This morning's Ratigan/Wasserman Schultz dust-up illustrates our double standards. . .

[wndycty]

. . .and our knee jerk hero worship/demonizing.

We celebrate and praise Ratigan, Matthews et al, when they go after folks on the right, corporate shills, etc, however we are offended, disturbed and bothered when they go after our own.

I haven't made up my mind yet when it comes to Ratigan and his tactics, but I think its important to be consistent.

He is consistent with his rapid fire asking questions, answering questions before a guest can respond and talking over them style, so we need to be consistent when it comes to how we feel about it. Its either all good or all bad. Not good when he does it to "them" and bad when he does it to "us."

[dkf]

1. Oh I'm with Ratigan all the way.

I love Wasserman Schultz, but sometimes she is too programmed. He needs to get her out of robot mode and into real person mode.

[napi21]

2. What did he go after Debbie for? I turned him on, but only about 15 mins before the show

was over so I missed the dustup.

[Richardo]

3. I hate any of those assbites who don't have enough confidence to let someone speak.

Which is why I like Rachel Maddow.

Matthews is the worst.

[RaleighNCDUer]

12. I absolutely agree.

We're supposed to like it when someone uses Bill-O's tactics against THEIR side? The tactics still suck.

Besides, if you don't let THEM speak, how can you make fun of their nonsensical replies?

[T Wolf]

4. Schultz showed her true colors and loyalty during the elections when she would NOT SUPPORT

any Democratic candidates against her Florida repuke buddies.

She is another LIEberman.

[PassingFair]

7. +1

She is a true DLC team player.

She took a bullet for Clinton in the primaries.

[Fla Dem]

5. He asked her why all the Health Ins Co's stocks have gone up in the past week.

He took the stand that because there is mandated insurance and subsidized insurance this will be a windfall for the Ins companies and the people who analyze stock know it, so they are buying health ins stock. He kept asking her why the HIC's stock are going up. She responded by saying she didn't know, that the health care bill had many good features. He wouldn't let her talk AT ALL. Kept yelling over her why are the ins co stock going up? Answer me, tell me why they are going up. She said she didn't know, she was not a stock analyst, and he should have asked a stock analyst to come on his show to answer his question. He was continuing YELLING over her demanding she answer his question and then answering it himself.


I enjoy a good give and take anytime, and DO enjoy seeing the other side get their comeuppance. But I sometimes feel the left keeps shooting themselves in the foot. Instead of a meaningful debate over the good and bad points of the bill, it this incident dissolved into a grammar school bully beating up on someone whose mic volume was set lower that his. Not productive at all.
If I was her, I would NEVER go on his show again.

[Kahuna]

6. The correct answer from her should have been, "speculation, that often turns

out to be only that. Traders gamble on speculation all the time.

[Winterblues]

8. For the moment that is the correct answer

After the Bill gets signed into Law and the stocks soar it is no longer speculation but solid investment.

[Romulox]

15. Your answer ignores the real question: speculation as to WHAT?

A: Speculation of higher earnings because of a massive influx of new captive customers. (Let's remember that health insurers make money by spending less on care than they take in premiums!)

:hi:

[change_notfinetuning]

16. Health insurance stocks have been going up. That is all I need to know to

determine what the effect of this bill will be. That was his point. And your point is what - he expected an answer that any of us not dumber than shit would know, and she politicianly refused to answer what we all know, so he bullied the poor baby?

Maybe you could say he asked it rhetorically. That I could agree with. But her not being able to connect the dots - gimme a break. Not willing is more likely. And that says it all!

[petals121]

9. He lost me this morning.

I like Dylan, but his inability to let some of his guests (the ones he doesn't agree with)speak has gone from endearing to annoying. I already know what his opinion is, and although I usually agree, I would like to hear what his guests have to say. I really don't see the point of having guests on the show if he isn't going to let them speak.

Plus, he yells the same things over and over. I don't find watching these particular interviews to be a good use of my time. I think tomorrow morning it's time to find another way to spend that hour.

[Patsy Stone]

10. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[Raineyb]

11. I have no idea what you're talking about.

I have absolutely no problem with him going after Wasserman Schultz. And the question is a valid one. Why, if the reforms are so ornerous to the insurance companies are their stocks going up after we hear about the public option being dumped from the Senate Bill? And frankly, the answer is easy to come by. Those who speculate are betting that the insurance companies will make more money which is a no brainer if you put onto the books a law that forces people to buy health insurance and do nothing to make sure that the insurance companies can't gouge, rip off, and otherwise abuse it's new and old customers since the customers won't have any choice but to buy their product.

[FLAprogressive]

13. Never trust Debbie Wasserman Schultz so I say go Ratigan!

[Romulox]

14. Matthews is a groveling lickspittle who likes Obama just as much as he liked Bush. nt