Ann is right as usual.

gordonbloyershow said:
Ann is right as usual.

And that’s why the Tea Baggers will be irrelevant in 2 years. It’s funny because the blind partisans still haven’t figured out the way this country works yet….

Ann: A reasonable voice in an unreasonable world!

Democrats have already pushed out or marginalized most of the moderates in their party. Research votes on issues in the House and Senate from the early – mid 80′s to now and ratings by groups like Americans for Democratic Action, which tracks votes on issues important to the far left. The numbers cannot be argued, the party has moved much farther left. Now Coulter wants to see the same thing in the Republican party. Calling someone a “whining baby” because they question the wisdom of voting for someone like O’Donnell is idiotic. Kill all moderates seems to be the theme these days. Are we headed for civil war?

“It’s funny because the blind partisans still haven’t figured out the way this country works yet….”

yep, hope and change, how’s that working for you? Talk about blind partisans……

Jackie_Treehorn said:
And that’s why the Tea Baggers will be irrelevant in 2 years.

Highly doubtful. You’re talking about a movement that started in 2009 with a few local protests, and is now enormous. If you think the movement will be irrelevent in 2 years, dream on.

Jackie_Treehorn said:
It’s funny because the blind partisans still haven’t figured out the way this country works yet….

Of course, you’re talking about the blind partisans on both sides……..right?

Jackie_Treehorn said:
And that’s why the Tea Baggers will be irrelevant in 2 years.

You libs are irrelevant NOW!

Say goodbye 11/2/2010!

Ann Coulter is correct, these people are whiners…

It proves my point…When times are tough, you find out what people are really made of….During the good times, they all look and sound alike.

Dede Scozzafava,NY drops out of the Congressional race and endorses her former Democratic opponent after Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman experienced a late-in-the-game surge.

Charlie Christ, FL switched to Independent after losing the primary.

Lisa Murkowski, AK, runs as an independent after losing the primary.

Tom Tancredo, CO runs for Governor because he did not like the results of the primary.

Mike Castle is considering a write-in campaign for the Senate seat he lost in the primary.

Arlen Specter, PA switched parties so that he wouldn’t lose the primary, then loses the primary.

“Accordingly, I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your President.”
In a speech to be delivered by Barack O’Bama on or before March 31, 2012, Original quote from LBJ’s, 3/31/68 speech to the nation!

Jackie….let me know how that theory works for you on Nov 3.

Please…do not assume my message was only about Republican.

It holds true for Democrats as well.

It is a people thing…not a political party thing.

That’s one mean dude.

well, i kind of enjoyed her tweaking Hannity, who is a boy scout & intellectual cripple.

Go on people. Propel the Tea Party folks to power. It will make the Dark Ages seem smart by comparison

Penguin60 said:
“It’s funny because the blind partisans still haven’t figured out the way this country works yet….” yep, hope and change, how’s that working for you? Talk about blind partisans……

Go back, read his full comment, not just the part that allows you to dismiss him in your mind. It dealt with both parties and their disregard for the moderate voice. BOTH PARTIES.

moriarty70 said:
Go back, read his full comment, not just the part that allows you to dismiss him in your mind. It dealt with both parties and their disregard for the moderate voice. BOTH PARTIES.

Nevermind I thought that was refering to a different comment. I screwed up.

Andy Lamb said:
Democrats have already pushed out or marginalized most of the moderates in their party. Research votes on issues in the House and Senate from the early – mid 80’s to now and ratings by groups like Americans for Democratic Action, which tracks votes on issues important to the far left. The numbers cannot be argued, the party has moved much farther left. Now Coulter wants to see the same thing in the Republican party. Calling someone a “whining baby” because they question the wisdom of voting for someone like O’Donnell is idiotic. Kill all moderates seems to be the theme these days. Are we headed for civil war?

Andy: A reasonable voice in an unreasonable world!

You know what’s funny; only the people looking to turn america into a one party, one political spectrum nation can call Obama, democrats and moderates cry baby nazis.

gordonbloyershow said:
Ann is right as usual.

Be sure to tell her that when she comes on your show, Rush.

Penguin60 said:
“It’s funny because the blind partisans still haven’t figured out the way this country works yet….”

yep, hope and change, how’s that working for you? Talk about blind partisans……

Yes because my support of Hillary in the primaries and my constant shit talking on Obama shows how much of an Obama lover I am…..

Another funny thing with you guys. You think it’s one extreme or the other never can be anything down the line. While I don’t like Obama I REALLY don’t like the Tea Baggers and the other right wing loons.

crazywater said:
Jackie….let me know how that theory works for you on Nov 3.

Wow another right winger with reading comprehension issues….color me surprised.

She said that?

On Hannity?

A profile in courage.

Jackie_Treehorn said:
Yes because my support of Hillary in the primaries and my constant shit talking on Obama shows how much of an Obama lover I am…..

Another funny thing with you guys. You think it’s one extreme or the other never can be anything down the line. While I don’t like Obama I REALLY don’t like the Tea Baggers and the other right wing loons.

Jackie, trying to reason here is like arguing with a 2-year-old.

Jackie_Treehorn said:
Yes because my support of Hillary in the primaries and my constant shit talking on Obama shows how much of an Obama lover I am…..

Another funny thing with you guys. You think it’s one extreme or the other never can be anything down the line. While I don’t like Obama I REALLY don’t like the Tea Baggers and the other right wing loons.

9/10 they can’t eve tell you 1 thing Obama has done. All they know is what they’ve googled.

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
9/10 they can’t eve tell you 1 thing Obama has done. All they know is what they’ve googled.

should be 9 times out of 10

Jackie, enough of these rants of yours against Obama. You’re really starting to go over the top.

Jackie_Treehorn said:
Yes because my support of Hillary in the primaries and my constant shit talking on Obama shows how much of an Obama lover I am….. Another funny thing with you guys. You think it’s one extreme or the other never can be anything down the line. While I don’t like Obama I REALLY don’t like the Tea Baggers and the other right wing loons.

That’s funny, I do not consider myself a TEA Party member. I have been to their rally’s and I have been to Democrat rally’s specifically for Murtha(when he was alive) Sestak and Critz. My problem with loons like you is that I don’t believe you have attended a TEA PArty meeting or listen to anything they have to say, you let LSDNBC and olberdork make your mind up for you. Tell me what exactly is “loon” about the TEA Party? Please don’t quote KOS.
I will concede that Hillary would be a step up the food chain from barry.

Remember when Mussolini said the same thing about Franco? Then, Hitler about Mussolini. Now, Mann Coulter about ….

“Mann Coulter”. LOL

But now, if someone had commented on Rachel Maddow in such a way, that wouldn’t be funny at all.

Penguin60 said:
That’s funny, I do not consider myself a TEA Party member. I have been to their rally’s and I have been to Democrat rally’s specifically for Murtha(when he was alive) Sestak and Critz. My problem with loons like you is that I don’t believe you have attended a TEA PArty meeting or listen to anything they have to say, you let LSDNBC and olberdork make your mind up for you. Tell me what exactly is “loon” about the TEA Party? Please don’t quote KOS.I will concede that Hillary would be a step up the food chain from barry.

