Maddow is an Idoit

Originally posted by genius/idoit
I just caught part of her show where she blasts the repubs for their choice of rebuttal speaker (McDonnel, virginia) for his lack of experience.
Her words "his 12 day incumbancy".
My question.Doesn't that entitle him to a piece prize?

a piece prize ? sic

no.

The point Maddow was making is the natl GOP leadership wants to act like the 8 years of George Bush didn't happen. All the Fox News talking heads called Obama "arrogant". And Rove called him "weak" for mentioning what a horrible mess Bush left in his wake. Even though Reagan blamed his recession on Carter, and Bush 43 upon taking office tried to say Clinton ran up the debt They want people to forget the massive deficits caused by Bush's policies. Reagan and Bush 43 were two of the most fiscally irresponsible presidents in modern history.

The rebuttal was weak. Many of its points were irrelevant after the SOTU. You can tell it was canned and written far in advance, it didn't play like an honest "response" to Obama's speech, but merely canned Frank Luntz talking points.

[edit on 29-1-2010 by Schaden]

reply to post by harrytuttle


If I were you I wouldn't be the first to cast a stone!

"Tuttle" - a Wiktionary definition. en.wiktionary.org — 1. (slang), (pejorative): To needlessly threaten the wrong person/party; to invoke expertise where none exists; to showcase incompetence through groundless inclusion of "higher authorities"; to incidentally expose oneself as pompous or self-righteous.

link


You should put that in your signature


[edit on 29-1-2010 by genius/idoit]

[edit on 29-1-2010 by genius/idoit]

reply to post by Schaden


A stronger speaker wouldn't have to blame everything on prior administration which is what Obama keeps doing.

GET THE FLIP OVER IT! What happened happened, its not going to change, and its over a year now past the administration now!

The people are more interested in what YOU are going to DO NOW, not what someone else did then.

Originally posted by SlasherOfVeils
reply to post by Schaden

 

A stronger speaker wouldn't have to blame everything on prior administration which is what Obama keeps doing.

Useless platitudes.

As the neo-con hero Reagan said, We don't know where we are or where we're going if we don't know where we've been.

Sorry if the facts are politically inconvenient for you now. The Bush White House and GOP Congress drove up the deficit at an alarming rate, let billionaires and corporations get all the tax loops, paid for the elected wars "off the books", they are the epitome of hypocritical conservatives. I put the majority of the blame for the state of the economy on them.

Originally posted by SlasherOfVeilsGET THE FLIP OVER IT! What happened happened, its not going to change, and its over a year now past the administration now!

The people are more interested in what YOU are going to DO NOW, not what someone else did then.

The National Republican party trying to now ignore the past, and lay the blame for the high unemployment rate and budget deficit on Obama, is a bad joke. A lot of ignorant masses think it's all Obama's fault we haven't recovered from the recession, because reality contradicts with their neo-con ideology. Macroeconomics isn't as exciting as NFL football. He should be calling Bu$h and the corporate establishment out. It can't be said enough times how badly they screwed up, the worst shape the country's seen in several decades.

reply to post by Schaden


I think you missed my point. Yes history is important and maybe he should look at some quotes from our nation's founders when he starts putting his big government beliefs to practice.

"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." - Thomas Jefferson

You know, all you have to learn from bush policy is to not repeat the mistake. This guy can't even do a single speech without blaming bush. I am sick and tired of hearing about bush. Bush this, bush that, ENOUGH! What are you gonna do about it? Explain it to us! Why and how will that work and give me a reason to support you Mr. Obama! That is all I want!

I am an independant moderate but he has so far given me any reasoning to support his action beyond "I am not Bush"

Sorry, but that just does not cut it for me.

And I apologise on double posting here, but while the Democrats are so quick to blame bush for prior issues, they also neglect to point out that the majority power in congress was controlled by Democrats, not by Republicans. Sure he has executive order but that only gets you so far. Policy decision isn't exempt from congress, and how did those majority democrat votes decide on all this "toxic policy to blame"?

We have separation of power for a reason, Bush was able to work with the other entities of power, but Obama can't even pass his prime issue (healthcare), with a same party majority in congress?

That is just another reason why he is weak.



[edit on 29-1-2010 by SlasherOfVeils]

So, Maddow is an idiot, but Glen Beck should be forced upon everyone?

