Political Discussions
Bizarreness Extraordinaire
Posted by clioandme • 7/01/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: incredible but true
People sometimes say things in public life that are just beyond all comprehension. I'll give you an example from Limbaugh, because he makes it easy:
Limbaugh gives Reagan credit for Michael Jackson's good years, blames Bush and Clinton for his bad years and Obama for his death. Here it is: mediamatters.org/mmtv/200907010015 (Hat tip: twitter.com/Wisco/status/2430474164)
What favorite freakish things have you heard or read lately? Try and make it good, not just a lame political crack.
User Comments
-
Beck guest Scheuer: "The only chance we have as a country right now is" for bin Laden to "detonate a major weapon" in U.S.
mediamatters.org/mmtv/200906300039
Can you imagine what would happen if a Democrat said that?-
Yeah, I'll give ya that one. He's out there, even for me. -
You mean there are some conservatives out there that think we need another attack like 9/11?!
My goodness.
Beck’s Guest Longs For A Major Terrorist Attack To “Save” America
www.newshounds.us/2009/07/01/becks_guest_longs_for_a_major_terrorist_attack...
-
-
Stupidity should hurt. Maybe fewer people would say things like that (both to Mark and Sati's quotes) if it felt like an ice pick went through their brain every time they said something that ridiculous.
-
That almost sounds inspired by Clockwork Orange. Pure evil. Naughty Ninja!
-
-
anok wants Scheuer and Limbaugh to get icepick lobotomies?!?
...sorry... gave it that fox news spin, huh?
-
-
Here's another good one by State Rep. Cynthia Davis (R-MO) on food programs for children:
Anyone under 18 can be eligible? Can’t they get a job during the summer by the time they are 16? Hunger can be a positive motivator. What is wrong with the idea of getting a job so you can get better meals?
cynthiadavis.net/PDFs/cpr090604_Summer_Food_Program.htm-
What makes that statement truly perverse, is that it did not simply slip out of her mouth. Nor was it merely a spontaneous response on a forum. Instead, she actually went to the trouble of posting the statement, however it initially came to her, on her website. Worse, this is from 2009, when youth are being disproportionately affected by unemployment.
-
Jon Stewart had a field day with that quote.
-
-
LOL... saw that and almost posted it yesterday myself. Sadly, some people hang on his every word.
-
And I find it bizarre how liberals bring up Rush Limbaugh in conversation more frequently then conservatives. -
Glenn Beck still tries to associate himself with Thomas Paine...
www.amazon.com/Glenn-Becks-Common-Sense-Control/dp/1439168571
It's good to know that Beck sympathises with the plight of women in the a male dominated world... (www.thomaspaine.org/Archives/occ.html)
believes in a steep progressive taxation... (www.constitution.org/tp/rightsman2.htm)
and believes that the land of the Earth is the common property of all (www.thomaspaine.org/Archives/agjst.html)
and that the the bulk of the problem of crime could be solved by alleviating poverty (www.cooperativeindividualism.org/paine_dissertations_on_first_prin.html)
I feel confident that Glenn Beck beleives is such things, as he surely did his homework on the works of Paine before claiming to be inspired by him (o_0) -
Here's a good one. Sarah Palin is going to sue anyone who publishes anything bad about her. This after she made the claim that Obama "palled around with terrorists."
Gov. Sarah Palin's personal attorney issued a statement Saturday denouncing rumors that Palin resigned because she is under criminal investigation and threatening legal action for publishing "defamatory" material about the governor.
www.adn.com/palin/story/853746.html
I also heard lawyers are volunteering to defend anyone she tries to sue. lol!-
Here's the letter from the lawyer:
To the extent several websites, most notably liberal Alaska blogger Shannyn Moore, are now claiming as “fact” that Governor Palin resigned because she is “under federal investigation” for embezzlement or other criminal wrongdoing, we will be exploring legal options this week to address such defamation. This is to provide notice to Ms. Moore, and those who re-publish the defamation, such as Huffington Post, MSNBC, the New York Times and The Washington Post, that the Palins will not allow them to propagate defamatory material without answering to this in a court of law. The Alaska Constitution protects the right of free speech, while simultaneously holding those “responsible for the abuse of that right.”
