Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Free email alerts!

NewsBusters logo
May 23, 2013
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Take Action
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • RSS

Hot Topics

  • Obama Targets Fox News
  • IRS Targets Tea Party
  • Censoring the News
Home » Blogs » Matt Hadro's blog
  • MSNBC’s Finney On IRS Scandal: ‘Why Didn't Romney Make More Of A Big Deal Of It?’
  • Obama Losing Chris Matthews? Host Rails Against 'Profiling' By IRS: It's Like Targeting Innocent Arabs
  • Jake Tapper Slams Obama Admin for Treatment of Fox News Reporter
  • NBC's Lauer Uses Oklahoma Tornado to Bash GOP Over Sandy Relief
  • New York Times: Obama Administration 'Threatening Fundamental Freedoms of the Press'
  • ABC’s Cokie Roberts Acknowledges Obama’s Contempt for the Press, Blasts 'Presidential Propaganda'
  • NYT Lawyer: Obama Worse Than Nixon, 'Worst President Ever' on Press Freedom
  • Chuck Todd: Obama Administration Wants to 'Criminalize Journalism'

Obama More 'Hawkish' Than Bush, More Charming, Say 'Morning Joe' Pundits

By Matt Hadro | March 24, 2011 | 12:30

A  A

Is Obama more 'hawkish' and yet more charming than his immediate predecessor?

Apparently so, claimed Time's Mark Halperin and MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski on Thursday's edition of "Morning Joe."

Halperin believes that President Obama has been more cavalier than his predecessor, and Brzezinski thinks that although Obama has extended many of Bush's unpopular policies, he brings a different "characterization" to the table.

The panel harped on the irony of Obama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize despite his inexperience in the White House at the time (less than a year) and the fact that he has continued American wars overseas and started a third one in Libya. Liberals Mike Barnicle and Mika Brzezinski both admitted to having been taken aback by the 2009 decision to bestow the prize on the president in his freshman year in office. (Interestingly enough, this recalls an episode in 2009 when co-host Joe Scarborough mocked the Nobel committee's decision on the "Morning Joe" set.)

(Video after the jump. Comments from start until 3 minutes in.)

Halperin chimed in that Obama, ironically, has been more "hawkish" than President Bush even though the Nobel committee awarded him the peace prize "because he wasn't George W. Bush." Halperin labeled Obama a "muscular executive" due to his continuation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the present military action in Libya.

"By almost every metric you can use in terms of being a muscular executive – acting alone without congressional authority, extending the Bush policies overseas, particularly in the War on Terror and Afghanistan and Iraq – he's been more hawkish than George Bush," Halperin remarked.

Later in the segment, co-host Joe Scarborough pressed his liberal colleague Mika Brzezinski to admit that President Obama has continued most of the national security policies of the previous administration. Brzezinski admitted that but tried to sugarcoat the suggestion that Obama, who claimed to be a fresh face on the scene, is simply an extension of an unpopular administration.

"Yes, but he characterizes some of them differently," she said of Obama and the Bush policies. Scarborough burst out laughing and called Brzezinski out on her "spin."

A transcript of the segment, which aired on March 24 at 7:02 EDT, is as follows:

JOE SCARBOROUGH: I gotta say, I'm trying to figure out this Nobel Peace Prize, Peggy. I'm just wondering, okay. Now when I say that, it was like me getting a lifetime achievement award for my work in Hollywood, which of course I haven't started yet. That career starts three years from now. But it's like me getting that award at the beginning of – and I still don't get it, and I gotta say in my defense, if the Nobel committee had a chance, a do-over again, I would suggest that they would not give him the Nobel Peace Prize.

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: I wonder how that question was asked. Did you really deserve it, Mr. President?

SCARBOROUGH: I don't know, but Mike Barnicle, since he's got the Nobel Peace Prize, he's tripled the number of troops in Afghanistan – tripled them – of course, and then of course we've got Libya and many other things. It's – It is – I'm sure that they are wringing their hands, the Nobel committee, this morning.

