HA Goodman is not a progressive or member of the left. Never has been.

[NCTraveler]

Yet he had a following during the primaries. Some lashed out at me for "shooting the messenger" when I called this scum out. Fake news is a big deal because it works. With certain very simple minded people, as long as the "journalist" says what they want to hear, then said "journalist" is good in their mind. This entitled ratfucker is now speaking for feminists in a completely sexist manner. He will still be followed and loved by some. This guy is flat out a Trump supporter. Including during the primary. It was blatantly clear what he was doing.

GQ’s Keith Olbermann Called Trump a ‘Russian Whore’ on Twitter. Olbermann Owes People An Apology

Imagine Donald Trump had Tweeted someone was a “whore,” and used another country as a description of the word. What would The New York Times and Washington Post say? Furthermore, is it alright to call anyone, even a man, a “whore” simply because you disagree politically? If Trump had called another man a “whore,” and used another country as part of the term, America’s media establishment would have exhibited outrage of Biblical proportions. In addition, feminists would have every right to condemn such deplorable use of language; especially if the intention is to insult a man by demeaning the women of another nation.


If you listen to GQ’s Keith Olbermann nowadays, he sounds like a less charming Joseph McCarthy. Yesterday on Twitter, however, Olbermann became more of a demagogue than Trump or anyone else. In a world where Bernie Sanders pointing his finger was considered sexist, Olbermann Tweeted that Trump was a “Russian Whore.” He repeated the xenophobic, sexist, and vile term in numerous Tweets, seen below:

In addition to sexist language, warning the President Elect “we will get you” should warrant at least a call from the FBI. As for his insulting message, progressives who care about ending misogyny and sexism should read his series of Tweets. Olbermann’s use of the phrases “Russian whore” and “Russia’s whore” (Tweeted throughout the day) is linked directly to his belief that such terms are insulting. If Trump had an alleged political link to the UK, it’s doubtful Olbermann would have called Trump a “British whore.” Someone should ask Mr. Olbermann if there were any double meanings pertaining to his use of the phrase; prostitution in Russia surged after the financial crisis. For Olbermann to have insulted the women of a rival nation, simply because he disagrees with Trump, is despicable. In addition, for Olbermann to have used the term without any evidence (emails, video, recordings, suspects) backing up the claim Russian hackers worked to elect Trump, is yet another flaw in his logic.

The biggest question pertaining to Olbermann’s use of the term “Russian whore” is how Slate, The Daily Beast and other progressive thought police will react. Had Trump Tweeted the same words towards a liberal male writer or pundit, Democrats would likely have contacted the International Criminal Court. Since Keith Olbermann is one of the more vocal defenders of Hillary Clinton, it’s telling that nobody paid attention to the xenophobia and hate found within his Tweet.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gqs-keith-olbermann-called-trump-a-russian-whore_us_5853afd6e4b0d5f48e164e5f

He also claims we are using Red Scare tactics. I can't believe people on the "left" ignorantly followed this entitled little man. We need to become better as a whole at combating infiltration from the right. It works on our most vulnerable voters.

[Gothmog]

1. HA Goodman is a joke

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. I assume you are referring to H A Goodman, who is indeed an ass

and not Keith Olbermann, who isn't.

[kcr]

3. Olbermann isn't the one claiming we are using Red Scare tactics. The author of that piece is.

HA Goodman is a joke.

[NCTraveler]

4. I thought it was pretty clear I was talking about the author of the piece. nt.

[kcr]

6. Actually, that wasn't clear at all. You might want to edit your headline n/t

[NCTraveler]

7. I truly don't see how.

That said, I have included the ratfuckers name in the headline to remove any lack of clarity some might have.

[kcr]

8. Not everyone is a fan of Olbermann. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

It's not that I feel like I have to be the huge champion and defender of Olbermann or anything, though I think he's ok. I'm just very much not a fan of Goodman I could easily see someone falling for his phony balony outrage over the Russian whore thing.

[NCTraveler]

10. Understood. I actually referenced multiple items in the Goodman article.

That is why I thought it was very clear.

[SFnomad]

9. Not, it's not ... not even close n/t

[NCTraveler]

11. "He also claims we are using Red Scare tactics."

That should have cleared it up. It's clear who said it.

"is now speaking for feminists"

Also in the article by ratfucker Goodman in case the first reference wasn't enough for some.

Now I have included his name in the op, before your reply here, for those who weren't able to make the connections above. It's clear why Goodman worked on some.

[SFnomad]

16. No, it didn't "clear it up"

The way you posted it, it wasn't clear at all.

