Comments on: McCaughey Vs. Ratigan: “One Of The Most Browbeating Interviews In TV History”

By: martinac

martinac — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:55:24 +0000

Hey thanks for providing the video. I have heard lots of good thing about Ratigan. He is witty and very courageous, have a very good sense of humor. I would love to see the video how he takes over the interviewer. aminosäuren

By: ImNotBlue

ImNotBlue — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 03:38:21 +0000

Thanks Nachi… as always, your comments add a lot to the discussion. But next time, don’t hold back… tell us how you really feel.

By: Nachi

Nachi — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 02:43:42 +0000

And here they are: Chris, Chuck, the rest of the uneducated, unthinking wanna-be-a-Nazi troglodytes. Trying their Repug best to somehow “identify” w the ultra wealthy. Nameless Little People with unknown qualifications. Living half-lives that, indeed, are not worth living at all. Vomiting forth opinions & recorded mantra of which they typically know nothing. Repressive, repugnant Republiscum rodents. Feeding upon the carcass of BushDrunk World. Life-time destructive malcontents in our nation who have proven themselves to be deserving of nothing more than…a turpentine enema. Primitives. Neanderthals. Goose-stepping goons of conformity. Truly, “The Rancid Masses.” You go, Little People. Have no fear – I will not further reduce you. You are small enough already.

By: Magister

Magister — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:29:25 +0000

OK – That last sentence was poorly rewritten.

*I doubt he’ll find a lot of sympathetic ears*
*I hope he’ll not find a lot of sympathetic ears*

Dan, Rex or any Mediaites that be; You know, Disqus would at least let us edit.

By: Magister

Magister — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:24:41 +0000

@tjl: Yeah, advocating the murder of television hosts probably isn’t the best way for Chuck to approach a media site. I’m sure like you, I doubt (and hope) he won’t find a lot of sympathetic ears.

By: tjl

tjl — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 22:31:02 +0000

And Chuck Steele, I assume you have books banned from your house as well. That poor child in your arms…. The level of discourse coming from you – advocating killing someone because he doesn’t agree with someone on policy. Again, you don’t deserve a place in this debate. I assume that’s not your grandchild in your arms, but your classmate. I also assume that if it disagrees with you you’ll give it the same same treatment you gave Mr. Ratigan. It’s only fair…

By: tjl

tjl — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 22:24:27 +0000

@Chris Jones: Your ignorance never ceases to amaze me. It saddens me that this is your “outlet.” I don’t want to lay into you, but I just needed to tell you that it amazes me that you’re still so very ignorant. And I take it lonely…

By: Magister

Magister — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:59:22 +0000

@Chris Jones: I’ve seen other clips, where he was getting very worked-up over the financial crisis and corporate abuses. These aren’t exactly Obama-favorable issues, so it appears that he may be passionate about the things, he believes.

By: Chris Jones

Chris Jones — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:48:10 +0000

@Magister He’s not on a crusade to get questions answered, he’s on a mission to protect The Dear Leader.

By: Magister

Magister — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:12:06 +0000

I’ve only seen Ratigan via embedded clips, but he seems very passionate and lately it appears that he’s been on a crusade to get his questions answered. Down the road, it might cost him some future guests, but in the meantime, it’s been enough for me to click over to MSNBC to see what time he runs.

By: ImNotBlue

ImNotBlue — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:19:59 +0000

Anthony Rosa says:
October 6, 2009 at 2:27 pm

You can go on and on about why your opponents plan won’t work until the day is long but until you have an alternate solution, you’re still part of the problem.

FALSE! Sometimes the “alternate solution” is nothing… and that, in and of itself, is something. Additionally, the notion that “something is better than nothing,” is also false. Changing nothing, may (in some opinions) may be more beneficial than just implementing something for the sake of change. If the status quo is bad, changing the situation could make things worse and not better, so being “anti-change” isn’t necessarily a bad or faulty opinion.

By: ChrisNH

ChrisNH — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:54:15 +0000

What you’ve got here is a Liberal media that fully expected it to be ‘raining candy’ by now, and it’s not. So, you’d expect MSNBC’s hosts to beat people up every which way they can. Things aren’t going their way, and they need an outlet. Let’s just hope that people are keeping an eye out for the well-being of Ratigan’s wife (if he manages to even have one).

By: RazorsEdge

RazorsEdge — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:36:56 +0000

It’s called entertainment. This is where PR stares journalism in the face. My take it is intentional to get, well maybe a site like Mediaite to cover it.

I know cynical, but you do realize networks need profits and ratings to drive profits. You can’t trust you would get any ethical or non-spin answer when PR and publicity higher ranked than journalism. Just because the coverage makes you feel good, warm, and fuzzy as a viewer doesn’t necessarily mean it’s truthful info. It might, but it also might be it just agrees with one’s own personal philosophy.

Aside from the yelling and name calling, what was settled from the segment?

By: Anthony De Rosa

Anthony De Rosa — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:27:20 +0000

Ratigan does the same thing O’Reilly does, which I appreciate. Neither Ratigan or O’Reilly allow people to come on their show and instead of answer questions directly, use it as an opportunity to spout their party line talking points that present no solution whatsoever.

You can go on and on about why your opponents plan won’t work until the day is long but until you have an alternate solution, you’re still part of the problem.

Every time McCaughey opened her mouth, when asked directly to present her solution, she went right into her talking point. Good for Ratigan. Come back when you have some answers.

By: Chuck Steele

Chuck Steele — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:26:09 +0000

McCaughey should have just moved on to the second ammendment and just put a round through that asshats head, right between his eyes. At least she could have got that point accross without interuption.
That shows others why I choose to have MSNBC blocked from my home. That “moderator” would not let her answer a question if it looked like it was not going to be an answer that he liked.

By: Chris Jones

Chris Jones — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:40:25 +0000

Dylan Ratigan is an ass hat. “MSLSD” exists solely for the purpose of carrying water for this administration. Every single anchor on the channel even during hard news (such as it is on MSLSD) is a partisan left-winger. Yes, I know Scarborough is there, but he’s a phony conservative and a cocktail party republican — so he belongs lumped in with the rest of the cretins. Betsy shouldn’t feel too bad though, nobody watches that channel anyway. Also, Anthony Weiner is a disgrace to New York and a no good, lousy Red.

By: Puter Boi

Puter Boi — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:25:35 +0000

Did you edit out the part where Ratigan says..”I know you are but what am I?”

And McCaughey answers….”neener neener!”