BRZEZINSKI: Certainly not the President's fault.

MIKE BARNICLE: You know, the Nobel Peace prize being awarded to President Obama, in retrospect, it's like 24 year-old actors and rappers writing their autobiographies, you know, at the age of 24. He did nothing to get the Nobel Peace Prize. It was given as a gesture, I think, of what the goodwill that he represented at the time, and you're right. I mean now he's saddled with all the burdens and problems of the Presidency, and in Stockholm they're probably saying, "Hmm, geez."

SCARBOROUGH: Well you know Mark Halperin has to write many chapters about Barack Obama in the upcoming "Game Change 2," so let's go to him now for a defense of the President receiving the Nobel Prize. I'm joking. But seriously, he had to speak about it yesterday. It is ironic, since he received the award, he's tripled the number of troops in Afghanistan, he has, I guess about 120-130 cruise missiles on Libya getting in them middle of a civil war in Africa – this is not an anti-war peacenik in the White House.

MARK HALPERIN: Well, the irony is extended even further because of the man he replaced. He largely got the peace prize because he wasn't George Bush and the Europeans were so delighted to have a new American president. By almost every metric you can use in terms of being a muscular executive – acting alone without congressional authority, extending the Bush policies overseas, particularly in the War on Terror and Afghanistan and Iraq – he's been more hawkish than George Bush.

SCARBOROUGH: He really has. Mika, he has extended most of the policies of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

BRZEZINSKI: Yes, but he characterizes some of them differently.

SCARBOROUGH: (Laughing) Oh does that make him alright? That is the best spin I have heard this morning! That was great!

BRZEZINSKI: Peggy Noonan, what of those in the administration – what do you say to those who say this isn't actually war, this is a humanitarian effort in Libya? It's not war, and we're not taking him out – although Quadaffi must go.

 

About the Author

Matt Hadro is a News Analyst at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow Matt Hadro on Twitter.
  • Libya
  • War on Terrorism
  • Obama's Nobel Prize
  • Middle East
  • Foreign Policy
  • Obama transition
  • Mika Brzezinski
  • Morning Joe
  • MSNBC
  • Video
  • Matt Hadro's blog
  • Login to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Comments

does joe have a string on his

Submitted by TruthMonger on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 12:21pm.

does joe have a string on his back that obama's people just pull every day or something...?

Congratulations Jimmy Carter!

  • Login to post comments

Yes he does.

Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 12:31pm.

They were going to use him as a hand puppet, but Joe's head was blocking the access.

President Obama is a Muslim (from his own lips), Kenyan (read it from his publicist) a homosexual (read it on a news magazine cover) and a Socialist (I'm alive and can see it for myself)
  • Login to post comments

Probably not a string

Submitted by hbnolikeee on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 12:57pm.

He's more like a hand puppet and you know where the hand that controls him resides...

hbnolikeee
  • Login to post comments

He's a character from the old TV sitcom

Submitted by Clutch1956 on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 2:11pm.

"Dinosaurs"; remember Howard Handupmee? This guy is nothing more that a liberal meat puppet that squawks whatever his liberal masters instruct him to do.

  • Login to post comments

No strings attached, TM...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 2:53pm.

Let's see:

--Scarborough ridicules the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama;

--He mentions Obama's tripling of the forces in Afghanistan [highlighting Scarborough's frequently expressed disagreement with the administration's policy in that region];

--He again notes Obama's Libyan intervention without Congressional approval for which he and the panel blistered Obama on yesterday's show;

--He points out that Obama has continued most of the Bush-Cheney national security measures--[mocking the administration's promises and the Left's expectations they would be rescinded];

Doesn't sound much like an Obama puppet to me.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

If Jer is defending

Submitted by Scuba Dude on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 3:06pm.

If Jer is defending Scarborough he must be a liberal.

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." President Ronald Reagan
  • Login to post comments

Let me 'splain it to you Scube...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 3:39pm.

