Rand Paul:
Call me cynical, but I didn’t think his [Obama's] views on marriage could get any gayer.
We won't call Rand cynical. Ignorant, bigoted asshole is more fitting. An adult using ...
Happy Friday.
The best from Political Humor‘s collection of the week’s late night political humor.
"President Obama came out with approval of same-sex marriage. He said that over the years, he has ...
I've never understood Log Cabin Republicans - gay conservatives who give their support to a homophobic political party that derides their sexuality and refuses to grant them equal rights under ...
Finally.
“I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own ...
Election roundup:
Indiana.
As polls forecast, the Tea Party's efforts to cleanse the GOP of any impure conservatives has Dick Lugar out and teabagger Richard Mourdock in. Mourdock is the new Republican ...
There are lies...and then there are lies.
My own view, by the way, was that the auto companies needed to go through bankruptcy before government help. And frankly, that’s finally what ...
From the papers captured last year at Osama bin Laden's Pakistani hideout comes this.
Like any public figures, bin Laden and his advisers were mindful of the media. Adam Gadahn, one ...
The best from Political Humor‘s collection of the week’s late night political humor. Happy Friday.
"Today Mitt Romney visited a firehouse here in New York City. Of course, he was disappointed ...
It happened to Kerry. Can it happen to Obama? Nope says Margaret Carlson.
Obama’s belief system -- in that hopey-changey business and the post-partisanship thing -- has been altered by reality. ...
Sullivan:
What do Republicans call a gay man with neoconservative passion, a committed relationship and personal courage?
A faggot.
Exactly right, but then could one expect anything different from a political party that ...
And they claim that atheists are immoral?
The ugly side of religion shows its face once again. The words below were spoken at a Sunday sermon by Sean Harris, a pastor ...
It's been fun watching conservatives and Romney twist themselves into pretzels trying to undo Mitt's past words on GM and bin Laden.
Romney, April 2007:
It’s not worth moving heaven and earth ...
In an op-ed piece in the Washington Post, a couple of scholars from liberal and conservative think tanks, discuss the state of American politics.
We have been studying Washington politics and ...
Romney's VP-in-waiting, Marco Rubio, is perfecting the conservative sleaze play.
He has proposed his version of the Dream Act in which people who entered the country illegally as children will be ...
Beyond the rhetoric, the political BS, the lies - that is, the concerted effort by the right-wing noise machine to distort and misinform at every opportunity - is the very ...
It was never a matter of 'if'...only of 'when'.
Two constituencies that President Obama is holding onto about as strongly now as he did four years ago are voters under 30 ...
I'm not sure what one does with information of this sort but I thought it important you know. From Alex Pareene's new ebook, The Rude Guide To Mitt.
Every good Romney ...
Guess whose illustration made the May cover of a national magazine? Mine!
I'm quite sure there isn't much Stephen Moore/Newsmax and I share in common as far as politics goes but ...
Jesus (c. 30 CE):
Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's.
Bishop Daniel R. Jenky of the Catholic diocese of Peoria, Illinois (2012 ...
And that is what is wrong with American Politics today.
I saw a woman that was evasive. I saw a deer caught in the headlights that was out witted, out matched, and just simply wrong. I saw a liar, lacking the conviction to stand behind the garbage she pukes out on a daily basis. She had the courage to spew all sorts of hateful, stupid lies and garbage about O’Reilly from the anonymity of a magazine article. But lacked courage and conviction when faced with the truth.
O’Reilly is reviled in a heinous manner by all these intellectual garbage dumps on a daily basis. All you elite left wing blowhards say anything you please without the least bit of truth or substantiation. More often than not, your garbage goes unchallenged and you simply get pats on the back from the starry eyed zombies that hinge on your words.
Good for O’Reilly when he faces them down for the cowards and intellectual, moral waste lands that they are.
liberalsRs….d my man – You really need to go lay down now. Perhaps a comedy show after O’Reilly. Then Get some Bricks; Build a Bridge; and get OVER it!
@dahl & lawrence……..look back at almost any post on here dealing with Beck, Limbaugh or O’Reilly. To hear you guys tell it, they are the Anti Christ and the embodiment of all evil. For some of us, it’s not “worship” of anyone or anything. On the other hand, you loons get hysterical every time one of them passes gas.
The left loons demonize them so, all you can see is the exact opposite in that if someone DOESN’T vilify them as you do, then they must be worshiping them, idolizing them, whatever your loony superlative of the day might be.
How about if I just don’t see them as the center of all evil as you loonies do? Just that simple.
I’m sorry, LiberalsRs, but I’m confused by your basic premise. “She had the courage to spew all sorts of hateful, stupid lies and garbage about O’Reilly from the anonymity of a magazine article.” If Joan Walsh did all that anonymously, how did you know it was Joan Walsh? If you’re referring to her posts on Salon.com, they are attributed to “Joan Walsh.” She not only signs those columns, she accepted O’Reilly’s invitation to appear on HIS show. Certainly she wasn’t hiding behind any pseudonym. If you’re unclear about the meaning of the word “anonymous,” I’m afraid to find out how you would answer if I asked how many different “sorts of hateful stupid lies and garbage” she put forth. Or what you know about this “anonymous” woman’s morals that make you feel so comfortable impugning her personally here.
Instead, I’ll just pay close attention to the clip Mario posted, which Joan Walsh says in her new, dated and signed salon.com post is accurate. (She even gives the O’Reilly producers credit for not editing it unfairly.) You seem too confused, partisan and angry to contribute to any serious discussion.
