They start recycling stories from 1995.
I mean, really people, can we find some current news, please? ![]()
![]()
Read the rest of the stupidity here.
This blog is no longer active as of October 31, 2011

They start recycling stories from 1995.
I mean, really people, can we find some current news, please? ![]()
![]()
Read the rest of the stupidity here.
I knew this was coming.
The Article: Hillary Clinton loses traction over Barack Obama in Pennsylvania, Indiana (Via Los Angeles Times)
With three crucial Democratic primaries looming, Hillary Rodham Clinton may not be headed toward the blockbuster victories she needs to jump-start her presidential bid — even in Pennsylvania, the state that was supposed to be her ace in the hole, a new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found.
The survey found the New York senator leading Barack Obama by 5 percentage points in Pennsylvania, which votes next Tuesday. Such a margin would not give her much of a boost in the battle for the party’s nomination.
What is more, the poll found Clinton trailed Obama by 5 percentage points in Indiana, another Rust Belt state that should play to her strengths among blue-collar voters.
In North Carolina, an Obama stronghold, he is running 13 percentage points ahead.
The race remains volatile, however, because many likely voters in the Democratic primaries are still undecided — 12% in Pennsylvania, 19% in Indiana and 17% in North Carolina.
I have an opinion as to why this is the case. Firstly, I believe that people just are not going to hold the Reverend Wright story against Obama. Because, the main reason is, it was not Obama saying the stuff, it was Reverend Wright. Secondly, I think that whole "Elitist" thing was overplayed by the media and pundits alike and I think most people saw right through it. I know I saw through that, from the minute it broke, this is why I did not whip out a Editorial on it. Because I thought it was quite silly.
It also seemed like Hillary was just piling on, and that might have cut into her likeability factor a bit.
There is going to be a debate tomorrow. I most likely will not be watching it. I mean, there’s been so many, and after a while, they’re repeating the same talking points over and over and over…. it gets kind of old. I will be interested, however, to see how this primary turns out. I am really wondering, if Hillary will drop after the Pennsylvania Primary or not.
It should be interesting and I look forward to it.
Others on this: THE LIBERAL JOURNAL, The Moderate Voice, The Fix, The Sleuth, Hot Air, The Swamp, TalkLeft, Daily Kos, American Street, Marc Ambinder, AMERICAblog, Liberty Street, The Raw Story, Viking Pundit, Donklephant, TPM Election Central, CQ Politics, Dick Polman’s American Debate, WCAU-TV and The Trail – Related Stories via Memeornadum
It seems so….
An Article that was reported by The Politico, exposes an paper, that was originally written in 1965. The Article that was dug up by Greg Ransom at PrestoPundit. However, he didn’t get much of a acknowledgement, which is telling of the MSM.
The Original Article can be found here. Adobe reader is required.
Some of the Highlights of this Paper:
OBAMA ON COMMUNAL OWNERSHIP OF LAND
"[Session Paper No. 10] goes into use and control of resources. The first statement concerns conflict of opinion on attitude toward land ownership. It is true that in most African societies the individual had sole right as to the use of land and proceeds from it. He did, however, own it only as a trustee to the clan, tribe or society. He could give it on loan to someone outside the tribe to use, but he had no right to sell it outside the tribe .. How then can there be a conflict of opinion on communal ownership? ..
It is surprising that one of the best African traditions [the communal ownership of land] is not only being put aside in this paper [in favor of private ownership] but even the principle is not being recognized and enhanced .. we can avoid economic power concentration and bring standardized use and control of resources through public ownership, let alone the equitable distribution of economic gains that follow ..
Will [land consolidation] be easily done through individual action, through co-operatives or through government ownership? Realizing social stickiness and inflexibility and looking at the society’s distrust of change, one would see that, if left to the individual, consolidation will take a long time to come. We have to look at priorities tin terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise.
Would it not seem, then, the government could bring more rapid consolidation through clan co-operatives? Individual initiative is not usually the best method of bringing land reform. Since proper land use and control is very important if we are going to overcome the dual [rich Indian & European vs. poor black African class] character of our economy and thereby increase productivity, the government should take a positive stand and, if need be, force people to consolidate through the easiest way, which, I think, would be through clan co-operatives rather than through individual initiative."
OBAMA ON A CLASSLESS SOCIETY
"If one says that the African society was classless as the paper says, what is there to stop it from being a class society as time goes on? Is what has been said in the paper, if implemented, enough to eschew this danger? .. The question is how are we going to remove the disparities in our country such as the concentration of economic power in Asian and European hands while not destroying what haws already been achieved and at the same time assimilating these groups to build one country?