The mission statement of NewsBusters is "Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias". Where the evidence offered is clear and credible--Bozell's recent critique of ABC's one-sided presentation of tsunami early-warning funding cuts by Republicans was an excellent example--I will not even attempt to rationalize or defend media behavior.

However, while some of the Scarborough-related blogs [pushing the theme that Morning Joe is little more than a source for disseminating Obama talking points] present reasonable, if random, examples of same, a lot of them are completely off the mark.  And it's those latter cases with which I'll take issue.

I "defend" Scarborough not because he is a liberal but because he is not.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

I "defend" Scarborough not

Submitted by Scuba Dude on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 3:50pm.

I "defend" Scarborough not because he is a liberal but because he is not.

Sure you do. /sarc

Your MO is to always to defend the liberal and/or their position.  Therefore Scarborough is a liberal (like most of us here know he is).

Don't be embarrassed Jer, it's what you do.

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." President Ronald Reagan
  • Login to post comments

Since I believe you are reasonably well-informed, Scube...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 4:00pm.

I'm sure you are familiar with Scarborough's views on government spending and fiscal policy. Why don't you briefly summarize it for us and then explain how it coincides with liberal philosophy.

Thanks.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer and Mouse Wife

Submitted by Unsane on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 7:49pm.

Have we ever seen Jer and the infamous Scarborough apologist Mouse Wife in the same room?  Hmmmmm?

"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)

  • Login to post comments

Maybe you never saw us, Unsane...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 8:07pm.

but unfortunately my wife did. And either I or the Mouse had to go. No more Mouse.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

: ]

Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 8:11pm.

I hope you used a humane LIVE trap?

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

Jer,

Submitted by Ashrak on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 4:19pm.

Joe Scarborough Begs Obama to Gain Perspective, Stand Up to GOP on Tax Cut Compromise

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough Continues Defense of Obama; Comparisons to Katrina 'Obscene'

For every slam offering you make I can bring to the table of a way to demonstrate that Joe is just another that thinks playing both ends against the middle means he is "moderate".

What it really shows is that he has no principles and he is indeed run like a puppet on strings.  That's exactly what he is.


 

That an individual right exists requires that some policy positions be removed from the table of debate.
  • Login to post comments

Thanks Ashrak, I was going to

Submitted by Scuba Dude on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 4:28pm.

Thanks Ashrak, I was going to reply when I got home and surfing on a better computer. :-)

Just realize this won't be enough for Jer, he will pooh pooh it and say that he was looking for something else.

Obfuscate, Obfuscate, Obfuscate. Could this be the Jer family motto? :-)

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." President Ronald Reagan
  • Login to post comments

Scoob---

Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 4:56pm.

"Obfuscate" is the legal profession's motto.

Jer's motto for defending Joe the Scab as 'not a liberal' is:

"Parturiunt montes, nascetur ridiculus mus"

Translation:  the mountains are in labor, and a ridiculous mouse will be brought forth.

In order to sideslip the obvious, reference Scarborough, ol' Jer then goes with:

"Nil desperandum" - Never despair.

Just keep on keeping on, says he; while shoveling that tide back with his three-tined pitchfork.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Scuba,

Submitted by Ashrak on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 5:01pm.

I was just trying to point out to Jer that it is so awfully hard to make the case that Joe is anything but what he is, which is a progressive lefty, when he hits Obama (as is jer's position) from the LEFT!

That an individual right exists requires that some policy positions be removed from the table of debate.
  • Login to post comments

Ashrak...You CANNOT be serious.

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 5:33pm.

SCARBOROUGH: Actually, you know, it's funny you say that. Because I talked about the steaming pile of garbage that the Stimulus was – well Andy, you know what this is? This is Barack Obama couldn't get a second stimulus package. He's got it now with tax cuts that aren't going to be paid for, and unemployment benefits that aren't going to be paid for. And by the way, for the record, a Bush commission study came out this week from the Labor Department – for every dollar you pay in unemployment benefits, two get generated in the economy. [emphasis added]

Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2010/12/07/joe-scarborough-b...

