The Obama Presidency - 2008 & 2012

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

To paraphrase, he's saying,

I'm nervous when I see people in Muslim garb because the fact is that the Muslims want to kill us all.

Wow, way to broad brush everything...

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Look at it this way...

A serial killer is terrorizing an area and the only thing that the public know about him is that he wears a red hat. You are walking at night and when you tun the corner you see someone with a red hat walking towards you. What do you feel?

It's not bigotry, it's called being freaking human and having a survival instinct. The only people to be blamed for someone feeling nervous about seeing a muslim on a plane are the radicals that caused the problem in the first place.

So Muslims are serial killers?

That's just the point, a very small percentage of Muslims have committed acts of terror in the U.S. and not a single one of them was in Muslim garb.

btw- I tend to recall that you get rather testy when people accuse all Philadelphia fans of being unruly and violent. Can you not see the parallel?

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Wow, way to broad brush everything...

How else do read this:

He said the war with Muslims, America's war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don't think there's any way to get away from these facts.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

So Muslims are serial killers?

That's just the point, a very small percentage of Muslims have committed acts of terror in the U.S. and not a single one of them was in Muslim garb.

btw- I tend to recall that you get rather testy when people accuse all Philadelphia fans of being unruly and violent. Can you not see the parallel?

When did I say that Muslims are serial killers? Can you freaking understand anything? I presented a fucking common sense point of view and you are fucking twisting every word.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

How else do read this:

I don't really give a shit. I just wanted to try to present a logical view to demonstrate that everything is not "racism" as people love to label things. But then you start twisting my words to say that I said "Muslims are serial killers".

[EagleFan]

If I ever come in this thread again please have me commited. I try to present one freaking point without adding any goddamn opinion of my own and people (person) start twisting those words.

I present one logical reference to attempt to explain how someone could be concerned but that does not seem to be able to be comprehended so I give up.

[JPhillips]

Come on.

There is nothing similar about a serial killer in a red hat and people in Muslim garb unless you're implying that the danger level of a Muslim and a serial killer are somehow equivalent.

[JPhillips]

Williams himself should understand his bigotry given he wrote this:

Neither black nor white store owners are in business to display the virtues of admitting people of all colors, creeds, and fashions to their stores. They are in business to make money. I would want to take precautions to prevent robbery; I would look closely at people entering the store. The race of a potential customer would be one factor among many to be considered as I girded myself against thieves.

But in Washington and almost all other major cities, blacks do patronize jewelry stores. A jeweler in Beverly Hills who closed his door to heavily bejeweled Mr. T would be foolishly closing his cash register. Unless I am a racist, race and age cannot be the sole deciding factors in calculating whom I will and will not let into my store. And I certainly would not close my door to, say, all young black men - not even to those who are casually dressed and behaving nervously. I would act cautiously in dealing with them, as I would with an antic, strangely dressed white man.

As a cabdriver I would apply the same considerations. Discrimination can be used judiciously. I would certainly exclude one class of people: those who struck me as dangerous. Nervous-looking people with bulges under their jackets would not be picked up; nor would those who looked obviously drunk or stoned. It all comes down to a subjective judgment of what dangerous people look like. This does not necessarily entail a racial judgment. Cabdrivers who don't pick up young black men as a rule are making a poorly informed decision. Racism is a lazy man's substitute for using good judgment.

[Dutch]

Wow, you remembered something Juan Williams said verbatim? That's impressive, I'll give you that.

[JPhillips]

I figure if you can keep track of everything the AP prints I can at least keep track of Juan Williams.

[Greyroofoo]

Can't we all just get along?

[lungs]

I'm really hoping the Democrats in Milwaukee get the Cigarettes for Votes program going again. We're going to need it this year.

[stevew]

I really don't care about my house race. Kathy Dahlkemper is getting a ton of money it seems. Her one add comparing Mike Kelley's tax plan as "teachers pay more taxes, Ray Lewis gets a tax cut". I'm not big on her attempt at class warfare. That kelly is a bad person cause he is wealthy.

However Sestak better beat Toomey the douche. Seems to be getting tight. Toomey has to be stopped now.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by lungs

I'm really hoping the Democrats in Milwaukee get the Cigarettes for Votes program going again. We're going to need it this year.

