Libtalker Press Undercuts Dem Nominee To Protect Obama
When a loyal liberal Democrat (and key candidate in an extremely important state) tangles with Barack Obama, who wins? We now have a clear answer: the party moves to protect the president's political fortunes at all costs.
While that might seem obvious, the damage done to Democrats can't be overstated: they need to retain a crucial US Senate seat, but Sestak also cannot be right in asserting he was offered a position in exchange for dropping out to clear the field for incumbent Senator Arlen Spector (D-PA). That would expose Obama to a potentially-damaging scandal.
The resulting mess leaves Democrats in the unbearable position of being compelled to undermine Sestak, who subsequently knocked out Specter in the primary election. In a terribly uncomfortable spot is Sestak himself, who has largely disappeared since the flap erupted into a major conflagration.
Enter ultra-partisan Democrat / former CNN hosts Bill Press, he of the instant Bomb-seller Toxic Talk: How The Radical Right Has Poisoned America's Airwaves, headed to a remainder table near you. Confronted by a caller to his syndicated radio talk show yesterday, Press wasted no time portraying Sestak as dishonest:
PRESS (52:48): I think Sestak brought it up because he's trying to get a little extra mileage in the primary, frankly, and I think he exaggerated a conversation into a job offer.
Funny how the real "toxic talk" seems to be emanating from Press himself. Consider this a case study in how the left eats its own when under stress.
Al Sharpton Struggles To Defend Obama's Gulf Disaster Non-Response
NOT SO SHARP
Reverend Tries, Fails To Defend Obama's Gulf Oil Response
Is there no limit to the Reverend Al Sharpton's devotion to Barack Obama? Even in the face of angry longtime supporters questioning his blind loyalty to the president, America's most infamous race hustler continues to test the boundaries of credulity.
The phenomenon extends even to subject areas about which the Reverend knows little, if anything at all. In a particularly ridiculous example from yesterday's syndicated radio program, Sharpton attempted to deflect growing criticism surrounding Obama's handling of the Gulf oil disaster, shifting blame directly to Bush and Republicans, while absolving the current White House occupant of any responsibility whatsoever:
SHARPTON (3:18): Well, we have a lot going on today, a lot going on around the country.
The oil spill, the BP oil spill, let’s be clear who is responsible and who is supposed to be the one stopping it. It seems to still be raging, the oil spill that is. It is interesting how many of the Republicans who were in charge when a lot of these policies were put in place that the federal government does not have the equipment, the Department of the Navy and other agencies don’t have the capacity to deal with oil spills.
Now they are calling on President Obama to intervene when there is no government agency that has the equipment or capacity to really intervene because the policy set was that these private companies like BP would be responsible and contracted to do their own covering of things like oil spills. Now that this oil spill has occurred, it is now interesting that they are now calling on this administration to do something that there is not the equipment or the capacity to do, that started under former administrations.
Is there at least a remote corner of Sharpton's mind that wonders whether the next several years are destined to be consumed with cleaning up Obama's easily avoidable presidential messes?
Is it really worth it, Al? Life is terribly short.
In a classic case of literary irony, an angry anti-Rush Limbaugh and conservative talk radio book has hit store shelves the same day as a long-awaited biography of the talk titan. As the duel begins, how will they fare?
On one end of a dusty main street at sundown is libtalker Bill Press, who with Toxic Talk: How the Radical Right Has Poisoned America's Airwaves, makes a case for structural unfairness in the medium, based on group ownership that supposedly favors conservative talkers over their liberal counterparts. This leads to unchecked rhetoric that somehow damages American political discourse.
Mr. Press weakens his case by ignoring or glossing over comparable sins made by progressive talk-show hosts and media figures. Liberal radio host Randi Rhodes recently aired a song parody that repeatedly calls Mr. Limbaugh, among other things, a Nazi. (Mr. Press says that she is "colorful" and "convincing.")