Scarborough is a deficit hawk.  He blasted the stimulus package.  He blasted Pelosi and Reid.  He has consistently blasted excessive government spending.  He blasted the Wisconsin Dems and the unions.  He blasted the Left/progressives over their opposition to the Bush/Cheney national security policies, Guantanamo, CIA interrogators, etc. 

Your claim that Scarborough is a lefty progressive who attacks Obama from the left is so laughably absurd that it belongs in an SNL comedy sketch rather than the comment threads of a political website.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer you're more rabid on defending Joe than a hardcore Palinista

Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 5:46pm.

What the dillio?

  • Login to post comments

Just trying to set Scuba Dudey straight, SoL...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 6:03pm.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

That still doesn't explain your intense motivation, Jer.

Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 6:08pm.

You're more rabid on this subject than any other here, including the more emotional touchstone topics.

Inquiring minds want to know.

  • Login to post comments

SoL...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 6:53pm.

I never bring up the subject of Scarborough. NewsBusters appears to be absolutely obsessed with the guy. If they are going to incessantly blog about him, then it should be done so in a balanced manner and not be up to me or anyone else to supply the balance.

Jer

BTW...In light of your recent post on the other thread, I thought you would be more appreciative of my "Scuba Dudey" reference.  Guess it should have been "Dudie"

  • Login to post comments

OK, Jerie, yes, actually I was very appreciative.

Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 7:16pm.

However, as I am still in beatdown mode, that would display weakness on my part to acknowledge it.

"Draft Scarborough!"

;)

  • Login to post comments

Well, I'm officially beat

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 7:42pm.

Well, I'm officially beat up...so I'm ready for the SoL 'upbeat' mode. ;-)

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Any posturing posts, by anyone, on a conservative site---

Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 5:49pm.

that purport to portray the pretentious, pusillanimous putz Joe Scarborough, as a conservative, are so laughably absurd that they belong in an SNL comedy sketch rather than the comment threads of a site dedicated to exposing liberal bias.

Only a house liberal, much like the crazy uncle no one will admit to being related to, could keep insanely beating a dead horse this way and not get run off the site amid hoots and catcalls of derision.

Oh wait, it's only Jer.

Same old, same old.

Carry on with carrying Joe Scab's water, there, Jer.  :o)

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Are you carrying Ashrak's water, Matthew...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 6:00pm.

and agreeing with the absurdity that Scarborough's a "progressive lefty"?

I like you.  It pains me when you embarrass yourself.  ;-)

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer---

Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 6:10pm.

My thoughts exactly every time you post your horseshit reference Scarborough being a conservative.  :o)

Try to avoid, if you can, inferring meanings from my posts by conflating them with what someone else posts regarding their thoughts or ideas. 

I maintain that Scarborough is not  a conservative; I never said a word about the Scab being a 'progressive lefty' nor did I ever evince anything along that line, and you know it.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Matthew...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 6:38pm.

Please point to my horseshit reference to Scarborough being a conservative...or is this a case of you inferring meanings from my posts by conflating them with what someone else posts regarding their thoughts or ideas?

Try to avoid that if you can. Furthermore, I merely asked if you agreed with Ashrak's assertion, and you know it. You still haven't provided a direct answer to the question.  I'll give you another opportunity: Yes or no?

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Dance and dodge is not your usual style, Jer---

Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 7:03pm.

You have been spouting the Scarborough crap for as long as I have been around NB's, and you know it.

You stoutly maintain the Scab is forever beating on liberals and going after their policy decisions, on a regular basis, etc., etc., ad nauseum.

That is simply not true, and is pointed out; over, and over, and over again here on NB's.

I would add and you know it, but as SoL alluded to, you are flat out demented on this subject, and may well not recognize that fact because you truly cannot see what is before your face; the obvious - Joe Scarborough is not a conservative.

If you choose to counter with your usual, "Well, he most certainly isn't liberal", then if you watch Morning Joe with the regularity you say you do, you are effin' deluded.

