Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
yikes, you guys are scared. Very interesting.
I liked it. Satire, kept above the belt, is fine for politics.
I’m looking forward to the VP debates. It will be interesting.
ROTF.
Not scared, for now too busy laughing our asses off.
Yes the veepquest is under attack by the leftist MSM.
“People who talk about bias in the mainstream press, left of center bias, are not imagining things. It has to do with the kind of people who go into journalism, okay? So I’m not arguing with that general notion. I think that those of us in journalism have to do our best to try to present the most objective view we can of what we have, but everybody brings their own filter into it.” – from John Harwood, CNBC’s chief Washington Correspondent.
Yet last night good old Wolfie Blitzer said: “We want you to see, to get a feeling for what it’s like to be here whether you agree with what they’re saying or not.”
Funny Wolfie – where was that line last week?
Anderson Cooper is a registered Democrat.
Jeanie Moos is a registered Democrat.
Gloria Borger is a registered Democrat.
Jeanne Meserve is a registered Democrat.
Suzanne Malveaux is a registered Democrat.
Soledad O’Brien is a registered Democrat.
Yes, CNN really objective!
Did you know dozens of media people were seen chanting the Obama DOnkey slogans last Thursday at the convention? Yep, they are objective.
Well at least the veepquest doesn’t have to worry about jimmy Cahhhhrter”. I guess you all missed Jimmy Carter calling Obama “black boy” Well, at least Biden called him clean and articulate.
antihippies.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/jimmy-carter-calls-barack-obama-a-black-boy/
Yes, the veepquest continues to the chagrin of the lefty MSM:
“The question, can a mother of five, including an infant with Downs Syndrome, be an effective vice president?” – Maggie Rodriguez, CBS Early Show Co-host.
“She has five children. One has Downs Syndrome. You have a child with Downs Syndrome, right Congresswoman?…That — special needs requires more attention. Does that factor into this at all?” – Maggie Rodriguez, CBS Early Show Co-host.
Does this mean Michelle Obama will take care of the two girls exclusively if Barack wins the white house?
Take about sexism, I thought the Donkey were against sexism? Well, if it only applies to donkey in politics.
*yawn*
point that same partisan wand at
faux news, kemosabe.
Puddy @ 4
Objectivity with regard to politics and public policy leads people to become Democrats. There is not a scrap of rationality left in the contemporary Republican Party. Just witness the fawning over Sarah Palin. Thanks for the amusement you provide, though.
The Republican Party of my father’s generation would never have stooped to the kind of whining that we hear today about the “liberal media” and how Republicans are a bunch of victims. It’s kind of pathetic.
Dutch
“Scared”? While my first inclination is to chuckle and ask what you’ve been smoking, another thought came to mind.
Yes, you may be right. I am scared.
Much as I would like to think that this election is a shoe in for any Democrat, and that with an inspiring leader like Senator Obama, we couldn’t possibly lose, I realize that there is still a large group of folks that believe that:
1. Businesses should not be held accountable by government, but groups of workers that get together to influence business practices should be restricted or forbidden by government.
2. “Freedom of religion” means the right to belong to any evangelical Christian denomination
3. “Leadership” means the desire to go to war
4. “Fiscal responsibility” means letting their grandchildren pay off their debts
5. “Energy policy” means getting cheaper gasoline
6. “Environmental policy” is making sure the oil slicks don’t mess up their private beaches, and that global climate change is a leftist plot.
7. The Constitution only applies when it is safe or convenient.
8. “Liberty” means the right to agree with them.
While there are many, myself included, that believe that “irregularities” in the last two Presidential elections may have changed the outcome, there is no doubt that the elections were close. Lots of Americans seem to agree with those ideas, although they certainly phrase them differently.
They talk about “a Christian nation” and a “positive business climate” and listen to folks that tell them what they want to hear, rather than the truth.
They convince others that the world is such a scary place that we cannot afford follow the precepts laid down in the Constitution, and need “strong leadership” that is willing to break laws in order to “keep us safe”.
There are still enough of those folks around to keep the neo-cons in the running.
Am I scared? Yes.
You see, my side believes in the rule of law. We believe in fair, open and honest debate. We believe in letting the people (even the folks that actually vote for neo-cons) choose our leaders.
We don’t use tactics like pre-programmed voting machines, voter suppression, intimidation, “caging”, or any of the other illegal tactics that the neo-cons have shown themselves to be experts in.
We’re not good at the tactics of personal smears and phony “truth” groups, and despite the continued claims of the neo-cons, most of the news media are owned by large businesses with a decidedly conservative leaning.
(Some of the conservatives that own broadcast networks and newspapers are reasonably honest folks, and simply insist that news be disseminated honestly. This is what the neo-cons call the “liberal media”.)
So yes. I’m scared of Governor Palin.
It’s frightening that someone that fired her town librarian for refusing to ban books from the public library may be elected as Vice President to the oldest first-term President in history. I’m scared that a person that used her office to retaliate against her sister’s ex-husband might end up running the executive branch of the United States government. I’m afraid that the person choosing the next couple of Supreme Court justices is a person that believes that her brand of religion should be taught in the public schools.
And I’m scared of a major party that seems to believe that the Constitution of the United States is just a “scrap of paper”, and is willing to do anything to stay in power.
#10. Great post. A great summation.
@1 You’d be scared, too, if our party did what your party just did. This is our country, too. Never in my life have I ever before seen such appalling irresponsibility from an entire political party as the GOP now exhibits on a daily basis. The willingness of some voters to support that party and its asinine candidates dumbfounds me. Is half the country (i.e., the GOP-voting half) taking stupid pills? It seems so.