I believe you are a Tea Partier. Normal Americans would make the plural of “rally” ,rallies, and not use the singular possessive. Tea Partiers often use singular possessive for plural. Not to be picayune ….

Well there you have it, Penguin. The King thinks you’re a tea partier, so you are. BTW, Robert. Have you shaved that beard yet? It looks like pubic hair.

“Not to be picayune ….”

But you are Blanche, you are………

And by the way, if I come to the point in my life that I care what the queen thinks, I’m just moving to FLA, getting the white shoes and belt and ending it all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEg_qLi0vaU&feature=youtube_gdata

Good grief!

writer said:
“Mann Coulter”. LOL But now, if someone had commented on Rachel Maddow in such a way, that wouldn’t be funny at all.

Well, it doesn’t work, does it? Ann — Mann, Rachel — Machel? That would be stoopid.

Penguin60 said:
“Not to be picayune ….” But you are Blanche, you are……… And by the way, if I come to the point in my life that I care what the queen thinks, I’m just moving to FLA, getting the white shoes and belt and ending it all.

I don’t live in Florida, so that’s fine with me. I recommend Naples. They’re pretty far right.

Robert, I didn’t say to use the exact wording for Maddow. Just meant similar comments, such as her looking ‘manly’.

“I don’t live in Florida, so that’s fine with me. I recommend Naples. They’re pretty far right.”

Thank God that’s fine with you. Internet ego’s are amazing…….

I’m sure that’s Florida’s loss.

Cornell Alums, Ann Coulter, Keith Olbermann, Laura Ingraham, and Bill Maher. Four of the more famous celebrity radical political pundits in their 40′s-50′s who have never been married. Is it these folks are sociopaths or closeted homos?

Andy Lamb said:
Calling someone a “whining baby” because they question the wisdom of voting for someone like O’Donnell is idiotic

They are “whining babies” because they refuse to gracefully accept the fact that they lost in a fair election.

BTW, your argument is ridiculous. Yes, Democrats have driven out the moderates in their party and are now run by extreme leftists. But you think that moderate Republicans who are willing to compromise with the extremists are the answer. How exactly will that stop the extremist agenda of the Left?

pundits in their 40’s-50’s who have never been married.

Don’t know about the others, but I believe Maher leases.

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
Jackie, trying to reason here is like arguing with a 2-year-old.

So you ARE a 2 year old!

I thought so- your comments come across on the screen written in crayon.

Penguin60 said:
That’s funny, I do not consider myself a TEA Party member. I have been to their rally’s and I have been to Democrat rally’s specifically for Murtha(when he was alive) Sestak and Critz. My problem with loons like you is that I don’t believe you have attended a TEA PArty meeting or listen to anything they have to say, you let LSDNBC and olberdork make your mind up for you. Tell me what exactly is “loon” about the TEA Party? Please don’t quote KOS.
I will concede that Hillary would be a step up the food chain from barry.

I was at the Tax Rally in Medford Oregon in April of last year and was in attendance at Defazio’s Town Hall last year where the majority of anti health care sign holders were screaming loons.

Maybe loons was over the top. I should’ve went with uninformed which is the conclusion I have come to when most of the attendees were holding signs bitching about tax hikes when 97% of the country (and I’d say 100% of the attendees) received tax breaks and the even more hilarious Death Panel and Medicare signs at the Town Hall.

I have listened to plenty of what the Tea Baggers have to say in person and in other mediums which has led me to discount them as a lunatic fringe group that’s being taken advantage of by the elite.

notsofast said:
So you ARE a 2 year old!

I thought so- your comments come across on the screen written in crayon.

Pot meet kettle….

Only thing is yours are from the two year old who’s daddy left pregnant mommy which led her to drink and snort meth while still carrying you.

A day earlier, in Milwaukee, in front of an audience of more sympathetic businessmen, McCain had been asked how debate over the immigration bill was playing politically. “In the short term, it probably galvanizes our base,” he said. “In the long term, if you alienate the Hispanics, you’ll pay a heavy price.” Then he added, unable to help himself, “By the way, I think the fence is least effective. But I’ll build the goddamned fence if they want it.”

Oh..MyGod! You’re Like Totally Right, As Usual, Daddy! DUH!

HEY! WHO BOOSTED MY APPLE FRITTERS!? GRRR!

Jackie_Treehorn said:
a lunatic fringe group

My understanding is that the Tea Party believes in smaller government, lower taxes, following the American Constitution, individual freedom, and the free market.

Leftist Democrats don’t believe in any of that.

Yep, the Tea Party sure sounds like lunatics to me.

Jackie_Treehorn said:
Yes because my support of Hillary in the primaries and my constant shit talking on Obama shows how much of an Obama lover I am…..

Another funny thing with you guys. You think it’s one extreme or the other never can be anything down the line. While I don’t like Obama I REALLY don’t like the Tea Baggers and the other right wing loons.

It’s OK Jackie, no one likes you either.

Patrick Henry said:
It’s OK Jackie, no one likes you either.

Good thing your mom, sister, wife, grandmother and any other female relatives you have do then huh? ;-)

Azarkhan said:
They are “whining babies” because they refuse to gracefully accept the fact that they lost in a fair election.

If you’re talking about Castle or Murkowski, who whined when they lost, OK. Coulter also seemed to be talking about folks like Charles Krauthammer, who questions O’Donnell’s chances of winning against Coons, as do I. If I end up being wrong, I’ll come on here, seek you out, and apologize. I think she’s got almost no shot of winning.

Azarkhan said:
BTW, your argument is ridiculous. Yes, Democrats have driven out the moderates in their party and are now run by extreme leftists. But you think that moderate Republicans who are willing to compromise with the extremists are the answer. How exactly will that stop the extremist agenda of the Left?

In your opinion. It will be very difficult to ever get a hard core conservative elected to the Senate in states like Maine or Deleware. If one is going to get the GOP nod, it would at least be nice if he/she was a strong candidate. O’Donnell is not. If my choices are Castle or Coons (which I think they were) then I take Castle. We’ll see what happens.

Jackie_Treehorn said:
Pot meet kettle….

Only thing is yours are from the two year old who’s daddy left pregnant mommy which led her to drink and snort meth while still carrying you.

What a retort! You are a creative genius when it comes to crap.

“While I don’t like Obama I REALLY don’t like the Tea Baggers and the other right wing loons.” I can understand your dislike of “right wing loons,” you’re more left wing from what I gather, but isn’t the Tea Party about fiscal responsibility? What’s looney about that? Spending money you don’t have seems looney to me. Or is it that you think it’s just a front for the Republican party? That I can understand, distain for fiscal responsibility I do not. Cheers.

