Export thread
DNC joins GOP in crazyland
#1
Krisken
While I think the source is throwing stones while living in glass houses, it doesn't excuse the extreme rhetoric. It was wrong seven years ago, it's wrong now.
(See? I do denounce crazy, no matter what side of the aisle it comes from.)
Krisken
"The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists - the Taliban and Hamas this morning - in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace prize," DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse told POLITICO. "Republicans cheered when America failed to land the Olympics and now they are criticizing the President of the United States for receiving the Nobel Peace prize - an award he did not seek but that is nonetheless an honor in which every American can take great pride - unless of course you are the Republican Party.
"The 2009 version of the Republican Party has no boundaries, has no shame and has proved that they will put politics above patriotism at every turn. It's no wonder only 20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim," Woodhouse said.
"The 2009 version of the Republican Party has no boundaries, has no shame and has proved that they will put politics above patriotism at every turn. It's no wonder only 20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim," Woodhouse said.
While I think the source is throwing stones while living in glass houses, it doesn't excuse the extreme rhetoric. It was wrong seven years ago, it's wrong now.
(See? I do denounce crazy, no matter what side of the aisle it comes from.)
#2
Iaculus
Iaculus
So we have a thread that implicitly supports terrorism on this board? I'm impressed.
#3
Covar
Covar
sweet for critizising Obama we're racists AND terrorists. If only he was a muslim, we could be bigots too.
#4
Armadillo
Armadillo
Wow. That's just...wrong.
I think the Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same ugly-assed coin, but to compare people questioning why he won a Nobel Peace Prize to TERRORISTS? That's WAY over the line, and he should be ashamed of himself.
It does fit the modus operandi for the DNC, though: criticize Obama and you're either racist, a terrorist, a Nazi, or all three.
I think the Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same ugly-assed coin, but to compare people questioning why he won a Nobel Peace Prize to TERRORISTS? That's WAY over the line, and he should be ashamed of himself.
It does fit the modus operandi for the DNC, though: criticize Obama and you're either racist, a terrorist, a Nazi, or all three.
#5
JCM
JCM
However it seems too idotic for someone to have his head stuck up so far his political party to overlook that for the first time in 8 years USA is being respected, is actually making great headway in disarment, diplomacy and actually is giving a good example to the rest of the world, to complain that someone from a different political party won the Nobel prize.
In that way, one could say the republicans are pretty much like the Muslim extremists, ignorant of anything beyond what they are told to believe.
Funnily, at about the second time Bush was elected, suddenly everyone that is against democrats or talks with Republicans talking points call themselves Libertarians or Independents.
In that way, one could say the republicans are pretty much like the Muslim extremists, ignorant of anything beyond what they are told to believe.
This part I agree though.20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim,
Funnily, at about the second time Bush was elected, suddenly everyone that is against democrats or talks with Republicans talking points call themselves Libertarians or Independents.
#6
drawn_inward
drawn_inward
Moved my post to the General topic. It fight there better than here.
#7
DarkAudit
I mean when you have a sitting Congressman publicly praising a man for standing up and declaring himself a "right-wing terrorist".
And then repeating the praise when reminded later of just what the first guy said.
DarkAudit
If the shoe fits...Wow. That's just...wrong.
I think the Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same ugly-assed coin, but to compare people questioning why he won a Nobel Peace Prize to TERRORISTS? That's WAY over the line, and he should be ashamed of himself.
It does fit the modus operandi for the DNC, though: criticize Obama and you're either racist, a terrorist, a Nazi, or all three.
I mean when you have a sitting Congressman publicly praising a man for standing up and declaring himself a "right-wing terrorist".
And then repeating the praise when reminded later of just what the first guy said.
#8
Krisken
Krisken
Yup. That was kinda my "glass houses" bit.However it seems too idotic for someone to have his head stuck up so far his political party to overlook that for the first time in 8 years USA is being respected, is actually making great headway in disarment, diplomacy and actually is giving a good example to the rest of the world, to complain that someone from a different political party won the Nobel prize.
In that way, one could say the republicans are pretty much like the Muslim extremists, ignorant of anything beyond what they are told to believe.
This part I agree though.20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim,
Funnily, at about the second time Bush was elected, suddenly everyone that is against democrats or talks with Republicans talking points call themselves Libertarians or Independents.
#9
JCM
Lets see,
-get Iran to allow frequent IAEA inspections
-getting Clinton´s arse out there to get back US reporters in North Korea
-Try and help to fix the shit Bush left in Afghanistan, when he forgot all about it and ran after Saddam with excuses of Alqaeda.
-Start talks with countries on an equal level
-regain confidence and respect of the world
-establish communication with Iran after 30 years
-get UN and other countries on board against nuclear weapons proliferation
-stop tensions with Russia over the missile shieal crap from the Bush years
USA was the laughingstock of the world, heck in Brazil jokes about USA and americans making shit, then making things worse as they try to fix their shit are as common as Argentinian jokes.
When I was in Malaysia, people were laughing in bars in Sept 11 when the planes hit.
In South Africa, all I heard was jokes about the US photo-op trying to make it look like Iraqis were toppling the Saddam statue, not american soldiers.
Like Kissinger, who opened up the East, and made headway into China and Russia with diplomacy that eventually weakened communism and allowed capitalism to go East, people are just gonna bitch that he didnt stop a war and overlook diplomacy that will have positive effects for many years to come.
Today´s US policy, what the nobel award described as -a world of zero nuclear weapons, fighting climate change, addressing Middle East peace, repairing relations between the US and the rest of the world, seeking rapprochement between the US and some if its major adversaries, seem to me the best US can offer the world.
Enjoy the fact that the world is giving you guys a homage and basically forgetting the Bush years and looking up to you, instead of bitching about it.
---------- Post added at 05:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:22 PM ----------
I do think its premature, but on the other hand, you have the worlds most powerful man actually trying to be an example, its not hard to see why people would want to homage that.
JCM
Errr, more towards peace in a few months than Bush did in 2 terms as president? But seeing online that most americans think "accomplishemnt" means attacking, killing and disobeying the same laws human rights and treaties previous presidents fought for, lets have a quick list off my mind?So, what exactly has he done to deserve this? Not that it matters, they gave the fucking thing to Arafat and Gore. Peace Prize doesn't mean shit anymore.
Lets see,
-get Iran to allow frequent IAEA inspections
-getting Clinton´s arse out there to get back US reporters in North Korea
-Try and help to fix the shit Bush left in Afghanistan, when he forgot all about it and ran after Saddam with excuses of Alqaeda.
-Start talks with countries on an equal level
-regain confidence and respect of the world
-establish communication with Iran after 30 years
-get UN and other countries on board against nuclear weapons proliferation
-stop tensions with Russia over the missile shieal crap from the Bush years
USA was the laughingstock of the world, heck in Brazil jokes about USA and americans making shit, then making things worse as they try to fix their shit are as common as Argentinian jokes.
When I was in Malaysia, people were laughing in bars in Sept 11 when the planes hit.
In South Africa, all I heard was jokes about the US photo-op trying to make it look like Iraqis were toppling the Saddam statue, not american soldiers.
Like Kissinger, who opened up the East, and made headway into China and Russia with diplomacy that eventually weakened communism and allowed capitalism to go East, people are just gonna bitch that he didnt stop a war and overlook diplomacy that will have positive effects for many years to come.
Today´s US policy, what the nobel award described as -a world of zero nuclear weapons, fighting climate change, addressing Middle East peace, repairing relations between the US and the rest of the world, seeking rapprochement between the US and some if its major adversaries, seem to me the best US can offer the world.
Enjoy the fact that the world is giving you guys a homage and basically forgetting the Bush years and looking up to you, instead of bitching about it.
---------- Post added at 05:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:22 PM ----------
Yup. That was kinda my "glass houses" bit.[/QUOTE]True, missed that bit.However it seems too idotic for someone to have his head stuck up so far his political party to overlook that for the first time in 8 years USA is being respected, is actually making great headway in disarment, diplomacy and actually is giving a good example to the rest of the world, to complain that someone from a different political party won the Nobel prize.
