Don’t Go There, Mr. President

A rare slip-up. He’s got to THINK! Not cool!

Ugh.

By the way, i think JS looks just fine.

No more joking ever again Mr. President!

Some people might disagree with what you say and yell about it on the internets for months to come!

women don’t generally consider their weight a joking matter, as i suspect michelle informed him as soon as they turned the camera off.

To be fair, this looks way worse in transcript form than on video. Lauer was teasing him about how a family photo from the inside had been altered for the cover, where Michelle and the girls were featured but he’d been totally obstructed by a sidebar. So he’s looking at the place where his face used to be, and there’s a pink headline reading “WEIGHT BATTLE” over Simpson’s picture. So he’s literally reading off of the cover Matt’s pointing to.

That and I remember hearing “in a weight battle”, NOT “losing a weight battle” as transcribed above. And I was listening for it.

I think he was just reading the cover; but either way that was TOTALLY wrong. With two daughters he ought to be FAR more sensitive to the issues surrounding weight. And sarcastr0, I’ve been through bulimia and when you look at someone as gorgeous as Jessica Simpson and SHE’S not good enough and apparently too fat then there’s something majorly screwed up that messes with your mind.

It’s a disgusting facet of our society that women, if overweight or too thin like Richie, or if they have food issues are somehow less and found wanting and ridiculed or joked over. That careless comment would have hurt me a lot if I were Simpson. It’s not cool or fair. I’d think better of the president if he apologizes.

Next he shows up on MTP wearing a “NO FAT CHICKS” t-shirt.

First it’s fantasy Sports – now it’s boneheaded comments about someone’s appearance.
.
Does anyone else get the impression that there’s a resentment growing over the fact that Obama is just another typical male?

Yeah, video here, 10:45 mark. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/01/obama-talks-football-troo_n_162971.html) He says “Who’s in a weight battle, apparently”, and then the “Oh well” is in reference to getting bumped from the front page. There’s no qualifier of “losing”.

After I heard that, I told my wife that I predict that Obama will have a major politically-incorrect incident during his Presidency involving insensitivity to women. I don’t think he’s stupid enough to give a female foreign leader a back rub during a photo-op, but this is definitely an Achilles heel of his.
.
I’m sure p_luk will be happy to weigh in with the PUMA perspective on this.

Question: Was he making the observation himself, or referencing the Us headline on Simpson? It would make a difference.

C’mon, guys. What would you be saying if George Bush had said the same thing?

Wow, are we back to Al Gore “I invented the internet” territory here? The guy was reading the damn headline lampooning the magazine for bumping him from the cover. K Tizzle please tell me this was just a snarky post. I just saw the same topic on MSNBC and at least the dimwitted Contessa Brewer even pointed out that he was reading the headline.

KT, please fix the posted transcript! Take out “losing”.

Bemused: As travellingatalanta noted, it definitely sounds worse in transcript and I totally understand how, during a Lauer interview, you are trying to stay lighthearted and speak off-the-cuff.
.
That said, I definitely cringed when I heard it.

K Tizzle
.
Thats easy. George Bush wouldn’t have said it because he can’t read!

will fix the transcript if someone can prove that it is wrong. i didn’t hear it, and those network mikes are usually pretty sensitive.

C’mon, guys. What would you be saying if George Bush had said the same thing?

KT: I’d probably be saying, “Well, its better than molesting the German Chancellor.”

KT, I posted the URL where they’ve got video (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/01/obama-talks-football-troo_n_162971.html). It’s at the 10:45 mark.

I’d seen that mag cover at the grocery about half an hour earlier. The president was far more gentle than the US fotog and editors were.
If that’s the the takeaway from tha

Sorry. As I was saying,

If that’s the takeaway from an excellent interview someone has some pretty f-ed up priorities.

Karen Tumulty-

I think you hace to go back and see the video. He said “who’s in a weight battle apparently” which is much more benign than losing the weight battle. I don’t where the “losing” came from but this is just much ado about nothing. With that said, she needs to be disciplined and restrained when it comes to the food she puts in her mouth!

Karen Tumulty-

I think you have to go back and see the video again. He said “who’s in a weight battle apparently” which is much more benign than losing the weight battle. I don’t know where the “losing” came from but this is just much ado about nothing. With that said, she needs to be disciplined and restrained when it comes to the food she puts in her mouth!

Let me guess, that was Mark Halperin’s transcript huh? I am sure Drudge will link to it pretty soon.

The point is he shouldn’t be looking at white women. What? What did I say?

Well, at least he’s consistent…
.

The Republican Party leadership in its latest act of self-immolation appointed, Michael Steele, a radical Black racist as the leader of the Party,” – David Duke.

