The contrast between this video and that provided by Sarah Palin is noticeable.

Give it a rest, Matt, Palin’s approval rating has gone UP since she gave that speech. I’m more the type that follows a persons actions and not their words, therefore, I find it a little hard to find Obama sincere when he sat on his hands and let innocent people be accused by HIS politcal allies as being accessories to murder. His silence was deafening.

ps, does anyone know who does his hair? Last Saturday, it was black, then on Wednesday it was mostly gray and now it’s black again. Almost like he wanted to look more presidental and wise on Wednesday. And about all that applause they said they couldn’t control, the crowd was told to applaud via the jumbo tron. Face it, this Admin controls everything that goes on when he’s involved.

I hear Mark (Obama needs his own OK City) Penn is beaming with pride.

Yes, we need to carry on and continue to work to eliminate Modern Liberalism/Progressivism from our culture by supporting our Founding ways and principles.

Well, we got our first bash Palin for the day, how many more will there be?

Hey Alz, you’d better explain what you mean by “eliminate” before you’re accused of using violent rhetoric. Just a suggestion.

Do we get a ” CARRY ON ” t shirt ?

They are not listening. It brings in ratting, why would they listen when it brings in money to the coffers.

One of the more hopeful developments is if they set up mixed seating for the State of the Union speech. The traditional ‘Tastes Great! Less Filling!’ arrangement where Dems are on one side and Republicans on the other does nothing but fuel the so-called ‘rhetoric’ seen on TV and heard on the radio. If politicians want to lead by example, then do it. I just don’t get the feeling that they want to lead by example at all; I feel as though all they want to do is point fingers at nebulous things as a way to divert attention from their own ineptness. And that goes for BOTH sides of the aisle.

Oh, Mediaite, this new multi-page system is going to kill the commenting. It’s MUCH better to have it all on one page. The best way to handle it is to have an OPTION so users can pick which method they prefer.

One of the reasons is the increased effort requited to see what was written. For people who come into the discussion after a few pages have been created, they now have a lot of extra work to see what was written as it’s harder to scan.

I suspect that if an option is not put in, that the number of comments and the interactions drop. Just my $0.02 (plus tax).

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
Hey Alz, you’d better explain what you mean by “eliminate” before you’re accused of using violent rhetoric. Just a suggestion.

“Eliminate” as in “Vote out”, “convince people that it sucks”, etc.

ChrisNH said:
One of the more hopeful developments is if they set up mixed seating for the State of the Union speech. The traditional ‘Tastes Great! Less Filling!’ arrangement where Dems are on one side and Republicans on the other does nothing but fuel the so-called ‘rhetoric’ seen on TV and heard on the radio. If politicians want to lead by example, then do it. I just don’t get the feeling that they want to lead by example at all; I feel as though all they want to do is point fingers at nebulous things as a way to divert attention from their own ineptness. And that goes for BOTH sides of the aisle.

The Democrats want to do that so they can continue to try to hide their losses from November. If the Republicans lost so much, I doubt the Democrats would be looking to dilute their advantage.

The media covered it all up, but the Democrats lost something like 400 years of Congressional experience. Ginormous and devastating losses.

The Dem’s SUDDEN, “can’t we all just get along” attitude is code for, “don’t you Repubs dare try to repeal Obamacare or fight us on anything, or we’ll just scream hatemonger!! Didn’t this tragedy teach you anything?!”

Big Eddie said:
Do we get a ” CARRY ON ” t shirt ?

I want the Bill Ayers limited edition!

In the spirit of toning it down – Now when they bring a knife, I’ll just bring a big stick.

Alz said:
Oh, Mediaite, this new multi-page system is going to kill the commenting. It’s MUCH better to have it all on one page. The best way to handle it is to have an OPTION so users can pick which method they prefer.

One of the reasons is the increased effort requited to see what was written. For people who come into the discussion after a few pages have been created, they now have a lot of extra work to see what was written as it’s harder to scan.

I suspect that if an option is not put in, that the number of comments and the interactions drop. Just my $0.02 (plus tax).

Mediaite, maybe the best way to handle it is to add a drop down that allows us to control how many comments are shown at a time…some thing (25, 50, 100, 200, all). “All” is important. Plus, it should remember the user’s setting.

Might I suggest a nightstick, SmartAlec?

Alz said:
Oh, Mediaite, this new multi-page system is going to kill the commenting. It’s MUCH better to have it all on one page. The best way to handle it is to have an OPTION so users can pick which method they prefer.

