Goldberg shows an ability to read exactly what’s going to happen. Obama’s firing of McChrystal is going to be perceived as exactly the right course of action by the American public and Goldberg is trying to keep ahead of the curve. Watch McChrystal’s firing bump up Obama’s numbers over the next days.

McChrystal knew excactly what he was doing. Oblahblah is an incompetent idiot..and his incredibly stupid ROE are doing nothing to advance the cause..they are only getting our guys killed.

Oblahblah has their blood on his hands,

The media is lying about Oblahblah agreeing to implement McChrystal’s plan. He gave McChrystal less than half the numbers of troops he said were necessary to get the job doen. Oblahblah..in all his idiocy…refused to because he said he didn’t want it to seem like we were occupying Afghanistan.

Yes..Oblahblah is that stupid.

McChystal fell on the sword for his men. He knew this was the only way to get the media to report on what is going on.

Funny how Oblahblah tapped Patreus, isn’t it?? Remember how the jug-eared idiot did nothing but criticize Patreus’ strategy in Iraq??

Oh..and MorOn.org took the Patreus Betray Us ad from their site right after the news about his taking over came out. Gee…isn’t that odd?

So is Goldberg wrong about the hypocrisy Barney?

AHHAHAhahaHAHAHaHAHAhaHAHAHAHA “Oblahblah” HAhahaHAHAhahaHAHALOLOLOlolololololoLOOLOLOLOL!!!!1

Bernie is so right on this one. Thats what pisses me off about these so called Conservatives. They bitch and moan about people on the left. Then turn around and act the same way! You just don’t dis the boss. If you do your going to get fired!!!

Is there anyway for this President to make the conservaligious happy? Short of something horrific involving a funeral? In the face of tragedy in the Gulf they blame Obama for BPs failings, a General violates all sound standards of good judgment and they blame the CnC who rightly holds him accountable, a republican apologizes to a CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT CEO and they castigate the President for doing his job on behalf of the American People and in the nations best interests, you name it and they will twist it to be an issue for which the President must be DESTROYED.

And when someone dares to refute or disprove the foundations of the HATE that motivates the CONSERVATIVES “they must be destroyed” becomes the rallying call of conservatives, and when anyone dares to point out to conservatives that they are ROOTING for failure of the United States they EXPLODE with how it is not their fault it is OBAMAs and DEMOCRATS fault that conservatives want the worst things possible for America.

It escapes them how insane they are in this and other matters, and when it starts to penetrate in to their carefully constructed delusions that this is of their own doing they turn back to blaming the Obamas and democrats for it.

Whats it going to take? will we have to undergo another horrific domestic conservative terrorist attack like Oklahoma City to bring home to them that they are promoting a climate for this kind of horror? Do we need another cowardly conservative terrorist bombing campaign like E RUDOLFS?

Thomas,
I’m not sure where to even start if your ridiculous rant. Let’s start with how the left blames the right for terrorist attacks on this country such as OC. I find it absolutately repulsive. How about putting the blame where it belongs, with the terrorist. Have you listened to left wing radio latey? Why don’t you do that before you spout off. I routinely email absolutely hateful things said by left wing talkers to mediaite. Just because they don’t report it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

As far as the right wanting the country to fail, another ridiculous statement. If we are accused of being racists who want the country to burn everytime we have a disagreement with this president, how do you think we should voice our objections? I love some suggestions.

I for one criticized the general for doing what he did, so I don’t think I’m a hypocrite in this matter. As for the other disagreements I have with Obama, it’s not me just disagreeing to see him fail, it’s that some of us honestly think the policies he’s pushing mean the end to America as it was founded.

Now, the left will continue to say we are creating terrorists and want the country to burn, because they don’t want to argue the merits of our disagreements, but that’s fine. Saul taught you well!

Bill Adkins says:
June 24, 2010 at 7:40 am

Ah… when Goldberg says something you agree with… he’s got an “ability to read exactly what’s going on.” Of course, the other 90% of the time, when he says things you disagree with… you hate him, and he’s a buffoon. Funny how that works.

