“I’d cheat to keep these bastards out”

[Shady]

Not suprising when you look at the actions of Acorn, and the SEIU. But this is pretty unbelievable. But it's how the left thinks. They feel they're entitled to government power, and if that means breaking the law, and undermining democracy, so be it.

MSNBC's Schultz- I'd Cheat To Keep Brown From Winning In Massachusetts

[Guest American Woman]

Yes. That's exactly how "the left" thinks. One person says one dumb thing, and it's how "the left" thinks. Apparently I can attribute everything Coulter, Rush, pundits on Fox News, fundamental Christians etc. say to "how the right thinks." Only I'm not an ignoramus, so I won't.

[punked]

Not suprising when you look at the actions of Acorn, and the SEIU. But this is pretty unbelievable. But it's how the left thinks. They feel they're entitled to government power, and if that means breaking the law, and undermining democracy, so be it.

MSNBC's Schultz- I'd Cheat To Keep Brown From Winning In Massachusetts

That is true on both sides, it is why we have laws against it. The difference is Republicans are actually cheating to win this one. Red state is trying out of state phone bank line jamming which is illegal and something republicans have gone to jail for.

SHADY "HEY POT YOU ARE BLACK!!"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/1/16/825847/-ACTION-ITEM!-RedState-trying-to-jam-Coakley-phone-banks!

Edited January 16, 2010 by punked

[Bugs]

Yes. That's exactly how "the left" thinks. One person says one dumb thing, and it's how "the left" thinks. Apparently I can attribute everything Coulter, Rush, pundits on Fox News, fundamental Christians etc. say to "how the right thinks." Only I'm not an ignoramus, so I won't.

With you on that one, American Woman ... I don't like Coulter much myself, but here's the thing ... Rush, Coulter, et al argue their opinions, and can be publicly refuted. They don't claim to be objective. Isn't Schultz a liberal version of Rush? Doesn't he claim that his show where America comes for the truth? Besides, this goes beyond the normal editorializing ... this is right into counseling a felony, if you ask me.

This is one of the things that drives conservatives nutty -- the bias in the media. Trent Lott had his career ended, while Harry Reid gets a hug from Sharpeton, for acts of approximately the same degree of inappropriateness.

Don't think that I have loyalties to Trent Lott, or any party in the US. I consider American politics the greatest show on earth. I don't say this as a partisan. Rush always seems to me to be cogent and he educates me, as a Canadian, about a whole other side of American politics. It isn't so much that I believe him. I don't know who's right, but he opens my eyes.

This guy? Not so much.

Edited January 16, 2010 by Bugs

[BubberMiley]

I noticed "the right" thinks that Haitians made a deal with the devil and that Rush Limbaugh, supreme leader of "the Right", thinks the U.S. already did enough to help Haiti.

[Smallc]

Rush isn't even bad. You should have heard Mike Church and Andrew Wilkow....oh, and Schultz is an idiot.

[jbg]

Poll shocker: Scott Brown surges ahead in Senate race

Riding a wave of opposition to Democratic health-care reform, GOP upstart Scott Brown is leading in the U.S. Senate race, raising the odds of a historic upset that would reverberate all the way to the White House, a new poll shows.

Although Brown’s 4-point lead over Democrat Martha Coakley is within the Suffolk University/7News survey’s margin of error, the underdog’s position at the top of the results stunned even pollster David Paleologos.

“It’s a Brown-out,” said Paleologos, director of Suffolk’s Political Research Center. “It’s a massive change in the political landscape.”

The poll shows Brown, a state senator from Wrentham, besting Coakley, the state’s attorney general, by 50 percent to 46 percent, the first major survey to show Brown in the lead.

Obama, repeating a mistake made by Hilary Bill Clinton, has touched a political third rail with health care. Barack, I guess, assumed that his silver tongue, charisma and charm would sell a proposal poisonous to the vast majority of Americans.

There's a line from "New York, New York", "If I can make it there I'll make it anywhere". The flipside is "if I fail in Massachusetts I'm truly drowing".

I sure hope Obama hasn't wrecked a promising presidency over this ideologically driven issue.

[capricorn]

I noticed "the right" thinks that Haitians made a deal with the devil and that Rush Limbaugh, supreme leader of "the Right", thinks the U.S. already did enough to help Haiti.

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh and televangelist Pat Robertson are being scolded for their comments in the immediate aftermath of an earthquake in Haiti that has killed tens of thousands, according to early estimates.

Critics from both the left and right are denouncing their remarks as insensitive to the disaster and attempts to score political points off human tragedy.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31502.html

I'll believe that unbiased analysis over yours which comes across as narrow minded and uninformed. And, it may come as a surprise to you that many in Canada also think they pay enough in taxes which support foreign aid to Haiti. I doubt they consider themselves left or right wing. But you know what? That won't stop many of them from opening their wallets to donate.