In that way, one could say the republicans are pretty much like the Muslim extremists, ignorant of anything beyond what they are told to believe.
This part I agree though.20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim,
Funnily, at about the second time Bush was elected, suddenly everyone that is against democrats or talks with Republicans talking points call themselves Libertarians or Independents.
I do think its premature, but on the other hand, you have the worlds most powerful man actually trying to be an example, its not hard to see why people would want to homage that.
#10
Krisken
I do think its premature, but on the other hand, you have the worlds most powerful man actually trying to be an example, its not hard to see why people would want to homage that.[/QUOTE]
Which I think is great. It's nice to have the world rewarding leaders when they work toward peace. He was nominated before he accomplished anything, but he has since then made steps to closing Guantanamo Bay, having trials for those prisoners, and working toward nuclear disarmament. That's more than many presidents do in two years, let alone 8 months. I do feel we have a long way to go yet (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan), not to mention equal rights for women and gays.
My complaint was more about the DNC reaction. Rhetoric calling people un-American or unpatriotic was the tactic of the Bush administration. It was vile and stupid. It lowers the conversation to the dregs and trivializes not just the complaints, but the accomplishments. I don't want a liberal GOP.
Krisken
True, missed that bit.
Yup. That was kinda my "glass houses" bit.However it seems too idotic for someone to have his head stuck up so far his political party to overlook that for the first time in 8 years USA is being respected, is actually making great headway in disarment, diplomacy and actually is giving a good example to the rest of the world, to complain that someone from a different political party won the Nobel prize.
In that way, one could say the republicans are pretty much like the Muslim extremists, ignorant of anything beyond what they are told to believe.
This part I agree though.20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim,
Funnily, at about the second time Bush was elected, suddenly everyone that is against democrats or talks with Republicans talking points call themselves Libertarians or Independents.
I do think its premature, but on the other hand, you have the worlds most powerful man actually trying to be an example, its not hard to see why people would want to homage that.[/QUOTE]
Which I think is great. It's nice to have the world rewarding leaders when they work toward peace. He was nominated before he accomplished anything, but he has since then made steps to closing Guantanamo Bay, having trials for those prisoners, and working toward nuclear disarmament. That's more than many presidents do in two years, let alone 8 months. I do feel we have a long way to go yet (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan), not to mention equal rights for women and gays.
My complaint was more about the DNC reaction. Rhetoric calling people un-American or unpatriotic was the tactic of the Bush administration. It was vile and stupid. It lowers the conversation to the dregs and trivializes not just the complaints, but the accomplishments. I don't want a liberal GOP.
#11
SpecialKO
SpecialKO
This. A thousand times this.My complaint was more about the DNC reaction. Rhetoric calling people un-American or unpatriotic was the tactic of the Bush administration. It was vile and stupid. It lowers the conversation to the dregs and trivializes not just the complaints, but the accomplishments. I don't want a liberal GOP.
#12
Iaculus
Iaculus
Was that on Obama's initiative? I must confess to not knowing the precise political mechanics behind that stunt, but it seemed like Clinton himself was the one who came up with it from what I read.-getting Clinton´s arse out there to get back US reporters in North Korea
#13
The Lovely Boehner
The Lovely Boehner
The DNC is really a huge mess. It was kind of a fluke that Obama won after their huge bungles in the post-Clinton elections.
#14
Soliloquy
Soliloquy
Nah, it's just that the GOP shot themselves in the foot by evolving into complete nutjobs over the past 8 years.The DNC is really a huge mess. It was kind of a fluke that Obama won after their huge bungles in the post-Clinton elections.
#15
JCM
JCM
Nah, it's just that the GOP shot themselves in the foot by evolving into complete nutjobs over the past 8 years.[/QUOTE]Pretty much this.The DNC is really a huge mess. It was kind of a fluke that Obama won after their huge bungles in the post-Clinton elections.
#16
Cuyval Dar
I would argue that it is both of these.
Also, Nobel Prize for Obama. What the fuck, Norway?
All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.
Cuyval Dar
Nah, it's just that the GOP shot themselves in the foot by evolving into complete nutjobs over the past 8 years.[/QUOTE]The DNC is really a huge mess. It was kind of a fluke that Obama won after their huge bungles in the post-Clinton elections.
I would argue that it is both of these.
Also, Nobel Prize for Obama. What the fuck, Norway?
All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.
#17
Krisken
Krisken
What a dick, getting along with our neighbors. We should, you know, insult them and threaten to turn their cities to rubble when they don't want to do what we tell them. M I Rite?All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.
#18
JCM
I would argue that it is both of these.
Also, Nobel Prize for Obama. What the fuck, Norway?
All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.[/QUOTE]Amen Bruther Cuvyl!
All dat crap about "doing what shouldve been done" und "opening up diplomatic channels with every country" tah "leading the world to peace and non-nuclear proliferation" ish all bullcrap! Uf curse he damn suck them European cocks!!! Bloody fagget communist Nigah!
Now lets go and bang up sis while we go shoot at that damn towelhead´s store!! Dats what he should do, shoot them towelheads and asians dead, dem Nobelians must be in line with the Alquaeda and Iranians too!!
Yeeeeehaw!
JCM
Nah, it's just that the GOP shot themselves in the foot by evolving into complete nutjobs over the past 8 years.[/QUOTE]The DNC is really a huge mess. It was kind of a fluke that Obama won after their huge bungles in the post-Clinton elections.
I would argue that it is both of these.
Also, Nobel Prize for Obama. What the fuck, Norway?
All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.[/QUOTE]Amen Bruther Cuvyl!
All dat crap about "doing what shouldve been done" und "opening up diplomatic channels with every country" tah "leading the world to peace and non-nuclear proliferation" ish all bullcrap! Uf curse he damn suck them European cocks!!! Bloody fagget communist Nigah!
Now lets go and bang up sis while we go shoot at that damn towelhead´s store!! Dats what he should do, shoot them towelheads and asians dead, dem Nobelians must be in line with the Alquaeda and Iranians too!!
Yeeeeehaw!
#19
Bowielee
That was the George Bush form of diplomacy.
Bowielee
What a dick, getting along with our neighbors. We should, you know, insult them and threaten to turn their cities to rubble when they don't want to do what we tell them. M I Rite?[/QUOTE]All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.
That was the George Bush form of diplomacy.
#20
Cuyval Dar
I would argue that it is both of these.
Also, Nobel Prize for Obama. What the fuck, Norway?
All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.[/QUOTE]Amen Bruther Cuvyl!
All dat crap about "doing what shouldve been done" und "opening up diplomatic channels with every country" tah "leading the world to peace and non-nuclear proliferation" ish all bullcrap! Uf curse he damn suck them European cocks!!! Bloody fagget communist Nigah!
Now lets go and bang up sis while we go shoot at that damn towelhead´s store!! Dats what he should do, shoot them towelheads and asians dead, dem Nobelians must be in line with the Alquaeda and Iranians too!!
Yeeeeehaw![/QUOTE]
Wow, I'm not sure sure just how to respond to a post like that. But I'll try.
Obama is not doing anything from Bush.
Guantanamo isn't being closed, just relocated. He has not pulled out of Iraq, and he is 'deliberating' on how many troops to send to Afghanistan.
Sending Clinton to 'rescue' a pair of journalists who shouldn't have been in North Korea is the first place? Wow, real groundbreaking diplomacy there.
And as far as nuclear non-proliferation? Now Iran is building nukes, and I know that you aren't so gullible as to believe that they will stop just because the UN says so.
And, on the domestic front, he can't get his healthcare bill through, even with a filibuster-proof Democrat majority.
All he has done for the economy is drive us deeper in debt, and give the Federal Reserve unprecedented power to bail out whatever industry they deem 'critical'.
He keeps telling us that we are out of the worst of the recession, but September's unemployment good a massive nosedive.
The only thing he has done is give Europe a woody because now there is a US president who is willing to say anything just to make them 'like' us.