Don't forget the Black Panthers All Up In Your Grill program. That was highly effective as well!

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Don't forget the Black Panthers All Up In Your Grill program. That was highly effective as well!

Voter intimidation is so Middle East. I'd hope we've moved beyond that and give cigarettes to homeless people.

In all seriousness, I did offer two of my friends a pack of cigarettes in exchange for a vote for Russ Feingold. Just doing my part.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Don't forget the Black Panthers All Up In Your Grill program. That was highly effective as well!

Don't forget the mindless sheep who believe everything they are told program.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by RainMaker (D)

Don't forget the mindless sheep who believe everything they are told program.

That's not a party-specific program!

[RainMaker]

Illinois has some nasty races for Governor and Senate. First time in awhile that we've had close races in such large races.

I think I'm going to go with Brady for Governor. He's still 100 years behind on a lot of social issues, but I don't think that's going to matter as Governor. Doesn't have a strong record on anything, but he's not a Democrat which is good right now. The Illinois House and Senate are extremely corrupt and tied in with Quinn and we just need someone in there who is going to fuck with them. I really don't like either candidate and have to bite my lip with the bigoted stuff from Brady, but the State can't afford more debt and Quinn just wants to borrow money and give it to everyone who will vote for him.

Kirk and Gianoulias is much tougher. Kirk is a moderate but that's mainly because he just follows whatever the political tide is. He was a Republican for the war, then he shifted to the left when the tide shifted in 2006 and 2008, now he's somehow a fiscal conservative again (which he's never been). He's got good experience which is good and bad. Gianoulias seems like a smart guy, but he's still real young. He's also in the "spend a ton of money" camp which I'm just against right now. I'm pretty split on the two and might not make up my mind till the actual election day.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I figure if you can keep track of everything the AP prints I can at least keep track of Juan Williams.

*snicker*

SI

[Greyroofoo]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Illinois has some nasty races for Governor and Senate. First time in awhile that we've had close races in such large races.

I think I'm going to go with Brady for Governor. He's still 100 years behind on a lot of social issues, but I don't think that's going to matter as Governor. Doesn't have a strong record on anything, but he's not a Democrat which is good right now. The Illinois House and Senate are extremely corrupt and tied in with Quinn and we just need someone in there who is going to fuck with them. I really don't like either candidate and have to bite my lip with the bigoted stuff from Brady, but the State can't afford more debt and Quinn just wants to borrow money and give it to everyone who will vote for him.

Kirk and Gianoulias is much tougher. Kirk is a moderate but that's mainly because he just follows whatever the political tide is. He was a Republican for the war, then he shifted to the left when the tide shifted in 2006 and 2008, now he's somehow a fiscal conservative again (which he's never been). He's got good experience which is good and bad. Gianoulias seems like a smart guy, but he's still real young. He's also in the "spend a ton of money" camp which I'm just against right now. I'm pretty split on the two and might not make up my mind till the actual election day.

I didn't know that Illinois had elections. I thought they just had auctions.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I figure if you can keep track of everything the AP prints I can at least keep track of Juan Williams.

I guess a response was in order here, I've stopped using Yahoo! as my home page and just switched to the blank default Google search engine. I discovered that it was Yahoo! News and it's AP article selection that was a huge source of my angst since I originally assumed it was fair and balance. You should try switching your homepage away from juanwilliams.com and see if it curbs your angst. Good luck.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

But he also said that it's reasonable to be fearful of all Muslims in Muslim garb. That's the very essence of bigotry, whether he wants to admit it or not....

See, and I think it is YOU that is adding the ALL. I think it is reasonable for people to feel uncomfortable while boarding a plane and noting the presence of middle eastern men, whether they are in "garb" or not. Possibly the same for women in the ubiquitous "garb". I haven't felt that way when I have been placed in that position while flying. That said, I don't think it would be an impossibility for me given the right circumstances.

I give JW the benefit of the doubt that he doesn't ALWAYS feel this way about EVERYONE he observed in such dress, also that muslim garb wasn't the only element to his own assessment of his safety while flying. I don't equate the inclusion of racial profiling into this assessment as racism, although giving race too much weight in a flash assessment of an individual is misguided and naive.