[Guest American Woman]

BubberMiley, on 16 January 2010 - 06:31 PM, said: I noticed "the right" thinks that Haitians made a deal with the devil and that Rush Limbaugh, supreme leader of "the Right", thinks the U.S. already did enough to help Haiti.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31502.html

I'll believe that unbiased analysis over yours which comes across as narrow minded and uninformed.

I'm thinking he purposely made the statement he did for a reason; to show how ignorant the opening post was. In case you really missed it, the opening post in this thread was just as "narrow minded and uninformed" as his post was, so his post was showing that in reverse-- ie: directed towards "the right." I notice you had nothing to say about the opening post, though, and how "narrow minded and uninformed" it was to attribute the characteristics of one comment by one supposedly liberal commentator to "the left." I can't help but wonder why ...... perhaps you truly did miss it?

Edited January 17, 2010 by American Woman

[Guest American Woman]

With you on that one, American Woman ... I don't like Coulter much myself, but here's the thing ... Rush, Coulter, et al argue their opinions, and can be publicly refuted. They don't claim to be objective. Isn't Schultz a liberal version of Rush? Doesn't he claim that his show where America comes for the truth?

I honestly never hear of Schultz before this thread as I don't watch MSNBC, and he isn't syndicated the way Rush is (making it difficult to totally avoid him), so I'm not sure what his claim is. I only know that if this comment is typical of him, and from a quick search I'm afraid it is, he's as big an idiot as Rush and Coulter are.

Besides, this goes beyond the normal editorializing ... this is right into counseling a felony, if you ask me.

No more so than some of the stupid remarks that Rush and Coulter have made.

This is one of the things that drives conservatives nutty -- the bias in the media. Trent Lott had his career ended, while Harry Reid gets a hug from Sharpeton, for acts of approximately the same degree of inappropriateness.

Different comments, different intentions. They were not "acts of approximately the same degree of inappropriateness." One was politically incorrect while the other was racist:

Republicans labeled Reid a racist and demanded his resignation, recalling that Republican Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott was forced to resign back in 2002 for racist comments. In case you forgot, Lott said, "When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either."

Reid's comments were poorly phrased; Lott openly endorsed the politics of white supremacy. Reid endorsed Obama, a black man for president; Lott endorsed a black man at the back of the bus.

Trent Lott also has something Harry Reid doesn't have — a racist past. link

Don't think that I have loyalties to Trent Lott, or any party in the US. I consider American politics the greatest show on earth. I don't say this as a partisan. Rush always seems to me to be cogent and he educates me, as a Canadian, about a whole other side of American politics. It isn't so much that I believe him. I don't know who's right, but he opens my eyes.

Ummmm... so you don't believe Rush, and you don't know who's right, but Rush "seems cogent" and he "educates you?" How can someone you don't know if you should believe, if you don't know is right, "educate" you? Do you not realize what kind of "education" that gives you?

This guy? Not so much.

Which tells me you're very partisan. Perhaps it's a result of your *ahem* "education." But if you seriously don't want to be yet another partisan ignoramus, I suggest you get your education on American politics elsewhere.

Rush isn't even bad. You should have heard Mike Church and Andrew Wilkow....oh, and Schultz is an idiot.

So...................Rush isn't bad, but Schultz is an idiot. It's like my sig line says ..........

[Sir Bandelot]

I honestly never hear of Schultz before this thread as I don't watch MSNBC, and he isn't syndicated the way Rush is (making it difficult to totally avoid him), so I'm not sure what his claim is. I only know that if this comment is typical of him, and from a quick search I'm afraid it is, he's as big an idiot as Rush and Coulter are.

I've never heard of him either. It will be interesting to see if his message gets the same wide level of appeal as those of Limbaugh et al. I doubt it. As far as I know there is no left wing equivalent.

[Guest American Woman]

I've never heard of him either. It will be interesting to see if his message gets the same wide level of appeal as those of Limbaugh et al. I doubt it. As far as I know there is no left wing equivalent.

From what I can see, he has no "level of appeal" from the left, much less equivalent to that of Rush et al; as far as I know, too, there is no left wing equivalent. I can't think of one left-winger that's syndicated, to begin with, and I think that says a lot because as I pointed out, it's difficult to entirely avoid Rush for that reason. Furthermore, to my observation, the right as a whole doesn't seem to mind that they have an idiot speaking for them. I don't see that in the mainstream left when some lefty makes a moronic comment.

I guess we all have our crosses to bear, though, as there are morons on both ends of the political spectrum. I'd like to get in Schultz's face, though, and ask him if he's really stupid enough to believe that he's doing the Democratic cause any good in Mass. with his moronic comment.

[jbg]

I've never heard of him either. It will be interesting to see if his message gets the same wide level of appeal as those of Limbaugh et al. I doubt it. As far as I know there is no left wing equivalent.

Ditto.

I've never heard of Schultz.