These falsehoods abuse the right to free speech; continuing to publish these falsehoods of criminal activity is reckless, done without any regard for the truth, and is actionable.
www.politico.com/static/PPM124_release_for_7-4-09-1.html -
So much for the theory that she can't afford lawyers. She likes this stuff. Totally in keeping with her and her husband's going after that trooper.
By the way, does Alaska have different laws about ruining reputations than we have? She does know this isn't England, right? And she knows her political allies specialize in character assassination? Oh hell, I shouldn't even be trying to make sense of her. -
Why all the hatred towards Palin? Why do you libs hate her? -
I wrote a really long blog post back on Sept. 4th. There I tried to be objective and just disagree with her policies and qualifications. Her own tactic of declaring that I and a couple hundred million other Americans aren't part of the real America kind of alienated me even more, which you can see in my blog.
But this is supposed to be a humor thread, and she sure offered fodder for that then, even being a good sport about things on SNL. Apparently she's gearing up to give more, although it's all dead serious for her, I know. -
I can see your points, but I think what Letterman did was out of line. Completely. So I can understand her wanting to step down. It is hard to be in the spotlight like that. Not everyone is cut out for it, if she is or not, well only time will tell.
-
I ignored that, because it was icky. Stupid of him, too, to turn her into a victim.
If you're right about the spotlight, by the way, then what does that say about her apparently still real national ambitions, whatever shape they might take? -
Not sure at this point. I mean she strikes me as the type of politician that does things for a reason. What her reason is for this step is still unknown. But, if she positions herself in the right way, I could see her running in '12.
-
I could see her running in '12.
We can only hope. That would assure Obama a second term. -
We'll see. With his asinine policies, I doubt he will get a 2nd term. Personally I think we would have been better off with Hillary. But that's just me. The media really turned on her, when Obama become their golden boy.
-
Course, as a conservative, you might have a hard time reading mainstream and liberal voters. I had a hard time doing that when the mainstream was conservative.
-
True, but I am of the notion that there are a lot of conservative Americans that are the silent majority. What the GOP needs to do is to concentrate on how best to motivate them.
-
If you go back to how Nixon used the term, the "silent majority" were those who didn't make anarchy in the streets, who worked hard, saved for the future, payed their taxes and prized law and order. I don't know that the Fox News brand of conservatism appeals to such voters.
-
That strikes me as a really keen obervation, Agit8r.
-
Nixon also coined the term "Hispanic" which was his attempt to put all people of Latin American and Spanish descent under one term. He did this in effort to capture their vote. Making his own demographic, if you will. There truly is no Hispanic person, although the term now has crept into our vocabulary and is used freely and liberally. (liberally as in easily, not using the political meaning)
I would say as to Fox appealing to voters, if you look at their ratings, they are appealing to the majority of Americans. How that translates to votes, I am not sure. Nor do I think that Fox worries about that. They worry about ratings, yes. Votes, no. -
perhaps it is a different world now... and perhaps the majority is no longer the silent sort : |
-
I would say as to Fox appealing to voters, if you look at their ratings, they are appealing to the majority of Americans.
Got any evidence to back that up?
As far as Nixon, he was also responsible for a lot of affirmative action programs, perhaps to attract minority voters. -
As a Quaker, Nixon believed in social justice as well as ending U.S. involvement in Indochina.
Let's not forget the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency and signing the Occupational Safety and Health Act. In fact much of Nixon's record would be considered far from conservative by today's standards.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon#First_term
www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/37_nixon/nixon_domestic.html
...however, the shrewd strategy of applying the New Federalist principle to his domestic agenda provides a potential lesson to modern would-be social reformers.
-
-
"I would say as to Fox appealing to voters, if you look at their ratings, they are appealing to the majority of Americans.
Got any evidence to back that up?"
