Richard Cohen (WaPo) now complains about getting "hatred" from Democrats

[Julius Civitatus]

Well, this guy just doesn't get it.

After his nasty column last week, in which he trashed Colbert and called him an "unfunny bully," Cohen received a lot of emails complaining about it. He calls it "hatred." Today, he dedicates his waste of a column to denigrate all the "hatred that is threatening America from the Democratic party."

Seriously, the guy is out to lunch. Check it out:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/08/AR2006050801323.html

Digital Lynch Mob

(...)
Then I wrote about Stephen Colbert and his unfunny performance at the White House correspondents' dinner.

Kapow! Within a day, I got more than 2,000 e-mails. A day later, I got 1,000 more. By the fourth day, the number had reached 3,499

(...)
When I guilelessly clicked on the name, I would get a bucket of raw, untreated and disease-laden verbal sewage right in the face. (...) But because I held such a view, my attentive critics were convinced I had a political agenda. I was -- as was most of the press, I found out -- George W. Bush's lap dog. If this is the case, Bush had better check his lap.

It seemed that most of my correspondents had been egged on to write me by various blogs. In response, they smartly assembled into a digital lynch mob and went roaring after me. If I did not like Colbert, I must like Bush. If I write for The Post, I must be a mainstream media warmonger. If I was over a certain age -- which I am -- I am simply out of it, wherever "it" may be. All in all, I was -- I am, and I guess I remain -- the worthy object of ignorant, false and downright idiotic vituperation.

What to make of all this? First, it's not about Colbert. His show has an audience of about 1 million -- not exactly "American Idol" numbers. Second, it marks the end of a silly pretense about interactive media: We give you our e-mail addresses and then, in theory, we have this nice chat.
(...)

But the message in this case truly is the medium. The e-mails pulse in my queue, emanating raw hatred. This spells trouble -- not for Bush or, in 2008, the next GOP presidential candidate, but for Democrats. The anger festering on the Democratic left will be taken out on the Democratic middle. (Watch out, Hillary!) I have seen this anger before -- back in the Vietnam War era. That's when the antiwar wing of the Democratic Party helped elect Richard Nixon. In this way, they managed to prolong the very war they so hated.

The hatred is back. I know it's only words now appearing on my computer screen, but the words are so angry, so roiled with rage, that they are the functional equivalent of rocks once so furiously hurled during antiwar demonstrations. I can appreciate some of it. Institution after institution failed America -- the presidency, Congress and the press. They all endorsed a war to rid Iraq of what it did not have. Now, though, that gullibility is being matched by war critics who are so hyped on their own sanctimony that they will obliterate distinctions, punishing their friends for apostasy and, by so doing, aiding their enemies. If that's going to be the case, then Iraq is a war its critics will lose twice -- once because they couldn't stop it and once more at the polls.
[e-mail]

Democrats angry. Democrats scary. It was the Democrats and the peace movement that "prolonged the Vietnam war and elected Nixon." And Democrats and peace activists, because we are "angry" at been ignored, censored by the media, screwed over, and basically excluded from the political process, we will be responsible for not stopping the Iraq war. Whaaaa?

Cohen, you are an IDIOT. You are way too deep in the D.C. beltway game to anything beyond it. Just retire and let a real liberal write your column.

Where has this guy been for the last 5 years?

Oh, yeah! On Chimpy's lap. Of course.

[FrenchieCat]

1. well he got one thing right......

"watch out Hillary!"

Boy the old fart sounds Skeered!

[lvx35]

2. Those god damned Democrats who brought us Nixon???

how does this shit get published? How can an asshat blame Democrats for a Republican president on any charge other than not voting?

[EST]

17. Not to defend this idiot, but he actually does have a point here.

Nixon, in typical Republican fashion, lied his way into office, in 1968. He swore that he would correct the obvious lies and mismanagement of the then administration and would end the VN war, "peace with honor," immediately. Although I could not vote then, since W.VA. had yet to enact it's try at enabling 18 year olds to vote, I was an enthusiastic supporter of anyone whose aim was to stop that illegal, insane war.