I gave you an answer reference Ashrak's post that you just will not accept - I said that I never said Scarborough was a 'lefty progressive', or a 'progressive lefty'.

I maintain he is not a conservative, period.

End of story.

It is not incumbent upon me to "directly" answer a question by you that is not only incorrectly formatted as regards the issue at hand;  but especially when I already answered the question as it was originally posed.

Asked and answered, barrister.

Fold your "another opportunity" five ways and stick it where the sun don't shine.   :o)

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

md...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 7:37pm.

In other words, you lack the intellectual certitude necessary to give a direct answer. So stop tossing around the "asked and answered, barrister" BS, because if you were being cross-examined in court you would be required to answer "yes" or "no" and then be allowed to explain your answer. However, in light of your following remark...

If you choose to counter with your usual, "Well, he most certainly isn't liberal", then if you watch Morning Joe with the regularity you say you do, you are effin' deluded

. ...it appears your view reasonably approximates that of Ashrak, although "lefty progressive" may not be the term you would personally use and perhaps connotes an ideological position slightly more to the left than Joe's political philosophy would warrant. Is that a fair inference?

Jer

  • Login to post comments

So Jer, you concede

Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 8:05pm.

Scarecrow in Not a conservative?

Please point to my horseshit reference to Scarborough being a conservative
 

I personally think he is an outsider RINO, who is mad because he cant get any attention. Well except from the libtards.

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

Boudin...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 8:26pm.

I doubt he fits the NewsBusters/Limbaugh definition of a conservative who is apparently required to believe "liberalism is a mental disease and liberals are the embodiment of all that is evil" but I think Scarborough is being truthful when he says he still adheres to the same policy positions he held when he first came to Washington as a Reagan conservative.  And having watched Morning Joe frequently, that assertion is regularly validated. That's not to say he doesn't occasionally criticize Republicans--he does--or doesn't occasionally compliment Obama--he does that, too--but philosophically he clearly remains on the "right" of the ideological spectrum.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer knows*

Submitted by cajun2 on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 8:39pm.

Jer will always defend his client

  • Login to post comments

Jer, Scarborough is not a Reagan conservative

Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 8:41pm.

Anyone who knows the first Rule knows that.

"liberalism is a mental disease

And you can prove it isnt?

How else do you explain ignoring all prudence? Or is today the day, Jer is finally going to revel the libtard agenda, and how were all going to love it?

Please Jer, proceed.

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

Ahh, Jer uses the old "you lack the intellectual ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 8:42pm.

certitude necessary to give a direct answer" ploy.

This from a house liberal who states unequivocally "I never bring up Joe Scarborough", but proceeds to screech like a mashed cat any time a conservative says, on a conservative site, that Scarborough is no conservative; propounds endlessly about the myriad smack-downs ol' Joe Scab administers to liberals, Dems, or their policies, interwoven, of course, with voluminous reminisces on how many times he himself has whacked errant liberals and Dems for their missteps.

You say " However, in light of your following remark -----, it appears your view reasonably approximates that of Ashrak, although "lefty progressive" may not be the term you would personally use --- -.  Is that a fair inference?"

Not even close to a fair inference, as it is your inference of what I said, not what I said.

Said; not implied.

 I am sure I spent as much time as an expert witness in criminal trials as you spent as an attorney in criminal trials, and I know damned well that if asked my opinion, which is exactly what you are alluding to, "What do I think Joe Scarborough's ideological mind set is", I am  NOT required to give a yes or no answer because that is not a direct question. 

If I were to be asked if I thought Joe Scarborough was a conservative, I would answer no.

That is the question I answered. 

You can formulate that question as many ways as you can conceive of, but asking someone a question about their opinion is subjective in the extreme.

I answered the question and you bring up this inherent silliness about lacking intellectual certitude.

Balderdash.  

I remind you, barrister, that even under oath in a court of law, a direct question does NOT have to be answered with a yes or no. 

