Says a lot about the GOP that she’s a serious candidate for the nomination now. It doesn’t matter what you know, so long as you spit out the applause lines with authenticity and enthusiasm. I certainly trust Barack Obama to run the largest, most powerful institution in human history more than a woman who thinks it’s relatively simple.

Bachmann is attempting to appear more reasonable and mainstream now that she is running for president. She knows that appearing like a wingnut on the Right will get her nowhere on the end. The bottom line is that on the Far Right it had become cool and fashionable in the most savage, aggressive ways to question the president’s patriotism and citizenship. Barack Obama became demonized not for his policies, but for who he was as a person. Thankfully, the trauma of the Tuscon shooting has calmed down the boiling, personal hatred of Obama. I’m sure that Bachmann would like to take back a few of her past statements just like Beck and others would like to recant some of what they have said and done in the past two years. Will the more appealing, mainstream Bachmann change her identity from far right, Glenn Beck like wingnut to serious contender for the Republican nomination? I’m not so sure. First impressions always matter the most. Once a politician develops a personal narrative it is hard to create a new one. My guess is she does well in the primaries, but not well enough to win the nomination. We will see…

Publius219 said:
Says a lot about the GOP that she’s a serious candidate for the nomination now. It doesn’t matter what you know, so long as you spit out the applause lines with authenticity and enthusiasm. I certainly trust Barack Obama to run the largest, most powerful institution in human history more than a woman who thinks it’s relatively simple.

Well it is simple! Think the intro to Ozzy’s Crazy Train……….

TAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAX CUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The batshit crazy anti-Obama inflammatory remarks that she says she may regret now is how she got her batshit crazy anti-Obama base behind her.

She’s the leader of the stupid, now she thinks she can fool the masses.

Why regret it? The little b*tch Obama is anti-American.

Publius219 said:
Says a lot about the GOP that she’s a serious candidate for the nomination now. It doesn’t matter what you know, so long as you spit out the applause lines with authenticity and enthusiasm. I certainly trust Barack Obama to run the largest, most powerful institution in human history more than a woman who thinks it’s relatively simple.

She was born in Iowa and has been a rep for many years in next door MN. She obviously has the home field advantage there. You guys thought John Edwards was a “serious” candidate a few years ago. Look how that worked out. No one has a crystal ball as to how a candidate will work out in the long run. Obama claimed he would unite us again and so on, and he has just exacerbated the pre-existing divisions. There must be some reason he has lost so many white voters who had voted for him. Don’t blame Rush Limbaugh, the white independents don’t listen to him so try another excuse.

Publius219 said:
Says a lot about the GOP that she’s a serious candidate for the nomination now. It doesn’t matter what you know, so long as you spit out the applause lines with authenticity and enthusiasm. I certainly trust Barack Obama to run the largest, most powerful institution in human history more than a woman who thinks it’s relatively simple.

Ironic that you should describe a novice who can read prepared remarks well, perhaps you mean from a teleprompter? Sayhing nonsense such as ‘Yes We Can!”… How ’bout “Get ‘er Done!”, or “Just Say No”, or maybe you’d prefer your President to just say “Submit” and be done with it. Why have any personal responsibility whatsoever? Bachman would make a fine Senator and might make for a good President. I think someone of Palin’s star power may be more effective in many regards, but Bachman would be better than Jimmy Carter (the lowest bar) and I think would also be better, at least in some respects, to the current President. Obama wasn’t even an effective Senator, spending his whole term running for President and when he wasn’t voting present he either missed votes (controversial ones) or voted with whatever was popular with the liberal cash-giving public wanted that particular week. As President his legacy will be known more for being ‘present’ that actually leading or participating in policy creation. Reagan was arguably one of our best Presidents, Palin, if more vocal about policy issues, is the closest we’ve seen to a successor to the Reagan legacy. Since she isn’t running this time (probably), Bachman will have to take the torch and run with it. She has the beliefs, heart, and judgement to do it. Obama’s legacy will be comparing his legacy to Carter’s – not exactly something to be proud of. Of course, if he were to fire his entire administration and bring in competent centrists he’d be able to work with both sides of the aisle and if lucky instead be compared to Clinton – which also has its (Monica) negatives.

Nacho said:
The batshit crazy anti-Obama inflammatory remarks that she says she may regret now is how she got her batshit crazy anti-Obama base behind her.

