I heard it to on the radio, the entire dialogue. He has been taken totally
Posted By: out of context. . nm on 2005-09-30
In Reply to: It's really too bad you didn't take the time to read the entire transcript - Another Republican
x
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Dialogue? Giving your opinion and insisting you're right is not dialogue.
Okay, heard from radio
about american solutions.com so one can vote on this energy bill, but I keep getting link broken. Any idea what I am doing wrong?
I agree. I only heard recaps on the radio the next day.
However, I agree with you Lurker. At first I didn't though. I was like *all that wasn't necessary* and when my husband brought up the funeral I told him and his reply was the Kings were political and those were things Coretta believed in, so why should people sugar coat things because of the guests. It was after all HER funeral, not either of the BUSHES.
I heard on the radio the same kind of thing...
asked people about Obama and put Palin as his VP and vice versa with McCain and Biden. People actually said that they thought the Obama/Palin ticket was great and didn't like the McCain/Biden ticket! Unreal, and these people are allowed to vote? Another reporter asked about the policies of each candidate, but switched them around and out of 10 people, 9 thought Obama would get their vote because he believed like they did (of course they didn't know they were actually siding with McCain). It's a sorry time in America when the homeless on the park bench have a vote that is more coveted than our military's vote. Freedom is right and those who are fighting right now are defending those on this board's right to bash them and their service.
My husband heard this is a definite yesterday on the radio (nm)
x
I heard and interesting interview on the radio today...
While everyone is so wrapped up in Colin Powell supporting Obama, did anyone take note that Lieberman supports McCain?
I agree you can't have a dialogue with the
but for lots of the others, such as Russia, Venezuela and much of South America, China, etc., our disagreements with them shouldn't send us into all-out war. (Especially with Russia and/or China, which might very likely WIN.)
Why It's IMPOSSIBLE to Have an Intelligent Dialogue with Conservative *Followers*
I would strongly advise watching the video. I saw Mr. Dean on this show, and everything started to make a lot of sense as to why it's impossible to have any kind of intelligent debate on these boards. In the couple times I have tried, I never received any substantive responses to the issues. I only received (and continue to receive) personal attacks.
Video: 50 year study says conservatives 'followers'
07/11/2006 @ 11:48 am
In an interview with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, former Nixon counsel John Dean explained a largely unknown 50 year academic study. The data shows that conservatives are much more likely to follow authoritarian leaders.
Dean discovered the ongoing study while researching his new book, Conservative Without Conscience.
Dean believes that the study helps to explain why the Republican party has been driven further right.
A rush transcript follows the video.
Video can be found at: http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Video_50_year_study_says_conservatives_0711.html
DEAN: Goldwater Republicanism is really R.I.P. It's been put to rest by most of the people who are now active in moving the movement further to the right than it's ever been. I think that Senator [Goldwater], before he departed, was very distressed with Conservatism. In fact, it was our conversations back in 1994 that started this book. That's really where I began. We wanted to find answers to the question, Why were Republicans acting as they were? -- Why Conservatives had taken over the party and were being followed as easily as they were in taking the party where [Goldwater] didn't want it to go.
OLBERMANN: What did you find? -- In less than the 200 pages that the book goes into.
DEAN: I ran into a massive study that has really been going on 50 years now by academics. They've never really shared this with the general public. It's a remarkable analysis of the authoritarian personality. Both those who are inclined to follow leaders and those who jump in front and want to be the leaders. It was not the opinion of social scientists. It was information they drew by questioning large numbers of people -- hundreds of thousands of people -- in anonymous testing where [the subjects] conceded their innermost feelings and reactions to things. And it came out that most of these people were pre-qualified to be conservatives and this, did indeed, fit with the authoritarian personality.
OLBERMANN: Did the studies indicate that this really has anything to do with the political point of view? Would it be easier to impose authoritarianism over the right than it would the left? Is it theoretically possible that it could have gone in either direction and it's just a question of people who like to follow other people?
DEAN: They have found, really, maybe a small, 1%, of the left who will follow authoritarianism. Probably the far left. As far as widespread testing, it's just overwhelmingly conservative orientation.