Or are you telling me that a witness may be threatened, successfully, with incarceration for contempt of court, for replying to a DIRECT question -

"I don't know"  - or - "I don't recall"  ---?

Tell me again, Jer, what words I may or may not use while sojourning in your domain of expertise.

MD

 

 

 

 

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Well you convinced me

Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 9:03pm.

But folks with a "mental disease" wont get it

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

Good grief, Matthew...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 9:03pm.

No wonder you're flailing about so wildly! You don't even know which question you were originally asked. [Hint: It wasn't anything like "Answer yes or no, Matthew, what is your opinion of Lady GaGa."]

I've gotta run. In the meantime, here are some words you may use while sojourning in my absence: "I, Matthew Dean, do not know my ass from my elbow."

;-)

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Give it up, Jer,---

Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 10:41pm.

you asked if I agreed with Ashrak's assertion that Scarborough was lefty progressive and I answered that I don't believe Scarborough is a conservative.

I DON"T KNOW if he is a lefty progressive. 

I don't find it necessary make up an answer to that to satisfy you when my only contention all along has been that Scarborough is NOT a conservative

Did you merely gloss over my last post?

You are using a version of moving the goalposts by insinuating I am in error - flailing - because you don't feel the answer you received is sufficiently tailored to meet your question.

Because you got hog-slammed on the "direct question" in a court of law, you now start the Sioux City Shuffle.

As I said earlier, you seem to be resorting more and more to the slip slide method - dancing and dodging - rather than confronting a debate head on.

You ARE attempting to make light of my answer by mixing in assertions by another poster that have no bearing on my specific thoughts about the Scab.

As I "do not know my ass from my elbow", kindly expound upon, again, and expand upon, how I may or may not answer in a court of law; and edify me, O' learned one.

Or continue to pretend you were not shot down in flames regarding your instructions on how I must comport myself, answer-wise, when in the barristers bailiwick.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

For All Dealing With Jer

Submitted by stratman on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 10:03pm.

Let me simplify any further discussions with Jer regardless of topic. His posts will invariably end with something like this:

  • "Oh noooo!  Your tire's all flat and junk. Aww, did I do that?  Here, let me get my cellular out... call you a wrecker.  Oh shoot, I got no phone.  Cause I'm a pothole.  Soooo... K-bye!"
  • Login to post comments

Are you channeling me, strat?

Submitted by Blonde on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 10:34pm.

That and "Maxwell" are my two favorite commercials of all time, I think.

Excellent, strat. Sublime, in fact.

Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)

  • Login to post comments

strat...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 10:47pm.

Do you recall that last PM to you a couple of months ago in which I voted you and KC Mulville the top two poster/commenters at NB?

I take it back.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

strat

Submitted by Radical1979 on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 10:50pm.

In your grief please try not to rend your clothing or set yourself on fire. Life will go on.

Proud member of the 53%!
  • Login to post comments

Multitasking Reply

Submitted by stratman on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 11:53pm.

Blonde:

You are my muse.

 

Jer:

Have you noticed that since you've said that I've been in your dog house and KC Mulville's been MIA?  Please, no more compliments!

 

Rad:

LOL!

Last week, Jer visited me during the infamous dog house incidence and I happened to have the video camera on.  I think he could use an updated pair of glasses.  Otherwise, he looks good for his age.

  • Login to post comments

Hmm...strat wants no more compliments from me.

Submitted by Jer on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 1:09am.

Thinking this over...let's see:   strat accuses me of being committed to ideology and not the law, mocks me for emoting, charges me with telling half-truths, labels my comments "pathetic", informs me he no longer respects me, advises NBers dealing with me that my posts are nonsense...

Well, I can't promise there will be no more compliments forthcoming, but I'll certainly give your request serious consideration.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Strat,

Submitted by Blonde on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 1:30am.

That's one of the best compliements I've ever gotten. Thank you, sincerely.

Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)

  • Login to post comments

Back, have I missed anything?

Submitted by Scuba Dude on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 9:14pm.