.
From Sully’s Malkin Award nominations

Welcome back, pourme. We missed you on the most recent stimulus thread. Of course, getting the lion’s share of those Super Bowl party meatballs was more important than hanging with us. We get it.

Meatballs rule.

[...] 2, 2009 by Clyde Our media sure is stupid sometimes. Karen Tumilty of Time Magazine has her panties in a twist over Obama’s comment about Jessica’s Simpson replacing him on the cover of US [...]

I’m sure p_luk will be happy to weigh in with the PUMA perspective on this.
_
actually, I have no problem with Obama’s reaction. (the real one, not the phony “losing” quote.) It was a light, perfectly appropriate “human” moment, and if it had been a picture of a male celeb with the ‘title’ “weight battle”, I think Obama would have had the same reaction.
_

Ruh Roh K Tizzle, someone no likey your post!

TA: You are absolutely right. I’ve fixed the transcript.
.
I still think you guys would be crucifying George Bush for saying the same thing.

actually, Obama was praising Simpson for her contribution to stimulating the agriculture sector of the economy!

I still think you guys would be crucifying George Bush for saying the same thing.
_
sorry, Karen, but if I’m not criticizing Obama for it, who’s gonna be doing it!

Guys, the reality is that if Bush had said the exact same thing, the media would crucify him. Somehow I doubt that Obama will get the same treatment.

Apart from that, this guy really needs to learn something. When you’re POTUS, you don’t get to make jokes like that at other people’s expense. People may or may not like Jessica Simpson, but she really didn’t deserve this.

On another topic, here’s a great quote from Tom Daschle: “Make no mistake, tax cheaters cheat us all, and the IRS should enforce our laws to the letter.”

Is it appropriate to suggest a stimulus package I have in mind for this issue?

KT’s right.

I haven’t posted here in a bit because I was out of town for almost a month (in Harriman TN where my mother lives,and where is the media coverage about that disaster?)and was subsequently very busy catching up at work.

That was a really stupid thing to say on Obama’s part. He shouldn’t have touched the weight issue in any way.

On the other hand, we have very serious problems in this country (including a terrible ecological disaster that is getting very little national scrutiny)and reporters should not make a mountain out of a molehill, as we have plenty of real mountains to scale in order to get out of this economic mess.

I’ve read this blog long enough to know that if Bush did this, people would be on yelling “I have a link to this article about how Bush is gonna bomb Iran with the Gitmo detainees!! Why are you writing about this funny stuff?!!”

Thanks, KT!

And you’re right, I’d be pissed at GWB. But none of these comments exist in a vacuum, and Obama’s got a better track record of being considerate and moderate in his comments, while Bush was all about foot-in-mouth syndrome. Who knows, a few more slipups like this, and Obama might also earn instant, merciless evisceration via web. But for now, I’m inclined to give him a pass.

southern: i don’t think a blog post is making a mountain out of a molehill. and i try to do a mix of posts here, some serious and others less so. but i must say, i’ve noticed that lighthearted ones often get way more comments than more serious ones.

I might be in the minority on this, but I like a woman who looks healthy. The starved look has never appealed to me. I also think the comment was a minor mistake. I think we all have just a little fascination with tabloids. Maybe the President glances through them for laughs and had read something about her weight. The response seemed light hearted enough to me. If Bush would have said it, it wouldn’t have made any difference there either. He screwed up enough on the real issues that something like this wouldn’t have even registered. One thing to consider, if a woman with a healthy appetite gets sick and loses 30 pounds, she looks good. A woman who is rail thin gets sick and loses 30 pounds, she’s a corpse. Have a slice of pizza ladies. There are those of us out here who love you for who you are, not how thin you look.

A lot of Psychics out there! give it a rest, Bush will never say it as Prez coz he’s gone for good. Thank God!

What part of he was reading the damn headlines can nobody understand? He didn’t say she was fat, he read what was on the front frikkin page to LAMPOON US Weekly for knocking him off the cover for that bullsh*t. Man if this is what otherwise reasonable women think about a very harmless situation I am not sticking around to hear rose83′s diatribe.
.
And K Tizzle if your whole shtick is that you posted it because we “would have crucified George Bush for saying it” doesn’t that make your argument terribly weak? I’m just sayin.

…I just watched the video, and maybe it was the lighting/camera angle, but Obama looked kinda bloated, didn’t he?

SG: that wasn’t WHY i posted it. but that is my reaction to your reaction.

One of the worst interviews I have ever seen. Everyone in Lauer’s business should be ashamed of his questions, tone, and demeanor.