Hilarious because it’s likely TRUE! He didn’t want her but she was foisted on him. She’s not worthy of this office but here we are. I think Sarah (who didn’t show up for 4, count ’em 4 debates for governor and when she did show had color-coded index cards for her answers) is going to be vastly entertaining in her debate with Biden (that is, if she shows up).
And again, don’t care if it’s a male or female or what their personal issues are but if a candidate has too much on his or her personal plate, they shouldn’t be running. She does and as a mother (and God help me I’m agreeing with Dr. Laura here), her kids need her…now. She has a baby with Down’s syndrome. You don’t just hand that off to a nanny. She’s got a knocked-up 17-year old who’s marrying her boyfriend who says (on My Space) that he doesn’t want kids (no shotgun wedding there). How is she going to be so supportive of her daughter, the marriage and this baby if she’s thousands of miles away in D.C.?
This and no real experience? Please.
Frankly, if Americans want to elect her because she looks like them, then they should do it. We’ll be the laughing stock of the world and our nation will fall further in decline but hey, if all you look for in a VP is someone who fires a gun and is a hockey mom, then vote for her.
Sarah Palin is the new Alan Keyes. He’s a “black guy” the Republicans in Illinois got to try to run against Obama for the Illinois Senate. The Illinois Republicans assumed that black people only voted for Obama because he was black, obviously not because of what he said or did. So if THEY had a black guy too, they’d win, or at least get 50% of the black vote. That did not go well. And Alan Keyes is a footnote today. Now McCain thinks he can get the Hillary voters, because hell, Palin is a woman, and that’s the only reason Hillary’s supporters liked her. It wasn’t her positions on universal health care, reproductive rights, GLBT issues, nope…it was just because she had breasts. So obviously they’ll vote for Palin now. ROTFLMAO
Yes, westello, tell us how Karl Rove was involved?
Tell me Obama’s “real” experience?
When is someone’s daughter in the equation?
Only when they are running against your “messiah” right?
13
I’ve heard about the cue cards at the gubernatorial debate. The debate must have been televised. You haven’t found a link to it, have you?
Gov. Oink: Biggest Earmark Pig Of All
Turns out Gov. Palin pursued the nation’s highest per capita earmarks for her state — a state with no state taxes, huge budget surpluses, and which sends checks to its residents. Oink oink.
And when she was mayor of Wasilli, the little town of 8,000 inhabitants got $27 million of federal largesse, which amounts to over $3,000 per person. Oink oink.
This is too much even for Seattle’s Republican newspaper. The Times says today,
” …[E]armarks … have become a mainstay of political life here, and one that Palin embraced from early on in her career …
“Just this year, she sent to Sen. Ted. Stevens, R-Alaska, a proposal for 31 earmarks totaling $197 million — more, per person, than any other state. …
“Palin’s requests to Congress came at a time of huge federal deficits, while Alaska state revenue was soaring due to rising oil prices and a major tax increase on oil production that Palin signed into law in late 2007.
“As a result, Alaska this year was in such a money-flushed condition — with no state income tax or sales tax and total state revenues of $10 billion, double the previous year’s — that Palin gained legislative approval for $1,200 cash payments to every Alaskan.
“In addition, each Alaska resident gets an annual dividend check, about $2,000 this year, from Alaska’s oil-wealth savings account, known as the Permanent Fund, now fattened to more than $35 billion.
“The state also has been able to tap into a gusher of federal money as its Republican congressional delegation rose in seniority and clout. …
“‘She was hungry for earmarks just like everybody else,’ said Larry Persily, who worked at the Alaska state office in Washington, D.C., until earlier this year. ‘Everyone was feeding at the trough.’
“Before she left office, Wasilla, with aid of the lobbyist and the blessing of Stevens and Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, got $27 million in earmarks, according to the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense.”
(Quoted under fair use.)
On the McCain ads at the top….
What the hell is a Compliance Fund? The Republicans playing tricks with money? Anyone know?
John Barelli – nice to see you today:
John, those are the facts from one liberal discussing other liberals. Those are their registrations. Scary huh?
“We need a president who doesn’t think that the protection of the unborn or a newly born baby is above his pay grade,” Thompson said.
1. Businesses should not be held accountable by government, but groups of workers that get together to influence business practices should be restricted or forbidden by government.
I’m sure you’ll discuss this thought with the Shaw Group and the multiple companies owned by Richard C. Blum – you know the guy who’s company didn’t fix the Walter Reed Army Medical Center problems? I posted those links many months ago.
2. “Freedom of religion” means the right to belong to any evangelical Christian denomination
Really John. Where in the platform does that “appear”?
“We need a president who doesn’t think that the protection of the unborn or a newly born baby is above his pay grade,” – Fred Thompson
3. “Leadership” means the desire to go to war.
Wait a minute, last week Obama said he’ll end the war in Iraq and go to war in Afghanistan agains the taliban.
“Senator Obama is a gifted and eloquent young man who I think can do great things for our country in the years ahead. But eloquence is no substitute for a record — not in these tough times. “In the Senate …. he has not reached across party lines to accomplish anything significant, nor has he been willing to take on powerful interest groups in the Democratic Party to get something done.” – Joe Lieberman. I guess he witnessed it.
“When others were silent, John McCain had the guts and the judgment to sound the alarm about the mistakes we were making in Iraq. When others wanted to retreat in defeat from the field of battle … when colleagues like Barack Obama were voting to cut off funding for American troops on the battlefield, John McCain had the courage to stand against the tide of public opinion, advocate the surge.” – Joe Lieberman
4. “Fiscal responsibility” means letting their grandchildren pay off their debts.