I don't think Juan Williams is moving all that far away from his position in that statement you quoted. I just think, from his perspective that he is copping to being a little "lazy", and not a little racist. That was why he couched his comments. He was conscious of the fact that he isn't on the "high ground" here. He was admitting to something that embarrassed him.

[SteveMax58]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I don't think Juan Williams is moving all that far away from his position in that statement you quoted. I just think, from his perspective that he is copping to being a little "lazy", and not a little racist. That was why he couched his comments. He was conscious of the fact that he isn't on the "high ground" here. He was admitting to something that embarrassed him.

I think this is the crux of the issue & what saddens me most about dialog in this country any more. It isn't good enough to acknowledge your honest feeling while stating what you know to be the case(or the more noble reaction). Trying to reconcile those 2 things is the very heart (IMHO) of getting past racism/racial issues as a topic in this country (in a good sense).

But rather than embrace his honesty (both emotional & intellectual) he was fired. Whether he was fired as a matter of convenience due to past actions, or fired for this particular issue on its own merits, I think this type of firing does more to add divisive speech to race relations rather than create the atmosphere to better them.

But as it stands...he'll get his own books, his own show, make a lot more money now, and decide that being controversial feeds his family better than being "honest". Sure "honesty" got him to this point...but it doesn't sell very well on most topics which is what Hannity, O'Reilly, Olberman, Maddow, Coulter, Limbaugh, Moore, and many other people have found out.

[JPhillips]

Where does he say this was something that embarrassed him? Instead of coping to a natural, if undesirable feeling he says that we have to deal with the fact that there is a war between the USA and Muslims.

[Dutch]

...but it doesn't sell very well on most topics which is what Hannity, O'Reilly, Olberman, Maddow, Coulter, Limbaugh, Moore, and many other people have found out.

Or the AP for that matter.

[DaddyTorgo]

Pictures of Muslims Wearing Things

[SteveMax58]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Where does he say this was something that embarrassed him? Instead of coping to a natural, if undesirable feeling he says that we have to deal with the fact that there is a war between the USA and Muslims.

I don't know that he said that, maybe on a different day or show, possibly.

But if you watch the entire segment (not just the trimmed down portion) he is actually lecturing O'Reilly about not making his (i.e. O'Reilly's) blanket statements about muslims without at least qualifying it (or giving scope).

[flounder]

Here's a transcript of the entire segment as well as the segment before.

Spoiler

O'REILLY: Hi. I'm Bill O'Reilly. Thanks for watching us tonight.

The Muslim dilemma -- that is the subject of this evening's talking points memo. So, in case you just got back from Easter Island, I, your humble correspondent, am causing trouble once again.

Today on "The View," the ladies addressed the shootout I had with them last Thursday when I said that building a mosque near Ground Zero is inappropriate because Muslims killed us there. That caused Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar to walk off the set.

Of course, what I said is absolutely true, but is insensitive to some. In a perfect world, you always say Muslim terrorists killed us, but at this point, I thought that was common knowledge. I guess I was wrong.

Anyway, the heated controversy continues and goes far beyond me and "The View" ladies. It has entered the fabric of America.

Barbara Walters said something interesting today. She said that the nation is very angry. Therefore, commentators must watch the rhetoric. OK.

But my question to Ms. Walters is this: Why is America so angry?

There are a number of answers to that question. One of them is that folks are fed up with politically correct nonsense. There is no question there is a Muslim problem in the world and if "The View" ladies will not acknowledge that, that's their problem, because most Americans well understand the danger coming out of the Muslim world.

Ms. Walters went on to say that my statement about the Japanese attacking the USA in World War II is not a valid comparison.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALTERS: I think that what Bill O'Reilly said was totally wrong. I also feel that on his program when he compared it to Germany and Japan, which he did, and said, well, you wouldn't have been built monuments -- countries, they were not religion.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'REILLY: With all due respect to Barbara Walters, who has handled herself with dignity in this controversy, she is misguided.

American forces had to remove the Taliban government in Afghanistan because it supported the al Qaeda killers. The U.S. and many other countries are now desperately trying to prevent Iran from building a nuclear bomb because most everyone understands some crazy jihadists may use that bomb to ignite a holocaust. Right now the countries of Russia, China, the Philippines, many nations in Africa and Thailand are all fighting Muslim insurrections.