Keeping in mind that the boomer bunch was a huge, mostly liberal, politically innocent block of neophyte voters, we really did bring Nixon into office--the dem party was awesomely dishonest--and the dem candidate looked weak.

We did not realize Nixon actually intended to end the war by escalating it into submission. With the evil assistance of his early neo-con cabal, headed up by Kissinger, he deceived us again in 1972, saying that this time he really meant it and would stop the war and did, only when forced.

The real problem, of course, was and is lying, contemptuous, slimy politicians.

This WaPo hack, instead of remembering that he had, long ago, figured out that his sense of humor just simply is not tickled by sophisticated, deep irony, tried to salve his own hurt feelings over being excluded from the joke by excoriating Colbert as being bitter rather than funny.

Colbert is not really my cuppa, all the time, in all situations, but that is not his responsibility. I intensely dislike reality shows, horror flicks, and even find Funniest Home Videos often painful rather than funny: too empathetic, I suppose.
Colbert is heavy handed but that is exactly what it takes for him to pull it off successfully.

[CBHagman]

24. Also, the Democrats can't afford to be divided.

Don't get me wrong. Cohen does display the mainstream media's tendency to believe that Democrats will be punished for both their own sins and those of the Republicans. And it's funny how much was made of the angry voters who supported Gingrich and the class of '94, when in reality they made up a relatively small percentage of the electorate.

That said, however, he does have a point. Turmoil, anger, infighting, and division have done horrific damage to the Democratic Party and can easily be our undoing. We cannot afford to expend energy on some notion of ideological purity. We need to get allies, now, from all of our natural constituencies.

You win elections by gaining allies, not losing them. You make policy by winning elections and then having a strategy (and allies and/or a solid majority) to pass those legislative items you support.

Let's not waste this opportunity. It's going to be painful, but we have a chance to make a change.

[lvx35]

37. I'm not really sure I buy this stuff about the hateful left.

Its just so easy to fire off an email claiming to be anybody, and there is a culture of dirty tricks at play with the Republicans. I've been attacked so severly here that I wanted to leave the party, then my brain took over and I realized how weak we would be if everybody did that. We really can't afford people ready to abandon the party the Dems because somebody claiming to be a dem yelled at them. We can't get drawn into dialogues about how bad the "hateful left" is because of infultraitors playing mind games.
Somebody needs to define us as not "not hateful" at a high level so we can point at that when anybody gets hate to demonstrate that they are not really Dems.

[Dr Fate]

3. I guess I do hate him- since I despise ignorance. n/t

n/t

[Hardrada]

4. I only called him a swine when I called the DMR

about his crappy column. I urged them to atleast publish what Colbert said so the readers would know WTF was going on.

[chookie]

5. Aw -- poor widdle Wichard!

The nasty Democwats are saying mean things to him.

He's all about ego -- not investigation or critical thinking.

His instinct is for self-preservation. He doesn't "get it" that Colbert's performance encapsulated the antiBush dissent that is sweeping the country under his very nose (maybe because his head is up his ass) -- of which Colbert's performance was only a manifestation.

Earth to Cohen: It ain't just Democrats who have turned on Bush -- sane Republicans have also turned against Monkey Boy, and I know a few who were as gratified by Colbert's performance as I was.

[incapsulated]

6. What's his email address, again?

Oh, yeah... [e-mail]

:evilgrin:

[Hardrada]

9. He is Mr. Ego and has long written vapid self-absorbed tripe.

Someone once counted the number of times he used the word "I" in one of his columns and came up with 37 or 40 times!!

[Jai4WKC08]

36. Mine was short and sweet

Subject: Not hatred. Disdain.
Body: Idiot media whore.

[grasswire]

7. show us the e-mails

It's time to call these WaPo sissies on their claims of "hate mail" from Dems. So many of them use this as a dodge. Milbank, Schmidt, yada yada.

Prove it, Cohen. Print the e-mails. All of them.

[Hardrada]

8. Luckily his email address was at the bottom of his column

so I added my 2 cents worth!! Pile on, people!

[Peace Patriot]

10. "By the fourth day, the number had reached 3,499"! Hallelujah!