Yes I already documented the 6 tax increases Obama plans. Also how many earmarks did Obama accept John?
“Now, our opponents tell us not to worry about their tax increases. They tell you they’re not going to tax your family. (Laughter.) No, they’re just going to tax “businesses.” So, unless you buy something from a business, like groceries or clothes or gasoline or unless you get a paycheck from a business, a big business or a small business, don’t worry, it’s not going to affect you! They say they’re not going to take any water out of your side of the bucket, just the other side of the bucket! That’s their idea of tax reform.” – Fred Thompson
5. “Energy policy” means getting cheaper gasoline
You mean drill like T Boone Pickens says? Use NG like T. Boone Pickens says?
6. “Environmental policy” is making sure the oil slicks don’t mess up their private beaches, and that global climate change is a leftist plot.
When has there been an oil slick caused by drilling John? McCain supports the war on climate change. Did you miss the memo?
7. The Constitution only applies when it is safe or convenient.
Now this is a strange on John.
8. “Liberty” means the right to agree with them.
You mean the belt-way Donkey? “Some Washington pundits and media big shots are in a frenzy over the selection of a woman who has actually governed rather than just talked a good game on the Sunday talk shows and hit the Washington cocktail circuit. I say give me a tough Alaskan Governor who has taken on the political establishment in the largest state in the union — and won — over the beltway business-as-usual crowd any day of the week.” – Fred Thompson
I received an A in my Psych 101 class, so I think that qualifies me to make the observation that perhaps some of the animosity on this blog toward Palin is rooted in the fact that fact that no females have posting privileges here.
McCain, your avowed enemy, the embodiment of all that is evil and wrong in America, is more progressive than you! He’ll share power with a woman, but you people won’t. That makes you angry, doesn’t it? Could it be that her being on the ticket is a subconscious reminder of your own latent sexism? But it’s easier to denounce her than it is to explore your deeper feelings on this subject, isn’t it?
I struck a nerve, didn’t I?
“Barack Obama and his sycophants are caught in their own irony. They have become exactly what they purported to despise: Threatening, lowlife fascists, misogynists and sexists.”
Puddy,
I am surprised at your lack of intellectual honesty. You want to fashion statements from thin air and innuendo and call them puddy-facts. Then you turn around and purport to “destroy” a finely written piece by John B. (Who I think should be a contributor here at HA) and accuse him of manufacturing what I suppose you would call “JohnB-facts”.
Every point John made in post 10 is valid and documented. Period.
You should be ashamed since you have no honor.
How bad are things going for obama?
He’s going on o’reilly’s show thursday.
Not too long ago obama along with other democrats didn’t want to have debates on faux so not to give them any credence as a legitimate news source.
“Roger Rabbit spews:
Doesn’t she have young kids? Why doesn’t she stay home to raise her children? Palin is a bad mom!
08/29/2008 at 11:50 am “
The left smear machine at work….
Hating women, trying to put them back in the box, at home with the kids………
Way to go Roger, you are a real inspiration to advancing women’s causes…..
BTW, now that DB has lost her home to fire and has children that need mothering, shouldn’t she now withdrawl from the race?
@17
Funny….I don’t recall a mayor EVER securing earmarks as they are a function of the US Congress.
Nice try……
Oh and yes, it is always a good thing, when there is a budget surplus to give the money back to the people it belongs too…..
Or should the state just keep it comrade?
Sarah Palin is a fraud. Period. End of discussion. She is not qualified to be the deputy mayor of Seattle, never mind the Vice President of the United States.
Anyone who would argue otherwise is a fool. And the sad part is they know it. The quest for power, or to cling to that power, has caused some otherwise good men to absolutely lose all sense of propriety, decency and honor. And furthermore, they know it.
Sarah Palin will prove to be the icing on the cake of McSame’s undoing. I am not scared of Palin, I am laughing at the foolishness of her selection and the coming landslide that will bury the Republican party for the next two generations.
Thank you, John McCain, for allowing your poor judgment to cloud what is left of your better sense.
Did you see where Roger Rabbit said that mothers with young children belong at home, not the workplace, but that doesn’t apply to fathers with young children, because “they make more money” than the average woman?
Amazing.
25 my left foot
seconded.
Sarah Palin = Alan Keyes
John McCain = George W. Bush
23 Obama on OReilly???
Really. This sounds like a scene from the Gladiators.
I wonder if Palin will show up on Oberman?
20 Troll
HAs lack of a feminine presence
1. everyone has posting priv. here .. and if you can tell gender from an IP address you are a better woman than I am.
2. True nuff, too few women seem to get involved ion blogging here or at SP. Hmmm .. maybe we need affirmative action?
3. Do lesbians and male transexuals count as females?
My Left Foot: Good to see you are feeling well today. Don’t stress out the ticker now.
John Barelli, who I really do love and would break bread with over lunch or dinner is using his Eight “Points” to skew his argument.
If we can’t debate facts and all we do is delve into innuendo, where does this put us? Obama has made come caustic claims on taxes, going to war against the Taliban, environmental policy, allowing aborted but fully alive out of the womb babies to die, sucking out the brains of babies so they die in the last trimester, etc.
Since John wants to make the claim the MSM isn’t lefty biased after I prove once again their voting registrations, this shows ignorance on his part.
I can go on but my good friend SeattleJew will have some anti-Puddy comments so I can’t waste all my ammo yet.
