Is Greenwald totally embarrassing and obnoxious in this video, or not? Reminds me of a FOX TV jerk

[uhnope]

I find his performance cringeworthy. In fact I couldn't watch more than about 8 minutes. I don't know anything about Ruth Marcus but she conducts herself really well in comparison. Greenwald's demeanor reminded me of other shit that I can't bear to watch--the fucked up rant that inspired the Tea Party:

But I'm starting to wonder if it's just me. I don't watch FOX TV, where people talk like this all the time. I don't watch reality TV, I never watched any of those shlock shows like Jerry Springer. Am I just behind the times? Is Greenwald's behavior the new normal?

[99th_Monkey]

1. Not. -nt-

[Jack Rabbit]

2. No, I didn't think it was particularly cringeworthy

I thought Ms. Marcus was refusing to acknowledge that the American legal landscape has changed since 1971 and, as a result, Mr. Snowden will not have the opportunity to make his case for justice as Dr. Ellsworth did. While she wasn't at all infuriating in her demeanor, it's still infuriating to listen her argue her point from a position bordering on willful ignorance.

[SamKnause]

3. No !!!!!!!!!!!

On the other hand Ruth Marcus proves she is totally clueless.

We must have watched different videos.

[markpkessinger]

41. Indeed -- as she often has! n/t

[baran]

5. Not. -nt-

[grasswire]

6. NO!!

I see a bulldog fighting for our liberties, and a tool on the other side.

I am grateful to Greenwald for his ferocious defense of our Constitutional rights.

[Thinkingabout]

7. Just when you do the paper work and flush the toilet you think it when away forever.

Sometimes the toilet overflows and it comes back out, this is the case here. Greenwald points out others are guilty of something so it must make Snowden innocent, no, it does not. Greenwald wants to keep peddling the story Snowden "did a great favor", to who since this information of the collection has been happening since 2006, so Bush should get credit if anyone gets credit. Snowden is a hacker, he is playing patsy to somebody or someone's, he has a lot of people fooled but he has never convinced me he is much more than a hacker and committed espionage.

[uhnope]

15. apparently we are in the minority, if you look at the rest of the replies

[Thinkingabout]

17. I am not in the minority, perhaps with those who fall to the cognitive dissonance of

Snowden and Greenwald but not with the general population. Too many lies, too many tales with both of them trying to come up with a story which will stick. If you listen closely to Greenwald he is basically saying Snowden is guilty when he brings up Clapper, Greenwald wants Clapper tried for something and Snowden should be tried also. Snowden knew to run before the information was released, somewhat admission he doesn't want to return to the US and face 30 years. Even Snowden knows this much.

[uhnope]

39. yeah, I think this brought the True Believers out, not the average person

Anyway I certainly hope that the thrall of cognitive dissonance isn't that prevalent

[Thinkingabout]

40. If "True Believers" believes Snowden is innocent then I elect to stay on the side

Of reality, I will choose remain on the side of the Constitution true meaning.

[Cooley Hurd]

8. Appropriate video response:

...with Tony Levin!!!!

[vi5]

9. No

Any other troll-worthy questions?

[Cleita]

10. Amy Goodman doesn't think so and Amy Goodman is the only

news person whose judgement I trust in the journalists she brings on her show to explain issues in depth. She has Greenwald on frequently, as well as Jeremy Scahill and other brave journalists.

[navarth]

21. this. nt

[uhnope]

25. with critical thinking skills, you don't have to rely on others' judgment like that

I'm glad Democracy Now exists, but sometimes they show their Old Left weakness for knee-jerk anti-Americanism, which Greenwald has been riding to the bank for a long time now.

There's something seriously wrong with Greenwald:http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026064643#post8

Read this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6052385

Greenwald has lost credibility with most serious folk

[navarth]

29. Look

You certainly have the right to express opinion and I would fight for you to have that right.

But my impression of Amy Goodman, over years and years of observation, is that she has iron-clad integrity. If I choose to trust her, it's not because of an absence of critical thinking skills IMO.

My impression of the people on DU that always want to attack Greenwald is that they doth protest too much. (I know, that's a really shitty job of paraphrasing Shakespeare.)

'Old Left weakness for knee-jerk anti-Americanism'? Seriously dude?

'Greenwald has lost credibility with most serious folk'? I guess maybe I'm not serious then. This, of course, depends on who gets to decide who's serious.

I'm just expressing observations here, not looking to hurt anybody. I would still fight for your right to express what you're saying about Greenwald or Democracy Now.

[Cleita]

32. Yes. Only an idiot would would deny Amy's bonifide credentials and

proven skills and integrity. Thanks.

[uhnope]

34. be careful when using that "idiot" word, you might hurt yourself. see post 33

bonafide btw

[Cleita]

35. Thank u to the word police. do not worry about my spelling skills.

I often post from a mobile device that edits words before I catch them.

[uhnope]

33. wow. You think Amy Goodman never missteps, ever?

It's a bit of a bizarre statement. Amy Goodman supports Greenwald so he cannot be obnoxious in the video.

It's a sidetrack, but since you went there I will briefly discuss.