She’s the leader of the stupid, now she thinks she can fool the masses.

Wow. Liberal, I mean Angry,much?

teccec said:
Wow. Liberal, I mean Angry,much?

It’s funny how you interpret angry.

Why would I be angry? I find her and her ilk amusing.

There is no reason to viciously attack Michele Bachmann. If you don’t like her (even hate her) for what ever reason, fine…move on down the street.

teccec said:
Ironic that you should describe a novice who can read prepared remarks well, perhaps you mean from a teleprompter? Sayhing nonsense such as ‘Yes We Can!”… How ’bout “Get ‘er Done!”, or “Just Say No”, or maybe you’d prefer your President to just say “Submit” and be done with it. Why have any personal responsibility whatsoever? Bachman would make a fine Senator and might make for a good President. I think someone of Palin’s star power may be more effective in many regards, but Bachman would be better than Jimmy Carter (the lowest bar) and I think would also be better, at least in some respects, to the current President. Obama wasn’t even an effective Senator, spending his whole term running for President and when he wasn’t voting present he either missed votes (controversial ones) or voted with whatever was popular with the liberal cash-giving public wanted that particular week. As President his legacy will be known more for being ‘present’ that actually leading or participating in policy creation. Reagan was arguably one of our best Presidents, Palin, if more vocal about policy issues, is the closest we’ve seen to a successor to the Reagan legacy. Since she isn’t running this time (probably), Bachman will have to take the torch and run with it. She has the beliefs, heart, and judgement to do it. Obama’s legacy will be comparing his legacy to Carter’s – not exactly something to be proud of. Of course, if he were to fire his entire administration and bring in competent centrists he’d be able to work with both sides of the aisle and if lucky instead be compared to Clinton – which also has its (Monica) negatives.

A mind poisoned by partisanship. I lost count of how many fallacious talking points you hit on.

To the absurd teleprompter remark, remember when Obama took questions from the GOP House conference and Fox News cut away?

dougx said:
There must be some reason he has lost so many white voters who had voted for him.

I don’t think he’s gained or lost anyone yet.

Having been a psychodiagnostician for three decades, Michell Bachmann is best described as a narcissist and sociopath who will do and say anything to get to the top. She lacks the moral integrity of an troglodyte.

Batshit Bachmann would not respond to her raft of bald-faced lies that Politifact has tracked either.

Since she is being redistricted and is the only teabagger in the field she will horn in on the ticket as VP.

Wasn’t Bachmann the one who wanted congress-persons investigated for un-American activities?

What is truly comical about this is that the left still thinks that Obama won the election based on the popularity of his positions. But the fact remains that Bush was a fiscal liberal and many conservatives opted out of voting for McCain because he was merely a third term of Bush coming, and as a result Obama won by default. Anyone who takes the time to actually look at the real numbers of the election will find that Obama won with votes from only 32% of the electorate. Hardly the “landslide” that his faithful claim.

WillP said:
Bachmann is attempting to appear more reasonable and mainstream now that she is running for president. She knows that appearing like a wingnut on the Right will get her nowhere on the end. The bottom line is that on the Far Right it had become cool and fashionable in the most savage, aggressive ways to question the president’s patriotism and citizenship. Barack Obama became demonized not for his policies, but for who he was as a person. Thankfully, the trauma of the Tuscon shooting has calmed down the boiling, personal hatred of Obama. I’m sure that Bachmann would like to take back a few of her past statements just like Beck and others would like to recant some of what they have said and done in the past two years. Will the more appealing, mainstream Bachmann change her identity from far right, Glenn Beck like wingnut to serious contender for the Republican nomination? I’m not so sure. First impressions always matter the most. Once a politician develops a personal narrative it is hard to create a new one. My guess is she does well in the primaries, but not well enough to win the nomination. We will see…

You are right. I can still hear Sarah Palin at a rally in Florida while running for VP calling Obama a “terrorist” and someone in the crowd yelled “kill him” and she didn’t show any leadership – a real leader would have stopped in their tracks and said “no” and addressed that remark. She didn’t.
Kudos to Senator McCain though who during a town hall meeting had a lady say that “Obama is a muslim” and he stopped her at once and said “No”.
THat is real leadership.;

dougx said:
She was born in Iowa and has been a rep for many years in next door MN. She obviously has the home field advantage there. You guys thought John Edwards was a “serious” candidate a few years ago. Look how that worked out. No one has a crystal ball as to how a candidate will work out in the long run. Obama claimed he would unite us again and so on, and he has just exacerbated the pre-existing divisions. There must be some reason he has lost so many white voters who had voted for him. Don’t blame Rush Limbaugh, the white independents don’t listen to him so try another excuse.

