Liberal Rolling Stone Magazine Desperately Tries (And Fails) To Get Bob Dylan To Profess Love For Obama

Mediaite.com:

Whenever Bob Dylan decides to give an interview, it becomes a monumental event. Despite being one of the most important American social figures of the last 50 years, Dylan has always been reticent with the press and, at times, outright hostile to their ceaseless prodding. Snagging an interview with Dylan is almost as impossible as spotting Sasquatch (although getting him to make a cameo on Pawn Stars apparently isn’t that difficult).

The latest edition of Rolling Stone features one of those rare interviews, timed with the release of Dylan’s 35th studio album Tempest. Interviewer Mikal Gilmore spends most of the time asking decent questions about the legendary musicians’ life, including accusations of plagiarism that arose from Dylan’s 2001 record Love & Theft album (Dylan says: “wussies and pussies” make such claims about him). 

But for another chunk of the interview, Gilmore spends an uncomfortable amount of time prodding Dylan to confirm his support for President Barack Obama and label the president’s critics racist.

The discussion first got political when Dylan expressed his belief that slavery has unfortunately stained this country’s fabric since its founding: “This country is just too fucked up about color,” he said. “People at each other’s throats just because they are of a different color. It’s the height of insanity, and it will hold any nation back – or any neighborhood back,” he continued before explaining that perhaps if slavery had ended in a more peaceful way, we would have progressed faster in terms of race relations.

Gilmore then saw an opportunity to ask whether he believed the Obama presidency would signal an important sea change in American race relations. “I don’t have any opinion on that,” Dylan responded. “You have to change your heart if you want to change.”

The interviewer pressed further, remarking that there has been great backlash since Obama’s election. Dylan’s response: “They did the same thing to Bush, didn’t they? They did the same thing to Clinton, too, and Jimmy Carter before that. [...] Anybody who’s going to take that job is going to be in for a rough time.”
Unsatisfied, Gilmore came right out with what he really meant to ask: Isn’t the backlash against Obama rooted in racism? “I don’t know,” Dylan said.

Gilmore then took a few more swings, mentioning that Obama’s critics call him a socialist and un-American. Dylan responded: “[A]s if you’ve never heard those kind of words before. Eisenhower was accused of being un-American. And wasn’t Nixon a socialist? Look what he did in China. They’ll say bad things about the next guy, too.”

When Gilmore tried for a fourth time to elicit a they-hate-him-because-he’s-black response out of Dylan, the musician said: “Do you want me to repeat what I just said, word for word? What are you talking about? People loved the guy when he was elected. So what are we talking about? People changing their minds? Well, who are these people who changed their minds? Talk to them.”

As the bizarre exchange continued, Gilmore asked whether Dylan votes. Seemingly scoffing at the question, Dylan responds with the generic: “We live in a democracy. What do you want me to say? Voting is a good thing.”

Then Gilmore wanted to know what Dylan thinks of Obama. The musician has met the president several times, most recently when he was honored at the White House (while wearing sunglasses indoors!) with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. At first Dylan remarks that “You should be asking his wife what she thinks of him,” and then he gets understandably cranky with the interviewer: “He loves music. He’s personable. He dresses good. What the fuck do you want me to say?”

Oh, but it doesn’t end there! Gilmore tried again, asking whether Dylan would like to see Obama re-elected. “I’ve live through a lot of presidents! And you have too! Some are re-elected and some aren’t. Being re-elected isn’t the mark of a great president.” 

Gilmore then brought up the time Dylan said, while on-stage the evening of Obama’s inauguration, “It looks like things are gonna change now.” Clearly Gilmore wanted Dylan to profess his love of the president, but instead the musician said: “Did I go down to the middle of town and give a speech?. [...] I don’t know what I could have meant by that. [...] I’m not going to deny what I said, but I would have hoped that things would’ve changed. I certainly hope they have.”

Reason‘s Brian Doherty has likely the most accurate analysis of Gilmore’s prodding:

It all feels peculiarly quasi-totalitarian–you must praise the Great Leader!–as well as sad and childish, like Gilmore can’t get through a meeting with one of the major cultural forces of his time without getting that force to ratify Gilmore’s political beliefs, like Dylan’s his cultural dad whose approval must be sought for a political love that maybe even Gilmore is seeing is based in little concrete.