.. On class problems, the paper states that since there was not such a thing in Africa, the problem is that of prevention. This is to ignore the truth of the matter. One wonders whether the authors of the paper have not noticed that a discernible class structure has emerged in Africa and particularly in Kenya. While we welcome the idea of prevention, we should also try to cure what has slipped in.
The elimination of foreign economic and political domination is a good gesture towards this, so are plans to develop in order to prevent antagonistic classes. But we also need to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now. It is a case of cure and prevention and not prevention alone."
OBAMA ON THE NATIONALIZATION OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISE
"There is a statement made on nationalization [in Sessional Paper No. 10]. True there are cases in which nationalization is bad, but there are, likewise, quite a few benefits to be derived from it. On this subject I would like to refer the authors to Prof. Bronferbrenner’s [sic] work on the "Appeals for confiscation in Economic Development"* [sic — the referenced article is titled "The Appeal of Confiscation in Economic Development"]. Nationalization should not be looked at only in terms of profitability alone, but also, or even more, on the benefit to society that such services render and on its importance in terms of public interest .."
*Econ. Development and Cultural Change — Vol III, No. 3, 1955 pp. 201-18
OBAMA ON THE CONFISCATION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY KENYANS OF ASIAN AND EUROPEAN DECENT
"There is also a statement that nationalization will apply to African enterprise. How can we talk of nationalizing African enterprise when such enterprises do not exit? If we are going to nationalize, we are going to nationalize what exists and is worth nationalizing. But these are European and Asian enterprises.
One need not be a Kenyan to note that nearly all commercial enterprises from small shops in River Road to big shops in Government Road and that industries in the Industrial Areas of Nairobi are mostly owned by Asians and Europeans. One need not be a Kenyan to note that when one goes to a good restraurant he mostly finds Asians and Europeans, nor has he to be a Kenyan to see that the majority of cars running in Kenya are run by Asians and Europeans. How then can we say that we are going to to be indiscriminate in rectifying these imbalances? We have to give the African his place in his own country and we have to give him this economic power if he is going to develop. The paper talks of fear of retarding growth if nationalization or purchases of these enterprises are made for Africans. But for whom doe we want to grow? Is it the African who owns this country? If he does, then why should he not control the economic means of growth in this country?
It is mainly in this country that one finds almost everything owned by the non-indigenous populace. The government must do something about this and soon."
OBAMA ON 100% TAXATION
"Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100 per cent of income so long as the people benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed."
OBAMA ON MARX AND TAXATION
"The paper wishes to encourage domestic accumulation. This is a good gesture except for the underlying assumption which one only reads between the lines, that it is individual private enterprise and business that tends to encourage accumulation. True, in the paper there is a realization that taxation can be used as a means of forced saving, but it is given a secondary place in this respect. Certainly there is no limit to taxation if the benefits derived from public services by society measure up to the cost in taxation which they have to pay. It is a fallacy to say that there is a limit and it is a fallacy to rely mainly on the individual fre
e enterprise to get the savings. Who are we going to rid ourselves of economic power concentration when we, in our blueprint, tend towards what we ourselves discredit? In paragraph 47 the paper state that the company form of business organization is a departure from the direct individual ownership typical in Marx’s day. Yet one who has read Marx cannot fail to see that corporations are not only what Marx referred to as the advanced stage of capitalism but Marx even called it finance capitalism by which a few would control the finances of so many and through this have not only economic power but political power as well."
OBAMA ON THE POLICY OF "NON-ALIGNMENT"
"It is a tautology to say that we want to be independent of other countries since every country has always wished this. It would have been more important to talk of how we intend to break our dependence on other countries politically and economically, since this is fait accompli. It may be true that this is still the case because of our lack of basic resources and skilled manpower, yet one can choose to develop by the bootstraps rather than become a pawn to some foreign powers such as Sekou Toure did. While the statement of the policy of non-alignment is good and encouraging, one would wish to see it put into practice."
[Note: At the time Obama’s article was written Guinea President Sekou Toure was accepting aid from the United States and acceding to many of its foreign policy demands, after an earlier period when Toure had accepted aid from the Soviets and the Soviet block. Relations between Toure and Moscow had cooled after Toure accused the Soviets of helping to plot the overthrow of his government.]
Now, honestly? I don’t believe that we should base our judgement of Obama, based on a paper, written in 1965 by Obama Father. Obama’s Father is not Barack Obama. Obama’s Dad had some serious issues, It has been reported that his Dad was an alcoholic and ended up committing suicide. Well, at least was in a Alcohol related accident.
However, anyone who is a rational person, will look at this, and would want to know more about him, he should be pressed, HARD about his feelings about this Paper. He needs to be grilled, hard on his Political and World-view, he should be cornered and asked if he agrees with this paper, point by point.