Know what else happened on NBC yesterday? David Gregory made up some statistics about Social Security to bolster Republican arguments about the stimulus bill, then had a panel stacked with Republicans to discuss the stimulus bill.
You can sure see why the Howler Monkeys booed the NBC booth at the McCain convention.
**
On topic: I took this to be Obama mocking the triviality of Lauer bringing up Us magazine.

Do you think this story would’ve gotten the same coverage if the magazine had had a picture of a man instead of Simpson and the headline had been “love rat”? Because I still think Obama was just reading off an amusingly absurd headline, rather than making any sort of social comment on Simpson. Either way, Obama’s probably getting aversion training to any mention of weight, but I think this is a simple case of reading a funny-sounding headline.

I mean, it’s absurd — “Jessica Simpson in WEIGHT BATTLE”? It sounds like a sumo wrestler attempted a home invasion or something.

“I still think you guys would be crucifying George Bush for saying the same thing”
.
I’ve read variations on that theme lately. After the House vote it was something along the lines of “You were all upset when Bush forced his bills through but now it’s okay for Obama?”
.
Will this be the 2009 version of “I thought you were liberal” when people objected to Kristol getting a NYT gig?

Looks to me like he wasn’t commenting on Jessica’s figure as much as the “Big Scandal News of the Day!!!” Economy in turmoil, bankers not trustable, Wall Street playing while USA burns, wars, oil, climate change, real issues, and instead the gossip rag focuses on whether someone is or isn’t fat.

I think it’s nothing more than the old “lipstick on a pig” thing. There’s no “there” there.

I also think JS looks just fine.

KT, I wasn’t referring to you in particular but to the media in general. I’ll be surprised if Fox and even CM and DS on MSNBC don’t give Obama’s comments some airtime, and not in a lighthearted way.

travellingatlanta

not sure that Obama doesn’t also have foot-in-mouth disease . . . .

57 states; explaining that he lost Kentucky (a state that borders his adopted state, Illinois) to Clinton because she’s from that part of the country; Iran goes from being not a threat to a grave threat in the space of a day; lipstick on a pig; “gee guys I’ve answered like eight questions”; his “China’s infrastructure is better than ours” rif (note to Barack, when earthquakes strike here, we don’t have thousands upon thousands killed because of substandard construction).

And those are just what I can remember off the top of my head.

“I still think you guys would be crucifying George Bush for saying the same thing.”

KT: I don’t really understand this sentiment because you’re claim that we would be crucifying Bush had he said the same thing doesn’t naturally segue into your implied claim that we would be right for doing so.

“I still think you guys would be crucifying George Bush for saying the same thing.”
.
I don’t think so. At least I wouldn’t have. It was a pretty benign comment. As soon as he said though I knew there would be people listening for something to make an issue out of.

KT-By the way, did you do a post about Dick Armey’s comments?

charity and gunny:
.
i say that because i recall how gleefully commenters here jumped on bush’s malaprops.
.
and take it from me, guys. don’t EVER comment on a woman’s weight. also, if she asks you: “do i look fat in this?”–the answer should ALWAYS be no. trust me on this.

Has Dick Armey been a relevant figure to anyone anywhere since the 90s?

gysgt
.
Ooops don’t ask that question. I mean why draw a false equivalence between President Obama’s innocuous comments and Dick Armey’s obviously sexist and repugnant comments and how Armey’s offense never made it into a Swampland post. I mean I am sure KT et all have a very good reason why they ignored the former big time Republican congressman’s truly reprehensible comments. And besides we wouldn’t have made a stink if Rahm Emmanuel said the same things that Armey said would we?
.
snark

charity
.
Evidently he is relevant enough to be on Tee Vee flogging Republican talking points about the stimulus bill which would probably make him more relevent than you or I.

Like it or not, we’re all about to pretend we think that Dick Armey has been a relevant figure to anyone anywhere since the 90s…

guys, i’ve got to go do some work now. but, sg, i can’t believe you really see an equivalence between what a washed-up pol says on a lightly rated cable show, and what the current POTUS says on a nationally televised interview that leads up to the super bowl.

i say that because i recall how gleefully commenters here jumped on bush’s malaprops.

**
Was it a “malaprop” or was he reading the headline that Matt Lauer, Very Serious Journamalist, brought into the interview?

Even if I were to concede that Armey were relevant enough to cover, the point here is that relative to Barack Obama – the focus of Amy’s post – Dick Armey is almost as relevant as, well, you or I.

JimFL, thanks for bringing up DG’s awful performance yesterday.

DG is the worst kind of reporter, another in a long line of MSM types who is more desperate to prove he’s not librul than in informing Americans.

I think he will continue to do the terrible job the late TR did on MtP.