It all goes to prove that if the REpublican party is full of hate and doesn’t want to be united for the love of their country, you can’t make them come to the table and negotiate.

They remain in my view the worse thing that has ever happened to our country., In fact, the republican leadership – McConnell, Cantor seem to be Un-American pro-corporate to me., They hate poor people and the middle class. And they sure don’t want to make a mistake and pass any legislation that would create JOBS.

Nacho said:
It’s funny how you interpret angry. Why would I be angry? I find her and her ilk amusing.

I mean, she use to sound like Joe McCarthy but has cooled it a bit. Don’t you think? That doesn’t mean some of those old videos aren’t around to use in campaign ads down the road.

Jon Weiss said:
What is truly comical about this is that the left still thinks that Obama won the election based on the popularity of his positions. But the fact remains that Bush was a fiscal liberal and many conservatives opted out of voting for McCain because he was merely a third term of Bush coming, and as a result Obama won by default. Anyone who takes the time to actually look at the real numbers of the election will find that Obama won with votes from only 32% of the electorate. Hardly the “landslide” that his faithful claim.

So what does that make Bush’s 2 wins? Well, 1 win.

I am waiting for this moron Bat-s*tht crazy to slit her wrists.

Dem4Ever said:
There is no reason to viciously attack Michele Bachmann. If you don’t like her (even hate her) for what ever reason, fine…move on down the street.

Get real wingnut……batshit crazy bachman can go pound sand and you can go along for the ride….you dumbasses WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO RUN A POP STAND…..dont even think about running the whole country, you might as well cross bachmann, cain, pawlenty, huntsman, gingwich, romney and paul off the list…..none of them will EVER EVER BE PRESIDENT….i know it and in the back off your twisted ass mind you do too

Oh, dear. This thread started off so well, with informed, even-handed comments, and so quickly decended to, well:

Skippy said:
I am waiting for this moron Bat-s*tht crazy to slit her wrists.

Don’t feed the troll.

Jon Weiss said:
What is truly comical about this is that the left still thinks that Obama won the election based on the popularity of his positions. But the fact remains that Bush was a fiscal liberal and many conservatives opted out of voting for McCain because he was merely a third term of Bush coming, and as a result Obama won by default. Anyone who takes the time to actually look at the real numbers of the election will find that Obama won with votes from only 32% of the electorate. Hardly the “landslide” that his faithful claim.

That’s impressively stupid. What’s your point exactly? Conservative votes don’t count if they don’t go conservative? And the economy didn’t fail because Bush was any kind of liberal. He was a free-market idealogue who surrounded himself with Neocons. Get over it. You can’t just slap the label liberal on everything you don’t like about your country.

I hate people who have unAmerican views.

murphy0071 said:
Having been a troglodyte for three decades, and a narcissist and sociopath, I will do and say anything..

Okay, but what do your mental deficiencies have to do with Michele Bachmann?

There must be something a little bit wrong with Michele Bachmann, if she was willing to give Bob Schieffer a few minutes of her time.

As for all the crazy comments posted this evening, nearly all of them negative, I have to think that Ms Bachmann has got some people worried, people very high up in the Democrat Party. Otherwise they would be content for her to go as far as she can toward the nomination, or even win the nomination. But now it looks like they do not want her to succeed, because if she is the nominee then Obama doesn’t stand a chance.

He was already looking very weak, but his Afghanistan speech, and the release of oil from the SPR, and now the attacks on Michele Bachmann… Obama is looking very desperate for this being 16+ months until the general election.

cheap wholesale NFL jerseys, buy authentic NFL jerseys
at http://www.nfl-chargers-jerseys.com

Publius219 said:
A mind poisoned by partisanship. I lost count of how many fallacious talking points you hit on. To the absurd teleprompter remark, remember when Obama took questions from the GOP House conference and Fox News cut away?

