This entry was posted on June 11, 2009 at 5:45 am and is filed under Free For All . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
The liberals favorite Republican (for now), Joe Scarborough re the Palin matter:
Scarborough: I think this [the Lettermann matter] is just an extension that people have for the Palins on the East Coast. I’m not saying that she’s a good candidate or she’s a great politician. I’m not saying it. I’m just saying we’ve seen this from the first day that Sarah Palin has come onto the scene politically, nationally, the Palins have been treated like aliens from another planet. And been targeted. We saw it. I mean, the Daily Kos lies about Sarah Palin. And the media just chased it, they were rabid. We saw it the first night it broke. There’s something about the Palins that make people –
BRZEZINSKI: – feel like they can go further.
SCARBOROUGH: that liberals hate.
I’m with Joe. I don’t get it.
Palin’s a nothing really; she has no political future. She’s a nice person without the “gravitas” or experience or “it” that is needed to serve in national office.
And yet her critics have to go that extra mile and her defenders do too.
So there was a big “discussion” yesterday around these parts, centering on “who leads the Republican party.” An interesting question… which was quickly corrupted but some of the more crazy posters (I can think of at least one).
Anyway… I’d like to turn the question around… “Who leads the Democrats.” Pres. Obama was elected by the people, but not necessarily by the Democrats… and while he is the de facto speaker for the Democrats, I would hardly call him their real leader. So who is it?
Is it Pelosi, with her less-than-Cheney approval ratings? Is it Ted Kennedy, whose isn’t fairing so well health-wise currently? Is it Vice President Biden, with his (almost daily) gaffe-prone blunders? Or maybe it’s a media person… is it Olbermann, Maddow, Ed? What about Jon Stewart or Colbert, are they leading the party?
The question is… after Obama, or (more aptly) without Obama, where are the Democrats?
The Iranian elections tomorrow are something to watch.
Apparently the reform candidate Mousavi – especially his wife with her calls for a more open society especially for women – is gathering support.
One of the questions is why the mullahs, who really run things, haven’t squelched some of the more interesting demands by the wife.
Question – An Iranian Thermidor; or just show.
Perhaps the election of Obama has shaken things up there more than we realized. To be sure, lots of other forces at play but I wonder if Obama’s election hasn’t coalesced those forces.
Why do conservatives continually ignore the obvious about Palin? She came out of nowhere to play McCain’s attack dog. All of her “domestic terrorists” and “say it aint so Joe” garbage rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. The day McCain announced her candidacy, the press was universally positive. They deep-sixed it with her nasty convention speech. She looked like a spoiled prom queen winking while she stuck it to her underlings. If you’re gonna be a jerk, people will treat you like a jerk.
Debating who leads the Democratic Party is silly. It’s that guy leading the Muslim world to vote for pro-America leadership.
Obama leads the country… not the Democrats. He is not the “Democratic Party” leader (in other words, he has to do things that are good for the country as a whole, not just things that are good for the party… notice he doesn’t often make “rah rah Democrats” speeches, he makes “rah rah America” speeches).
So who is the leader? Thus far I’m hearing: “You’re stupid,” “___,” and “Don’t talk about it.”
Sooooo, is that a nobody? Does that mean the party is in disarray?
“Sooooo, is that a nobody? Does that mean the party is in disarray?”
No, it’s that you’ve been told the same exact person by multiple people. You’re just refusing to hear it and acting like an a s s. Obviously, that’s nothing new for you, but still, it helps to point it out every now and then.
back to Imnot – if the incumbent president ISN’T leader of his own party, why does he get to APPOINT the chairman of the national committee while the party on the outs has to elect a chairman?
Is it your contention that during his Presidency, someone OTHER than Ronald Reagan led the GOP? That someone other than Bush was the leader of the GOP from 2001-2008?
Yawn… okay, so now I’ve been called an “a s s.” How will I ever go on?
Okay, for you guys who want to play stupid (I think you’re playing) and ignore the question… I’ll rephrase it for you… who is the number two? Who’s next?
I hope you can deal with that (although I just expect more name calling).
INB you ignorant slut…er…sorry…bad Dan Akroyd flashback. No. 2 is about as hard to determine for the Democrats as no. 1 is for the GOP. The Dems were out of power for a long time, then took over with a new star, which reshuffles the rest of the deck. The Repubs faced the same reshuffling after losing in ’08. The main reason Rush keeps getting traction is that there isn’t an obvious elected official leading the GOP. Obama’s domination of his party leaves the same same vacuum for no. 2 on that side.
Okay, for you guys who want to play stupid (I think you’re playing) and ignore the question… I’ll rephrase it for you… who is the number two? Who’s next?
Why, when there’s a clear leader of the party, is it important for you to insist we name a number two? I think it’s your lame attempt to turn the tables on all the talk about how leaderless the GOP is. I can’t think of any other reason why you’d care.
Thank you Joe… that is more or less the point I was going for.
Yes there is a power vacuum in the Republican party… but that’s more or less the nature order of things. Prior to Obama’s election (or selection) as the Democratic nominee… the Democrats had no “leader” either. Think about it… who was it? Pelosi? Reid? Clinton? Nahh… and how many years did they have to make that decision?!
The media is harping on the Rush and whomever else to MAKE UP A STORY, but there is no real story… and the situation is not unique.
The Republicans won’t have a dominant “leader” for some time, if at all… it may not be until election time that someone emerges. But as long as the media wants to accuse and attack the Republicans, they’ll keep on this “party in disarray” fallacy, because it fits their spin.
It’s a good thing you can make up the facts… otherwise, you’d have no facts at all.
PS
You don’t know me… and the next time, before you decide to tell me what I think, or “what I do,” perhaps you should just keep your hands in your pocket. You know, looking stupid is worse than just being stupid.
Yesterday Chuck Todd said we probably don’t know the name of the next Republican president, i.e. he/she is in politics somewhere but not well known. Discounting Romney, Huckabee, Palin, Pawlenty and Jindal is a brave prediction.
I agree. Isn’t it shameful though, that he has to be brave (on Fox at least) to say what is obvious to all but 75% of the country. The alternate reality that Fox creates is dangerous.