Also My Left Foot, I posted many of these things on HA in yestermonths.
SeattleJew: regarding women posters
FricknFrack, Jennie Tlaz, Horse Whisperer, Priscilla (ain’t westello a woman too.) are lefties.
Tlaz and FricknFrack still won’t answer why they were brought up to hate blacks. Tsk Tsk Tsk.
HowCanYouBeProudtoBeAnAss, and ChristmasGhost on the right.
Puddy @ 31
If we can’t debate facts and all we do is delve into innuendo, where does this put us?
I have no problem with debating the facts, just so long as we’re careful to distinguish between facts and opinions. For example, a conclusion is not a fact. It’s an opinion.
Obama has made come caustic claims on taxes, going to war against the Taliban, environmental policy, allowing aborted but fully alive out of the womb babies to die, sucking out the brains of babies so they die in the last trimester, etc.
Not one of the statements you make in that paragraph is a statement of fact. They are all conclusions and interpretations of fact.
Now, some of them might actually be reasonable conclusions (though I doubt it), they are not independently verifiable facts.
If you’re going to demand that we discuss facts, then it really behooves you to know the difference between an actual statement of fact and a statement of opinion.
Has olbermann ever had someone on the show that disagreed with him?
Follow the money.
Of course John isn’t going to admit the obvious liberal bias (what, no mention of Biden’s daughter being arrested years ago??) in the media.
I think Lee explained it well…
@19 Puddy .. in case you are not just being a troll
Rep policies in its.
1. Businesses should not be held accountable by government, but groups of workers that get together to influence business practices should be restricted or forbidden by government.
Yoour reposponse did not comment on this. In the reform agenda of the Palin-MCain GOP. exctly where does it say we need to reform the obvious messes in areas of business like banking and health?
As for unions, do you think the disappearance of unions in the US is a good thing?
2. “Freedom of religion” means the right to belong to any evangelical Christian denomination
Exaggeration aside, surely you are concerned that Dobson has so much power. Do yo approve of mandatory religion in our military. Creationism?
“We need a president who doesn’t think that the protection of the unborn or a newly born baby is above his pay grade,” – Fred Thompson
As opposed to someone arrogant enough to feel ashe knows all the answers cuz God speaks to her pastor?
3. “Leadership” means the desire to go to war.
Puddy says:
Wait a minute, last week Obama said he’ll end the war in Iraq and go to war in Afghanistan agains the taliban.
OK, so??? As I recall we were attacked by the Taliban. Doesn’t that suggest we have good reason to end their business?
OTOH, as one of the more rational folks I know, what do YOU think we should do about S. Ossetia?
“When others were silent, John McCain had the guts and the judgment to sound the alarm about the mistakes we were making in Iraq. When others wanted to retreat in defeat from the field of battle … when colleagues like Barack Obama were voting to cut off funding for American troops on the battlefield, John McCain had the courage to stand against the tide of public opinion, advocate the surge.” – Joe Lieberman
There is some truth here, BUT Obama’s main issue was the lack of strategy for why we were surging .. aconcern shared by Adm Zini and Gen Petraeus, publically, and since.
One thing to note is the mazing dearth of recent retired gen staff, including Colin POwell, in the McC camp. Why is this?
4. “Fiscal responsibility” means letting their grandchildren pay off their debts.
Puddy Yes I already documented the 6 tax increases Obama plans. Also how many earmarks did Obama accept John?
That is not responsive. The issue of the long term debt is very real and McC has made NO proposals to deal with it. Why do you suppose that Oneil, Rubin, and Buffett support Obama?
Actually, McC is FOS on this one. First earmarks are a problme but the total in dollars is too small to have much effect on serious problems. Second, somehow his state still gets more than its share of earmarks ,, that is why it has two senators! Has McC EVER voted against an earmark for AZ?
“Now, our opponents tell us not to worry about their tax increases. They tell you they’re not going to tax your family. (Laughter.) No, they’re just going to tax “businesses.” So, unless you buy something from a business, like groceries or clothes or gasoline or unless you get a paycheck from a business, a big business or a small business, don’t worry, it’s not going to affect you! They say they’re not going to take any water out of your side of the bucket, just the other side of the bucket! That’s their idea of tax reform.” – Fred Thompson
Guess why the Fredster is no longer in government? He know nothing about economics. FWIW, the NY Tomes had a through analysis of Obama-omics. you and Fred ought to read it.
5. “Energy policy” means getting cheaper gasoline
You mean drill like T Boone Pickens says? Use NG like T. Boone Pickens says?
Hmm .. do you mean TBP the Republican?
Drilling will not solve much if anything and leing to the public about that is evil.
6. “Environmental policy” is making sure the oil slicks don’t mess up their private beaches, and that global climate change is a leftist plot.
When has there been an oil slick caused by drilling John?
Puddy says:
McCain supports the war on climate change. Did you miss the memo?
Puddy, again are you being a Troll or maybe making fun of the Reps? WADR to McC, saying he is in support of this is a hell of a lot different then criticizing his predecessor or proposing policies of his own.
7. The Constitution only applies when it is safe or convenient.
Now this is a strange on John.
Gonzales
Bush’s inscriptions
suspension of habeus corpus
etc etc
Pussy cites : You mean the belt-way Donkey? “Some Washington pundits and media big shots are in a frenzy over the selection of a woman who has actually governed rather than just talked a good game on the Sunday talk shows and hit the Washington cocktail circuit. I say give me a tough Alaskan Governor who has taken on the corrupt Republican political establishment in the largest state in the union by land mass— and won despite the opposition of us old boys in the GOP— over the beltway business-as-usual crowd any day of the week.” – Fred Thompson
Inserts are enough. Her own behavior in the town, BTW was pretty bad too.