OLBERMANN: There is an extraordinary amount of academic work that you quote in the book. A lot of it is very unsettling. It deals with psychological principles that are frightening and may have faced other nations at other times. In German and Italy in the 30's, come into mind in particular. But, how does it apply now? To what degree should it scare us and to what degree is it something that might be forestalled?
DEAN: To me, it was something of an epiphany to run into this information. First, I'd never read about it before. I sort of worked my way into it until I found it. It's not generally known out there, what's going on. I think, from the best we can tell, these people -- the followers -- a few of them will change their ways when the realize that they are doing -- not even aware of what they are doing. The leaders, those inclined to dominate, they're not going to change for a second. They're going to be what they are. So, by and large, the reason I write about this is, I think we need to understand it. We need to realize that when you take a certain step of vote a certain way, heading in a certain direction, where this can end up. So, it's sort of a cautionary note. It's a warning as to where this can go. Other countries have gone there.
OLBERMANN: And the idea of leaders and followers going down this path or perhaps taking a country down this path requires -- this whole edifice requires and enemy. Communism, al Qaeda, Democrats, me... whoever for the two-minutes hate. I overuse the Orwellian analogies to nauseating proportions. But it really was, in reading what you wrote about, especially what the academics talked about. There was that two-minutes hate. There has to be an opponent, an enemy, to coalesce around or the whole thing falls apart. Is that the gist of it?
DEAN: It is one of the things, believe it or not, that still holds conservatism together. There is many factions in conservatism and their dislike or hatred of those they betray as liberal, who will basically be anybody who disagrees with them, is one of the cohesive factors. There are a few others but that's certainly one of the basics. There's no question that, particularly the followers, they're very aggressive in their effort to pursue and help their authority figure out or authority beliefs out. They will do what ever needs to be done in many regards. They will blindly follow. They stay loyal too long and this is the frightening part of it.
OLBERMANN: Let me read something from the book. Let me read this one quote then I have a question about it. Many people believe that neoconservatives and many Republicans appreciate that they are more likely to maintain influence and control of the presidency if the nation remains under ever-increasing threats of terrorism, so they have no hesitation in pursuing policies that can provoke the potential terrorists throughout the world. That's ominous, not just in the sense that authoritarians involved in conservatism and now Republicanism would politicize counter-terror here which we've already argued that point on many occasions. Are you actually saying that they would set up -- encourage terrorism from other countries to set them up as a boogey man to have, again, that group to hate here -- more importantly, afraid of?
DEAN: What I'm saying is that there has been fear mongering, the likes of which we have not seen in a long time in this country. It happened early in the cold war. We got accustomed to it. We learned to live with it. We learned to understand what it was about and get it in proportion. We haven't done that yet with terrorism. And this administration is really capitalizing on it and using it for its' political advantage. No question, the academic testing show -- the empirical evidence shows -- when people are frightened, they tend to go to these authority figures. They tend to become more conservative. So, it's paid off for them politically to do this.
OLBERMANN: This all seems to require, not merely, venality or immorality but a kind of amorality where morals don't enter into it at all. We're right. So anything we do to preserve our process, our power -- even if it by itself is wrong -- it's right in the greater sense. It's that wonderful rationalization that everybody uses in small doses throughout their lives. But, is this idea, this sort of psychological sort of review of the whole thing, does it apply to Dick Cheney? Does it apply to George Bush? Does it apply to Bill Frist? Who are the names on these authoritarian figures?
DEAN: You just named three that I discuss at some length in the book. I focused in the book, not on the Bush Administration and Cheney and The President because they had really been there done that, but what I wanted to understand is what they have done is made it legitimate to have authoritarianism. It was already operating on Capitol Hill after the '94 control by the Republicans in Congress. It recreated the mood. It restructured Congress itself in a very authoritarian style, in the House in particular. The Senate hasn't gone there yet but it's going there because more House members are moving over. This atmosphere is what Bush and Cheney walked into. They are authoritarian personalities. Cheney much more so than Bush. They have made it legitimate and they have taken way past where anybody's ever taken it in the United States.