Dylan’s refusal to join in on political idol worship really shouldn’t surprise anyone. For decades, he has been resistant to political pigeonholing from both sides.

Left-wing folkies thought they owned him in the early ’60s, but then he went rogue and seemingly denounced the hierarchical madness of the movement via songs like “Maggie’s Farm” and “My Back Pages.” At one point he became reclusive, shrugging off the left-wing countercultural icon label that had been placed upon him: “Like Abraham destroying his father’s idol shop, only it was my own idol shop,” he said.

He has also confounded the left with a retroactive statement of positive feelings for Barry Goldwater; a bizarre (but somewhat brief) foray into evangelical Christianity; and his 1983 song “Neighborhood Bully,” a not-so-subtle defense of the State of Israel.

But he is no right-winger either. Many of his songs scorn the military-industrial complex (“Masters of War,” “With God on Our Side”), and others rail against a criminal justice system favorable to white people (“Hurricane,” “The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll”). 

His reluctance to play the game should serve as inspiration for those of us who feel disillusioned with a two-party system that has become, at its core, a competition amongst used car salesmen. Platitudes are exchanged, harsh words are spewed, the promise of “reform” is parroted over and over again, but nothing ever really changes. And if it does, it’s not because some politician in a big office made it so.
Dylan understands that. 

“Politics is entertainment,” he once told the UK Telegraph. “Politicians are interchangeable.”

Although political candidates of all stripes have endorsed him, we can be thankful Dylan will likely never endorse them.

RELATED: The Badgering of Bob Dylan, Or, Tell Us You Love Obama, Bob! Please!

Barack Obama’s Horrible, Gaffe-Laden Week Goes Unreported

Mediaite.com:

The United States and President Barack Obama have suffered a pretty bad week, but for varying reasons. The U.S. was dealt a heavy blow Tuesday when the American Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, was brutally murdered in a coordinated attack on a consulate in Benghazi. But the focus of most of the press has, to their disgrace, been on the appropriateness of the timing of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s attacks on the president over this incident. In the space of the last 24 hours, however, the president has committed two offenses against both etiquette and policy that should be reported on extensively. 

On Wednesday, in an interview with the Spanish-language network Telemundo, the president was asked about the attacks on two U.S. embassies in North Africa, specifically a breach of America’s embassy in Cairo by crowds of protesters. The Telemundo reporter asked if Obama considered Egypt an ally. Obama replied that the United States did not consider Egypt an ally, “but we don’t consider them an enemy.”

This remark displays a flippant nonchalance about American security policy and a downright antipathy for history and the work of generations of Obama’s predecessors. 

The United States, in concert with Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, wrestled the key Arab state away from the Soviet sphere of influence during the tenure of President Jimmy Carter. This effort culminated in the 1979 Camp David Accords, which are better known for cementing a lasting peace between Egypt and Israel. The agreement also served as a basis for a lasting partnership between Cairo and Washington — this relationship has safeguarded peace in the region for more than a generation. 

By cavalierly saying Egypt is not an ally of the United States, the president has bucked more than 30 years of American foreign policy in a critical region. This casual display of disregard for precedent and a pillar of diplomatic policy should inspire a measure of outrage. On that front, there is a glimmer of hope. On Thursday, NBC News’ chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel delivered a rebuke of Obama’s dismissal of America’s relationship with the Egyptian government.


But the tepid outrage of one reporter does not a trend make. This episode merits wider reporting and at least some debate over how appropriate it is for the president to single-handedly usher in a major shift in American global security policy vis-a-vis our relationship with Egypt. 

Following what can only be correctly described as a gaffe regarding Egypt, the president made what can only be correctly described as a gaffe on the campaign trail. 

While attending a campaign rally on Wednesday in Las Vegas – yes, a campaign rally, on a day marked by such solemnity that the press viewed it necessary to harangue Romney for even broaching the subject of politics – President Obama drew a comparison between the sacrifices of his campaign volunteers and those of the American service personnel who lost their lives in Libya just hours prior.

“And obviously [our] hearts are broken for the families but I wanted to encourage those folks at the State Department that they were making a difference,” he said.

“The sacrifices that our troops and our diplomats make are obviously very different from the challenges that we face here domestically but like them, you guys are Americans who sense that we can do better than we’re doing….I’m just really proud of you,” he added

Had this statement not occurred in an environment marked by the most farcical displays of outrage over Romney’s supposed breach of conduct, it could go ignored. However, in light of how the press jumped down Romney’s throat over the process and tone of his criticisms of Obama (watch the press conference here if you missed it), the media will be correctly accused of putting its thumb on the scales if they do not treat this statement with a similar measure of distress. 