But as for a bump in poll numbers… doubtful. He had to let the General go… so he gets no points for being “tough,” he was just doing what protocol said he had to do. More over… the substance of McChrystal’s comments paints a very different picture of Obama and his administration. The added chaos this causes, further building on the “he’s a poor leader” will hurt Obama… not help him.

If Obama’s numbers stay flat after this, consider it a victory… and evidence that the press are only talking about the “A” story (the firing)… not the “B” story (the situation that got him there).

Thomas G Williams says:
June 24, 2010 at 9:07 am

Reminds me of how the left treated Bush for 8 years. But, that was different… right? The left really REALLY didn’t like Bush… so it was okay. Right?

Hypocrisy.

And ps Thomas, were you asleep or out of the country during the Bush years? That man was vilified more than Obama. When the left was calling Bush and our troops murderers, were they rooting for the defeat of America? Let me guess, they were being patriotic, right? Spare me your faux outrage, ok?

The end of America as it was founded? That seems a bit much. America is so weak that one president can do that much damage in one term? That line of thinking is nothing new though. Doomsayers have been prominent since at least the days of the first Pilgrims. Considering we’re still standing, hyperbole about “the end to America as it was founded” is definitely overdoing it.

Plus, both sides are guilty of attacking the other when it comes to national security and terrorism. Neither one can really claim the high road Michelle.

Some on the right have said they want Obama to fail. I believe Rush has said as much more than once, hasn’t he?

lol, hypocrisy to choke a horse, now that’s pretty funny, the sad bit is its true. I see them as actors, that’s all, the sad thing is if people think they are right in what they say.

paulmdoro says:
June 24, 2010 at 9:42 am

Some on the right have said they want Obama to fail. I believe Rush has said as much more than once, hasn’t he?

You’re better than that, Paul.

Rush said that if Obama wants to bring socialism to the United States, and then listed a bunch of other things that seem to be his agenda… then he hopes he fails. Not that he hopes Obama fails or the country fails, but that he’s goals… the goals he disagrees with… fails.

This is the same as rooting for the Arizona Immigration law to “fail.” That’s not saying you hope Arizona fails, or you hope the country is overrun with illegal immigrants… but that you hope a plan/law/agenda you disagree with doesn’t succeed.

For the leftists complaining about this old and debunked comment… I don’t recall you complaining in the lead up to the Iraq conflict. Did you hope that Bush failed, and that soldiers died and everything when to crap? Or did you hope that his advocating of action against Iraq failed? See… there’s a difference.

Some on the right have said they want Obama to fail. I believe Rush has said as much more than once, hasn’t he?

As Rush has repeatedly said, he wants his policies to fail. You know what he said, but refuse to acknowledge it.

I’m curious Kam, do YOU think you’re right in what you say?

Good for Goldberg. He’s right. As he pointed out, if this had been a Republican or conservative President the right would have wanted McChrystal hung. On the White House lawn.

But similarly – let’s not kid ourselves – if this was a Republican President the left would be supporting McChrystal.

Everything for alot of people is politics.

McChrystal and his staff needed to be fired. Full stop.

ImNotBlue, I think that’s getting into semantics, but I see your point. The left can’t claim the high road here because I’m sure plenty wanted Bush to fail. I resent any implication that I wanted soldiers to die and everything to go to crap. I did not want the war to fail. My brother-in-law served in Iraq. He is a beloved family member.

Also, it doesn’t change the fact that claims of America’s impending doom are hysterical hyperbole.

paulmdoro says:
June 24, 2010 at 9:56 am

And that’s the point, Paul. They didn’t (at least most of them… there are some loons, but they’re not really worth talking about beyond acknowledging that there are loons) want people to die… just the strategy to fail before implemented. The same for many on the right and things like healthcare, cap & trade, redistribution, etc. It’s the same thing… selective outrage on display.

paulmdoro says:
June 24, 2010 at 9:59 am

True… but that too is nothing new. I think the other party always things that the current leader will bring “impending doom” upon the world.