Although, if I know the MSM, like I do, they will go easy on him and won’t press him at all. Because, basically, they’re acting like he’s freaking Jesus Christ, and I think it is totally wrong. The main reason they won’t press him, because he is black, if they start needling him with questions, some feckless Negro or Liberal (Same difference anymore!), screams "RACE!"
We need answers, but, if I know the media like I do. We won’t get them.
Others on this: PrestoPundit, michellemalkin.com, Liberal Values, Hot Air, Sweetness & Light, The New Republic, Outside The Beltway, baldilocks, Gateway Pundit, The Opinionator, The Page and Balloon Juice
Oy…..
The Video:
At the close of Q and A at an Associated Press luncheon in Washington, DC, AP chairman Dean SIngleton skipped over a question on what’s becoming known as “bitter-gate” in favor of asking Illinois Senator Barack Obama what he surely thought would be a less controversial question on Iraq.
Would the senator be willing to shift a substantial number of troops from Iraq to Afghanistan, asked Singleton, where the Taliban has been gaining strength — and “Obama bin Laden” is still at large.
The room was quiet – as the crowd contemplated whether they’d in fact heard what they thought they heard. But Obama, apparently, heard the same thing. After a pause and a smile, he said “I think that was OSAMA bin Laden.”
A red-faced Singleton put his hands to his head. “If I did that, I’m so sorry!” he said.
Obama assured Singleton that the verbal misfire was a-ok with him. “This is part of the exercise that I’ve been going through over the last 15 months,” he said, breaking into a grin. “Which is why it’s pretty impressive I’m still standing here.” The professionally-stoic crowd of journalists gave Obama a round of applause.
Had that been Fox News or anyone on the Conservative side, the Liberal roar of outrage would be deafening.
What a weekend! Obama sticks his foot in his mouth and the whole World nearly grinds to a halt. The Neo-Conservative Apologists like William Kristol are calling him a Godless Commie. …and this is just April.
However, Obama’s poll numbers continue to hold steady, so, It might just be the fact that people are looking at all this and thinking like I do, that it is all rather silly.
I have to say that I very much agree with that sentiment, I believe all of this, is rather silly myself, I really wish, that if people are going to attack Obama, attack him on this Politics, not on the blatant silly nonsense, that they have been attacking him with.
Frankly, I am surprised that the Main Stream media did not pick up on the story of Rev. Jeremiah Wright throwing off on Fox News and saying that Thomas Jefferson was a Pedophile. That did shock me a bit. Although, I’m inclined to believe that the majority of the media out there agree with him about Fox News.
Blog Reactions to this latest round of Obama controversy, can be found Here, Here, Here, and Here
Update: In Fairness to the man, here is what was said…..:
Honestly the only people freaking out about this, are the Far Right Wing Conservatives and the Hillary supporters. Which I think is stupid, did he insult people? No. Did he possibly say something in a bad manner? Yes. But people are acting like he just insulted the damn pope or something! Which I think speaks volumes for the people insulted, if you ask me. and that last part, that some people are going ape over, was, in fact, a joke. I think some turban headed pundits, need to find something else to bitch about. Things must be slow over there at a well known, pseudo-Conservative Blog, and they’re now grasping at straws. No wonder Preston left. ![]()
It appears that Senator Obama is now eating crow. Here’s the story via the AP, which comes in via Yahoo:
The Article: Obama concedes remarks were ill chosen (via AP/ Yahoo! News)
Democrat Barack Obama on Saturday conceded that comments he made about bitter working class voters who "cling to guns or religion" were ill chosen, as he tried to stem a burst of complaints that he is condescending.
"I didn’t say it as well as I should have," he said at Ball State University.
Here is the Video:
And…. of course, Senator Hillary Clinton felt the need, that she just HAD to pile on.
Quote:
As he tried to quell the furor, presidential rival Hillary Rodham Clinton hit Obama with one of her lengthiest and most pointed criticisms to date.
"Senator Obama’s remarks were elitist and out of touch," she said, campaigning about an hour away in Indianapolis. "They are not reflective of the values and beliefs of Americans."
I got news for you lady, there is a quite a few things that I could say about YOU being out of touch with the rest of America. However, because I do not wish to sit here and get into a dissertation about your Husband’s Presidency, I shall refrain, but let me just say this here, that "out of touch" stuff goes both ways Hillary. You know it and your feckless Husband knows it.
Others on this: American Street, Little Green Footballs, NY Daily News, Examining Presidential … and Liberal Values
As if we needed anymore proof that this man was a hater.
Comes this Revelation, from The Politico, who saw it on Huffington Post.
Quoting Barry:
You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them…And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.
And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Not a smart way to endear yourself to the people, Barry!
