Joining us now
“Joining us now is your first wife…” “WHAT?”
(Chris Matthews & John McCain)
picture: dunno source, via our lol builder. lol caption: senoralki
Show Only: News | Democrats | Republicans | Media
« Previous Nuclear power | Campus Police Next »
» 140 Comments
Get Daily Lol News Emails
RSS Lol News Feed
-
Recent Comments
Cecilie on HYPOCRISY pittypat on HYPOCRISY WTF on HYPOCRISY Eric-in-STL on HYPOCRISY pittypat on HYPOCRISY Eric-in-STL on HYPOCRISY Eric-in-STL on HYPOCRISY Eric-in-STL on HYPOCRISY Eric-in-STL on HYPOCRISY fish eye no miko on HYPOCRISY
Good, she’s a McCain supporter too.
I’d rather see Obama being told Bill Ayers was gonna be joining them !
typical McCain pandering to the Religious Right… having 2 wives to try to court the Fundamentalist LDS vote
If Ayers was such a big deal you’d have thought that McCain would have brought it up in the second debate…
What about Keating?
The RNC is about to pull the plug on its joint ads with the McCain campaign and devote its resources instead to trying to save a couple Republican senators. OMG PWND.
Well, at least it approaches originality. Not “stupid”, “evil”, “greedy”, “power hungry”, etc., etc. Still not funny.
No not really, but he does make some funny faces sometimes! You have to admit it.
I expeshully liked his “Popeye” faisk! Keh, keh, keh, keh, keh, keh! *whistles through pipe*
glad to see you got your profile back!
AAaaiiii, Zerg rush! Oh sorry, that “keh, keh, keh” gave me flashbacks.
That’s supposed to be “kek”
I guess the problem is that all the issues have been hashed and rehashed ad nauseam… there’s really nothing new to lol at. The material’s gone stale.
I am trying to think of a way to cleverly say he is expected to discuss the economy. I think the face would be accurate for his reaction.
Yea, for either one of them! We need Romney!!
Lol made, not sure if it is funny enough.
There we go, now you may boo.
I lol’d.
Thanks love.
I’m jealous *pouts*
I thought it was all right.
Ya I figure it needed something but I am still pondering.
Maybe something about Palin and the troopergate findings. I can has ethics violation?
That’s an extremely misleading news report, and an extremely misleading report, period. I can has October Surprise?
Mind supporting your claims?
The only support I have is the Yahoo News article I read that said 4 paragraphs in that she wasn’t found guilty of any ethics violations. The headline implied (said) that she was, and if you only read the first couple of paragraphs you would assume that the charges had stood. They did say that she ‘probably’ abused her power and allowed her personal relationships with the guy cloud her judgement, but that as far as the ethics violations go, there were none.
I’m sure Senator Obama appreciates all the hard work Mr. Matthews is doing for his campaign.
Just like how McCain appreciates all the hard work Fox News is doing for his campaign.
McCain is running against Obama and the MSM.
Maybe you don’t agree with the MSM, because you’re wrong and the majority of us are right.
It’s not agree or disagree it’s that I see bias towards Obama when their should be none. Which interview did anyone jump in to correct McCain or Palin the way George Stephanopolus did with Obama? It’s more than obvious and a lot of people are made about it.
There. Is. No. Bias.
The MSM isn’t talking 24/7 about Ayers, nor are they mention Keating or Liddy. How long did they run on Rev. Wright? How much coverage has Palin’s antisemitic pastor received?
They said very very little about Rev. Wright INMO. But that’s not all of what I mean. They pamper Obama and squeal like little girls over him. This guy Chris Matthews, didn’t he say something like he got tingles down his legs or something when he met with Obama? It was something like that anyway.
just like he was all over Pres Bush in 2002, like everyone else. see my note below, please.
Very little about Rev. Wright?! That’s all I heard about for months! Any bit of dirt hit the Repub talking points, and the MSM covering those.
Matthews has made similar comments about Republicans too, most noteably his unsettling “real man” comments about Fred Thompson based on his wearing Aqua Velva. Besides which, Matthews is hardly representative of the MSM.
The MSM doesn’t even pretend to be unbiased anymore. CBS with it’s forged George Bush documents, Couric body slamming Pailin, yet nothing but kisses and hugs for Obama. He doesn’t have skeletons in his closet- he’s got an entire graveyard ! Yet I haven’t heard anything about Rev Wright for a long time. Get real, Obama owns the press. Look up Caglecartoons.com about the press and Obama.