Thanks to the 3,499 patriots and heros who blew this yappy little warmongering rat out of the water with THREE THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED AND NINETY-NINE emails!

I wish I'd been one of them! I have detested Cohen's slimebag column for years!

Go peddle your war profiteering, corporate crap to the Iraqis, Mr. Cohen! See if they buy it. The American people are fed up with you and that treasonous rag you write for!

THIS time we're going to throw you ALL out--the War Democrats, the war profiteering corporate news monopolies, the dirty rotten military contractors in the dirty rotten military-industrial complex, the stinking fish in the Bushite election theft companies, AND the Bushites!

Yup, your stinko corporate news monopolies are gonna get busted. The gig's up. Better go write that novel that's running around in your head about the reporter who stood up to the president....

FICTION...

[Mythsaje]

11. For example--MY "hate-filled" e-mail...

Most of the time I don't find Colbert particularly funny. His pretend Republican shtick doesn't work for me. Usually. But standing in front of Bush himself and delivering the same message? Well, that's a different story.

Sorry, Mr. Cohen. It was damn funny. Uncomfortable at times, especially for those in the audience who didn't want to draw attention to themselves, but still funny. Scalia laughed loudly enough while Colbert openly mocked him. Takes a certain kind of guy to do that.

Guess Bush isn't that kind of guy. Now there's a surprise.

You don't get the joke? The joke is that this man and his administration insulate themselves from criticism at every opportunity. The press is walking on eggshells as if afraid they'll be dragged into a dark room and beaten with a stick for pointing out not only their foibles, but their outright deceptions.

As long as one American soldier, or one Iraqi child, is held captive to his imperial ambitions, Mr. Bush should be forced to suffer the indignity of public mockery on a regular basis. In person.

It's only fair.

Don't get it? Too bad for you. We certainly do.

[FrenchieCat]

12. Well, I see the problem....

You used the word Damn!




(PS. Actually, that was an excellent rational letter!)

[AtomicKitten]

13. nah, he's right ... I hate him

[ShortnFiery]

14. What a sniveling little creep! You can't have it both ways

Cohen. Pssst! When you are a public figure and write a piss poor commentary, what do you expect?

But no, go running back and hide under Mommy's (WaPo) skirt to cry out, "Oh Momma, those mean-ole Democrats are filled with hate! No, I didn't do anything wrong (shill for *), honest. :blush:"

What a frigging maroon cry baby ... the WP commentaries, with a few exceptions, are horrid these days. :(

[C_U_L8R]

15. SOW >>> REAP

[xchrom]

16. the theory of the horse's ass.

one person calls you a horse's ass -- you can ignore it.

two people call you a horse's ass, you should stop and think about it.

three people call you a horse's ass, investing in a saddle is in order.

[Vickers]

18. Nixon ran on an "I'll stop the war!" platform. So much for facts, huh?

:eyes:

Man, these guys are really wetting the bed lately. How does it feel to be SCARED motherfucker?

[annabanana]

19. BOY! Talk about dishing it out & not being able to take it!

Waa Waaa Waaaaa

[Chomp]

20. Hang on a moment

Richard Cohen is generally a very reasonable and sane columnist. Here are some of his recent pices:

Bush Wanted War
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/29/AR2006032902057.html

A Campaign Gore Can't Lose
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/17/AR2006041701259.html

Vietnam's Forgotten Lessons
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/10/AR2006041001027.html

Let Moussaoui Live
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/04/05/BL2006040501945.html

Culture of Intellectual Corruption
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/03/08/BL2006030801844.html


People should calm down. His criticism of Colbert was entirely on the basis of it's style, rather than it's substance. He (reasonably) gave his opinion that he thought the routine was graceless and rude. He was not saying that he was wrong to have a go or wrong on the issues or anything like that. No, he was saying that as a piece of satire, it was ill-conceived.

For example, I think thispoint is well made:

"Rude is not the same as brash. It is not the same as brassy. It is not the same as gutsy or thinking outside the box. Rudeness means taking advantage of the other person's sense of decorum or tradition or civility that keeps that other person from striking back or, worse, rising in a huff and leaving."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/03/AR2006050302202.html

I happen to agree with this, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that Bush is a dirty lying shitbag.