And let’s not forget why else Rush is looked at as the leader of you people. Everytime a Republican stands up to that idiot, they are groveling to him and apologizing within a day or two. He has considerable heft (ha!) in your party. No one dares to cross LimPbaugh if you’re Republican. Sounds like a leader to me.
Is it your contention that during his Presidency, someone OTHER than Ronald Reagan led the GOP? That someone other than Bush was the leader of the GOP from 2001-2008?
No, but it was *MANY* people’s contention that Dick Cheney and/or Karl Rove was the leader during Bush 43 and everyone from Lee Atwater to Nancy Reagan’s Astrologer was in charge during Reagan.
“Discounting Romney, Huckabee, Palin, Pawlenty and Jindal is a brave prediction.”
I seriously doubt Republicans are going to rethink their entire ideology before the next election. And I think that’s what it would take for them not to pick one of those poor schmucks.
When it comes to Rush… I think a lot of people on the left are just jealous. I mean really… who speaks with such authority and power to that many people on the left? Who has the platform that Rush does, on the left? Nobody… and I think that really gets under their skin… but instead of finding someone, and putting together a really successful left-wing program (on radio or television), they try to take Rush down. And the more they try, the more power and listeners he manages to scoop up.
Rush speaks for fewer people than he doesn’t speak for… but really, if that’s who you want to focus on, by all means… knock yourselves out. Why you think that will help in the long run is beyond me.
With all due respect, Shawn… are you really in any position to “give advice” to Republicans?
I mean, you haven’t met (or thought you met) a Republican you didn’t like. Am I wrong? Why not just keep it simple and say, “Arg… Republicans, I hate them all!” And do away with the false sense that you’d even consider doing anything more that hating someone to the right of Hillary Clinton.
Sean, Todd’s prediction was for the next Republican to win the White House, not the next one to run. Part of what is interesting about his analysis is the implication that the GOP won’t regain the presidency until they have burned through this generation’s picks. I think he’s right.
The long time pastor and political adviser to President Barack Obama – Reverend Jeremiah Wright – claims that the ‘Jews’ are controlling the President and are preventing the President from seeing what is going on the world.
Those warning in recent weeks of the dangers of extremist language will join with me, I’m sure, in a concern of how much influence this exremist has had on our President.
‘the problem we non-believers have with Rush is that he stirs up the nastiest parts of your party’
I mostly agree with that concern but it would have been, well, nice, to have heard concerns about stirring up the wackos over the past five years when we had elements talk about how the ‘neocons want to control the world’ and ‘Bush is a fascist terrorist’ and other such horseshit, excuse the language.
Maybe you did it, Joe; but you didn’t seem to have a lot of allies.
And no, as that noted philosopher Bill O’Reilly has pointed out, you don’t defend bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior. I’m criticizing the excesses of both.
Information found in one of the writings of James Von Brunn who shot and killed a guard at the Holocaust Memorial Museum included the following:
In one essay, Von Brunn attacked “JEWS-NEOCONS-BILL O’REILLY,”
Since Olbermann has expressed some strong and hateful comments towards at least two of these three, perhaps he should also be investigated for possible ties to this gentleman.
Congratulations Willier. You’ve managed to join a conversation in progress and decide I started it. Dittohead.
I wasn’t sure about It’s the Economy on MSNBC at first. It didn’t seem like Contessa Brewer and Mellissa Francis liked each other much, but it turns out they’re really good together. They should consider moving them to Primetime. Those girls are hysterical.
Yes lalo, because Olbermann spouts anti-semitic rhetoric the same way O’reilly went after “abortionists” and specifically “Tiller-the-baby-killer”. Nice try,
I don’t blame O’Reilly specifically for the murder of Tiller. He was just one cog in the hate machine better known as the conservative movement.
Nice try smh, I never said Olbermann spouted any anti-semitic rhetoric, but Olbermann has definitely denounced the other two named people, same as Mr. Von Brunn. My point is that Von Brunn hated some of the same groups as Olbermann. For you to characterize him as a ” cog in the hate machine better known as the conservative movement” is to completely ignore the fact that he has more in common with some liberals today. Birds of a feather…
The four Uighurs released by the Obama Administration to Bermuda all admitted to being trained in terrorist camps in Afghanistan.
link [warning 'neocon' magazine link] -http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/06/uighurs_released_to_bermuda_al_1.asp
Additionally, the US government got guarantees from the government of Bermuda that the Uighurs would not be allowed to travel to the US without our approval beforehand.
The British government, meanwhile, is furious that they weren’t consulted before the release of the Uighurs to Bermuda, an overseas territory belonging to the UK
The German government refused to accept the Uighurs in part because the Obama Administration could not provide enough information that the Uighurs would not be a danger to the German people.
The Uighurs may have just been caught up in things they weren’t aware; but the evidence tends to show otherwise.
My point is that Von Brunn hated some of the same groups as Olbermann. For you to characterize him as a ” cog in the hate machine better known as the conservative movement” is to completely ignore the fact that he has more in common with some liberals today. Birds of a feather…
HA! I knew we’d see this talking point eventually – it’s making the rightwing rounds.
It goes like this – Von Brunn was really LIBERAL! Because he hated many of the same things (Bush, neocons) that liberals hate! Enemy of my enemy is my friend, etc.
He hated neocons because many of them are Jewish. And he hated Bush because he wasn’t conservative enough and didn’t hate blacks and Jews as much as VonB did. I mean, come on – Bush appointed a black sect-state. You think a white supremicist is going to admire him?
The four Uighurs released by the Obama Administration to Bermuda all admitted to being trained in terrorist camps in Afghanistan.
I think I spoke to this before; perhaps you weren’t paying attention. They were shown how to disassemble and reassemble a rifle and took turns shooting it. Wow. Terrifying.
From your link: “All four of them are members or associates of the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (otherwise known as the Turkistan Islamic Party). The ETIM/TIP is a U.S. and UN designated terrorist organization affiliated with al Qaeda and has attacked civilians in China, as well as reportedly plotted against other targets elsewhere, including the U.S. embassy in Kyrgyzstan.”