The Muslim threat to the world is not isolated. It's huge! It involves nations and millions of people.

Yet, the left in America will not face that fact.

"Talking Points" has given President Obama has given a pass on his soft rhetoric towards the Muslim world, because he needs to get nations like Pakistan to cooperate with us. The president can't afford tough rhetoric like the kind I'm giving you tonight. That is perfectly understandable.

In Germany, however, Chancellor Angela Merkel is getting tough. She told the world that attempts to build multi-cultural society in her country have, quote, "utterly failed." Ms. Merkel has enormous problem with 5 million Muslims who are not assimilating into German society.

In France, the parliament there has outlawed burqas after that country endured rioting in Muslim areas that the police could not control.

Here in the USA, we are lucky. The vast majority of American Muslims are good citizens and deplore the extreme actions in the Muslim world. But they know there is a clash of civilizations in play.

Despite all that, Ms. Goldberg was deeply offended by my statement about 9/11. Here's what she said this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOLDBERG: When you say Muslims are responsible for 9/11, does that mean Muhammad Ali? Because Muhammad Ali is a Muslim. Does that mean Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

To me, you need to be distinct when you say things like this because this is a volatile time. You cannot just throw stuff around like that in my opinion.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'REILLY: Now, that statement is worth addressing. No sane individual thinks Muhammad Ali or Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is responsible for 9/11.

But the reality is that most Americans are uneasy with the Muslim world in general because moderate Muslims have not stepped up in a visible way to help combat the jihadists. Look at all the problems we're having with Pakistan. We've sent that country billions of dollars hoping to motivate them to fight the Taliban and al Qaeda.

If Whoopi Goldberg doesn't think there's a Muslim problem, she ought to ask President Obama about it.

The cold truth is that in the world today, jihad, aided and abetted by some Muslim nations, is the biggest threat on the planet. If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, Israel and other countries are in grave danger.

So, I have had enough of the political correct nonsense and I condemn the far-left fanatics who label people with whom they disagree "bigots." That's what Joy Behar did again today, which is simply stunning because as Laura Ingraham pointed out last Friday, Ms. Behar's anti- Christian analysis has been off the charts.

And then there is Rosie O'Donnell who used to host "The View." Here's what she said.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

ROSIE O'DONNELL, ACTRESS: Bill O'Reilly, you know, what does he do besides incite kind of hatred? What does he do besides that?

JANETTE BARBER, EXECUTIVE PRODUCER: To stand there and say Muslims killed us, I hope you didn't take that wrong. I didn't mean anything bad about them. It's like I hate it when they lie within the same sentence, at least take a break before you lie.

O'DONNELL: But it's like that's what Bill O'Reilly does. Why would you book him?

(END AUDIO CLIP)

O'REILLY: Now, Ms. O'Donnell's analysis reminded me of this --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

O'DONNELL: Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America where we have a separation of church and state. We're a democracy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'REILLY: Interesting. Nobody walked off the set of "The View" when Rosie O'Donnell said that. Did they?

As "Talking Points" stated on Friday, there is a reason behind the madness. Many in the Muslim world despise the United States because we are Israel's biggest supporter. Any of the liberal precincts believe our support for Israel is wrong and that we have ignited Muslim anger. It is our fault that some Muslims hate us.

I don't think the ladies on "The View" see it that way. But certainly, the far-left has held that opinion for quite some time.

Finally, wherever I went this weekend, people were high-fiving me. It was amazing. People yelling out windows, "O'Reilly, keep going," that kind of stuff.

Are all these people bigots? Do they all hate Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

That's just nuts. This has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics. Americans are simply fed up with politicians and media people denying the obvious. There is a dangerous problem in the Muslim world and once again, I call for all peace-loving Muslims to join the United States and other conscientious nations to fight the jihadists to defeat radical Islam. And that's the memo.

In a moment, Juan and Mary Katharine will tell me where I'm going wrong on all of this.

And later, how is the O'Reilly view Muslim controversy playing on talk radio? Right back with those reports.

O'REILLY: Continuing now with our lead story, danger from the Muslim world.