The only problem (okay, one big problem… there are many) is that if you believe XYZ will bring doom… you inherently believe that your guy will be the savior. That’s what we’ve seen for Obama. The “doom-sayers” were in full force for Bush… and became the hero worshipers for Obama. And both positions, doom or hero, are equally ludicrous.

Regarding your last two posts ImNotBlue, no argument here. Selective outrage is most definitely on display and both sides are guilty of it. Just as both sides have doomsday seers, and have for a long time.

IMPENDING DOOM? YOU MEAN LIKE “ARMAGEDDON????”

YOU MEAN LIKE THIS WEEK’S DICK MORRIS COLLUMN WHERE HE CLAIMS THE WORLD WILL END IN 2011?

ACCORDING TO OUT FAR RIGHT FRIENDS THERE’S BEEN AT LEAST THREE SEPARATE
ARMAGEDDON’S SINCE OBAMA’S TOOK OFFICE ACCORDING TO OUR THINK SKINNED FAR RIGHT FRIENDS. NO THERE IS NO PROBLEM AT ALL WITH THEIR LOVE OF EL RUSHBO AND HIS UTTER NONSENSE.

I SEE WE HAVE MANY THINK SKINNED WHINNING NINNNIES PLAYING THE PEOPLE WERE MEAN TO BUSH CARD-GET OVER IT! WHEN YOU MAKE MISTAKES PEOPLE CALL YOU ON IT. PERHAPS
YOU SHOULD TAKE A FEW WEEKS A GET OVER YOUR GREIF SO YOU CAN “MOVE ON”

THESE PEOPLE NEVER WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE TOP THEY’RE TOO BUSY RE-WRITING HISTORRY AND PROJECTING THEIR OWN FAILURES ON OBAMA.

MICHELLE-F AND IMNOT BLUE ARE PERFECT EXAMPLES OF THE KIND OF CRETINS THAT ARE
PUSH THIS COUNTRY DEEPER INTO THE TOILET WITH THEIR MYOPIC HYPOCRITITAL BULLSHIT.

ONE TRULY WONDERS IF THEY CAN MAKE THROUGH ONE HOUR WITHOUT SOBBING ABOUT HOW THE LEFT WAS OH SO MEAN TO BUSH AND HOW RUSH LIMABAUGH IS “MISUNDERSTOOD.”

THESE PEOPLE ARE LESS THAN LOSERS.

GOOD DAY.

All Caps is no fun to read.

The end of America as it was founded? That seems a bit much. America is so weak that one president can do that much damage in one term?

Paul, I’m taking Obama at HIS word when he says he wants to fundamentally change America.

I am easily amused.

Don’t all presidents want to change America Michelle? Who runs for president with no desire to change anything? How is that the same as believing a president can destroy America and all it was founded on in one term?

I am easily amused. -THAT’S WHAT I THOUGHT!

Paul, I have NEVER heard a president say he wants to fundamentally change America, have you? And as far as destroying it in one term (and I am confident he will only get one), the policies he puts into place could take at a minimum decades to reverse. As a very smart man once said:

“Our democracy will cease to exist
when you take away from those who are willing to work
and give to those who would not.”

- Thomas Jefferson

Cleary, this is what Obama has in mind. If you want I can post his MANY quotes confirming it, but I’ve done it so many times, it’s getting a little tired.

Again, semantics. Whether a president has ever said “fundamentally change” is not something to get hung up on. Every president has big ideas and wants to make significant changes. Otherwise why bother running for president? What president has ever said “I want to make small, minor changes during my term”?

I disagree that Obama wants to take from those willing to work and give to those who refuse to work. That is a difference of opinion. It is hardly evidence that Obama is trying to destroy democracy. That is absurd.

AND NOW YOU’RE MAD?


You didn’t get mad when the Supreme Court stopped a legal recount and appointed a President. 

You didn’t get mad when Cheney allowed Energy company officials to dictate energy policy.

You didn’t get mad when a covert CIA operative got ousted.

You didn’t get mad when the Patriot Act got passed..