Jackie_Treehorn said:
I should’ve went with uninformed which is the conclusion I have come to when most of the attendees were holding signs bitching about tax hikes when 97% of the country (and I’d say 100% of the attendees) received tax breaks.

When you look at everything that has either been taxed, or is proposed to be taxed, NO ONE is getting a tax break under the current administration. Unless, of course, you’re counting people who pay no taxes at all to begin with. They are receiving a number of “tax rebates”, so I suppose if you call giving additional tax dollars to people who aren’t paying to begin with, then yes, a few people are getting their “taxes” cut under Mr. Obama.

Azarkhan said:
My understanding is that the Tea Party believes in smaller government, lower taxes, following the American Constitution, individual freedom, and the free market. Leftist Democrats don’t believe in any of that. Yep, the Tea Party sure sounds like lunatics to me.

That’s the point. I find it odd that someone that has listened to “plenty of what Teabaggers(sic) have to say in person” call them lunatics. How so? Uninformed? What did Pelosi say, we have to pass it to know what’s in it? Who’s uninformed. The libs ripped Bush about government intrusion and they do the lemming imitation when it comes to health care, seems more than a little hypocritical.

Here is a WHOPPER, a QUOTE from Coons in his debate with O’Donnell last night –

“As we look to Washington, we see a place that is broken down,” Coons began. “For many of us who voted for change, we have not yet gotten the change that we hoped and worked for.”

All I can say is……WOW! This guy slams Obama right out of the gate. The President is hemorrhaging support so fast it is unreal. I have never, ever seen anything like this – ever. I told people WHEN HE GOT ELECTED that he would be a one term President, but I never imagined it would get this bad. Hillary is watching……more closely than ever.

Jackie_Treehorn said:
Only thing is yours are from the two year old who’s daddy left pregnant mommy which led her to drink and snort meth while still carrying you.

Ahhhhhhh, go to a neurosurgeon for an estimate, and take you flies with you.

You are proof that manure can grow hands and type.

Andy Lamb said:
It will be very difficult to ever get a hard core conservative elected to the Senate in states like Maine or Deleware

That’s two. However, there are 50 states.

Andy Lamb said:
If you’re talking about Castle or Murkowski, who whined when they lost,

And Specter and Crist. Not only do these turncoats not accept defeat, but like Murkowski, and probably Castle (who is now “polling” to see if he can win), they actually mount campaigns against their own party.

Sorry, but they are no different then big-government Democratic swine. They have to go.

Andy Lamb said:
who questions O’Donnell’s chances of winning against Coons,

It is fine to question whether someone can win. But to publically provide talking points to the Democrats the way Karl Rove did on the night of O’Donnell’s victory is beyond the pale.

Rush was right. If the objective is to get 51 seats, then the Republicans should go “balls to wall” for ALL of their candidates. Of course, we know that the Republican establishment if more concerned about retaining power then supporting patriots like Sarah Palin or the Tea Party.

zzzZZZP

I see you need the perspective of the Great Gazoo…

OK, dumdums, here’s how the parties have shifted over the past 40 years:

GOP Dem
1970 right-of center left-of-center
1980 center-right center
1990 center-right center-right
2000 hard-right left-of-center
2010 extreme-right center-left
2020 (est) extinct center

Class dismissed.

Interesting. I notice there is no extreme left.

Azarkhan said:
My understanding is that the Tea Party believes in smaller government, lower taxes, following the American Constitution, individual freedom, and the free market.

I bet some of them do, but their leaders sure don’t. They believe in repealing the 14th and 17th Amendments, eliminating Social Security and Medicare, individual freedom for corporations to own the political process, and a market that is just free enough for corporate multinationals to dominate global trade, but not free enough to allow new startups to compete. You’re right, Democrats don’t believe in any of that crap.

But I’m sure there’s a job for you in corporate security somewhere. Good luck with that. ;-)

writer said:
Interesting. I notice there is no extreme left.

Only the GOP has allowed their party to be hijacked by their own extremists. Ergo… ;-)

To paraphrase Bill Clinton, I guess it depends on what your definition of ‘extreme’ is. For many of you on the left, Chairman Mao and Stalin could have been classified as ‘middle of the road’.

Paul Westlake said:
Only the GOP has allowed their party to be hijacked by their own extremists.

LOL. Just a question fool: are you on the payroll of the Democratic Party, or do you make up lies for free?

Azarkhan said:
LOL. Just a question fool: are you on the payroll of the Democratic Party, or do you make up lies for free?

Wow, look at you attracting flies with honey. I think I’ve seen you say something smart once or twice. Tough break losing a stupid streak like that. ;-)

writer said:
Mao and Stalin

Really?

hahahahaha

Paul Westlake said:
Wow, look at you attracting flies with honey

Actually, you are more like a gnat. So how much are they paying you?

hahahahaha

What a coincidence, Paul. I was thinking the same thing about your denial of extreme leftists in the Democratic party.

Paul Westlake said:
I bet some of them do, but their leaders sure don’t. They believe in repealing the 14th and 17th Amendments, eliminating Social Security and Medicare, individual freedom for corporations to own the political process, and a market that is just free enough for corporate multinationals to dominate global trade, but not free enough to allow new startups to compete. You’re right, Democrats don’t believe in any of that crap. But I’m sure there’s a job for you in corporate security somewhere. Good luck with that. ;-)

Did you just cut and paste that off the Kos? Another lemming takes the dive…………

“Interestingly, though, Coulter also said she didn’t really want Republicans to win both houses of Congress, because “then Obama will get a second term like Bill Clinton did.”

She is exactly right. The best case scenario for Obama is that the republicans take both houses. Then, in two years, Obama will be sharing the blame for the economy.

Michelle has said being first lady is ‘hell’. Best case scenario, she talks Barry out of running again.

“Badness of a second term for Obama > Goodness of saving the entire country.”

Heck that’s the directive the Repubs have been working under since he entered office almost 2 years ago. Anyone who hasn’t noticed something that was so blatantly obvious within the first couple of weeks by now is simply being delusional. And in the case of Cons it’s extremely hypocritical that they would spout about wanting to help the country but be hellbent on trying to destroy one man over trying to actually help the country.

It seems that most of the career politicians (any party), big business, bankers and talking heads still don’t get it. A lot of Americans don’t like much of what has occurred over the past 30+ years. Elitists, money mongrels, lobbyists and unions all conspire to buy votes from congressmen. They consider themselves the elite and the royalty and will continue to live this way until enough people rise up and make the needed changes. We need to enforce greater moral and ethical standards for all of them. I now have more of a voice, and will support whomever is thinking in that direction.

Azarkhan said:
Actually, you are more like a gnat. So how much are they paying you?

Ooh. I feel the burn. Did you?

Not paid, schmuck. Just honest. Try it sometime. ;-)

Penguin60 said:
Did you just cut and paste that off the Kos? Another lemming takes the dive…………

Got anything to dispute those points or just your third grade-level sarcasm?