This summer, during a much-panned visit abroad after having offended the British people by questioning London’s preparedness for the Summer Olympics, Mitt Romney was asked by a perturbed member of the political press, “What about your gaffes?” I eagerly await the press directing this loaded question towards the president. At this point, the credibility of the political media just about depends on it.

RELATED:  White House Clarifies Obama’s Egypt Comment: ‘Ally Is A Legal Term Of Art’

Ann Coulter: Media’s New Tactic is To Act Like They’re ‘Shocked’ By ‘Perfectly Appropriate’ Criticisms Of Obama

Mediaite.com:

Audio of reporters coordinating questions ahead of a press conference by Mitt Romney on Wednesday continues to cause a stir. Conservative commentator Ann Coulter appeared on Fox & Friends on Thursday where she said this incident is reflective of how journalists will handle the campaign until November. She said that the media’s new tactic is to act outraged by Romney’s critiques of President Barack Obama no matter how appropriate those criticisms are.

Steve Doocy played the clip for Coulter and asked, “What do you think was happening there?”

“What many of us suspected was happening,” Coulter replied. “How could all these reporters independently come up with so many boneheaded questions?”

“It was the same question,” said Brian Kilmeade. Coulter agreed and said that the media ignored the behavior of the Obama administration – which she says lead to the death of the U.S. ambassador to Libya – and opted to focus on Romney’s criticisms of the president.

“The media’s technique now is to play a perfectly appropriate answer from Mitt Romney, and then to come back to them, the hosts, and act like they’re shocked,” said Coulter.

Gretchen Carlson asked Coulter why those reporters would ask the same question of Romney six times. Coulter said that this technique will be reversed when they are interviewing President Obama, and they will ask him questions like, “How hard is it dealing with these Republicans?”

Coulter went on to criticize the Obama administration for accepting that an anti-Islam movie made in the U.S. in June would ignite the deadly attacks on U.S. embassies on Tuesday. Coulter called the movie a pretext for the attacks.

RELATED: Romney Offends the Pundits

The Insane Leftist Questions Mitt Romney Faced at Libya Presser

NationalReview.com:

So if a presidential candidate gives remarks about a foreign-policy crisis, you’d be forgiven for thinking that in the Q&A held immediately afterward, reporters would ask him about . . . foreign policy. But when Mitt Romney took questions today after talking about the situation in Libya and Egypt, the dominant theme of the questions was all about process and politics. Here are the seven questions asked:

1.  Reporter brings up that Romney had a “toughly worded statement last night,” and asks, “Do you regret the tone at all given what we know now?”

2. “Do you think, though, coming so soon after the events really had unfolded over night was appropriate, to be weighing in on this as this crisis was unfolding in real time?” Follow-up: “What did the White House do wrong then, Gov. Romney, if they put out a statement saying they disagreed with it?”

3. “The world is watching. Isn’t this itself a mixed signal when you criticize the administration at a time that Americans are being killed? Shouldn’t politics stop for this?”

4. “Some people have said that you jumped the gun a little bit in putting that statement out last night and that you should have waited until more details were available. Do you regret having that statement come out so early before we learned about all of the things that were happening?” 

5. “If you had known last night that the ambassador had died, and obviously, I’m gathering you did not know . . . if you had known that the ambassador had died, would you have issued such a strongly-issued statement?”

6. Reporter comments that Romney is running on his “economic know-how and private sector experience,” and adds, “but now that foreign policy and the situation in the Middle East has been thrust into the presidential campaign, can you talk about why specifically you think you are better qualified than President Obama to handle these issues?”

7. “How specifically, Governor Romney, would a President Romney have handled this situation differently than President Obama did? You spoke out before midnight, when all the facts weren’t known. How would you have handled this differently than the president did?”

Only the last question even addressed what Romney would have done if he was in office. None of the questions asked Romney to give details or be more specific about what he thinks the United States should do going forward.

I’ve long been critical of how few press conferences Romney has held, both in the primary and in the general election. Sure, the media can be biased. But 1) I think it’s good for a presidential candidates to be available to the press, to be subject to tough questions, and to be asked about a variety of matters; and 2) I think that a Republican candidate should prove he can deftly handle biased questions — it’s not fair, but it’s the reality of what he will face as president day after day.