[Bugs]

I noticed "the right" thinks that Haitians made a deal with the devil and that Rush Limbaugh, supreme leader of "the Right", thinks the U.S. already did enough to help Haiti.

An 80-year-old preacher speaks for the 'Right'?

What you see on the Right is a marketplace of ideas. Media voices put material into that debate, but there's no playbook, no set of slogans, no visions of an idealistic future against which to tick off the present ... that's the other folks.

The Haitians are no Na'mi. A lot of their problems are their problems. Nobody did anything to them. They're poorer than Cuba.

This earthquake is different. It's a human disaster. Actually, I think we're doing a lot. No doubt, you are critical of those evil people in Canada who think that generally its a good idea to balance the national budget ... and who wouldn't want to ridicule that? But even such a viperous critic of all-things-conservative as Haroon Siddique have the honesty to give some credit.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/article/751486--siddiqui-micha-euml-lle-jean-and-stephen-harper-do-us-proud-in-haiti

[Bugs]

From what I can see, he has no "level of appeal" from the left, much less equivalent to that of Rush et al; as far as I know, too, there is no left wing equivalent. I can't think of one left-winger that's syndicated, to begin with, and I think that says a lot because as I pointed out, it's difficult to entirely avoid Rush for that reason. Furthermore, to my observation, the right as a whole doesn't seem to mind that they have an idiot speaking for them. I don't see that in the mainstream left when some lefty makes a moronic comment.

I guess we all have our crosses to bear, though, as there are morons on both ends of the political spectrum. I'd like to get in Schultz's face, though, and ask him if he's really stupid enough to believe that he's doing the Democratic cause any good in Mass. with his moronic comment.

Are you kidding? This is just a random selection of what the mainstream offers. This clown seems to have the worst features of Limbaugh without the star features ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVwqorhJG_E

And what about some of the others. What his name, McConnell? Frankly, in 40 years of watching TV, I have never seen such opinionated people giving the news, and interlacing their own extreme attitudes with the readings of the factual stuff. When Obama was new, it was almost intolerable.

Don't misunderstand, I don't have any loyalty to either of the parties. I liked the Democrats back when ... I still like LBJ, how about that? I thought Reagan was an actor run by a corporation when he got elected. Since, I have changed, buy, like a lot of Canadians, I watch like its sports, and my team has been eliminated. I am probably an old-fashioned liberal, circa 1960, which makes me hidebound in 2010.

[Topaz]

You know what, the people in the US, since we are talking about the US, can't and shouldn't trust either the Republicans or the Dems. I read that since the computer voting machines have come into effect, there been cheating going on for many years! I will say that the article , had more Cons cheating with it than the Dems but I hope one day that a third more honest party will appear on the scene and shock those two parties. I don't think its healthy for a country to have only two party choices to vote for.

[Guest American Woman]

....I hope one day that a third more honest party will appear on the scene and shock those two parties. I don't think its healthy for a country to have only two party choices to vote for.

Yes, we Americans live for the day when we get a political party as honest and completely trustworthy as Canada's .....

In the meantime, we do have more than two party choices to vote for. We just mostly choose not to.

[BubberMiley]

What you see on the Right is a marketplace of ideas.

No, I was just demonstrating how foolish those on "the right" are for thinking a whole side of the political spectrum can be represented by one person or even one "type" of person.

But I guess subtlety is not "the right's" strong suit.

[Smallc]

And, it may come as a surprise to you that many in Canada also think they pay enough in taxes which support foreign aid to Haiti.

I haven't heard from a single one of those people. The most libertarian and conservative people I know support the effort. If there are Canadians that believe this, they're in the extreme minority.

[punked]

I haven't heard from a single one of those people. The most libertarian and conservative people I know support the effort. If there are Canadians that believe this, they're in the extreme minority.

Even President Bush said Rush was idiot for that statement today.

[Guest American Woman]

On the topic of Robertson and Limbaugh, this is great.....

[Smallc]

On the topic of Robertson and Limbaugh, this is great.....

That was actually quite good.

[Shady]

On the topic of Robertson and Limbaugh, this is great.....

You gotta love somebody criticizing people for politicizing the earthquake, after that same person politicized the earthquake in support of Obamacare. Olby's always good for laughs. My favourite clips of his are when he constantly tells people to resign, and/or compares them to nazi's.

[Guest American Woman]

You gotta love somebody criticizing people for politicizing the earthquake, after that same person politicized the earthquake in support of Obamacare.

Obermann wasn't criticizing Robertson and Limbaugh for politicizing the earthquake (that would be GW Bush), he was criticizing them for being heartless idiots. And he did it well.

[Born Free]

Obermann wasn't criticizing Robertson and Limbaugh for politicizing the earthquake (that would be GW Bush), he was criticizing them for being heartless idiots. And he did it well.

Agreed. Limburger and Robertson are likely to yell fire in a crowded theatre if it served their purpose.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Born Free