The US designated ETIM a terrorist organization in 2004, long after we’d already imprisoned these guys. AND, we did it at the request of China.
Someone tell me what Reagan would think of the US taking orders from a communist dictatorship.
Nice deflection lalo. I never accused you of saying that Olbermann used anti-semitic rhetoric. That is the point – he didn’t. However, O’Reilly did go after Tiller constantly, by name. As did the rest of your ilk.
You know, for someone to accuse “liberals” of having more in common with the recent string of domestic terrorists than the right-wingers completely ignores REALITY and FACTS. I know you people have to tell yourself these things to make yourselves feel less guilty, but few believe the crap spewing from all of you.
I shouldn’t have said make yourselves feel less guilty, because I know you people do not feel guilty about the murders your movement has incited. So I take that back.
You know, for someone to accuse “liberals” of having more in common with the recent string of domestic terrorists than the right-wingers completely ignores REALITY and FACTS.
Heh – I think it’s well known that many conservatives live in an alternate reality called Fox News. In fact, noted conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer even admits it: “What Fox did is not just create a venue for alternative opinion. It created an alternate reality.”
Watch carefully as those who say that those who associate with anti-abortion extremists are culpable in violence perpetrated against abortion providers but those who train and work with Muslim extremists are really innocent individuals who received little training in arms.
Stevemg – you think you have to link something twice to get someone to read it? I totally understand – you clearly haven’t read the many links I provided that debunk your favorite talking point.
Also? WRT toeing the Chinese line on who we call a terrorist? Keep in mind that China considers the Dalai Lama a leader of a terrorist group. Maybe we should do our communist pals a favor and toss him in Gitmo?
Stevemg – you think you have to link something twice to get someone to read it?
Two different links.
It’s clear what you think – Bush is a monster screwup despot who locked up innocent people. And the Uighurs are just a bunch of harmless people who somehow wound up in a terror camp in a foreign country (I’ll note again that if they received this type of training from an anti-abortion extremist group here that you wouldn’t hold such a sanguine view of them).
The evidence points otherwise but you’ve made quite clear that you reject the evidence.
I’ll note that others read this site beside you. Perhaps they’re a bit more willing to discard their ideological blinkers.
Pay attention Willier. INB speculated that the left’s problem with Rush was jealousy. I replied that our problem with him is he feeds the crazies. I DIDN’T BRING IT UP.
Ah, I see – your two linked articles just quote the same thing, and spin it the same way.
It’s clear what you think – Bush is a monster screwup despot who locked up innocent people.
Bush has PROVABLY locked up innocent people. Do you think the people already released from Gitmo were terrorists? If so, why aren’t you screaming bloody murder about it.
(I’ll note again that if they received this type of training from an anti-abortion extremist group here that you wouldn’t hold such a sanguine view of them).
I’ll note again that these guys got to shoot a rifle once or twice. I’ll also note that this ‘type of training’ is a weekend with dad for many American boys/girls.
Your links quote extensively from these guys’ testimony during their CSRT hearings which you (and the article poster) considers proof, PROOF that they are terrorists.
So please explain, how, based on this supposedly terrorist-pointing testimony, did the review panel rule that these guys were NOT enemy combatants and should NOT continue to be held?
Keep in mind, this is the trumped-up, bush-invented, kangaroo-trials which was all we were allowing detainees and the time, and even so, they determined these guys weren’t terrorists.
So why do you continue to insist that they ARE, when the military, the Bush Administration and every court who’s heard them has said otherwise?
Speaking of Rush, since Willier brought it up (ah c’mon Willier, that’s funny), he (Rush) linked the Holocaust Museum shooter’s anti-Jew sentiments to “the left” and “the kind of people around Obama”. Keep feeding those dittoheads, Rush. I hope Shep calls him out. This crap needs to stop.
Hell freezes over. Obama just landed in David Shuster’s Hypocrisy Watch for keeping a tax on health benefits on the table despite attacking McCain over the issue in the campaign. First Shep, now Shuster. There must be something in the water.
Obama just landed in David Shuster’s Hypocrisy Watch for keeping a tax on health benefits on the table despite attacking McCain over the issue in the campaign.
And keeping single payer OFF the table, which is frankly BIZARRE.
Joe, didn’t Obama spend 20 years in Rev. Wright’s church, had his children baptized him, and considered him his spiritual advisor?
Kinda unfortunate that Wright made these statements yesterday, of all days, via Daily Press:
“Asked if he had spoken to the President, Wright said: “Them Jews aren’t going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he’ll talk to me in five years when he’s a lame duck, or in eight years when he’s out of office…
Wright also said Obama should have sent a U.S. delegation to the World Conference on Racism held recently in Geneva, Switzerland, but that the president did not do so for fear of offending Jews and Israel.
“Ethic cleansing is going on in Gaza. Ethnic cleansing of the Zionist is a sin and a crime against humanity, and they don’t want Barack talking like that because that’s anti-Israel,” Wright said…..
And regarding the Holocaust shooter, maybe you lefties should have watched Olbermann last night and listened to the domestic terrorism expert talking about the EXTREME LEFT’S HATRED OF JEWS, being a serious threat. (My guess is he’ll never be invited back on the show).
Despite your b.s. smears to the contrary, the shooter targeted: Fox News, the Weekly Standard, hated both Bush presidents & John McCain, hated Bill O’Reilly, was jailed for 6 years for attempting kidnapping of the REAGAN APPOINTED FEDERAL RESERVE.
He also believed Bush was behind 9/11.
Yet the idiots in the media & the left (the same thing, basically), call him a “right wing extremist”.
Are you KIDDING?? You think the left wants to ‘take Rush down’?
I’m happy as a clam that he’s the most visible voice of conservatism out there. Goooo, Rush!
So what you’re saying is you like having Rush to kick around. Is that really a good thing? Is that how you hope society functions?
Either way, this is the same thing the left says when their obvious hatred of O’Reilly/FOX News/Bush, etc. is brought up. “We just want to keep shouting about them,” is the message… that is, until the next boycott comes along, and they “try” (and fail) to get them kicked off whatever platform it is they’re on.