… yeah, that’s what I thought.

writer said:
Michelle has said being first lady is ‘hell’. Best case scenario, she talks Barry out of running again.

The person she allegedly said that to said she never said that in a recent interview. Stay fact free, it’s safer. ;-)

writer said:
What a coincidence, Paul. I was thinking the same thing about your denial of extreme leftists in the Democratic party.

Point them out, along with their extremist policies, as I have done. Or you can just continue to prove that you’re a reactionary because it just “feels” right. I know facts suck sometimes, but it’s what we have. Deal with it. ;-)

Paul Westlake said:
Just honest

But of course you are.

hey Jackie_Treehorn from one Hillary supporter to another…

how about dropping the tea bagger slur?

its petty and very disrespectful and Mrs Clinton would never – ever EVER approve.

Ive never seen anyone but Obamacrats use it – please refrain…youre better than that…

Ann Coulter, now that is who should play the bad witch in a remake of The Wizard of Oz. You know she and Laura Ingraham are in the closet.
They both speak for the super rich and left morality at the door. A reality check is coming though.

and the author of the book which had michelle (Ill scratch his eyes out ) Obama say that her life in the WH was hell sticks to her reporting and said that of course – they would deny it from both sides.

dcmediasux said:
Ive never seen anyone but Obamacrats use it

Except for today… and all the other times… but who’s counting? LOL

Oh, and Jackie, on the off chance that you’re not just another incarnation of DCMediaFraud, DC is NOT a Hillary supporter, he’s a Republican acting like a deranged Democrat.

Hiya, Fraudster! ;-)

Azarkhan said:
But of course you are.

Thanks for noticing. ;-)

oh look my personal stalker (and nutcase) paul westlake has put his picture up!

whod a thunk hed look like the quintisential net nerd live in his mama’s basement demented paranoid conspiracy nut kossack wannabe “citizen journalist”?

ME!

I mean just LOOK at this dude!

LOSER squared….

(I so own this freak – I bet he DREAMS about me!)

and just for him -

Both Bush and Obama Sux –

Hillary 2012!

(or just give the job over to Biden – id be OK with that)

oh and hes wearing a “press pass” – he MUST be important!

and hey genius – why if me and jackie too – why would i post a comment asking her to play nicer?

you are SUCH a weird confused twit!

excuse moi:

“why if Im me and jackie too”

sorry dufus.

Oh, Fraudster. I know how your juvenile mind works… just like a Republican.

Call me a stalker all you like, but judging by the amount and tone of the comments between us, it’s pretty clear who is completely unhinged here. ;-)

OK, media whore, back to your safe anonymity. ;-)

Writer said:
What a coincidence, Paul. I was thinking the same thing about your denial of extreme leftists in the Democratic party.

Paul Westlake said:
Point them out, along with their extremist policies, as I have done. Or you can just continue to prove that you’re a reactionary because it just “feels” right. I know facts suck sometimes, but it’s what we have. Deal with it. ;-)

Go here, to this left agenda watchdog website called Americans for Democratic Action. They’ve been following the liberal agenda since 1947 –

http://www.adaction.org/pages/publications/voting-records.php

In 1985, for example, there were 253 Democrats in the House, the ADA considered only 20 of them “all-stars”, Dems who voted as liberally as could possibly be rated.

In 2009, there were 255 Democrats in the House, the ADA rated 98 of them liberal all-stars.

That’s 5 times as many absolute far left, as hard core as possible liberals from 1985 to 2009. 7.9% of the House members in 1985, as opposed to 38.4% now are as far left as is humanly possible.

And you say above that only the GOP has allowed their party to be hijacked? Sure doesn’t seem that way.

Is that fact rich enough for ya?

dahni said:
It seems that most of the career politicians (any party), big business, bankers and talking heads still don’t get it. A lot of Americans don’t like much of what has occurred over the past 30+ years. Elitists, money mongrels, lobbyists and unions all conspire to buy votes from congressmen. They consider themselves the elite and the royalty and will continue to live this way until enough people rise up and make the needed changes. We need to enforce greater moral and ethical standards for all of them. I now have more of a voice, and will support whomever is thinking in that direction.

Hit the nail on the head. Two things that really need to happen are Congressional term limits and finance reform.

Ann is shoulders above Hannity in intelligence. She also does it for the money, hence, I can never take much of what she says seriously. She’s correct to point out the whiny, incorrect regarding Republicans getting great things passed. They kind of had control of stuff for a spell and ran it into the ground. And, with new plan for America which is Same Old Plan for Americuh, can’t agree with Ann.

She’s less evil than Ingraham (sociopath). Ann’s not gay. Maher is pretty much a manwhore and Olbermann is an arse. So, aside from sociopath applying to Cornell grad Laura Ingraham, the rest are neither gay nor sociopaths.

One thing I will say about Tea Partiers: aside from shared social conservatism and fiscal “responsibility”, they’re not a cohesive group that one word/phrase will summarize but they’re pretty much older and whiter.

Oh, and the Tea Party itself is the initial coiner of the term “teabaggers” to describe themselves. Can’t help if the rest of us sniggered and said, “okay, if you want to call yourselves that, won’t stop you…” and then thought to ourselves if they knew the low-brow definition of “teabag”.

Andy Lamb said:
In 1985, for example, there were 253 Democrats in the House, the ADA considered only 20 of them “all-stars”, Dems who voted as liberally as could possibly be rated.

In 2009, there were 255 Democrats in the House, the ADA rated 98 of them liberal all-stars.

That’s 5 times as many absolute far left, as hard core as possible liberals from 1985 to 2009. 7.9% of the House members in 1985, as opposed to 38.4% now are as far left as is humanly possible.

And you say above that only the GOP has allowed their party to be hijacked? Sure doesn’t seem that way.

Is that fact rich enough for ya?

Yes it is, and it perfectly reflects my timeline above. If you base “extreme” on the politics of 1985, when the GOP was center-right and the Dems had drifted almost totally to the center, of course today’s Dems will look “extreme” by comparison. But if you go back just ten more years, the numbers are much closer. Go back ten more, and this Democratic party is further to the right. The measure is not whether or not some independent group’s ratings, it’s policy. Mid-80s Dem policy was very centrist. By the mid-90s, it was right-of-center (“the era of big government is over”). It has since drifted back to the more traditional Democratic center-left policy position. That’s not extreme, that’s back to normal.

Meanwhile, over that same period, almost all moderate Republicans have been purged from the party, including a popular governor who would be a shoe-in for the Senate (Crist) in any other climate. Even the most staunch Republican analysts know that Reagan would be considered liberal by today’s standards, and Nixon would be reviled as a liberal RINO. I don’t see ANY equivalency in the Democratic party.

And, by the way, I thought “as far left as is humanly possible” was called “communism.” Can we watch the hyperbole, please. ;-)

Paul Westlake said:
And, by the way, I thought “as far left as is humanly possible” was called “communism.” Can we watch the hyperbole, please. ;-)

No, as far Left as you can go is Socialism. When you get to Comminism you wrap back around to the Right since that focuses on controlling what you can think or say.