Guess what? America doesn't need Europe to like us at all. They can go back to their perpetually failed negotiations with Iran and North Korea.
If you actually want to hold a civilized argument,JCM, without your usual non sequiturs and offensive ramblings, I won't be waiting.
Cuyval Dar
Nah, it's just that the GOP shot themselves in the foot by evolving into complete nutjobs over the past 8 years.[/QUOTE]The DNC is really a huge mess. It was kind of a fluke that Obama won after their huge bungles in the post-Clinton elections.
I would argue that it is both of these.
Also, Nobel Prize for Obama. What the fuck, Norway?
All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.[/QUOTE]Amen Bruther Cuvyl!
All dat crap about "doing what shouldve been done" und "opening up diplomatic channels with every country" tah "leading the world to peace and non-nuclear proliferation" ish all bullcrap! Uf curse he damn suck them European cocks!!! Bloody fagget communist Nigah!
Now lets go and bang up sis while we go shoot at that damn towelhead´s store!! Dats what he should do, shoot them towelheads and asians dead, dem Nobelians must be in line with the Alquaeda and Iranians too!!
Yeeeeehaw![/QUOTE]
Wow, I'm not sure sure just how to respond to a post like that. But I'll try.
Obama is not doing anything from Bush.
Guantanamo isn't being closed, just relocated. He has not pulled out of Iraq, and he is 'deliberating' on how many troops to send to Afghanistan.
Sending Clinton to 'rescue' a pair of journalists who shouldn't have been in North Korea is the first place? Wow, real groundbreaking diplomacy there.
And as far as nuclear non-proliferation? Now Iran is building nukes, and I know that you aren't so gullible as to believe that they will stop just because the UN says so.
And, on the domestic front, he can't get his healthcare bill through, even with a filibuster-proof Democrat majority.
All he has done for the economy is drive us deeper in debt, and give the Federal Reserve unprecedented power to bail out whatever industry they deem 'critical'.
He keeps telling us that we are out of the worst of the recession, but September's unemployment good a massive nosedive.
The only thing he has done is give Europe a woody because now there is a US president who is willing to say anything just to make them 'like' us.
Guess what? America doesn't need Europe to like us at all. They can go back to their perpetually failed negotiations with Iran and North Korea.
If you actually want to hold a civilized argument,JCM, without your usual non sequiturs and offensive ramblings, I won't be waiting.
#21
Bowielee
I would argue that it is both of these.
Also, Nobel Prize for Obama. What the fuck, Norway?
All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.[/QUOTE]Amen Bruther Cuvyl!
All dat crap about "doing what shouldve been done" und "opening up diplomatic channels with every country" tah "leading the world to peace and non-nuclear proliferation" ish all bullcrap! Uf curse he damn suck them European cocks!!! Bloody fagget communist Nigah!
Now lets go and bang up sis while we go shoot at that damn towelhead´s store!! Dats what he should do, shoot them towelheads and asians dead, dem Nobelians must be in line with the Alquaeda and Iranians too!!
Yeeeeehaw![/QUOTE]
Wow, I'm not sure sure just how to respond to a post like that. But I'll try.
Obama is not doing anything from Bush.
Guantanamo isn't being closed, just relocated. He has not pulled out of Iraq, and he is 'deliberating' on how many troops to send to Afghanistan.
Sending Clinton to 'rescue' a pair of journalists who shouldn't have been in North Korea is the first place? Wow, real groundbreaking diplomacy there.
And as far as nuclear non-proliferation? Now Iran is building nukes, and I know that you aren't so gullible as to believe that they will stop just because the UN says so.
And, on the domestic front, he can't get his healthcare bill through, even with a filibuster-proof Democrat majority.
All he has done for the economy is drive us deeper in debt, and give the Federal Reserve unprecedented power to bail out whatever industry they deem 'critical'.
He keeps telling us that we are out of the worst of the recession, but September's unemployment good a massive nosedive.
The only thing he has done is give Europe a woody because now there is a US president who is willing to say anything just to make them 'like' us.
Guess what? America doesn't need Europe to like us at all. They can go back to their perpetually failed negotiations with Iran and North Korea.
If you actually want to hold a civilized argument,JCM, without your usual non sequiturs and offensive ramblings, I won't be waiting.[/QUOTE]
FYI unemployment is a leading and trailing economic indicator. The unemployment rate is always the last thing to improve in a recovery from a recession.
Bowielee
Nah, it's just that the GOP shot themselves in the foot by evolving into complete nutjobs over the past 8 years.[/QUOTE]The DNC is really a huge mess. It was kind of a fluke that Obama won after their huge bungles in the post-Clinton elections.
I would argue that it is both of these.
Also, Nobel Prize for Obama. What the fuck, Norway?
All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.[/QUOTE]Amen Bruther Cuvyl!
All dat crap about "doing what shouldve been done" und "opening up diplomatic channels with every country" tah "leading the world to peace and non-nuclear proliferation" ish all bullcrap! Uf curse he damn suck them European cocks!!! Bloody fagget communist Nigah!
Now lets go and bang up sis while we go shoot at that damn towelhead´s store!! Dats what he should do, shoot them towelheads and asians dead, dem Nobelians must be in line with the Alquaeda and Iranians too!!
Yeeeeehaw![/QUOTE]
Wow, I'm not sure sure just how to respond to a post like that. But I'll try.
Obama is not doing anything from Bush.
Guantanamo isn't being closed, just relocated. He has not pulled out of Iraq, and he is 'deliberating' on how many troops to send to Afghanistan.
Sending Clinton to 'rescue' a pair of journalists who shouldn't have been in North Korea is the first place? Wow, real groundbreaking diplomacy there.
And as far as nuclear non-proliferation? Now Iran is building nukes, and I know that you aren't so gullible as to believe that they will stop just because the UN says so.
And, on the domestic front, he can't get his healthcare bill through, even with a filibuster-proof Democrat majority.
All he has done for the economy is drive us deeper in debt, and give the Federal Reserve unprecedented power to bail out whatever industry they deem 'critical'.
He keeps telling us that we are out of the worst of the recession, but September's unemployment good a massive nosedive.
The only thing he has done is give Europe a woody because now there is a US president who is willing to say anything just to make them 'like' us.
Guess what? America doesn't need Europe to like us at all. They can go back to their perpetually failed negotiations with Iran and North Korea.
If you actually want to hold a civilized argument,JCM, without your usual non sequiturs and offensive ramblings, I won't be waiting.[/QUOTE]
FYI unemployment is a leading and trailing economic indicator. The unemployment rate is always the last thing to improve in a recovery from a recession.
#22
JCM
All dat crap about "doing what shouldve been done" und "opening up diplomatic channels with every country" tah "leading the world to peace and non-nuclear proliferation" ish all bullcrap! Uf curse he damn suck them European cocks!!! Bloody fagget communist Nigah!
Now lets go and bang up sis while we go shoot at that damn towelhead´s store!! Dats what he should do, shoot them towelheads and asians dead, dem Nobelians must be in line with the Alquaeda and Iranians too!!
Yeeeeehaw![/QUOTE]
Wow, I'm not sure sure just how to respond to a post like that. But I'll try.
Obama is not doing anything from Bush.
Guantanamo isn't being closed, just relocated. He has not pulled out of Iraq, and he is 'deliberating' on how many troops to send to Afghanistan.
Sending Clinton to 'rescue' a pair of journalists who shouldn't have been in North Korea is the first place? Wow, real groundbreaking diplomacy there.
And as far as nuclear non-proliferation? Now Iran is building nukes, and I know that you aren't so gullible as to believe that they will stop just because the UN says so.
And, on the domestic front, he can't get his healthcare bill through, even with a filibuster-proof Democrat majority.
All he has done for the economy is drive us deeper in debt, and give the Federal Reserve unprecedented power to bail out whatever industry they deem 'critical'.
He keeps telling us that we are out of the worst of the recession, but September's unemployment good a massive nosedive.