During the campaign to fill the Senate seat long occupied by Ted Kennedy, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann attacked Republican candidate Scott Brown as a "homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, teabagging supporter of violence against women and against politicians with whom he disagrees." Actress and former radio talker Janeane Garofalo has described the Republican Party as a "white-power movement."
Liberal talker Mike Malloy's show is "a hell of a lot of fun," Mr. Press says, approvingly noting Mr. Malloy's "fun" nicknames for President Bush, including "Unelected Idiot."
But wait. It’s about to get better. He also writes in his column: “You never hear those kinds of ugly comments from progressive talkers Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller, or Thom Hartmann, if you can find them on your radio dial at all.”
Never?
Who said this: “You're damn right, Dick Cheney's heart's a political football. We ought to rip it out and kick it around and stuff it back in him. I'm glad he didn't tip over. He is the new poster child for health care in this country.”
Who said this: “How can Evan Bayh sit there as an honest player for health care reform when his wife works for an [insurance] industry that is just absolutely butchering the American people?” The same host denounced Mrs. Joe Lieberman: “Does the word 'whore' apply? Are we there yet?”
Who said this: “You rat bastards are going to cause another Murrah Federal Building explosion, you are. And then...maybe at that point Beck will do the honorable thing and blow his brains out. Maybe at that point, Limbaugh will do the honorable thing and just gobble up enough Viagra that he becomes absolutely rigid and keels over dead. Maybe then O'Reilly will just drink a vat of the poison he spews out on America every night and choke to death.” Even the Christian evangelist Franklin Graham recently made this host’s please-kill-yourself list.
Who offered a Limbaugh song parody, with lyrics including these: “I’m a Nazi!...That’s right! I really I am!...I’m a Nazi! That’s right, you’re being scammed! I’m a Nazi! I don’t care about the middle class. I’m a big fat conservative butthead, with the face of a horse’s ass.”
And finally, who said this: “Taking a page right out of a Nazi playbook, [conservative] organizers bus in professional protesters and arm them with instructions on how to take over meetings, shut down discussion, shout over any pro-health care reform speakers, and then post video of the resulting chaos on YouTube. It's mob rule, pure and simple.”
The answers are: Leftwing radio and MSNBC talk show host Ed Schultz offered the first two pearls. The third comes from the especially vicious left-wing radio host Mike Malloy. The fourth attack, words and music, comes from Randi Rhodes, the former Air America darling.
And the fifth should be familiar to Bill Press -- since it came from Bill Press.
The bottom line, of course, is that any allegations of unfairness in radio programming certainly don't apply in the case of dueling books, where each has a chance to succeed equally based on public demand.
Libtalker Pleads With Obama To Take Action On Oil Spill
THEY'RE WORRIED
Libtalkers Worry Public Outrage Shifting Toward Obama
Can blame for gross inaction on the Gulf oil spill be shifted away from Obama indefinitely? Some on the left are clearly beginning to realize the anti-BP OUTRAGE (!!!) machine has begun to lose its effectiveness.
While that won't stop many "progressives" from continuing their relentless tirades against Big Oil, there is increasing worry that the president's mishandling of the situation has become difficult to defend.
That has the state-run media desperately searching for new ways to cover for him, including attacking Sarah Palin and other Republicans. But none other than Official White House Apologist Chris Matthews has now raised the question of Obama's "eventual" responsibility.
Making the case in blunt terms is MSNBC libtalker Ed Schultz, who used his television program to plead with the federal government for quick action (though it now seems much too late):
SCHULTZ (4:52): Our government's not doing enough. We have how many millions of Americans that are unemployed? Would it make sense to, maybe, offer a job to people who want to go down to the Gulf and get accommodations and get meals and just help with the cleanup? Could BP write that check? Is there anything we can do to save our beaches? Is there anything we can do to keep the oil offshore?
SCHULTZ (5:57): Mr. President, I'm a huge fan, but this is now your oil spill. It's on your watch. We need to come up with some kind of huge plan on what we're going to do, because we've spent thirty days waiting for BP, waiting for Transocean, who've done a great job of just washing their hands of all of this.