But more importantly, the only people who seem to really focus on Rush… are people on the left. The people on the right either listen to him, or not. He’s not making policy, he’s not effecting people who aren’t his listeners… he’s just kinda there. It’s the left, who in trying to win support for their own ideas… instead of arguing “this is a good thing” they argue “he’s a bad guy,” because their ideas alone wouldn’t win support. The left is giving him much more importance than he’s earned on his own… it’s lazy politics, and if you ask me, pretty pathetic.
“Yes lalo, because Olbermann spouts anti-semitic rhetoric”
Hmmm… don’t I remember Olbermann getting a nasty letter from the ADL, about his nazi salute/O’Reilly “comparison?” Hmmm… seems I do!
Speaking of Rush, since Willier brought it up (ah c’mon Willier, that’s funny), he (Rush) linked the Holocaust Museum shooter’s anti-Jew sentiments to “the left” and “the kind of people around Obama”.
Well, not that I want to defend this (because it’s dumb)… BUT, there is more to it than simply rolling your eyes, and pretending like the left is without anti-Semitic loons.
Rev. Wright’s recent quotes, come to mind… also the reaction after Lieberman left the party comes to mind. There were plenty of people across the blogs who attacked the Jews (via Liebermann, things like “Jews only look out for each other” and so on), and there are still plenty of people who hide behind “We don’t like Israel,” and then get wrapped up in some pretty offensive anti-Semitic commentary.
So did the left cause this… no… and of course, neither did the right. The guy was a loon outside the left/right paradigm. And the sooner we move passed that, the sooner we can actually look at the cause of this problem… not just this problem as a political football.
maybe you lefties should have watched Olbermann last night and listened to the domestic terrorism expert talking about the EXTREME LEFT’S HATRED OF JEWS, being a serious threat.
Okay, you got me curious, so I had to go to the MSNBC site and watch the clip. Assume you mean the interview with Jack Levin?
He said nothing that I could disagree with.
Yet the idiots in the media & the left (the same thing, basically), call him a “right wing extremist”.
just fyi, it was under the FIRST Bush that the ‘patriot militias’ first really took off. Because he was clearly a member of the oligarchy building a one-world government and stomping on the sovereignty of the individual.
Because the ‘freemen’ and the ‘militias’ distrusted and feared Bush-I, is it really your contention that this makes them LEFTISTS?
Art, I didn’t say it makes Von Brunn, or other militias “leftists”. But idiots on your side, like Shawny, try to blame Fox News & all conservatives whenever some nutcase does something like this… even though Von Brunn TARGETED FOX NEWS.
Oh, and Rev. Wright (Obama’s 20 year spiritual advisor, the man who presided over his wedding & baptized him & his daughters) clarified his statement today about the Jews controlling Obama:
““Let me say like Hillary, I misspoke,” Wright said. “Let me just say: Zionists.”…
Rev. Wright also said that “the Jewish vote, the A-I-P-A-C vote, that’s controlling him, that would not let him send representation to the Darfur Review Conference, that’s talking this craziness on this trip, cause they’re Zionists, they would not let him talk to someone who calls a spade what it is. “
Instead of blaming Bill O’Reilly or Glenn Beck, maybe we should look at extreme lefty Jew haters….like Barack Obama’s father figure Jeremiah Wright….. for violence like yesterday.
Remember when I said Sarah Palin won the Letterman thing? Never mind. Someone on her staff released a statement saying they need to “keep Willow away from David Letterman.” Isn’t there anybody in Alaska willing to tell the Palin’s when they’ve won? It astonishes me the extent to which they’re willing to drop their kid’s names for a political point.
June 11, 2009 at 5:59 am
The liberals favorite Republican (for now), Joe Scarborough re the Palin matter:
Scarborough: I think this [the Lettermann matter] is just an extension that people have for the Palins on the East Coast. I’m not saying that she’s a good candidate or she’s a great politician. I’m not saying it. I’m just saying we’ve seen this from the first day that Sarah Palin has come onto the scene politically, nationally, the Palins have been treated like aliens from another planet. And been targeted. We saw it. I mean, the Daily Kos lies about Sarah Palin. And the media just chased it, they were rabid. We saw it the first night it broke. There’s something about the Palins that make people –
BRZEZINSKI: – feel like they can go further.
SCARBOROUGH: that liberals hate.
I’m with Joe. I don’t get it.
Palin’s a nothing really; she has no political future. She’s a nice person without the “gravitas” or experience or “it” that is needed to serve in national office.
And yet her critics have to go that extra mile and her defenders do too.
June 11, 2009 at 6:34 am
So there was a big “discussion” yesterday around these parts, centering on “who leads the Republican party.” An interesting question… which was quickly corrupted but some of the more crazy posters (I can think of at least one).
Anyway… I’d like to turn the question around… “Who leads the Democrats.” Pres. Obama was elected by the people, but not necessarily by the Democrats… and while he is the de facto speaker for the Democrats, I would hardly call him their real leader. So who is it?
Is it Pelosi, with her less-than-Cheney approval ratings? Is it Ted Kennedy, whose isn’t fairing so well health-wise currently? Is it Vice President Biden, with his (almost daily) gaffe-prone blunders? Or maybe it’s a media person… is it Olbermann, Maddow, Ed? What about Jon Stewart or Colbert, are they leading the party?
The question is… after Obama, or (more aptly) without Obama, where are the Democrats?
Discuss…
June 11, 2009 at 7:03 am
“and while he is the de facto speaker for the Democrats, I would hardly call him their real leader. So who is it?”
Obama isn’t the Democrat’s real leader? Are you as stupid as you
sound here?
June 11, 2009 at 7:16 am
The Iranian elections tomorrow are something to watch.
Apparently the reform candidate Mousavi – especially his wife with her calls for a more open society especially for women – is gathering support.
One of the questions is why the mullahs, who really run things, haven’t squelched some of the more interesting demands by the wife.
Question – An Iranian Thermidor; or just show.
Perhaps the election of Obama has shaken things up there more than we realized. To be sure, lots of other forces at play but I wonder if Obama’s election hasn’t coalesced those forces.
June 11, 2009 at 7:43 am
Hah! Josh Marshall: “How long will it be until white supremacists claim that the shooting at the Holocaust Museum never happened?”