Not anywhere in your post did you have Goodman's name in it ... not anywhere, until you edited it. And your editing style made it look like the first paragraph you wrote, the middle was the article and the last paragraph you wrote.

You had to click into the link to clear up any confusion ... which shouldn't have been necessary.

[NCTraveler]

17. Didn't think I needed his name with the clear references.

You have made your confusion clear and I understand. To the point I put his name in the title before your first reply. I am sure that cleared it up. Yes, one would have had to have read in order for it to be clear. I fully agree.

My most sincere apologies for the confusion it caused you. You have made your point.

Fuck ratfucker HA Goodman. Amazing that he had/has a following.

[SFnomad]

18. I was writing my reply before you put his name in the title

By the time I hit "post my reply", you had updated it.

Yes, one would have had to have read in order for it to be clear.

No, one had to click into the article for it to be clear, before you updated the title. It didn't matter how much one read your post. I'm glad you updated your OP to clear up the confusion.

[dionysus]

34. I don't know what ppl are going on about. You'd have to have serious reading comprehension problems

to not understand what you were saying...

[Dr Hobbitstein]

5. Correct, HA Goodman is an right wing hack posing as a leftier than thou.

Of course, one of Goodman's groupies alerted on this post.

[forjusticethunders]

12. We're seeing the reverse of the Trots into neocons in 2017.

Now the neocons are becoming left populists. Glenn Greenwald was a hard right neocon until he found a niche appealing to dumb wannabe leftists. Tulsi Gabbard was a social conservative Blue Dog, now she's the great Leftist hope.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

14. Yup. nt

[boston bean]

33. Correct.

Before you know it we will have the left tea party that is basically another rw front.

People need to wake up.

[JHan]

13. "red scare tactics" ....

anytime I hear that I know the person saying it is on shit.

[Ace Rothstein]

27. Exactly.

We are afraid of becoming more like Russia because they are an authoritarian right-wing dictatorship. The exact opposite of a red scare.

[Me.]

15. He Owes An Apology To HRC

For his dogging her and his articles on Salon.

[otohara]

19. Neither is...

David Sirota, Amy Goodman and her favorite guest Glenn Greenwald, Cenk Uygur, Lee Fang...David Schuster...and more who delighted the liberal HATE-HER audience on many sites we frequent and have thousands of followers on their Twitter feeds...

PUTIN’S PAWNS
Beware the Hillary Clinton-Loathing, Donald Trump-Loving Useful Idiots of the Left
The Republican nominee’s words are music to the ears of progressives averse to the Democratic nominee’s support for the U.S.-led liberal world order.

In this weirdest year, there may be no weirder phenomenon than the rise of the progressive Donald Trump supporter.
There exist two broad species of this political genus. First are the radical instrumentalists who see the Republican nominee as a noxious but necessary way station on the road to socialist revolution. Two months ago in this space, a writer named Christopher Ketcham made the “left-contrarian arsonist” case for Trump, arguing that, “What’s needed now in American politics is consternation, confusion, dissension, disorder, chaos—and crisis, with possible resolution—and a Trump presidency is the best chance for this true progress.” While acknowledging Trump as “fascistic,” Salon’s Walter Bragman urged his fellow lefties to at least acknowledge that “he would shake the current system to its core.” In March, actress Susan Sarandon explained to MSNBC’s Chris Hayes her hesitancy to support Hillary Clinton in the general election because “Some people feel that Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately if he gets in.”
With their purposeful enablement of right-wing populist extremism over center-left incrementalism, America’s latter-day revolutionaries are behaving like Weimar-era German communists, who, on Joseph Stalin’s orders, attacked Social Democrats as “social fascists” rather than battle Nazi brown-shirts. Clearing the way for an actual fascist to take power would “heighten the contradictions of capitalism,” a dialectical Leninist concept holding that conditions must deteriorate drastically in order to wake the proletariat from its slumber.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/15/beware-the-hillary-clinton-loathing-donald-trump-loving-useful-idiots-of-the-left.html

[NCTraveler]

20. Thank you for this addition. nt.

[BainsBane]

22. Fascism is as fascism does.

And they fit the bill.

[BlueMTexpat]

24. K&R as well!

[m-lekktor]

25. this "everybody critical of Hillary is in league with Russia" stuff is batshit insane. nt

[otohara]

28. au contraire

They continue to mock Democrats for implying Russia had anything to do with the election results.

Perhaps you probably forgot - Sanders supporters were gleeful when the Russians hacked the DNC just like the bloggers listed.