OLBERMANN: Our society's best defense against that is what? Do we have to hope, as you suggested, the people that follow, wise up and break away from this sort of lockstep salute to, of course, they're right, of course there are WMDs, of course there are terrorists, of course there is al Qaeda, of course everything is the way the president says it. Or do we rely on the hope that these are fanatics and fanatics always screw up because they would rather believe in their own cause than double-check their own math.
DEAN: The lead researcher in this field told me, he said, I look at the numbers of the United States and I see about 23% of the population who are pure right-wing authoritarian followers. They're not going to change. They're going to march over the cliff. The best thing to deal with them -- and they're growing, and they have a tremendous influence on Republican politics -- The best defense is understanding them, to realize what they are doing, how they're doing it and how they operate. Then it can be kept in perspective and they can be seen for what they are.
You C*nt Say That On Radio!
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_temper_boiled_over_in_92_0407.html
Believe it or not, I don't own a radio (nm)
x
You can also check out NPR on the radio....
conservative they ARE NOT.
Ron Paul radio interview
For those of you in the listening area, Ron Paul is being interviewed on NPR. I am in New England and it is on now. But if you miss it, you can log onto NPR on the web and play it back at your leisure. :o)
today on radio, they were discussing
his own party is in controversy over flip-flops. disgusted almost with the whole lot of them. someone said government growth has been 60% in the last few years. Don't know about that, but upsetting story on medicare losing millions by having doctor's available info on line which, of course, has been abused. Some of these guys have been dead for years and so people have been using their id's and #'s to scam/order wheelchairs. oh well, we'll always have more taxpayers, right? The name of the game is money, and they are all to blame for this energy problem, alternative methods have been squelched for almost 80 years. We could very quickly find ourselves in a fine pickle if they shut off the tap over there and I don't put it past them. After all, we have already made them filthy rich, they won't need us anymore, especially with our losing economy. Indonesia and Viet Nam won't even accept american money. or so I heard a couple of weeks ago, not like I tried to spend any money anywhere! I strongly feel the need to become self-sufficient and I mean that on an individual level as well, think 1800's. our people are much too busy fingerpointing to get anything accomplished and I am sick of all the bickering and wastefulness. I really feel for the ones to come after us.
I am hearing on the radio that it was her husband, not she...
who was the member and it was several years ago. The jury is out on that one.
Obama went to the dailykos convention and spoke to them. Does that mean he approves of the smarm on that website?
Wright said God dam* America. Obama was in his pews for 20 years. Are we to attribute that comment to Obama?
You can't have it both ways.
yep. talk radio covered this. sm
Rush said that's why they went after him. Seriously, for those who have never explored talk radio, it's like getting your doctorate in history. It's so different than what many think. Of course, I like all of it, but this is a fabulous encyclopedia for sources other than the "drivebys." Of course, that's why the far-left Dems want that so-called Fairness Doctrine. The centrists (what few are left flailing with little or now face time, for obvious reasons) know full well that if it happens to the conservatives, it'll come right back around and hit them in the butts, too.
The Dems are very divided but put on a show for the cameras. If a centrist or a new Rep. doesn't follow The Pelosi Principle, he/she will never get $ for another run, and certainly won't get to introduce anything of interest to that Rep. The domino effect on that trickles down to the Rep's state, which in turn essentially gets nothing.
It's quite refreshing to be able to have a friendly exchange here. What on earth happened? Let's hope it lasts!
do you ever listen to Glen on the radio as well?
don't forget talk radio!
Of course, the libs want to squelch freedom of speech with the so-called "Fairness Doctrine." If they had any brains, they'd nix that one, as it will most definitely bite them in the butt, too. Michael Savage, for one, says if they pull it off, he'll go after them (all of them will, actually) to get equal time on ultra-lib shows, such as 60 Minutes, NPR, etc. Funny how we taxpayers fund NPR, yet Rush Limbaugh has more than 20 million listeners, and continues to grow. My favs are LauraIngraham.com, Rush (of course--I'd marry him if I could and weren't already married), MarkLevinShow.com, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck (now on Fox). Glenn's best friend, Pat Gray, does a talk show in Houston with Edd Hendee. If you go to patgray.com, you can hear Pat & Edd's shows. Levin has the same. Laura is a total nut, yet not one to cross (recovering lawyer, as she says).