That is not a basis to hammer the guy like he's being hammered. I can well imagine that a large proportion of the people who emaailed him never actally read the piece.

Can every person posting in this thread say, hand on heart, that they read the piece? I most certainly hope that people would at least have the decency to do that before crucifying the guy.

I am not saying Cohen was right, merely that his opinion was far more reasonable than people are crediting.

[Julius Civitatus]

23. Funny you only quote his recent articles...

he's now a "librul" again when it's fashionable. Have you read his column for the last 5 years? I have. Have you read his anti-Clinton tirades? Do you remember when he bragged about voting for Bush? Do you remember when he defended every neocon position? He was pro-invasion of Iraq and wrote about it often. He excoriated those who opposed the Iraq war. Furthermore, he has defended the use of torture. And recently he claimed Fitzgerald is conducting an unfair witch-hunt against the poor, poor Republicans. Cohen writes exactly what the Washington DC establishment thinks it's ok to write at a given moment, and at the same time claiming to be a "voice of liberalism." Here's an interesting trip down Lexis-Nexis to see some of the stuff he has written.

He was pro everything that Bush has done... until now that Chimpy's ratings are at 31%. Now he suddenly starts writing negatively about the Preznit, after his brown-nosing since 2000.

It just doesn't ring sincere.

[Chomp]

25. Hi Julius

Nope, I didn't know all that (the link you provide is pretty scary). And I have not been reading him for 5 years, so I accept what you are saying. I only looked at his most recent pieces.

However, I will stand by the substance of my post above on this narrow issue. Perhaps when it is put in the context of his other stuff, it looks bad. But on it's own merits, I don't think it is as bad as everyone is saying.

But your point is well taken.


Cheers.

[Julius Civitatus]

27. Hi Chomp

:hi:

Yes, recently Cohen has taken a sudden turn back to progressive positions. Funny enough, this turn coincides with Bush's quick drop in the polls. He is now a "librul" again when it's "safe" to be a liberal. Now his columns seem reasonable and, like you, I can certainly agree with some of his recent writings.

But again, Cohen has been an object of frustration for many people on the left, since he has been the "official lefty columnist" still left at the WaPo, yet he writes like a neocon of the worst order. For the last 5 years he has sided with Bush on just about everything, and chided the Democrats for not joining the cult of Bush. It's been quite frustrating.

Now he gets a lot of angry email in response to his patronizing column about Colbert, and rants about "hatred" from the left, and "hatred" from the Democrats.

[Chomp]

28. Of course,

even a stopped clock is right twice a day!

But you're right: the problem with talking shit for 5 years is that when you actually get it right, no one is left to listen to you. (Not that he necessarily has it right, but you get the point).


Cheers.

[Dr Fate]

34. In 2000, he ENDORSED Bush. That's all you need to know. (link)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1139504&mesg_id=1140097

[IndianaGreen]

43. Members of the jury, the evidence is incontrovertible!

He is a rightwing puke, through and through.

[ChiciB1]

32. But He's UNABLE To Take Criticism And If He's So Fair...

why is he crying so loud?? And WHY is he "dissing" US when we only told him what we thought??

Oh, I get it.... I can Dish it Out, but I Can't Take It!!!

[wicket]

21. Waaaah! Waaaaah!

Sounds like he needs his pampers changed :eyes:

[Nomen Tuum]

22. I don't believe a single word that PRE$$TITUTE writes

He is every bit the liar that everyone else is who writes for the Washington TASS!

[DUHandle]

26. Is 3,499 a low number

a high number, or just an average negative response to one of his columns?

What's the count of positive reponses?

Incidentally, doesn't a high number of negitive reponses help to keep his readership and thus salary high?

[Puglover]

29. Okay I admit it....

I ended my email with a cheery....

"You. Are. A. Tool. Dick.


I wasn't very nice.

:evilgrin:

[Puglover]

30. OMG....this guy is a bigger drama queen then I am....

"Truth to tell, I peeked into only a few of the e-mails. I did this because I would sometimes recognize a name I thought I knew, which was almost always a mistake. When I guilelessly clicked on the name, I would get a bucket of raw, untreated and disease-laden verbal sewage right in the face."