Let me just say this, Washington: It's time to get it on. It's time to get real serious about this.
The real question: why the left waited 30 days to challenge the White House on its chronic laziness when it's clear Bush wouldn't have been given 30 minutes before being subjected to a full-scale partisan attack. Is protecting Obama really worth the cost?
Libtalker Rosie O'Donnell: Jane Fonda's Vietnam-Era Actions Correct
JANE WAS RIGHT
O'Donnell: Jane Fonda Ahead Of Her Time On Vietnam Stance
During this time of global turmoil, why have seemingly-ancient debates suddenly been resurrected? Do Americans really have time for this silliness?
While Republican Rand Paul takes heat for expressing views on civil rights legislation, he's not the only one in the middle of needlessly-revisited, circa-1960s issue: Rosie O'Donnell wrapped up a radio interview with Jane Fonda Wednesday and immediately praised her pro-Viet Cong wartime stance.
And though Rosie rarely exercises much discretion in shooting off her mouth, she knew better than to bring up the subject during her chat, knowing full well that Fonda has since apologized for being "thoughtless and careless" in some of her statements from that era.
Surely Rosie knows that Jane wasn't just "against the war", but an active supporter of the enemy, to the point of appearing in propaganda photos and giving a radio address behind enemy lines intended to damage morale on our side.
From O'Donnell's program:
The bottom line: this political gotcha game can work both ways. And while Rosie isn't running for office this year (God help us if she were), Democrats who believe the tactic will save their sagging party this November could be in for a rude awakening when it backfires.
Americans are concerned with jobs, the economy and other far more practical concerns relevant to our lives today.
Andrea Mitchell Claims Chris Matthews Has Big Ratings
CHRIS THE KINGMAKER
Silly Andrea Mitchell: Matthews Plays Key Role
What's in the drinking water at MSNBC? Rachel Maddow's bizarre, Chris Matthews-like moment wasn't the far-left cable talk outlet's only televised election night oddity.
During Maddow's special 11pm hour, guest Andrea Mitchell interrupted her review of Obamist talking points to make a bizarre assessment of the supposed political clout of Matthews himself that went well beyond professional courtesy and into the realm of the bizarre.
It's a moment that provides real insight into the warped sense of reality shared by Beltway media elitists:
RACHEL MADDOW (in 'Sestak marks changing of Pennsylvania guard'): Do you sense that the White House is worried about its ability to deliver political help to endangered Democrats come November?
ANDREA MITCHELL: Well, they ought to be if they're not and in fact we look at the results in Massachusetts, the results here, the bottom line is that at five o'clock tonight, Chuck Todd, who you're going to talk to in a minute, was on the air on Hardball, which is widely watched here in Pennsylvania, it's widely watched, of course, across the country, but Chris Matthews has a very special role to play in Pennsylvania and what Chuck was reporting is that the White House really was washing its hands of Specter and was feeling that Sestak could be more competitive against Toomey.
Chuck can speak for himself as to what his information was from the White House, but we were hearing this for days that from the Obama team in the White House, not from the vice president but from the president's team of political advisers inside the White House, that they felt that Sestak was a more competitive candidate and that in fact they were telling people here, don't expect the president to come back in and do some Hail Mary pass for Arlen Specter, which most people here think might have been effective, might have turned up the vote here in Philadelphia, because he did not get a big enough margin in Philadelphia to overcome the deficit in the rest of the state.
Huh? A shout-out to a colleague is one thing, but Andrea obviously hasn't seen Hardball's numbers: they truly stink!
In fact, Matthews is often the lowest-rated host of anyone on MSNBC, CNN or Fox, with Monday's 5pm airing as an example. On that day, he averaged only 87,000 viewers in the key 25-54 demographic. Does it get any worse than that?
Tuesday's numbers were a bit better, boosted by election night coverage.