How much do you want?
tvbythenumbers.com/2009/07/06/cable-news-ratings-for-thursday-july-2-2009/2...
tvbythenumbers.com/category/ratings/top-news/cable-news
"Fox News is continuing its ratings dominance as America settles into the Obama era.
After a strong month of February, in which the network ranked #3 in primetime among all cable channels, Fox News posted even stronger ratings for the week ending March 1. It placed #2 in primetime among all cable channels — behind only USA — and averaged 2.6 million viewers for the week, which included President Obama's first address to a joint session of Congress.
This marks the seventh consecutive week that Fox News has placed in the top three cable channels in primetime — meaning that is has sustained interest for the duration of the Obama administration, emphatically ending any debate whether the network would succeed under a Democratic administration.
As a comparison, CNN ranked 14th in primetime (averaging 1.2 million total viewers) and MSNBC ranked 19th in primetime (averaging 1.1 million total viewers).
In total day ratings, where Nickelodeon is a perennial first-place winner, Fox News placed 4th (averaging 1.3 million total viewers), CNN ranked 17th (averaging 685,000 total viewers), and MSNBC placed 26th (averaging 483,000 total viewers)."
www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/03/fox-news-ratings-remain-s_n_171455.html
And that one was from one of your faves, sati - the huffington compost.
www.broadcastingcable.com/article/210239-Cable_News_Ratings_Fox_News_Stays_...
www.thrfeed.com/2009/06/fox-news-ratings.html
"1. “The O’Reilly Factor” (Fox News): 3,498,000 total viewers
2. “Hannity” (Fox News): 2,566,000 total viewers
3. “Glenn Beck” (Fox News): 2,230,000 total viewers
4. “On the Record with Greta van Susteren” (Fox News): 2,173,000 total viewers
5. “Special Report with Bret Baier” (Fox News): 2,047,000 total viewers
6. “The Fox Report with Shepard Smith” (Fox News): 1,915,000 total viewers
7. “The O’Reilly Factor” (Fox News, repeat): 1,723,000 total viewers
8. “Your World with Neil Cavuto” (Fox News): 1,520,000 total viewers
9. “America’s Newsroom” (Fox News): 1,505,000 total viewers
10. “Studio B with Shepard Smith” (Fox News): 1,314,000 total viewers
11. “Happening Now” (Fox News): 1,247,000 total viewers
12. “Countdown with Keith Olbermann” (MSNBC): 1,237,000 total viewers
13. “The Live Desk” (Fox News): 1,210,000 total viewers
14. “Larry King Live” (CNN): 1,093,000 total viewers
15. “Anderson Cooper 360″ (CNN): 1,058,000 total viewers
16. “The Rachel Maddow Show” (MSNBC): 1,042,000 total viewers
17. “Situation Room” (CNN): 898,000 total viewers
18. “Lou Dobbs Tonight” (CNN): 826,000 total viewers
19. “Campbell Brown: No Bias, No Bull” (CNN): 786,000 total viewers
20. “CNN Newsroom” (CNN): 725,000 total viewers"
bellalu0.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/fox-news-absolutely-rules-in-cable-news-r...-
That's not the majority of Americans; that's the majority of cable news viewers.
Fox "news" viewers are dedicated. They probably watch every day, which boosts their ratings, while MSNBC viewers probably don't watch as much TV. I don't have any statistics to back that up, but when you look at the demographics, it's probably true. Less educated people watch more TV. -
I should also note that Fox has a near-monopoly on televised right-wing chatter.
-
It looks like fewer Fox news watchers have jobs. They should stop collecting government checks and get to work. -
@xmarks...any proof of that outlandish claim?
@sati...so you are saying that people who watch Fox are dumber than people who watch other news channels? So what study are you citing? Or is this just more bitterness on your part? More rhetoric? If so, then once again, you are just trying to be divisive instead of honestly talking about things.
