She asked all the questions TC didn’t ,should have, and more.

It’s nice to see a real journalist at work on this racist and his racist group.

Tommy Tommy Tommy now Steve Steve Steve…you guys are getting suckered by YOUR great Shabazz!

Maybe ole Shabazz forgot he made the video below…..

http://www.breitbart.tv/new-black-panther-president-malik-zulu-shabazz-admits-to-blockade-philly-voting-office/

Maybe ole Shabazz never heard “loose lips sink ships!!!”

Tommy and Steve, you had better buy all the vasoline in all the store near you….you are going to need it. When Shabazz snapps his fingers, one of you better be running to see what he wants.

PS We don’t want to see any “after interview” shots….Please!

It’s a bit of a coinkydink that:” Tommy Christopher’s exclusive interview with Shabazz earlier in the week”

How did he do it? He & TBPP must be really tight…
And what a coincidence again, that shabazz was prepared & tempered compared to his usual ranting & raving self…
Almost like he was told what to say in his defense:”It was an isolated incident, not what the Black Panthers stand for”bah blah blah blah & “We do not tell anyone to break the law”
Someone @
the White House sent the talking points to him.

I’m guessing after seeing a real interviewer take on this racist, that TC is too embarrassed to show his face.

I’m a naturalized citizen as are my parents. I wouldn’t have been intimidated but my 80+year old parents would have been.

Somehow, I don’t see the same correlation between Tea Party protesters and this.
If the Klan was out…I could see the similarity.

Nobody should be intimidated when they use their right to vote.

Steve Krakauer said:
if there’s anything we can say was learned from this interview, it’s that Shabazz said he doesn’t think the New Black Panther Party will be showing up at the polls in 2010 or 2012.

Once the disinfecting light of day is shining on any sort of cockroach, it’s sure to run and hide.

So, if Steve’s assessment is indeed correct, Megyn Kelley has done everyone, Black, White & all others, a very big favor by calling that racist hate monger out, & drawing his lying a$$ into the sunshine.

BTW, if TC had half of Megyn’s stones, Mediaite could have easily gotten this scoop.

Poor TC. And poor Mediaite too!

Great job by a REAL journalist.

lazzalo writes:

“I’m a naturalized citizen as are my parents. I wouldn’t have been intimidated but my 80+year old parents would have been.

Nobody should be intimidated when they use their right to vote.”

So you’d have a problem if anti-immigrant activists alligned with the Minuteman showed up with guns and tried to intimidate voters?

–Cobra

this is just another manufactured scandal from Fox News….it’s amazing how many of their viewers really don’t know what’s going on in the world….so, the question is: where are and who are these voters that were intimidated?

The answer: NOBODY and NOWHERE because they do not exist….Fox News hounded Clinton for 8 years…Fox News will do the same with Obama…Fox needs a label on top of their screen that says, “listening may be harmful to your intelligence”

Megyn Kelly says:

“Kelly asked Shabazz, “Do you hate white people?” No. “Have you ever referred to a white person as a cracker?” “It’s possible,” said Shabazz. “Do you hate Jews?” No. “Have you ever referred to Jews as something other than Jews?” “Not the real Jews, no ma’am,” said Shabazz.”

Will Megyn ask similar questions of Fox News Paid Contributor Mark Fuhrman the next time they appear together?

Anybody want to give me odds on that happening?

–Cobra

MakeANoise said:
this is just another manufactured scandal from Fox News….it’s amazing how many of their viewers really don’t know what’s going on in the world….so, the question is: where are and who are these voters that were intimidated? The answer: NOBODY and NOWHERE because they do not exist….Fox News hounded Clinton for 8 years…Fox News will do the same with Obama…Fox needs a label on top of their screen that says, “listening may be harmful to your intelligence”

I suppose this person was intimidated?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX4dcvIYk9A&feature=related

Cobra said:
Megyn Kelly says: “Kelly asked Shabazz, “Do you hate white people?” No. “Have you ever referred to a white person as a cracker?” “It’s possible,” said Shabazz. “Do you hate Jews?” No. “Have you ever referred to Jews as something other than Jews?” “Not the real Jews, no ma’am,” said Shabazz.” Will Megyn ask similar questions of Fox News Paid Contributor Mark Fuhrman the next time they appear together? Anybody want to give me odds on that happening? –Cobra

Is Mark Fuhrman currently part of an ongoing civil rights investigation? Why would she ask that question?

“Kelly has been driving the DOJ/Black Panthers story for a couple weeks”
————————————————————————————————-
DRIVING THIS STORY!!

This story threatens the essence of our democratic system – WHY WASN’T THE AMERICAN MEDIA (outside of FOX) REPORTING THIS STORY FOR WEEKS?

What if it were the Klan outside an Alabama polling place? How would the media have covered THAT??????? – THE MEDIA IN THIS COUNTRY IS NOTHING MORE THAN A PROGRESSIVE PROPAGANDA MILL!

YEA! – Kelly was REPORTING IT! (not driving it!!) & FOX is galvanizing millions of citizens to overthrow this Obama-led progressive COUP!!!!

This IS NOT Venezuela!!!
————————————

Here’s what BARRY’s (he doesn’t deserve the respect NOT to be called ‘Barry!’) plan was:

1) ACORN falsifies votes
2) seiu & panthers intimidate poll-watchers
3) the racist Holder protects seiu & panthers
4) Obama & progressives STEAL elections & takeover the gov’t.
—————————————————————————————-
BECK, FOX & TALK RADIO PUT AN END TO THAT!

Cobra said:
Jews as something other than Jews?” “Not the real Jews, no ma’am,” said Shabazz.”

Will Megyn ask similar questions of Fox News Paid Contributor Mark Fuhrman the next time they appear together?

WHat exactly r u comparing here?
THE BLACK PATHERS w/Mark Furman?

Only from the MediaMaters crowd
a bit of a stretch, no?

And yet there he is, trotted out like King Kong in a gage, for something like the 25th time. No one promotes the New Black Panthers than FOX. Without FOX, it is unlikely that people would know that they exist.

tiredofbs said:
THE BLACK PATHERS w/Mark Furman?

OK<if only we had an edit feature…

THE BLACK PANTHERS __Fuhrman*

MakeANoise said:
this is just another manufactured scandal from Fox News….it’s amazing how many of their viewers really don’t know what’s going on in the world.

Seriously, do you people have zero shame? The intellectual dishonesty is truly something to behold. Was Van Jones a “manufactured” scandal? F’ing amazing how you people can even look in the mirror.

“a lot of broad questions and very few specific answers.”

Really? Sounds like someone is jealous. And what specific answers did Tommy get during his interview? For instance, Tommy let Shabazz get away with not specifically answering the “killing white babies” comment, but Megyn got him to do just that on the record even if his response was a lie. Not only did Megyn corner this lunatic about the voter intimidation situation, she got him to screw himself with his own words and those of other racists.

The one thing she missed was when he said that “no one in our organization was instructed to do that or to speak like that at that location on that day”. She should have asked him if his members are ever ordered to speak like that on any day. She also should have reminded him that the NBPP has been listed as a hate group by the SPLC and the Anti-Defamation League.

Shabazz also tried to blame King Shamir Shabazz’s hate speech on the Republicans without condemning his words, only saying that “he should be careful” He blames whites for selling guns to blacks, but he doesn’t blame blacks for buying them or using them on each other. He also went back to that old crap about reparations. It’s the 21st century dude, get over it!

I especially like the way Megyn got him to admit that he has used derogatory remarks against whites and Jews. If we give credibility to what this guy says whites can now use derogatory remarks against blacks anytime they want. There is always a good excuse. That will be great news to Imus.

Megyn must have had difficulty not laughing when Shabazz used Al “Tawana Brawley” Sharpton, Jesse “Himey Town” Jackson, and the king of all racial hatred Louis Farrakhan and those racists in the Congressional Black Caucus as references.

As for Tommy’s question, if Gibbs had given me that answer I would have asked the obvious follow up question, ” is the president paying attention to this”?

@ Cobra: Will Megyn ask similar questions of Fox News Paid Contributor Mark Fuhrman the next time they appear together?
——————————————-
Mark Fuhram is not the head of an ADMITTEDLY Racist Organization!

Mark Fuhrman spoke one word, and a killer was let loose – because of BLACK RACIAL POLITICS!
——————————————-

This guy was previously asked point blank if he agreed with what his racist buddy said about killing ‘cracker-babies’, and he said ” not in that context!”

This isn’t about race! – It’s about civilization vs. barabarians – those who refuse to condemn the slaughter of innocent children!!!!!

It’s all about reparations with these folks. Forgive and move on . Jesus , your just keeping your enslaved. The racial tensions are driven my groups like these , and progressives calling Tea Party member racists . Shit , nowadays if you POINT out racism — your yourself a racist . Ask Glenn Beck

Yes, let us ask Glenn Beck and his defense of McCarthy. The racist witch hunt takes after the communist witch hunt.

valkyrie101 said:
The racist witch hunt…

Honestly, don’t you think that’s a bit retarded? No witch hunt here whatsoever. Some black asshole made outrageously racist rants, and his black asshole boss doesn’t seem to have much of a problem with it. It’s really quite simple.

valkyrie101 said:
Yes, let us ask Glenn Beck and his defense of McCarthy. The racist witch hunt takes after the communist witch hunt.

———————————-
Check the polls – PLAYING THE LIBERAL RACE-CARD ISN’T WORKING ANYMORE, NOW IS IT?

McCarthy’s communist witch hunt offends you Valkyrie ? Well we know where you stand . I’ll show ya how progression works Val .