The only thing he has done is give Europe a woody because now there is a US president who is willing to say anything just to make them 'like' us.
Guess what? America doesn't need Europe to like us at all. They can go back to their perpetually failed negotiations with Iran and North Korea.
If you actually want to hold a civilized argument,JCM, without your usual non sequiturs and offensive ramblings, I won't be waiting.[/QUOTE]So lets see how many classic libertablican tactics you've used in one post-
1) Again, uneducated blabber showing total utter ignorance. Guatamano is being closed, yes it will take longer as they discovered your idol Bush didnt even give them proper case files, so theyll have to gather everything from zero, but it is a)being closed, b)people are being tried, under proper rules and c)abuse of detainees is being dealt with.
2)The usual "overlook easing of tensions with EVERY other damn country" and whining about what? How Iran must be building nukes, even with now IAEA inspections. Guess them nukes in Iraq showed you how guts = the truth, right?
3)Then some wrambling about how I must be evil, even though nobody in this thread is impressed at all with your "HEY DEM NIGGAH MASTURBATE THE EU LOLZ!" arguement.
4)Healthcare bitching? Funny how the Bush-loving crowd doesnt give a shit about spending when its for a)tax cuts, b)military spending and c)wars. Guess killing people must give ye a hardon, but helping people = bad?
So again, Yeehaw bruder, good luck with the hoisting the southernflag while bitching about how da Obama dunner kill them asians/towelheads. I'll be back if you post anything intelligent, or just to joke about the usual Bushist "sucking the EU' you have here, or laugh at the ad-hominems.
---------- Post added at 03:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:04 AM ----------
JCM
Amen Bruther Cuvyl!I would argue that it is both of these.Soliloquy;272271 said:Nah, it's just that the GOP shot themselves in the foot by evolving into complete nutjobs over the past 8 years.The DNC is really a huge mess. It was kind of a fluke that Obama won after their huge bungles in the post-Clinton elections.
Also, Nobel Prize for Obama. What the fuck, Norway?
All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.
All dat crap about "doing what shouldve been done" und "opening up diplomatic channels with every country" tah "leading the world to peace and non-nuclear proliferation" ish all bullcrap! Uf curse he damn suck them European cocks!!! Bloody fagget communist Nigah!
Now lets go and bang up sis while we go shoot at that damn towelhead´s store!! Dats what he should do, shoot them towelheads and asians dead, dem Nobelians must be in line with the Alquaeda and Iranians too!!
Yeeeeehaw![/QUOTE]
Wow, I'm not sure sure just how to respond to a post like that. But I'll try.
Obama is not doing anything from Bush.
Guantanamo isn't being closed, just relocated. He has not pulled out of Iraq, and he is 'deliberating' on how many troops to send to Afghanistan.
Sending Clinton to 'rescue' a pair of journalists who shouldn't have been in North Korea is the first place? Wow, real groundbreaking diplomacy there.
And as far as nuclear non-proliferation? Now Iran is building nukes, and I know that you aren't so gullible as to believe that they will stop just because the UN says so.
And, on the domestic front, he can't get his healthcare bill through, even with a filibuster-proof Democrat majority.
All he has done for the economy is drive us deeper in debt, and give the Federal Reserve unprecedented power to bail out whatever industry they deem 'critical'.
He keeps telling us that we are out of the worst of the recession, but September's unemployment good a massive nosedive.
The only thing he has done is give Europe a woody because now there is a US president who is willing to say anything just to make them 'like' us.
Guess what? America doesn't need Europe to like us at all. They can go back to their perpetually failed negotiations with Iran and North Korea.
If you actually want to hold a civilized argument,JCM, without your usual non sequiturs and offensive ramblings, I won't be waiting.[/QUOTE]So lets see how many classic libertablican tactics you've used in one post-
1) Again, uneducated blabber showing total utter ignorance. Guatamano is being closed, yes it will take longer as they discovered your idol Bush didnt even give them proper case files, so theyll have to gather everything from zero, but it is a)being closed, b)people are being tried, under proper rules and c)abuse of detainees is being dealt with.
2)The usual "overlook easing of tensions with EVERY other damn country" and whining about what? How Iran must be building nukes, even with now IAEA inspections. Guess them nukes in Iraq showed you how guts = the truth, right?
3)Then some wrambling about how I must be evil, even though nobody in this thread is impressed at all with your "HEY DEM NIGGAH MASTURBATE THE EU LOLZ!" arguement.
4)Healthcare bitching? Funny how the Bush-loving crowd doesnt give a shit about spending when its for a)tax cuts, b)military spending and c)wars. Guess killing people must give ye a hardon, but helping people = bad?
So again, Yeehaw bruder, good luck with the hoisting the southernflag while bitching about how da Obama dunner kill them asians/towelheads. I'll be back if you post anything intelligent, or just to joke about the usual Bushist "sucking the EU' you have here, or laugh at the ad-hominems.
---------- Post added at 03:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:04 AM ----------
What a dick, getting along with our neighbors. We should, you know, insult them and threaten to turn their cities to rubble when they don't want to do what we tell them. M I Rite?[/QUOTE]Looks like the Bush-style "non-cocksucking" to me.All it's for is because Obama isn't Bush, and he likes to cocksuck the Europeans.
#23
Armadillo
Armadillo
BUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSH
Bush hasn't been President for nine months now. At some point, it's not going to work to keep blaming him. Obama's going to have to take ownership of his presidency and the state of the nation. All the pretty speeches in the world won't save him from a jobless recovery or repeated legislative failures despite his party having unassailable majorities in both houses.
There are a lot of liberals/Democrats who don't understand why Obama got the Peace Prize, so it's not a purely partisan thing. The truth is there are many more deserving people that have been outshone by Obama's glowing, warm, warming glow. I mean, even Saturday Night Live, who've been slow to make jokes at his expense, took him to task last week for accomplishing exactly nada of his agenda. Intentions aren't going to be enough forever.
Bush hasn't been President for nine months now. At some point, it's not going to work to keep blaming him. Obama's going to have to take ownership of his presidency and the state of the nation. All the pretty speeches in the world won't save him from a jobless recovery or repeated legislative failures despite his party having unassailable majorities in both houses.
There are a lot of liberals/Democrats who don't understand why Obama got the Peace Prize, so it's not a purely partisan thing. The truth is there are many more deserving people that have been outshone by Obama's glowing, warm, warming glow. I mean, even Saturday Night Live, who've been slow to make jokes at his expense, took him to task last week for accomplishing exactly nada of his agenda. Intentions aren't going to be enough forever.
#24
Krisken
Krisken
Oh my god. 9 whole months? Well, you're right. It must be all Obama's fault then. It's not like the last 8 years of deregulation shouldn't be easy to overturn in just 9 months, eh?
Looks like the so-called "Bush derangement syndrome" was just projection for things to come.
Looks like the so-called "Bush derangement syndrome" was just projection for things to come.
#25
JCM
JCM
Funnily, in 9 months he almost but recovered the reputation of "USA being the world leader" that it took Bush 8 years to destroy.
Just hope he can recover from the deficits of the last few Republican presidents, USA's debt might be big, but unlike Japan or some EU countries, its not even 30% of USA's gross national produce.
Just hope he can recover from the deficits of the last few Republican presidents, USA's debt might be big, but unlike Japan or some EU countries, its not even 30% of USA's gross national produce.
Nobody who can make a difference in the whole world more than the most powerful man in the world seeking peace, the disarming of nuclear weapons and diplomatic relations with everyone?The truth is there are many more deserving people that have been outshone by Obama's glowing, warm, warming glow.
#26
Krisken
Krisken
Santa?Funnily, in 9 months he almost but recovered the reputation of "USA being the world leader" that it took Bush 8 years to destroy.
Just hope he can recover from the deficits of the last few Republican presidents, USA's debt might be big, but unlike Japan or some EU countries, its not even 30% of USA's gross national produce.Nobody who can make a difference in the whole world more than the most powerful man in the world seeking peace, the disarming of nuclear weapons and diplomatic relations with everyone?The truth is there are many more deserving people that have been outshone by Obama's glowing, warm, warming glow.