No, Bush just made fun of blind people.
-
That said – the president probably shouldn’t joke on tape. It can’t do any good, and at worst it can backfire. (We begin bombing in 5 minutes?)
-

see an equivalence between what a washed-up pol says on a lightly rated cable show,

Oh, KT, now you’ve gone and made Tweety cry.

But you made me chuckle.

And are you implying that jousting with us about utter trivialities isn’t “work”? As a TW stockholder, I think I’m getting better return out of this than paying for some gomer to go to a Swiss ski resort to schooze, booze, ski and eat rösti. None of which I can afford to do, in part because of that TW investment.

KT: First off, I think you need to clarify what you mean by “crucified”. If you mean that Bush would have been mocked in the Swampland comment threads, then you are probably correct. If you mean that the media would have “crucified” Bush then…whoa, excuse me for breaking into an uncontrolled fit of laughter (again, see Merkel, Angela). But I will concede that Bush would have taken more heat in the Swampland comment threads.
.
Now three questions for you:
.
(1) If Obama’s comment was arguably in bad taste, why is THAT more important than US Weekly publishing the cover in the first place?
.
(2) You work for a company Time-Warner that has no problem “going there” to make a buck. Do you have any problem with the editorial choices of, say, People magazine with regard to commenting on the weights of celebrity women?
.
(3) Former Swampland contributor Dick Armey recently appeared on Hardball and displayed a far more offensive attitude towards women. He wasn’t merely impolite. He was flat-out sexist and boorish. If Swampland (or the rest of the MSM) had any words of criticism of Armey, I missed the “crucifixion”. Any thoughts?

K Tizzle says
.,

i can’t believe you really see an equivalence between what a washed-up pol says on a lightly rated cable show, and what the current POTUS says on a nationally televised interview that leads up to the super bowl.

.
Right so Armey gets a pass because he is on Hardball, which is “lightly rated”. Wow. Of course the real point I was making was the difference between a REAL sexist comment and a FAKE one but pay me no mind. Thats a very illuminating statement from you actually. Thanks for that

“i say that because i recall how gleefully commenters here jumped on bush’s malaprops.”
.
KT-I don’t comment on people’s weight man or woman. If GWB made the same comment in the same context what in the world would there be to upset about? Simpson rightly or wrongly is being talked about because of her weight to the point the mag Matt was referring to knocked Obama of the cover in favor of her. Was Matt wrong for bring it up in the first place?

He read the friggin headline when Lauer showed how he had been cut out of the cover. People need to get a grip and, yes, I’m a woman. I saw it when it aired live. This is rather ridiculous.

This is a great example of why we end up with politicians who are scared to say anything other then a memorized talking point.

I’m kind of surprised at you here, Karen. You seem to usually have plenty of common sense. The use of the word apparently also made it seem like just another tabloid story about some celebrity. I’m sure he could make some comment about how if you believe everything in the magazines then he has been abducted by aliens and Michelle should be about 13 months pregnant (since the Iowa caucuses).

C’mon, Tumulty. The President’s point was a joking reference to the fact that the leader of the free world got dumped for something as trivial as a starlet’s weight change. Simpson herself, I might add, is so inane she complimented Bush Secretary of the Interior Gail Norton on what a great job she (Norton) had done decorating the White House.

The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com

Now, what was LAUER up to? Of all the important/weighty things he could have asked the POTUS of the greatest nation (in the south part of North America) …..
.
” .. Mr. President, just don’t go there.”
Touchy, touchy ..

Tell us your weight battle story, KT.

re: “lightly rated cable shows”

c’mon Karen, we all know that these “lightly rated” cable shows actually determine not merely what is newsworthy, but how the issues are framed, because while only a few million people may watch them, villagers watch them obsessively — and its the villagers who determine “conventional wisdom”, “controversy”, and “acceptable opinion.”

To be fair to KT, if you saw it in transcript first (as I did as well), the comment appears to be an out-of-left-field gossipy presidential remark about a starlet. As in, he brought up Simpson’s weight unprompted.
.
When you look at the video and realise Matt’s waving a magazine that reads “WEIGHT BATTLE!” in the space where Obama’s head should be and asking him to comment, it’s a totally different impression.

Had Obama said what NBC’s transcript said he said, KT’d be right – Do Not Go There. Even if you’re just reading the headline. And I’m sure Michelle would’ve dope-slapped him the minute the cameras were off, if not before. Even so, this post would not merit what I would call a Terribly Serious Discussion. Now that KT’s corrected the transcript, though, and it’s apparent he Did Not Go There, this continued navel gazing is even more pointless. Next, please.

Actually, Armey’s words to Joan Walsh were picked up with glee by Chris Wallace at Fox, giving them a much wider viewership.