I got a feeling that this is going to be all over the media come the weekend or next week. I think he won’t get PA, that’s for sure.
Why? Because it smells of Elitism, which does not go over well, with the Working class, in PA, Detroit, MI, and other major cities were working class folk live. Plus his comments about Guns and Religion tend to alienate people that support the Second Amendment and Christians, plus people who want our borders security.
Big time Reactions in the Blogosphere Via Memeorandum
Cross Posted @ The Christian Nationalist
This stuff is getting beyond silly, if you ask me. But this was too funny to pass up.
Former President Bill Clinton tried defending his closet lesbian wife, and proceeded to lie his royal behind off in the process!
Follow the link it has all the juicy details, I really don’t want cut and paste all the crap on here.
I’ll before it’s over with, they’ll be in the wrestling ring and fighting for the title. Yeah, it’s gotten that silly.
Others: The Moderate Voice, The New Republic, Jonathan Martin’s Blogs, The Caucus, Comments from Left Field, Ben Smith’s Blogs, Gothamist, The Raw Story, Political Radar, michellemalkin.com, Hot Air, Media Blog, Swampland, Commentary, The Jed Report, The Page and AMERICAblog (via Memeorandum)
An interesting poll, taken by the Associated Press-Ipsos shows that McCain is basically tied with Obama.
Quote:
An AP-Ipsos poll taken in late February had Obama leading McCain 51-41 percent. The current survey, conducted April 7-9, had them at 45 percent each. McCain leads Obama among men, whites, Southerners, married women and independents.
Clinton led McCain, 48-43 percent, in February. The latest survey showed the New York senator with 48 percent support to McCain’s 45 percent. Factoring in the poll’s margin of error of 3.1 percentage points, Clinton and McCain are statistically tied.
However, here’s the thing that kind of makes this poll a joke:
Although the race between Clinton and Obama remained unchanged, there were a few shifts in whom voters are choosing:
• The gender gap has mostly disappeared, with Clinton losing her advantage among women. In February, 51 percent of Democratic women supported Clinton while 38 percent were for Obama. Now they’re statistically tied at 44 percent for Clinton, 42 percent for Obama. That is partially offset by a decline in male support for Obama, down 7 points to 50 percent, while Clinton gained 10 points among men. She is now at 42 percent.
• Obama and Clinton are now statistically about even among households earning under $50,000. In late February, Clinton led 54 percent to 37 percent, but now it is just 48 percent to 41 percent.
• Obama now leads Clinton among self-described moderate Democrats, 51 percent to 35 percent. Previously they were 45 percent Clinton, 40 percent Obama.
The poll questioned 1,005 adults nationally. Included were interviews with 489 Democratic voters and people leaning Democratic, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.4 points; and 369 Republicans or GOP-leaning voters, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5.1 points.
I mean, how fixed can a poll be? If that wasn’t a bad poll, I don’t know what is. ![]()
![]()
Leaning?!?!?! That could mean anything, how do we know those people weren’t lying?
I really do not think that this will really matter, the general public and those paying attention, know the John McCain is going to be equated with Bush and his Policies and people will not vote for him. Obama will win, I think, I would be wrong. But I highly doubt people will vote for him.
Others: MSNBC, Wake up America, TalkLeft and PoliGazette (via Memeorandum)
This according to a TIME Poll. It really does not matter however, because Obama has a lead in delegates.
I guess, that is why I don’t understand the MSM’s attempt to paint this as an attempt to steal the nomination. Not like that is going to happen, if you think that the super-delegates will switch to her, you’re crazy, they will do the will of the people.
I just don’t understand why Hillary just doesn’t concede defeat and hope she gets a VP nod, like the rest of them. ![]()
Anything to inflate her ego, I suppose.
Others: TalkLeft, Telegraph, Marc Ambinder, The Moderate Voice, PoliBlog (TM), Donklephant, The Page, PoliGazette, Below The Beltway, Political Machine, TPM Election Central, Southern Political Report and more via Memeorandum
The Article: Reverend Eric Lee’s Anti-Semitism: A Personal Story (via Pajamas Media)
On April 4, 2008, at a Los Angeles event commemorating the assassination of Martin Luther King, the African-American fraternity Alpha Kappa Psi gave Israeli-American Daphna Ziman its Tom Bradley Award for community service. Then the event’s keynote speaker, Reverend Eric Lee, turned to Ms. Ziman and launched an anti-Semitic diatribe. Roger L. Simon interviewed Ms. Ziman.
Watch this Video:
That’s the saddest thing I have ever had to watch. I think Senator Barack Obama needs to publicly condemn this, there’s just no call for it.
I look for this to be the big story in the next couple of days.