Back, have I missed anything? Oh, looks like I missed Jer being taken to task for defending a liberal.

Comparing the current tax cut compromise with Barack Obama's stimulus plan of 2009, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough labeled the tax cuts a "steaming pile of garbage" on his December 13 show.

Looks like he hated the tax cuts the Republicans pushed for.

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough slammed President Obama Tuesday for not standing up to Republicans but rather compromising over extending the Bush tax cuts. Scarborough called the tax cuts for millionaires "inefficient" and agreed with co-host Mika Brzezinski that the Republicans are "complete hypocrites" when it comes to dealing with the deficit.

Wow, Scarborough REALLY hated the tax cuts.

Scarborough, a former member of Congress from Pensacola, Fla., said were he still a voting member and if government money were put in the appropriate places, he'd have voted not only for a stimulus of those proportions, but one more than double that. And as for those appropriate places? Light rail and energy development.

Yep, a real deficit hawk right here.

SCARBOROUGH: You know what? That is a hard question to answer. I am trying to figure out why the hell I would be a Republican. I'm dead serious.

Even Joe wonders if he is a Republican.

 

 

Just the tip of the iceberg.
 

 

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." President Ronald Reagan
  • Login to post comments

Scuba...You apparently overlooked Scarborough's comments

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 10:26pm.

immediately following his 'wondering about whether he is still a Republican' [which Mark Finkelstein, to his credit, reported]:

Some might be tempted to take Scarborough's statement as a sign he's moved left. But when I reached out to Joe, he provided this explanation of his remarks:

I became a Republican because I believe in less government, tax cuts, balanced budgets and a rejection of Wilsonian foreign policy.

For the past five years, the GOP in Washington has increased deficits, doubled the national debt, championed a $7 trillion explosion in entitlement programs, and promoted a foreign policy that would make Woodrow Wilson blush.

The Republican Party in Washington needs to reform itself or die. I admire people like Paul Ryan, Ron Paul and John Shadegg but I am waiting to see if the Republican leaders in DC will follow their approach to championing less government and mean it

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2010/01/18/scarborough-ser...

I would say that was a rather significant omission, but not a particularly surprising one since it obviously undercuts the "Joe the Lefty" argument.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

The Scab speaks, therefore it is true, eh?---

Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 10:30pm.

By that logic, all the incarcerated felons who swear they are innocent are to be believed.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

I know, Matthew...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 10:39pm.

The only evidence to be believed is that which "proves" he's a liberal, e.g. his criticism of a Republican.  On the other hand, Scarborough's statements describing his political philosophy [clearly not liberal] are to be rejected as lies.

Makes sense on the planet Matthew Deandom.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Look around, Jer, ---

Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 10:51pm.

as in up and down the thread, and see how many others inhabit the planet wherein it is firmly established that Joe Scarborough is NOT a conservative.

You just will not face up to the obvious.

You really should consider glomming onto either another line of Scarborough worship, as in, "Oh!  He is just soooo cute!",  or pick a different non-conservative to adore.

I recommend Anthony Wiener.  

No one here at NB's would argue with you about that little stud mouse.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

md...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 11:06pm.

And what per centage of NB members [excluding lib members, but of course including those who don't consider Joe to be a "true" conservative] do you believe agree with you that Scarborough's a "liberal", or with Ashrak that he is a "lefty progressive"?

I bet the majority, while believing Scarborough may have drifted leftward and/or has shed his credentials as an authentic conservative, still recognize he is no liberal.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Based on the posts I read at NB's, Jer---

Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 11:37pm.

I'd say the majority would say Scarborough is no conservative.

I surmise as well, that most here would label him a sell out to whatever "conservative" principles he once had.

 Wherever Scarborough has drifted, whatever he has shed, he IS NOT a conservative.

If you maintain he is not a liberal, based on your standards, ok fine.

He damn sure ain't conservative.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Reread your own words, Matthew...

Submitted by Jer on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 1:22am.