Due to the huge success of talk radio, the Dems can't stand it, which is why they want to shut down free speech, which is in our Constitution!
I hope to see future posts from you re this. You won't hear the stuff from the driveby media, for obvious reasons. MarkLevinShow.com has a Keith Overbite page, which is a doozy.
Enjoy!
don't forget talk radio!
Of course, the libs want to squelch freedom of speech with the so-called "Fairness Doctrine." If they had any brains, they'd nix that one, as it will most definitely bite them in the butt, too. Michael Savage, for one, says if they pull it off, he'll go after them (all of them will, actually) to get equal time on ultra-lib shows, such as 60 Minutes, NPR, etc. Funny how we taxpayers fund NPR, yet Rush Limbaugh has more than 20 million listeners, and continues to grow. My favs are LauraIngraham.com, Rush (of course--I'd marry him if I could and weren't already married), MarkLevinShow.com, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck (now on Fox). Glenn's best friend, Pat Gray, does a talk show in Houston with Edd Hendee. If you go to patgray.com, you can hear Pat & Edd's shows. Levin has the same. Laura is a total nut, yet not one to cross (recovering lawyer, as she says).
Due to the huge success of talk radio, the Dems can't stand it, which is why they want to shut down free speech, which is in our Constitution!
I hope to see future posts from you re this. You won't hear the stuff from the driveby media, for obvious reasons. MarkLevinShow.com has a Keith Overbite page, which is a doozy.
Enjoy!
don't forget talk radio!
Of course, the libs want to squelch freedom of speech with the so-called "Fairness Doctrine." If they had any brains, they'd nix that one, as it will most definitely bite them in the butt, too. Michael Savage, for one, says if they pull it off, he'll go after them (all of them will, actually) to get equal time on ultra-lib shows, such as 60 Minutes, NPR, etc. Funny how we taxpayers fund NPR, yet Rush Limbaugh has more than 20 million listeners, and continues to grow. My favs are LauraIngraham.com, Rush (of course--I'd marry him if I could and weren't already married), MarkLevinShow.com, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck (now on Fox). Glenn's best friend, Pat Gray, does a talk show in Houston with Edd Hendee. If you go to patgray.com, you can hear Pat & Edd's shows. Levin has the same. Laura is a total nut, yet not one to cross (recovering lawyer, as she says).
Due to the huge success of talk radio, the Dems can't stand it, which is why they want to shut down free speech, which is in our Constitution!
I hope to see future posts from you re this. You won't hear the stuff from the driveby media, for obvious reasons. MarkLevinShow.com has a Keith Overbite page, which is a doozy.
Enjoy!
Even our conservative talk radio sm
station focused on how "hot" Sarah Palin was, not her brains. How they'd like to see her naked, in a bikini, etc, etc. As for being governor, the state of Alaska ranks 47th in population, not exactly New York or Massachusetts or you name it. As for bashing her because she is "pretty", I'll take brains over beauty any day. Pretty shallow to back someone because they're "pretty" or "hot." The day Sarah Palin sets foot in the white house, is the day I move to Canada or maybe I'll move to Alaska!
And lastly, as for me typing my little black keys, look who is calling the kettle black. When was the last time you ran for governor? 
Ed's a good guy (though he's awkward on TV and better on the radio).
nm
I did hear about the flyers on the radio though.. that is true (sm)
Our local radio & TV stations were trying to make sure everyone knew that was a scan. You can't blame republicants for that though...was probably just a couple of people with a hair-brained idea.
Interesting Insight into Talk Radio
I confess I am fascinated by the inner workings of the things that influence public opinion, be it media, politics, or religion. I found this article fascinating.
nope. Never listened to Rush. No radio.