#27
SpecialKO
SpecialKO
Of interest:
The CBO's new report shows that the current health plan before Congress is, in fact, budget neutral (i.e. its cost-saving mechanisms cancel out its costs), and will actually reduce the deficit by $81 billion.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/cbo-report-could-be-turning-point.html
The CBO's new report shows that the current health plan before Congress is, in fact, budget neutral (i.e. its cost-saving mechanisms cancel out its costs), and will actually reduce the deficit by $81 billion.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/cbo-report-could-be-turning-point.html
#28
Bowielee
I dislike Bush as much as the next liberal, but I think it's fair to say that he wasn't the only cause of the current state of affairs. A snowball this big takes a hell of a lot of momentum to get going.
Also, the economy IS turning around. The dow is improving. As I said before Unemployment is a leading and trailing economic marker. It's the first and LAST indication of the health of the economy. We won't see any improvement in the job market for a while. Businesses won't start hiring again until the recession is actually over and the economy is back in a positive state. Expecting unemployment to do anything other than decline in this economy is just plain nieve, and a bit thick.
Bowielee
FYI, it's more like 30 years of deregulation. It started with the Regan administration. And yes, it even continued, though slowed down a bit, through the Clinton administration.Oh my god. 9 whole months? Well, you're right. It must be all Obama's fault then. It's not like the last 8 years of deregulation shouldn't be easy to overturn in just 9 months, eh?
Looks like the so-called "Bush derangement syndrome" was just projection for things to come.
I dislike Bush as much as the next liberal, but I think it's fair to say that he wasn't the only cause of the current state of affairs. A snowball this big takes a hell of a lot of momentum to get going.
Also, the economy IS turning around. The dow is improving. As I said before Unemployment is a leading and trailing economic marker. It's the first and LAST indication of the health of the economy. We won't see any improvement in the job market for a while. Businesses won't start hiring again until the recession is actually over and the economy is back in a positive state. Expecting unemployment to do anything other than decline in this economy is just plain nieve, and a bit thick.
#29
Krisken
I dislike Bush as much as the next liberal, but I think it's fair to say that he wasn't the only cause of the current state of affairs. A snowball this big takes a hell of a lot of momentum to get going.
Also, the economy IS turning around. The dow is improving. As I said before Unemployment is a leading and trailing economic marker. It's the first and LAST indication of the health of the economy. We won't see any improvement in the job market for a while. Businesses won't start hiring again until the recession is actually over and the economy is back in a positive state. Expecting unemployment to do anything other than decline in this economy is just plain nieve, and a bit thick.[/QUOTE]
I knew I should have said 30 years! Gah!
Krisken
FYI, it's more like 30 years of deregulation. It started with the Regan administration. And yes, it even continued, though slowed down a bit, through the Clinton administration.Oh my god. 9 whole months? Well, you're right. It must be all Obama's fault then. It's not like the last 8 years of deregulation shouldn't be easy to overturn in just 9 months, eh?
Looks like the so-called "Bush derangement syndrome" was just projection for things to come.
I dislike Bush as much as the next liberal, but I think it's fair to say that he wasn't the only cause of the current state of affairs. A snowball this big takes a hell of a lot of momentum to get going.
Also, the economy IS turning around. The dow is improving. As I said before Unemployment is a leading and trailing economic marker. It's the first and LAST indication of the health of the economy. We won't see any improvement in the job market for a while. Businesses won't start hiring again until the recession is actually over and the economy is back in a positive state. Expecting unemployment to do anything other than decline in this economy is just plain nieve, and a bit thick.[/QUOTE]
I knew I should have said 30 years! Gah!
#30
Armadillo
Armadillo
On a different track, nice job "uniting Americans," Mr. President:
WH Communications Director: "FOX News is a Wing of the Republican Party."
WH Communications Director: "FOX News is a Wing of the Republican Party."
Now, I know FOX doesn't have the best reputation in liberal circles, and they're most certainly not my first choice in a news outlet, but I don't particularly care for an administration singling out a particular network for their scorn and ridicule. I've always felt that the White House and the media should have a cordial-yet-leery relationship; the media is supposed to keep the government honest and the White House is supposed to be above the fray. With this move, they've made it clear that they view FOX News and FOX News ALONE as the enemy, while also seemingly saying that CNN, MSNBC, and the networks will "go easier" on them. Not a good precedent to set, but this White House has been all too eager to use their bully pulpit to go after American citizens they disagree with, so I guess I shouldn't be too surprised.Dunn scoffed at the network's defense that viewers can distinguish between Fox's news content and the conservative commentary of the network's primetime hosts.
"There is a very different story selection," Dunn said. "This isn’t us making it up."
But, Dunn said, "When [Obama] goes on Fox, he understands he is not going on a news network, he’s going on to debate the opposition."
#31
Dave
Dave
#32
Bowielee
Bowielee
Yes, because one person's comment represents the entire administration.On a different track, nice job "uniting Americans," Mr. President:
WH Communications Director: "FOX News is a Wing of the Republican Party."
Now, I know FOX doesn't have the best reputation in liberal circles, and they're most certainly not my first choice in a news outlet, but I don't particularly care for an administration singling out a particular network for their scorn and ridicule. I've always felt that the White House and the media should have a cordial-yet-leery relationship; the media is supposed to keep the government honest and the White House is supposed to be above the fray. With this move, they've made it clear that they view FOX News and FOX News ALONE as the enemy, while also seemingly saying that CNN, MSNBC, and the networks will "go easier" on them. Not a good precedent to set, but this White House has been all too eager to use their bully pulpit to go after American citizens they disagree with, so I guess I shouldn't be too surprised.Dunn scoffed at the network's defense that viewers can distinguish between Fox's news content and the conservative commentary of the network's primetime hosts.
"There is a very different story selection," Dunn said. "This isn’t us making it up."
But, Dunn said, "When [Obama] goes on Fox, he understands he is not going on a news network, he’s going on to debate the opposition."
#33
Armadillo
Actually, it does. She's an official in the White House; to be more specific, she's the White House Communications Director. In other words, she has a major role in determining how the administration's message gets disseminated to the media. She explicitly said that Fox News is "not a news channel," which is just not a wise thing to say when you work for the President. When you are in that high-ranking of a position, you represent your boss every time you speak in public, otherwise how did what Rumsfeld or Andrew Card or Peter Wolfowitz do/say get slapped onto Bush? If what you're saying is true, then we have a White House that can't stay on message and/or has officials randomly shooting their mouths off with no knowledge of what anyone else is doing. Neither scenario is desirable.
Armadillo
Yes, because one person's comment represents the entire administration.[/QUOTE]On a different track, nice job "uniting Americans," Mr. President:
WH Communications Director: "FOX News is a Wing of the Republican Party."
Now, I know FOX doesn't have the best reputation in liberal circles, and they're most certainly not my first choice in a news outlet, but I don't particularly care for an administration singling out a particular network for their scorn and ridicule. I've always felt that the White House and the media should have a cordial-yet-leery relationship; the media is supposed to keep the government honest and the White House is supposed to be above the fray. With this move, they've made it clear that they view FOX News and FOX News ALONE as the enemy, while also seemingly saying that CNN, MSNBC, and the networks will "go easier" on them. Not a good precedent to set, but this White House has been all too eager to use their bully pulpit to go after American citizens they disagree with, so I guess I shouldn't be too surprised.Dunn scoffed at the network's defense that viewers can distinguish between Fox's news content and the conservative commentary of the network's primetime hosts.
"There is a very different story selection," Dunn said. "This isn’t us making it up."
But, Dunn said, "When [Obama] goes on Fox, he understands he is not going on a news network, he’s going on to debate the opposition."