Moderate- Democrat-Progressive – Socialist – Communist.. The progress is clear.

murf said:
McCarthy’s communist witch hunt offends you Valkyrie ? Well we know where you stand . I’ll show ya how progression works Val . Moderate- Democrat-Progressive – Socialist – Communist.. The progress is clear.

I wonder where Jesus would fit into that? He’s over on the right asking for coins on TV? Or those socialist minded Pilgrims who came over on the Mayflower.

Mediaite was quick to characterize Mel Gibson’s private phone call to his gf as “vile, hate-filled racist rant”, but failed to characterize King Samir Shabazz’s public display of hate-filled words the same way.

Double standards?

Failure to condemn equals guilt…

Wasnt Nancy Pelosi crying on TV about how scared she was of the tea party people? Didnt CNN and MSNBC push that on us every hour.
I see why now the Liberals love the Black Panthers they are there main voting pool…. Dont want to upset there voters! well at least the ones without a felony charge.

@PureFreedom, “Wasnt Nancy Pelosi crying on TV about how scared she was of the tea party people? Didnt CNN and MSNBC push that on us every hour.”

Let’s not forget the way they kept warning viewers about the “dangerous” white militia groups.

Malik Zulu Shabazz is the face of the Democrat Party!

Cobra, I didn’t notice you denouncing the panther that made the ‘baby killing’ remarks. Racism doesn’t count unless it’s coming from a white person?

Ahh.. Valkyrie is one  of the ” Jesus was a Socialist ” revisionist.. Feeding , healing ,and giving money to the poor.. That’s their argument . Conservatives are rich , and do not care for the poor. So Jesus MUST be a Socialist.. 

See Valykrie , Jesus fought against the Pharicees, and teachers of the law, who were just hypocrites of ” pretending to care for the poor ” ie. [ Modern day progressives ] while in reality would just continue to do nothing to improve their conditions but just keep them down in order to keep then on their dependency. [ Welfare receipents , minorities ].

Democrats have done little to nothing to improve poverty , education in this country. Just keep the govt handouts flowing and play plantation politics with the poor saying Republicans are racists and do not care about you.

In reality Conservatives , Church groups , missionaries , worldwide have  donated the most money and done the most for poverty and poor.

Bush AiDS program in Africa in which he gave billions , to this day, he hasn’t recieved much credit for.  

raaaa cist !
Where is CNN?
Where is MSNBC?
Where is the “perky” one?

Hahahahaha.

You mediaite people are quite hilarious whenever one of your own is trumped in an outrageous fashion.

Daniel M. Chick said:
Hahahahaha.

You mediaite people are quite hilarious whenever one of your own is trumped in an outrageous fashion.

Haha.

I totally forgot that Tommy was involved in the last Mediaite disaster that occurred between he and Greta Van Susteren. lol — I’ve deduced the constant reason! Tommy is comedic gold! Only, the shame of it is, we’re laughing *at* him. :S

valkyrie101 said:
Or those socialist minded Pilgrims who came over on the Mayflower.

It’s funny you mention that… Not until the third year, when they decided to give up on the collective idea, did they prosper. The Pilgrims were a microcosm of why socialism fails: when you know you’re going to benefit the same as the next guy, regardless of how much or how little you work, it’s natural to slack off. On the large state farms in Ukraine and White Russia back in the 60′s and 70′s, the small plots of acreage that individual families were allowed to farm privately were far more productive per acre than the production of the collective.

Cobra said:
lazzalo writes:

“I’m a naturalized citizen as are my parents. I wouldn’t have been intimidated but my 80+year old parents would have been.

Somehow, I don’t see the same correlation between Tea Party protesters and this.
If the Klan was out…I could see the similarity.

Nobody should be intimidated when they use their right to vote.”

So you’d have a problem if anti-immigrant activists alligned with the Minuteman showed up with guns and tried to intimidate voters?

–Cobra

Hey, fool, they never did that.

MakeANoise said:
this is just another manufactured scandal from Fox News….it’s amazing how many of their viewers really don’t know what’s going on in the world….so, the question is: where are and who are these voters that were intimidated?

The answer: NOBODY and NOWHERE because they do not exist….Fox News hounded Clinton for 8 years…Fox News will do the same with Obama…Fox needs a label on top of their screen that says, “listening may be harmful to your intelligence”

You are just an ahole all over aren’t ya, child?

But don’t ya just love how the libs defend racists like this guy and Byrd?

Their racism knows no bounds.

lanquihue said:
It’s funny you mention that… Not until the third year, when they decided to give up on the collective idea, did they prosper. The Pilgrims were a microcosm of why socialism fails: when you know you’re going to benefit the same as the next guy, regardless of how much or how little you work, it’s natural to slack off. On the large state farms in Ukraine and White Russia back in the 60’s and 70’s, the small plots of acreage that individual families were allowed to farm privately were far more productive per acre than the production of the collective.

So we should abandon our socialist military system, postal system, library system, police and fire department system, and stop collecting taxes to pay for roads because socialism is a loser?

lanquihue said:
Honestly, don’t you think that’s a bit retarded? No witch hunt here whatsoever. Some black asshole made outrageously racist rants, and his black asshole boss doesn’t seem to have much of a problem with it. It’s really quite simple.

That pretty much sums it up.

Valk

“So we should abandon our socialist military system, postal system, library system, police and fire department system, and stop collecting taxes to pay for roads because socialism is a loser?”

That may just be your most retarded statement to date.

valkyrie101 said:
So we should abandon our socialist military system

Step away from the HuffPost coaching for a sec while I blow your stupid argument to shit. One, if the military is so socialist, why aren’t all you lefties lining up? Two, the military is an all volunteer organization, and it isn’t socialist, it’s _military_ for Christ’s sake. It’s a whole other world, one that I’ve known, and whether they’re liberal or conservative, most of my brothers and sisters and I have seen and done things that would make the average progressive shit their pants. Point is, you’re stupid.

timzank said:
Valk “So we should abandon our socialist military system, postal system, library system, police and fire department system, and stop collecting taxes to pay for roads because socialism is a loser?” That may just be your most retarded statement to date.

Valk has made this comment a few times now. Just goes to show, you can’t teach stupid.

Poor , poor Valkyrie101.. The military works in Rank Structure.. Meaning your start at the bottom and work your way up . Your pay increases with every rank earned – Capitalism baby !. In a socialist military their would be a 1 Commander and the rest privates with equal pay .

BatBoy said:
Maybe ole Shabazz forgot he made the video below…..

http://www.breitbart.tv/new-black-panther-president-malik-zulu-shabazz-admits-to-blockade-philly-voting-office/

Maybe ole Shabazz never heard “loose lips sink ships!!!”

Holy crap, BatBoy, that’s an amazing piece of video. Yes, we did it, yes, they had us nailed for it, and then the DoJ changed hands and they threw it all out. (Except for the King Samil Shabazz “No more bringing a nightstick to Philly polling places until 2012″ injunction) I couldn’t have summed it up better myself, and certainly not with as much credibility as one of the defendants who got all his charges thrown out by the new, post-racial DoJ.

I wonder if Robert Gibbs has anything on this. Or Tommy Christopher, for that matter.

valkyrie101 said:
No one promotes the New Black Panthers than FOX. Without FOX, it is unlikely that people would know that they exist.

The DoJ would know. The Civil Rights Commission would know. The SPLC would know. The Anti-Defamation League would know. Bartle Bull would know.

But if people remained ignorant of them, you’d like that better? What a good little sheep you are.

murf said:
Poor , poor Valkyrie101.. The military works in Rank Structure.. Meaning your start at the bottom and work your way up . Your pay increases with every rank earned – Capitalism baby !. In a socialist military their would be a 1 Commander and the rest privates with equal pay .

You misunderstood. We collect taxes. We use the money to pay for military protection for our whole nation. Now lets create a new unit, the U.S. Medical Corp., which provides medical care to needy people and maintains free hospitals and clinics throughout the United States, and on call to other parts of the world in case of emergency. You call that socialism, but it is exactly the same as how we run our military.

murf said:
Ahh.. Valkyrie is one of the ” Jesus was a Socialist ” revisionist.. Feeding , healing ,and giving money to the poor.. That’s their argument . Conservatives are rich , and do not care for the poor. So Jesus MUST be a Socialist..

The real problem with that theological argument is that Jesus enouraged people to be giving. He was giving Himself. At no point, ever, did He suggest that the government should collect and pool everyone’s wealth and buy everyone collective salvation. He insisted that each person has a duty to his fellow man and he never said that you should pawn it all off to the government. That, after all, is stupid. The path to Eternal Salvation isn’t paying all the appropriate taxes, folks.

valkyrie101 said:
You misunderstood. We collect taxes. We use the money to pay for military protection for our whole nation. Now lets create a new unit, the U.S. Medical Corp., which provides medical care to needy people and maintains free hospitals and clinics throughout the United States, and on call to other parts of the world in case of emergency. You call that socialism, but it is exactly the same as how we run our military.

Find me the Constitutional authorization for that and then we’ll talk. I’d start looking in the 18 enumerated powers if I were you.

Valkyrie your Medical Corps , is already In place — it’s called the Red Cross.

You have a Utopia view on how the US should operate.. ,Free Medicare for all is ideal , but economically and financially flawed on so many levels.

valkyrie101 said:
You misunderstood. We collect taxes. We use the money to pay for military protection for our whole nation. Now lets create a new unit, the U.S. Medical Corp., which provides medical care to needy people and maintains free hospitals and clinics throughout the United States, and on call to other parts of the world in case of emergency. You call that socialism, but it is exactly the same as how we run our military.

The only difference being that one is constitutionally mandated and the other isn’t, unless I’m mistaking something.

Pablo , precisely .. You explained it better than me. Thanks.