I like listening to Bill Kristol, because even though I disagree with him about just about everything, I can learn from the reasonable way he presents his POV. Same with Tucker Carlson and even Pat Buchanan (when a show gives him more than a minute or two to make his point). But there just seems to be something about FOX that seems to encourage viewers, hosts and bloggers to be apoplectic and almost allergic to anything other than personal attacks and rage.
You’re correct. I used the wrong word. I should have said “safety” or “relative safety” of the combination of a magazine article and a distance from the object of her constant and erroneous harangues.
The accuracy of her statements is obviously debatable.
“Or what you know about this “anonymous” woman’s morals…”
(Let’s not get carried away with one mistaken use of a word.) This lady said she thought Tiller was a hero. She refused to acknowledge fully viable babies should have any rights. To me, that would bring her “morality” into question.
“You seem too confused, partisan and angry to contribute to any serious discussion.”
Not really. But I do get a little impassioned at times being the only source of reason on this blog. It’s a difficult task I have taken upon myself but someone has to do it! :-)
With that said. I commend Ms. (Mrs.) (?) Walsh for having the cajones to appear on O’Reilly’s program. She should exhibit the same level of courage and acumen in her articles.
And that is what is wrong with American Politics today.
I saw a woman that was evasive. I saw a deer caught in the headlights that was out witted, out matched, and just simply wrong. I saw a liar, lacking the conviction to stand behind the garbage she pukes out on a daily basis. She had the courage to spew all sorts of hateful, stupid lies and garbage about O’Reilly from the anonymity of a magazine article. But lacked courage and conviction when faced with the truth.
O’Reilly is reviled in a heinous manner by all these intellectual garbage dumps on a daily basis. All you elite left wing blowhards say anything you please without the least bit of truth or substantiation. More often than not, your garbage goes unchallenged and you simply get pats on the back from the starry eyed zombies that hinge on your words.
Good for O’Reilly when he faces them down for the cowards and intellectual, moral waste lands that they are.
btw…O’Reilly’s best “d–khead” mode was when he rightly lambasted that idiot, despicable liar, Barney Frank.
Although he didn’t do a bad job on either this loony or Krugman!
liberalsRs….d my man – You really need to go lay down now. Perhaps a comedy show after O’Reilly. Then Get some Bricks; Build a Bridge; and get OVER it!
Hey. I’m not the one that has a hemorrhage every time O’Reilly or Beck sneezes.
So glad to hear that. Perhaps you could work on not becoming apoplectic whenever O’Rielly or Beck’s opinions are challenged.
To the O’Reilly worshipper with the cockeyed view of the world,
“The quiet voice of reason will always triumph over angry, fact-suppressing, rambling rants.”
@dahl & lawrence……..look back at almost any post on here dealing with Beck, Limbaugh or O’Reilly. To hear you guys tell it, they are the Anti Christ and the embodiment of all evil. For some of us, it’s not “worship” of anyone or anything. On the other hand, you loons get hysterical every time one of them passes gas.
The left loons demonize them so, all you can see is the exact opposite in that if someone DOESN’T vilify them as you do, then they must be worshiping them, idolizing them, whatever your loony superlative of the day might be.
How about if I just don’t see them as the center of all evil as you loonies do? Just that simple.
I’m sorry, LiberalsRs, but I’m confused by your basic premise. “She had the courage to spew all sorts of hateful, stupid lies and garbage about O’Reilly from the anonymity of a magazine article.” If Joan Walsh did all that anonymously, how did you know it was Joan Walsh? If you’re referring to her posts on Salon.com, they are attributed to “Joan Walsh.” She not only signs those columns, she accepted O’Reilly’s invitation to appear on HIS show. Certainly she wasn’t hiding behind any pseudonym. If you’re unclear about the meaning of the word “anonymous,” I’m afraid to find out how you would answer if I asked how many different “sorts of hateful stupid lies and garbage” she put forth. Or what you know about this “anonymous” woman’s morals that make you feel so comfortable impugning her personally here.
Instead, I’ll just pay close attention to the clip Mario posted, which Joan Walsh says in her new, dated and signed salon.com post is accurate. (She even gives the O’Reilly producers credit for not editing it unfairly.) You seem too confused, partisan and angry to contribute to any serious discussion.
I like listening to Bill Kristol, because even though I disagree with him about just about everything, I can learn from the reasonable way he presents his POV. Same with Tucker Carlson and even Pat Buchanan (when a show gives him more than a minute or two to make his point). But there just seems to be something about FOX that seems to encourage viewers, hosts and bloggers to be apoplectic and almost allergic to anything other than personal attacks and rage.
You’re correct. I used the wrong word. I should have said “safety” or “relative safety” of the combination of a magazine article and a distance from the object of her constant and erroneous harangues.
The accuracy of her statements is obviously debatable.
“Or what you know about this “anonymous” woman’s morals…”
(Let’s not get carried away with one mistaken use of a word.) This lady said she thought Tiller was a hero. She refused to acknowledge fully viable babies should have any rights. To me, that would bring her “morality” into question.
“You seem too confused, partisan and angry to contribute to any serious discussion.”
Not really. But I do get a little impassioned at times being the only source of reason on this blog. It’s a difficult task I have taken upon myself but someone has to do it! :-)
With that said. I commend Ms. (Mrs.) (?) Walsh for having the cajones to appear on O’Reilly’s program. She should exhibit the same level of courage and acumen in her articles.
And I commend you on a well written comment.