Technically true, but as a corporate entity (or series of entities) its primary motivation/bottom line is to make money. Which explains so many things.

 

If Obama was a Republican, and was as popular as he is now, he would be getting nonsense headlines like "Obama likes cheeseburgers" or "Obama's wife wears a short skirt."

Ok dude, now you're talking out your ass. Let 'er rip.

 

 

 

Ok dude, now you're talking out your ass. Let 'er rip.

 

I recall seeing Bush clearing brush on many occasions.

 

Really though, its hard to argue that the media hasn't been fawning over Obama. He's a popular, charismatic guy. If you see his poll numbers drop sufficiently, I think you'll see these fluffer stories go away.

Edited June 4, 200916 yr by StrangeSox

Ok dude, now you're talking out your ass. Let 'er rip.

Irony ftw

 

Irony ftw

 

A very rough* summary of the English-language Arab editorials I've read today about Obama's speech:

-Overall, very positive reception. They like what they hear and they want to believe him.

-Still, much cynicism and doubt. They say "we've heard it all before" or "they're just words, nice to hear, but need action"

-They liked that he cited Koranic verses and understood their religion

-They liked that he was up-front about America's relationship with Israel (i.e., it's not going to change) and liked how he addressed the Palestinians' cause as legitimate, even though he denounced violence (he actually used the words "resistance" and "occupation" IIRC). They still want to see progress even though Netanyahu makes it difficult.

 

*a bunch of stuff I've read lumped together, not in any way intended to look like a cohesive, unified view.

A very rough* summary of the English-language Arab editorials I've read today about Obama's speech:

-Overall, very positive reception. They like what they hear and they want to believe him.

-Still, much cynicism and doubt. They say "we've heard it all before" or "they're just words, nice to hear, but need action"

-They liked that he cited Koranic verses and understood their religion

-They liked that he was up-front about America's relationship with Israel (i.e., it's not going to change) and liked how he addressed the Palestinians' cause as legitimate, even though he denounced violence (he actually used the words "resistance" and "occupation" IIRC). They still want to see progress even though Netanyahu makes it difficult.

 

*a bunch of stuff I've read lumped together, not in any way intended to look like a cohesive, unified view.

It's really cool how he can actually use Koranic verses in an overseas policy speech, but yet, if anyone does that over here with regards to the Bible, they are outrightly dismissed as a "right wing lunatic" (read: liberal version of "evangelical") ... and it's funny how he can paraphrase the Bible in speeches over here, but he better not quote it, because some people might get offended.

 

As a note: I don't care that he used Koranic verses, just pointing out the hypocritical elements of our friendly liberals in this country.

It's really cool how he can actually use Koranic verses in an overseas policy speech, but yet, if anyone does that over here with regards to the Bible, they are outrightly dismissed as a "right wing lunatic" (read: liberal version of "evangelical") ... and it's funny how he can paraphrase the Bible in speeches over here, but he better not quote it, because some people might get offended.

 

As a note: I don't care that he used Koranic verses, just pointing out the hypocritical elements of our friendly liberals in this country.

He ended the speech with quotes from the Koran, Torah, and the Bible FWIW.

He ended the speech with quotes from the Koran, Torah, and the Bible FWIW.

That's ok, I guess.

 

But, it's pathetic how PC our country has gotten. Could he just end a policy speech over here with a Bible verse? No. It might offend someone.

 

 

It's really cool how he can actually use Koranic verses in an overseas policy speech, but yet, if anyone does that over here with regards to the Bible, they are outrightly dismissed as a "right wing lunatic" (read: liberal version of "evangelical") ... and it's funny how he can paraphrase the Bible in speeches over here, but he better not quote it, because some people might get offended.

 

As a note: I don't care that he used Koranic verses, just pointing out the hypocritical elements of our friendly liberals in this country.

We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.

That's ok, I guess.

 

But, it's pathetic how PC our country has gotten. Could he just end a policy speech over here with a Bible verse? No. It might offend someone.

 

Well, I mean the topic was on American-Muslim relations and Israel is a big part of that. He was talking about shared values, in that case peace etc.

We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.

 

This is a copout. It's not a quote of anything. It's a paraphrase... if this is the same thing lf was talking about.

Could he just end a policy speech over here with a Bible verse? No. It might offend someone.

 

I would prefer policy speeches to begin and end with facts and evidence. It is useful to quote a religion's text to show religious terrorists the betrayal of their own faith of which they claim to be defending. When speaking in Muslim countries where Muslim terrorists are cultivated, it is more useful to quote the Quran than the Bible to point out the terrorists' hypocrisy regarding their religion.

 

I would prefer policy speeches to begin and end with facts and evidence. It is useful to quote a religion's text to show religious terrorists the betrayal of their own faith of which they claim to be defending. When speaking in Muslim countries where Muslim terrorists are cultivated, it is more useful to quote the Quran than the Bible to point out the terrorists' hypocrisy regarding their religion.

That wasn't my point at all. With that said, of course what you're saying here is valid.

 

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Dick (Uncut)
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Economic Crisis

The latest Anti-Obama e-mail to get forwared to me...