BTW, big props to Steve Krakauer for his straight up reporting in this post. Mr. Abrams, Steve should be teaching a weekly class to the staff.

murf said:
Valkyrie your Medical Corps , is already In place — it’s called the Red Cross.

Yep, and every time a disaster happens, Americans flood their coffers with cash, and off they go. The rest of the world, not so much. And the Red Cross is just one of many orgs that do awesome work fueled by the love of Americans for their fellow man. And then there’s the UN.

Pablo said:
Find me the Constitutional authorization for that and then we’ll talk. I’d start looking in the 18 enumerated powers if I were you.

Yes, socialism built right into the Constitution. Collect taxes, and for our collective good and mutual protection, hire people to defend us and run a military organization. We also use our taxes to pay for our library system, another socialist invention.

Pablo said:
Yep, and every time a disaster happens, Americans flood their coffers with cash, and off they go. The rest of the world, not so much. And the Red Cross is just one of many orgs that do awesome work fueled by the love of Americans for their fellow man. And then there’s the UN.

The point is, you would argue that a government run health care system is socialism, and I point out that the military is exactly the same concept. We hire a group of people to work primarily for the public good and pay their salary out of the federal coffers (i.e. taxes).

 A military is part of the few Constitutionally defined roles of government. If you read your Constitution, you will find this following bit: “provide for the common defense”. You don’t even have to get further than the preamble.

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The problem is that liberals take “promote the general Welfare” to mean cradle to grave welfare programs, which is farthest from the truth. What it means is establishing standardization and a fair and efficient economy that maximizes all people’s ability “to pursue happiness”.

Socialism makes it the responsibility of the government to be a “nanny state”. Specifically, the government is supposed to provide health insurance AND health care, labor is controlled and moderated by the government, and all forms of monetary exchanges is moderated by the government. Socialism is essentially communism light.

Everything  beyond regulating transportation, providing for the military, and establishing and enforcing just law is beyond government function and becomes Socialism.

“Democrat-Progressive – Socialist – Communist.. The progress is clear.”

How bout this Republican-Conservative-Corporatist-Fascist. The progress is clear

Cobra says:
July 9, 2010 at 5:43 pm

So you’d have a problem if anti-immigrant activists alligned with the Minuteman showed up with guns and tried to intimidate voters?

I think we’d all have a problem (or we should) no matter who, or what group they were affiliated with, or whether or not they succeeded, attempted to intimidate voters. Encourage voters through ideas and policy… not through threats of violence and harm.

MakeANoise says:
July 9, 2010 at 5:44 pm

this is just another manufactured scandal from Fox News….it’s amazing how many of their viewers really don’t know what’s going on in the world….so, the question is: where are and who are these voters that were intimidated?

Please show us where it is said that to be “voter intimidation” it needs to succeed. I guess according to you, unless someone is actually too afraid to vote (and if that were the case, why would they say anything publically), then you’re allowed to threaten people. It’s not a crime unless you succeed? No… I’m afraid that’s not how things work.

Cobra says:
July 9, 2010 at 5:50 pm

Will Megyn ask similar questions of Fox News Paid Contributor Mark Fuhrman the next time they appear together?

Three quick points about this question:
1) IMO, FNC should have never hired Fuhrman. It does nothing to help their brand, he is not an “expert” or anymore of an “expert” than someone else in a similar position.
2) Unless it’s somehow relevant to the topic they’re talking about, how would that matter?
3) Have you and the left not forgiven other people for using inappropriate language?

I get what you’re going for… an “I’ll attack Kelly and FNC, because I can’t actually defend Shabazz” argument. For weeks now, you’ve been trying to defend the NBP and the Obama Administration’s mishandling of this. Your comment is a misdirection, and irrelevant to the topic at hand.

valkyrie101 says:
July 9, 2010 at 5:58 pm

Except for the folks who saw about them on a Nation Geographic special.

But really, what’s the point? Isn’t that what a news network is supposed to do? Expose problems in society? So now you’re blaming FNC for doing a good job and exposing bad guys? Do you get the whole “journalism” concept?

valkyrie101 said:
Yes, socialism built right into the Constitution.

OK, where is that in the Constitution? I’m afraid you can’t just assume it’s there, val, you have to point it out. And then I can begin explaining the difference between local government and the federal government and how that all relates to the enumerated powers of the federal government and the 10th Amendment. But you’ve got to finds that Constitutional hook you hope to hang your hat on first.

Please, Glenn. A frigging civics class. A remedial civics class. And make it free. America needs you.

murf said:
 A military is part of the few Constitutionally defined roles of government. If you read your Constitution, you will find this following bit: “provide for the common defense”. You don’t even have to get further than the preamble. “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” The problem is that liberals take “promote the general Welfare” to mean cradle to grave welfare programs, which is farthest from the truth. What it means is establishing standardization and a fair and efficient economy that maximizes all people’s ability “to pursue happiness”. Socialism makes it the responsibility of the government to be a “nanny state”. Specifically, the government is supposed to provide health insurance AND health care, labor is controlled and moderated by the government, and all forms of monetary exchanges is moderated by the government. Socialism is essentially communism light. Everything  beyond regulating transportation, providing for the military, and establishing and enforcing just law is beyond government function and becomes Socialism.

You again fail to understand. The concept of socialism is very old, from antiquity. The Pilgrims were quite caught up in it, probably out of necessity, but the first founding document of our country, and one reason why we cherish the Pilgrims, is the Mayflower Compact, which is quite socialist. The fact that we included a socialist concept into the Constitution as an enumerated power of the federal government, to wit: the formation of a government run military, with the federal government therefore being one of the biggest employers in the nation, demonstrates that our founding fathers had nothing against “socialism” per se.

ImNotBlue said:
Encourage voters through ideas and policy… not through threats of violence and harm.

And don’t even do that within 100 feet of a polling place. People should be left alone to vote, period.

valkyrie101 said:
The fact that we included a socialist concept into the Constitution as an enumerated power of the federal government, to wit: the formation of a government run military, with the federal government therefore being one of the biggest employers in the nation, demonstrates that our founding fathers had nothing against “socialism” per se.

I’m sorry, but that just demonstrates to me that you’re illiterate. “Provide for the common defense” is not socialism, it’s group survival. It doesn’t make us beholden to each other for our daily bread, it makes us beholden to each other to fight when we have to defend the nation. Again, there are 18 enumerated powers. All of them give the government permission to do certain things for the common good. The Founders stopped the list at 18 for a reason. And if you want to add more powers to the list, they provided a way to do that. But until you get that done. the list doesn’t change. You could Google it.

Oh, and the Founders never envisioned the military as we know it now. They couldn’t have.

Musing a little further, the military isn’t socialist, it’s authoritarian. They’re right up front about the fact that once you sign, you’re government property. The price you pay could be your life, and anyone that joins without understanding that is not paying attention. By the time you’re there, you’ve signed off on it. Socialism prefers to sneak up on you. And the military benefits are much, much better than those of socialism.

Fair enough Valkyrie . If you want to label the Pilgrims socialists . Fine . It FAILED  ( Mayflower Compact was a total failure), yes over 300 years ago Socialism was tried and did not succeed. The Pilgrims learned that when freedom thrives, so does hard work, productivity, innovation, and prosperity. Communism, along with its twin tyrannical sisters of Socialism and Fascism, leads to precisely the opposite.

valkyrie101 said:
You again fail to understand. The concept of socialism is very old, from antiquity. The Pilgrims were quite caught up in it, probably out of necessity, but the first founding document of our country, and one reason why we cherish the Pilgrims, is the Mayflower Compact, which is quite socialist. The fact that we included a socialist concept into the Constitution as an enumerated power of the federal government, to wit: the formation of a government run military, with the federal government therefore being one of the biggest employers in the nation, demonstrates that our founding fathers had nothing against “socialism” per se.

Wow, this dunce cannot be helped.

Ninja said:
Wow, this dunce cannot be helped.

Yes, he can be. He’s me when I was young. But, it’s not because people will tell him he’s f’d up, it’s because he’ll get married and raise a family and pay taxes, and instead of his paycheck going to his kid’s college fund, most of it will be going to pay for other kids’ college funds so they can learn to hate whitey. The United States of America is mostly a conservative, right leaning nation, despite the media telling us at every turn that we’re stupid hicks. Why do you think that is?

I love Valkyrie 101.. Misguided yes — so what… The truth comes from within ,… You can preach for years , but do your actions speak louder than words? If not , shutup .

Why isn’t Megan grilling White racists?

Rhetorical question.

Haha , Lanquihue.. One thing …! Marines kick ass .. Navy suck lol I know .. I’m a hater ! Lol

Here’s another Shabazz classic:

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=XdZu6UIruz

lanquihue said:
Yes, he can be. He’s me when I was young. But, it’s not because people will tell him he’s f’d up, it’s because he’ll get married and raise a family and pay taxes, and instead of his paycheck going to his kid’s college fund, most of it will be going to pay for other kids’ college funds so they can learn to hate whitey. The United States of America is mostly a conservative, right leaning nation, despite the media telling us at every turn that we’re stupid hicks. Why do you think that is?

Face it guys, you have no response. The U.S. military is a socialist institution authorized by our founding fathers in the Constitution which proves that socialism is not per se un-Constitutional.

valkyrie101 said:
Face it guys, you have no response. The U.S. military is a socialist institution authorized by our founding fathers in the Constitution which proves that socialism is not per se un-Constitutional.

You really have no concept do you? Military is a protective force, it doesn’t supply heart transplants or high school physicals….there is simply no correlation between socialized medicine, banks etc. and the military.

Apples and oranges. Nice try though.

valkyrie101 said:
Face it guys, you have no response. The U.S. military is a socialist institution authorized by our founding fathers in the Constitution which proves that socialism is not per se un-Constitutional.