@Agit8r...I agree that Fox is one of the few conservative television outlets. Their commentators are very conservative and they make no bones about that. But I think when it comes to reporting the news, there is less bias on many of the cable news networks, Fox or othewise. Punditry and commentating are not news. They are entertainment about the news. I think you might find this report interesting, Agit8r.
news.illinois.edu/NEWS/08/0625media.html -
I'm not saying people who watch Fox are dumber -- just less educated, especially when you compare liberal democrats to social conservatives.
people-press.org/report/?pageid=945 -
And Fox helps keep them that way. Course, so does CNN.
-
sati...your own citation works against you.
"On the other hand, Enterprisers and Liberals whose political opinions mix no better than oil and water have a surprising amount of common ground both economically and educationally."
If you took the time to read the entire report, not just the part that you think proves your point, you would see that it said that the Democratic party was being held together by its hatred of Bush.
"The Democratic party faces its own formidable challenges, despite the fact that the public sides with them on many key values and policy questions. Their constituencies are more diverse and, while united in opposition to President Bush, the Democrats are fractured by differences over social and personal values."
Guess what? Bush is gone and now your party is going to self-destruct. Read your history. -
less biased?! Martha MacCallum and Megyn Kelly frequently editorialize, particularly during interveiws
-
AR: You quoted many day time rating numbers. Fox had a larger portion of them. While there are jobs 24 hrs a day, the majority of them are during regular business hours. Therefore, fewer Fox watchers have jobs.
-
@xmarks...so no one in your world works 2nd or 3rd shift? Only daytime workers in your world, I guess?
I also quoted PRIMETIME ratings, which Fox dominates during. So your entire argument is null and void, unless you can cite some studies that prove it?
You are letting your own bias against Fox destroy any objectivity you might have. Because you don't like Fox, it is easy for you to come up with a theory that supports your position. Not very scientific, nor intellectually honest. But if that is how you want to debate... -
@Agit8r...I was referring to all cable news outlets, not just Fox. During the reading of the news, there is of course going to be less bias than during a commentator's segment. That stands to reason.
-
sati...your own citation works against you.
No, I was just looking at the numbers. 49% of liberals have completed college while only 28% of social conservatives have. Pro-government conservatives are even less at 15%.
This is also important in the study:
The Republican Party's current advantage with the center makes up for the fact that the GOP-oriented groups, when taken together, account for only 29% of the public. By contrast, the three Democratic groups constitute 41% of the public. -
@xmarks...so no one in your world works 2nd or 3rd shift? Only daytime workers in your world, I guess?
But the college educated generally don't work shifts. -
My but you pick and choose, don't you sati?
"Liberals have the highest education level of any typology group 49% are college graduates and 26% have some postgraduate education. But the Enterprisers also include a relatively high percentage of college graduates (46%), although fewer Enterprisers than Liberals have attended graduate school (14%)."
In the report you cite, the term they use that most closely describes what you call 'right-wingers' is 'Enterprisers.' And as you can see it is 49% to 46%, after allowing for the plus or minus they are virtually neck and neck. Social conservatives are not conservatives in general.
"But the college educated generally don't work shifts"
Really? So Doctors and Nurses only work during the day? How about engineers? My uncle was an engineer for NASA and he worked the night shift for years at Cape Canaveral.
How about Social workers? Do they not have to meet with clients at night? Child protective services social workers are virtually on call 24 hours a day.
Then there are the ag sciences. I suppose they only study plants and animals during the day. Wonder how they find out about nocturnal animals?
Or paralegals and lawyers. They don't pull all-nighters?
The list goes on and on, sati. Face it, what you said is not founded in logic, to put it nicely. -
The list goes on and on, sati. Face it, what you said is not founded in logic, to put it nicely.
What is with you that you have to make everything a personal attack? Why are right-wingers so damned emotional?
Again, you make it an all or nothing argument. I said the college educated generally don't work shifts. Sure, there are exceptions. I've pulled a few all nighters to meet deadlines, but I generally work from about 8-5. -
I attacked you, HOW? What you said isn't founded in logic. That would make it illogical.