You mean a fact like “Congress shall pass no law” that you didn’t want to debate yesterday?
@35 .. GOOD question! I do not know who Olberman has interviewed do you?
Surely, a bright girl like you doesn’t think there is any intellectual content in an interview with BillO?
Or maybe Paylin wants to go on Bill Maher? He certainly has had folks who disgree with him and is one hell of a lot more respectful that the thugs on Faux.
31 …
Given the choice between the Dobson, creationist, millenialist, glocal warming denier and the dems, what party do you think most educated folks would join?
Political chatter is one thing, but folks like Limbaugh, O’Reilly’ Bush Jr, Hannity, Dobson and their ilk are so far off of any rational plane that the issue in not R vs L, it is ane vs insane.
Look, McC’s bizar choice was apparently done because the Maverick was cowed by the rafical republican bosses. These guys are not Nazi’s but they do represent an unreaosning, possibly fatal crew who could destry this country.
Given our unwritten constitution there is no real prospect of a third party. So the BEST reason for voting for the few sane Repricans out there may be to block the formation of a single party government.
Until a moderate wing re-emerges, why would any sane person wnat to call themselves a Repub?
I’m amused by all the “you must be scared” projection by the wingnuts. After being lead around by their short hairs by the “fear card” Bush/Cheney/Rove admin. no wonder they see the world through the fear prism.
at 38
You mean a fact like “Congress shall pass no law” that you didn’t want to debate yesterday?
You were debating something? Last I knew, you were intent on displaying your ignorance. Did you want me to aid and abet you in that effort?
@34 All good points, Don Joe!
Do you ever make it to DL?
Bet this’ll give you trolls woodies (assuming you’ve taken your Viagra today, of course). If this photo is real, she’s a joke.
40454_palinqueen_122_828lo.jpg
DavidS @ 43
Do you ever make it to DL?
I haven’t gone, and, between family and work obligations, it’s difficult for me to go. Moreover, I’m afraid most of you would find a tea totaler like me to be fabulously boring.
Sorry, this link should work: thebruceblog.files.wordpress .com/2008/08/palinqueen.jpg
@45 That’s too bad.I haven’t gone, and, between family and work obligations, it’s difficult for me to go.
Oh, that’s too bad. Maybe we could link up some time?
PL @ 46
That image is a photoshop composite. Take a look at this image. Her facial expression and hair are the mirror image of the facial expression and hair in the image you linked.
Puddy
SJ has covered most of your points pretty well, but there’s one more that you keep making about the media.
Yes, some reporters are Democrats. Others are Republicans and still others are independents. While some here would disagree with me, I think this speaks well for the rather traditional conservatives that are in ownership positions in the various media outlets.
If the MSM were truly as biased as the right claims, we would be getting regular recaps of the Keating five case, questions about Senator McCain’s behavior while a POW, lots of stories about his cheating on his wife, etc…
Additionally, we would have heard nothing about Rev Wright, and the “bitter” remark would never have even seen the light of day.
Some pundits are openly biased. No surprise there. I expect neither Keith Olbermann nor Bill O’Reilly to be unbiased, as they are essentially commentators and make no secret of it. (Although Keith at least makes an attempt to check his facts, while BillO seems to just make them up as he goes.)
Certainly, reporters are being far more skeptical than they were while President Bush and the neo-cons were pushing for war. They’re no longer willing to be cheerleaders for the neo-cons (I hope).
But if anything, the MSM seems to be going pretty easy on Senator McCain and Governor Palin. There’s been surprisingly little coverage of the family issues of the “family values” candidates.
The MSM seems unwilling to probe an area that is being touted by the right. It’s ok for the Republicans to bring up what a “wonderful mother” Governor Palin is, and what a loving husband Senator McCain is, but saying anything that challenges those images is “off limits” and irresponsible.
Of course, “media bias” has long been a complaint from anyone (liberal or conservative) that didn’t like what was being written or said about them.
And the more accurate the information, the louder the claims of bias. If you cannot refute the message, the only option left is to shoot the messenger.
How desperate are you that you have to post obvious fakes.
I wasn’t really debating, I was pointing out the flaw in your argument.
So, did you find any laws that congress passed yet?
John @ 49
The problem with the main-stream media is that they simply haven’t done their job. Bill Moyers (who some here are going to accuse of being a liberal) has actually done a decent job of documenting the extent to which they haven’t done their job.
Now, if the media aren’t actually doing their job, it’s possible to find instances where their failure to live up to their full potential results in a story that’s biased against conservative points of view, but that’s no more proof of a pervasive liberal bias than the extent to which Crooks and Liars have documented opposite instances constitute proof of a pervasive conservative bias.
And, ultimately, you’re correct. Simply throwing around the charge of “liberal bias” is meaningless. If there is, in fact, a bias in the reporting of a given story, then the way to correct that bias is to point out what facts are missing in such a way as to show how the story is changed.
at 51
I wasn’t really debating, I was pointing out the flaw in your argument.
You were certainly trying to point out a flaw in my reasoning. I think you are alone in your belief that you actually succeeded. For example:
So, did you find any laws that congress passed yet?
The premise behind your question is flawed. We’re not talking about statutory law, so there shouldn’t be any reason to expect me to find a law passed by congress addressing the issue.
Don Joe
I assumed it was a fake, but given how crazy she is, I had some doubt, which is telling.