You’d be going from a President who reads off a teleprompter to one who reads off of one and into the worng camera. There is no way this can miss.

She just said the trurh.

Unfortunatley no one can see it or refuses to believe it.

Dem4Ever says:
There is no reason to viciously attack Michele Bachmann. If you don’t like her (even hate her) for what ever reason, fine…move on down the street.
………………………………………………
This from you…!!!! Could we, maybe have this work both ways in the future?

J Baustian said:
As for all the crazy comments posted this evening, nearly all of them negative, I have to think that Ms Bachmann has got some people worried, people very high up in the Democrat Party. Otherwise they would be content for her to go as far as she can toward the nomination, or even win the nomination. But now it looks like they do not want her to succeed, because if she is the nominee then Obama doesn’t stand a chance.

As someone generally concerned about a bad GOP candidate and a bad economy dooming Obama’s re-election chances, I love this line of thinking by the far right.

Publius219 said:
J Baustian said:
As for all the crazy comments posted this evening, nearly all of them negative, I have to think that Ms Bachmann has got some people worried, people very high up in the Democrat Party. Otherwise they would be content for her to go as far as she can toward the nomination, or even win the nomination. But now it looks like they do not want her to succeed, because if she is the nominee then Obama doesn’t stand a chance.
As someone generally concerned about a bad GOP candidate and a bad economy dooming Obama’s re-election chances, I love this line of thinking by the far right.

The problem for Obama and the lefties is that Bachmann has credibility and can easily appeal to more-centrist voters. But if you love the idea of Bachmann becoming the nominee, why aren’t you attacking Romney? Could it be that Bachmann is the greater threat to Obama’s reelection?

J Baustian said:
The problem for Obama and the lefties is that Bachmann has credibility and can easily appeal to more-centrist voters.

That is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve seen. Bachmann is the most fringe candidate of the lot. She is actually forcing the rest of them to recognize the extremists.

J Baustian said:
There must be something a little bit wrong with Michele Bachmann, if she was willing to give Bob Schieffer a few minutes of her time.

You have no idea what you’re saying. Whether you agree with it not, Schieffer actually goes down as one of the greats. Their is a reason why every journalism school tries to recruit him for visits. Take a history of journalism course and learn about the guy before you make uneducated comments.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Bachman has a lot of stuff to backtrack on. She’s just getting warmed up.

djhtex said:
She just said the trurh. Unfortunatley no one can see it or refuses to believe it.

Including herself, or so it would seem.

Or maybe she just isn’t letting her hatred do her thinking for her anymore.

She is anti-American for calling the president anti-American.

Skippy said:
I am waiting for this moron Bat-s*tht crazy to slit her wrists.

Strong post Skippy. I’m sure you were staring at the screen hard for an hour before you came up with this well thought out intellectual classic.

What exactly has she done that you actually wish her dead? Must be her “anti-American” tirades against Obama. Well if thats the case, i’m sure you were disgusted with many many liberals the previous 8 years.

Good typical liberal representation anyway Skip.

Jon Weiss said:
Obama won by default.

Exactly!

ProObamaAgenda said:
Get real wingnut……batshit crazy bachman can go pound sand and you can go along for the ride….you dumbasses WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO RUN A POP STAND…..dont even think about running the whole country, you might as well cross bachmann, cain, pawlenty, huntsman, gingwich, romney and paul off the list…..none of them will EVER EVER BE PRESIDENT….i know it and in the back off your twisted ass mind you do too

Quite a stance from someone who obviously supported the no name unknown inexperienced senator. What you should be be realizing is that after this disgrace, Obama, NO ONE in the country can be deamed to “inexperienced” for the White House.

Thats right idiot, time to sh!t yourself!

I’m a little confused, what is she apologizing for?

It’s like apologizing for the fact that Monday follows Sunday!
LMAO!

Skippy said:
I am waiting for this moron Bat-s*tht crazy to slit her wrists.

I’m waiting for you to be heaved.

That already happened when he was using his ‘Bovine’ name.

For anyone interested here’s an article listing some of her more outrageous statements.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/27/michele-bachmann-quotes-_n_872256.html#s288337&title=Many_Scientists_Believe

I’m beginning to wonder if her plan all along was to get national attention by saying these crazy extreme things that appeal to the ultra conservative base, only so she could back off later. Candidates often try to use more moderate rhetoric during a campaign but sheesh, she sure has a long way to go.