I think KT is missing the emphasis here by Obama, which seems to be directed toward the triviality of the US Weekly coverage of a celebrity’s weight, and implicitly, Matt’s questioning the President about it.

What is this…f@cking Page Six now? You know what I took away from that interview, which you conveniently don’t mention. It’s that just when Obama was explaining to the American people what you in the media refuse to do, is that the Dems in congress HAVE MADE COMPROMISES…the sound cut out. I’m sure it’s just a big ole co-winky-dink, just like the time CBS ‘accidentally’ edited out an embarrassing answer for John McCain and inserted a non controversial one.
.
…and you decided to post about this but not about your former colleague Dick Armey. Another coincidence I’m sure.

This is high on the list of most inane Swampland posts ever.

KT –
southernbell’s observation applies to both Armey’s medium of exposure and Obama’s, and it tends to undercut your dismissal of the former. You can’t assume a little old blog posting is immaterial, as it quickly can become an item on cable news, then on the networks, then in the dead-tree media. I don’t know how many times during the campaign I cringed at an online, off-the-cuff observation having no real consequence instantly being adopted – and run into the ground – over one “news” channel or another.

Ms. Tumulty, suggest you actually WATCH the video before blogging next time. The video was pretty clear — the president was READING the People magazine cover and not just exchanging banter with Matt Lauer.

That you jumped on this without checking the facts says more about you, IMO, than President Obama. Oh wait, I get it. Bloggers aren’t really journalists.

“I still think you guys would be crucifying George Bush for saying the same thing.”
.
No, but I’d be willing to crucify him for the tens of thousands of deaths he’s caused.

I hope President Obama has decided not to waste time with Matt Lauer in the future. I’d imagine the reason he did the interview in the first place was to show his down-to-earth “human” side, which I think we are all well aware of by now. The comment he made referring to the magazine was just that – something any normal person would say in a conversation. To borrow words from Bush (which is a REAL first for me)… so what?

I did not like Obama calling a female reporter “sweetie” during the campaign, but I saw this live and did not take offense. It seemed clear that he was sort of rolling his eyes at the silliness of the US magazine story.

(I was a lot more upset at all those GoDaddy ads last night during the Super Bowl.)

Man if this is what otherwise reasonable women think about a very harmless situation I am not sticking around to hear rose83′s diatribe.
.
SG… what can I say? I seriously don’t know why you’re obsessed with the idea that I’m this irrational angry woman. This is all getting a little too weird for me.
.
And I don’t think his comment was sexist (the “in” makes it very different than “losing”). I assume he was making fun of US Weekly and his family’s new “celebrity” status. It was just insensitive to Jessica Simpson. There are a lot of things that are fine to say in the privacy of your home, or even in public, that become problematic when you say them on TV AND you’re the most powerful person in the world. And I say this as someone who has made Jessica Simpson jokes. Anyway I agree with KT that Michelle would have quickly explained why bringing up a woman’s weight problem on TV is not a good idea.
.
It must be quite the learning curve: 5 years ago he was an ordinary member of the Illinois Senate and now every word he utters is micro-analyzed.

Isn’t the real “issue” here, if there is one, the embarassing melding of politics and entertainment? Another recent example: I foolishly tuned into the network’s “recap” shows on inauguration day, hoping to watch Obama’s speech or at least a good portion of it. Instead, I watched George Stepenapolous and Diane Sawyer comment on everyone’s fashion and had to endure “what this means to me” speeches from the likes of Beyonce and Ashanti.

And, please — JS, in her current version, is fat. No way to sugar coat it. Girlfriend needs to lay off the Ho Hos.

KT — I know you’re just having some fun and every now and then that’s a good thing. But give me break, Obama wasn’t commenting on how she looks, he was commenting on the headline — this was post was very deceptive.

People like Gary in NC got his shorts in a bunch with Obama READING the headline of a magazine during an interview…

Wow, find something of importance to discuss like the economy, or at least the Super Bowl, since this is as important as paint drying

De gustibus non disputandum est, I guess, but I’d hit it so hard anyone who pulled me out would be declared the King of England.
.
…we return you now to your previous decorous discussion, which is already in progress.

SG — my kindred spirit. I hadn’t had a chance to read the entire thread until after I posted my comment about the headline on the cover. But once again I find that we the exact same perspective.

Hi Southernbell,

Completely O/T. We’re temporary transplants in the north but still have a home in Rockwood TN – on the river and 5 miles downstream from the TVA coal plant. We ski (well, we used to) on the Little Emory river that flows past Harriman.
.
The toxic debris and environmental mess will take years to clean up and I don’t understand why this seems to have completely fallen off the news cycles. It isn’t affecting as many people as the economy but perhaps some bit of coverage since it’s clear TVA is trying to lie their way out of this.
.
Two things we have really come to terms with recently…(1)Clean coal is a myth. A dangerous myth. (2) Arsenic is not something you want floating past your home (or seeping into your well.)