In Andrea's elite fantasy world, where only rarefied air will suffice, Chris Matthews is a major political power broker. In America, however, he's bitter, angry and mean, a toxic combination thoroughly rejected by cable audiences from coast to coast.
When put to music, how do the extreme limits of hate and rage sound?
For those who've ever pondered this question, we can thank libtalker Randi Rhodes. Apparently learning nothing from previous parody-related meltdowns, Rhodes viciously takes aim at a fellow host syndicated by the same outfit, Premiere Radio Networks.
Especially touching: the "I'm a Nazi" chorus.
As for humor, the only laughs here come unintentionally, thanks to the ridiculously inaccurate "falling ratings" dig. Hey Randi, how are yours these days?
From today's Randi Rhodes Show:
They say that I'm sleaze/ An elitist you please/ Everybody disagrees with my wrath/ I'm horrendous, I'm hauling/ My ratings now are falling/ I'm so full of bull - so full (of crap)/ With condescending eyes/ Making money selling lies/ You might say everybody hates my guts/ I'm offensive, I'm a bigot/ I'm a fraud; can you dig it/ I'm a sexist, racist, homophobic fat pathetic putz!
I'm a Nazi/ He's a Nazi/ That's right! I really am/ Because I'm a Nazi/ That's right; you're being scammed/ I'm a Nazi/ I don't care about the middle class/ I'm a fat conservative butthead with a face of a horse's ass/ He's a fat conservative butthead with a face of a horse's ass!
I have a subhuman figure, a huge rear end/ My brain that's another story/ I have a face the size of a washtub/ and my ass is as big as Missouri/ Yes!
(This bastard is sick, he's a fat pompous pig and his ass is as big as Missouri)
Yessirree Bob! Manipulating statements; exaggerating truth/ I can't believe they hate my show in spite!
Just because I'm stupid; just because I'm smug/ It's just because Republicans are liars/ I'm heartless, I am vain/ Insensitive, insane/ They say that I am a national disgrace/ I'm nasty; insulting; basically revolting/ I'm a concentrated pile of human waste!
('I'm a Nazi' chorus)
They say this is not about my vanity/ They doubt my sanity/ They think I'm nuts/ A cyst on the ass of humanity/
New Republican slogan, read my [...] / From the bowels of Adolf Hitler/ Is the voice of Rush Limbaugh/ In closing let me say/ That each and every day/ I'm a evil rotten egotistical snob/ I'm the cop-o, a Joe McCarthy-like gestapo/ The right-wing home of a jack-booted slob/ The Democratic trashing/ Years of liberal bashing/ When the equivalent compassion of a (unclear)/ The IQ of a fig/ I'm a fat, obnoxious pig/ And the truth of the matter is I'm vomit!
(repeat 'I'm a Nazi' Chorus)
He's a fat conservative butthead/ Sick Republican sleazeball/ Fearmongering scumbag/ Egotistical asswipe/ Mean-spirited, hog-walling, fat conservative putz/ With the face of a horse's ass/ Mega dildos Rush!
Thanks to the genius of Paul Shanklin, here's how truly funny talk radio parodies sound:
Thanks, libtalkers, for demonstrating once where Hate Radio has truly been mastered.
MSNBC Libtalker: AZ Law Will Bring Apartheid To America
Does a libtalker's lack of ratings excuse him or her from accountability when incendiary statements are made? As MSNBC's Rachel Maddow recklessly compares Arizona's new immigration law to South Africa's onetime system of Apartheid, it's time to raise this question once again.
That leaves partisan spinmeisters like Maddow searching for some other line of attack, with the evils of Apartheid seeming to fit the bill. Too bad it's nothing more than childish scaremongering.
From her MSNBC show:
RACHEL MADDOW (Thursday 13 May 2010 - 00:49 in 'Los Angeles has history of activism'): Apartheid was a race-based governmental system that was totally morally egregious. People of color had to carry specific papers with them at all times to be checked by police on demand.