No response? Scroll up, genius. The only thing you’ve proved is that you’re not very good at comprehension.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
Why isn’t Megan grilling White racists?

Rhetorical question.

She doesn’t have your phone number.

Big_F-ing_Deal says:
July 10, 2010 at 4:18 am

Rhetorical question.

Is it rhetorical because you already know the answer?

The answer is obvious… because there aren’t any white racists (currently) accused of voter intimidation, who’ve had their cases dropped by the DOJ, and are under investigation from the Civil Rights Commission. Her interview wasn’t simply an expose on racism… but specifically about this particular group, and the charges made against them. Duh.

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 8:48 am

Face it guys, you have no response. The U.S. military is a socialist institution authorized by our founding fathers in the Constitution which proves that socialism is not per se un-Constitutional.

But even if that was true (and it’s pretty clear from everyone else, that it’s not)… what’s your point? That because there is one element of socialism in one area, there should be broad socialism everywhere? That doesn’t make sense at all! By that logic, there are also elements of a libertarian society in the Constitution… so does that show that mean that all attempts at libertarianism should be recognized as “good?”

What’s your point? And how is this not a distraction because from the NBP story and interview?

murf said:
Haha , Lanquihue.. One thing …! Marines kick ass .. Navy suck lol I know .. I’m a hater ! Lol

Marines… um…. weren’t they those security guards over at the gate? :)

Pablo said:
No response? Scroll up, genius. The only thing you’ve proved is that you’re not very good at comprehension.

Face it, you can not distinguish socialism from our Constitutionally required U.S. Military. Next time the subject comes up about how “socialist” government control of our health care system is an unconstitutional act, and that anyone promoting that is a socialist, not withstanding the general powers that the federal government has in all matters “interstate commerce”, or for the general welfare, you can again seek to distinguish our socialist military from a socialist healthcare system other than through your worshipable adherence to the magic of the free market system, where greater profits for a few trumps the general welfare of the people as a whole, and we as a nation. Our Constitutional forefathers provided us with an excellent model of government ownership of the military apparatus that protects our country. That is the best system for protecting all of us, collectively. And there is no reason we can not follow that model in addressing the similar problems we have in protecting our citizens, medically, from harm. For example.

valkyrie101 said:
Face it guys, you have no response. The U.S. military is a socialist institution authorized by our founding fathers in the Constitution which proves that socialism is not per se un-Constitutional.

Dude, multiple people have sent your argument straight to hell. Don’t be a typical liberal douche.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
Why isn’t Megan grilling White racists?

Rhetorical question.

When she has you on.

BFD, why do you only comment on or worry about white racism? Are you a black panther?

valkyrie101 said:
Face it, you can not distinguish socialism from our Constitutionally required U.S. Military.

No, no. YOU cannot distinguish between the two, because you’re not very observant. Myself and several others have done so with a great deal of ease.

The fact that Black Panthers are exempt from prosecution by the justice department is only part of the story. The big story here is the way the rest of the media (except for Fox) is trying to hide this scandal. Fox again shows why it is growing its audience, while others are shrinking. Every time the media pulls a con job like this, they lose another 10-20 thousand viewers. And since they do this kind of stuff all the time, the numbers add up.

Evidently MSNBC isn’t aware the black panthers exist, and should do some research. They should send Keith Olbermann into a panther meeting. He could explain to them that he’s a liberal and is on their side, see what happens, then come back and give a full report.

Writer give me a break bro, Olbermann , ..and I am not joking . Told someone on Twitter [ I know , but it's the only way he communicates with the opposition ] that he has no desire to cover this story , because it was broken by Fox News , and they aren’t in his words.. ” real news ” . He also told the person on Twitter he or she was showing he or she’s racism by talking about this. I shit you not.

That’s a shame. I’d tune in to see Keith touring south central L.A. or attending panther meetings. He could explain that he’s liberal and feels their pain. I’m sure they’d help him out with that. It’d be a ratings winner.

lanquihue said:
Dude, multiple people have sent your argument straight to hell. Don’t be a typical liberal douche.

Yes, we have a room full of constitutional scholars on hand today, folks. Querie: Was the U.S. ownership of the First Bank of the United States unconstitutional? Could Washington and Hamilton been closet socialists too?

Anything to divert attention away from black racism, huh, valk?

writer says:
July 10, 2010 at 11:27 am

SERIOUSLY! What the heck! He’s all over the place… everywhere but on the NBP story! Yeesh!

And his point about Socialism is so dumb-dumb stupid! Even if he’s correct… so what? Does one element of (alleged) “Socialism” mean the rest of everything else must follow? No… of course not! It’s the, “Well, her mom lets her go out at night,” argument… just in Constitutional form. Waste of time!

Valkyrie , I gave up on you last night . However please explain to me why the US capitalism, free market system is envied by the world ? One last point , please name a Socialistic nation that economically is prospering above everyone else ?

So now you are adding “black racism” to your list of things to be afraid of? Between those nasty Islamics, those head chopping Mexicans. those tea bagging gays, and now, black men that go thump in the night, where do you hide?

valkyrie101 said:
So now you are adding “black racism” to your list of things to be afraid of? Between those nasty Islamics, those head chopping Mexicans. those tea bagging gays, and now, black men that go thump in the night, where do you hide?

You don’t think Malik Shabazz is a racist? Really? Are blind, deaf AND dumb?

Just two “extremist” trying to make each other look bad.

murf said:
Valkyrie , I gave up on you last night . However please explain to me why the US capitalism, free market system is envied by the world ? One last point , please name a Socialistic nation that economically is prospering above everyone else ?

As our forefathers indicated, socialism is not always the best economic model. Thus, a socialist military, but otherwise, only certain needs, such as roads, police and firemen (local socialism), regulatory agencies like the EPA, meat inspectors, etc. And medical care is perfect for socialism.

As for socialist nations in the manner I described: Germany, Japan, and most others ranked ahead of the U.S.

timzank said:
You don’t think Malik Shabazz is a racist? Really? Are blind, deaf AND dumb?

There are lots of racists in the world. No, he does not scare me at all.

Well Valkyrie you took my bait . Japan HA ! — Do some ” google ” research on how their bailouts and government stimulus programs have worked out . [ on which Obama has tried ]

Hint : They haven’t

ImNotBlue writes:

“Cobra says:
July 9, 2010 at 5:43 pm

I think we’d all have a problem (or we should) no matter who, or what group they were affiliated with, or whether or not they succeeded, attempted to intimidate voters. Encourage voters through ideas and policy… not through threats of violence and harm.”

Then…where are you posts about this? SAME Department of Justice (Bush)…from 2006?

“Perez: “[T]he Department declined to bring any action for alleged voter intimidation” in 2006. In his May 14 testimony before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Thomas Perez, assistant attorney general for the DOJ’s civil rights division, highlighted a case that completely undermines the notion that the DOJ’s decisions in the Black Panthers case were unprecedented or racially motivated. Perez testified that in 2006, the DOJ “declined to bring any action for alleged voter intimidation” “when three well-known anti-immigrant advocates affiliated with the Minutemen, one of whom was carrying a gun, allegedly intimidated Latino voters at a polling place by approaching several persons, filming them, and advocating and printing voting materials in Spanish.”
[U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 5/14/10]

Armed with a 9mm Glock automatic strapped to his side, Warden said he planned to photograph Hispanic voters entering polls in an effort to identify illegal immigrants and felons. “

As I said on the other thread….White Guys with guns at the polls intimidating non-Whites are FINE, but let Black guys with funny hats say something…FOX NEWS ALERT!

ImNotBlue writes:

“1) IMO, FNC should have never hired Fuhrman. It does nothing to help their brand, he is not an “expert” or anymore of an “expert” than someone else in a similar position.
2) Unless it’s somehow relevant to the topic they’re talking about, how would that matter?
3) Have you and the left not forgiven other people for using inappropriate language?”

The fact that Fox News DID HIRE Mark Fuhrman impeaches any negative editorial opinion by Fox News or their spokespeople about racially charged and/or inappropriate language.

If Fox News can put a man on the payroll who says things like THIS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrgZ87UGIzk

What POSSIBLE problem could they have with Malik Zulu Shabazz?

Ninja writes:

“Is Mark Fuhrman currently part of an ongoing civil rights investigation? Why would she ask that question?”

Listen to the Furhman tapes and tell me honestly….which PERSON is more deserving of an ongoing civil rights investigation…Malik Zulu Shabazz or Furhman?

Murf writes:

“One last point , please name a Socialistic nation that economically is prospering above everyone else ?”

“After peaking at $801.5 billion, China’s holdings of U.S. Treasury securities declined to $755.4 billion at the year’s end, dropping the communist power into the position of second-largest holder of Treasury debt after Japan’s $768.8 billion, official government data reveal. “

If you owe somebody MONEY, you can’t quite say you’re “prospering above” them.

–Cobra

murf said:
name a Socialistic nation that economically is prospering above everyone else ?

Val, answer the question.

valkyrie101 said:
So now you are adding “black racism” to your list of things to be afraid of?

Wait, I thought we were supposed to be opposed to racism. When did it become politically correct and why didn’t anyone tell me?

murf said:
Well Valkyrie you took my bait . Japan HA ! — Do some ” google ” research on how their bailouts and government stimulus programs have worked out . [ on which Obama has tried ] Hint : They haven’t

The economies of every nation in the world have been going through turmoil. And you blame that world crisis on, let me guess, socialism? Check the current rankings of the world’s nations. Is America on top where it belongs? Nope. People have a better standard of living in several countries, all of which use some socialist models.

Pablo said:
Wait, I thought we were supposed to be opposed to racism. When did it become politically correct and why didn’t anyone tell me?