TIME’s Joe Klein has a piece that’s both relevant to Gov. Palin and the discussion about bias in the media.
Campbell Brown’s takedown of Tucker Brown is something we on the left have been wanting the media to do for years. I’d laugh at the umbrage that the McCain camp is taking to this sort of thing if the attempt at coercion weren’t so nauseating.
I just heard that Sarah Palin is involved in a longterm relationship with a goat. In her defense, the two are committed to each other with plans to eventually marry, and, as we all know, the Republican platform does advocate the legalization of goatfucking, so at least she’s not hypocritical.
Don Joe:
So you want to debate. Well you have to leave Kurse, DUmmys and Stikny Progressive to start:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbZJYWjkAPo
I don’t want my daughters “PUNISHED” with a baby – Barack Obama
Sure we’re scared of Sarah Palin. We’re scared about the questions that are still open regarding her role in troopergate, her lack of experience, her connections to the AIP, her history of earmarking and lobbyists, and so on. But we can’t get answers to these questions, because the GOP is in full-throated indignant scream mode regarding the pregnancy THEY announced to the world.
Cowardly, cum-drunk Puddylicker tends to roll that way — you know, suing people for saying mean things about his wife, blaming the media because his party looooooses…he should just call 1-800-crybaby! Do it now bitch!
Don Joe:
So you want to debate.
Do you remember The federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act? It passed unanimously in the U.S. Senate and overwhelmingly in the U.S. House. Sens. Kennedy and Boxer even spoke in support on the Senate floor. NARAL expressed neutrality.
Your “messiah” Obama actively opposed nearly identical legislation in Illinois. He was the sole state senator to speak against Illinois’ Born Alive two years in a row.
In 2003, Your “messiah” Obama single-handedly stopped identical legislation to the federal Born Alive Act from being introduced in the Illinois Senate as chairman of the committee vetting the bill.
Stay tuned Don Joe…
Puddy @ 57
You’re making absolutely no sense whatsoever. Are you expecting me to be shocked by a single sentence taken out of context, or do you want to debate the point that Obama’s making–namely that the most important step to dealing with teen pregnancy is education–or are you only interested in pissing and moaning about sound-bytes?
So Don Joe, I guess by your and other’s reckoning any baby who survive an abortion are not afforded protection by the US Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause?
Puddy @ 60
First of all, can the “Messiah” crap. It’s bullshit, and you know it. That, alone, tells me that you’re clearly not interested in any form of well-reasoned debate.
Secondly, if all you’re going to do is crack open a can of the old Puddy Parade of Partial Punditry, then we’re not having a well-reasoned debate. I’m not going to get into a shouting match with someone who is clearly not interested in reviewing all of the relevant facts.
Regarding the particular Illinois legislation you reference above, would it not be appropriate to consider Obama’s reasoning and justification for his vote? If you think that’s not relevant, then you’re not debating the facts.
Puddy @ 62
So Don Joe, I guess by your and other’s reckoning any baby who survive an abortion are not afforded protection by the US Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause?
No. Frankly, your question has absolutely nothing to do with what Obama’s talking about.
How is the sentence being taken out of context? He’d want his daughter to abort.
I am talking about his positions such as his statements in #60
On March 5, 2002 at the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee , “messiah” Obama stated:
“What we are doing here is to create one more burden on women, and I can’t support that.”
So Don Joe you support aborted babies who are viable outside the womb to be shelved to die so they wouldn’t be burdensome to mothers? Think about all those who want to adopt because they are barren. That’s the “messiah’s” stand.
They you go again Don Joe. You care less about an aborted viable outside the womb baby. He was asked about this in May and when caught he pulled the same blabbering as he did with Rick Warren at Saddleback.
@60 “So you want to debate.”
Hmm, this might be good.
@61 “Are you expecting me to be shocked by a single sentence taken out of context”
Yes, that was quite good. Oh, well, so much for Pudnuts.
But when you dig deeper into what the “messiah” said
“The bill was unnecessary in Illinois and was introduced for political reasons”.
You see Don Joe, the “messiah” Obama was caught in a lie. The federal law which he opposed in Illinois was crafted very similarly.
Federal paragraph (c): Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section.
Illinois’ paragraph (c): A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.
This is where the Equal Clause of the Constitution comes in. Glad I could clarify it for you Don Joe.
Of course Don Joe doesn’t want to debate the facts. I stated Obama’s words direct from his mouth.
But to Don Joe when I put forth what obama said and his lie or flip-flop I’m engaging in “Puddy Parade of Partial Punditry”
Yessireeeee deflect, conflate, reject the truth!
Peggy Noonan and Mike Murphy talking when they thought the mike was off:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrG8w4bb3kg
What a thing of beauty – they know that they are totally screwed!
“It’s over.”
Looks like they are off of their talking points!
Now onto taxes Don Joe.
Obama is going to raise taxes. BIG TIME
John: when is 86% of them “some”?
We have John. Check URLs besides the horse manure from bybygoober.
I was kudoed by SeattleJew when I proved lefty lawyer Robert Bennett wanted to remove John McCain from the Keating 5 except it was the lefty group Common Cause that raised a ruckus over the Keating 4 being all Donkeys. Did you miss the memo John?
His POW life has been pilloried earlier this year John.
When John Edwards was caught with his boxer shorts around his knees there were “journalists” who reminded us of Newt Gingrich and John McCain.
@70 “Yessireeeee deflect, conflate, reject the truth!”
No shit, Pudnut. Project much?