You didn’t get mad when we illegally invaded a country that posed no threat to us.

You didn’t get mad when we spent over 600 billion(and counting) on said 
illegal war.

You didn’t get mad when over 10 billion dollars just disappeared in Iraq . 

You didn’t get mad when you found out we were torturing people. 

You didn’t get mad when the government was illegally wiretapping Americans.

You didn’t get mad when we didn’t catch Bin Laden.

You didn’t get mad when you saw the horrible conditions at Walter Reed.

You didn’t get mad when we let a major US city drown. 

You didn’t get mad when we gave a 900 billion tax break to the rich.


You finally got mad when the government decided that people in America 
deserved the right to see a doctor if they are sick.

Yes, illegal wars, 
lies, corruption, torture, stealing your tax dollars to make the rich 
richer, are all okay with you,
but helping other Americans… oh hell no.



AND NOW YOU’RE MAD !

Paul, then we can agree to disagree. I have to say though, I consider you to be a thoughtful person and yet you refuse to see what’s right in front of you. Obama surrounds himself with communists and socialists, in fact he says to seeks those people out. He makes statement after statement about redistributing wealth and yet you can entertain the thought that he is what he says he is. I know it’s scary to think that we have a president that has these ideals, but I take him at his word, why don’t you?

It is hardly evidence that Obama is trying to destroy democracy. That is absurd.

THAT’S WHY THE GOP HAS MAINSTREAMED ABSURD EXTREMIST RHETORIC-WHEN YOUR
POLICES HAVE BEEN COMEPLETELY REJECTED YOU GO TO THE NEXT STEP- HYPERBOLI INFLAMTORY CONTRARIAN RHETORIC BASED ON IDEAOLGY-REGARDLESS OF COMMON SENSE. WHAT
ELSE ARE THEY GOING TO DO???? OBAMA HAS TO FAIL IF THEY ARE TO EVEN GET CONTROL AGAIN
THEY KNOWN THIS-A SUCCESS FOR OBAMA MEANS THE FAR RIGHT IS OUT OF LUCK FOR AT LEAST A GENERATION. THESE PEOPLE ARE FRIGHTENED AND ARE TAKING AN EXTREME DEFENSEIVE POSTURE.

ARMAGEDDON!!!!!!!

Who are the known Communists and Socialists that Obama surrounds himself with? I would love to see a detailed and comprehensive list of names. Where are the statements proving that Obama actively seeks out Communists and Socialists?

You call me thoughtful but then insult me by saying I refuse to see what’s right in front of me. Disagreeing with you does not make me blind Michelle.

We could also add to the list destroyed the American economy but a nice concise list.

Where are the statements proving that Obama actively seeks out Communists and Socialists?

Paul, he said that in the book HE wrote. As for those that he surrounds himself with, I’ve done it more times than I can count, but if you give me a bit, I’d be happy to do it again when I get a chance.

Paul, I wasn’t trying to insult you, honestly. It just blows my mind that people don’t take Obama at his word and call those that quote him crazy for repeating what HE himself said.

Zumpano, bootie and Iris, go back to the kids table, the adults are trying to have a conversation.

I haven’t called you crazy nor do I think your crazy. However, I would love to see statements where Obama specifically says he actively seeks out Communists and Socialists as well as a detailed list of the known Communists and Socialists in his administration.

Paul, This is a quote from Obama’s nominee to run the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

“Any health care funding plan that is just equitable civilized and humane must, must redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is by definition redistributional,” Donald Berwick said.

However, I would love to see statements where Obama specifically says he actively seeks out Communists and Socialists as well as a detailed list of the known Communists and Socialists in his administration.

EASILY AMUSED? AFTER WRITING THAT I SUSPECT OTHERWISE.

Um, OK. Hardly a damning statement. I’ll wait for the statements where Obama specifically says he actively seeks out Communists and Socialists as well as a detailed list of the known Communists and Socialists in his administration.