Nobody would even know that Shabang and his group even exists but for FOX having him on over 25 times.

yweston said:
Just two “extremist” trying to make each other look bad.

One of them succeeded.

valkyrie101 said:
Nobody would even know that Shabang and his group even exists but for FOX having him on over 25 times.

Bingo!

Valkyrie , Once again you use failed logic .. Sorry , it seems to me like you love group the US and other countries into the same column. Again , you fail , or are purposely blind to the US’s exceptionalism via Capitalism and free markets .

valkyrie101 said:
People have a better standard of living in several countries,

Do you even have a clue how stupid that is? Back in high school, (70′s) I knew a chick that dated a college dude from Kuwait. Everyone from Kuwait goes to college, and just about every family has servants. (oil) However, I’m still free to think on my own, and I’ll take that over money any day.

valk, not scared of black racism. Just pointing out to you lefties that the white race doesn’t have a monopoly on it. Your attempts to change the subject prove how uncomfortable the subject makes you.

valkyrie101 said:
Nobody would even know that Shabang and his group even exists but for FOX having him on over 25 times.

That doesn’t answer the question. It’s also not true.

Valkyrie, you stick up for the left even when they show up at the polling place with threats and weapons. Do you ever draw the line at anything?

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 11:48 am valkyrie101

So now you are adding “black racism” to your list of things to be afraid of?

Things that are better to be afraid of (according to the liberal left):

-Right-wing/Libertarian talk show hosts
-Former Alaskan governors
-The “elderly” who watch FNC
-The “elderly” and “dumb” who consider themselves Tea Partiers
-Police and soldiers
-Business owners
-Bankers and investors
-Stay at home moms
-White people
-Men

Val is attempting yet another slight of hand distraction. He/She knows the situation… but instead of addressing this issue, he/she will expand it to ridiculous levels making the “everyone” statement. Nobody is talking about “everyone,” only this specific group, and these specific folks… but since they are undeniably racist, and since that gives Val less cover to defend those on his/her political side, the expansion allows him/her to mock people without actually having to address the issue.

But yet again, nobody is falling for it.

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 12:05 pm valkyrie101

There are lots of racists in the world. No, he does not scare me at all.

Why is that? And are you afraid of racists at all?

Furthermore, who is talking about “afraid?” Isn’t there a difference between breaking the law, and wanting to see the law enforced… and fear?

Another straw-man argument.

Cobra says:
July 10, 2010 at 12:15 pm Cobra

Then…where are you posts about this? SAME Department of Justice (Bush)…from 2006?

This is a fun “gotcha” attempt… which will backfire momentarily…

I’d need to see more info on what happened, why there were no charges brought, and whether or not an actual crime was committed. The difference is, of course, that when the DOJ brought charges in this case, they were dropped AFTER they had already won… which makes the situation more unique and questionable.

However, if they really were out there trying to intimidate voters, then yes… they should have been charged and punished. Voter intimidation is not acceptable, no matter who does it. Period.

As I said on the other thread….White Guys with guns at the polls intimidating non-Whites are FINE, but let Black guys with funny hats say something…FOX NEWS ALERT!

Black guys shouting racial epithets, carrying batons, and wearing army fatigues IS worthy of a news story. I’m not sure why you want to pretend it’s something they’re not. Of course, these guys are also known racists, and part of an openly racist group… another fact you want to pretend doesn’t exist.

But let me ask you a follow-up question (and here’s the backfire), did other networks report this story? Did FNC report that story? And do you think they should have?

Apparently, you’re upset with some Minutemen who may have attempted to intimidate voters… but not with NBP’s who undeniably did. Why is that? You want to accuse me of being upset about one, but not the other (which is false), yet you appear to be doing exactly the same. Why is it wrong for white guys, but not black guys? Hmmm?

The fact that Fox News DID HIRE Mark Fuhrman impeaches any negative editorial opinion by Fox News or their spokespeople about racially charged and/or inappropriate language.

Really? This one guy, who once allegedly used some inappropriate language, who now only talks about things from the perspective of a police detective… ruins ALL of FNC? Wow.

Do you hold the other networks to the same standards? What about all the networks that interview or pay to interview Jesse Jackson? I guess that ruins their credibility too?

Listen to the Furhman tapes and tell me honestly….which PERSON is more deserving of an ongoing civil rights investigation…Malik Zulu Shabazz or Furhman?

Hmmm… the former cop, or the guy who says he needs to kill white people and white babies.

Really? That’s not a tough choice. Tell me, why do YOU think one worse than the other?

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 12:29 pm

DukeCO says:
July 10, 2010 at 12:35 pm

Unless they saw the National Geographic special.

Of course, I guess your point is, if people don’t know about racists… they don’t really exist? Really?

Dumb.

felixw said:
Valkyrie, you stick up for the left even when they show up at the polling place with threats and weapons. Do you ever draw the line at anything?

Republicans.

Just Tex said:
BTW, if TC had half of Megyn’s stones, Mediaite could have easily gotten this scoop.

Poor TC. And poor Mediaite too!

Tex, maybe you’re confused about the definition of a “scoop.” We scooped Fox by 2 days.

Tommy Christopher says:
July 10, 2010 at 1:15 pm

Can you really call it a “scoop” if you didn’t get anywhere near the same information that Kelly did?

I guess by that logic, the guy at the Stop & Shop “scooped” Mediaite a week earlier, when he asked Mr. Shabazz “Do you have your Stop & Shop card?”

Tommy seems to think the New Black Panther Party is ‘misunderstood’. So when that guy was ranting that he wanted to kill white babies, I guess he meant it in a good way.

Tommy .. The only thing you scoop is ice cream . Get real dude.

writer said:
Tommy seems to think the New Black Panther Party is ‘misunderstood’. So when that guy was ranting that he wanted to kill white babies, I guess he meant it in a good way.

So then, you have a problem with those “we didn’ bring our guns, this time” signs at the tea party rallys or having a bunch of armed men show up at tea party rallys?

What are you saying, valk? Two wrongs make a right?

By the way, valk. That guy pictured with a gun was a black guy.

Pablo said:
Republicans.

Racial discrimination and threats happen every day. In this case, one of those isolated incidences is being played by the conservatives as evidence of Obama and/or the Justice department being in favor of black on white racism, as they play every incident they can find in the same way. Of course you all had a different story when the shoe was on the other foot.

writer said:
By the way, valk. That guy pictured with a gun was a black guy.

Yes, perhaps a law allowing the police to just arrest black people for displaying guns should be implemented. Or how about deportation?

writer said:
What are you saying, valk? Two wrongs make a right?

Equal protection.

“Of course, you all had a different story when the shoe was on the other foot.”

Isn’t that what you’re doing now, valk?

ImNotBlue writes:

“I’d need to see more info on what happened, why there were no charges brought, and whether or not an actual crime was committed. The difference is, of course, that when the DOJ brought charges in this case, they were dropped AFTER they had already won… which makes the situation more unique and questionable.”

LOL. Where did you “see more info” on the New Black Panthers case? Fox News? Pajamas Media? Right winged talk radio? You HONESTLY expect those sources to give you an “in-depth expose” on a case involving WHITE Conservaties allegedly intimidating non-White voters? That’s hilarious!

Second. The DOJ won the case by DEFAULT–the NBP never even mounted a defense in court.

ImNotBlue writes:

“However, if they really were out there trying to intimidate voters, then yes… they should have been charged and punished. Voter intimidation is not acceptable, no matter who does it. Period.”

News accounts of the Arizona incidents:

“From a November 8, 2006, Austin American-Statesman article:

Mr. Warden said he planned to photograph Hispanic voters entering polls at as many as 20 precincts in an effort to identify illegal immigrants and felons.”

Do you need more, ImNotBlue? Trust me…I can post more.

—Cobra

ImNotBlue writes:

“Hmmm… the former cop [Furhman], or the guy who says he needs to kill white people and white babies.

Really? That’s not a tough choice. Tell me, why do YOU think one worse than the other?”

I don’ t really like either, to be honest…but the NBP guy is talking about killing white people in the future, where as convicted FELON Mark Furhman is talking about killing Black people in the future, while admitting his OWN personal civil rights abuses and police brutality against minorities.

–Cobra

writer said:
“Of course, you all had a different story when the shoe was on the other foot.” Isn’t that what you’re doing now, valk?

I am not even addressing what the guy did. Rather, I am pointing out your hypocrisy.

And just what is that hypocrisy, valk? All I’m saying is that the left is always up in arms over white racism, but when blacks display racism, you bend over backwards to explain it away. Rather than discuss the panthers’ racism, you keep bringing up instances of white racism. Why is that? Are you unable to discuss racism when the perpetrator is black?

valkyrie101 said:
So then, you have a problem with those “we didn’ bring our guns, this time” signs at the tea party rallys or having a bunch of armed men show up at tea party rallys?

Are they breaking the law?

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 1:54 pm valkyrie101

So then, you have a problem with those “we didn’ bring our guns, this time” signs at the tea party rallys or having a bunch of armed men show up at tea party rallys?

Yes to the first, no to the second. The first suggests violence… but the second is allowed under the law, and while it may make the left “uncomfortable,” until they violate the law there’s nothing you can do or complain about.

Of course, again, this is just a diversion from the NBP story. They WERE violating the law AND had weapons… and this is a consistent position, unlike the position that Val unknowingly highlighted where the left is upset with Tea Partiers, even though they didn’t break the law… but giving a pass to the NBPs even though they DID break the law.

You keep trying to do this equating bad behavior thing… yet, each time, you only manage to highlight your own hypocrisy… not the hypocrisy of anyone else. Why do you think the actions of the are Tea Partiers wrong, but NBPs right?