Orion Antares said:
No, as far Left as you can go is Socialism. When you get to Comminism you wrap back around to the Right since that focuses on controlling what you can think or say.

I could nitpick, but let’s not get bogged down in political science when we all know there has never been a pure iteration of any of those labels in existence in human history… except maybe before we left the caves. ;-)

Paul Westlake said:
They believe in repealing the 14th and 17th Amendments, eliminating Social Security and Medicare, individual freedom for corporations to own the political process, and a market that is just free enough for corporate multinationals to dominate global trade, but not free enough to allow new startups to compete.

“Got anything to dispute those points or just your third grade-level sarcasm?”

Tossing out allegations without proof, now that’s 3rd grade. How about some proof, and not from your favorite libby news like Kos, huff and puff or Daily Beast. I doubt you’ve talked to anybody right of olberdork. Another shill that let’s LSDNBC do his thinking for him….congrats.

“I don’t see ANY equivalency in the Democratic party.”

Some people value principle more than power. I know that’s a foreign idea to libs.

Paul, since you’re out there in the far left stratosphere, of course there are very few people who seem extreme leftist to you. You probably consider Bill Ayers to be just another college professor, and Keith Olbermann to be an unbiased journalist.

this info is for my personal stalker Paulwestlake and any other fool that thinks that Hillary supporters are backing Obama.

from George Wills column today- a column about how PA 8′s Patrick Murphy will be losing in 40 days.

“Although Bill Clinton campaigned for Murphy in 2006, perhaps with his wife’s 2008 presidential candidacy in mind, Murphy became the first Pennsylvanian holding federal office to endorse Barack Obama’s candidacy. Today, the Clinton-Obama contest still reverberates.

Political analyst Charles Cook doesn’t hire dummies, and one of his talented associates, David Wasserman, has this theory: Democratic members of Congress who are in peril are disproportionately from districts where Democrats preferred Hillary Clinton over Obama in 2008. She decisively beat Obama in the 8th District with 63 percent, and in November 2008 her voters were not Obama swooners: They simply hired him to fix the economy.”

i worked in PA in 2006 for true Clintonite Joe Sestak in 2006 and remember very well what a fake Murphy is . (he lied about his military service) remember that Obama and Axelrod then went out of their way to screw Joe by backing that P.O.S> Snarlin Arlin…but PA real Dems said FU Barry and chose him anyway.

Real democrats – as opposed to worshipful Obamacrats will do whatever it takes to win our Party back ESPECIALLY if that means that frauds like Pelosi and Clyburn – who said over and over again that they were neutral in 2008 – while doing everything they could to stab both Clintons lose their positions in the DEM leadership.

If we could just kick them out and put in my man Steny Hoyer as Speaker – id be for that – but thats not how it works – but once these fools lose us the House – their leadership days are DONE and Steny will be elected the next t inority leader – you watch!

oh and just for your info – heres a link to all the pro hillary – anti Obama PUMA sites on the net

LIST OF JUST SAY NO DEAL COALITION MEMBERS:
writehillaryin.com
clintondems.com
swingcrats.org
hireheels.com
hillarysupporters.com
clintons4mccain.com
hillarygrassrootscampaign.com
riverdaughter.wordpress.com
hillaryclintonforum.net
womenforfairpolitics.com
donedems.com
pumaparty.com
hillaryunited.com
savagepolitics.com
seatourdelegates.com
noquarterusa.net
liberalrapture.com
nowewont.org
shutthefreudup.com
pumapac.org
petitionforhowarddeantoresignasdncchair
petitionpledgetovoteagainstobama
petitionhillarydontbevp
millionwomenmarch.blogspot.com
obamawtf.blogspot.com
rezkowatch.blogspot.com
pumapac.blogspot.com
clintondem.blogspot.com
fair-reflection.blogspot.com
bluelyon.blogspot.com
comealongway.blogspot.com
reflections-in-tyme.blogspot.com
mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com
worstlittlecaucusintexas.blogspot.com
caucusconfession.blogspot.com
caucuscheating.blogspot.com
florida-michigan.blogspot.com
floridavoters.blogspot.com
hillaryorbust.blogspot.com
politicaldiscontent.blogspot.com
independentsformccain.blogspot.com
americaforhillary.blogspot.com
whatsuddenly.blogspot.com
panmetron.blogspot.com
typicalpawhitewoman.blogspot.com
politicallizard.blogspot.com
nobamablog.blogspot.com
investigatebarackobama.blogspot.com
hillarygreenmountain.com
floridademandsrepresentation
latinosforclinton.com
paresidentsforhillary.com
hillary-clintons-voice.com
walkamileinourshoes.org
misshillaryclinton.com
democrats-against-obama.org
writeinpartyusa.org
knowobama.org
reclusiveleftist.com
givemehill.com
helphillary.org
hillary-wins.com
sugarnspice
bitterpoliticz
insightanalytical
perrylogan
paganpower
4hillaryweblog
mudanpoliticalblog
mccainb4obama.com
citizenpressroom
justwatchmeburn.livejournal.com
capitalhillforum.com
hillaryisourchoice.com
no-obama09.com
f-u-dnc
hcsfjm.com
lobbydelegates.com

Lets just hope that Obama does the right thing and announces that he wont be running again -(for the good of the Party) and then actual Democrats can then proudly elect a real Democrat to the White House!

Hillary 2012!

dahni said:
It seems that most of the career politicians (any party), big business, bankers and talking heads still don’t get it. A lot of Americans don’t like much of what has occurred over the past 30+ years. Elitists, money mongrels, lobbyists and unions all conspire to buy votes from congressmen. They consider themselves the elite and the royalty and will continue to live this way until enough people rise up and make the needed changes. We need to enforce greater moral and ethical standards for all of them. I now have more of a voice, and will support whomever is thinking in that direction.

You will be reviled by the left as a “teabagger” and a wingnut, so be prepared.
I agree with your above comments, but anything said against the current machine will be attacked.
They don’t get it that the bailouts, handouts, and spending need to be checked. A lot of people who were apolitical have had enough, it’s too much for them.

dcmediasux said:
this info is for my personal stalker Paulwestlake and any other fool that thinks that Hillary supporters are backing Obama.

aside from the sites that don’t exist, the ones that now have chinese jibberish, whatever sugarnspice (on the xxx sites again?) there are blogs that have not been updated since 2008 and this
Now that the 2008 Presidential Primary season has wrapped-up

Yeah Hillary – now like burnnotice told another commenter the other night
start a blog – threadhog

Penguin60 said:
Tossing out allegations without proof, now that’s 3rd grade. How about some proof, and not from your favorite libby news like Kos, huff and puff or Daily Beast. I doubt you’ve talked to anybody right of olberdork. Another shill that let’s LSDNBC do his thinking for him….congrats.