Actually, it does. She's an official in the White House; to be more specific, she's the White House Communications Director. In other words, she has a major role in determining how the administration's message gets disseminated to the media. She explicitly said that Fox News is "not a news channel," which is just not a wise thing to say when you work for the President. When you are in that high-ranking of a position, you represent your boss every time you speak in public, otherwise how did what Rumsfeld or Andrew Card or Peter Wolfowitz do/say get slapped onto Bush? If what you're saying is true, then we have a White House that can't stay on message and/or has officials randomly shooting their mouths off with no knowledge of what anyone else is doing. Neither scenario is desirable.
#34
Steven Soderburgin
Steven Soderburgin
What is Fox going to do in response? Badmouth Obama? Oh my fuck.
#35
Krisken
Krisken
Um, as soon as Fox news sent their broadcasters to Tea party events as celebrities, that kind of cemented them as a wing of the GOP. Sorry, Armadillo. I really can't blame the White House on this one.
Also, name the amount of times George Bush had been on other stations other than Fox. I'll wait.
Also, name the amount of times George Bush had been on other stations other than Fox. I'll wait.
#36
Armadillo
This isn't even about me defending Fox or blasting MSNBC, CNN, or WGKS out of Omaha, it's about the White House Communications Director basically making it White House policy that FOX is not to be trusted, which is not something I like to hear from the government. Ya know, First Amendment and all. Now in fairness, the White House has not violated the First Amendment, but once you peg a news station like they have, the road to taking action against them is suddenly a hell of a lot shorter than it was before.
Armadillo
I'll get back to you with a comprehensive list about half past never, but off the top of my head, he appeared on 60 Minutes multiple times, interviewed with Wolf Blitzer, interviewed on Dateline NBC, and the rest. I also don't remember the White House Communications Director under Bush singling out a particular news outlet like this Dunn lady did. I'm willing to be wrong on this, however, and welcome a link to that very thing happening.Um, as soon as Fox news sent their broadcasters to Tea party events as celebrities, that kind of cemented them as a wing of the GOP. Sorry, Armadillo. I really can't blame the White House on this one.
Also, name the amount of times George Bush had been on other stations other than Fox. I'll wait.
This isn't even about me defending Fox or blasting MSNBC, CNN, or WGKS out of Omaha, it's about the White House Communications Director basically making it White House policy that FOX is not to be trusted, which is not something I like to hear from the government. Ya know, First Amendment and all. Now in fairness, the White House has not violated the First Amendment, but once you peg a news station like they have, the road to taking action against them is suddenly a hell of a lot shorter than it was before.
#37
Krisken
This isn't even about me defending Fox or blasting MSNBC, CNN, or WGKS out of Omaha, it's about the White House Communications Director basically making it White House policy that FOX is not to be trusted, which is not something I like to hear from the government. Ya know, First Amendment and all. Now in fairness, the White House has not violated the First Amendment, but once you peg a news station like they have, the road to taking action against them is suddenly a hell of a lot shorter than it was before.[/QUOTE]
So if the Enquirer had a news station and spouted things that were not only biased (which is to be expected) but continuously repeat things that are proven to be untrue (death panels, birth certificate, etc), then they would be wrong to call them out on it?
Krisken
I'll get back to you with a comprehensive list about half past never, but off the top of my head, he appeared on 60 Minutes multiple times, interviewed with Wolf Blitzer, interviewed on Dateline NBC, and the rest. I also don't remember the White House Communications Director under Bush singling out a particular news outlet like this Dunn lady did. I'm willing to be wrong on this, however, and welcome a link to that very thing happening.Um, as soon as Fox news sent their broadcasters to Tea party events as celebrities, that kind of cemented them as a wing of the GOP. Sorry, Armadillo. I really can't blame the White House on this one.
Also, name the amount of times George Bush had been on other stations other than Fox. I'll wait.
This isn't even about me defending Fox or blasting MSNBC, CNN, or WGKS out of Omaha, it's about the White House Communications Director basically making it White House policy that FOX is not to be trusted, which is not something I like to hear from the government. Ya know, First Amendment and all. Now in fairness, the White House has not violated the First Amendment, but once you peg a news station like they have, the road to taking action against them is suddenly a hell of a lot shorter than it was before.[/QUOTE]
So if the Enquirer had a news station and spouted things that were not only biased (which is to be expected) but continuously repeat things that are proven to be untrue (death panels, birth certificate, etc), then they would be wrong to call them out on it?
#38
Armadillo
It's unseemly for the White House to be engaging in a public pissing match with a cable news outlet, especially in light of all the important stuff going on right now.
Armadillo
I don't even remember the last time I saw the birth certificate thing brought up by Fox or any other legit news source, so I think that's a bit of a strawman, but this goes to what Fox's point is: they have hard, legitimate journalists, and they have opinion guys. Hannity and Beck are opinion guys, while Shepherd Smith, Major Garrett, and Chris Wallace are journalists. Obama doesn't have to give the opinion guys the time of day, that's not what bothers me. It's the ignoring of Fox as a whole because they're harder on Obama than the others. Dunn even admitted that they view Fox as "opposition," so does that mean they view CNN as "not opposition?" It just smacks of the White House being completely incapable of taking any kind of criticism, so they lash out at anyone who dares to question them. We've seen it with the tea parties, the town halls, Fox News, Limbaugh, Beck, and the blogs.So if the Enquirer had a news station and spouted things that were not only biased (which is to be expected) but continuously repeat things that are proven to be untrue (death panels, birth certificate, etc), then they would be wrong to call them out on it?
It's unseemly for the White House to be engaging in a public pissing match with a cable news outlet, especially in light of all the important stuff going on right now.
#39
Krisken
Krisken
I'll give you Shephard Smith, but Wallace is as big a hack as Hannity or O'Reilly. Don't really know Garrett.
For me, the difference between a journalist and a hack is a journalist will offer a correction when they are shown to be incorrect in their reporting.
For me, the difference between a journalist and a hack is a journalist will offer a correction when they are shown to be incorrect in their reporting.
#40
DarkAudit
DarkAudit
Fox is not a news organization any more than the Sun or the New York Post is. They're outlets to broadcast Rupert Murdoch's view of the world and not much more. Their "reporters" aren't their covering the "tea parties" and "town hall protests". They're promoting them with the Fox personalities as celebrity appearances.
Lest ye forget, a former Press Secretary in the Dubya administration admitted to feeding talking points to Fox News. Where did Karl Rove end up mere months after leaving the White House? Fox News.
Any network that still thinks Jack Thompson is credible has no business being in the field of journalism.
Lest ye forget, a former Press Secretary in the Dubya administration admitted to feeding talking points to Fox News. Where did Karl Rove end up mere months after leaving the White House? Fox News.
Any network that still thinks Jack Thompson is credible has no business being in the field of journalism.
#41
Dave
Fox - Extensive coverage.
CNN - Medium coverage.
MSNBC - NO coverage.
So rail on the right all you want, the left does the same thing.
Dave
And MSNBC is on the other side and I've proven it several times based on coverage on certain stories that were beneficial to the GOP. There was one in particular about an Iraqi operation in the Bush years.Fox is not a news organization any more than the Sun or the New York Post is. They're outlets to broadcast Rupert Murdoch's view of the world and not much more. Their \"reporters\" aren't their covering the \"tea parties\" and \"town hall protests\". They're promoting them with the Fox personalities as celebrity appearances.
Lest ye forget, a former Press Secretary in the Dubya administration admitted to feeding talking points to Fox News. Where did Karl Rove end up mere months after leaving the White House? Fox News.
Any network that still thinks Jack Thompson is credible has no business being in the field of journalism.
Fox - Extensive coverage.
CNN - Medium coverage.
MSNBC - NO coverage.
So rail on the right all you want, the left does the same thing.
#42
DarkAudit
Fox - Extensive coverage.
CNN - Medium coverage.
MSNBC - NO coverage.
So rail on the right all you want, the left does the same thing.[/QUOTE]
To quote a Republican icon, "There you go again."
This is not the same thing. Unless you have similar proof that the Democrats were feeding talking points to MSNBC.