Andy Stern – the most frequent whitehouse guest:

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

President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the largest union in the AFL-CIO
Was instructed in the techniques of radical union organizing by the Midwest Academy, which was formed by Paul and Heather Booth to train community organizers and infiltrate the labor movement
Member of the Executive Committee of the Democratic Party auxiliary America Coming Together (ACT), which is funded by George Soros

Former New Leftist Andrew Stern is the current President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the second largest labor union in North America. The economic model championed by Stern and SEIU includes universal health care, increased taxation, an expansion of social welfare programs, and further opportunities for workers to unionize. According to Ryan Lizza, Associate Editor of The New Republic, SEIU leaders such as Stern “tend to be radical, even socialist.” (of course he recently stepped down at SEIU)

In 2008 Stern supported Barack Obama’s presidential candidacy. His SEIU spent approximately $60.7 million to help elect Obama to the White House, deploying some 100,000 pro-Obama volunteers during the campaign (including 3,000 who worked on the election full time). Stern went on to become an immensely influential advisor to President Obama. As of October 30, 2009, Stern had visited the White House 22 times since Obama’s inauguration — more than any other individual.

In an April 2, 2009 speech at the Kennedy School of Government, Stern said the following about his socialist vision for “the new American economy”:

“We are at the historic crossroad, I think, economically, in my lifetime — in terms of what a new president is trying to do, and the different way we are goiing to try to evaluate the economy. And so all of a sudden we are witnessing the new American economic plan, led by the government, not necessarily led by the private sector.”

In the same speech, he spoke about his desire to facilitate a massive redistribution of wealth in the United States:

“We now have a new metric. You know, the president says he wants to judge the new economy [by] whether it increases the number of people in the middle class, [by] whether we have shared prosperity, not just [by] whether we have growth which is a fundamental different philosophy than we have seen in our country up to date. And clearly government has has a major opportunity to distribute wealth through the EITC [Earned Income Tax Credit], through tax policies, through minimum wages, through living wages. The government has a role in distributing wealth or social benefits like Medicare, Medicaid, children’s health insurance.”

I would recommend reading this article on his history: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1830

I actually like Bernie Goldberg. Yes, I disagree with him a lot and some of the things he says baffles me, but he is willing to call out those on his side as well. This is a great example.

Michelle, I’ll have to agree with paul on this one in that, unless he specifically said he seeks out communists and socialists, I’m not buying the argument.

I’m sure someone will bring up Van Jones. Yes, he was a Communist in his younger days, key word “was”. He has since changed his ways.

I am still waiting for the statements where Obama says he actively seeks out Communists and Socialists to surround himself with. I am also waiting for the long list of Communists and Socialists surrounding the president.

Stan had to have know that what he was saying would lead to problems. He knew the difference between “on the record” and “off the record comments.”

It was Stan’s and his staff words that lead to Stan’s resignation, not the RS reporting it. Even the author of the story was surprised that the story lead to this resolution.

I am also waiting for the long list of Communists and Socialists surrounding the president.”

Long? Why does it have to be a long list?

Here are two:

Van Jones and Anita Dunn- and that’s two too many!

THERE YA GO NOTSOFAST!

A FINE DISPLAY OF INTELLECTUAL HONESTY AND ON TOPIC.

I AGREE WITH YOUR ASSEMENT 100%

GOOD MAN

I’m sure someone will bring up Van Jones. Yes, he was a Communist in his younger days, key word “was”. He has since changed his ways.

Thanks Stooge, that is where I was headed next.

Two weeks before he started his White House job, however, Jones delivered the keynote address at Power Shift ’09, which was billed as the largest youth summit on climate change in history. A reported 12,000 young people were at the D.C. Convention Center for the event.

During his speech, available on YouTube, Jones threw around terms like “eco-apartheid” and “green for some,” and preached about spreading the wealth while positing a call to “change the whole system.”

In one section of his twenty-minute speech, Jones referenced “our Native American brothers and sisters” who, he claimed, were “pushed,” “bullied,” “mistreated” and “shoved into all the land that we didn’t want.”

“Guess what?” Jones continued. “Give them the wealth! Give them then wealth! No justice on stolen land … we owe them a debt.”