Update: Thankfully, this is being picked up, several Bloggers have started talking about it: Roger L. Simon and Classical Values
There’s no denying it. Clinton is slipping, so says Gallup:
Personally, I don’t see why she stays in. Because it will only ruin the party. But that’s your Liberals for you.
Others: The Daily Dish, Talking Points Memo and TPM Election Central (via Memeorandum)
This is living proof of why it is not smart for celebrities to get involved into Politics.
Oprah’s favorability ratings also remained consistently — and unusually — high. In November 2003, Gallup found that 73 percent of Americans held favorable views about Oprah. Seventy-four percent of Americans reported favorable impressions of Oprah in a January 2007 Gallup/USA Today poll.
And then, seemingly out of nowhere, Oprah announced on CNN’s “Larry King Live” on May 1, 2007, that she would officially endorse her longtime friend Barack Obama for the presidency — the first time she had ever thrown her support behind a political candidate. “I think that my value to him, my support of him, is probably worth more than any check,” Oprah told Larry King. At the time, Oprah did not indicate whether she would campaign for Obama.
Almost instantly, Oprah’s popularity in America plummeted. An August 2007 CBS News poll showed only 61 percent of Americans were favorably disposed to her — a considerable drop of 13 percentage points from a similar survey conducted just seven months prior. An October 2007 Gallup/USA Today poll that showed Oprah with a slightly higher 66 percent favorability still reflected a drop.
Ouch. I guess she must have felt that little jolt in the pocketbook or at least from her producers.
Still, a lesson celebrities may extract is that political endorsements carry the risk of alienating fans, often without the reward of considerably boosting support for the candidate. While celebrities are certainly entitled to express their political beliefs — just like every other American — it is possible that the public prefers high-profile entertainment personalities to stay on the tube and off the stump.
I can understand that, especially if many of her viewers are a-political or not active in Politics, they may have been turned off by the show being turned into a Political infomercial.
As an extra bonus, Check out this article here on Oprah.
Others: Sister Toldjah, Tami, the One True, The Democratic Daily, Taylor Marsh, Political Machine and The Moderate Voice
Hey Goldiefarb!
Has it really been that long?
Goldfarb drops this turd….:
They Need More White people (via The Weekly Standard)
Quote:
The Tartan, Carnegie Mellon’s student newspaper, reports on a campaign event featuring Michelle Obama:
While the crowd was indeed diverse, some students at the event questioned the practices of Mrs. Obama’s event coordinators, who handpicked the crowd sitting behind Mrs. Obama. The Tartan’s correspondents observed one event coordinator say to another, “Get me more white people, we need more white people.” To an Asian girl sitting in the back row, one coordinator said, “We’re moving you, sorry. It’s going to look so pretty, though.”
“I didn’t know they would say, ‘We need a white person here,’ ” said attendee and senior psychology major Shayna Watson, who sat in the crowd behind Mrs. Obama. “I understood they would want a show of diversity, but to pick up people and to reseat them, I didn’t know it would be so outright.”
The Obama campaign discriminates against people of color, and their own supporters no less, in what is presumably a misguided pander to white voters. Very strange, but perhaps Obama’s candidacy really has transcended race in America (surely this is a first). Alternatively, the campaign may just plan to stage-manage it out of public view. Go balloons!
Has this feckless idiot forgotten, this?:

Typical moron Neo-Con, Can’t remember past yesterday.
Others: TBogg and The New Editor and more via Memeornadum
Oy….
Why can’t people just endorse the guy, and keep their opinions to themselves?
![]()
Contrary to what the Liberals want you to believe, The story of McCain going to blows with another senator is old news, that has been reported a few times already.
Quote:
Perhaps the most remarkable story of McCain’s temper involved Arizona Congressman Rick Renzi. Two former reporters covering McCain, one who witnessed the following events and one who confirmed the facts provided by the first, relayed it to me as follows: In 2006, the Arizona Republican congressional delegation had a strategy meeting. McCain repeatedly addressed two new members, congressmen Trent Franks and Rick Renzi, as ‘boy.’ Finally, Renzi, a former college linebacker, rose from his chair and said to McCain, "You call me that one more time and I’ll kick your old ass." McCain lunged at Renzi, punches were thrown, and the two had to be physically separated. After they went to their separate offices, McCain called Renzi and demanded an apology. Renzi refused. Apparently this posture made McCain admire him, as they became fast friends.
Seriously, do these people do any kind of research at all??? This story is older than dirt.
Research gents, It could only help!
Other idiots who Blogged about this: The Politico, New York Times, Crooks and Liars, MotherJones.com, Booman Tribune, The Campaign Spot, The Raw Story, DownWithTyranny!, Brilliant at Breakfast, Cliff Schecter …, Open Left and Wonkette
A good Book:
A classic example of recycle the rumor….