Couric didn’t “body slam” Palin… she asked what for any other politician (save perhaps Bush) would have been softball questions!
“What newspapers do you read?” I mean, come on! That ought to be really frickin’ easy. What supreme court decisions do you disagree with? She could at least have pulled out Dred Scott!
Palin’s a joke, and now she’s got an ethics violation to her name for Troopergate. Will be interesting to see where that goes.
You must be careful, n8. Hitting the Repubs with the truth too suddenly may send them into a state of shock. It’d be like telling a seven-year-old that not only is there no real Tooth Fairy, but that it’s really Ungle George sneaking into their rom to touch their bathing suit areas.
I suppose I could be more gentle, but where’s the fun in that? Many repubs are like children… children who like to run up and down the restaurant and screech loudly while I’m trying to enjoy my meal. Little bastards need to get the hell off my lawn… wait… what was I talking about again?
Ok gramps!
There is no excuse for Palin’s performance in the interviews, but what is the excuse for the softball questions to Obama?
Well, it would be a double standard to lob softball questions at one side and hardball questions at the other, now wouldn’t it?
Ema, sorry, but the whole MSM idea is just not true. Those character’s would sell their mother’s souls if it would generate ratings. They have no agenda other than making money. The fact is, your message only resonates with certain segments, just as mine only resonates with others, so naturally we see bias when someone else doesn’t see what we see. The rest are so wishy-washy that they will follow whomever they see as popular.
Corporate media is designed solely to earn money. Tight races generate interest, as do strong conflicts. The MSM is less concerned about the collection and dissemination of information than how the books balance for the shareholders.
“You furnish the pictures. I’ll furnish the war.”
The yellow journalism of Hearst and others is directly responsible for ethics standards being adopted by nearly all newspapers who fancy themselves to be credible. Most journalists look back on that era as a dark time.
But the truth of the matter is that since this countries inception, newspapers have been politically skewed. First there were the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers. Then there were pro-Union and pro-Confederate papers. Then Hearst and Pulitzer and the pro-sensationalist bullshit papers.
Today, we’re doing better than ever before, whether you realize it or not. We journalists respect our profession and for the most part put its integrity above our own political beliefs. I hate how those screaming about MSM bias seem to forget that the media is made up of individuals. Thousands of them. We’re doing the best we can.
I agree with you one hundred percent, the problem today is centered on the 24 hour “news” channels. I remember the agruements against CNN when it began… you can’t do a 24 hour news show because it will degenerate into entertainment to secure ratings… guess what… it did. i love print journalism because of exactly what you said.
Ninety eight per cent of whom consider themselves liberals.
“Four Times More Journalists Identify as Liberal Than Conservative”
http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics.asp
(Page down to item #4.)
***
More polls on how journalists view themselves:
“Media Bias Basics”:
http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics.asp
One quote: “Among the journalists working at prominent news organizations, just 6 percent would admit to being Republicans, compared to 43 percent who said they were Democrats.”
***
Read both links before bothering to respond, please.
Well I certainly did see attack mode against Gov. Palin as opposed to Sen. Obama in the media and they were both very very popular. The questions Gibson asked of Palin were so harsh compared to what he asked Palin.
Have you compared the full transcripts yet? It would be easy for a summarist to cherry-pick the toughest Palin questions and the softest Obama queries.
No, not the whole transcripts, I may just have to search that out though because it bugs me.
Now here is Gibson and Obama:
Senator, I’m curious about your feelings last night. It was an historic moment. Has it sunk in yet?
What’d she say?
Public moments are not your own. There’s a million people pulling you in a million different directions, but when everybody clears out, the staff is gone, you’re in your hotel room at night and you’re alone — do you say to yourself: “Son of a gun, I’ve done this?”
(inaudible) when you announced, did you truly, in your gut, think that a black man could win the nomination of a major party to be president of the United States?
You don’t get much time to enjoy this before people immediately start talking about the vice presidency.
But there obviously is one name that looms over all. Hillary Clinton has already, to some extent, expressed her willingness. There are supporters putting out petitions. There is a drumbeat of pressure. There are those 18 million votes.
Is she a special case that you have to deal with before the others, or is she considered just like everybody else? How long can you let the “Hillary Clinton on the ticket” question linger?