I don't take it personally that you continue to call me a right winger, among other things. I have apologized in the past when I DID insult you. You never have. Should I remind you about the personal attacks you made about my health condition?
I know, I know, you're not insulted, you're just drawn that way. -
Yeah, I showed someone online my pic a few days ago and she said I'm much more handsome than my avatar would indicate.
Nothing you could say could insult me, but you do make everything a personal issue. -
lol that is a good thing.
But I didn't think you would address the issue of your attacks on me. -
If you attack someone and that person attacks you back, you have no grounds to cry victim.
-
Antics, if I remember correctly, only 20% of Americans admit to watching cable news programs - whereby most Americans still get their news from printed news (online or in papers) and some not at all.
20% is hardly a majority by any stretch of the imagination - and Fox news still only gets a piece of that 20%.
Of course, my usual retort is that the Jerry Springer show was wildly popular and beat even Oprah's ratings. High ratings don't equal quality TV -
Well my ninja angel, we weren't discussing quality, he he.
@sati...you are the one who continually cries victim, not I. -
If TV ratings were king, the Democratic primaries last winter and spring and the presidential election last fall would have turned out very differently.
One indication of their declining relevance: the crisis in add revenues that many networks are seeing. Like print media, television is being given a run for its money by new media on the internet. Indeed, I suspect this new media is making it really hard to measure anything, at least until our understanding of the media landscape solidifies, which is gonna be hard in this period of flux. -
Ant: You are right. I skimmed your post and mis-read it. I thought you were quoting a lot of day time stats. Easy to do. Kind of like your comments about 2 and 3 shift people which I had already addressed in mine.
Your quick jump to conclusions sort of missed the target though. I actually watch more fox news than the other cable news networks. I don't really have a problem with Fox. I have more of an issue with those who worship Fox and take anything said on it as truth. -
@xmarks...fair enough. We have common ground on this one. I watch Fox, too - AND I have a brain, lol. For instance I switched to O'Reilly tonight and he was saying that it was okay to say Michael Jackson was accused of pedophilia this soon after his death, but when things were said about other celebs that died shortly after their death, it was out of bounds. I found that to be wanting it both ways.
Not that it matters, I mean I was just saying that I don't sit and nod my head whenever Fox (or any other news channel) is on. During my classes for my Psych degree, I learned how to be skeptical and to think critically. Since I do that anyway, it comes easy.
-
-
@AR
But Martha and Megyn work what appear to be news segments.
MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell is obviously biased as well, but she tends to gently lead her interviewees, rather than debating them using presupposed statements. A good example of the latter was during a cap and trade debate... er i mean 'interview' in which Martha stated that increased regulation would further stifle growth in California's economy, as if that were a fact rather than speculation or theory -
By the way, has anyone got any more strange tales to tell? What? Have Palin and Sanford shut up or something?
-
well, I googled "palin" and got various 'news' results... including this one:
andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/07/the-odd-lies-of-sarah...
which includes (among many others)
"Palin lied when she denied that the Alaska Independence Party supports secession and denied that her husband had been a member; in fact, even the McCain campaign noted that the party's very existence is based on secession and that Todd was a member for seven years."
www.akip.org/platform.html ...which includes:
"To support the right of jurors to judge the law as well as the facts, according to their conscience."
talk about bizarreness!
andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/11/the-odd-lies--1.html
-
-
I was flipping through the channels last night and came across a program where they had filmed Michael Jackson just being himself. Talk about bizarre!
-
OFF TOPIC!
We's talkin' about crazy republican Governors like Mississippi's Hailey Barbour who's throwing Katrina money at industrial improvements
thanks-katrina.blogspot.com/2009/06/screwing-victims.html -
Here's more on the current expansion project
www.breakbulk.com/content/?p=306
and an article that includes that original proposal that Gov. Barbour referred to... a $250,000,000 dollar project that was to be appropriated through the Mississipi State Port Authority!
logisticstoday.com/logistics_services/outlog_story_7457/
This is the ABUSE of the New Federalism -
Yes, but the OP mentioned Michael Jackson.
