and have them curbstomp any troublesome local reporters. And there will be absolutely no consequences from it, except possibly a cake presented by Sean Hannity or some other Fox cheerleader for fascism.

  50. 50
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    @Kryptik:

    Christ, as much as I have come to despise Harry Reid, losing him is not worth Angle as a senator, I’m sorry.

    Agreed. I want Reid to go away, but Senator Sharron Angle is far too high a price to pay.

  51. 51
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Sentient Puddle:

    For instance, the current rule is that you need 60 affirmative votes to break a filibuster. Rejigger it so that you need 41 votes to sustain a filibuster (putting the onus on the minority).

    I’ve never understood why the rules are set up so it’s the responsibility of the majority to overcome the minority’s block. Even with a “real” filibuster, it’s the majority party that has to keep the quorum going, not the minority party. All the minority party has to do is send one guy, but the whole majority party has to stay or the filibuster succeeds. Dumb dumb dumb.

  52. 52
    lol says:

    @West of the Cascades:

    THE FILIBUSTER DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.

  53. 53
    Mnemosyne says:

    @West of the Cascades:

    I have been waiting two years to see piss dribble down Mitch McConnell’s pantlegs as he entered his tenth hour of reading out of the telephone book.

    Sadly, that’s not how the filibuster works. More like, “McConnell and other Republicans get to tag-team each other after a couple of hours while the Democrats have to camp out in the Senate in order not to lose the quorum.”

    With the rules of the filibuster, it would be the Democrats who would have to pull on the Depends, not the Republicans, because leaving the room would end the quorum and the filibuster would win.

    The only reason Mr. Smith ends up collapsing on the floor of the Senate in the movie is because no one else in the Senate will join his filibuster, not because only one guy is allowed to talk. Jesus, pay better attention to the fucking plot next time.

  54. 54
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Origuy:

    At the beginning of each session of Congress, the House and Senate approve the rules under which they will operate for the next two years. I believe approval only requires a majority vote. So in January, the Senate has an opportunity to change its rules.

    And they won’t, because Senators aren’t in the habit of giving up their perks and prerogatives as Senators. Most of them fully intend to make a close-to-lifelong career out of being Senators, and they care more about what they’ll be able to do in the future than they care about any pipsqueak president and what _he_ wants to do in his piddling four or eight years.

    Most Senate Democrats care at least as much about being Senators as they do about being Democrats.

    @SteveinSC:

    The idea of bipartisanship and compromise only works when you have a partner who has the country’s interest at heart. The Republicans (remember No to everything) are fucking political terrorists

    True. But voters still like hearing about bipartisanship and compromise, and they say so in poll after poll after poll. And Reid or any majority leader has to try to find compromise even within his unipartisan caucus, because conservative Democrats don’t like to ratify liberal policy. Just getting all Democrats behind something is a _massive_ effort. So everything that can happen at all in the Senate first has to run the gauntlet of conservative Democrats, then, after getting all those chuckleheads on board, you still need to poach a Republican or two, because everything is automatically filibustered and process-loving old hands in the Democratic caucus like having Filibuster Power. I don’t think it’s fixable.

Comments are closed.