Does there have to be a yes or no on the issue of Hillary Clinton before you get to the others, or can this issue linger on, because it pervades everything?
You want to move on to the general election. You want to pivot to a campaign against John McCain.
Can you do that while this question hovers over you?
So, you won’t do — you won’t deal with her first, get that out of the way, and then either move on or not?
As long as that question lingers, can you get about the business of unifying the party, or does that have to be taken care of first?
Did she squeeze you in any way by making known her interest in the job?
Should you choose her, how do you handle Bill Clinton?
On what three issues will this campaign turn to you?
Do you worry that it could turn on race, age and class?
John McCain has issued an invitation to do a series of town meetings (inaudible). Going to do it?
Will you go to Iraq?
Public financing: Going to take it or going to say no?
But there’s a dynamic on your side, as well. You originally said you would take it.
That was before we saw a…
If you already see that money coming in, it seems to me you’re saying…
Is the hardest part of all this behind you or ahead of you?
The picture of you in the paper, this morning, with your wife, watching the Clinton speech. What did you think of the Clinton speech?
She didn’t exactly acknowledge your victory.
And finally your daughters. What did they say to you? Did they take it as a matter of course that Daddy could be nominated to be president? They never knew what older people know in terms of discrimination, although they may still feel some. What did they say about that?
I watched closely your countenance last night, your mien, as you stood in that hall. You didn’t smile much. Has the joyfulness of this hit home yet? Do you take joy from it?
I apologize in advance for the wall of text posts I am about to make here.
This is the full transcript of the Palin interveiw with Gibson, Part 1:
When McCain asked you to take the number two spot on the ticket, for a moment, did you think no?
And you didn’t say to yourself, am I experienced enough? Am I ready?
Doesn’t that take some hubris?
But this is not just reforming a government. This is also running a government on the huge international stage, in a very dangerous world. When I asked John McCain about your national security credentials, he cited the fact you have command of the Alaskan National Guard and that Alaska is close to Russia. Are those sufficient credentials?
National security is a lot more than energy.
Did you ever travel outside of the country prior to your trip to Kuwait and Germany last year?
Have you ever met a foreign head of state?
Let me ask you about specific national security situations. Let’s start, because we are near Russia. Let’s start with Russia and Georgia. The administration has said, we’ve got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?
You believe unprovoked?
What insight into Russian actions particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of this state give you?
You in favor of putting Georgia and Ukraine into NATO?
And under the NATO treaty, wouldn’t we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?
Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be a threat to Israel?
So, what should we do about a nuclear Iran?
What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
So if we wouldn’t second guess it and they decided they needed to do it, because Iran was a threat, we would be cooperative or agree with that?
So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right?
We talk on the anniversary of 9/11. Why do you think those hijackers attacked? Why did they want to hurt us?
Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?
Well, what do you interpret it to be?
No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated in September 2002, before the Iraq war.
The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?
Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan, from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?
But Governor, I’m asking you, do we have the right, in your mind, to go across the border, with or without the approval of the Pakastani government?
And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there. Is that a yes, that you think we have the right to go across the border, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government to go after terrorists who are in the Waziristan area?
I got lost in here!! Anyway, just look at the difference in the tone for each one. I am NOT saying that Palin should not have been asked those questions, I am just saying why did they not ask the same kinds of questions with the same tone to Obama?
Ema you need to realize these are in completely different contexts. We knew nothing about Palin before that interview aired. We knew plenty about Obama when his Interview with Gibson did air.
That is the context. We already knew where Obama stood on the issues. Not where Palin stood on them.
No matter the context, I have not seen even one interview with Obama with questions comparable to the ones with Palin, not one… That’s all I’m saying.
Researching WIN.
I’ll award you points for this, but I do share PinaV’s POV: Obama received a hell of a vetting through the Clinton war machine. I don’t expect you paid that close attention to what the other guys were doing in the primaries, so I could forgive this oversight on your behalf.
Right, and the supposedly biased msm is covering the Ayers stuff, but not the Keating/Liddy stuff, which is WAY more relevant, considering the deregulation is the cause of the crisis.
Not to mention that Rev Wright was heavely covered by the news, it bugged me a LOT on CNN, and Palin’s pastor only got a small remark.
MSM also refused to show Gore’s ads during the debate on most channels. Not that it was partisan or anything, just a little girl playing with blocks and a call for wind and solar energy … weird that it was refused.