“We have to create a green economy, that’s true, that’s true. But we have to create a green economy that Dr. King would be proud of,” he exclaimed.

“This movement is deeper than solar power. … Don’t stop there! We are going to change the whole system!” he exclaimed.

Jones was the leader and founder of a radical group, the communist revolutionary organization Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM. That group, together with Jones’ Elle Baker Center for Human Rights, led a vigil Sept. 12, 2001, at Snow Park in Oakland, Calif.

STORM’s official manifesto, titled, “Reclaiming Revolution,” surfaced on the Internet.

STORM’s newsletter boasted “we also saw our brand of Marxism as, in some ways, a reclamation.”

STORM worked with known communist leaders. It led the charge in black protests against various issues, including a local attempt to pass Proposition 21, a ballot initiative that sought to increase the penalties for violent crimes and require more juvenile offenders to be tried as adults.

Speaking to the East Bay Express, Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots, during which time he was arrested.

“I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th,” he said. “By August, I was a communist.

“I met all these young radical people of color – I mean really radical: communists and anarchists. And it was, like, ‘This is what I need to be a part of.’ I spent the next 10 years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary,” he said. (for those keeping track, we are up to 2002, wow ancient history)

Jones, formerly a self-described “rowdy black nationalist,” boasted in a 2005 interview with the left-leaning East Bay Express that his environmental activism was a means to fight for racial and class “justice.”

OH WELL SPKE TOO FAST!

BACK ON THE COMMUNIST HUNT!

OH WELL SO MUCH FOR THIS THREAD.

NICE.

Oh, and another socialist?

BHO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoqI5PSRcXM

In Obama’s book, he talks about his mentor Frank, who was identified as Frank Marshall Davis.

Who is Frank Marshall Davis?

A member of the old Moscow-controlled Communist Party USA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHfpSuCWsuQ (don’t bother complaining this is from Hannity, unless you can refute what he says)

Van Jones. Of course. This is already boring. Let’s just agree to disagree Michelle. We’re never going to get anywhere or see eye-to-eye on this.

Goldberg is growing tiresome…and O’Reilly is beginning to talk over EVERY guest to get his own spin out there. I would bet that the ground is fertile for a new entry in this time slot…and I don’t mean Spitzer and The Swallower.

Cass Sustein, reg Czar:

A legislative effort to regulate broadcasting in the interest of democratic principles should
not be seen as an abridgment of the free speech guarantee.
–Cass R. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech, The Free Press,
1995, p. 92

Consider the “fairness doctrine,” now largely abandoned but once requiring radio and
television broadcasters:
…[I]n light of astonishing economic and technological changes, we must doubt whether,
as interpreted, the constitutional guarantee of free speech is adequately serving
democratic goals. It is past time for a large-scale reassessment of the appropriate role of
the First Amendment in the democratic process.
–Cass R. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech, The Free Press,
1995, p. xi

A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not
necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government.
–Cass Sunstein, arguing for a Fairness Doctrine for the Internet in his book,
Republic.com 2.0 (Princeton University Press, 2007), p.137
[M]any people all over the world have become even more concerned about the risks of a
situation in which like-minded people speak or listen mostly to one another…Democracy
does best with what James Madison called a ‘yielding and accommodating spirit,’ and
that spirit is at risk whenever people sort themselves into enclaves in which their own
views and commitments are constantly reaffirmed… [S]uch sorting should not be
identified with freedom, and much less with democratic self-government.
–Cass Sunstein, arguing for a Fairness Doctrine for the Internet in his book,
Republic.com 2.0 (Princeton University Press, 2007), p. xii

Paul,
What I’m hearing from you is it wouldn’t matter the evidence, you have made up your mind to ignore it. Well, then I won’t waste my valuable time.

We’re never going to get anywhere or see eye-to-eye on this.

WOW. TOOK YOU THAT MANY POSTS TO GET THAT.