I dont want to live in the word you envision, my friend.

You do realize that Maddow and beck are simply opposite ends of the exact same spectrum, right?

She is the best. I know MSNBC is biased but what they say I already agree with so it's just saying to me what I think to myself. She is IN MY OPINION very good for leftist opinions. But she is still not as good as Olbermann or Ed, they are the best.

Yes I am a leftist, I am a Democratic Socialist. But contradictory to common beliefs I am a Civil Libertarian.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
So, Maddow is an idiot, but Glen Beck should be forced upon everyone?

If this was targetted at me I never agreed that Beck should be forced upon anyone, I only added my own opinion of his program to the thread.

Noone should be forced upon anyone, its a violation of civil freedom.

That goes for the government also!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/925f6db55941.jpg[/atsimg]
Just say'n

I bet Rachel Maddow could beat me up!

That scares me.

I like women - even some of THOSE women ( wink wink ) - but she seems angry and gay.

Gay,angry and mean!

Gay, angry, mean and looking to whoop some male ass.

I consider myself a failry smart individual - so I say this.

I may listen to her from time to time on the radio ( TV now I guess ) but I will not, REPEAT not get my assed whooped by her - unless she loses some of that anger

Dorian Soran

Originally posted by SlasherOfVeils

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
So, Maddow is an idiot, but Glen Beck should be forced upon everyone?

If this was targetted at me I never agreed that Beck should be forced upon anyone, I only added my own opinion of his program to the thread.

Noone should be forced upon anyone, its a violation of civil freedom.

That goes for the government also!

it wsnt directed at you at all. it was directed at the OP, who made a thread claiming Beck should be required viewing, and then followed it up with this thread.

The OP is either pushing an agenda, or has some interest in Glen Beck beyond his opinions.

For the record, i have no issue with you.

reply to post by fieryjaguarpaw

Okay, that's hilarious!!!!! I bet she would get a laugh too.

As far as Maddow goes, any friend of Jonathan Turley is a friend of mine.

I think she's great. I love how she uses logic to generally eviscerate idoits from both sides, but mostly the right..

Plus, Rachel, if your are reading this - you need to get some new lady suits Hon!

Originally posted by Dorian Soran

Gay, angry, mean and looking to whoop some male ass.

Hey, you don't have to be Gay to want to get in on that action. Don't be a Hater.

[edit on 29/1/2010 by kosmicjack]

reply to post by kosmicjack


You got it right, I love her also, don't miss her show at 9:00 PM Eastern, funny how some don't like to be called out and hear the truth, sure they would like her to go away, Ed, Keith and Rachel, doesn't get any better.

reply to post by Aquarius1


Ed!? No.

Keith, meh, when he isn't being an arrogant something or another and preaching 'til I puke.

I am liking Dylan Ratigan though. And Rachel

I have to agree with you on Ed, I prefer him on the radio, rarely miss Keith or Rachel, on occasion listen to Chris, he is OK but talks too fast for my taste...lol

None of you lefties find it a bit ironic that she was ridiculing McDonnell for only being in office twelve days and giving the repub. rebut.But your Messiah was nominated for the PEACE prize for the same amount of days in office?

Come on!

reply to post by genius/idoit



You don't get it. There is no contradiction.

She was ripping on the GOP for using a 12 day governor to deliver the rebuttal (usually it's a respected elder of the party, not a newcomer) and he only referenced the new senator from Massachusetts. The leadership are lying low and trying to dump the Bush years down the memory hole. Maddow wasn't saying anything personally bad about the VA gov. The GOP is dangerously inept at running this country.

Originally posted by kosmicjack
As far as Maddow goes, any friend of Jonathan Turley is a friend of mine.

My husband calls Turley my "boyfriend" I love him!

I like Rachel. She's sensible, unemotional (unlike Keith and Glenn) and she's SMART. She's respectful and kind to her conservative guests and she will also take on Obama when he screws up.

I'd LOVE to have dinner with Rachel.

As far as the "response" to the SOTU, they could have done much worse. They could have gotten Jindal again.

Originally posted by genius/idoit
But your Messiah

After the way you moon over Glenn Beck and worship at his altar (wanting to force everyone else to do it, too), you hardly have any room to use the term "messiah" when referring to Obama. Your hypocrisy in this area knows no bounds.