Via Raw Story:
Three reporters from Arizona, on the condition of anonymity, also let me in on another incident involving McCain’s intemperateness. In his 1992 Senate bid, McCain was joined on the campaign trail by his wife, Cindy, as well as campaign aide Doug Cole and consultant Wes Gullett. At one point, Cindy playfully twirled McCain’s hair and said, "You’re getting a little thin up there." McCain’s face reddened, and he responded, "At least I don’t plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt." McCain’s excuse was that it had been a long day. If elected president of the United States, McCain would have many long days.
The problem is, not a bit of it is true…. McRanger over at Macsmind weighs in:
The only problem is that the story is false. This tale first floated up around the 2000 election primary cycle but was quickly knocked down by Cindy herself in an interview in 1999. Further this article – while counting the ups and downs of McCain’s political career and marrage to Cindy makes no mention of the event.
You would think if true this story would have been old news by now. It’s doubtful Cliff Schecter got this from anything except the top of his head.
You know, I don’t agree with McRanger much, we’re not on the same page Politically, as I’m more right of center and he is, of course, a Republican. But I have to agree with with ol’ Mac here man, this story is quite hard to believe.
I tend to believe personally, and I base this upon looking at photographs of Cindy McCain, I tend to believe that if John McCain would have gotten knocked flat of his back, had he said that to her.
I think sometimes, in the haste of trying to find dirt of the opponent, the Liberals and some Conservatives, jump the gun on a story, to smear someone.
Fact checking Gentlemen! Look into it! ![]()
Listing of stupid Bloggers who bought this stupid story: Jesus’ General, Firedoglake, Taylor Marsh, Emptywheel, MyDD, Pandagon, Air America Radio blogs, American Street, Blue Girl, Red State, Wonkette, AMERICAblog, Cliff Schecter …, The Impolitic, Crooks and Liars, The Republic of T., Pam’s House Blend, Shakesville and The Agonist
Cross-Posted @ The Christian Nationalist
Man, go over to a friends house for a couple of hours and something huge drops! WOW! ![]()
The News via the political wires is, that Mark Penn, Hillary Clinton’s Chief Strategist Mark Penn has left Clinton’s Campaign for President.
You know, I will be honest with you. That guy really made me suspicious for the word go. I just wonder, what else was he up to?
The story is, that he was involved in working on a Colombian free-trade agreement that Clinton opposes. Not smart, not smart at all.
I just wonder, and I am sure that many others are wondering to, is this the beginning of the end for Hillary’s Campaign? I mean, people have said for weeks, that the wheels were coming off of her campaign, I just wonder if this confirms it or if this was just a necessary adjustment?
Time will tell, I suppose. It will be an interesting development to watch this coming week.
Of course, there has also been a few other events that could have hurt her chances, the sniper fire story that turned out to be not true. Then the story about the woman and her child dying, that turned out not to be entirely true, and now this.
Wow…. Just wow…
Reality bites, in a bad way.
That’s what Snoop Dog says.
Of course, Calvin Broadus isn’t known for his intelligence either.
Obama, however says it ain’t true:
Finally when Obama took the stage the audience cheered and screamed. It was reminiscent of the Nickelback concert I attended, but with a lack of women professing their undying love and virginity. As camera flashes were blinding I stood in the front row and yelled out:
Mr. Obama how do you feel about Snoop Dog accusing you of accepting funding from the KKK?
The people around me looked at me like I just asked him for a mustache ride. I really wasn’t shocked. Apparently not hearing me, I yelled it again as I made eye contact with him. Obviously trying to make it to the podium he merely said:
“It is completely untrue.”
How absurd, accusing a black man for taking support from the KKK.
Hey, Calvin, Stick to your day job man, stay out of politics, you’re making the brothers look silly!
Others: QandO and Outside The Beltway
With apologies to every English teacher I have had….
For all intents and purposes… A Michigan redo isn’t happening..
So nice to be a part of the damn political process in America. ![]()
"The Democrat Party, Where your votes don’t count, so why vote anyway?"
That should be their new slogan.
It’s enough to make a person want to move to Oregon.
Here is the video news story via the AP:
Memeorandum has the various Blog reactions and story on Hillary’s website.
The only thing I have to say about it is this. The Clinton’s were successful people, I do not have a problem with that, at all. They went to college, got law degrees and were successful at it.
Does that bother me? Of course not! Sorry, I am just not one of those kind of people, who hold grudges against people who are successful in life. There are Liberals and some Conservatives like that, I am not.
If it makes anyone feel better, Keith Olbermann, The Liberal’s talking head, has a 5 year contact with MSNBC for 5 million dollars. So, I really do not see all the fuss over the Clinton’s wealth is.