“I still think you guys would be crucifying George Bush for saying the same thing.”
.
Frankly, this is ridiculous, the sheer magnitude of the number of ineptitudes in the Bush column pretty much guarantees that we would never have time to rant about this triviality.

“The toxic debris and environmental mess will take years to clean up and I don’t understand why this seems to have completely fallen off the news cycles.”
.
A)Corporate interest in continuation of fossil fuel economy.
B)None of that toxic sludge made it’s way to any Beltway cocktail parties.
C)The media sucks @ss.
D)all of the above.

KT — thanks for going under the hood and reviewing the clip. And updating your post. I think everyone (Media included) was all over Bush for his inability to speak in complete sentences. Then came 911 and we were at war and almost all MSM criticism of 43 came to a screeching halt.
.
You’re right this is a blog. I would submit that our country is in a worse crisis than it was in 2001 after the attacks. I think in the harsh light of day, we should hold Obama accountable for appointing tax evaders and lobbyists to his cabinet, question whether he is kowtowing to the republicans, breaking his political promises, etc., etc. Those issues deserve scrutiny and should be challenged by the press and the public, and by you, MS or anyone else here at Time.
.
But this post about JS and Obama on today is nonsense and in IMHO a BFWOT. Hey call him out on the other stuff if you want KT, it’s fair game, but don’t get in the sewer with rest of the rats. I have a lot of respect for you as a journalist. I really do.

Open question: from reading the thread I think most commenter are on the side of seeing this whole discussion as ridiculous. But I’m curious:
.
For those of you who feel that his words were somehow offensive — considering we live in a country that discriminate with impunity against people who are overweight and fat people are the only people you can insult that doesn’t require a mea culpa in the morning. Hell it doesn’t even trigger a 7 second delay on either day time or late night comedy shows. So please tell me what with all the sudden concern because POTUS drew additional attention to a woman who went from a size zero to a size 12 (the camera does put on extra pounds).

Dee
.
Yeah this post by K Tizzle made my stomach turn. I enjoy “fun” posts as much as the next guy but its pretty apparent that this wasn’t snark. Its also apparent that K Tizzle didn’t even see the interview on Tee Vee to know what the context was. Just like Joke Line with the “rookie mistake” post she wrote it backwards and thats something I guess I ASSumed K Tizzle was immune to doing. When K Tizzle starts posting crap like this, who knows what Scherer will be flogging next.

Good point Cincy. We were well aware of the mercury in the water (a by-product of porous filtering on the coal stacks – it floats around in the atmosphere and eventually comes back to the ground) but somehow we rationalized it by telling ourselves that mercury is heavy, it sinks to the bottom of the river, and that eating the catfish is a bad idea. We’re not exactly reactionaries when it comes to pure clean living (we’re in bourbon and moonshine country) but this has been enough to shake a lot of us out of our complacency.
.
Some of our friends have lost their homes (TVA is offering to buy them out at ‘fair market value’ and they’re going to lose their shirts) and the wildlife – including the deer that drank at the river’s edge in front of our bedroom window every morning – are going to live how long with these metals and contaminants?

Sorry for being so O/T but it was pure negligence and a very beautiful part of this country has been poisoned.

I saw that comment by Obama last night, and figured there would be some histrionics about it on Fox or their ilk. I didn’t expect to see it here.

And, if Bush had done the same thing I would not have cared. However, given the fact that he was responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people, thousands of US troops for no good reason and wiped his a$$ with the constitution, he is deserving of any and all criticism from anyone at any level.

SG — I know what you mean it’s the kind of thing I’ve learned to expect from Mika or practically any other reasonably decent (a relative term and the bar is set really low) journalist that appears on morning Joe more than once.
.
I’m also glad you called her on her reasoning for not posting about Armey. This is that scale thing again. If it’s bad it’s bad. To me it’s all crack versus cocaine. If I’m not going to give Brooks and Will a pass KT can’t get one either. So the “decepticon of the day is Karen Tumulty.

Dee, there’s a certain irony that obesity is killing our children and us in this country and when there is an opportunity to have a meaningful discussion, all we can to do is point and laugh.

I haven’t seen the clip, so I will when I get home. Reading the revised words on the transcript, I found it hard to be offended. When i watch it I may form a different opinion.

I had to take a few days off from the swamp so my head didn’t explode.