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 2:02 pm

Equal protection.

Which is something you’re CLEARLY arguing against!

Cobra says:
July 10, 2010 at 2:07 pm Cobra

LOL. Where did you “see more info” on the New Black Panthers case?

Great point! If the rest of the media want to keep something quiet, they let FNC and rightwing outlets talk about them. That way, when someone wants to discredit them, they just say, “Well, only FNC was reporting it, and they’re no good.” Then you can dismiss the whole thing, without having to defend the undeniable facts.

There was a video. There was testimony from a multitude of people, including civil rights activists. There is the ongoing (and new subpoenas) from the Civil Rights Commission. What more do you want? I’ll tell you what… if you think FNC has misreported the story, then find me a better source who had reported it more fairly. YOU have the burden here… show me “the truth.”

Second. The DOJ won the case by DEFAULT–the NBP never even mounted a defense in court.

And that matters, how? A win is a win, is it not?

Do you need more, ImNotBlue? Trust me…I can post more.

Well, yes actually. It sure sounds like they were trying to intimidate folks (although, one could make the argument that they weren’t talking about voting… but that gets awfully down in the mud, and the point is more that they were doing it at a polling location, so it’s no good). However, that only provides information about what they were doing, not what charges were or weren’t brought against them. That’s some more info I’d like to see.

But let me ask you this… you’ve called the NBPs a “couple of guys in funny hats.” But let’s compare:
-Weapon (gun / club)? Yes.
-Racial motivations? Yes.
-Prior history of violence? Yes.
-Shouting racist statements at people walking by? No. The NBPs did that, but not Dove or Warden.
-Camera and Clipboard? No. The NBPs didn’t have that, just Dove and Warden… neither of which are weapons or “intimidating,” are they?

So what’s the difference for you? Apparently, these guys are bad and racist… but the NBPs aren’t, despite the similarities. Why is that?

Perhaps you believe that since these guys weren’t charged, the NBPs should be allowed to “get away with it.” Is that right? Is that fair?

What is your point… what should happen to both groups?

Cobra says:
July 10, 2010 at 2:12 pm

I just did some quick research… but wasn’t able to find anything that said Furhman advocated killing Black people in the future. When did he say that, and what did he say?

As far as I can tell, Furhman’s big “crime” was dropping the “n” word all over the place, and saying some pretty racist things. Is there evidence of police brutality?

Oh, and you didn’t address my question about Jesse Jackson.

writer said:
And just what is that hypocrisy, valk? All I’m saying is that the left is always up in arms over white racism, but when blacks display racism, you bend over backwards to explain it away. Rather than discuss the panthers’ racism, you keep bringing up instances of white racism. Why is that? Are you unable to discuss racism when the perpetrator is black?

I have not defended the guy once. My entire point is that such incidences happen, in isolation, with white people, black people, Hispanic people, and who knows, maybe Asian people from time to time. Some incidences of racism and such are prosecuted, some are not, and some, like in this case, are examined for substance and only partially prosecuted. Using that to attack Obama, making a mountain out of a molehill in that regard, which is the entire point of it all, is just hypocritical. Usual stuff out of you guys. Excuse me if I call you out on it.

Here’s why the ‘attack’ on Obama. Holder chose to drop the case. He’s Obama’s AG. Besides a twenty year association with known racists (Rev. Wright and best friend Louis Farrakhan), Obama has made other questionable appointments, such as Van Jones (Who claimed white people were purposely polluting black neighborhoods) So despite the left’s attempts to automatically dismiss all questions of black racism in this administration, the evidence is there. Excuse me if I call you out on that.

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 3:02 pm

So it doesn’t bother you that this wasn’t prosecuted… and I assume the other cases of White on Black racism don’t bother you either?

I thought this country had laws that were meant to be enforced… not just meant to take up space in a book.

writer says:
July 10, 2010 at 3:09 pm

Ditto.

writer said:
Here’s why the ‘attack’ on Obama. Holder chose to drop the case. He’s Obama’s AG. Besides a twenty year association with known racists (Rev. Wright and best friend Louis Farrakhan), Obama has made other questionable appointments, such as Van Jones (Who claimed white people were purposely polluting black neighborhoods) So despite the left’s attempts to automatically dismiss all questions of black racism in this administration, the evidence is there. Excuse me if I call you out on that.

Knowing and talking to a racist does not in any way make a person a racist. Knowing and talking to a former domestic terrorist does not make a person a domestic terrorist, or a supporter of domestic terrorism. Having a racist on a cable news commentary show, even though it is done to increase ratings and make money, does not make anyone a racist either. Correct?

As far as I know, valk, O’Reilly or Glenn Beck didn’t hang around with that black panther for twenty years and refer to him as a ‘mentor’.

ImNotBlue said:
valkyrie101 says:July 10, 2010 at 3:02 pm So it doesn’t bother you that this wasn’t prosecuted… and I assume the other cases of White on Black racism don’t bother you either? I thought this country had laws that were meant to be enforced… not just meant to take up space in a book. writer says:July 10, 2010 at 3:09 pm Ditto.

This may surprise you, but not all crimes are prosecuted. If they were, half of the students at college, and several well known conservative media personalities would be in jail for violating substance abuse laws. Serious cases, violent cases, tend to be prosecuted. Lesser crimes often are not. In this case, a man with a club who did not hit or threaten to hit anyone was investigated, but not charged, though he was hit with a restraining order to make sure it does not happen again. All you folks are doing is making a mountain out of a mole hill, for your own partisan objectives.

That one attorney claimed he was told by someone in DOJ that since it was a black on white offense, it wouldn’t be looked into. That hasn’t been substantiated yet. A lot will depend on whether that proves to be true.

I am not sure what Tommy means by “scoop”, but Megyn Kelly has been talking about the DOJ scandal for quite some time and both O’Reilly and Beck have interviewed that lunatic racist Malik Shabazz in the past.. This interview wasn’t a “scoop”. Shabazz didn’t give a definitive answer to any of his questions, in fact, Shabazz controlled the interview. .

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 3:52 pm

So I’ll take that as a “no.”

To summarize… people standing outside of a polling place, attempting to intimidate people based upon race, shouting racists statements, representing a racist and violent hate group, who were prosecuted by the DOJ, and then had their case dropped AFTER they had won it, for no given or logical reasoning… is fine by you. You’re cool with that.

Wow.

I hope you send a memo to the Klan, let them know too. Personally, I’ll keep complaining when the laws aren’t upheld, and people are allowed to violent important and symbolic rules, like those preventing voter intimidation.

writer said:
That one attorney claimed he was told by someone in DOJ that since it was a black on white offense, it wouldn’t be looked into. That hasn’t been substantiated yet. A lot will depend on whether that proves to be true.

That wasn’t substantiated yet… Oh.

Libra Blue how dare you !! Whenever the mainstream media gets around to
it ! That’s when it’s relevant !!

ImNotBlue said:
To summarize… people standing outside of a polling place, attempting to intimidate people based upon race, shouting racists statements, representing a racist and violent hate group, who were prosecuted by the DOJ, and then had their case dropped AFTER they had won it, for no given or logical reasoning… is fine by you. You’re cool with that.

Sounds like not much happened beyond freedom of expression. Perhaps that is why they did not prosecute other than getting the restraining order against a person carrying a baton. As intimidation at the polling place goes, that was pretty minor. Compare that to what blacks routinely faced for a hundred years.

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 5:15 pm

Sounds like not much happened beyond freedom of expression.

Unbelievable. Another excuse. They were just “expressing themselves,” and how they want to kill white people.

Apparently, the left believes in “hate speech” and “hate crimes,” but not when certain people are the ones doing the “hating.” I guess it’s just expression to make threats. I guess even though there are specific laws forbidding this… it’s okay (and we’ll see why in a moment).

Perhaps that is why they did not prosecute other than getting the restraining order against a person carrying a baton.

Oh, but they did! And the NBP didn’t show up to court… so the government won on a summary judgment. But then dropped the case. How many times do we have to go over this?!

The Obama Administration dropped the case AFTER they had won it! What is the logic behind that?! Give me that excuse! Tell me why a case, that already had a whole bunch of resources invested into it, was dropped AFTER they won it? What’s the rationale?

As intimidation at the polling place goes, that was pretty minor.

And what would make it “major?” What would they have had to do to make this a worthy case? Apparently, just committing the crime isn’t enough… they have to have something more. So what is it… what is the standard?

Compare that to what blacks routinely faced for a hundred years.

And that’s the real reason why the left doesn’t care about this, about racism from the NBPs or other minority groups… because of white guilt. What is white guilt? Well, simply put it’s a feeling by some (majority on the left) that they are still superior to minorities. However, knowing they’re superior means they have to do certain things -make excuses, grant special privileges, look the other way on occasion- when a “certain person” does something wrong. White guilt is nothing but more racism… the idea that “they don’t know any better,” or “lets treat them differently” is patronizing, arrogant, and offensive.

You want people to be equal, well then start treating them equally. Yeah, Blacks were treated really poorly in history. So were the Jews, Christians, Muslims, Gypsies, poor people, and every other type of person based upon ethnic, economic, racial, religious, etc. reasons. So either we start giving everyone a pass… or we start actually working like an equal society, and punishing those who break the law.

Enough of these BS excuses. The NBP’s have no right to intimidate anyone for any reason, and neither does anyone else. Period.

OMG, is Megyn Kelly the worst teleprompter reader in all of Fox News?

It makes no sense. She’s an intelligent well educated person, but she often pauses 2-3 times in the reading of a single sentence.