If they didn't have the right documentation on them at all times, just because of what they looked like, they were subject to being arrested. Just for being not white and not having the right papers please. See, compared to Arizona that was (pause), never mind.
Using Maddow's approach,any requirement by foreigners to carry documentation while in America, including tourists with a passport and visa, could be construed as "Apartheid". Would she really travel overseas without keeping such documentation with her at all times?
It certainly isn't advisable, nor is continuing this silly line of attack.
Ed Schultz Afraid To Ask Democrat About Big Oil Contributions
I'M SCAR-ED
MSNBC Libtalker Afraid To Challenge Dem Senator Directly
Even as they criticized the president's positions on illegal immigration, amnesty and other major issues, during the Bush years, conservative talkers were routinely blasted for their supposed partisanship.
With "progressives" now running the country, however, it's fascinating to watch liberal hosts take naked partisanship to levels previously unseen. As Democrats sink further in the polls, lefty talkers have forfeited an opportunity to take independent positions in favor of doubling-down on a failed approach.
Nothing illustrates the point better than this cowardly display from syndicated radio libtalker Ed Schultz, who failed to mention Senator Mary Landrieu's (D-LA) Big Oil campaign contributions until AFTER the conclusion of her MSNBC interview earlier this week.
Schultz has spent weeks lambasting Republicans over the Gulf oil spill, to the point of attempting to blame Bush and GOP senators for the incident. To maintain at least a shred of credibility, Big Eddie knew he must mention Landrieu's oil donations, but skipped a clear opportunity to confront her:
SCHULTZ (13:28) (after the Landrieu interview): We should point out that Sen. Landrieu has taken $1.8 million from BP over the last ten years, and she's also taken money from the anti-drillers.
We will have her on the program again talkin' more about this. You just can't look at this number [$1.8 million] and say that people aren't affected by that, and I will give her an opportunity, again, to come back and talk about it.
The next day, Schultz corrected the amount received by Landrieu (claiming the real figure is less than one million from Big Oil), but failed to explain his reluctance to challenge Landrieu directly when given the opportunity.
Libtalkers would do well to consider the successful strategy of distance from a then-adrift GOP used by their conservative counterparts during Bush's second term. Why go down with the SS Reid, Pelosi & Obama?
Rush: I Didn't Know Obama Responded To Golf Proposal
*** EXCLUSIVE LIMBAUGH REACTION ***
Though he knew last year that author Zev Chafets had proposed a "golf summit" between himself and Barack Obama, Rush Limbaugh had no idea there'd been a response from the president until reading about it in today's New York Post.
Had the event occurred, it most certainly would have generated headlines and perhaps even bolstered Obama's sagging poll numbers. But the suggestion was clearly met with hostility from the president's handlers.
Meanwhile, buzz is quickly building around the Chafets book, with more nuggets expected between now and the upcoming release date.
Chafets reports he encouraged Limbaugh to reach out to the president just after last July's "Beer Summit" that Obama hosted between Professor Henry Louis Gates and Sgt. Joseph Crowley, the Cambridge cop who arrested Gates after he locked himself out of his own home.
"You guys are both golfers," Chafets told Limbaugh. "Would you play a round with the president and show the country that there are no hard feelings?"
"He's the president of the United States," Limbaugh told Chafets. "If any president asked me to meet him, or play golf with him, I'd do it. But I promise you that will never happen. His base on the left would have a s--t-fit."
"How about letting me ask?" Chafets said.
"Go ahead," Limbaugh said. "Nothing will come of it."
Chafets writes that he reached out to Obama adviser David Axelrod, "whom I know slightly," but Axelrod didn't return calls. Then Chafets spoke to "a very senior Democratic activist with whom I'm friendly" who said he would convey the message.
A day or two later the adviser responded, "Limbaugh can play with himself." Chafets wouldn't name the aide or say whether the quote was directly from Obama.