One of the reasons is the increased effort requited to see what was written. For people who come into the discussion after a few pages have been created, they now have a lot of extra work to see what was written as it’s harder to scan.

I suspect that if an option is not put in, that the number of comments and the interactions drop. Just my $0.02 (plus tax).

It seems like it is done this way to provide more real-estate for advertisements. Many newspapers do it this way, and you know how much THEY grovel for every advertising nickel they can suck up.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
I’m more the type that follows a persons actions and not their words, therefore, I find it a little hard to find Obama sincere when he sat on his hands and let innocent people be accused by HIS politcal allies as being accessories to murder. His silence was deafening.

Absolutely. Hussein let his DemoCrit operatives encourage violence against Conservatives for most of the week before making his obligatory but empty speech. We can’t help noticing how effective the Demons have been in stirring up hatred against Conservatives since Democrat Eric Fuller volunteered to publicly threaten the life of a Tea Party speaker. Despicable.

Davo said:
Absolutely. Hussein let his DemoCrit operatives encourage violence against Conservatives for most of the week before making his obligatory but empty speech. We can’t help noticing how effective the Demons have been in stirring up hatred against Conservatives since Democrat Eric Fuller volunteered to publicly threaten the life of a Tea Party speaker. Despicable.

Obviously you don’t get it.

Alz said:
Yes, we need to carry on and continue to work to eliminate Modern Liberalism/Progressivism from our culture by supporting our Founding ways and principles.

Yep, bring back slavery, non-voting woman, and ten year old factory workers like the good old days. Progress is over rated.

valkyrie101 said:
Yep, bring back slavery, non-voting woman, and ten year old factory workers like the good old days. Progress is over rated.

Typical liberal. When someone says “Limited Government”, you guys think it means “No Government”.

Our Founding Ways ALLOWED us to overcome those problems. I suspect that you will never get it.

Read up on the foundations of our system. Hint: it’s the OPPOSITE of Modern Liberalism, Progressivism, Socialism, Fascism, etc. where there is central control and limited individual freedoms.

ChrisNH said:
It seems like it is done this way to provide more real-estate for advertisements. Many newspapers do it this way, and you know how much THEY grovel for every advertising nickel they can suck up.

Maybe, but it also eases the load on the servers when they don’t have to reload all of the comments every time someone refreshes, which should improve the often dismal page load times. I don’t love the format, but there are valid techie reasons for doing it.

Yes, we need to carry on and continue to work to eliminate Modern Liberalism/Progressivism from our culture by supporting our Founding ways and principles.

Where did you learn American History?

Pablo said:
Maybe, but it also eases the load on the servers when they don’t have to reload all of the comments every time someone refreshes, which should improve the often dismal page load times. I don’t love the format, but there are valid techie reasons for doing it.

Perhaps, but it makes it difficult to do things like respond to posts on multiple pages. And it discourages people from reading all the comments before posting. Although, in truth, many aren’t worth the time….

Watching a little bit of the the Television does not make you History Professor…..

Obaowma thinks we’re SO STUPID that we won’t notice shit like the hair color change or the Left Hand and it’s destructive anti-American policies. Can you blame him? He doesn’t know us and he just assumes everyone is as gullible, impressionable and STUPID as his Liberal/Left/Progressive followers (his base).

valkyrie101 said:
Obviously you don’t get it.

The votes on our posts say with great bias, that YOU don’t ‘get it.’

“before we are Democrats or Republicans, we are Americans.”

and there is a great piece in the wash. post by john mccain. despite how i feel about his politics, he is a great man to step up like this.

We Americans have different opinions on how best to serve that noble purpose. We need not pretend otherwise or be timid in our advocacy of the means we believe will achieve it. But we should be mindful as we argue about our differences that so much more unites than divides us. We should also note that our differences, when compared with those in many, if not most, other countries, are smaller than we sometimes imagine them to be.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/14/AR2011011403871.html

Matt Writes: The contrast between this video and that provided by Sarah Palin is noticeable. By filling his video with only positive words, Obama, like after his Arizona memorial speech, leaves critics hard-pressed to find anything to dislike.

My Comment: He is reading a speech, prepared by a writer….lets just watch how “positive” his words are in the coming weeks.

Matt Continues: Interesting to wonder if Palin did decide to keep her video short and sweet, whether her critics too would have been willing to offer begrudging praise?