ImNotBlue said:
Compare that to what blacks routinely faced for a hundred years.
And that’s the real reason why the left doesn’t care about this, about racism from the NBPs or other minority groups… because of white guilt. What is white guilt? Well, simply put it’s a feeling by some (majority on the left) that they are still superior to minorities. However, knowing they’re superior means they have to do certain things -make excuses, grant special privileges, look the other way on occasion- when a “certain person” does something wrong. White guilt is nothing but more racism… the idea that “they don’t know any better,” or “lets treat them differently” is patronizing, arrogant, and offensive.
You want people to be equal, well then start treating them equally. Yeah, Blacks were treated really poorly in history. So were the Jews, Christians, Muslims, Gypsies, poor people, and every other type of person based upon ethnic, economic, racial, religious, etc. reasons. So either we start giving everyone a pass… or we start actually working like an equal society, and punishing those who break the law.
Enough of these BS excuses. The NBP’s have no right to intimidate anyone for any reason, and neither does anyone else. Period.

Sorry blue, we see through your act. This is a big issue for you, now, but the thousands of times far worse voter intimidation takes place it fully escapes both your notice, or your scorn. And no problem with those tea partiers showing up outside where the president was speaking with holstered guns at their side. So excuse me if I do not take your current outrage that seriously. So if you want a comprehensive rebuttal of your position, go here: http://mediamatters.org/research/201007070034

valkyrie101 said:
Knowing and talking to a racist does not in any way make a person a racist.

Robert Stacy McCain will be glad to hear that. Will you tell Charles Johnson?

valkyrie101 said:
As intimidation at the polling place goes, that was pretty minor. Compare that to what blacks routinely faced for a hundred years.

I’m not seeing that anywhere it the Voting Rights Act of 1965. It just makes a number of actions illegal, like the stuff the Shabozo twins were up to. Could you point me to the Black Mulligan section of that Act?

Cobra said:
I don’ t really like either, to be honest…but the NBP guy is talking about killing white people in the future, where as convicted FELON Mark Furhman is talking about killing Black people in the future, while admitting his OWN personal civil rights abuses and police brutality against minorities.

I think Mark Furhman is an asshole, but I didn’t know he was a convicted felon. Which is interesting because I went and looked and now I’m damn near positive he isn’t a convicted felon. So, does that make me a Furhman apologist or does it make Cobra a liar? You make the call. Me, I think Cobra is making stuff up.

Speaking of intimidation… anybody remember this? http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/19/news/companies/SEIU_Bank_of_America_protest.fortune/index.htm

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 8:43 pm

Sorry blue, we see through your act.

Whoop… here comes another rationale. I should have bought stock.

This is a big issue for you, now, but the thousands of times far worse voter intimidation takes place it fully escapes both your notice, or your scorn.

Liiike? And really, what did I say about them? Show me!

And no problem with those tea partiers showing up outside where the president was speaking with holstered guns at their side.

Especially since they weren’t violating ANY LAWS by doing that! Funny how those folks are very threatening to you… yet, there were no actual complaints, and no laws broken. I wonder why you’re afraid of those folks, yet not of the folks ACTUALLY committing a crime.

So excuse me if I do not take your current outrage that seriously.

Yeah, yeah. Heard it all before. Everyone else is a hypocrite because they weren’t concerned when it happened previously. Of course, the left was concerned then, but aren’t concerned now… but that doesn’t simultaneously show them to be hypocrites. Why? Because Val says so. These things only negatively affect Republicans and those and right… and if you disagree, you’re just partisan and probably a racist. Yeah, yeah. Old excuse.

So if you want a comprehensive rebuttal of your position, go here: http://mediamatters.org/research/201007070034

Let me see if I understand this. In a previous post (in another thread) you said:

This is a partisan issue, pressed by a partisan, Adams, involving Breitbart, another partisan, for a partisan purpose. Thus, it is a hot newsmax issue, of course, but a paper tiger for the res of us.

And to prove that, in this thread you quote Media Matters. Do you not see the irony? You accuse everyone else of being partisans… and to back yourself up, you quote a partisan advocacy group. Do you get it?

Anyway, basically MM takes a source involved in the case, and presents his testimony as fact. Now sure, that testimony directly contradicts other testimony given… but MM has made up its mind that this guy is the guy to trust, not the other guys. Why? Well, because this guy is saying what they already believe… so of course they’re going to believe him!

Sorry buddy… if MM is your primary source, no wonder you’re having such a hard time with this.

Pablo says:
July 10, 2010 at 8:57 pm

Apparently, Furhman is a “felon” because he was convicted of perjury. In the Simpson case, he said he hadn’t used the “n” word in 10 years, but that was found to be untrue. So a case was brought against him, and he pleaded guilty.

So I guess he’s “technically” a felon, for the crime of perjury. Of course, there’s a certain President I can think of who also committed perjury… and while he’s not a technical “felon,” I guess it means Furhman isn’t the only one to have committed that crime.

ImNotBlue said:
And to prove that, in this thread you quote Media Matters. Do you not see the irony? You accuse everyone else of being partisans… and to back yourself up, you quote a partisan advocacy group. Do you get it?

Um, let’s see. I’m pretty sure I am a progressive. What do you think? So you are accusing me of being partisan, and it being ironic because I cite media matters, a leading progressive site? Hello. I am partisan, so are you, that is the dynamic. This is an interaction between competing partisan views. I give my guy the benefit of the doubt, you give your guys the benefit of the doubt. That is how it works. You want to press this matter as a big issue, a decision by career justice department officials to handle a fairly minor case the way it was, and turn it into an indictment of everything Obama. Sure, that is what the usual partisans on your side do. I understand, and I take no offense.

valkyrie101 says:
July 10, 2010 at 10:05 pm

So you are accusing me of being partisan, and it being ironic because I cite media matters, a leading progressive site?

Well, I’m criticizing you because you said this:

This is a partisan issue, pressed by a partisan, Adams, involving Breitbart, another partisan, for a partisan purpose. Thus, it is a hot newsmax issue, of course, but a paper tiger for the res of us.

So apparently, you’re complaining because the issue is “partisan.” What you really mean to say (based on your above post) is that it’s bad because it’s “partisan the wrong way.” It’s not the bias you dislike, after all you just said, “This is an interaction between competing partisan views. I give my guy the benefit of the doubt, you give your guys the benefit of the doubt.” It’s that they’re talking about something that hurts your political side.

That’s pretty much what I’ve been saying. You’re a hack! You’re unable or unwilling to separate out the facts from the opinion, and do any kind of critical thinking which might lead you to criticize your own political party. That’s the definition of a hack!

Additionally, it voids a lot of your other statements. You’re clearly willing to distort (as I’ve said you are), because you’re so partisan! You’re willing to distract, and make excuses… because you’re so partisan! That’s not a good thing, buddy! You should be able to think for yourself… not follow the hive simply because you’ve been told to think a certain way.

It’s the reason why you could never answer the simple question I asked before: Why was the case dropped after they won it? That’s the key… and IMO, the only completely indefensible action. And based upon your non-defense of it… I think you agree… although, you’d never admit it.

I would love to hear ANY well-known black Democrat come out and denounce this dirt bag–Sharpton, Rangel, Jackson, even ol’ Roland Martin would do. For me, people like this do more to harm race relations than ten rational people can ameliorate.

ImNotBlue said:
valkyrie101 says:July 10, 2010 at 10:05 pm So you are accusing me of being partisan, and it being ironic because I cite media matters, a leading progressive site? Well, I’m criticizing you because you said this: So apparently, you’re complaining because the issue is “partisan.” What you really mean to say (based on your above post) is that it’s bad because it’s “partisan the wrong way.” It’s not the bias you dislike, after all you just said, “This is an interaction between competing partisan views. I give my guy the benefit of the doubt, you give your guys the benefit of the doubt.” It’s that they’re talking about something that hurts your political side. That’s pretty much what I’ve been saying. You’re a hack! You’re unable or unwilling to separate out the facts from the opinion, and do any kind of critical thinking which might lead you to criticize your own political party. That’s the definition of a hack! Additionally, it voids a lot of your other statements. You’re clearly willing to distort (as I’ve said you are), because you’re so partisan! You’re willing to distract, and make excuses… because you’re so partisan! That’s not a good thing, buddy! You should be able to think for yourself… not follow the hive simply because you’ve been told to think a certain way. It’s the reason why you could never answer the simple question I asked before: Why was the case dropped after they won it? That’s the key… and IMO, the only completely indefensible action. And based upon your non-defense of it… I think you agree… although, you’d never admit it.

You see yourself as a bastion of objectivity. Not so. You have one goal, everyday when you wake up, attack Obama or anything “liberal”. Am I wrong on that? Well fine, I kind of enjoy your nonsense. But please, do not put on the FOX “fair and balanced” moniker and expect anyone to believe it, any more than anyone but a partisan believes FOX on that. You haven’t done your research on this story and are willing to believe people that have a long history of distorting the facts (e.g. Adams and Breitbart). Its a wonder we have not got O’Keife involved in this

valkyrie101 says:
July 11, 2010 at 7:36 am

You see yourself as a bastion of objectivity. Not so. You have one goal, everyday when you wake up, attack Obama or anything “liberal”. Am I wrong on that?

Yes, you are wrong on that… and you have no proof to back it up. But for you, this is still par, so I’m not surprised.

Well fine, I kind of enjoy your nonsense.

I know… anyone who disagrees with you, is simply spouting “nonsense.” What a high opinion of yourself you must have.

But please, do not put on the FOX “fair and balanced” moniker and expect anyone to believe it, any more than anyone but a partisan believes FOX on that.

Yeah yeah yeah… FNC is the devil, must attack them at all costs. Talk about “having one goal.”

You simply don’t like that they present stories and information that the other networks hide. Information you’d prefer not get out, because it hurts your partisan buddies. I get it. You get it. We all get it.