June 11, 2009 at 7:47 am
Why do conservatives continually ignore the obvious about Palin? She came out of nowhere to play McCain’s attack dog. All of her “domestic terrorists” and “say it aint so Joe” garbage rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. The day McCain announced her candidacy, the press was universally positive. They deep-sixed it with her nasty convention speech. She looked like a spoiled prom queen winking while she stuck it to her underlings. If you’re gonna be a jerk, people will treat you like a jerk.
Debating who leads the Democratic Party is silly. It’s that guy leading the Muslim world to vote for pro-America leadership.
June 11, 2009 at 7:56 am
Obama leads the country… not the Democrats. He is not the “Democratic Party” leader (in other words, he has to do things that are good for the country as a whole, not just things that are good for the party… notice he doesn’t often make “rah rah Democrats” speeches, he makes “rah rah America” speeches).
So who is the leader? Thus far I’m hearing: “You’re stupid,” “___,” and “Don’t talk about it.”
Sooooo, is that a nobody? Does that mean the party is in disarray?
June 11, 2009 at 7:58 am
Give me a break, Imnot – the sitting president is de facto the leader of his party. Always has been.
June 11, 2009 at 7:58 am
It looks like the crazies are really pissed off at Shepard Smith for stating the obvious:
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=100732
June 11, 2009 at 8:01 am
“Sooooo, is that a nobody? Does that mean the party is in disarray?”
No, it’s that you’ve been told the same exact person by multiple people. You’re just refusing to hear it and acting like an a s s. Obviously, that’s nothing new for you, but still, it helps to point it out every now and then.
June 11, 2009 at 8:01 am
hahaha, smh – I knew he was going to take heat for that. He’s braver than I guess I gave him credit for.
June 11, 2009 at 8:05 am
back to Imnot – if the incumbent president ISN’T leader of his own party, why does he get to APPOINT the chairman of the national committee while the party on the outs has to elect a chairman?
Is it your contention that during his Presidency, someone OTHER than Ronald Reagan led the GOP? That someone other than Bush was the leader of the GOP from 2001-2008?
June 11, 2009 at 8:05 am
Don’t call him smh, he likes to be called Shawny…
June 11, 2009 at 8:09 am
C’mon girls, are we really going to seriously debate the leadership of the Democratic Party today? Everybody knows it’s Rush.
June 11, 2009 at 8:09 am
Yawn… okay, so now I’ve been called an “a s s.” How will I ever go on?
Okay, for you guys who want to play stupid (I think you’re playing) and ignore the question… I’ll rephrase it for you… who is the number two? Who’s next?
I hope you can deal with that (although I just expect more name calling).
June 11, 2009 at 8:23 am
INB you ignorant slut…er…sorry…bad Dan Akroyd flashback. No. 2 is about as hard to determine for the Democrats as no. 1 is for the GOP. The Dems were out of power for a long time, then took over with a new star, which reshuffles the rest of the deck. The Repubs faced the same reshuffling after losing in ’08. The main reason Rush keeps getting traction is that there isn’t an obvious elected official leading the GOP. Obama’s domination of his party leaves the same same vacuum for no. 2 on that side.
June 11, 2009 at 8:33 am
Way to ignore the rest, Arthur.
Pick and chose, pick and chose… ignore the argument, and then spin spin spin.
Rinse, lather, repeat… huh?
June 11, 2009 at 8:34 am
Okay, for you guys who want to play stupid (I think you’re playing) and ignore the question… I’ll rephrase it for you… who is the number two? Who’s next?
Why, when there’s a clear leader of the party, is it important for you to insist we name a number two? I think it’s your lame attempt to turn the tables on all the talk about how leaderless the GOP is. I can’t think of any other reason why you’d care.
June 11, 2009 at 8:34 am
Thank you Joe… that is more or less the point I was going for.
Yes there is a power vacuum in the Republican party… but that’s more or less the nature order of things. Prior to Obama’s election (or selection) as the Democratic nominee… the Democrats had no “leader” either. Think about it… who was it? Pelosi? Reid? Clinton? Nahh… and how many years did they have to make that decision?!
The media is harping on the Rush and whomever else to MAKE UP A STORY, but there is no real story… and the situation is not unique.
The Republicans won’t have a dominant “leader” for some time, if at all… it may not be until election time that someone emerges. But as long as the media wants to accuse and attack the Republicans, they’ll keep on this “party in disarray” fallacy, because it fits their spin.
June 11, 2009 at 8:36 am
But as long as the media wants to accuse and attack the Republicans, they’ll keep on this “party in disarray” fallacy, because it fits their spin.
it also fits the facts, but never mind that.
June 11, 2009 at 8:36 am
You need to “think outside the box,” Arthur… or more aptly, “the bubble.”
June 11, 2009 at 8:41 am
You need to “think outside the box,” Arthur… or more aptly, “the bubble.”
Pretty good, from someone who never heard a rightwing talking point he didn’t parrot.
June 11, 2009 at 8:49 am
Arthur… you know me so well… or not at all.
It’s a good thing you can make up the facts… otherwise, you’d have no facts at all.
PS
You don’t know me… and the next time, before you decide to tell me what I think, or “what I do,” perhaps you should just keep your hands in your pocket. You know, looking stupid is worse than just being stupid.
June 11, 2009 at 8:53 am
I like parrots.
Yesterday Chuck Todd said we probably don’t know the name of the next Republican president, i.e. he/she is in politics somewhere but not well known. Discounting Romney, Huckabee, Palin, Pawlenty and Jindal is a brave prediction.
June 11, 2009 at 8:57 am
“He’s braver than I guess I gave him credit for.”
I agree. Isn’t it shameful though, that he has to be brave (on Fox at least) to say what is obvious to all but 75% of the country. The alternate reality that Fox creates is dangerous.
June 11, 2009 at 9:02 am
And let’s not forget why else Rush is looked at as the leader of you people. Everytime a Republican stands up to that idiot, they are groveling to him and apologizing within a day or two. He has considerable heft (ha!) in your party. No one dares to cross LimPbaugh if you’re Republican. Sounds like a leader to me.