HMMMMMMMM

MichelleF you need to read this ( http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts ) and by the way I DID ALL THE WORK FOR YOU TO GET THIS DIRECTLY, You never post a link to what you say and insult everyone who ask you to implying they are lazy (your words) and dishonest for not finding the things you claim right at their finger tips.

In fact every body should copy that link into your favorites or bookmarks or what ever it is you do to save something to show to others, this one is a real deal factual non-partisan (yes it is factually critical of republican policies and that does not make it partisan) piece and it is clear and concise in the connection of the DOTS.

What I’m hearing from you is it wouldn’t matter the evidence, you have made up your mind to ignore it. Well, then I won’t waste my valuable time.

YUP PAUL YOU SURE DESERVED THAT YOU MORON.

SEEMS YOU HAVE WASTED ALL OF OUR TIME TODAY.

Like I said Michelle, we don’t agree. I’m not ignoring anything. You have not provided a list of statements Obama made saying that he actively seeks to surround himself with Communists and Socialists, and I do not agree that he has surrounded himself with Communists and Socialists in the manner you suggest. We just don’t agree. Sorry.

Quit the name-calling Bootleghaircut. Try and act civilized.

You don’t appear to be going anywhere.

Referencing jokers/actors.entertainers on radio does not count as reference. If a College Student does that, they’d get straight ‘F’. It’s even worst if it’s discovered that the data are innuendos.

Karl Spensen’s 8:24 post getting eight thumbs up is making me question this voting system.

Paul,
The quote I’m referring to is from Obama’s book dreams from my father. Feel free to look it up. Even though we don’t agree, I do enjoy debating with you.

Writer, where the heck have you been!!

Since you brought it up, I think the voting system is kind of dumb. The libs will vote thumbs down on conservative posts and vice versa.

I already called her out yesterday and I’ve done it before. But finally short heer up yesterday, when her action was blatantly clear. You talk about topic ‘A’, she brings up Topic ‘B’. A total failure(action) in academic field.

Hey Kam, Why don’t you read my posts. My first post was a response, so I wasn’t changing the subject. And if I were you, I wouldn’t be talking since you never actually add to the conversation, just critique other people’s posts.

KAM

I DID THE SAME THING TO HER LAST NIGHT WHEN SHE TRIED TO PULL THE SAME CRAP ON THE
CARLSON THREAD.

ITS GETTING TIRESOME AND I DON’T KNOW WHO IS MORE STUPID HER-OR THE LIMP WRISTED
WANNA BE LIBERALS WHO THINK THEY’RE PROVING SOMETHING EITHER TO HER OR ABOUT HER WHN ALL THEY ARE DOING IS ENABLING HER PATHOLOGY.

I’D LOVE TO SEE HER APPROACH JUST ONE TOPIC AS THE SUBJECT-BUT THAT WON’T HAPPEN BECAUSE IF SHE DOESN’T LIKE IT SHE’LL JUMP TO OBFUSCATE.

I SEE THIS CRAP ALL THE TIME AND I HAVE NO PATIENCE FOR HER OR HER ENABLERS.

PARTISANSHIP ASIDE IF YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF SUSTAINING A A DEBATE ABOUT THE TOPIC
THEN YOU ARE IN THE WRONG PLACE. SHE NEEDS TO GO TO WORLD NET DAILY OR TOWNHALL WHERE HER NUROSIS CAN BE NURTURED IN A LOVING APPROVING ENVIRONMENT.

Likewise Michelle. I enjoy it as well, regardless of what some others say.

I am not sure which is the dumber thing to read…..right-wing hypocrisy stating that the General was just stating the truth OR the nicknames people give Obama on the right-wing such as the ones in these comments

They aren’t even funny or original

MY OBAMA NICKNAME

O’COOL BREEZY

” ImNotBlue says:
June 24, 2010 at 9:38 am ImNotBlue(Quote)
3 13
Bill Adkins says:
June 24, 2010 at 7:40 am

Ah… when Goldberg says something you agree with… he’s got an “ability to read exactly what’s going on.” Of course, the other 90% of the time, when he says things you disagree with… you hate him, and he’s a buffoon. Funny how that works.”