Bill Moyers is a big time liberal on National Progressive Radio. I guess you missed his softballs when he interviewed Dr Jeremiah KKK Amerikkka Wright.
Puddy @ 68
“The bill was unnecessary in Illinois and was introduced for political reasons” — Barak Obama
So, the fact is, that Obama voted against the law, because he thought it was an unnecessary political ploy that placed an additional burden on women. Regardless of whether or not you think his assessment of the law is correct, you do have to give him credit for placing principle over politics.
Puddy @ 69
The federal law which he opposed in Illinois was crafted very similarly.
That sentence makes no sense. He opposed a proposed Illinois law in Illinois that was similar to a federal law that he supported as a member of the Senate.
This is where the Equal Clause of the Constitution comes in.
Actually, that would be the Equal Protection clause of the XIVth Amendment to the Constitution, and, no, that clause doesn’t come into play merely because Obama opposed a state law that had similar wording to the wording of a Federal law that Obama supported. You haven’t clarified anything. Indeed, you’ve muddied the waters, which, I suspect, is your objective.
By the way, if you insist on referring to Obama as the “messiah,” please allow me to make it clear that I do not consider, and never have considered, Obama to be any form of “messiah.” Your use of the term is pure ad-hominem, and has no place in a debate that’s based on facts.
Steve HAs Biggest ASSHole – prove to the world Obama didn’t say those things.
Oh you can’t because they are public record.
Hey Don Joe ever heard of Dan Radmacher?
http://bigsaltlick.blogspot.co.....acher.html
Hey Don Joe ever heard of Dan Radmacher?
bigsaltlick.blogspot.com/2005/04/yes-its-that-dan-radmacher.html
Puddy @ 70
But to Don Joe when I put forth what obama said and his lie or flip-flop I’m engaging in “Puddy Parade of Partial Punditry”
If you deliberately omit a material fact, that’s a lie, Puddy. When you cite only some of the relevant facts, I am at least giving you credit for being ignorant as opposed to calling you an outright liar (I reserve that distinction for Pudge).
But debating only some of the facts isn’t debating the facts. It’s pure obfuscation and diversion. It tells me that you aren’t interested in a well-reasoned debate, hence my moniker of the “Puddy Parade of Partial Punditry.”
Puddy @ 71
Obama is going to raise taxes. BIG TIME
Yup. On me, though most likely not on you.
You have a better way to address our spending deficit without sacrificing essential government services? I certainly hope you do, because John McCain hasn’t provided any cogent plan for doing so.
@77 “HAs Biggest ASSHole”
Why do you keep flattering me? Haven’t you noticed that it’s not getting you anywhere?
Puddy @ 78
So, you’re taking sarcasm as fact? If your goal is to prove to us that you don’t understand the difference between fact and opinion, I have to say that you’re succeeding quite well in that effort.
I haven’t gone, and, between family and work obligations, it’s difficult for me to go.
Don Joe, I’m curious – what do you do?
@ 82
Don Joe, I’m curious – what do you do?
My official title is “Principal Software Development Engineer.” Is that a fair and complete enough answer?
71. Puddybud spews:
Now onto taxes Don Joe.
Obama is going to raise taxes. BIG TIME
You forgot to finish the sentence. It should have read “Obama is going to raise taxes. BIG TIME…..on people making more than $200k a year.
My official title is “Principal Software Development Engineer.” Is that a fair and complete enough answer?
I suspect they’re are lots of techies on this board (including me!). What type of software/products, if I may ask?
@ 85
Office productivity.
Office productivity.
Too much (so am I). I also have difficulty making DL because of schedule. Are you on the east side?
@ 87
Are you on the east side?
It’s not clear whether you’re asking about my work or my residence, but the answer for both is “Yes.” Jay Inslee is my Representative on Congress.
No Obama is going to raise taxes big time – period.
When you tax a corp who pays in the end?
Don Joe:
Results 1 – 10 of about 2,350,000 for Obama Messiah
Almost all of them leftist
It’s not clear whether you’re asking about my work or my residence, but the answer for both is “Yes.” Jay Inslee is my Representative on Congress.
Sorry, I’m multi-tasking. I can’t get to DL easily but can hook up on the east side depending on my schedule (I travel a lot).
How about lunch sometime (sort of a mini DL!).
Wow Don Joe@76 you are spinning this over and over.
Those were his words then he tries to say he didn’t say it and you gloss over it. He was the only Illinois senator to vote negative.
But digging more: 1999 – Obama was the only Illinois State Senator to vote against a bill barring early release for incarcerated sex offenders.
Hmmm…? That’s bybygoobers favrit blogging item.
@89 No Obama is going to raise taxes big time – period.
He’s going to raise them, yes, but this is focused on higher earners.
You see Don Joe I just had to look a little longer to find it again. I thank you for spurring me on…
http://www.nysun.com/national/.....ion/84059/
Read the rebuttal and then the spin
John@93: When he raises them BIG TIME on businesses we all pay in the end.
@95 When he raises them BIG TIME on businesses we all pay in the end.
I’m not crazy about having taxes raised (who is?), but I don’t see how we escape it and I’ll take Obama over McCain on this. I think McCain would be a fiscal disaster.
Puddybud, Puddybud, Puddybud.
**HEAVY SIGH**
I know you know better than to say stuff about raising taxes will hurt the economy.
That’s exactly what your comrades on the right were saying in 1991 about Bill Clinton.
We were facing our 3rd serious recession since Reagan / Bush took office. We had record deficits, record borrowing, weak job creation . . . much like today.
What happened?