Hubby listens to him all the time.
BTW, used to watch Glen Beck all the time. Can't wait until he's on Fox January 19th. He was on O'Reilly last night and I did watch, but he was pretty toned down, probably cause it was Bill's show.
He's from about 35 miles from here; been listening to him on radio for years.
nm
There is no way you can do an entire
report by the point and click method.
Some crazy loon on talk radio today
said that Bush's grandfather had Kennedy assasinated. Do you believe that?
Death of Right-Wing Talk Radio Influence sm
The Death Of Right-Wing Talk Radio Relevance
By Steve Young
Twelve years of unmerited influence and half-truths swathed in red, white and blue patriotism met its demise this past Tuesday with a dagger to the heart served up by revelations from the Iraq Study Group substantiating that everything right wing talk radio had said was right about the Iraqi, was wrong.
Born the day Rush Limbaugh mid-wifed Newt Gingrich's Contract For (On) America, RWTRR lived a healthy and wealthy life duping a great portion of the America public into voting against their own best interests.
Right wing talk grew larger and louder over its lifetime, adding names like Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Neal Boortz, Dennis Prager and many more imitators. They each spent three hours a day catchphrasing words and thoughts - no matter how rickety their evidence (if any) - that the mainstream media would give equal time and space along side the truth.
All of a sudden, the truth was only worth 50% of any issue.
Enabled by a gullible mainstream media hoping to hitch itself to the growing Lords of Loud audience, the Rove-inspired red-herrings were greased up even more by talk radio's band of Professor Harold Hills and shoved charmingly down America's throat. And, as with all great con men, these snake oil salesmen sold hole-cloth, betraying the public trust and making fistfuls of dollars doing it.
To be fair, they had to. It's was a Catch-22. If they had trusted their audience with the truth, they'd have no audience.
But November's election and the ISG report finally drained life-giving oxygen from a lying heart. Not only did the public begin to understand they were being duped, but even the FOBIJB (Friends of Bush including James Baker) could no longer ignore the tide. Of course there will continue to be FOBIL (Friends of Bush Including Lieberman), but they will sustain escalating losses, just as the LOL are losing audience in droves.
But the one-two punch of November's mid-terms compounded by the Iraq Study Group's revelations, knocked a terminal hole in any credibility right wing talk may have had left.
Limbaugh admitted he was shilling for Republicans who didn't deserve to be elected, then attempted to hush the death knell rung by the ISG by recasting it, oh so hysterically, as the Iraq Surrender Group. Get it? He changed one of the words. Second-rate comics who are dying on stage always go for the insipidly obvious and as with the comics, it never gets the audience back.
Hannity has gone off the deep end calling everyone else but himself wrong. He persists on telling liberal callers that we found WMD even though Bush doesn't seem to have gotten the same intelligence Sean has while Curt Weldon and Rick Santorum were voted out of office whipping the same dead horse.
Beck asks an American Congressman to prove he's not working for the enemy.
Prager believes the same Congressman holding his bible will bring down American civilization.
O'Reilly can't drum up many recruits to fight this year's War Against Christmas, and how many times can you hear look at me with out re-tasting last night's dinner?
And Savage...? Well, just Savage.
Oh, they'll keep some listeners, but they'll be talking to a choir who doesn't care that they're hearing to a bunch of cloutless charlatans who never had the guts to serve our country but have no problem sending other families into life-changing horror; fans who don't care their heros had it wrong, and had it wrong over and over. And when it came to the war...dead wrong.
Now any relevance these cascading Lords of Loud might once have had, if not dead, is on life support. And if there are some in the legitimate media who still choose to give these mongrels of misrepresentation any time, space or air, they do it at the risk of their own relevance.