I guess moving from wacky conservative to reasonable conservative is becoming more moderate.

The Huffington Post often tells us that being on the far right is bad.

CosmosDan said:
For anyone interested here’s an article listing some of her more outrageous statements. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/27/michele-bachmann-quotes-_n_872256.html#s288337&title=Many_Scientists_Believe I’m beginning to wonder if her plan all along was to get national attention by saying these crazy extreme things that appeal to the ultra conservative base, only so she could back off later. Candidates often try to use more moderate rhetoric during a campaign but sheesh, she sure has a long way to go. I guess moving from wacky conservative to reasonable conservative is becoming more moderate.

Grow up my child, it’s the Huffpost! They’re not “too” slanted, (roll eyes). Complete with any possible picture that’s not favorable to her, most of this is comical to take serious issue with. There are some serious gaffs, but so what? Are you aware of the Obama collection out there? It’s quite an eye opener. And you waste our time with this link? As if you didn’t know?

There are some serious blog site’s where liberals do a decent job of acting their age and articulating why it is exactly that they are against repubs and conservative. This is not of them. You and the other libs here are like dealing with children. Grow up!

writer says:

The Huffington Post often tells us that being on the far right is bad.

That’s true. Sources vary in how bias they are, and it’s okay if you disagree with any conclusions about the facts, but facts are still facts. I’m only presenting this because it contains some of her most outrageous statements. Not just gaffes, but a demonstration that IMO she is willing to dishonestly vilify people in order to gain attention and support. How does that fit in with her supposed Christian principles.

You can draw your own conclusions but let’s not dismiss facts just because they were listed on HuffPo. Are those her actual words or not?

And did she dishonestly attend church for twenty years, then say she didn’t know what the pastor had been saying?

Steve_27 says:
Grow up my child, it’s the Huffpost! They’re not “too” slanted, (roll eyes).

Do you think condescension is a sign of being a grownup? I didn’t make any claim of HuffPo being an unbiased source. Are those her actual words or not? You can draw your own conclusion about what they mean about her.

There are some serious gaffs, but so what? Are you aware of the Obama collection out there? It’s quite an eye opener. And you waste our time with this link? As if you didn’t know?

I’m not talking about the gaffes. A gaffe is a mistake, slip of the tongue. I don’t care about those and am tired of the press trying to make stories out of them. Anyone who speaks to the public constantly wil make them occasionally.
I’m talking about Bachman’s declarative sentences, such as calling Obama anti American, and now having to back off, because she wants to be a serious candidate. She has a history of those, as well as dishonesty.
Maybe it was her political strategy to say controversial, less than honest things to get press coverage and attention and to establish a conservative base, so she could back track later. That may be good strategy in today’s political climate. Personally, I don’t call it leadership.
I’ve seen the tendency to dismiss information based on it’s source. The question is, are those actual quotes from Bachman? I only posted it because they had made the effort to collect them, and it’s relevant to a thread about her backing off a previous statement.

There are some serious blog site’s where liberals do a decent job of acting their age and articulating why it is exactly that they are against repubs and conservative. This is not of them. You and the other libs here are like dealing with children. Grow up!

What a joke. Nobody’s forcing you to be here or read any links. You’re assuming my intent and casting judgement without really knowing what you’re talking about. The fact is I’m not against conservatives or republicans. I’m against a corrupt system that doesn’t really address the needs and general welfare of it’s citizens, no matter what party they belong to. I’m against ignorance , and blind partisanship that keeps people so divided that we don’t address the real issues.
I think both liberals, conservatives , and moderates, all have something to offer in bringing about solutions to problems , but only if we can engage in honest fact based discussions and stop playing partisan games.

writer says:
And did she dishonestly attend church for twenty years, then say she didn’t know what the pastor had been saying?

I don’t know. Does she tout her Christian faith and then lie to the public. Isn’t that dishonestly attending church?