[charlyvi]

30. And where did you read in the OP the statement saying

"everybody critical of Hillary is in league with Russia"? You didn't. Hyperbole much?

[Demsrule86]

37. Anyone who did not vote for Hillary helped elect the Siberian candidate

Trump who is indeed in league with Russia. Hillary was the only thing that stood between us and Trump...and those who did not vote for her are not and never were progressives. Trump is a dangerous fascist wannabe...

[JHan]

26. One of the best things i've read in a long time:

I don't expect them to admit to their culpability either. Their guilt will make them double down on the stupid.

[forjusticethunders]

40. History doesn't repeat itself...but it rhymes.

With their purposeful enablement of right-wing populist extremism over center-left incrementalism, America’s latter-day revolutionaries are behaving like Weimar-era German communists, who, on Joseph Stalin’s orders, attacked Social Democrats as “social fascists” rather than battle Nazi brown-shirts. Clearing the way for an actual fascist to take power would “heighten the contradictions of capitalism,” a dialectical Leninist concept holding that conditions must deteriorate drastically in order to wake the proletariat from its slumber.

[BainsBane]

21. Russian propagandist

Was likely on their payroll all along.

[BlueMTexpat]

23. K&R!

[BlueCaliDem]

29. Sad that so many on DU fell for HAHA Goodman's war against Hillary Clinton as he pretended to be

a Bernie Sanders supporter. It's what they do - disingenuous tripe against the stronger Democratic candidate in order to set the weaker one up for the fall and have their RW-guy win in the GE.

I be all those Liberals who supported HAHA Goodman because he claimed to be a Bernie Sanders supporter, feel stupid now.

[pnwmom]

31. You'd have to be pretty stupid to think that a Rand Paul endorser

was genuinely supporting Sanders, but there were a lot of people here who were pushing Goodman.

[BlueCaliDem]

32. I'd noticed! And they did so with the anger and aggression you'd expect a Republican to defend

an elected Republican official, too. That alone told me all I needed to know about that person.

[Demsrule86]

38. Bernie was the weaker candidate which is why they wanted him.

And any who did not give their all for Hillary are equally culpable for the shitshow that is about to happen and for the Americans who will not survive. Bernie was not attacked by Russia quite the contrary. That our progressive policy forged over decades from Roosevelt to now will be lost is undoubtedly true...and the great irony is those who call themselves progressives participated in the demise...they are nihilists, not liberals or progressives. I sincerely hope their suffering is great. They absolutely deserve it.

[Adrahil]

35. The best part of HaHa Goodman...

Wound up as a stain on a sheet. Fuck that guy.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

36. That guy is strictly anti-Hillary!

F**k him!

Source:
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/exposing-facts-about-fanatical-pro-bernie-sanders-blogger-ha-goodman/

Below are some of his pre-Bernie article titles:
* Why Martin O’Malley and Elizabeth Warren Can Beat Any Republican, Including Walker, Bush, Paul and Cruz (March 25, 2015)
* The Answer to Hillary Clinton’s ‘Emailgate’: Vote Senator Elizabeth Warren in 2016 (March 6, 2015)
*Why Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire Should Choose Jim Webb Over Hillary Clinton (April 21, 2015)
* How O’Malley, Warren and Webb can save Democrats from Clinton (April 16, 2015)
* Why Americans should consider O’Malley for President (April 1, 2015)
* 5 Reasons Liberals Tired of War Should Vote for Rand Paul Over Hillary Clinton (November 21, 2014)
* I’m a Liberal Democrat. I’m Voting for Rand Paul in 2016. Here is Why. (November 17, 2014)
* Why President Rand Paul Will Keep America Safer Than Bush, Obama and Hillary Clinton (November 13, 2014)

He also had almost nothing to write about Trump?!

And by one subject, I mean one subject. Looking through his archives from June 2015-June 2016, I saw maybe 4 or 5 (if that) articles where he wrote about something that didn’t pertain to Sanders or Clinton.

As a writer myself, I find that absolutely ridiculous. Especially from someone who considers himself a “liberal” or a “progressive” who didn’t seem to find the need to cover Donald Trump much at all. One would think that, even as “pro-Bernie” as Goodman claims he is, he might have found it important to call out Trump’s belittling of veterans; sexism; racism; bigotry; calls to ban all Muslims; or to address anything one of the most vile candidates in modern U.S. history has said and done over that same 12-month timespan.

[Blue_Tires]

39. Goodman has been batshit insane fow awhile....