I think that the MSM is all over Palin because she is completely out of left field and we only had like 2 months to learn ANYTHING about her. If you look at all of the stuff already dug up on Obama and Biden and compare it with the questions asked of Palin it is probably about equal.
Of course then you have all the juicy scandal stuff that MSM tries not to show. I honestly think they cut her more slack than Obama gets. She just has more issues so it looks like they are slamming her.
Have you watched any of the rally tapes? Seen any of the supporterr video? Her crowds are getting really ugly. They call Obama a terrorist, shout racial slurs and scream about killing him. McCain let it go until the media picked it up and he had to condemn it. Palin still hasn’t condemned it. That looks bad.
Imagine an Obama rally where supporters screamed kill whitey. I am guessing there would be a LOT more outrage.
I agree with Jellybeans’s points, and what others too have said about 24 hr news channels, they really do turn more into “infotainment” machines than anything else.
And, crazily enough, I do agree with ema that MSNBC shows bias towards obama, or at least some of the talking heads on it do, though I wouldn’t pick Matthews out as one of them. I really like Olbermann, but I certainly won’t deny that the guy is unabashedly liberal, I just think he’s also very smart and argues his points well, and is at times, hilarious.
are all ov these the sort ov people who put random ‘e’s on the end ov words, or is that just you
[well aware that i'll eventually start catching flak for my spelling ov 'ov']
Exactly. Is it just me or have MSNBC and Fox News simply stopped pretending to be unbiased?
Yep. Olbermann and O’Reilly are in the same business. They just market to different clienteles. Of course, I prefer Olbermann, but that’s hardly shocking news.
I’m hoping they cancel each other out. Olberman got fired for revealing his obvious bias. O’Reilly is someone who is technically on one’s side, but one wishes he wasn’t.
Well Fox just barely evens out all the others, what other network is comparable? Except maybe AM radio shows but they don’t get the audience. Just shows me there is a need for it.
Conservative talk radio has nearly 10x the audience of Progressive talk…
You’d be surprised at the audience Rush, Beck, Hannity, et al receive.
But, you can’t compare the audience of radio to television news.
Two different beasts.
As stated above: the main stream media is not left-leaning. They don’t have a liberal agenda. They care only about profit. FoxNews has a painfully obvious bias; MSNBC (to quote George Hearst in “Deadwood”) “lies the other way”, but covers its tracks with a few conservative shows. The other stations are concerned with the bottom line.
If you watch a few episodes of “Democracy Now!”, you’d understand what true Left-Wing news media looks like.
The vast majority of the MSM is left-leaning. Journalists and editors donate to Democrats over Republicans by a 10-to-1 margin. Most of the mainstream can be considered an arm of the Democratic Party publicity machine.
This is true. Journalists and editors tend to have a higher level of education. People with higher levels of education tend to be democrats.
Repost from above:
Ninety eight per cent of [journalists] consider themselves liberals.
“Four Times More Journalists Identify as Liberal Than Conservative”
http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics.asp
(Page down to item #4.)
***
More polls on how journalists view themselves:
“Media Bias Basics”:
http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics.asp
One quote: “Among the journalists working at prominent news organizations, just 6 percent would admit to being Republicans, compared to 43 percent who said they were Democrats.”
***
Read both links before bothering to respond, please.
Please read my post above. In short, many times more journalists consider themselves liberals than as conservative. From two respected polling agencies.
Do Not Want!!!!!
Very true. It’s not about the issues after all.
What a priceless face. I would like to know under what circumstances it was actually made.
i was thinking a mild freduian slip facial expression before a massive sneeze….?? or an insane laugh
blast from the past
And this showcases the ignorance of the obamabots in this campaign.
Mr. McCain is reconciled with his first wife and she supports him.
But let’s not confuse this poor soul with any facts, now.
Yeah, they reconciled just like Bristol and Levi reaaaally wanna get married.
Sources to that ?
And that changes his initial, abominable behavior toward her how?
It’s sad when a marraige breaks up but sometimes it happens and it takes two so it’s not all his fault. The fact that she supports him and he is happily married now for 28 years speaks volumes to me.
It three to commit adultery, ema. He may have reconciled with his first wife, but to say that there is always equal fault in a breakup strikes me as a bit… off. I suppose perhaps she does carry some of the burden; after all, if she hadn’t gotten into that car accident…
You don’t know how she acted towards him, do you? She may have taken out her anger at being in the accident on him and maybe he just wasn’t strong enough to take it. We don’t know what went on between the two of them in private, so we just have to take her word for it that she is fine with it. I don’t like to judge people that way in a situation like that.