This is, where I believe, that John Edwards blew it, he went around talking about two Americas, all the while being wealthy himself. I never saw that in Hillary, she was successful, because she worked for it. I cannot fault her for that.
My take on it is this, anyone that has the ability to go out and get a good education and make something of themselves and is able to amass that kind of wealth, I say, God Bless them, and I wish them the best. I do not have a problem with anyone being successful, as long as it is done in a honest manner.
That is one of the issues that I have with the progressives and far left liberals, and that is their contempt of anyone who is financially successful. The Anti-Capitalist mentality. Capitalism, sorry to say, is the American way. Honest capitalism is even better.
This whole idea of "Give me something, for nothing", I believe is anti-American, It seeks to punish those who are successful. It forces those who have made something of themselves to surrender their wealth to those who want something for nothing.
Just my take on it.
John Ashcroft calls Obama, Osama….
D’oh!
Click here to read
Of course, the only I remember Ashcoft for is….. THIS!
I hate to say this, But this crap right here, is why Conservatism is in it’s death throws and why America wants nothing to do, at all, with the G.O.P.
The Video:
The transcript: (via MMFA)
From the April 3 edition of Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes:
SEAN HANNITY (co-host): But I will bet you any amount of money, any bet, any dinner, any place, anywhere, restaurant of your choice, with any bottle of wine you want —
COULTER: — that I won’t vote for her?
HANNITY: You won’t vote for a Democrat. You will never pull the lever this election year for a Democrat.
COULTER: Well, I don’t want to give either of them a mandate, so I will probably write in Ronald Reagan.
HANNITY: Oh, come on.
COULTER: But I’m not going to vote for a Democrat, so I won’t vote for John McCain.
JOHN CARLSON (radio talk show host): I didn’t think it was congenitally possible for Ann Coulter to pull the lever for a Democrat.
HANNITY: Right.
CARLSON: You’re not really going to vote for Hillary.
HANNITY: No.
COULTER: If — as I said, and I haven’t —
HANNITY: She won’t.
COULTER: — changed my mind, if the election were close and it’s between Hillary and McCain, I think Hillary would be better on national security.
HANNITY: She’s not — she doesn’t mean it. I’m telling — I know she would never do it. Never.
COLMES: She’s lying?
[crosstalk]
CARLSON: Wait, wait, wait, hold on.
COLMES: Are you calling her a liar?
HANNITY: No, she’s not lying; she’s [unintelligible] —
COLMES: Let me defend you —
CARLSON: Why would Hillary — why would Hillary protect America better than John McCain?
COULTER: Do you really want me to go through this again on Fox airwaves?
HANNITY: Answer this.
COULTER: ‘Cause they’re getting a little testy with me for making the case.
CARLSON: No, no. Who do you think the soldiers in Iraq would rather to see as their commander and chief?
COULTER: No, I understand we have spent 10 years building up a hatred for the Clintons. And frankly, when I endorsed her, I was secretly pleased that it seemed to kill her nomination.
However, she’s not obsessed with being called a maverick by The New York Times, like — oh, who could I think of? Yes, John McCain. She’s not obsessed with waterboarding and stopping waterboarding, and given the glint in her eye, I think she’d like torturing them. Have you seen that woman give a speech? I think she would enjoy torturing them at Guantánamo.
CARLSON: They play those at Gitmo.
COULTER: She doesn’t run around saying we’ve got to shut down Guantánamo. So I think I’ve just made the case. What do you have to say?
[…]
COULTER: I think the point is, the most important question right now is — is who it is John McCain chooses as his vice president. Because he may end up being the luckiest man in the world, running against this absolute racist Obama, as noted in my column —
[crosstalk]
COLMES: Wait, wait a minute, wait a minute. Why are you calling him a racist? Why are you calling him a racist?
COULTER: — or Hillary Clinton, who — I mean, he could — he could be the luckiest man in the world, liberal Republican —
COLMES: Why are you calling him a racist?
COULTER: Because we — the topic we were supposed to be talking about in this segment, Sean — my column this week. I’m the only person in America who has read Obama’s autobiography —
COLMES: You know, as a matter of fact —
COULTER: — and all he has a racial hair-trigger, he’s a complete loon. All he talks about is constantly being offended. And Mr. Unity attacks Sean Hannity and me.
COLMES: All right, you said in your piece —
[crosstalk]
COULTER: — and now we’re offended.
HANNITY: Me and you in the same sentence —
COLMES: Hold on, we only have a second left. You said, if only — you might want to take a peek at Obama and what he writes — "if only people had read ‘Mein Kampf’ … "
COULTER: Yeah.
COLMES: So in other words, he would be as dangerous as Hitler?