Joining us from Washington FOX analysts Mary Katharine Ham and Juan Williams.

So, Juan, I got to tell everybody, own up to this, that talking points memo was really written by Alan Colmes.

So, where am I going wrong there, Juan.

JUAN WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, actually, I hate to say this to you because I don't want to get your ego going. But I think you're right. I think, look, political correctness can lead to some kind of paralysis where you don't address reality.

I mean, look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.

Now, I remember also that when the Times Square bomber was at court, I think this was just last week. He said the war with Muslims, America's war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don't think there's any way to get away from these facts.

But I think there are people who want to somehow remind us all as President Bush did after 9/11, it's not a war against Islam. President Bush went to a mosque --

O'REILLY: Well, there isn't any theology involved in this at all from my perspective, Juan. But you live in the liberal precincts. You actually work for NPR, OK?

WILLIAMS: Yes.

O'REILLY: And it's not about -- it's about politics as I said. But -- my analysis is that this Israel thing and that liberals feel that United states is somehow guilty in the world, of exploitation and backing the wrong side, and it makes it easier for them to come up with this kind of crazy stuff that, well, you can't really say the Muslims attacked us on 9/11.

WILLIAMS: No, but what Barbara Walters said to you --

O'REILLY: Were they Norwegians? I mean, come on.

WILLIAMS: Wait a second though, wait, hold on, because if you said Timothy McVeigh, the Atlanta bomber, these people who are protesting against homosexuality at military funerals, very obnoxious, you don't say first and foremost, we got a problem with Christians. That's crazy.

O'REILLY: But it's not at that level. It doesn't rise near to that level.

WILLIAMS: Correct. That's -- and when you said in the talking points memo a moment ago that there are good Muslims, I think that's a point, you know?

O'REILLY: But everybody knows that, Juan. I mean, what are, in 3rd grade here or what?

WILLIAMS: No, you don't -- but you got to be -- this is what Barbara Walters was saying --

O'REILLY: I got to be careful, you just said it. I got to be careful. I have got to qualify everything 50 times. You know what, Juan? I'm not doing it anymore. I'm not doing that anymore.

WILLIAMS: OK. So, be yourself. Take responsibility.

O'REILLY: But I'm not going to say, oh, it's only a few. It's only a tiny bit. It's not, Juan. It's whole nations, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, whole nations.

Go ahead, Mary Katharine. You want to get in here. Go.

MARY KATHARINE HAM, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: First of all -- first of all, the left only thinks that you should be careful with rhetoric in dangerous times when it's a right winger using the rhetoric. When they're doing it themselves, when it deals with other issues, they don't care. So there's a double standard there.

Second of all, there's a distinction worth making between moderate and extremism Islam as you have made that point in the talking points, because frankly, as a conservative, if anybody who believes in the mission in Iraq where you are building up a society of moderate Muslims to push back on extremists, you have to believe in that distinction. So, I think that's important to make.

But, this whole getting up and running off set because you don't use the distinction in every single sentence you say, I think, was ridiculous and immature and they stopped the conversation, not you. It was them freaking out about a conservative position and leaving the stage to stop the conversation.

O'REILLY: All right. But, look, here's the deal. Angela Merkel, all right, in the politically correct nation of Germany -- Germany has gone from being a militaristic society to a politically correct society in a generation. OK?

Angela Merkel comes out today and says, "You know what? This is out of control in our country. We can't control it anymore."

So, if it's only a few, and a couple and just in the mountains of Pakistan, that's all, why is Angela Merkel having such a hard time? Why are the French banning burqas? You know why --

(CROSSTALK)

O'REILLY: Come on.

WILLIAMS: Because -- they have a problem because people have stopped emphasizing and she went on to say, this integration assimilation.

O'REILLY: Why, Juan? Why?

WILLIAMS: -- to live side by side. That was wrong-headed and because she sees it as a threat. I think that she pointed out that two of every three or so children under the age of 5 in Germany is Muslim.

O'REILLY: Juan, who is posing a problem in Germany? Is it the Muslims who have come there or the Germans?

WILLIAMS: Absolutely.

O'REILLY: Who's causing the problem?

WILLIAMS: I think -- I think -- no, no, wait. See, you did it again. It's extremists. It's people who refuse to --

O'REILLY: It's not extremists.