Fair enough.
I live by a strict code of behavior which I expect out of all my friends. For most people, it is an impossible expectation, and they quickly find themselves on my disavowed side. I forgave a friend for sleeping with my then-girlfriend, but severed ties with him for breaking his Word of Honor.
I have such lofty expectations of people, and they frequently let me down. It’s a terrible state of affairs that I do not recommend.
(Although I do have a coterie of mench friends, and that’s a comfort.)
I hope you severed ties with both of them, because it takes two in a situation like that. Not too much to expect from friends!
I eventually forgave the ex-girlfriend, as she owned up to her half of the betrayal and wanted to work harder towards being a better person. The ex-friend still thinks he didn’t do anything wrong (nor does he get that my anger with him has nothing to do with carnal knowledge, but that he gave and broke his Word to me).
I’m not saying that John and [Bad Me for not knowing her name!] must always be bitter enemies; I’m saying that actions carry a lot of weight with me, and that John’s has a history that I do not approve of. Still, my venom is more towards those like Mommynator (”And this showcases the ignorance of the obamabots in this campaign…”); I’m aware of the reconciliation, but feel his actions demonstrate the core of his character.
I was raised by a single mom: respect for women goes a long way with me.
Adultery is still adultery. They could have split if they were having problems BEFORE he took up with the heiress. Think what happens in the media if it’s a democrat that has this happen. They slaughter the perpetrator.
Oh right, but there’s the liberal bias — not.
Still, I agree that this isn’t really a campaign issue. However, the supposedly biased media SHOULD be covering Keating/Liddy as McCain’s activities with them have impact on the current economic crisis.
Exhonerated (sp?) of all charges apparently means nothing here………
*sigh*
Exonerated suggests the committee thought he did nothing wrong, but that is no true. They said McCain and Glenn displayed ‘poor judgement’, although didn’t break any laws.
Click my name. The official “Poor judgment” ruling doesn’t even begin to tell the story either. He basically got off for blowing in his cronies. CNN corroborates this piece.
Is that anything like the feds dropping all charges against Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn?
No, I believe the charges were dropped on a technicality, and Ayers actually confesses and says he wishes he had done more.
Yes, all when Obama was 8-years old. He was rehabilitated and a distinguished professor by the time Obama met him, was Chicago citizen of the year or something like that. Ancient history. UNLIKE the deregulation business that directly impacts the economic crisis now.
So it would be cool if Timothy McVea had gotten off on a technicality and 30 years from now was teaching school and consorting around with the then Republican nominee for president?
Saying that deregulation is the reason for the financial crisis is a gross oversimplification. Blaming it on one party is as well. When you use government coffers as your own private piggy bank, things are bound to go south eventually.
Ayers is not the same as McVeigh. Ayers targets were generally objects, like monuments, etc. His object wasn’t to kill people, unlike McVeigh who tried to kill as many as possible in his bombing. People did accidentally get hurt though, and I would NEVER condone bombing anything as a form of civil disobedience. Nobody is defending Ayers actions of the past. He was not the same man as he was in his Weathermen days when Obama met him. He would not have risen to the prominence he had if he was still the extremely misguided hippie he was in the 60’s. Sheesh, people can change, and get second chances. That still doesn’t mean people are condoning what he did in the past.
Also, people are trying to tie Obama to him much more than he realy was associated. They never “palled around.” They were on a couple of organizations boards helping the community, and Ayers once hosted a meet and greet thing for someone else who he was ccloser friends with, that also happened to introduce Obama as state senate candidate. Know the facts before you make accusations.
And yes, most ecomonists say that deregulation is, in fact, the leading cause of this crisis, and that it has been coming for years (so no, it’s not al Bush) McCain has always been the deregulation champion. Of Course, as illing as most righties are to throw the debatable ayers card, they won’t even look at the keating economics info in my link.
You have to throw in there that McCain was warning of this several years ago. If you have a bastard-type corporation that is partially public and partially private, it isn’t capitalism and can’t be used to further the notion that all industries should be regulated more.
As far as targeting only monuments, I believe Ayers bombed the Pentagon, giving him something in common with another terrorist from 9-11-01.
fact check
voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/10/did_obama_lie_about_ayers.html
“Although the bomb that rocked the Pentagon was itsy-bitsy – weighing close to two pounds – it caused ‘tens of thousands of dollars’ of damage. The operation cost under $500, and no one was killed or even hurt.”