June 11, 2009 at 9:08 am
Is it your contention that during his Presidency, someone OTHER than Ronald Reagan led the GOP? That someone other than Bush was the leader of the GOP from 2001-2008?
No, but it was *MANY* people’s contention that Dick Cheney and/or Karl Rove was the leader during Bush 43 and everyone from Lee Atwater to Nancy Reagan’s Astrologer was in charge during Reagan.
June 11, 2009 at 9:12 am
“Discounting Romney, Huckabee, Palin, Pawlenty and Jindal is a brave prediction.”
I seriously doubt Republicans are going to rethink their entire ideology before the next election. And I think that’s what it would take for them not to pick one of those poor schmucks.
June 11, 2009 at 9:13 am
When it comes to Rush… I think a lot of people on the left are just jealous. I mean really… who speaks with such authority and power to that many people on the left? Who has the platform that Rush does, on the left? Nobody… and I think that really gets under their skin… but instead of finding someone, and putting together a really successful left-wing program (on radio or television), they try to take Rush down. And the more they try, the more power and listeners he manages to scoop up.
Rush speaks for fewer people than he doesn’t speak for… but really, if that’s who you want to focus on, by all means… knock yourselves out. Why you think that will help in the long run is beyond me.
June 11, 2009 at 9:15 am
smh3477 Says:
June 11, 2009 at 9:12 am
With all due respect, Shawn… are you really in any position to “give advice” to Republicans?
I mean, you haven’t met (or thought you met) a Republican you didn’t like. Am I wrong? Why not just keep it simple and say, “Arg… Republicans, I hate them all!” And do away with the false sense that you’d even consider doing anything more that hating someone to the right of Hillary Clinton.
June 11, 2009 at 9:18 am
Sean, Todd’s prediction was for the next Republican to win the White House, not the next one to run. Part of what is interesting about his analysis is the implication that the GOP won’t regain the presidency until they have burned through this generation’s picks. I think he’s right.
June 11, 2009 at 9:19 am
INB, the problem we non-believers have with Rush is that he stirs up the nastiest parts of your party. Dittoheads are bad for America.
June 11, 2009 at 9:28 am
The long time pastor and political adviser to President Barack Obama – Reverend Jeremiah Wright – claims that the ‘Jews’ are controlling the President and are preventing the President from seeing what is going on the world.
Those warning in recent weeks of the dangers of extremist language will join with me, I’m sure, in a concern of how much influence this exremist has had on our President.
I’ll await the posts from my new allies.
[tongue in cheek, now, tongue in cheek]
June 11, 2009 at 9:42 am
‘the problem we non-believers have with Rush is that he stirs up the nastiest parts of your party’
I mostly agree with that concern but it would have been, well, nice, to have heard concerns about stirring up the wackos over the past five years when we had elements talk about how the ‘neocons want to control the world’ and ‘Bush is a fascist terrorist’ and other such horseshit, excuse the language.
Maybe you did it, Joe; but you didn’t seem to have a lot of allies.
And no, as that noted philosopher Bill O’Reilly has pointed out, you don’t defend bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior. I’m criticizing the excesses of both.
June 11, 2009 at 9:43 am
Congratulations, Joe. You’ve managed to steer yet another conversation towards Rush Limbaugh.
June 11, 2009 at 10:11 am
but instead of finding someone, and putting together a really successful left-wing program (on radio or television), they try to take Rush down.
Are you KIDDING?? You think the left wants to ‘take Rush down’?
I’m happy as a clam that he’s the most visible voice of conservatism out there. Goooo, Rush!
June 11, 2009 at 10:14 am
Information found in one of the writings of James Von Brunn who shot and killed a guard at the Holocaust Memorial Museum included the following:
In one essay, Von Brunn attacked “JEWS-NEOCONS-BILL O’REILLY,”
Since Olbermann has expressed some strong and hateful comments towards at least two of these three, perhaps he should also be investigated for possible ties to this gentleman.
June 11, 2009 at 10:15 am
Congratulations Willier. You’ve managed to join a conversation in progress and decide I started it. Dittohead.
I wasn’t sure about It’s the Economy on MSNBC at first. It didn’t seem like Contessa Brewer and Mellissa Francis liked each other much, but it turns out they’re really good together. They should consider moving them to Primetime. Those girls are hysterical.
June 11, 2009 at 10:21 am
Yes lalo, because Olbermann spouts anti-semitic rhetoric the same way O’reilly went after “abortionists” and specifically “Tiller-the-baby-killer”. Nice try,
I don’t blame O’Reilly specifically for the murder of Tiller. He was just one cog in the hate machine better known as the conservative movement.
June 11, 2009 at 10:36 am
Nice try smh, I never said Olbermann spouted any anti-semitic rhetoric, but Olbermann has definitely denounced the other two named people, same as Mr. Von Brunn. My point is that Von Brunn hated some of the same groups as Olbermann. For you to characterize him as a ” cog in the hate machine better known as the conservative movement” is to completely ignore the fact that he has more in common with some liberals today. Birds of a feather…
June 11, 2009 at 10:39 am
Joe: Please do not call me names. I am not a dittohead.
I know you didn’t start the conversation. You’re just the one who brought up Limbaugh’s name. Again.
June 11, 2009 at 10:46 am
The four Uighurs released by the Obama Administration to Bermuda all admitted to being trained in terrorist camps in Afghanistan.
link [warning 'neocon' magazine link] -http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/06/uighurs_released_to_bermuda_al_1.asp
Additionally, the US government got guarantees from the government of Bermuda that the Uighurs would not be allowed to travel to the US without our approval beforehand.
The British government, meanwhile, is furious that they weren’t consulted before the release of the Uighurs to Bermuda, an overseas territory belonging to the UK
The German government refused to accept the Uighurs in part because the Obama Administration could not provide enough information that the Uighurs would not be a danger to the German people.
The Uighurs may have just been caught up in things they weren’t aware; but the evidence tends to show otherwise.
June 11, 2009 at 10:52 am
My point is that Von Brunn hated some of the same groups as Olbermann. For you to characterize him as a ” cog in the hate machine better known as the conservative movement” is to completely ignore the fact that he has more in common with some liberals today. Birds of a feather…
HA! I knew we’d see this talking point eventually – it’s making the rightwing rounds.