Subject: Remember Chicago & Are You Going to Believe Me or Your Lying Eyes?

 

Rod Blagojevich! The former Illinois governor who tried to sell the Obama seat in congress.

 

Barack Obama, quote "I only saw Rod Blagojevich one time .... And that was in the stands and from a distance at a Chicago Bears Football Game" unquote.

 

To understand the next 4 years, you have to understand the world according to Chicago.

While it is a city in Illinois, it is also a completely different country, with a whole different set of morals and language.

 

There are only three rules which anybody can understand.

 

You don't even need an attorney to understand them and if you need an attorney, well, you know too much...so look out for Rule #3!

 

RULE #1...No matter what you see, hear, or do, you don't know anybody and you don't know nothing!

RULE #2...If you capture something on tape or camera, it doesn't reveal nothing!

RULE #3...If you know what everybody knows in Chicago, well, you still don't know nothing.

 

Now pay close attention! We don't want to have to say this more than once. It's very simple.....we'll illustrate. Remember, you know nothing.

 

It then goes on to show all sorts of pictures with Obama talking to, or shaking hands with Blogo. Of course, the initial quote never actually happened. Google it. The only site to have it is a repost of the e-mail, not a news site. And OBVIOUSLY they knew each other. They worked in Springfield together for many years. Even a bold faced chronic liar couldnt have said what Obama supposedly said.

Edited June 5, 200916 yr by Athomeboy_2000

That wasn't my point at all. With that said, of course what you're saying here is valid.

 

I love your new avatar

I love your new avatar

Yea, I have to give you a hat-tip for that one.

 

Sean Hannity exits all reality:

Sean Hannity once again proves that he's the guy who put the 'a' in moron, this time by pushing the bizarre myth that earlier this week President Obama called the U.S. "a Muslim nation."

 

 

As you can see in the video, President Obama's actual remarks bear no resemblance whatsoever to Hannity's false claim.

 

There was a time when Hannity telling a lie this big was an outrage. Now, however, it's just sign #4,309 of the complete and utter collapse of the conservative movement as a coherent political force.

Sean Hannity exits all reality:

Again, you are only enabling whack-jobs like this guy by spraying his drivel all over the interwebs. If we all ignore him, he goes away.

 

President Obama:

 

We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation, or a Jewish nation, or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens, who are bound by ideals.

Sean Hannity:

 

The same president who insists the U.S. is not a Christian nation is now calling us a Muslim nation.

 

If you want to get downright technical, the president with the above quote DOES say that we are NOT a Christian nation. However, the context of all that to make it something it is not goes too far. And there's a lot of selected editing in the DailyKos piece - you can see it. But I'm not going to defend Hannity here, because he takes something like this and runs where no one else does.

 

Again, you are only enabling whack-jobs like this guy by spraying his drivel all over the interwebs. If we all ignore him, he goes away.

actually, the more we let him go unchecked, the more he gets to spread his lies to people who actually think he is an unbiased truth teller.

actually, the more we let him go unchecked, the more he gets to spread his lies to people who actually think he is an unbiased truth teller.

Because the DailyKos is SOOOOOOOO reliable.

 

Scott Roeder says there's a larger plot to kill more women's healthcare providers.

 

Will Joe Scarborough call for Roeder to be waterboarded until we learn the extent of the conspiracy? Or will he, you know, ask to represent Roeder in court?

 

LINK

Ok, Palin off rambling again, complaining about cuts in missile defense being a sign of weakness. I'd love to be able to say "ignore her and she will go away" but that's not happening, because every time she speaks the conservative base nuts on itself.

 

Ok, so in other words, this is Exhibit A why I still think the GOP is still absolutely clueless - harp on fiscal responsibility, but still not being fiscally responsible. Cut those taxes (nevermind that the overall tax burden hasn't been this low in a generation or so), but spend billions on technology we still haven't managed to make work (it's like trying to shoot a fly while it's moving with a sniper rifle from a mile away, not as easy as it sounds). Defense spending is the answer to everything, even if it's unaffordable and we have a massive deficit we need to get under control.

 

Thump the Bible a little harder.

Edited June 8, 200916 yr by lostfan

Ok, Palin off rambling again, complaining about cuts in missile defense being a sign of weakness. I'd love to be able to say "ignore her and she will go away" but that's not happening, because every time she speaks the conservative base nuts on itself.

 

Ok, so in other words, this is Exhibit A why I still think the GOP is still absolutely clueless - harp on fiscal responsibility, but still not being fiscally responsible. Cut those taxes (nevermind that the overall tax burden hasn't been this low in a generation or so), but spend billions on technology we still haven't managed to make work (it's like trying to shoot a fly while it's moving with a sniper rifle from a mile away, not as easy as it sounds). Defense spending is the answer to everything, even if it's unaffordable and we have a massive deficit we need to get under control.

 

Thump the Bible a little harder.

 

And then they just launch 10 flies at once and we're screwed anyway. Missile defense is a pipe dream because the aggressors will always have the technological upper-hand.