WILLIAMS: It's a German society. They are the ones causing that problem.

(CROSSTALK)

O'REILLY: But, Juan, Merkel -- according to Merkel, it's not extremists. It's most of the 5 million Muslims who have come there aren't assimilating. That's the problem.

HAM: And also what happens, Bill -- Bill, also what happens is that when moderate Muslims want to assimilate or want to stand up, they run the risk of being blown up by their co-religionist who are extreme. So, that is -- that's a threat that moderate Christians and Jews don't think.

O'REILLY: But that doesn't happen in America where most Muslim- Americans have assimilated.

HAM: Because our society demands that people assimilate. That's what we demand and that's why it works here.

WILLIAMS: But, Bill, here's a caution point. The other day in New York, some guy cuts a Muslim cabby's neck and says he's attacking him or you think about the protest at the mosque near Ground Zero --

HAM: That guy works at a liberal --

O'REILLY: Yes, he was a crackpot.

(CROSSTALK)

O'REILLY: Look, Americans are smart enough to know, Juan.

HAM: But I don't think -- the point is the rhetoric was not pushing him to do that.

WILLIAMS: I don't know what is in that guy's head. But I'm saying, we don't want in America, people to have their rights violated to be attacked on the street because they heard a rhetoric from Bill O'Reilly and they act crazy. We've got to say to people as Bill was saying tonight, that guy is a nut.

O'REILLY: He is a nut. And I said that about the guy in Florida -- who wanted to burn the Koran. I came town on him like crazy.

WILLIAMS: Correct. There you go.

O'REILLY: But I'll tell you what -- if there was going to be a backlash against Muslims, it would happened after 9/11. It didn't happen in this country.

WILLIAMS: It didn't happen in this country.

O'REILLY: It did not happen here. So, we are smart enough to understand who the good Muslims are and who the bad Muslims are. But to diminish the whole thing as the left wants to do, very dangerous. I have got to go, guys, as always.

WILLIAMS: That would be hypocrisy.

O'REILLY: All right. Thank you very much.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Where does he say this was something that embarrassed him? Instead of coping to a natural, if undesirable feeling he says that we have to deal with the fact that there is a war between the USA and Muslims.

He starts off by saying "I'm not a racist" or words to that effect. He is on the record with books on the subject of civil rights. To think that he isn't embarrassed by his admission to straying into racial profiling(my words), seems to reflect an effort to define his position on a complex issue using only his words from a two minute sound-byte.

Also, the war between the USA and Muslims was JW quoting the Times Square Bomber, conceding a point to B.O. while going on to disagree with O'Reilly's argument.

[RainMaker]

I still don't see what Juan Williams said that is so bad. Everytime I've heard him make an argument, whether I agree or not, it's well thought out and offers perspective. I thought what he was saying made sense. He was saying that despite his record on civil rights and his disgust toward racism/bigotry, even he feels uncomfortable in settings. That we have gotten so PC that we can't even discuss that.

I don't think he was fired for what he said as much as it was an excuse for NPR to fire someone who appears on hate speech shows. The sad thing is that Williams is so much better than the hacks on that network. Having him appear with a dope like Mary Katharine Ham is embarrasing to the guy.

He'd make a great host of a show but not sure there is a venue for him. Fox doesn't have the audience intelligent enough to understand him and the other networks aren't going to both with him either.

[WSR]

Nice attempt at bipartisanship there Mr. President:

We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."

Obama assails GOP on clouded final campaign push - Yahoo! News

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by WSR

Nice attempt at bipartisanship there Mr. President:



Obama assails GOP on clouded final campaign push - Yahoo! News

Why should he be bipartisan when the Republicans have not only repeatedly demonstrated that they won't be bipartisan, but have also come out and explicitly ruled out being bipartisan??

[WSR]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Why should he be bipartisan when the Republicans have not only repeatedly demonstrated that they won't be bipartisan, but have also come out and explicitly ruled out being bipartisan??

As I see it, they are not willing to work in a bipartisan manner on his Socialist initiatives and spending our great grandchildren into debt. I know how this sounds, but I am one of the Independents that have been disillusioned by his rhetoric and empty promises.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by WSR

As I see it, they are not willing to work in a bipartisan manner on his Socialist initiatives and spending our great grandchildren into debt. I know how this sounds, but I am one of the Independents that have been disillusioned by his rhetoric and empty promises.