I have a hard time with high profile politicians touting their religion too often, while just justifying lies with being in politics. That includes Obama. It seems to me that if you really took your religion very seriously, politics might not be the place for you, or you’d accept whatever level of success you could achieve without compromising your beliefs. I understand that in America , and especially conservative America, you have to profess you Christianity to be a serious contender. IMO, that’s a lack of maturity on the voters part. Bachman seems to regularly talk about her faith and God, etc and then doesn’t mind being dishonest to further her political career.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/06/26/ftn/main20074482.shtml

Bachmann: Got “sense” from God to run for office
or this gem

“When that happened, I heard the news on my local Christian radio station in Minneapolis-St. Paul and I was devastated,” she said. “And I took a walk and I just went to prayer and I said, ‘Lord, what would you have me do in the Minnesota state Senate?’ And just through prayer I knew that I was to introduce the marriage amendment in Minnesota.”

http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=8102&MediaType=1&Category=26

For years republicans courted the extreme religious right and ignored all their hateful rhetoric, but then Obama’s pastor became a national issue. The problem is when republicans take that tact , they open the door to that kind of discussion being public and their hypocrisy is exposed. Maybe that doesn’t matter to some conservatives but I’m betting it matters to independents.

CosmosDan said:
Do you think condescension is a sign of being a grownup? .

Good point, I lowered myself to your playing field and now I look equally stupid. Darn it! But it’s all down hill for you after that.

CosmosDan said:
I didn’t make any claim of HuffPo being an unbiased source. .

Dont be silly. It was your suggested link, I didn’t bring it up. And your actually admitting it’s a biased source? Geez guy, think about that.

CosmosDan said:
I’m not talking about the gaffes.

Yes you are. Did you even read the link you posted?

CosmosDan said:

What a joke. Nobody’s forcing you to be here or read any links.

This is where you really bombed. I never said I was forced, obviously, and I know i’m free to come and go whenever I want. Thanks for the permission anyway. I was merely pointing out how over the years on other blogs I have seen some very well read liberals who put there side out there very well. You, and all the lefties on here are seriously bland, hateful and just plain wrong about everything. You figure with so many of you’s, one of you’s might know something. Oh well.

Steve_27 said:
Good point, I lowered myself to your playing field and now I look equally stupid. Darn it! But it’s all down hill for you after that. Dont be silly. It was your suggested link, I didn’t bring it up. And your actually admitting it’s a biased source? Geez guy, think about that. Yes you are. Did you even read the link you posted? This is where you really bombed. I never said I was forced, obviously, and I know i’m free to come and go whenever I want. Thanks for the permission anyway. I was merely pointing out how over the years on other blogs I have seen some very well read liberals who put there side out there very well. You, and all the lefties on here are seriously bland, hateful and just plain wrong about everything. You figure with so many of you’s, one of you’s might know something. Oh well.

Sorry, “Theirs.”

Bachmann may back down, but I do not back down. Obama is un-American, anti-American, and an America hater. There, got that?

This is a sad video to watch. Backmann is back-peddling! Obimbo does have anti-American views, and no amount of white-washing her previous statement detracts from that fact! Mrs.Backmann’s initial attack of Obimbo was on point and that’s where she had better stay if she wants any kind of authenticity. This clown-president has made every effort to deflect this nation from open markets, to socialism! If that’s not UN-American, I don’t know what is!!

Steve_27 said:
Good point, I lowered myself to your playing field and now I look equally stupid.

No, you started lower because you made a bad assumption about where I was coming from and the reason for my post.

Dont be silly. It was your suggested link, I didn’t bring it up. And your actually admitting it’s a biased source? Geez guy, think about that.

I can be aware of it’s bias and still use it. Bias is all over the place to varying degrees but facts are still facts. Our job is to sift facts and reason from the bias. I used that link because it provided Bachman’s actual words. I’ve seen the tendency to completely dismiss sources because of their bias. I think that’s a lazy choice. There’s a difference between healthy skepticism and dismissal.

Yes you are. Did you even read the link you posted?

Do you know the difference between a gaffe and a declarative statement? I’m only concerned with her declarative statements.

I never said I was forced, obviously, and I know i’m free to come and go whenever I want.

You said I had wasted your time with my link, but I can’t really do that can I, because you’re free to ignore my posts and my links. You made a bad assumption and responded to that rather than asking for clarification like a mature poster might.

You, and all the lefties on here are seriously bland, hateful and just plain wrong about everything.