You haven’t done your research on this story and are willing to believe people that have a long history of distorting the facts (e.g. Adams and Breitbart). Its a wonder we have not got O’Keife involved in this

Simply saying, “You don’t know your facts,” while you have presented no actual evidence rings very hollow. I know you want to find an excuse, and avoid the questions (Why was the case dropped after it was won?), but it’s not going away. Sorry buddy.

You’re still on the losing side of this… and no amount of story changing or excuses will convince anyone of anything other than you’re a bitter partisan, who only sees political interest, not justice or the rule of law.

lanquihue said:
Seriously, do you people have zero shame? The intellectual dishonesty is truly something to behold. Was Van Jones a “manufactured” scandal? F’ing amazing how you people can even look in the mirror.

What did Van Jones do that you objected to?

ImNotBlue said:
You see yourself as a bastion of objectivity. Not so. You have one goal, everyday when you wake up, attack Obama or anything “liberal”. Am I wrong on that?
Yes, you are wrong on that… and you have no proof to back it up. But for you, this is still par, so I’m not surprised.

So you do not see yourself as a bastion of objectivity? Well that is what I was saying. And I am waiting to read some of your progressive comments. So far, I have only heard conservative notions being expressed. And as far as the President goes, still waiting for a single nice thing to be said by you. Lying? Far from it. You in denial? Yep.

ImNotBlue said:
You’re still on the losing side of this… and no amount of story changing or excuses will convince anyone of anything other than you’re a bitter partisan, who only sees political interest, not justice or the rule of law.

That’s pretty funny. You and the conservative pundits are calling Obama and Holder racists over this, and you are calling me a “bitter partisan”? Sure, I lean to the left, but bitter? Far from it. “Bitter” is what you call people who routinely accuse the democratically elected President to be a Marxist, or a racist, or someone who seeks to undermind the country. Indeed, that cynical approach of only criticism, accusation, and irrational opposition defines bitter. But that is the Republicans stated MO. Your’s to.

Republican MO? We didn’t see any vitriol directed at Bush?

The Republican leaders have stated that their intention is to oppose every initiative (using every tactic available) that Obama undertakes, hoping that by defeating his agenda, like Napoleon at Waterlloo, Obama’s popularity will wane and the Repubs can reclaim the WH and Congress. Correct? The Democrats said or did no such thing.

Republican leaders said that? Or MSNBC? Have any quotes?

Just google Obama and Waterloo. I am sure you will find some quotes. And I highly recommend mediamatters.com because they make it their business to keep a record Republican folly.

mediamatters? Why don’t I just check Daily Kos while I’m at it?

writer said:
mediamatters? Why don’t I just check Daily Kos while I’m at it?

As an intelligent man, it is your loss. Media Matters is unique. It provides the exact quotes, and almost always links to the actual (for example) Beck radio show tape or video of his cable show. That is how we all know the shocking things that Rush says on a regular basis. And the tape is right there so you can listen to it and make up your own mind. Same with Beck. Everything he says is recorded. Anything crazy, mediamatters flags it. Do yourself a favor, writer. Remember, traditional values are basically old ideas. Am I correct on that?

Rush is an ass but it is well know he uses satire, and I’ve been to Media Matters. Their web-designer and web-master need to be “re-assigned.” Its a terrible site, but most “watchdog” sites fit the mold.

The rodeo clown? Last I checked, neither he or Rush make policy, and Limbaugh’s been on the air for how many years now? Everybody’s still here.

comic,
Its actually pretty easy. Works like google. In the search field type “Beck, nazi, racism” or something like that. Then all the articles about any of that, shows up on the screen..

Valkire, do you believe the tea movement is racist or not?

valk, are you aware that Beck often uses videos of the people he’s talking about? He shows them speaking their own words, then gives his opinion of those words. Van Jones is a case in point. So when the left says Beck is ‘lying’, what is it that he’s ‘lying’ about?

Rogue-Comic said:
Valkire, do you believe the tea movement is racist or not?

No, the movement is not racist.

writer said:
valk, are you aware that Beck often uses videos of the people he’s talking about? He shows them speaking their own words, then gives his opinion of those words. Van Jones is a case in point. So when the left says Beck is ‘lying’, what is it that he’s ‘lying’ about?

Wow, what a task to produce everything here. Check out mediamatter.com. Querie: Beck, lying, lies, something like that.

valkyrie101 says:
July 11, 2010 at 12:16 pm valkyrie101

So you do not see yourself as a bastion of objectivity? Well that is what I was saying. And I am waiting to read some of your progressive comments. So far, I have only heard conservative notions being expressed.

Well… we’re really only talking about one issue, aren’t we?

And as far as the President goes, still waiting for a single nice thing to be said by you.

Again, I’m trying to stay on topic. Why are you more interested in talking about everything else besides the NBPs and the DoJ?

And nice or not… what does it matter? Did you have anything “nice” to say about Bush? Does that negate all your commentary about issues involving him?

You’re floundering… again.

Lying? Far from it. You in denial? Yep.

Flounder.

valkyrie101 says:
July 11, 2010 at 12:24 pm

You have no idea what you’re talking about, can’t provide one bit of evidence, and still continue to avoid the most relevant questions.

Sad, really.

valkyrie101 says:
July 11, 2010 at 1:55 pm valkyrie101

The Democrats said or did no such thing.

So you’re saying the Democrats never attacked Bush for political reasons?

Wow… just wow.

valkyrie101 says:
July 11, 2010 at 4:43 pm

Yup… Media Matters is great alright. Never take things out of context, and always correct the record when they make a mistake.

Hey, have they talked more about Beck’s ratings “decline.” You know, the one that didn’t actually happen, and have been disproven by the most recent ratings? No… well, I’m surprised. They’re usually so good at admitting they were wrong.

Ugh.

valkyrie101 says:
July 11, 2010 at 10:33 pm

Remember folks… MM shows videos, that proves it! Unlike, of course, the video of the NBPs attempting to intimidate voters. That proves nothing!

The difference is… um… the difference between them is… uuhhh. Well, I’m sure Val has a reason why they’re different! Val?

ImNotBlue said:
valkyrie101 says:July 11, 2010 at 12:16 pm valkyrie101 So you do not see yourself as a bastion of objectivity? Well that is what I was saying. And I am waiting to read some of your progressive comments. So far, I have only heard conservative notions being expressed. Well… we’re really only talking about one issue, aren’t we? And as far as the President goes, still waiting for a single nice thing to be said by you. Again, I’m trying to stay on topic. Why are you more interested in talking about everything else besides the NBPs and the DoJ? And nice or not… what does it matter? Did you have anything “nice” to say about Bush? Does that negate all your commentary about issues involving him? You’re floundering… again. Lying? Far from it. You in denial? Yep. Flounder. valkyrie101 says:July 11, 2010 at 12:24 pm You have no idea what you’re talking about, can’t provide one bit of evidence, and still continue to avoid the most relevant questions. Sad, really. valkyrie101 says:July 11, 2010 at 1:55 pm valkyrie101 The Democrats said or did no such thing. So you’re saying the Democrats never attacked Bush for political reasons? Wow… just wow. valkyrie101 says:July 11, 2010 at 4:43 pm Yup… Media Matters is great alright. Never take things out of context, and always correct the record when they make a mistake. Hey, have they talked more about Beck’s ratings “decline.” You know, the one that didn’t actually happen, and have been disproven by the most recent ratings? No… well, I’m surprised. They’re usually so good at admitting they were wrong. Ugh. valkyrie101 says:July 11, 2010 at 10:33 pm Remember folks… MM shows videos, that proves it! Unlike, of course, the video of the NBPs attempting to intimidate voters. That proves nothing! The difference is… um… the difference between them is… uuhhh. Well, I’m sure Val has a reason why they’re different! Val?

I voted for Bush, twice. I respect his presidency more than most Republicans, and I certainly do not blame him for the collapse of the economy, since that is a world event. On the other hand, blaming Obama is stupid, too.

valkyrie101 said:
The Republican leaders have stated that their intention is to oppose every initiative (using every tactic available) that Obama undertakes, hoping that by defeating his agenda, like Napoleon at Waterlloo, Obama’s popularity will wane and the Repubs can reclaim the WH and Congress. Correct? The Democrats said or did no such thing.

No, not correct. Jim Demint said that if they stopped ObamaCare it would be his Waterloo. Unless, of course, you have some other confirming quotes to offer…

Pablo said:
No, not correct. Jim Demint said that if they stopped ObamaCare it would be his Waterloo. Unless, of course, you have some other confirming quotes to offer…

The leader of the Republican Party, Limbaugh, famously said, and reaffirmed repeatedly, that he hoped Obama fails. Here is the tape: http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200906080034

valkyrie101 said:
The leader of the Republican Party, Limbaugh,

One, you’ve got to stop getting your facts from Obama. Limbaugh is a TALK RADIO HOST, not a member of the GOP leadership. Two, “I hope he fails” is not “We’re going to block everything he comes up with”. Which, is especially true when you note that radio hosts don’t control the Congressional GOP.

valkyrie101 said:
The leader of the Republican Party, Limbaugh, famously said, and reaffirmed repeatedly, that he hoped Obama fails. Here is the tape: http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200906080034

When you use a source such as “mediamatters” to illustrate a point in a “debate” against a right leaning commentator, its akin to passing a flat can of Pepsi to a coke drinker to argue that Pepsi trumps Coke.

valkyrie101 said:
No, the movement is not racist.

Wow, sounds like you may have true Democratic blood in your veins rather than what passes for it nowadays. I hope your “disease” is contagious.

To wit, “politifact” is so much better a source to site than “mediamatters.”