Kevin Drum on Taibbi's piece: "count me among the supporters"

[mcablue]

Kevin Drum, progressive writer for MotherJones and former Washington Monthly commentator , notes the mistakes and virtues in Matt Taibbi's recent piece about Barack Obama and Wall Street, and concludes:

"So, sure, I think Taibbi overstates Rubin's influence and thereby understates the real systemic problem here, but hey — it's his article, not mine. Generally speaking, he gets his facts right and he gets the big picture right: Obama's team is nearly as dedicated to the economic status quo as Republicans are. Ditto for many — though not all — Democrats in Congress. It's worth reading."

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2009/12/taibbi-vs-obama-0

[vi5]

1. Best summary of the entire debacle....

Kevin Drum:

"The finance industry, through both standard lobbying and what Simon Johnson calls "intellectual capture," has, over the decades since Reagan was elected, convinced nearly everyone that what's good for Wall Street is good for America, and that what's bad for Wall Street would be catastrophic for America. Everything else follows from that."

This is it. This is it all in a nutshell. Beautifully and simply stated. I see so many otherwise intelligent and sane people I know fall for this in some form or another. Whether's it's believing that unions are bad, or that because the stock market is up the economy is doing well, or believing regulation that would help millions of regular people would be bad for the economy or any number of other day to day things that seep into our politics.

And yes, our democratic party with the exception of a handful of representatives and an even smaller handful of senators also falls for this.

It's pathetic, it's wrong and until it stops (which sadly I don't think it ever will) we will continue to slide deeper and deeper into an economic abyss and the band-aid stimulus plans stemming the bleeding slightly are soon enough going to cease to be sufficient.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

2. This is a dupe post

Make sure you check if things have been posted earlier next time.

[mcablue]

3. Did you scold the writers of the duplicate anti-Taibbi posts that are currently alive?

Or are you just calling "dupe" on posts that contain an opinion you dislike?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=53202&mesg_id=53202
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x53567

[spiritual_gunfighter]

5. self edit

.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KansasVoter]

4. Too Late, the DU bus has already ran over him!

[alcibiades_mystery]

7. Another post about DU

Do you do anything but metacommentary? Do you know anything about anything at all?

[KansasVoter]

12. LOL......and your posts are amazing! I read your pathetic history!

[alcibiades_mystery]

14. I have no doubt that your "research"

consists of reading DU history, since that's all you seem to write about.

Contribution of knowledge = 0.

[KansasVoter]

15. OK, "Obama is perfect", feel better now? LOL!

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KansasVoter]

18. And your Hillary Resigning post was pure Flamebait! Brilliant!

[alcibiades_mystery]

20. Welcome to the fan club

:thumbsup:

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

24. Is this post Pro-Dem?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x23631

[alcibiades_mystery]

28. That post is neither pro nor anti-Dem

It is a question that calls on people to answer consistently, and that's all it is.

I'm not even sure where this stupid "pro-Dem" "anti-Dem" nonsense even entered this thread, apart from the previous poster's inability to understand. Since I never accused anyone of being "anti-Dem" (whatever that means), the whole "Is this pro-Dem enough for you?" post seemed off-point and dumb. As for the Hillary post, it was a simple thought experiment. It is telling, though, WHO got bemnt out of shape and imputed all sorts of meaning to it.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

29. thanks for the "thought experiment" n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. You're welcome

:thumbsup:

Next time I see a major inconsistency developing, I'll post another. Cheers.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[whistler162]

11. That will happen when you lie down in front of the bus

and use a remote control device to turn the bus on and put the bus in drive.

[KansasVoter]

13. Sorry, Obama is perfect! Feel better now! LOL!

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kdillard]

8. I love it. So people admit the article from Matt T is factually challenged but still

Consider it worth reading. No thanks. I am disappointed with progressives. Who think this is an acceptable form of journalism.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

9. You obviously didnt read Drum's article

I will never understand people who base an opinion on not knowing a thing about what was posted.

[Kdillard]

22. Believe what you want. I read Drum's piece and I wouldn't exactly call

It a ringing endorsemet for journalistic integrity. Agree with Matt T. all you want nobody is stopping you from believing crap that should make any serious journalist blush but I guess that is the level we have fallen to as long as it fits anti Obama rhetoric.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

23. What exactly in Taibbi's article did you take issue with?

What was factually inaccurate other than the one thing Taibbi copped to? I am interested in hearing your reply to this.

[mcablue]

10. All the facts need not be right for a piece to be worth reading

If the facts that are wrong are unimportant, the piece may be worth reading. If key facts are wrong then it's not worth reading.

Life is not as simple as you may think it is.

[Kdillard]

25. Matt T. should not be taken seriously by any interested in the truth. The fact

That this is not the first time he has been found lacking in accurately giving the basic facts should give any serious pause. I don't do exaggeration and over the top nonesense in place of reasoned accurate analysis. If people want to hang their hats on Matt T.'s article which can be riddled with red ink so be it just don't expect me to be cheering the misinforming of the masses with that crap.

[mcablue]

27. Drum says the error is "just nitpicky bullshit"

But you continue to assert that because the American Prospect guy said that Taibbi had made numerous errors, then it must be true that the errors were numerous.

[NYC_SKP]

21. Is this Tiabbi POS article like a fucking Zombie or What???

:wtf:

[JVS]

26. but... but .. but .. He was mean to Wesley Clark!

[FrenchieCat]

31. and to Howard Dean, and to John Kerry,

and he crossed a writer's picket line,
cause he didn't really give a shit.

Matt Taibbi ain't no more perfect than anyone else.
and his work ain't all that. period.

[madfloridian]

33. Digby defends Taibbi

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/stop-making-sense-by-digby-theres-lot.html

"At the risk of repeating myself, I'll relay again my observations about the reaction Taibbi gets when he speaks to people about arcane financial issues. We were on a panel together, along with David Sirota, a few months back talking about who was standing in the way of the progressive agenda. Sirota was great on the subject of the lobbying and corruption affecting both parties as you might imagine. I droned on a bit about Pete Peterson and the deficit hawks. But Taibbi just riveted the audience with his story of the financial collapse and the Wall Street barons. They came up afterward gushing about how they had never had it fully explained to them before and they hadn't understood what it all meant, etc.

He has a way of making people understand complicated issues, which used to be something to which journalism aspired. And because he is unafraid to take a position, he doesn't observe journalistic conventions which require ordinary people to read between the lines and translate the weird Village patois in order to get some sense of the underlying truth.

Mainstream journalists may not want to adopt Taibbi's language, but they could certainly learn a thing or two from his ability to engage his audience in subjects they want (and need) to learn about. He's a flamethrower and a polemicist, yes. But he gets to the heart of things in a way that most journalists do not --- indeed, cannot because the profession has allowed its doctrine about protecting sources, achieving balance and maintaining objectivity to turn into a form of opaque, rhetorical ritual which leaves the people to whom they are allegedly speaking confused and uninformed."