This really highlights your condescension and your ignorance. This kind of broad generalized BS is the kind of thing you seem to be criticizing , but here you are, dishing out your own stellar example.
I know what Mediaite is and belong to other sites. There are lots of posters here on both sides that offer little in the way of reasoned discussion. I can ignore most of them and respond to the few who know how to have some level of rational discussion. As I already explained and you ignored, you made a bad assumption about my position and my post. Let’s see if you’re mature enough to admit it.

CosmosDan:

Vilifying without fact is just propaganda. Vilifying with fact cannot be called vilifying, it’s a conception based on factual reliability. True, both sides are guilty of propaganda. That’s why the need for a third, viable party is so greatly needed. As an Independent, neither party comes close to my expectations. That’s why I, and millions of others have so openly welcomed the Tea-Party movement. They are looking at the issue’s with objectiveness, and seeing through the political rhetoric nonsense both Parties are guilty of. I strongly suggest you look at the issues, and then do the due-diligence required. I think you’ll find that you will agree more with the Tea-Party movement than with either of the other two parties.

CAconservative says:

CosmosDan:

Vilifying without fact is just propaganda. Vilifying with fact cannot be called vilifying, it’s a conception based on factual reliability. True, both sides are guilty of propaganda. That’s why the need for a third, viable party is so greatly needed. As an Independent, neither party comes close to my expectations. That’s why I, and millions of others have so openly welcomed the Tea-Party movement. They are looking at the issue’s with objectiveness, and seeing through the political rhetoric nonsense both Parties are guilty of. I strongly suggest you look at the issues, and then do the due-diligence required. I think you’ll find that you will agree more with the Tea-Party movement than with either of the other two parties.

But the judgement of what is or is not anti American is subjective, and vilifying someone for simply not seeing things your way, rather than arguing the fact and details of the issue, is dishonest and a disservice to honest debate.

I try to judge issues separately rather than along ideological lines. I’m sure I would agree with the Tea Party on
some things and not on others. Certainly fiscal responsibility is important. I think the issue is about the corruption of both parties and serving special interests rather than the general welfare of the public. We need honest fact based discussion instead of evasive partisan doubletalk. The public needs to value honesty and working together toward real problem solving, over partisan BS.

writer said:
he Huffington Post often tells us that being on the far right is bad

And your point is… LOL

Lets just say Obama is Patriotic and that his birth certificate is real, although both are very much in question, then lets just admit that Obama was a horrible choice for On-the-Job-Training in such tough times. He had no leadership ability whatsoever, never made any decisions in his life, and he did grow up with no American Values, since he spent his formable years in Islamic lands, and he certainly knows nothing about Honor or Integrity, as he has shown, over and over. Plus the fact that Obama is not about We, the People, with him is is only Me, Me, I, only about himself. The Oval Office does not deserve to have such a Failure sitting behind the desk. I was a Democrat until Obama, Pelosi, and Reid turned it into the Looney Tunes. Never again will I follow or vote for any of these people. Never voted for Obama the first time either, I could see from his arrogance and his wife not being proud of America, that he was Bad for America. I pray We, the People have woken up by 2012!

Why should she regret stating the blatantly obvious?

billwhit1357 said:
I was a Democrat until Obama, Pelosi, and Reid turned it into the Looney Tunes. Never again will I follow or vote for any of these people.

WELCOME into the light.

billwhit1357 said:
I was a Democrat until Obama, Pelosi, and Reid turned it into the Looney Tunes. Never again will I follow or vote for any of these people.

FWIW, I’m not a Republican. They sold my values out when the RNC nominated Bob Dole because it was “his turn,” and did the same thing when they nominated John McCain. Yes, both have, at times, served our country with great honor, but NEITHER was “the President.” Thankfully, the Tea Party has given the elitist RNC a bloody nose and we can hope they’ve awakened to the fact that it is “We the People” who decide the elections.

That’s hilarious: “someone of Palin’s star power may be more effective!” As if serving in the White House was like an episode of American Idol.

Now begins the uneasy burnishing of her image for the benefit of voters who are NOT among the GOP’s lunatic fringe. This lame attempt to simply ignore what she had said and refuse to explain the phrase “anti-American views” transforms her from outspoken firebrand into mealy-mouthed spin puppet. This will not mollify those who wonder at her idiotic statements, and will only serve to annoy and ultimately disillusion her fans–see how many comments here from her supporters who don’t understand why she should wish to back away from her remark. Watch her bid fizzle.