Right-wing talk show relevance was never married but leaves behind soon-to-be-irrelevant offspring: Dick Morris, Bernie Goldberg, Tom DeLay, Ann Coulter, David Horowitz, David Limbaugh, Bill Kristol, Michelle Malkin, General Tommy Franks, Oliver North, James Dobson, Whitewater, Swift Boaters, Flip-flopping, Terri Schiavo, The buses, Outing covert agents as appropriate government behavior, WMD, Saddam's close relationship with bin Laden, If you're against the war your against the troops, If you're against the President's policies you're against America, Activist judges are making laws, Making progress, Tax relief benefitting the middle class, No child left behind is a success, Republican legislators appreciating veterans, Pharmaceutical companies writing drug bills will benefit the public, Stem cell research causes baby cloning, and Wars against Christmas
Memorial services will be continued, sadly, three hours a day. All donations should be made to Fox News.
Yeah, we need conservative radio shows to give any
nm
I think the entire country knows how old he is...
I think they use the picture of him in his uniform to underscore his military service...which I don't think hurts his cause but helps it, in this world we live in now.
As to his mind...that is kind of a cheap shot, don't you think? I haven't seen any evidence of an unsound mind. Obama is not "old" but take him away from a teleprompter or a planned statement and he stumbles and stutters with the best of them...just trying to be fair here.
Nobody said he was. You ignored the entire text
nm
That is not even close to the entire transcription of what he said. nm
I believe O'Liely invented the entire
thing to help his pal John Gibson sell his book on this fictional topic.
After this *War on Christmas* was conjured up by these two, I believe that some people jumped on the *Happy Holidays* bandwagon simply because they're sick and tired of the religious right forcing their religion down everyone's throats for the past 5 years in the form of laws, supreme court nominees, FDA rulings, etc.
I think people of all religions are sick and tired of their religions being regarded as somehow *less* if they're not Christian (or even begin the *right kind* of Christian).
The other week, I made a contribution to a Salvation Army *pot* outside of a store I was visiting. The young man wished me a Merry Christmas, and I responded back with *Merry Christmas,* because I'm aware that the Salvation Army is a Christian organization. I would never dare to ASSUME that every stranger I encounter is Christian, and if I am the person initiating the *Happy* greeting, I use the phrase *Happy Holidays.* If I'm responding, I respond back with whatever they say to me first.
Yes, CHRISTMAS obviously is a Christian holiday first and foremost. But this holiday has also evolved into a secular one which includes Santa Claus and jingle bells, lights, tinsel and credit cards. It provokes people of ALL religions to act in a *Jesus-like* way: With kindness, charity, love and tolerance.
I believe that the Christmas *season* is so loved by ALL people that they are just unwilling to give it up to those who have proven to be so intolerant for the last 5 years. They want to feel included and validated, as well. It's ironic how some of the ones who claim to be the most *Christian* are unwilling to share their holiday with the rest of the country, and rather than being inclusive and welcoming of others under the umbrella of *Happy Holidays,* they instead choose, once again, to bully others. Must be the true meaning of the *bully pulpit.*
Merry Christmas to all Christians who celebrate Christmas.
Happy Holidays to others of all religions who just might enjoy the Jesus-LIKE feeling they get in their hearts during this time of the year. And as long as I initiate holiday wishes to strangers, I will be very respective, tolerant and inclusive of those who just might not be Christian, as I fondly remember the *good old days* when freedom of religion for ALL was not only *tolerated* but was unquestioned, welcomed and encouraged here in the United States of America. 
I agree the entire interview was not there.
And I truly don't understand why. I tried to quickly find the transcript of the entire interview, but I was unable to find it.
I wish they would have posted the entire interview because Sean and Newt argued and probably for the first time did not agree. If I remember correctly, there was even a jovial comment at the end about Newt being closer to Alan than Sean (or something to that effect). I don't remember the exact words. I did watch the entire interview, and I can tell you that Sean challenged Newt on points, but Newt still disagreed with him. The gist of what Newt said was that the President just needs to start being honest with the American people about things he does.
If I have more time later, I will search some more and see if I can find the entire interview in case you don't believe what I have told you after watching the entire interview.
I do agree, however, that the entire interview should have been there because I think his disagreement with Sean was much more interesting than his agreement with Alan.
That would certainly apply to the entire MTStars
(Thumbs up.)
Yes...this would be the liberal viewpoint of the entire...sm
Gov. Palin interview. Not surprising.