It goes like this – Von Brunn was really LIBERAL! Because he hated many of the same things (Bush, neocons) that liberals hate! Enemy of my enemy is my friend, etc.
He hated neocons because many of them are Jewish. And he hated Bush because he wasn’t conservative enough and didn’t hate blacks and Jews as much as VonB did. I mean, come on – Bush appointed a black sect-state. You think a white supremicist is going to admire him?
June 11, 2009 at 11:05 am
The four Uighurs released by the Obama Administration to Bermuda all admitted to being trained in terrorist camps in Afghanistan.
I think I spoke to this before; perhaps you weren’t paying attention. They were shown how to disassemble and reassemble a rifle and took turns shooting it. Wow. Terrifying.
From your link: “All four of them are members or associates of the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (otherwise known as the Turkistan Islamic Party). The ETIM/TIP is a U.S. and UN designated terrorist organization affiliated with al Qaeda and has attacked civilians in China, as well as reportedly plotted against other targets elsewhere, including the U.S. embassy in Kyrgyzstan.”
The US designated ETIM a terrorist organization in 2004, long after we’d already imprisoned these guys. AND, we did it at the request of China.
Someone tell me what Reagan would think of the US taking orders from a communist dictatorship.
June 11, 2009 at 11:06 am
Nice deflection lalo. I never accused you of saying that Olbermann used anti-semitic rhetoric. That is the point – he didn’t. However, O’Reilly did go after Tiller constantly, by name. As did the rest of your ilk.
You know, for someone to accuse “liberals” of having more in common with the recent string of domestic terrorists than the right-wingers completely ignores REALITY and FACTS. I know you people have to tell yourself these things to make yourselves feel less guilty, but few believe the crap spewing from all of you.
June 11, 2009 at 11:09 am
Willier, I didn’t “bring up Rush again”, I responded to INB. Dittohead.
June 11, 2009 at 11:12 am
I shouldn’t have said make yourselves feel less guilty, because I know you people do not feel guilty about the murders your movement has incited. So I take that back.
June 11, 2009 at 11:14 am
You know, for someone to accuse “liberals” of having more in common with the recent string of domestic terrorists than the right-wingers completely ignores REALITY and FACTS.
Heh – I think it’s well known that many conservatives live in an alternate reality called Fox News. In fact, noted conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer even admits it: “What Fox did is not just create a venue for alternative opinion. It created an alternate reality.”
I wonder if it’s the one where Spock has a beard?
June 11, 2009 at 11:18 am
The Uighurs in their own words.
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2009/04/the_uighurs_in_their.php
Actual testimony.
Watch carefully as those who say that those who associate with anti-abortion extremists are culpable in violence perpetrated against abortion providers but those who train and work with Muslim extremists are really innocent individuals who received little training in arms.
Don’t buy it.
June 11, 2009 at 11:22 am
INB was talking about the Democrats, Joe.
June 11, 2009 at 11:36 am
Stevemg – you think you have to link something twice to get someone to read it? I totally understand – you clearly haven’t read the many links I provided that debunk your favorite talking point.
June 11, 2009 at 11:39 am
Also? WRT toeing the Chinese line on who we call a terrorist? Keep in mind that China considers the Dalai Lama a leader of a terrorist group. Maybe we should do our communist pals a favor and toss him in Gitmo?
June 11, 2009 at 11:51 am
“I think it’s well known that many conservatives live in an alternate reality called Fox News.”
Exactly.
June 11, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Stevemg – you think you have to link something twice to get someone to read it?
Two different links.
It’s clear what you think – Bush is a monster screwup despot who locked up innocent people. And the Uighurs are just a bunch of harmless people who somehow wound up in a terror camp in a foreign country (I’ll note again that if they received this type of training from an anti-abortion extremist group here that you wouldn’t hold such a sanguine view of them).
The evidence points otherwise but you’ve made quite clear that you reject the evidence.
I’ll note that others read this site beside you. Perhaps they’re a bit more willing to discard their ideological blinkers.
June 11, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Pay attention Willier. INB speculated that the left’s problem with Rush was jealousy. I replied that our problem with him is he feeds the crazies. I DIDN’T BRING IT UP.
June 11, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Ah, I see – your two linked articles just quote the same thing, and spin it the same way.
It’s clear what you think – Bush is a monster screwup despot who locked up innocent people.
Bush has PROVABLY locked up innocent people. Do you think the people already released from Gitmo were terrorists? If so, why aren’t you screaming bloody murder about it.
Duh.
June 11, 2009 at 12:33 pm
I think I heard Neil Cavuto just call the Carrie Prejean story a “Breaking Business Alert.”
lol
June 11, 2009 at 12:35 pm
(I’ll note again that if they received this type of training from an anti-abortion extremist group here that you wouldn’t hold such a sanguine view of them).
I’ll note again that these guys got to shoot a rifle once or twice. I’ll also note that this ‘type of training’ is a weekend with dad for many American boys/girls.
Your links quote extensively from these guys’ testimony during their CSRT hearings which you (and the article poster) considers proof, PROOF that they are terrorists.
So please explain, how, based on this supposedly terrorist-pointing testimony, did the review panel rule that these guys were NOT enemy combatants and should NOT continue to be held?
Keep in mind, this is the trumped-up, bush-invented, kangaroo-trials which was all we were allowing detainees and the time, and even so, they determined these guys weren’t terrorists.
So why do you continue to insist that they ARE, when the military, the Bush Administration and every court who’s heard them has said otherwise?
June 11, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Speaking of Rush, since Willier brought it up (ah c’mon Willier, that’s funny), he (Rush) linked the Holocaust Museum shooter’s anti-Jew sentiments to “the left” and “the kind of people around Obama”. Keep feeding those dittoheads, Rush. I hope Shep calls him out. This crap needs to stop.
June 11, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Rush doesnt care that hes a WHITE SUPREMACIST, and a Birther freak on top of that.
June 11, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Hell freezes over. Obama just landed in David Shuster’s Hypocrisy Watch for keeping a tax on health benefits on the table despite attacking McCain over the issue in the campaign. First Shep, now Shuster. There must be something in the water.