Um… go read their fucking campaign websites and maybe a newspaper once in a while. The facts I mentioned are obvious and widely reported. I know when I need to dig up the proof, like when I cited copious academia to debunk the “forgotten depression” heroism of Warren Harding in another thread last night (hint: it was the Fed). You want call me out? Go ahead, but pick something a little less obvious next time.

Penguin60 said:
“I don’t see ANY equivalency in the Democratic party.”

Some people value principle more than power. I know that’s a foreign idea to libs.

Wow. A slightly refreshing take on a tired old retread. Not terrible. Not funny, or very clever. But not terrible.

You should listen to your copy of the “The Little Engine That Could” again. That oughta help. ;-)

writer said:
Paul, since you’re out there in the far left stratosphere, of course there are very few people who seem extreme leftist to you. You probably consider Bill Ayers to be just another college professor, and Keith Olbermann to be an unbiased journalist.

[sigh] I have stated repeatedly, and even to you, that I don’t defend Keith as a newsman. He’s a partisan. Rachel is a progressive, of that there is no doubt. She is also more fair in her interviews and reporting than anyone on Fox, hands down. I know you think that’s a deranged point of view. You really don’t have to tell me that again. ;-)

Um… go read their fucking campaign websites and maybe a newspaper once in a while.

You must be a journolist major. Yep, it’s obvious, they want to repeal the 14th and 17th amendments everybody knows that……Try 2 Xanax next time.
My guess is you never had a principled thought in your head.

Thanks for not disappointing, another classy lib……….

Penguin60 said:
Um… go read their fucking campaign websites and maybe a newspaper once in a while.

You must be a journolist major. Yep, it’s obvious, they want to repeal the 14th and 17th amendments everybody knows that……Try 2 Xanax next time.
My guess is you never had a principled thought in your head.

Thanks for not disappointing, another classy lib……….

Oh, for crying out loud!

14th – http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/05/rand-paul-deny-citizenship-kids-illegal-immigrants/
17th – http://repealthe17thamendment.blogspot.com/2010/05/rand-paul-wins-gop-nomination.html
The real Sharon Angle – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJ0xa1K82Fc
Her new image… for now – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZBkHSnE1B4

And it’s not like trying to eliminate Social Security is anything new to the right wing.

Now, go do your own homework for a change… and get a fucking job, ya freeloading conservative. ;-)

Rachel is more fair than anyone on Fox? Have you ever seen some of the guests on Fox shows? Hannity has had on Rev. Wright and Michael Moore. Beck has had on Al Sharpton. O’Reilly has had Jon Stewart on twice, has had members of the black panthers and Code Pink, and has Mark Lamont Hill as a regular guest. And O’Reilly frequently invites anyone who thinks he’s wrong to be a guest. But because the Fox hosts’ opinions don’t jibe with yours, then they’re ‘unfair’.

writer said:
Rachel is more fair than anyone on Fox? Have you ever seen some of the guests on Fox shows? Hannity has had on Rev. Wright and Michael Moore. Beck has had on Al Sharpton. O’Reilly has had Jon Stewart on twice, has had members of the black panthers and Code Pink, and has Mark Lamont Hill as a regular guest. And O’Reilly frequently invites anyone who thinks he’s wrong to be a guest. But because the Fox hosts’ opinions don’t jibe with yours, then they’re ‘unfair’.

No, dimwit, when the interview is abusive, in EXACTLY the way you accuse Rachel of conducting her interviews. Only Hannity does it in spades. And then he lobs softball after softball to meatheads like Liz Cheney. Rachel asks tough questions of PROGRESSIVES. The only time Hannity EVER gets in a GOP kitchen is when they’re violating Reagan’s 11th commandment, as we recently saw with Rove, and even then he was still a puppy dog. If a Dem had been sitting in Rove’s chair, making the identical statements, I don’t know if Hannity would have been able to contain himself.

Hey those false equivalencies keep you safe and warm, so you hang onto your blue blanket. And never, ever question right wing orthodoxy – since that would automatically negate your entire existence. I get it. I just don’t think I need to agree with all that for you to survive. ;-)

lers try again touchy-

from todays will column in todays wash post (and 200 other papers)

“…Today, the Clinton-Obama contest still reverberates.

Political analyst Charles Cook doesn’t hire dummies, and one of his talented associates, David Wasserman, has this theory: Democratic members of Congress who are in peril are disproportionately from districts where Democrats preferred Hillary Clinton over Obama in 2008. She decisively beat Obama in the 8th District with 63 percent, and in November 2008 her voters were not Obama swooners: ….”

First we win back our Party – then we’ll win back the White House!

STENY HOYER FOR MINORITY LEADER!

writer you are very, very right on this…

Penguin60 said:
A lot of people who were apolitical have had enough, it’s too much for them.

SINCE JANUARY 20, 2009, [a] lot of people WHO WERE REGISTERED REPUBLICANS AND TRIED TO CLAIM THE MANTLE “INDEPENDENT” have had enough, it’s too much for them, BUT ONLY SINCE JANUARY 20, 2009. Fixed for accuracy. You’re welcome.

When people say “far right loons” are you referring to someone who wants the government limited to what the Constitution authorizes the government to do? Why do you people require a snappy name for everything? How about if we use “truth” and “not truth”?

If someone said that a football field should change to be 110 yards long in the middle of the game, and then I complained about not following the rules, would you call me a conservative? A fundamentalist? A far-right loon? Party of no? Inflexible? Or at that point would you start making fun of me personally, like the size of my adam’s apple, or how I use punctuation, or whether my daughter was married when she had a kid?

Sometimes I wonder if you are really concerned about the good of society, or if you have been swept up in drinking Kool-aid from one party or another. I care about what is right. You care about who is right.

threadhog?

sorry no touchy …i dont know net nerd speak…

and why is it that you kossack obot blog warriors always eventually end up making sex comments as insults?

projection?

maybe “no touchy touchy” actually describes your own private life in yo mama’s basement…

dcmediasux said:
and why is it that you kossack obot blog warriors always eventually end up making sex comments as insults? maybe “no touchy touchy” actually describes your own private life in yo mama’s basement…

Well said, kossack obot blog warrior.

dcmediasux said:
from todays will column in todays wash post (and 200 other papers)

“…Today, the Clinton-Obama contest still reverberates.

In TWO papers, Washington Post and Denver Post, as far as I can see. Oh, and it’s an opinion column, you say? Oh no, what liberal columnist has chosen to drive a wedge into the party with this untimely act?

Oh no. It’s just George Will… again. Good old George Will, a man for all conservatives – hysterical, cynical, desperate for attention, and always trying to stir up trouble where it isn’t… kinda like DCMediaFraud. ;-)

Here’s the whole quote:
“Political analyst Charles Cook doesn’t hire dummies, and one of his talented associates, David Wasserman, has this theory: Democratic members of Congress who are in peril are disproportionately from districts where Democrats preferred Hillary Clinton over Obama in 2008.”