:rofl:


He is SO wounded.

In the first sentence this insufferable asshat declares "I peeked into only a few of the e-mails." And then one sentence later sez "When I guilelessly :eyes: clicked on the name, I would get a bucket of raw, untreated and disease-laden verbal sewage(what a word smith!) right in the face." Odd how reading after reading "only a few" he knew all 3500+ emails were so vile.

Unbelievable that people like this actually HAVE columns in the 1st place.

[depakid]

44. That's exactly what he is- although I'd add pathetic

It's embarrassing even for the Post....

[IndianaGreen]

45. He is a drama queen alright!

The fact that he voted for Bush in 2000 is more than enough evidence of where his true allegiances lie.

All of these rightwingers are alike. Rush Limbaugh railed against drug users saying that they should all be locked up and the key thrown away. Now that the shoe is on his own foot, we don't hear him calling for his incarceration.

[ChiciB1]

31. Well, I For One Wrote Him Last Week... But I Won't Do It

AGAIN! He's pretty dangerous himself. Not to mention a HUGE "cry-baby!" It's idiots like him that get to write this kind of stuff and then the people on the "other" side say... "see, what did I tell you, Democrats are left-wing cranks!"

[Dr Fate]

33. He ENDORSED Bush in 2000 now he is lecturing us upon a high horse?

Check it out- in 2000, Cohen Endorsed Bush and claimed Gore was mean & devisive. What an idiot.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1139504&mesg_id=1140097

[Sparkly]

35. This is so typical!! "Boohoo, people are being mean to me!"

Remember Deborah Howell a few months ago? Same thing.

Aaron Brown a few years ago? Same thing.

And of course, right on cue comes the standard "free advice" that we're too angry. If we're not nicer, it'll cause a backlash! (Of course, "nicer" just enables BushCo -- and they've always been SO nice to Democrats.)

:nopity:

[Contrary1]

38. What a load...

"Institution after institution failed America -- the presidency, Congress and the press. They all endorsed a war to rid Iraq of what it did not have."

He fails to blame Chimpie for precisely what Chimpie is responsible for.

Lying.

[Crunchy Frog]

39. Glad to see he got my email!

:evilgrin:

I can't speak for anyone else, but really mine was not laden with hate. A bit snarky, yes, but not hateful.

First of all, how does he know my political affiliation? Does everybody who admired Colbert's performance instantly become a representative of, and spokesperson for, the Democratic party? How does he know I'm not a Green, or and Independent, or a disaffected Republican, or a non-voter? Even if I am a Democrat, how did I just manage to become an official representative of the party? Does he really think that I emailed him as part of some organized internet "lynch mob"? I'm not capable of reading his column and emailing him with my opinion on my own initiative?

I don't suppose he's encountered any right wing hatred, probably because he's never managed to write anything that piss them off. He has written about liberal hatred before, all the while apparently failing to notice the Ann Coulters and Rush Limbaughs and Bill O'Reillies out there. The ones that Stephen Colbert parodies in his act.

The fact is that he is a mainstream media warmonger. Being called out on that fact seems to have made him rather angry and hateful. Or maybe he's seeing the writing on the wall as the blogosphere makes his kind irrelevant. It's no fun to realize that you are a dinosaur.

[WobbliesUnite]

40. I watched what happened in 1968

Humphrey was savaged by the anti-war (and angry) part of the Democratic party and the party was split. Hence, Nixon.

[IndianaGreen]

42. Bullshit.! Humphrey was as much a war criminal as Dick Cheney

I hope he and LBJ are burning in Hell for all of the innocent people they murdered in their bombing of Vietnam.

[IndianaGreen]

41. He is wrong! The antiwar left did not elect Richard Nixon

What elected Nixon was the Democratic establishment replacing all of Bobby Kennedy's antiwar delegates with prowar pukes that nominated the war criminal Hubert Humphrey who in turn, supported the storm trooper tactics of the Chicago police and the corrupt Mayor Daley and his mafia thugs.