Echoing a point that was made upthread, isn’t the fact that her weight was being referred to on the cover of a magazine 50 times more offensive than the fact the Obama had the audaicty to mention it on TeeVee.
.
If your going to base your entire income stream on the human tendency toward gossip AND the resultant insecurity over appearance that such things feed, then you’re not in a good position to complain if someone makes an offhand comment on the topic.
.
Time/Warner’s whole business model is geared around that very insecurity. That is hardly Obama’s fault.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_Time_Warner

I’ll take one fluff post (AS’s) 50+ comments and raise you an even puffier piece (100+). The J-communists refer to the 3 S’s: Sex, sports and screen–as the trio of safety valves to keep the sheep happy.

It doesn’t matter what Obama says about Jessica. Don’t worry Jessica because there is always hope… wait, oh no! Hope only comes from Obama. Ah, poor Jessica, your screwed.

It’s unfortunate that a misquote kicked off this blog post.

I saw the interview. Obama was simply remarking on a headline. If the headline had said “Aliens invade New York,” he’d have commented on that. It was tongue-in-cheek.

When I heard him make the comment, I told my wife that it wouldn’t surprise me if the Drudge Report took it out of context. Little did I know it would be a Time.com writer who did just that.

Congratulations, Karen. You’ve produced the most vacuous post that I can remember seeing from you in about 3 years of looking at Swampland. Don’t you have anything interesting to write about? So what if Obama noticed a headline? Why should anyone waste two minutes thinking about the fat content of Jessica Simpson. There are reasons why people have given up on journalism and the news outlets – and this is one of them. You insist on dumbing down your work to the level accessible to a particularly crass 12 year old, and then wonder why you lose readers. Jessica Simpson’s weight is not important – it’s just another piece of second-grade celebrity trivia-trash. If you want to apply for Gawker, go ahead. But don’t try ginning up this sort of vomit-worthy fake outrage here. Talk about something interesting and substantive, or quit the field.

My, my! I walk away from my computer for a few hours and the next thing I know this thread has #106 comments!
.
As someone who’s taught online, usually relying heavily on asynchronous discussion, I find Swampland fascinating. The venomous comments I’ve read today — aimed at Karen Tumulty, Joe Klein and Amy Sullivan — suggest a serious disturbance in the Force.
.
It might be interesting to have a discussion thread now and then on the State of the Blog, with all the Time writers participating. A few questions: what is the role of the journalist/blogger when the blog is owned by a major media corporation? What do readers expect, in tone and content? What is the relationship between the different roles of the professionals (KT at Swampland, Karen Tumulty in the pages of Time or providing analysis on CNN?) What is the role of the “regulars”, the ones we know by screen name and occasional personal revelations (which may or may not be true). Today there seemed to be an unusual level of name-calling and aspersion-casting; Super Bowl hangovers or hormones?
.
Blogs are still evolving, and being shaped by bloggers and readers together. Time for a Swampland Town Meeting?

joyo, what exactly is “asynchronous discussion”? where the top person sets the topic, the underlings discuss? How does that work in an online teaching environment? Do you get much discussion and useful discussion in that venue? seems like it would be even more disjointed than a blog.

it’s a discussion (like this one) where people participate at different times. I log in and post, then 15 minutes later you read and post. The other kind of discussion is synchronous, i.e. chat, which is done closer to real time. Imagine how Swampland would be different in a chatroom, or in Second Life (whee!) or in a classroom or at a bar. That kind of question interests me.
.
In the teaching environment, the role of moderator is pretty important for keeping the discussion on track and the discourse civil. Sometimes I lead discussions and sometimes students do.
.
My observation is that one of the things the Swamplanders like is when the blogger joins the discussion — which KT often does. We don’t have an official moderator, though solmetimes the “regulars” deputize themselves to keep order.
.
I like teaching online. You have no idea how freeing it is, after 34 years of teaching to be able to laugh out loud when a student says something really stupid.

Ah. but I can only imagine!
.
Interesting concept. I imagine the swamp discussion is somewhat more vigorous at times than your moderated classroom discussions. How successful is that model for online learning? Do you have to require participation? Are there particular subjects where it works better? For example, poli sci vs. psychology?
.
I have seen data that indicates for blogs, only one out of 20 readers *at best* actually post comments. Of course we aren’t doing it for a grade!
.

Karen, you wrote:

“i don’t think a blog post is making a mountain out of a molehill. and i try to do a mix of posts here, some serious and others less so. but i must say, i’ve noticed that lighthearted ones often get way more comments than more serious ones.”