Not the same. He wasn’t out to kill people. Still wrong, and I still don’t condone, but the comparison is ridiculous. Plus, you are suggesting people can’t ever be rehabilitated and that the name he has made for himself in more recent years is irrelevant. I’m not saying I admire the man even, just that there’s more to him than some stupid(albeit dangerously wrong) things he did 40 years ago.
McCain has ALWAYS been for deregulation. See the video I linked. And of course nobody is saying blanket increases in regulation will solve everything. Enforcing existing anti-trust laws would be a good start. Also, the regulations placed into the financial sector during the Great Depression worked very well for a long time. It’s when they started removing these during mainly the Reagan years that this latest collapse was set in motion.
Hello? McCain and G. Gordon Liddy?
Deregulation in and of itself is not a bad thing, it’s the type of regulation/deregulation that matters and the purpose of it. McCain was for regulation of Fannie/Freddie which is a catalyst in this whole economy problem, Obama took donations from Fannie/Freddie.
Minerva: “Obama and Ayers never palled around”: Obama launched his presidential campaign *in Ayers’ house*!
http: answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080828213533AAIC77U
“Ayers is not the same as McVeigh”: This is my opinion, but I think it worth something. McVeigh was a pro, a demolitions expert trained in the military. His bomb was an “air-fuel” explosive so powerful they considered charging him with using WMD.
Ayers was an amateur. He killed two or three of his own people when one of his bombs went off prematurely. He *did* kill an NYC cop and maim another. He was still learning, and said at least as recently as 2001 that he was unrepentant and wished he had done more. He lacked training, was all (thank God).
And knowing all this, Obie has consorted with the man on a continuing basis for many years. I don’t give a crap that he was eight when Ayers committed his confessed crimes, it’s what he (BHO) is doing NOW that concerns conservatives.
Bill Ayers isn’t doing ANYTHING now. Sheesh, you guys can justify and twist anything into paranoid delusional, sheep like talking points. Even McCain is now admitting that calling Obama a terrorist is going too far. Don’t you even keep up on your own candidate?
Also, he dd not launch his presidential campaign with Ayers. The meet and greet was when he first became STATE senator.
Cindy still maintained her investments with Keating after the drama llama too … but all we hear about now is how Ayers’ wife worked at the same firm Michelle joined 3 years after Ayers’ wife did … SCANDAL!!!! We should all completely vet every other employee of a company that hires us in case any are related to terrorists I guess.
haha true, since everyone is guilty through casual association. BTW, the “at his house!!!11!!!!1!!” event was a candidate meet and greet coffee. They were never particularly close. Total campaign contributions were like a grand total of $200.
There was something that struck me just plain wrong. And its
the reason Ive moved away from the right this year. They’re scrambling.
Scrambling because no one wants their policies, and they’re stances.
So hence this election suddenly “Is not about the issues.”
Ayers warrants a little interest but in truth, he’s not the same
person anymore.
What really irritates me is the stretching. I saw an article, or blog rather
on hotair.com the other day, where someone, a conservative
fundamentalist was “exposing a scandal” Where a civil service grooup
that fights adult illiteracy asked for $75,000 in state grants. Obama
reviewed and granted said grant. Now here’s where it gets stupid.
Forget the fact that the application process was legal. Forget the
fact that this civil service group is trying to teach adults to read
and write. The issue here was the the Director/leader what have you
of this civil service group was Michelle Obama’s first cousin once removed.
HOLY HELL! That right there was when I said “Ok, forget the right
this election year.” I mean lets ignore all the good that $75K will
do in stopping illiteracy, and focus on how Obama gave a grant
to a non-blood relative.
The very least the Republicans could do this year for us moderates
was try to debate the issues, and bring us answers. Instead all
Ive seen are blindsided attacks and avoidance of the issues.
And that…. my friends…. is not what I want.
if he wasn’t strong enough to take his wife’s anger, is he strong enogh to lead the nation?
ba-
(wait for it)
-zing.
:bows: thank you, thank you. i’ll be here all week.