My Comment: How many times have you Mediate folks told us that Sarah Palin is now finished. She will come back much stronger as the months go on. You might want to run down to the local drug store and get a box full of “Tums”…I think you are going to need them.

so you are advocating that we all just hold hands and get along. I suppose you support no winners/losers in intramural sports? I don’t mean to be mean spirited but it’s time this country began supporting the fact that there are winners and there are losers in every facet of life.

McCain has never passed up an opportunity to stab America and Conservatives in the back. This quote would, however, be relevant back in about 1964. But Democrats have pushed the envelope on anti-Americanism and vitriol to the point that we must endure the likes of last week.

was referring to chilipeppersfan

btw, notice a remarkable lack of libs in this thread. Hmmmmm????????

BatBoy said:
Matt Writes: The contrast between this video and that provided by Sarah Palin is noticeable. By filling his video with only positive words, Obama, like after his Arizona memorial speech, leaves critics hard-pressed to find anything to dislike.

My Comment: He is reading a speech, prepared by a writer….lets just watch how “positive” his words are in the coming weeks.

palin was reading a speech, prepared by a writer…off a teleprompter.

screwauger said:
so you are advocating that we all just hold hands and get along. I suppose you support no winners/losers in intramural sports? I don’t mean to be mean spirited but it’s time this country began supporting the fact that there are winners and there are losers in every facet of life.

wish i could put everything in a win or loose category…sometimes i compromise just to get shit done, but if it works for you…

ChiliPeppersFan said:
wish i could put everything in a win or loose category…sometimes i compromise just to get shit done, but if it works for you…

typical. You and dems want compromise when you are no longer able to just ram it through but, when you can ram it through, the hell with consensus or cooperation. Just vote in the middle of the night. Sort of like the part about screaming for bipartisanship which in the lib playbook means….concede to our demands/policies. Please, I like the chili peppers but…

Alz said:
Typical liberal. When someone says “Limited Government”, you guys think it means “No Government”.
Our Founding Ways ALLOWED us to overcome those problems. I suspect that you will never get it.
Read up on the foundations of our system. Hint: it’s the OPPOSITE of Modern Liberalism, Progressivism, Socialism, Fascism, etc. where there is central control and limited individual freedoms.

Except that is not what you said. Here is what you said: “Yes, we need to carry on and continue to work to eliminate Modern Liberalism/Progressivism from our culture by supporting our Founding ways and principles.”

Given that most of the “founding fathers” were so liberal that they were called “radicals”, by the conservative torie colonists who opposed the creation of a federal government, I would say your view is incorrect.

Davo said:
The votes on our posts say with great bias, that YOU don’t ‘get it.’

Here is what you posted: “Absolutely. Hussein let his DemoCrit operatives encourage violence against Conservatives for most of the week before making his obligatory but empty speech. We can’t help noticing how effective the Demons have been in stirring up hatred against Conservatives since Democrat Eric Fuller volunteered to publicly threaten the life of a Tea Party speaker. Despicable.”

If that is your view, then it also must be true that the congresswoman was shot because of right wingers encouraging violence against progressives. In fact that is not true, nor is what you said true.

Davo said:
McCain has never passed up an opportunity to stab America and Conservatives in the back. This quote would, however, be relevant back in about 1964. But Democrats have pushed the envelope on anti-Americanism and vitriol to the point that we must endure the likes of last week.

So the congresswoman was shot because of liberals?

valkyrie101 said:
So the congresswoman was shot because of liberals?</blockquote

according to some, it must have been…they say it wasn't because of conservatives.

has there been any movement on either changing the filibuster rules or clarifying the ones that exist right now?
last i heard, they had to do it at the beginning of the senate year.

ChiliPeppersFan said:

Yeah, your just one of those sickass libs that bitches about america all the time.

valkyrie101 said:
If that is your view, then it also must be true that the congresswoman was shot because of right wingers encouraging violence against progressives..

valkyrie101 said:
So the congresswoman was shot because of liberals?

Poor baby………….you’re so confused. Lemme try and help.

First, the original violence against “Progressives” was when America defeated them in the Revolutionary War. Since then, we fought them in both World Wars, Korea, Viet Nam, and the Cold War. I suspect you need to study-up on what the “Progressive” movement actually is, rather than falling for its up-beat sounding name.