Maybe this is why:

“And Karen Tumulty of Time magazine – who first wrote about the Gores and Love Story – explained more than once that Al Gore had never tried to claim a greater role as the inspiration for the popular novel and Movie than what author Eric Segal had confirmed to her.” Joe Conoson’s “Big Lies”, p.43.

These little stories acquire a life of their own, and they often have direct political consequences.

Usually my online discussions are required and graded. I’ve had some great discussions — large group, small group and one-on-one — using this format. My experience is only in American Studies, which tends to use discussion quite a bit anyway. Online discussion gives everyone a chance to be heard, if done right. In my very first class to use online discussion (1994), I had a blind student, who said it was the first time he really felt like he was part of the class.
.
What’s your idea of a great Swampland discussion?

KT, a member in good standing, knows:
.
The First CYA Rule of Village Journalism Club is never speak of Village Journalism Club.
.
The Second CYA Rule of Village Journalism Club is never admit you’ve made a mistake.
.
The Third CYA Rule of Village Journalism Club is never admit another member made a mistake.
.
The Fourth CYA Rule of Village Journalism Club is claim high-minded balance and/or dodge responsibility by touting false equivalence.
.
The Fifth CYA Rule of Village Journalism Club is denigrate outsider ‘lessers’ who simply don’t and can’t ever know the exalted morals/ethics of Village Journalism Club.
.
The Last CYA Rule of Village Journalism Club is when all else fails simply walk away and act as if any mistake/offense never occurred.
.

.
Oh! Interesting! How do you grade something like that? Quantity? Quality? How do you set criteria? You must have some great classes. Is that college level? Grad school?
.
Great swampland discussion. hmmm. good question. Probably the most interesting one I recall, with greatest participation, recently was on education and union issues here:
Swampland – TIME.com » Blog Archive Can Michelle Rhee Save Public Education? «
Us swamp people were left to our own devices all weekend while the Swampland Elite were off partying somewhere.
.
I’ve had some great conversations with some of the other posters that lasted long after everyone else had moved on. There are a lot of brilliant and interesting people that occupy this space, as you probably know.
.
This is a three-way conversation (after everyone else had moved on) I had about data mining:
Swampland – TIME.com » Blog Archive Cheney on Torture «.
.
But there have been many, many others.
.

I teach college level, mostly undergrad, using criteria I’ve developed over time. Online discussion are graded on a simple point system: 2=positive contribution, 1=warm body (me too!), 0= AWOL, -1= intellectual bullying or other destructive acts (ex.- trolling). (I use the same rules in class, as well). I enjoyed the links you gave; parts of today’s discussions seemed particularly contentious and non-productive. Some of the regulars would have gotten -1 for bullying in my grade book. (No cookies, either!)
.
But, as I mentioned earlier, I do think Swampland is play for many of us. Serious play, like recess.

Is that by the comment, or an overall grade? Does one, um, get a chance to redeem himself after an “intellectual bullying” mark, or not? (hangs head, hands in pocket.)
.
Play, is one facet. Swapping information another, I think. Testing hypotheses. All interesting.
.

By the comment, otherwise there is no room for growth. And swapping information and testing hypotheses are equally at home in work and play. (Truth or Dare, 20 Questions)

karen, sorry but this was a disgusting post. reminded me of the who lipstick on a pig controversy. grow up. chill out. he was just READING the headline. Shame on you for having POTUS or his team explain themselves. in case you hadn’t noticed the country ha a TON of problems. just because you have a job, doesn’t mean everyone else’s life is all hunky dory. And fyi I am a woman with weight issues and I don’t freakin care if potus reads a headline from a stupid magazine.

This is precisely why Sarah Palin doesn’t read newspapers.

Reading headlines, apparently, gets you into trouble.

I believe more of interest is that the President is in US Weekly. Every time I am at the store I see him on People, Entertainment Weekly, GQ, US Weekly, what is next Teen Beat as hunk of the month?

It is great that President Obama is so popular. Popularity and charisma, when well applied can be great for a leader. We need to try to remember however that he is the real President making REAL decisions that will impact us for generations to come. This is not Martin Sheen pretending to be President on The West Wing, or whoever is currently playing President on 24.

This is utterly ridiculous. I am a woman who could possibly be oversensitive to men making fun of women’s weight. And I saw the interview with Matt Laeur on TV. And I noticed absolutely nothing wrong with this moment. Obama read the headline that was on the magazine when Lauer held it up. Any woman actually saying she was dismayed by this moment or whatever is not only oversensitive, she is reading far too much into absolutely nothing. This is insane. Can we grow up please?

p.s. And I wouldn’t be ‘crucifying’ Bush for ‘saying’ the same thing. There were many, many, stupid and awful things that Bush did, and reading some words aloud off of a magazine cover would not even have made it onto my radar.