-
Fecetiousness doesn't always translate to the written word
-
I mentioned Michael Jackson? I would never mention Michael Jackson! Oh wait . . . Oops.
-
-
Then of course there is what Bobby Jindal did in his spare time during college:
blogs.cbn.com/thebrodyfile/archive/2009/02/24/bobby-jindals-story-about-dem...-
Yes, certified nut job.
-
Why? Because he believes in something you don't?
Wait, let me answer my own question. You think he is a nut job because he isn't a liberal Democrat. -
AR, you make every post a personal attack. It shuts down any chance for an honest debate.
-
You mean honest debate like your comment - "Yes, certified nut job."?
-
who has certified this?!
legit arguement underway -
Yes, is his certification legitimate? Who certified him and was it from an accredited institution? Was it just honorary or by public consensus? Or perhaps the phrase should have been "certifiable nut-job."
-
That piece would certainly be problematic on a national stage. My sense is that a pretty small minority in this country experiences their religion this way, and a larger group would be creeped out by it.
Fair game for a humor thread, methinks.
-
-
Then there is Jim Gibbons and his attempts to populate his own planet in heaven...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Gibbons_(United_States_politician)#Criticism_and_controversy_while_Governor
www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/04/07/nevada/ -
And (nothing against his sexual orientation) the ever-evil Rick Perry:
www.hightowerlowdown.org/node/528 -
-
I can't say enough how it's time that we get beyond and start focusing on this technology we have and move forward into the future so that our grandchildren can have the same lifestyle we have.
This Earth's been here 6,000 years -- and I know I'm going on and on and I'll shut up -- it's been here 6,000 years, long before anybody had environmental laws, and somehow it hasn't been done away with.
We need to get the uranium here in Arizona so this state can get the money from it and the revenues from it. It can be done safely and you'll never even know the mine was there when they're done.
So I am for this.
www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/8/751272/-Arizona-GOP-state-senator:-Eart...-
Looks like he forgot about 6 zeros.
His logic is like the guy who played Russian roulette five times and didn't get shot so he figures it is safe to play again. -
I forgot to give the author. It was Arizona Republican State Senator Sylvia Allen.
-
Can someone please explain to me how people who don't even know or recognize the scientific data about the earth (the age etc) be elected to a position of authority?
Really?
Gah argh -
Can someone explain to me how people claiming to hold scientific data so highly can blatantly disregard and try to hide scientific facts that disagree with them? -
plus, Uranium enrichment plays a key role in the fulfillment of End Times prophesy...
-
It's also used for carbon dating that has shown the earth to be about 4.5 billion years old.
Can someone please explain to me how people who don't even know or recognize the scientific data about the earth (the age etc) be elected to a position of authority?
Yes, people who don't even know or recognise the scientific data about the earth vote for them.
-
-
Here is Tim Pawlenty approving of police who roughed up members of the press (YES... HERE IN AMERICA!)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQsZ8Do331A-
Sinclair Lewis published a novel in the 1930s called It Can't Happen Here. Maybe he was on to something.
-
But it DID happen here! And F---face Pawlenty approves!
-
Umm, that was Lewis' point. (The novel is available online these days, by the way.)
-
oh... right...
*senses that his cultural illiteracy is showing* -
It's the fascist right-wingers at work again trying to destroy our democracy.
-
Those evil bastards!!
I wonder sati, when you were supposedly a Republican (yet you strangely voted Democrat, by your own admission) did you lash out at the far left so spitefully? -
I don't lash out at anyone out of spite. If I don't think someone is doing what's best for our country, I criticize them. And yes, I was registered Republican until 2004, and I voted for Clinton both times, but I also voted for Republican Bill Owens for governor and have voted for the both Republicans and Democrats for congress. I vote for the best candidates.
That said, the Republican party has moved so far to the right in the past 15 or so years, it's hard to even consider voting for a candidate who would be a member of that party. -
there's Arlem Specter... oh, wait
-
So you must really idealize Colin Powell. He is a pseudo-Republican who voted for Carter, Clinton, and Obama.