I’ll give ya’ a hint. “Prograssives” were the name Socialists gave themselves in late 19th Century Germany. They stood for building a tyrannical fascist empire to force their ideas of uniformity under the quise of “equality” upon an unwilling world. They instituted “Progressive” confiscation of property and wealth depending upon one’s ability to produce it. Because of the oppressive nature of such “equality,” violence has always been the partner of Progressives.

As for last week’s tragic events and by all accounts by those who know him, the shooter never listened to Conservative broadcasters, but WAS upset over the congresswoman’s “moderation.” Ya’ see, “Moderates” are only tolerated by Leftists when they are Republicans because it means they are simply Liberals. “Moderate” Democrats, however, are obstacles to the Leftist conversion of America from the land of the free to the land of the oppressed and dependent.

Now, your choosing to ignore the “Progressives’” instantaneous rush to blame Conservatives for the murders doesn’t negate the encouragement of violence it would cause in unstable Dims as we saw in Fuller’s reaction. So, as I stated in several other posts, I suspect complicity by the DNC in this week’s strife, because in the past they’ve shown no restraint in their lust for the destruction of their political opponents……………….especially when the Democrats’ track record is bad enough to relegate them to permanent exile from political power. The irrefutable evidence is that Conservatives have done absolutely nothing last week but endure death threats from Progressives. Where there’s smoke……………..

Davo said:
Poor baby………….you’re so confused. Lemme try and help. First, the original violence against “Progressives” was when America defeated them in the Revolutionary War. Since then, we fought them in both World Wars, Korea, Viet Nam, and the Cold War. I suspect you need to study-up on what the “Progressive” movement actually is, rather than falling for its up-beat sounding name. I’ll give ya’ a hint. “Prograssives” were the name Socialists gave themselves in late 19th Century Germany. They stood for building a tyrannical fascist empire to force their ideas of uniformity under the quise of “equality” upon an unwilling world. They instituted “Progressive” confiscation of property and wealth depending upon one’s ability to produce it. Because of the oppressive nature of such “equality,” violence has always been the partner of Progressives. As for last week’s tragic events and by all accounts by those who know him, the shooter never listened to Conservative broadcasters, but WAS upset over the congresswoman’s “moderation.” Ya’ see, “Moderates” are only tolerated by Leftists when they are Republicans because it means they are simply Liberals. “Moderate” Democrats, however, are obstacles to the Leftist conversion of America from the land of the free to the land of the oppressed and dependent. Now, your choosing to ignore the “Progressives’” instantaneous rush to blame Conservatives for the murders doesn’t negate the encouragement of violence it would cause in unstable Dims as we saw in Fuller’s reaction. So, as I stated in several other posts, I suspect complicity by the DNC in this week’s strife, because in the past they’ve shown no restraint in their lust for the destruction of their political opponents……………….especially when the Democrats’ track record is bad enough to relegate them to permanent exile from political power. The irrefutable evidence is that Conservatives have done absolutely nothing last week but endure death threats from Progressives. Where there’s smoke……………..

Dude, you do not get it. Chill.

ChiliPeppersFan said:
palin was reading a speech, prepared by a writer…off a teleprompter.

Yes and…..

You know where Sarah Palin stands, whether she is reading a speech from a Teleprompter, her hand or the horn of a moose. She is consistanct and I like her for that!

President Obama….not so fast…his speeches are very different than his actions…. I am saying he gave a good speech…but his actions in the next few months will tell us everyting. He even when to Church today…I am saying that is all show…and am confident the old Obama will be back at it soon.

valkyrie101 said:
Dude, you do not get it. Chill.

I’ll accept that as a confession that you’re not up to the discussion you butted-in on.

Davo said:
I’ll accept that as a confession that you’re not up to the discussion you butted-in on.

The discussions here are not private.

So, we are all one big family when it comes to pushing his agenda but, when we disagree we are misinformed, or not sophisticated enough to understand what he is trying to achieve.
The only comforting words I want to her from this interloper is, ” I will not seek a second term”!!

valkyrie101 said:
Except that is not what you said. Here is what you said: “Yes, we need to carry on and continue to work to eliminate Modern Liberalism/Progressivism from our culture by supporting our Founding ways and principles.”

Given that most of the “founding fathers” were so liberal that they were called “radicals”, by the conservative torie colonists who opposed the creation of a federal government, I would say your view is incorrect.

The Founding fathers were not liberal in today’s sense AT ALL. They were what is known as Classical Liberals, which is todays’ Conservatism.

The Founding Father’s would barf if they knew about the Leftism. I don’t think they could contemplate Modern Liberals/Progressives.