Do you even know what I am referring to when I say 'Old Left weakness for knee-jerk anti-Americanism'?

It does exist. During the Cold War and the strengthening progressive movement, amid all the righteous causes, some on the left got into unfortunate, binary thinking. The US was doing horrible things in the Vietnam War, so Communism and the USSR must be good--that kind of thing. Some of them got pretty weird and emotional about it, and so blind that they actually promoted the actions of dictatorships. Imagine some progressives today defending North Korea for their "for the people" rhetoric.

Anyway, there's still some of that left in progressive circles.
See this:

Strange bedfellows: Putin, the Chomskyite left and the ghosts of the Cold War
So-called radicals who side with the Russian despot on Ukraine are stuck in a poisoned Cold War narrative
http://www.salon.com/2014/07/26/strange_bedfellows_putin_the_chomskyite_left_and_the_ghosts_of_the_cold_war/

Check this http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026041979

I also have listened to Amy Goodman for years, and am glad that Democracy Now exists, but her show definitely can slip into that.

OK that's enough time on this for me.

[Cleita]

36. Why don't you just be intellectually honest and say you don't like

Greenwald and list the reasons why. Because name calling like saying he's obnoxious usually indicates you don't have much of anything valid to criticize.

[uhnope]

37. because that subject has been hashed and rehashed.

Yes, of course I think it's obvious that Greenwald is a dishonest pseudo-journalist; in fact he's already blown his own credibility to the point where that's a dead horse.

But my question was sincere--I wanted to know if those who still admire him saw anything wrong with his behavior in this video. Because if someone I admired or thought was reputable acted this way, I'd be mortified. You're not? (Your turn to be honest.)

[Cleita]

38. You are still just making accusations and name calling.

Frankly, how some one acts is the least of my concerns. It's what they say and GG speaks the uncomfortable truth. Frankly you putting up CNN and CNBC, known commercial propaganda news sources, doesn't help. I won't waste my time looking at them.

[markpkessinger]

42. "knee-jerk anti-Americanism" is a right-wing dog whistle . . .

. . . invoked to shield the public from facing hard truths.

[uhnope]

43. I showed in my message that is not always true and my post was not a dog-whistle

but a fleshed-out explanation. Are you saying the Salon article is right wing? I hope not since it's a pretty balanced analysis of the issue: http://www.salon.com/2014/07/26/strange_bedfellows_putin_the_chomskyite_left_and_the_ghosts_of_the_cold_war/

[Cleita]

44. Salon articles can be as right wing as some of them are left

wing. depends on who is writing it. You would know that if your critical thinking skills are as sharp as you seem to think they are.

[Cleita]

31. Oh dear, now we don't have critical thinking skills?

I suppose it doesn't occur to you that making a comparison to validate your thinking that Greenwald is a brilliant journalist by showing that other brilliant journalists also agree with what you think is a possibility?

[Overseas]

11. Perhaps obnoxious talking back to a liar but not embarrassing because he speaks the truth.

Marcus is pretending we are in the old days when Ellsberg could come forward and get some protection as a whistleblower.

The USA no longer protects whistleblowers.

Look at Chelsea Manning.

Look at John Kiriakou. He blew the whistle on torture and he was arrested and imprisoned while the torturers remain free.

[drynberg]

28. I was going to post anew, but you said just what I was thinking. Thanks.

[Enrique]

12. in a personality contest between Greenwald and Obama

Obama* will win. No one's going to post adoring photos of Greenwald for example.

But personality doesn't matter that much to everyone.

*And yes, I think anti-Greenwald posts are about Obama.

[Hissyspit]

13. No.

[RiverLover]

14. Greenwald did good, I thought.

I agree with Sam, we must have watched different vids.

He was the voice of reason here. Its so frustrating, the duplicity. I don't blame him for getting frustrated. But he handled it well and made excellent points.

[Fuddnik]

16. Major FAIL.

You might find some agreement in the BOG. Not anywhere else.

[oberliner]

18. Everybody loves Glenn!

Amazing to see the responses you are getting. People just can't recognize reality sometimes.

[Fred Sanders]

19. If this reminds one of Fox News, then one is wrong.

[libodem]

20. I think I'm in love with Glenn Greenwald

This makes me love him more not less!!!!

He's brilliant.

[tooeyeten]

22. He can be very obnoxious and arrogant n/t

[appalachiablue]

23. I'm pretty used to Greenwald's pugnacious style. He had some valid points, Markus' response shows

why she's an insider journalist for WaPo. Watching Santelli's rant damning millions of scammed mortgage holders was far more upsetting. But what could be expected from him and a room full of hacks who promote and make their living off Wall Street fraud and greed.

[pocoloco]

24. Try getting your head outta your ass before watching it!!

You got it backwards! LOL

[pa28]

26. But you would never think of imposing yourself on the rest of us with a self indulgent rant.

No. Not you.

[navarth]

30. LOL

razor sharp. Thanks for the chuckle.

[merrily]

27. Marcus embarrassed herself by having no impressive facts or analysis. Greenwald was overbearing, but

of the two, he was the one who had something to say.