Gee, if you vote for all Democrats, doesn't that make you a Democrat? If is looks like a duck, and smells like a duck and votes like a duck...
-
-
Bill O'Reilly deserves a place here: www.newshounds.us/2009/07/09/oreillys_comments_on_frankens_swearing_in.php
The second video is funny. Franken shows how he was lying, not misspeaking, about an award on repeated occasions, always with the same story, and all O'Reilly can come back with is name-calling and "Is that all you got?" Pathetic. And pretty thin-skinned considering how nasty he is to others. So of course more recently he was none to gracious about Franken now being a Senator.-
What did he call Franken? "A dipshit blinded by ideology?" That's exactly what O'Reilly is. There are probably several lies per show. I liked it when David Letterman told him to his face that about 60% of everything he says is pure crap. Still, people watch him: the people blinded by ideology.
-
...and by the glare of his pancake makeup
-
-
Here's a good one from a few days ago:
Earlier this week, New York Times columnist David Brooks wrote about how “the dignity code” has been “completely obliterated” in Washington, DC. Discussing the concept on MSNBC today, Brooks recalled how he “sat next to a Republican senator once at dinner and he had his hand on my inner thigh the whole time”:
BROOKS: You know, all three of us spend a lot of time covering politicians and I don’t know about you guys, but in my view, they’re all emotional freaks of one sort or another. They’re guaranteed to invade your personal space, touch you. I sat next to a Republican senator once at dinner and he had his hand on my inner thigh the whole time. I was like, ehh, get me out of here.
HARWOOD: What?
BROOKS: I can only imagine what happens to you guys.
O’DONNELL: Sorry, who was that?
BROOKS: I’m not telling you, I’m not telling you.
thinkprogress.org/2009/07/10/brooks-republican-senator-thigh/-
lol, a gentleman never tells
-
-
Not fair! Maybe he just had a 'wide' stance...
-
it is a bit bizarre that they perform such stings
-
-
this is a bizzare local story, involving your tax dollars!
www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/73k-is-indigent-if-you-are-a-murdering-co... -
-
Reality can be a bitch sometimes.
-
-
-
[oops]
-
-
Remember how Republicans wanted to let Medicare "wither on the vine"? Now they've got religion on Medicare. They've taken up its cause as a tactical weapon against health care reform. That's right. They're defending a a major achievement off President Johnson's "Great Society." washingtonindependent.com/55219/gop-embraces-medicare-to-kill-health-care-r...
At least they are for now.-
*headdesk*
-
Well medicare IS funded through regressive taxation...
-
You've got a point there, Agit8r. Still, you never pay more than you earn, just the same percentage, so there's more justice in it than anything the GOP has ever wanted for the citizens of this country in terms of health care.
(Oh yeah, you cease to pay that percentage of your income after a certain dollar amount level. I'll bet the GOP likes that part too.) -
"(Oh yeah, you cease to pay that percentage of your income after a certain dollar amount level. I'll bet the GOP likes that part too.)"
right that's the regressive part : [
Although I should note that this applies more to the party leaders and it's annointed law-givers--er... I mean lawmakers--than to the rank and file who actually have to pay such things.
...though there are some conservative JFK fans, and Medicare was his baby... o_0 -
I find it particularly amusing after the "get your hands off my medicare" bit, though. It's funny, on soo many levels
-
right, though they are "Liberals" now.... where is that Jon Stewart clip...?
*to busy jamming out to Aerosmith's "Cry Me A River" to bother finding it* -
rhetorical question
-
-
An extremely funny email: wonkette.com/410618/after-8-years-of-a-president-sent-by-god-to-lead-the-am...
Okay, it's also sad, but laughter is the better medicine.
Unfortunately, the Townhall page it references seems to have disappeared, although the article might still be out there if you really care enough to search.-
dang it! why don't those editors take that forged birth certificate seriously! Sheesh
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