Read it again, imn. I didn’t mean that as a compliment – I meant that Goldberg sees how this is going to play and he’s playing it safe, he knows this is not going to hurt Obama and if he tries to spin this as damage to Obama it’s he, Goldberg, who’ll get hurt. He is a buffoon, a self interested one.

Bill Adkins says:
June 24, 2010 at 2:10 pm

Oooooh… so when someone on the right says something you agree with, they’re “playing it safe” Safe from what, exactly? How would Goldberg get hurt?

If GW Bush had left America in as good of shape as when he took over from Clinton, we’d be much better off.
Obama will have to spend at least his first term cleaning up after GW Bush’s trashing of our systems and government.
Oh, and Bernie Goldberg is a tool.

Founders_were_Liberal says:
June 24, 2010 at 2:46 pm

The US was in decline after Clinton. The technology boom and the internet boom were over, and things were declining.

Read your history.

Please note that Bill and Bernie failed to mention which conservative talk show hosts were guilty. As refreshing as this exchange was, there’s still a line that they won’t cross.

Goldberg would have loved to have spun this as ‘obama fucked up by firing McChrystal’ – but the reaction to the firing has been overwhelmingly positive and Goldberg saw that coming. He couldn’t/wouldn’t/chose not to risk the backlash. Follow now, IMN?

Nice lie, Billo!

Bill Adkins says:
June 24, 2010 at 11:08 pm Bill Adkins

Goldberg would have loved to have spun this as ‘obama fucked up by firing McChrystal’

Ah… so now you can predict and tell what someone would have “loved to do.” Are you a mind reader? Who knew?!

– but the reaction to the firing has been overwhelmingly positive and Goldberg saw that coming.

Yes, and Goldberg has never said anything unpopular, or disagreed with the majority.

He couldn’t/wouldn’t/chose not to risk the backlash. Follow now, IMN?

Backlash FROM WHO?!

It’s amazing, even when someone on the right (or moderate right, or center, or not far-left) says something you agree with… you’re STILL angry about it! Ever think this might be the evidence YOU’RE doing something wrong? You’re always angry… always unhappy. I don’t know how much more proof you need that you’re not well.

I am a veteran, McChrystal should have damn well known better and frankly he was skating on thin ice to begin with AND the whole COIN idea was his baby to begin with.

Don’t shoot the messenger.

And all you guys crying about Obama, if Obama hadn’t fired him, you would all be calling him a wimp and weak willed. If he had taken Olberman’sadvice, you would have called him manipulative and a puppet to MSNBC. So before you all bitch about Obama again, just answer this question. What could Obama have done in this situation that would have made you happy and satisfied that does not involve leaving the office or exploding or anything like that.

Finally, the last minute of that conversation was the most important and points to the biggest problem in our country right now. The middle ground is disappearing.

Michelle F

I agree that taking everything away from people who work and giving it all to people who do not work is a massively bad idea. It’s worse than communism, and worse than socialism.

But that is not what we do. That is not what the policies of the Obama administration do, even if they were enacted as orginally drawn and not watered down versions.
The Health Care bill clearly benefited the insurance industry as thier lobbyists wanted.
The Financial Reform Bill will do very little to change our current banking situation.

And I never hear ONE SINGLE COMPLAINT from a conservative when a large corporations uses riduculously immoral and unethical (although absolutely legal) practices to basically take money out of people’s pockets who actually work.

Those “Lazy Worthless People” who got the Health Care Benefits? Most of them are lower middle class people who were not offered benefits by their small businesses.

The lazy non-workers, we have been taking care of them for decades. They don’t go to doctors when they are mildly sick because they can’t afford it, so they get worse and when they finally have to be hospitalized then they go and we foot the bill.

Stop posting pithy little quotes out of context that do not apply to real world situations. If you like slogans, go buy a hat or a t-shirt.
Otherwise, do your homework.

PS, BEFORE you call me a lefty and a communist, know this. I did not vote for Barack Obama and I am not a registered democrat.