Though Limbaugh didn't respond to the publication prior to today's Page Six report, he did provide insight on the situation to the Radio Equalizer this morning: "I knew of this last summer, but today is the first day I learned of the Obama response," according to Limbaugh.
"I'd only been told that Axelrod would not return the writer's calls. Everything in Page Six attributed to me is accurate. It's no biggie and certainly no surprise," he added.
Libtalk Reveals: White Liberal Elitists Love Kagan, African-Americans Not So Much
SUITABLY SNOOTY
While Blacks Complain, Kagan Pleases White Libtalkers
Underscoring striking differences between white liberal elitists and party-loyal African-Americans, Obama's nomination of Elena Kagan to the US Supreme Court reveals smug satisfaction by the former while the latter experiences bitter disappointment.
Clearly, at least some black supporters of the president expected a pick that matches their background. And while whites on the far-left also have expressed some reservations, at least she's got a snooty Manhattan upbringing in her favor!
Listen as one white libtalker's elitist vision (from today's Bill Press Show) contrasts with that of Al Sharpton's callers, who are underwhelmed by Obama's choice to say the least. With differences this striking, it's a miracle these groups are able to align at election time:
AL SHARPTON SHOW CALLER - DONALD (43:38): This judicial pick, by President Obama, I think he’s doing just what white folks want him to do cause he’s the Great Appeaser. So I think it’s a great thing. Why should he nominate or bring forth someone of African American descent? Why should he? He doesn’t have to, no. He wants to appease white folks.
....
CALLER - ROMEL (14:55): The nomination of a white woman to me is the president's going out of his way once again to show white America that he is not going to show any favoritism towards blacks and I’m just kind of disturbed by that.
--------------------
BILL PRESS (33:27): I do trust her, and here's why: I trust her based on some clues that she is a good, strong liberal we can count on. Some of these may be superficial, but look, she was raised on Manhattan's Upper West Side. You live on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, you're a liberal. No doubt about it. I know a lot of people that come from that area, and it's got a great reputation.
And here, listen as other libtalkers react to the selection of Kagan:
With friends like these, Kagan should have no problem sailing through the confirmation process.
Rep Linda Sanchez (D-CA): Opposition To Illegal Immigration Is 'Classist'
STAY 'CLASSY', DEMS
Dem Rhetoric On Illegal Alien Crackdown Increasingly Absurd
During a breathtakingly busy week for news, it's easy for silly political antics to slip through relatively unnoticed, but that doesn't make the behavior any less absurd.
While stock markets were plunging worldwide and Britain's election produced instability, Democrats here at home were busy amping up the rhetoric over Arizona's crackdown on illegal immigrants, apparently in the foolish belief they'll be able to swing public opinion in their favor.
Using liberal talk radio, Rep Linda Sanchez (D-CA) kicked the smear campaign against proponents into high gear, accusing crackdown supporters of having not just racist motives, but a "classist" agenda as well. From the party that has built electoral success almost entirely around the concept of class warfare, doesn't that seem especially amusing?
From the Ed Schultz Show a bit earlier in the week, here's her bizarre rant:
SANCHEZ (38:15): ...I think a majority of Americans feel we need to do something about immigration, but I don't think that racial profiling and classist profiling is the way that we want to accomplish that.
We could ignore this kind of silliness, but it's damaging to our country and the kooky Sanchez sisters deserve to be held accountable for their crazy rhetoric.
Because overtly-expressed "progressive" politics remain so thoroughly unpopular in America, its far-left practitioners must resort to coded language that masks the real agenda. During today's Al Sharpton Show, extremist actor / Hugo Chavez supporter Danny Glover has provided a fascinating example.
Clearly, "exceptionalism" is a reference to America's status as a global superpower, which Glover would like to see undermined to the point of extinction. Beyond that, his bizarre rant illustrates just how detached from reality the "progressive" left has become.
Decades spent immersed in East Bay radicalism and friendly visits with foreign despots can do that to a person.