Well, there it is. One pollster, who works for another pollster, has a theory that George Will likes a lot, that NOBODY else is writing about. Could it be because it’s just a theory and an inconclusive one at that? Could it be that other theories make more sense? George won’t tell. Why not? Could it be because this theory can sow the seeds of dissent among Democrats? Well, I can’t blame George for trying, but only a Republican would want to do that in the middle of campaign season, right? Right?

LOL!

as a clinton dem i loathe the kossack net nerd scum scrum .

and their insider lingo…oh god…its so annoying and repellent ya just wanna go back in a time machine and personally thank the bullies who beat these dufuses up in junior high…

No, dimwit.

Who says the left resorts to name calling? And Paul, when did I say anything about Rachel’s interview style? Merely pointing out that if Fox is as unfair as you’re always claiming, what’s with all of the left wing guests? And Beck’s talk with Sharpton was so calm, it was almost sedative. If you’d actually watch Fox instead of repeating leftist talking points, maybe you’d have known that.

hey personalstalkerpaulwestlake – as a wannabe “new journalist” youd think youd of heard of the washington post writers group syndication…but obviously as a obamacrat “VJ trainer” with no understanding of actual politics that doesnt come to you except from msnbc and kos – you dont know who or what charl8ie cook is…

god you are such a total tool!

oh and nobodys writing about it?
havent you noticed you freak that the media is uh obama’s base? (outside of net nerd “oh my precious” lovers like you)

what a dim dumb bulb you are.

me thinks you should go find another obsession…maybe you should pretend that your a music journalist or a sports journalist or some other fantasy…

enjoy dreaming of me and if youd like to read some more of my other anonymous FUs to Obots like you from back in the day – go here

http://www.google.com/search?q=seymour+glass+mydd&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

im outta here – cause unlike you i got a life offline -

dcmediasux said:
lers try again touchy-

nice touch – nice to see you back in character

dcmediasux said:
Political analyst Charles Cook doesn’t hire dummies, and one of his talented associates, David Wasserman, has this theory: Democratic members of Congress who are in peril are disproportionately from districts where Democrats preferred Hillary Clinton over Obama in 2008. She decisively beat Obama in the 8th District with 63 percent, and in November 2008 her voters were not Obama swooners: ….”

Now – Let’s try again dcmedia (or would you prefer mr sux)
your copy paste that here that I addressed in another thread actually presents a case for Hillary supporters to get on board with the OBOTS. You are presenting a case that states Hillary supporters are in Peril so they will take back the white house.
You seem to be as thick at the character you are trying to play (trying but forgetting to be the stupid can’t spell leftie)
oh wait – here is the character you started to play and have now gotten back to

dcmediasux said:
as a clinton dem i loathe the kossack net nerd scum scrum .

and their insider lingo…oh god…its so annoying and repellent ya just wanna go back in a time machine and personally thank the bullies who beat these dufuses up in junior high…

If you are going to play a character, you need to do a better job.

writer – mypersonalstalkerpaulwestlake started cursing at me and using foul language right quick after i had the GALL to disagree with him when i first came her…now that i push his nerd weirdness back in his face – he whines and pretends that i am soooo mean to him.

whaaaaa!!!

thats how all of these kossack freaks roll – its in their – get back at the bullies who made me cry when i was 13 – DNA.

their truly pathetic…as Id bet youve already noticed.

GOTTA GO – LOVING YO STUFF MY MAN!

(proverb: the enemy of my enemy is my bud!)

hey get no touch -

dude – that made NO sense whatsoever!

and whose got time to f-ing use spell check when im typin with my thumbs?!

i know this shit matters to me – but to me – i just enjoy stickin my finger in yo eye!

you nimrods actually think these comment sites matter – which is so friggin DELUSIONAL!

i come her to annoy richards like you – dont you get it – thats the point!

god – you people are so truly deeply lost in your fantasies about yourselves -

HILLARYOUS!

40 days bubba till obamas the lamest of ducks- enjoy em!

oops see what i mean – i never look before i hit send -

I MEANT

i know this shit matters to YOU – but to me – i just enjoy stickin my finger in yo eye!

and out – enjoy your friday evening on huff post!

and oh yeah…

if you can find the “thread that actually presents a case for Hillary supporters to get on board with the OBOTS”

ill give $100 to that ass Kaine in your honor.

Paul Westlake said:
Yes it is, and it perfectly reflects my timeline above. If you base “extreme” on the politics of 1985, when the GOP was center-right and the Dems had drifted almost totally to the center, of course today’s Dems will look “extreme” by comparison. But if you go back just ten more years, the numbers are much closer. Go back ten more, and this Democratic party is further to the right. The measure is not whether or not some independent group’s ratings, it’s policy. Mid-80s Dem policy was very centrist. By the mid-90s, it was right-of-center (“the era of big government is over”). It has since drifted back to the more traditional Democratic center-left policy position. That’s not extreme, that’s back to normal. Meanwhile, over that same period, almost all moderate Republicans have been purged from the party, including a popular governor who would be a shoe-in for the Senate (Crist) in any other climate. Even the most staunch Republican analysts know that Reagan would be considered liberal by today’s standards, and Nixon would be reviled as a liberal RINO. I don’t see ANY equivalency in the Democratic party.

OK, so the factual numbers I posted don’t really tell the story, but your opinion does. You are actually saying that the Democratic Party was right of center in the mid 90′S? It surely was closer to the center than now, but right of center is a huge stretch. Or maybe just hyperbole on your part.

So that I’m straight here, you are saying that the 90′s Democratic Party was right of center. You’ve said on other threads that WJ Clinton was a great President. Am I then to assume that right of center policy is great policy?

On your party purge statement, the guy the GOP nominated for President in 2008 was a very moderate Republican who ran against the Democrat who most people concede is the most liberal President in U.S. history. GW Bush nor GHW Bush were very conservative. All the moderates have been purged?

Nixon was very pragmatic, and often bent his principles when circumstances warranted a different approach. On many issues, he had little choice given the political climate of the times he governed. He succeeded LBJ, who was basically a Socialist. To call Reagan a liberal is something far lefties like to do, but it is a ridiculous assertion. I can just as easily say that JFK would be a Republican by today’s standards – a hawk because of his strong stand against the Soviet Union and especially during the Cuban missile crisis, against any negotiation with Castro, personal beliefs against abortion, his one appointment to the Supreme Court opposed Roe vs Wade, tax cutter!