DarkAudit
And MSNBC is on the other side and I've proven it several times based on coverage on certain stories that were beneficial to the GOP. There was one in particular about an Iraqi operation in the Bush years.Fox is not a news organization any more than the Sun or the New York Post is. They're outlets to broadcast Rupert Murdoch's view of the world and not much more. Their \"reporters\" aren't their covering the \"tea parties\" and \"town hall protests\". They're promoting them with the Fox personalities as celebrity appearances.
Lest ye forget, a former Press Secretary in the Dubya administration admitted to feeding talking points to Fox News. Where did Karl Rove end up mere months after leaving the White House? Fox News.
Any network that still thinks Jack Thompson is credible has no business being in the field of journalism.
Fox - Extensive coverage.
CNN - Medium coverage.
MSNBC - NO coverage.
So rail on the right all you want, the left does the same thing.[/QUOTE]
To quote a Republican icon, "There you go again."
This is not the same thing. Unless you have similar proof that the Democrats were feeding talking points to MSNBC.
#43
Covar
Covar
30min Infomercial on ABC.
but hey the communication director of the White House doesn't speak for the whole administration. The only way that could be funnier is if it was Robert Gibbs who said that.
but hey the communication director of the White House doesn't speak for the whole administration. The only way that could be funnier is if it was Robert Gibbs who said that.
#44
Dave
Fox - Extensive coverage.
CNN - Medium coverage.
MSNBC - NO coverage.
So rail on the right all you want, the left does the same thing.[/quote]
To quote a Republican icon, "There you go again."
This is not the same thing. Unless you have similar proof that the Democrats were feeding talking points to MSNBC.[/QUOTE]
Remember, I'm on the left side of the aisle. I'm not saying these things because I'm all GOP WARRLGARRBL. But if you think that the right is the only side that has a media outlet you're a bit naive. I know that Fox is more blatant about it but MSNBC is just as bad the other way, even if they don't have support from the DNC.
Dave
And MSNBC is on the other side and I've proven it several times based on coverage on certain stories that were beneficial to the GOP. There was one in particular about an Iraqi operation in the Bush years.Fox is not a news organization any more than the Sun or the New York Post is. They're outlets to broadcast Rupert Murdoch's view of the world and not much more. Their \"reporters\" aren't their covering the \"tea parties\" and \"town hall protests\". They're promoting them with the Fox personalities as celebrity appearances.
Lest ye forget, a former Press Secretary in the Dubya administration admitted to feeding talking points to Fox News. Where did Karl Rove end up mere months after leaving the White House? Fox News.
Any network that still thinks Jack Thompson is credible has no business being in the field of journalism.
Fox - Extensive coverage.
CNN - Medium coverage.
MSNBC - NO coverage.
So rail on the right all you want, the left does the same thing.[/quote]
To quote a Republican icon, "There you go again."
This is not the same thing. Unless you have similar proof that the Democrats were feeding talking points to MSNBC.[/QUOTE]
Remember, I'm on the left side of the aisle. I'm not saying these things because I'm all GOP WARRLGARRBL. But if you think that the right is the only side that has a media outlet you're a bit naive. I know that Fox is more blatant about it but MSNBC is just as bad the other way, even if they don't have support from the DNC.
#45
Steven Soderburgin
Steven Soderburgin
I think it's a bit inaccurate to say that MSNBC is "just as bad" because to my knowledge they've never deliberately and openly lied, such as when a legislator in a scandal is mislabeled as a Democrat instead of a Republican, which has happened several times on Fox.
#46
DarkAudit
Not going to claim innocence from that. Just sayin'...
DarkAudit
I'm not saying that, but your reply was just more of the pot/kettle clustersmurf that passes for debate in here. Whenever someone comes in with one action or another that one side did, someone on the opposite side comes in with an "oh, yeah?" accusation about something else, thinking that will absolve their side from whatever.Remember, I'm on the left side of the aisle. I'm not saying these things because I'm all GOP WARRLGARRBL. But if you think that the right is the only side that has a media outlet you're a bit naive. I know that Fox is more blatant about it but MSNBC is just as bad the other way, even if they don't have support from the DNC.
Not going to claim innocence from that. Just sayin'...
#47
Dave
Not going to claim innocence from that. Just sayin'...[/QUOTE]
Dig it, man. I feel ya. For the record, Fox news is evil, but MSNBC is on the dark side, too, even if they haven't fully fallen from the light side of the force.
Dave
Not familiar with that story. Do tell!I think it's a bit inaccurate to say that MSNBC is "just as bad" because to my knowledge they've never deliberately and openly lied, such as when a legislator in a scandal is mislabeled as a Democrat instead of a Republican, which has happened several times on Fox.
I'm not saying that, but your reply was just more of the pot/kettle clustersmurf that passes for debate in here. Whenever someone comes in with one action or another that one side did, someone on the opposite side comes in with an "oh, yeah?" accusation about something else, thinking that will absolve their side from whatever.Remember, I'm on the left side of the aisle. I'm not saying these things because I'm all GOP WARRLGARRBL. But if you think that the right is the only side that has a media outlet you're a bit naive. I know that Fox is more blatant about it but MSNBC is just as bad the other way, even if they don't have support from the DNC.
Not going to claim innocence from that. Just sayin'...[/QUOTE]
Dig it, man. I feel ya. For the record, Fox news is evil, but MSNBC is on the dark side, too, even if they haven't fully fallen from the light side of the force.
#49
Krisken
Krisken
There's a lot of people I don't like on MSNBC either. Keith Olbermann and Dan Abrams are the top of that list.
#50
JCM
Bitching about the government/people/anyone ridiculing Fox is basically the same as bitching a tabloid. Like Kissinger mentioned-
Heck, overseas its the only american cabe channel repeatedly criticized and warned against, like for example, by BBC-
http://www.justabovesunset.com/id193.html
The White house,
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/white-house-calls-out-fox-by-name-for-lying.php
It has been sued before, and found guilty of lying
http://www.foxbghsuit.com/
Fabricating stories and comments-
http://mediamatters.org/research/200410040006
Even fabricating white house vandalism
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1689
But anyway, Fox does serve a purpose here in Brazil, in Universities and political debate, because when one quotes Fox or its point of view, it means a lot of laughter, and a quick win for the opposition, and only a neo-republican/"libertarian" would ever defend Fox.
And Gasbandit, of course. Now for the current White house attack, lets take a look at Fox´s lies-
RHETORIC: BECK SAID VANCOUVER LOST $1 BILLION WHEN IT "HAD THE OLYMPICS." Glenn Beck said, "Vancouver lost, how much was it? they lost a billion dollars when they had the Olympics." [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]
REALITY: VANCOUVER'S OLYMPICS WILL NOT TAKE PLACE UNTIL 2010. Vancouver will host the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games from February 12 – 28, 2010 and March 12-21, 2010, respectively. [Vancouver2010.com, accessed 9/29/09]
RHETORIC: VALERIE JARRETT "WAS LAST SEEN WITH THE NEA." Beck's guest, FOX News contributor Pat Caddell, said, "[Obama] is going to go [to Copenhagen] with Valerie Jarrett who was last seen with the NEA pumping up their use of, you know, money." [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]
REALITY: VALERIE JARRETT WAS NOT ON THE NEA CONFERENCE CALL. Valerie Jarrett was not a participant in the August 10, 2009 United We Serve/NEA conference call.