I don’t know if that was true, it was just an example, there could be hundreds of other reasons it’s no more our business than Bill and Hillary’s marraige.
i realise it was an example, but i couldn’t resist.
and i actually agree that it’s none ov our business, but considering the big flaming deal republicans tend to make every time a democrat is caught anything ov which the bureau ov morality would not approve, i won’t exactly cry myself to sleep if more is made ov mccain cheating on and then leaving his wife.
Both sides love to use sex scandals against each other, it’s stupid, I wish they would just get over it. Ok, I’m sorry I really have to ask, why do you use “ov” instead of “of”?
I know this is sort of beating a dead horse, but in all honesty, what else COULD she say? If she didn’t support him, they would have the media all over her vilifying her as the spiteful ex. If she’s still a Republican, well, he’s the only candidate, there’s no one else to support. She would say this no matter what just to stay out of the media, for some peace and quiet.
And let’s not confuse this picture merely intended for laughs as an actual attack on McCain.
(And no, I’m not a liberal, nor a conservative for that matter, thank you very much).
I cannot wait for this election to be over so we can actually have humor on the lol sites without the threads ending up in an Obama-McCain pissing match.
Sigh.
you know…if it was any other guy than mccain, a lot more people would think it’s funny. goes to show you people take it a bit more personally if it includes their candidates…much more personally…
I already knew they get along but to me it was still hilarious. That face is classic.
I’m glad someone other than me found the humor in it.
OMG FINALLY! I’m reading the posts on this blog of MY ‘lol’ and was disheartened to see that people didn’t “get it”. Sigh!
ex-wives jokes are also funny too actually… it’s just not a campaign issue.
Lets see Bill Clinton on with Monica !
Let’s not! *reaches for eyebleach*
It’s almost getting as boring as making fun of Pres Bush. Sen McCain is such an easy target since he sold his integrity and his sole in order to win…and the devil sent someone to keep him to his word, she came from wasilla, ak.
sole? The bottom of his foot? That had to hurt!
I think Charlie is referring to Skippy, Sen McCain’s beloved pet fish, a flat bottom-feeder of the genus Solea solea.
He is now referred to as Filet of Sole. Poor Skippy…
I think Congress billed the taxpayers $400 a portion for him, though.
I hope the portions were big!
Hahahaha, similar to his reaction to his supporters at speeches nowadays when they say stuff like “I can’t trust Obama, he’s an Arab!” and he has to quickly dig his way out of it. Sorry, that’s what you get when you have to resort to whipping your wingnuts into a hate-filled, frothing mob. It’s never gonna make you look good.
I’ve read that supporters at those rallies have been yelling “terrorist” and “Arab”. Guest speakers at the rallies have been calling him “Barak Hussein Obama”. And don’t forget about the absentee ballots that were “accidentally” labeled as Barak Osama instead of Barak Obama. Oh yeah, we had three checkers and the S and B keys are nowhere near each other, but zoinks what an accident!
Palin still has no apology for letting someone shout “KILL HIM” at one of her rallies.
I seriously get creeped out watching the crowd interviews of the lines for McCain Palin stuff.
I KNOW that the ones who talk for the camera are the lowest common denominator and not all republicans are walking around saying Obama is a terrorist “because he has the bloodline” but if you watch all of the hate and racism … so disturbing.
The normal folks tend to avoid the camera so you wind up with a slightly skewed ratio of nutball to normal but still.
I really feel that they (Paline more so than McCain because it happens more at her rallies and she doesn’t try to stop it like McCain did) are running very close to inciting a riot and if it should occur they should be charged for that.
They couldn’t *possibly* be leftist provocateurs, could they.
They couldn’t *possibly* be honest rightists, could they.
OMG LIBERAL CONSPIRACY!
Maybe people like Evil Pundit are actually leftist plants to make the GOP look bad too. They’re doing a cracking job if they are.
Without even a scrap of proof to validate that ridiculous paranoid delusion I would have to say no. Let’s deal with facts, not fantasy here. Even if they were, the issue isn’t with them, it’s with Palin doing nothing to stop it. Allowing threats to the life of an innocent human being and doing or saying nothing to stop it says a lot about what kind of person she is.
“Palin, 44, has led the character attacks on Obama in the belief that McCain may be throwing away the election and her chance of becoming vice-president. Her supporters think that if the Republican ticket loses on November 4, she should run for president in 2012.
A leading Republican consultant said: “A lot of conservatives are grumbling about what a poor job McCain is doing. They are rolling their eyes and saying, ‘Yes, a miracle could happen, but at this rate it is all over’.”
OH NOES!