Of course, he may also simply be nuts:
AL SHARPTON (49:12): How is America perceived at this point with these new kinds of draconian laws with this fight over health care? I mean I’m trying to give people a sense of in many ways as much as we claim to be so advanced we are really behind on many of the human rights fronts.
DANNY GLOVER: Well, we exercise this idea of exceptionalism you know and that’s unfortunate you know, because you see exceptionalism happening in other places in the world. The fact that you have a president of a country, Bolivia, whose first language is not Spanish who is a shepherd of the mother Earth and talks about mother Earth in poetic ways and everything else. You see that happening.
You see woman, two women, most unfortunate now is only one woman now elected to be President of a nation in Latin America. This exceptionalism happens is a certain exceptionalism that is often we’ve claimed ownership to, but other people around the world have usurped us, you know they’ve moved past us. Have gone and said we’re gonna create dynamic democracies. We’re going to create democracies where woman have a voice.
Sharpton's playing a role here as well: "advanced" in progressive-speak means anti-American governance that is subservient to that of Third World dictatorships and other assorted global basket cases.
So much for the white male "tea partier" fantasy our left-wing state run media friends had projected right into the Times Square bombing attempt. With the bad news delivered today in the form of a suspect with Pakistani ties, "progressives" are crying into their soy lattes.
Admitting this out loud, however, is another story. Isn't this thought process better kept to one's self? Not to MSNBC's Contessa Brewer, who apparently thought libtalk was a safe place to reveal her anti-American agenda.
From today's Stephanie Miller Show:
CONTESSA BREWER (7:06): I mean the thing is is that and I get frustrated and there was part of me that was hoping this was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country because there are a lot of people who want to use this terrorist intent to justify writing off people who believe in a certain way or come from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way. I mean they use it as justification for really outdated bigotry.
And so there was part of me was really hoping this would not be the case that here would be somebody who is not the defined. I mean he’s accused he’s arrested you know I don’t want to convict him before it’s time to do so. He’s the guy authorities say is involved. But that being said I mean we know even in recent history you have the Haitari militia from Michigan who have plans to let’s face it create terror.
That’s what they were planning to do and they were doing so from far different backgrounds then what this guy is coming from. So, the threat is not just coming from people who decide that America is the place to be and you know come here and want to become citizens. Obviously this guy did.
Amazon orders originating with clicks here benefit The Radio Equalizer's ongoing operations. Your PayPal contributions keep this site humming along. Thanks!
Libtalkers Blame Gulf Oil Spill On Bush, While Praising Obama
'GOD'S A DEMOCRAT'
As Oil Spill Serves Their Agenda, Libtalkers Find Religion
As the rabid left expertly recognizes, the best defense is a good offense. And with Obama's inaction on the rapidly-escalating Gulf oil crisis becoming increasingly clear, his "progressive" minions have turned to an old standby: gratuitous Bush-bashing.
Yes, BUSH caused a major oil spill in 2010! And Obama's just a decent guy trying to work with mean Republicans! God is a Democrat! Rush is on drugs!
If these libtalkers could generate some ratings, perhaps they'd be able to upgrade their stuff from the cheap crack they're stuck with now.
From Friday's Stephanie Miller Show, including guest Laura Flanders:
Amazon orders originating with clicks here benefit The Radio Equalizer's ongoing operations. Your PayPal contributions keep this site humming along. Thanks!
While that might seem obvious, the damage done to Democrats can't be overstated: they need to retain a crucial US Senate seat, but Sestak also cannot be right in asserting he was offered a position in exchange for dropping out to clear the field for incumbent Senator Arlen Spector (D-PA). That would expose Obama to a potentially-damaging scandal.
While that might seem obvious, the damage done to Democrats can't be overstated: they need to retain a crucial US Senate seat, but Sestak also cannot be right in asserting he was offered a position in exchange for dropping out to clear the field for incumbent Senator Arlen Spector (D-PA). That would expose Obama to a potentially-damaging scandal.