Charlie Gibson did perform his role for the left well, didn't he? Entrapment journalism at its best.
There is absolutely nothing in the entire mess this
Their greed, and the greed of those who so stalwartly support every move they make, is the root of most of the problems we face today.
I have read his entire plan
And I think it is still a national health care plan. Slice away all the pretty words and what are you left with? Government control. Sorry, no thanks.
I don't agree with the entire thing....
X
You are missing the entire point. How sad. nm
x
LOL you missed the entire point...
If saving innocent lives (abortion) is your goal, then MCBUSH is certainly *not* the lesser of two evils because he is CHOMPING at the bit to start MORE fake wars that kill MORE innocent people.
Or as I said before, does it only matter if the "innocent life" being killed is American...?
Are Americans really this stupid they can't see that all these FAKE WAR deplete our own treasury, kil people, and MAKE US MORE ENEMIES??
OR, DO WE have to be brought to our knees by the CIVILIZED portion of the world before we stand up to government that invades innocent countries with OUR money using OUR sons and daughters as cannon fodder?
If you base your perceptions of the entire
populace of our country from the postings on this forum, you need to get out more.
I'm sorry they said bad things about your candidate. It obviously hurt you deeply.
Ditto your entire 2 posts...
I agree wholeheartedly. This should not be a race issue, but unfortunately that's all it has become and thats too bad. I'd like to give Obama the benefit of the doubt that he may be able to do a decent job, but I'm afraid these next 4 years are gonna be just one race issue after another, not very productive for our country. Like the posters below, where's my check?
Wrong! If you had seen the entire video, you ....sm
would have seen that Queen Elizabeth had first put her arm around Michelle Obama. You all are a bunch of crazy people. Obama is doing a terrific job, just what we elected him to do. I feel sorry for you.
Yeah - not at all like the NY Times, which has had entire
When you get up tomorrow morning, look in the mirror and say "Today, I will try NOT to be a dope".
Listen/Request Alan Colmes radio show in your area.
See link.
Nobody wants to listen to liberal talk radio..look at bankrupt Air America. No demand for it...
//
I read that entire article and I still didn't see where it said sm
U.S. military was protecting the Hezbollah supporters. Am I really missing it?
We need to vote as if our entire future depends on it,
x
Why would Obama bring his entire family
they were all just there as recently as August 7th? Michelle was an effective, seamless stand-in on the trail. Stop and think for a minute. Malia is 10 and Natasha is 7. That would make them both school age. They visited their GM 2-1/2 months ago when, although her health was frail, she was in much better shape, now that she has broken her hip and just been released from the hospital, is "gravely ill" and believed to be near the end.
A couple of things to consider. As responsible parents, it seems to me that the Obamas have all they can say grace over just trying to maintain some sense of normalcy during a heated and often hateful political campaign. Children of this age do their best when their normal routines are maintained. What makes no sense to me is the idea that they should return to Hawaii to see their GM after her health has deteriorated considerably, is weak and probably not looking that good. Personally, I would want to protect my children from seeing that, especially if it meant preserving a final memory of their grandmother during the happier days of a family vacation, rather than a deathbed scene.
I do not see anything "weird" in their decision not to take their children out of school in the middle of the week, put them on a 10-hour 4250 mile flight for a 1-day jet-lagged stay and a final farewell, and then turn them right back around again for a second 10 hour 4250 mile trip.
There is a distinct possibility that in the next 10 days, these children's lives are going to be changed forever, should they become the first children. They will be negotiating the glare of the media and in another 2 months, could be making a move from Chicago to DC into the White House. Hopefully, they will not have to be dealing with the death of their grandmother in the middle of all that.
You obviously failed to read the entire link.
to back up her claims. I don't need to research this further. I was a 40+ grown-up when the confirmation hearings were held and I remember them vividly, since it was one of the most blatent miscarriages of justice I have witnessed first-hand in my entire life. I was a bit more naive back then but now, of course, I understand completely how the Bushes operate and how this could have happened under their watch.
|