Alz said:
The Founding fathers were not liberal in today’s sense AT ALL. They were what is known as Classical Liberals, which is todays’ Conservatism.

The Founding Father’s would barf if they knew about the Leftism. I don’t think they could contemplate Modern Liberals/Progressives.

Of course they could, Alz. Modern Liberalism has been around since the beginning of oppression, only under different names. The Constitution was written and adopted for the single purpose of protecting America from modern Liberalism. They knew.

Alz said:
The Founding fathers were not liberal in today’s sense AT ALL. They were what is known as Classical Liberals, which is todays’ Conservatism. The Founding Father’s would barf if they knew about the Leftism. I don’t think they could contemplate Modern Liberals/Progressives.

Frickin’ Jefferson made his own Bible by eliminating the passages, such as the miracles of Christ, which did not conform with logic and reason. Does that sound conservative to you?

President Obama’s Weekly Address: “We Carry On Now”

“We Carry On Now” is almost as good a campaign slogan as “Together We Thrive,” but it won’t be used in 0bama’s 2012 campaign unless someone prints up the T-shirts really soon.

Perhaps some of you good Americans will join me in removing this event.

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=173664246009367

Davo said:
Of course they could, Alz. Modern Liberalism has been around since the beginning of oppression, only under different names. The Constitution was written and adopted for the single purpose of protecting America from modern Liberalism. They knew.

Weeeeelllll, yes and no. Maybe a better way to say it si”I don’t think they could contemplate the depth and extent of the Modern Liberals/Progressives affliction.” Something along these lines.

trica said:
Perhaps some of you good Americans will join me in removing this event.

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=173664246009367

That is gross.

valkyrie101 said:
Frickin’ Jefferson made his own Bible by eliminating the passages, such as the miracles of Christ, which did not conform with logic and reason. Does that sound conservative to you?

So that’s your answer?

All I’m pointing out is how foreign today’s deep-down Modern Liberals/Progressives would be to the Founding Fathers.

Alz said:
Weeeeelllll, yes and no. Maybe a better way to say it si”I don’t think they could contemplate the depth and extent of the Modern Liberals/Progressives affliction.” Something along these lines.

I knew what you meant. Even though our framers might not have known the extent that the anti-American Left would stoop to destroy what they’d founded, they set forth a Constitution capable of keeping such assaults in check………………IF the Constitution is adhered to.

Davo said:
I knew what you meant. Even though our framers might not have known the extent that the anti-American Left would stoop to destroy what they’d founded, they set forth a Constitution capable of keeping such assaults in check………………IF the Constitution is adhered to.

Exactly …”IF the Constitution is adhered to” …which is why the libs think it’s “old”, “outdated”, “a living document”, etc.

Alz said:
So that’s your answer? All I’m pointing out is how foreign today’s deep-down Modern Liberals/Progressives would be to the Founding Fathers.

Jefferson would be considered a liberal even today.

Alz said:
Exactly …”IF the Constitution is adhered to” …which is why the libs think it’s “old”, “outdated”, “a living document”, etc.

Yes, it just like the Ten Commandments except the authors said it was OK to change it if you want to.

valkyrie101 said:
Jefferson would be considered a liberal even today.

Nope. Didn’t Jefferson believe in Individual Liberty and Limited Government?

valkyrie101 said:
Jefferson would be considered a liberal even today.

Sure. He pushed for big government intervening into the lives and property of those pesky free Americans. He surely pushed for forcing citizens to purchase things he deemed in their best interests, regardless of what those pesky freedom-lovers thought. Yep, ol’ Tom also went after the property and wealth of those he deemed unworthy of it.

Valkyrie, if you’re sincere, you are in serious mental trouble. If not, then find another hobby besides trolling.

Alz said:
Nope. Didn’t Jefferson believe in Individual Liberty and Limited Government?

Are you seriously equating the right with individual liberty?

Davo said:
Sure. He pushed for big government intervening into the lives and property of those pesky free Americans. He surely pushed for forcing citizens to purchase things he deemed in their best interests, regardless of what those pesky freedom-lovers thought. Yep, ol’ Tom also went after the property and wealth of those he deemed unworthy of it. Valkyrie, if you’re sincere, you are in serious mental trouble. If not, then find another hobby besides trolling.