But today’s press conference was really an example of how the media sometimes just doesn’t deserve that access. Let political consultants talk about the timing and tone of the statement. The candidate should be grilled on policy, on issues, on what he thinks is the right course going forward, not politics and strategy.

RELATED: Romney Adviser Takes Andrea Mitchell To Task For Focus On Romney’s Libya Statement Over Obama’s Inaction

9/11: We Never Forget

Prayers to the family and friends of all those who lost their lives on Sept. 11, 2001.

LATimes.com:

Americans paused again Tuesday to mark the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks with familiar ceremony, but also a sense that it's time to move forward after a decade of remembrance.

Hundreds gathered at the World Trade Center site in New York, the Pentagon and Shanksville, Pa., to read the names of nearly 3,000 victims killed in the worst terror attack in U.S. history. President Barack Obama was to attend the Pentagon memorial, and Vice President Joe Biden was to speak in Pennsylvania.

But many felt that last year's 10th anniversary was an emotional turning point for public mourning of the attacks. For the first time, elected officials weren't speaking at the ceremony, which often allowed them a solemn turn in the spotlight, but raised questions about the public and private Sept. 11.

"I feel much more relaxed" this year, said Jane Pollicino, who came to ground zero Tuesday morning to remember her husband, who was killed at the trade center. "After the ninth anniversary, that next day, you started building up to the 10th year. This feels a lot different, in that regard. It's another anniversary that we can commemorate in a calmer way, without that 10-year pressure."

As bagpipes played at the year-old Sept. 11 memorial in New York, family clutching balloons, flowers and photos of their loved ones bowed their heads in silence at 8:46 a.m., the moment that the first hijacked jetliner crashed into the trade center's north tower, and again to mark the crashes into the second tower, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field.

President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama observed the moment in a ceremony on the White House's south lawn, and then laid a white floral wreath at the Pentagon, above a concrete slab that said "Sept. 11, 2001 — 937 am."

RELATED: Remembering 9/11: New York Ceremomy

Joe Scarborough: Clint Eastwood Spoke 'From The Bottom Of A Bottle'

Gee, and this 'idiot' just can't figure out why critics often refer to him as a RINO:

Joe Scarborough has suggested that Clint Eastwood was drunk when he gave his RNC speech.

Today's Morning Joe opened with a clip of Mitt Romney telling David Gregory that it was a thrill to have  Eastwood speak on his behalf at the RNC, and that he felt Eastwood spoke "from the heart."  Scarborough came on and said that rather than speaking from the heart, Eastwood spoke more "from the bottom of a bottle."

RELATED: Joe Scarborough Blasts ‘Idiots’ Who Call Him A ‘RINO’ For Saying Romney Will Lose

Alan Keyes Quote of the Day!

"Of course, Obama's 2008 victory also depended on virtually unanimous support from many black Americans. Among them were professing Christians, who put aside every consideration of faith and conscience to support someone dedicated to socialism, rooted in the God-erasing ideology of scientific materialism. This dedication led him to take stands on moral issues (like abortion and the law-enforced acceptance of homosexuality) that outrage and directly assault the tenets of the biblical faith these black Christians otherwise profess. But for Obama's sake, they put the idol of false racial pride above their respect for God and His word."

-  conservative political activist and author Alan Keyes

Politiks As Usual: In The News 9/10/12

Joe Scarborough On Romney: ‘A Real Conservative Would Be Winning Now’

Union: Chicago Teachers To Go On Strike

Gawker Wants Us To ‘Sympathize’ With Pedophiles

Dems Tone Deaf On The Moral Crisis

Up Next for Team Obama? Racial Quotas for School Discipline

Christianity is Compatible with Ayn Rand

Applying the “Fact Check” Hit Squad’s Romney-Ryan Rules to the DNC

The Godless Democrats

Record 88,921,000 Americans ‘Not in Labor Force’—119,000 Fewer Employed in August Than July

Wife of Jason Biggs Jokes about Child Rape; Defends Husband’s Misogynistic Tweets

Media Lions Roar at Christian Athletes

Pornographer Larry Flynt Offers $1 Million For Romney's Tax Returns

Romney: I'll Keep Parts of Obamacare

Video: Rand Paul sees a Libertarian future for the GOP