Bill Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy, created a pay as you go system of running the government, paid down the national debt, eliminated the Reagan/Bush record deficit and created the largest surplus in our nations history and ultimately created the greatest economic boom in the history of the world.
Now, remember Newt and the OCC Gang (Original Culture of Coruption) folks said the EXACTlt same thing you are saying now. Remember the fiscal battle of ’95 when Newt tucked his tail between his leg?
Yeah, why don’t you repeat contemporary history for me so I don’t have to spank you with it?
Thanks,
GBS.
Oh, and have a nice day.
Puddy @ 92
Wow Don Joe@76 you are spinning this over and over.
Those were his words then he tries to say he didn’t say it and you gloss over it. He was the only Illinois senator to vote negative.
I thought we were debating facts, Puddy. I’ve merely offered an alternative interpretation of the facts. Clearly, you don’t like the alternative interpretation I’ve offered, but all you have by way of response is to piss and moan about how I’m “spinning” this. Do you honestly think you’re not “spinning” the facts in your own way? Rather than piss and moan about it, why not try to explain why your interpretation of the facts is any better than mine?
But digging more: 1999 – Obama was the only Illinois State Senator to vote against a bill barring early release for incarcerated sex offenders.
So? There are a lot of reasons someone might be the only legislator to vote against a law, and I do have a rather hard time believing that Obama voted against it because he thought is vote would actually kill the bill. How is this not another example of Obama voting on principle as opposed to politics?
Go somewhere with this, Puddy. You’re trying to debate the facts, but you’re making no effort to draw any conclusions using the random facts you keep regurgitating.
Puddy @ 94
Read all that stuff a long time ago. It’s old crap. Again, do you have a point in rehashing this? You seem to think this casts Obama in unfavorable light, but there’s no obvious connection between the facts you’re citing and the conclusion you want to reach.
You want to debate facts, Puddy, sooner or later you’re going to have to actually construct an argument. If you don’t, all you’re doing is engaging in the rhetorical equivalent of autoeroticism.
Puddy @ 95
As John notes, I’d love to be able to wave a magic wand and have all our fiscal problems disappear. Unless you have a reasonably viable alternative to Obama’s plan, the only argument you have is that we shouldn’t vote for Obama, because the medicine he proposes doesn’t taste very good. Sorry, but I’ll take even bad-tasting medicine over a Republican sweet placebo any time.
Puddy
Your comments about the “nearly identical” law in Illinois.
“Nearly identical” meaning that the law should have been unneccessary, but the pro-life crowd was pushing it anyway.
Could those “slight” changes have been the reason for the proposed law? My understanding is that the state law contained some definitions that the pro-life crowd have been trying to get into laws for some time now, and that those definitions would have made it far easier for the pro-life people to have challenged abortion rights in court.
Certainly some (not all) in the pro-life movement have indicated a willingness to use apparently minor provisions in laws to do an end run around abortion rights laws.
***Deep Breath***
Then what happened? He lost the House and Senate in 1994. Threw a temper tantrum in 1995. Congress reduces the increases in year over year spending and the economy takes off.
That’s the facts jack.
Sorry your interpretation does not cover what he said or make what you are spewing factual! So if your interpretation is fact, then SeattleJew is an Olympic caliber marathon runner. Well we know that’s not true.
How does the spin from his campaign over his voting refute what I am saying above? How is this old news? He was caught in it at Saddleback in July. The poor man had no answers to the real questions. Wait a minute, it was above his paygrade.
And Don Joe: Why did he vote present 130 times?
That is curious!
I think Sarah Palin said what I said earlier. Obama is raising taxes six different ways.
GBS: Why did Clinton sign welfare reform?
Puddy @ 101
Sorry your interpretation does not cover what he said or make what you are spewing factual!
I never claimed that my interpretation is a fact. It’s a conclusion, and I never represented it as a fact.
In the mean time, we can all see that you’ve not offered another interpretation of the facts, which means that my interpretation now stands as the most reasonable conclusion in this debate.
What do you think it means to debate the facts? Do you think it consists of the two of us debating whether or not independently verifiable facts are, indeed, true? What a monumental waste of time.
Any idiot can search the web and find a plethora of disconnected facts and trivia. Constructing a valid argument using those facts, reaching well-reasoned conclusions, that takes a bit more doing. Unfortunately, it would seem that you’re not at all up to the task.
Don Joe: Why do I need to interpret what Barack Obama said? That’s called spin.
You are the one creating the hue and cry over “disconnected facts”? He was against a law that was passed and approved by Senator Boxer and NARAL. He got it wrong like the Iraq surge and the SCOTUS guns in WA, DC rejection.
I don’t need to spin anything. His words speak for themselves and I don’t need to construct any argument around his words.
They stand alone, catching him in a BIG TIME LIE, which his own spin doctors had to SPIN SPIN SPIN for him.
That’s why his Saddleback performance was stuttering and over his pay grade!
Puddy @106
Why do I need to interpret what Barack Obama said?
Good question. If you think you don’t need to spin what Barack Obama said, then why does the entire remainder of your comment consist of nothing but spin?
It’s not a question of whether or not you need to spin Obama’s remarks. It’s a fact that you are spinning Obama’s remarks. Your failure to acknowledge that fact is precisely the point I raised at the beginning of our conversation, and, I thank you for proving my point for me.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/artic.....s.h27.html
Read this
SURE GLAD I GOT TO SEE THIS BEFORE THEY PULLED IT!
JOHN BARELLI ALMOST MAKES ME WISH I WASN’T MARRIED!!