As I read over this blog about Ann Coulter I realize that we’re actually seeing a miracle happening right before our eyes. We’re witnessing the actual collapse of the Republican Party. When you see Ms. Coulter complaining about moderate Republicans whining like babies she’s also saying that the majority of people in this country are wimps and dupes and we must get into line or else. She’s one mean lady, even if it’s mostly made up. She sort of reminds me of Ilse Koch, the infamous “Blond Beast” concentration guard at Auschwitz. Seriously though,the Republicans have allowed a large group of insurgents to take over their party and the Tea Party is in reality not a genuine populist movement. If it was I along with millions of others would join in a heartbeat. The Tea Party is backed by the very same people who got us into this mess and their candidates are not qualified to lead anyone anywhere. We’ve watched for years how demagoguery and a corrupt corporative culture has brainwashed people into believing in irrational myths. To call any Democrat a leftist with the exception of Bernie Sanders shows how out of touch these people are. And it’s psychopathological misfits like Coulter, Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, O’Donnell, Bachmann, etc who will perform the coup de grace. I find it strange that the Teabaggers along with many of the hyper rightwingers on this blog take these people seriously. They have no rational ideas, programs or anything except an overriding desire to get rid bad, black, Muslim Obama. We’re beginning to see the polls slowly moving away from the extreme right as we get close to the election. Independents are having to face the fact that there is no alternative but to give Obama more time. He seems to have found his mojo and there’s a lot of help coming from the Clintons, and the court jesters, Stewart & Colbert are helping to demolish the hypocrisy surrounding all political discourse. The Tea Party will fizzle and the Republican Party will come back, but it will be more like the conservative parties in Europe who are miles to the left of American conservatives. The rightwing has done everything possible to deligitimitize government and they succeeded. We now need politicians who can put us back together again not take us backward. The rightwing had a chance to show us their mettle during the reign of Bush. He was a total failure and we’re not going to go back again thanks to the common sense of the majority of people in this country.

Andy Lamb said:
It surely was closer to the center than now, but right of center is a huge stretch. Or maybe just hyperbole on your part.

Yes, the top marginal tax rate went up and the family leave act came into being. But we also have welfare reform, gays in the military morphed into DADT, double-down on the war on drugs, expanding the scope of the death penalty, and doubling the prison population in eight years, NAFTA, health care reform shelved, education reform shelved, not just because the GOP controlled Congress, but because blue dog Democrats from the DLC dominated party policy. There was also the very neo-con intervention in Haiti. Sya what you will about Somalia, that was Bush Sr’s mess, and Bosnia and Kosovo involved many of our allies – Haiti was just us.

Andy Lamb said:
You’ve said on other threads that WJ Clinton was a great President.

I actually have not said Clinton was a great President. I have said he was better than Reagan, and I stick by that. But no, not great. Great Presidents in my book include Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, TR, FDR, Truman. Kennedy gets an honorable mention for the whole moon thing. ;-)

Andy Lamb said:
On your party purge statement, the guy the GOP nominated for President in 2008 was a very moderate Republican who ran against the Democrat who most people concede is the most liberal President in U.S. history. GW Bush nor GHW Bush were very conservative.

By the time McCain was nominated, he was far from the moderate McCain we all remembered from a bygone era, and there hasn’t really been a secret about McCain 2.0 for a good long time now. The man of character I knew from youth and young adulthood, was actually prepared to put Sarah Palin a heartbeat from the White House. No, the McCain you describe was lost to us long ago.

The only “most people” I know who label Obama thus are very partisan. And Bush Sr was plenty conservative, but he wasn’t delusional and raised taxes anyway. But W is a neo-con. Spending isn’t something he worried about… clearly.

Andy Lamb said:
He succeeded LBJ, who was basically a Socialist. To call Reagan a liberal is something far lefties like to do, but it is a ridiculous assertion.

Well, I certainly don’t call Reagan a liberal, but the comparison to today’s conservative is apt, and I’m amused by your assertion that LBJ was a socialist, especially in light of your assertion that Obama is the most liberal President in history. So you’re saying that Nixon had to compromise in the same environment that LBJ pushed the Great Society through, as the socialist that he was, but Obama is worse?

Andy Lamb said:
I can just as easily say that JFK would be a Republican by today’s standards – a hawk because of his strong stand against the Soviet Union and especially during the Cuban missile crisis, against any negotiation with Castro, personal beliefs against abortion, his one appointment to the Supreme Court opposed Roe vs Wade, tax cutter!

Well, you can, but it doesn’t really stick because he also wanted to spend all that money to go to the moon, he also wanted to abolish the Fed, he created the Peace Corp, pushed for a nuclear test ban treaty, and said “ich bin ein Berliner.” He’s a blue dog, anti-abortion Dem by today’s standards, but I’d wager he’d be in favor of exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother. We have several of those in our tent. Come on over. ;-)

writer said:
No, dimwit.

Who says the left resorts to name calling?

Touche. It was undeserved.

writer said:
And Paul, when did I say anything about Rachel’s interview style? Merely pointing out that if Fox is as unfair as you’re always claiming, what’s with all of the left wing guests? And Beck’s talk with Sharpton was so calm, it was almost sedative. If you’d actually watch Fox instead of repeating leftist talking points, maybe you’d have known that.

I see plenty of my share of Fox. Having opposing guests is great. How they’re treated and what is said when they’re gone is a big part of it. And even if they have incredibly fair interviews with liberals all the time (they don’t), it doesn’t excuse the softball political ads that masquerade as interviews when conservatives are in the not-so-hot seat. I was pretty certain you were one of the many I’ve seen accuse Rachel of asking gotcha questions, yada, yada. If not, my apologies. But Fox, with few, rare exceptions, is nowhere near Rachel’s league.

notsofast said:
Ann: A reasonable voice in an unreasonable world!

Stand away from the crack pipe.

nowhere near Rachel’s league.

You mean the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen? (Couldn’t help it. That pitch was straight down the middle.)

writer said:
nowhere near Rachel’s league.

You mean the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen? (Couldn’t help it. That pitch was straight down the middle.)

Can o’ corn. She would be extraordinary in any league. ;-)

She is in a league all her own. Perhaps a different deodorant.

Al Rethuglicans are whiny babies!

Ann got it half right.

writer said:
Robert, I didn’t say to use the exact wording for Maddow. Just meant similar comments, such as her looking ‘manly’.

Ann Coulter DOES look manly. Rachel Maddow doesn’t.

Coulter is a man, baby!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgOIEGz7o_s

Bids said:
Ann Coulter DOES look manly. Rachel Maddow doesn’t.

Disagree.
Coulter looks like a skeleton with skin stretched over.

notsofast said:
Ann: A reasonable voice in an unreasonable world!

Coulter is about as credible as my toilet. Another right wing nut bag selling books to unsuspecting conservatives. When will you guys ever catch on?

They really are making more money selling you guys garbage than they are taking food from the homeless!

and…The founding fathers said…by the way buy this DVD put it in your pocket, rub your head 3 times, tap your boots and you will be completely invisible to all those scary Obama people…and the Muslims too!

Buy 2 and get a free copy of:

Fleeced: How Barack Obama, Media Mockery of Terrorist Threats, Liberals Who Want to Kill Talk Radio, the Do-Nothing Congress, Companies That Help Iran, … Are Scamming Us … and What to Do About It

by Dick Morris