RHETORIC: CHICAGO IS CLOSING THE GOVERNMENT SEVERAL DAYS A WEEK BECAUSE THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO BE OPEN. Beck's guest Caddell said, "Chicago is closing the government several days a week because they cannot afford to be open. They are going to go and reward -- this is the biggest scandal." [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]
REALITY: CHICAGO HAS HAD ONE REDUCED-SERVICE DAY IN 2009, AND WILL HAVE TWO MORE ON THE FRIDAY AFTER THANKSGIVING AND ON CHRISTMAS EVE. On August 17, 2009, CBS Chicago reported, "If you planned to check out a library book, visit a city clinic or have your garbage picked up on Monday, you're out of luck. The City of Chicago is basically closed for business on Aug. 17, a reduced-service day in which most city employees are off without pay. City Hall, public libraries, health clinics and most city offices will be closed. Emergency service providers including police, firefighters and paramedics are working at full strength, but most services not directly related to public safety, including street sweeping, will not be provided. That also includes garbage pickup. Residents who receive regular collection on Mondays should expect trash to be picked up on Tuesday. Some other customers may experience a one-day delay as collectors catch up. As part of the 2009 budget, three reduced-service days were planned for 2009, days which are unpaid for all affected employees -- the Friday after Thanksgiving; Christmas Eve; and New Year's Eve. The City Council recently approved moving the reduced-service day planned for New Year's Eve to Monday. The 2009 budget anticipates saving $8.3 million due to the reduced-service days. In addition to reduced service days, all non-union employees were asked to take a series of furlough days and unpaid holidays, and most non-sworn union employees agreed to similar unpaid time off." [CBS Chicago, 8/17/09]
RHETORIC: VALERIE JARRETT WILL BENEFIT FINANCIALLY. Beck asked, "Is it possible that she is going to benefit if the Olympics come to Chicago?" Caddell responded, "Well, that’s the word. She has certainly had a lot of dealings going on in real estate." [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]
REALITY: UPON ENTERING GOVERNMENT, VALERIE JARRETT DIVESTED ALL HER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS EXCEPT FOR A SINGLE INVESTMENT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OLYMPIC BID. Valerie Jarrett divested all her investment real estate holdings upon entering government except for a single real estate holding that she was unable to sell. This single real estate investment has been determined by White House Counsel and the independent Office of Government Ethics to present no conflict of interest in performing her duties as a White House advisor. It has nothing to do with the Olympic bid.
For more info, enjoy- http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...nd-others-repeat-claim-white-house-political/
There isnt a man right now who CAN and is ABLE to make such an impact, and I dont see any reason but right-wing fanaticism, ignorance, or quasi-religious anti-democrat hate for one not to understand why he´d get a Nobel.
JCM
There´s a difference between bad news and pure outright slander.Now, I know FOX doesn't have the best reputation in liberal circles, and they're most certainly not my first choice in a news outlet, but I don't particularly care for an administration singling out a particular network for their scorn and ridicule. I've always felt that the White House and the media should have a cordial-yet-leery relationship; the media is supposed to keep the government honest and the White House is supposed to be above the fray. With this move, they've made it clear that they view FOX News and FOX News ALONE as the enemy, while also seemingly saying that CNN, MSNBC, and the networks will \"go easier\" on them. Not a good precedent to set, but this White House has been all too eager to use their bully pulpit to go after American citizens they disagree with, so I guess I shouldn't be too surprised.
Bitching about the government/people/anyone ridiculing Fox is basically the same as bitching a tabloid. Like Kissinger mentioned-
And believe me, thats just the tip of the iceberg.I think it's a bit inaccurate to say that MSNBC is \"just as bad\" because to my knowledge they've never deliberately and openly lied, such as when a legislator in a scandal is mislabeled as a Democrat instead of a Republican, which has happened several times on Fox.
Heck, overseas its the only american cabe channel repeatedly criticized and warned against, like for example, by BBC-
http://www.justabovesunset.com/id193.html
The White house,
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/white-house-calls-out-fox-by-name-for-lying.php
It has been sued before, and found guilty of lying
http://www.foxbghsuit.com/
Fabricating stories and comments-
http://mediamatters.org/research/200410040006
Even fabricating white house vandalism
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1689
But anyway, Fox does serve a purpose here in Brazil, in Universities and political debate, because when one quotes Fox or its point of view, it means a lot of laughter, and a quick win for the opposition, and only a neo-republican/"libertarian" would ever defend Fox.
And Gasbandit, of course. Now for the current White house attack, lets take a look at Fox´s lies-
RHETORIC: BECK SAID VANCOUVER LOST $1 BILLION WHEN IT "HAD THE OLYMPICS." Glenn Beck said, "Vancouver lost, how much was it? they lost a billion dollars when they had the Olympics." [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]
REALITY: VANCOUVER'S OLYMPICS WILL NOT TAKE PLACE UNTIL 2010. Vancouver will host the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games from February 12 – 28, 2010 and March 12-21, 2010, respectively. [Vancouver2010.com, accessed 9/29/09]
RHETORIC: VALERIE JARRETT "WAS LAST SEEN WITH THE NEA." Beck's guest, FOX News contributor Pat Caddell, said, "[Obama] is going to go [to Copenhagen] with Valerie Jarrett who was last seen with the NEA pumping up their use of, you know, money." [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]
REALITY: VALERIE JARRETT WAS NOT ON THE NEA CONFERENCE CALL. Valerie Jarrett was not a participant in the August 10, 2009 United We Serve/NEA conference call.
RHETORIC: CHICAGO IS CLOSING THE GOVERNMENT SEVERAL DAYS A WEEK BECAUSE THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO BE OPEN. Beck's guest Caddell said, "Chicago is closing the government several days a week because they cannot afford to be open. They are going to go and reward -- this is the biggest scandal." [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]
REALITY: CHICAGO HAS HAD ONE REDUCED-SERVICE DAY IN 2009, AND WILL HAVE TWO MORE ON THE FRIDAY AFTER THANKSGIVING AND ON CHRISTMAS EVE. On August 17, 2009, CBS Chicago reported, "If you planned to check out a library book, visit a city clinic or have your garbage picked up on Monday, you're out of luck. The City of Chicago is basically closed for business on Aug. 17, a reduced-service day in which most city employees are off without pay. City Hall, public libraries, health clinics and most city offices will be closed. Emergency service providers including police, firefighters and paramedics are working at full strength, but most services not directly related to public safety, including street sweeping, will not be provided. That also includes garbage pickup. Residents who receive regular collection on Mondays should expect trash to be picked up on Tuesday. Some other customers may experience a one-day delay as collectors catch up. As part of the 2009 budget, three reduced-service days were planned for 2009, days which are unpaid for all affected employees -- the Friday after Thanksgiving; Christmas Eve; and New Year's Eve. The City Council recently approved moving the reduced-service day planned for New Year's Eve to Monday. The 2009 budget anticipates saving $8.3 million due to the reduced-service days. In addition to reduced service days, all non-union employees were asked to take a series of furlough days and unpaid holidays, and most non-sworn union employees agreed to similar unpaid time off." [CBS Chicago, 8/17/09]
RHETORIC: VALERIE JARRETT WILL BENEFIT FINANCIALLY. Beck asked, "Is it possible that she is going to benefit if the Olympics come to Chicago?" Caddell responded, "Well, that’s the word. She has certainly had a lot of dealings going on in real estate." [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]
REALITY: UPON ENTERING GOVERNMENT, VALERIE JARRETT DIVESTED ALL HER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS EXCEPT FOR A SINGLE INVESTMENT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OLYMPIC BID. Valerie Jarrett divested all her investment real estate holdings upon entering government except for a single real estate holding that she was unable to sell. This single real estate investment has been determined by White House Counsel and the independent Office of Government Ethics to present no conflict of interest in performing her duties as a White House advisor. It has nothing to do with the Olympic bid.
For more info, enjoy- http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...nd-others-repeat-claim-white-house-political/
Santa?[/QUOTE]My point, exactly.Funnily, in 9 months he almost but recovered the reputation of \"USA being the world leader\" that it took Bush 8 years to destroy.
Just hope he can recover from the deficits of the last few Republican presidents, USA's debt might be big, but unlike Japan or some EU countries, its not even 30% of USA's gross national produce.Nobody who can make a difference in the whole world more than the most powerful man in the world seeking peace, the disarming of nuclear weapons and diplomatic relations with everyone?The truth is there are many more deserving people that have been outshone by Obama's glowing, warm, warming glow.
There isnt a man right now who CAN and is ABLE to make such an impact, and I dont see any reason but right-wing fanaticism, ignorance, or quasi-religious anti-democrat hate for one not to understand why he´d get a Nobel.