COULTER: No. He’s a dimestore Mein Kampf.
COLMES: Oh, he’s a two-bit Hitler?
COULTER: But yes. It is absolute racialist. If you read Mein Kampf —
COLMES: I see.
COULTER: — it’s all about his Germanic heritage. And this is — OK, go read it. If you don’t believe me —
COLMES: All right, I see.
COULTER: — you want to read the CliffsNotes version in my column.
COLMES: We should be as wary of Obama as they should have been of Hitler in Nazi Germany?
COULTER: If only people had read Mein Kampf.
COLMES: I just want to get you on the record. We will come right back.
She’s something else, in the quest of being ironic, cute and snarky, she’s basically destroying the Republican Party and running Conservative movement into the ratholes of America.
Pretty Lady, She is, stupid, but quite pretty. Like a poodle…..
Look what I found snooping around a particular controversial conservative talk radio host’s website.
That guy on the right is Michael Alan Weiner AKA Michael Savage.
Gee, I wonder, does McCain endorse Michael Savage’s hate speech that flows like a fountain on that show?
The reason why I ask this question is because, wasn’t it the Conservatives who want absolutely crazy over Senator Barack Obama’s Pastor?
Here is a nice sample of Michael Savage’s Hate speech… Click here
Transcript:
From the October 29 edition of Talk Radio Network’s The Savage Nation:
SAVAGE: Yee-haw! This is the America — this is the America that those Islamic-fascist, robe-wearing, throwback bums have never seen! Let’s get it on! Let’s bring it on! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Let’s get it on! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Wipe Hezbollah out of America! Cut the tentacles of Iran off! Cut the tentacles of that octopus off now! Get every hunter in America armed to the teeth! Throwback bastards! I’m so sick of them! I’m so sick of the brainwashing about Islam and Muslims and the Koran! Shove it! Shove it all! I’m sick of it!
Take the music off. I have never lived through a brainwashing like I’ve lived through for the last five years. Every day, another story sweet-selling Islam and the Koran. It goes in the face, it’s so counter-intuitive. Wherever you look on the Earth, there’s a bomb going off or a car going up in flames, and it’s Muslims screaming for the blood of Christians, or Jews, or anyone they hate. And every day we’re told the opposite here.
Everything we know to be true, we’re told, "Oh, don’t believe what your mind tells you, believe what the diversity trainers tell you. Believe what the government tells you. It’s a religion of peace." Well why don’t they prove it’s a religion of peace? Why don’t they put down their hateful little book for a few minutes, and tell us why, when we pick up their hateful little book — I can read chapter and verse, I can see what it says, in their book of hate.
It says that if you see a stranger, who is not a Muslim, either convert him or kill him. You want me to quote the Sutra? I’ll quote the Sutra! Page after page after page is about religion — a religion that teaches convert or kill. A religion that says oppress women, kill homosexuals, kill the Jew, kill the Christian, kill the infidel.
Page after page after page, and we’re supposed to sit here and listen to this rubbish about a religion of peace, and every day Bush brings in thousands of more of these throwbacks — throwbacks wearing medieval costumes, walking around, spitting on the ground every time they see a Christian, or a Jew, or a so-called infidel. These throwbacks think they’re better than you underneath it all, and 90 percent of them are on welfare. Ninety percent of them come in here, and all they do is breed more bombers. More bombers, and more bombers! And you’re telling me this is a sane country? There, I gave it to you from the bottom of my heart. If you don’t like it, it’s too damn bad. Go write the FCC. Marlene in Los Angeles, you’re on The Savage Nation.
I just wonder, does John McCain support this sort of thing?
Randy Rhodes, Liberal Talk Show Host and suspected Lesbian and/or sex change recipient, was suspended was calling Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro "Big F*****g whores".
Official statement from Air America Radio:
Air America has suspended on-air host Randi Rhodes for making inappropriate statements about prominent figures, including Senator Hillary Clinton, at a recent public appearance on behalf of Air America in San Francisco which was sponsored by an Air America affiliate station.
"Air America encourages strong opinions about public affairs but does not condone such abusive, ad hominem language by our Hosts," said chair Charlie Kireker.
Turns out, Kireker is a Hillary supporter. From what I have read, there is anger amongst Liberals about it too.
To be fair, Rhodes was not on her show, when she made these comments, she was at a personal appearance. Someone recorded it and it was posted to YouTube.
Of course, now at Huffpo, someone is calling John McCain a whore now too. Hey, At least they’re fair.
![]()
Others: NY Daily News, Shakesville, Hot Air, Taylor Marsh, Liberal Values, NO QUARTER, skippy the bush kangaroo, Don Surber and The Democratic Daily and more via Memeorandum