Learn what Socialism is before using the word.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by WSR

As I see it, they are not willing to work in a bipartisan manner on his Socialist initiatives and spending our great grandchildren into debt. I know how this sounds, but I am one of the Independents that have been disillusioned by his rhetoric and empty promises.

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Learn what Socialism is before using the word.

Seriously. The rhetoric you're using there marks you as one of those "independents" who isn't really independent at all.

Did you know for instance that the federal budget actually shrank by 9% this year?? (I believe this fact is correct, I only heard a snippet of it while I was working out, so don't jump down my throat if I got some piece of it wrong).

Sure we're still running massive deficits, but that's hardly the fault of Obama exclusively. The last president to present a balanced budget was a democrat, before Bush blew it out of the water with his massive deficit spending on foreign wars and tax cuts for large corporations and the top percentiles of earners.

[Greyroofoo]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Did you know for instance that the federal budget actually shrank by 9% this year?? (I believe this fact is correct, I only heard a snippet of it while I was working out, so don't jump down my throat if I got some piece of it wrong).

I would love to know what numbers you're using.

[flounder]

I think he's referring to the fact that the 2009 budget deficit was $1.4 trillion which was $162 billion below White House projections. However, that $1.4 trillion was $962 billion above 2008's deficit. Source here.

Edit: Whoops. I didn't realize there were 2010 numbers out. He's right. The budget deficit did decrease to $1.3 trillion in fiscal year 2010 according to this article.

[Greyroofoo]

Yeah that sounds about right, I thought he was referring to the total federal government expenditure, which has increased.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by WSR

Nice attempt at bipartisanship there Mr. President:

"The most you can expect is two years of good old-fashioned gridlock," Rob Bishop (R-Utah)

"The last Republican Congress didn't suffer from too little compromise, it suffered from too much." Mike Pence (R-Indiana)

"I don't care who, what, when or where, I'm not compromising." Ken Buck (R-Colorado)

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky)

And that's just this week.

[Neon_Chaos]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Learn what Socialism is before using the word.

+1

[lungs]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Learn what Socialism is before using the word.

The correct world he should've used was Islamomarxism.

[Passacaglia]

Islamo Marx? I must have missed the movies with him in it. Did he replace Chico?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by flounder

I think he's referring to the fact that the 2009 budget deficit was $1.4 trillion which was $162 billion below White House projections. However, that $1.4 trillion was $962 billion above 2008's deficit. Source here.

Edit: Whoops. I didn't realize there were 2010 numbers out. He's right. The budget deficit did decrease to $1.3 trillion in fiscal year 2010 according to this article.

Thanks for finding the source flounder. It was just a soundbyte I heard while getting dressed in the locker room at the gym or something.

[cartman]

Whoops. This is kinda of a big screw-up in the message. In the CA governor's race, Meg Whitman ran an ad declaring "30 years ago, anything was possible in this state". Sounds good, right? One problem with that. The governor 30 years ago was her current opponent, Jerry Brown.

Ad reminds Whitman who was governor 30 years ago – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by cartman

Whoops. This is kinda of a big screw-up in the message. In the CA governor's race, Meg Whitman ran an ad declaring "30 years ago, anything was possible in this state". Sounds good, right? One problem with that. The governor 30 years ago was her current opponent, Jerry Brown.

Ad reminds Whitman who was governor 30 years ago – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Whitman's an idiot.

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Islamo Marx? I must have missed the movies with him in it. Did he replace Chico?

Yes, and he played a mean trombone.

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Whitman's an idiot.

Just be glad you don't have to listen or watch all of her dumb ass ads. She trys to equate what she did at ebay to running the state of California.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JediKooter

Just be glad you don't have to listen or watch all of her dumb ass ads. She trys to equate what she did at ebay to running the state of California.

Oh I'm glad

[molson]

I'm disappointed that it's looking more and more like prop 19 won't pass in California. So we won't have the Obama administration stepping up federal criminal enforcement of state-legal California marijuana. The public response to which would have been very interesting.