June 11, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Obama just landed in David Shuster’s Hypocrisy Watch for keeping a tax on health benefits on the table despite attacking McCain over the issue in the campaign.
And keeping single payer OFF the table, which is frankly BIZARRE.
June 11, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Joe, didn’t Obama spend 20 years in Rev. Wright’s church, had his children baptized him, and considered him his spiritual advisor?
Kinda unfortunate that Wright made these statements yesterday, of all days, via Daily Press:
“Asked if he had spoken to the President, Wright said: “Them Jews aren’t going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he’ll talk to me in five years when he’s a lame duck, or in eight years when he’s out of office…
Wright also said Obama should have sent a U.S. delegation to the World Conference on Racism held recently in Geneva, Switzerland, but that the president did not do so for fear of offending Jews and Israel.
“Ethic cleansing is going on in Gaza. Ethnic cleansing of the Zionist is a sin and a crime against humanity, and they don’t want Barack talking like that because that’s anti-Israel,” Wright said…..
And regarding the Holocaust shooter, maybe you lefties should have watched Olbermann last night and listened to the domestic terrorism expert talking about the EXTREME LEFT’S HATRED OF JEWS, being a serious threat. (My guess is he’ll never be invited back on the show).
Despite your b.s. smears to the contrary, the shooter targeted: Fox News, the Weekly Standard, hated both Bush presidents & John McCain, hated Bill O’Reilly, was jailed for 6 years for attempting kidnapping of the REAGAN APPOINTED FEDERAL RESERVE.
He also believed Bush was behind 9/11.
Yet the idiots in the media & the left (the same thing, basically), call him a “right wing extremist”.
June 11, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Are you KIDDING?? You think the left wants to ‘take Rush down’?
I’m happy as a clam that he’s the most visible voice of conservatism out there. Goooo, Rush!
So what you’re saying is you like having Rush to kick around. Is that really a good thing? Is that how you hope society functions?
Either way, this is the same thing the left says when their obvious hatred of O’Reilly/FOX News/Bush, etc. is brought up. “We just want to keep shouting about them,” is the message… that is, until the next boycott comes along, and they “try” (and fail) to get them kicked off whatever platform it is they’re on.
But more importantly, the only people who seem to really focus on Rush… are people on the left. The people on the right either listen to him, or not. He’s not making policy, he’s not effecting people who aren’t his listeners… he’s just kinda there. It’s the left, who in trying to win support for their own ideas… instead of arguing “this is a good thing” they argue “he’s a bad guy,” because their ideas alone wouldn’t win support. The left is giving him much more importance than he’s earned on his own… it’s lazy politics, and if you ask me, pretty pathetic.
“Yes lalo, because Olbermann spouts anti-semitic rhetoric”
Hmmm… don’t I remember Olbermann getting a nasty letter from the ADL, about his nazi salute/O’Reilly “comparison?” Hmmm… seems I do!
Speaking of Rush, since Willier brought it up (ah c’mon Willier, that’s funny), he (Rush) linked the Holocaust Museum shooter’s anti-Jew sentiments to “the left” and “the kind of people around Obama”.
Well, not that I want to defend this (because it’s dumb)… BUT, there is more to it than simply rolling your eyes, and pretending like the left is without anti-Semitic loons.
Rev. Wright’s recent quotes, come to mind… also the reaction after Lieberman left the party comes to mind. There were plenty of people across the blogs who attacked the Jews (via Liebermann, things like “Jews only look out for each other” and so on), and there are still plenty of people who hide behind “We don’t like Israel,” and then get wrapped up in some pretty offensive anti-Semitic commentary.
So did the left cause this… no… and of course, neither did the right. The guy was a loon outside the left/right paradigm. And the sooner we move passed that, the sooner we can actually look at the cause of this problem… not just this problem as a political football.
June 11, 2009 at 1:23 pm
maybe you lefties should have watched Olbermann last night and listened to the domestic terrorism expert talking about the EXTREME LEFT’S HATRED OF JEWS, being a serious threat.
Okay, you got me curious, so I had to go to the MSNBC site and watch the clip. Assume you mean the interview with Jack Levin?
He said nothing that I could disagree with.
Yet the idiots in the media & the left (the same thing, basically), call him a “right wing extremist”.
just fyi, it was under the FIRST Bush that the ‘patriot militias’ first really took off. Because he was clearly a member of the oligarchy building a one-world government and stomping on the sovereignty of the individual.
Because the ‘freemen’ and the ‘militias’ distrusted and feared Bush-I, is it really your contention that this makes them LEFTISTS?
Are you serious?
June 11, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Gotta love that Rev. Wright eh? Please God don’t let him have a radio show.
June 11, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Gotta love that Rev. Wright eh? Please God don’t let him have a radio show.
Hell, give ‘em all radio shows. Why not?
June 11, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Art, I didn’t say it makes Von Brunn, or other militias “leftists”. But idiots on your side, like Shawny, try to blame Fox News & all conservatives whenever some nutcase does something like this… even though Von Brunn TARGETED FOX NEWS.
Oh, and Rev. Wright (Obama’s 20 year spiritual advisor, the man who presided over his wedding & baptized him & his daughters) clarified his statement today about the Jews controlling Obama:
““Let me say like Hillary, I misspoke,” Wright said. “Let me just say: Zionists.”…
Rev. Wright also said that “the Jewish vote, the A-I-P-A-C vote, that’s controlling him, that would not let him send representation to the Darfur Review Conference, that’s talking this craziness on this trip, cause they’re Zionists, they would not let him talk to someone who calls a spade what it is. “
Instead of blaming Bill O’Reilly or Glenn Beck, maybe we should look at extreme lefty Jew haters….like Barack Obama’s father figure Jeremiah Wright….. for violence like yesterday.
June 11, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Remember when I said Sarah Palin won the Letterman thing? Never mind. Someone on her staff released a statement saying they need to “keep Willow away from David Letterman.” Isn’t there anybody in Alaska willing to tell the Palin’s when they’ve won? It astonishes me the extent to which they’re willing to drop their kid’s names for a political point.