Your main problem seems to be fear of communists. During the Eisenhower administration the graduated tax rates for the wealthy was much higher than it is today. Much higher. Yet raising taxes constitutes, what, an “unconstitutional taking” by the federal government, according to your estimation?

valkyrie101 said:
Are you seriously equating the right with individual liberty?

Yep. But not the past “Republicans”. Conservatives “yes”, Republicans “partially.”

This is why the Tea Party has grown – to get away from the nasty liberalism in both parties.

Davo said:
Of course they could, Alz. Modern Liberalism has been around since the beginning of oppression, only under different names. The Constitution was written and adopted for the single purpose of protecting America from modern Liberalism. They knew.

Modern progressivism brings you: rights for blacks, rights for woman, freedom from oppressive religion, rights for children, limitations on greed, minimum living conditions for the poor, pollution regulation, and now, a watered down health care law, and on and on. It is true, however, that without progessives, the civil war would not have occured.

Alz said:
Yep. But not the past “Republicans”. Conservatives “yes”, Republicans “partially.” This is why the Tea Party has grown – to get away from the nasty liberalism in both parties.

The tea party is a coalition which includes diverse groups which do not agree on many crucial issues. They do agree that the federal government is evil, however.

valkyrie101 said:
They do agree that the federal government is evil

Why do you make this stuff up?

I do not believe you can find anyone associated with the Tea Party who has said that Government is “EVIL!”

If you did not make it up, they it must have come from one of the many lefty networks, cable or radio shows.

BatBoy said:
Why do you make this stuff up? I do not believe you can find anyone associated with the Tea Party who has said that Government is “EVIL!” If you did not make it up, they it must have come from one of the many lefty networks, cable or radio shows.

The “Federal” government, I should have said. Its gotten so bad that several high profile conservatives are talking about succeeding from the union.

Name them!

And by the way…Conservatives do not make people “toe the line” – there are lots of ideas….good ideas come from lots of other thought, whether you like them or not.

Please name the “several high profile conservatives!” We all are interested in hearing their names and in what context it was said.

BatBoy said:
Name them! And by the way…Conservatives do not make people “toe the line” – there are lots of ideas….good ideas come from lots of other thought, whether you like them or not. Please name the “several high profile conservatives!” We all are interested in hearing their names and in what context it was said.

Why ask when a thirty second google will bring it up? Gov. Perry, Glenn Beck, S. Carolina (again), several tea party leaders. How about you, Batboy, seceeding is an option?

valkyrie101 said:
Why ask when a thirty second google will bring it up? Gov. Perry, Glenn Beck, S. Carolina (again), several tea party leaders. How about you, Batboy, seceeding is an option?

Maybe Valkyrie, you need to Google and read the articles….
Rick Perry’s quote from your beloved Huffpo “Did you happen to read the last sentence “…though he said he sees no reason why Texas should do that.”

Perry called his supporters patriots. Later, answering news reporters’ questions, Perry suggested Texans might at some point get so fed up they would want to secede from the union, though he said he sees no reason why Texas should do that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/15/gov-rick-perry-texas-coul_n_187490.html

Glenn interview Dan Itse, from New Hampshire where he offered a Bill to succeed from the Union and Glenn told this man that he couldn’t do it.

Even you beloved Huffpo said about Glenn “Beck’s sort of wimpily half-stepping on the subject of Texas seceding from the Union.”

Nope…they didn’t say it, but Daily Kos and Media Matters has published it…but as we all know, they like to lie a lot.

Valjyrie, you like most of your lefty buddies listen only to those on the left….The left mediad just do not have it in them to report the FACTS. MSNBC, CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, NPR, -I’ll even throw this goofball a bone….Glennbeckreview. They report crap that makes people like you scream.

Do yourself a favor, watch Beck for one week, don’t listen to the MSNBC worshipers…trust me, you may still dislike Beck, you will see a completely differ Beck then you thought was there.

BatBoy said:
Maybe Valkyrie, you need to Google and read the articles….
Rick Perry’s quote from your beloved Huffpo “Did you happen to read the last sentence “…though he said he sees no reason why Texas should do that.”

Yea, he put it on the table, as a kind of threat, then said, but not yet.

As for Beck, he one of my main men and I watch or listen to his show almost every day. But an expert on American history or politics he is not. He is mostly an entertainer, a rodeo clown, and his job is to distract the bull.

valkyrie101 said:
As for Beck, he one of my main men and I watch or listen to his show almost every day

Turn up the sound!

BatBoy said:
Turn up the sound!

Sure.