If you choose to counter with your usual, "Well, he most certainly isn't liberal", then if you watch Morning Joe with the regularity you say you do, you are effin' deluded.

Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2011/03/24/obama-more-hawkis...

A reasonable inference from that statement, Matthew, is that you are suggesting Scarborough is indeed liberal. How else can you parse your contention that I am deluded if I claim he isn't liberal?

Silly me. I'm sure you'll find some way to continue your dancin' and dodgin'.

You're toast.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer, in my case, it's not

Submitted by amyshulk on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 3:55am.

Jer, in my case, it's not that I don't believe Joe thinks he's a conservative, it's the obvious pull to the left I observe on MJ that I find disturbing.

When they showed Trump on The View, Joe was all set to agree that Trump was perfectly reasonable to ask about it, but Mika was wire tight, shaking her head, and demanding Joe denounce Trump "WE don't agree"

That's the slide - Joe can talk all day about what he stands for, but when he so willingly gives up his opinion when Mika leans on him....

The government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
Ronald Reagan
  • Login to post comments

Wrong, Jer---

Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 4:03am.

for if I am toast, your ass is charcoalized.

You are starting to repeat another poster's phrases as if you were fresh out of Troll U.

For a retired barrister, you make an astonishing number of what you term "reasonable inferences" that are nothing more than your opinion camouflaged behind erudite phrasing.

If I state that I believe Scarborough is not a conservative, would your normal thought process lead you to suppose I believed Scarborough was in fact an alien?

An Episcopalian?

A sled dog?

Exactly how many choices, as far as being politically affiliated, do you think there are, anyway?

Do you feel as though you have made some type of quantum leap in ascertaining that I told a big whopper because by stating Scarborough is not a conservative meant that I was saying he is a liberal, and am now denying it?

Blinding glimpse of the obvious, indeed. 

If one believes Scarborough is not a conservative, there is a very strong likelihood that one would believe him to be either a liberal or a libertarian.

Why do you post as though this is some big mystery that you have solved?

Pretty mundane thought process, that of elimination, yet here you are, crowing like a Banty Rooster, a la Anthony Wiener.

I was only kidding when I suggested you take Wiener up as someone to adore; I had no idea you would revere him as a role model.

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Here's a thought, Matthew:

Submitted by Jer on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 8:17am.

Here's a thought, Matthew: Instead of spending all this time and energy and bandwidth complaining about inferences, thought processes of elimination, my alleged conflation of statements and posts, whether or not you should answer yes or no--all while you continue to torturously dissect and parse your words, my words, and various words of others--why not simply state clearly and unambiguously that in your opinion Scarborough is a liberal?

You deliberately bury your opinion under layers of fustian prose and tedious rhetorical shell games and then yelp about someone attempting to solve the "mystery" you authored.

In fact, one might think Joe is not a conservative while believing him to be an independent, a moderate or political centrist--but still not necessarily a liberal. That you do consider him one is fine. We disagree. I just don't understand why it took so much of this thread to extract the admission.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Play it, Jer. Obtuse it is,---

Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 9:30pm.

as I authored no "mystery", and I bury nothing except your silly assed comments about how I am to conduct my self while verbally responding in a court of law

Don't lay your disagreements and inability to change my statement that Scarborough is not a conservative onto or into verbiage satisfactory to your ends.

That is the bullshit card, but apparently, not beneath your utilization of it.

You are playing the word games you accuse me of; making as though I am somehow lacking in either honesty or courage because I don't pony up with words you insist on hearing.

Get it through your skull that my opinion is that Scarborough is NOT a conservative.  Period.

Where do you get off telling me what words I must use and how I am to go about  fleshing out my opinion?

I don't particularly care what you, Scarborough, or any one else thinks his political affiliation is, as it affects my life not one whit; and it only matters to me how I perceive Scarborough.

Here's a thought, Jer:  instead of giving me suggestions on how to conduct myself word-wise when posting, and delegating what I am to say, fall back once again to your forte;  tell me again what words I am allowed to use when responding to a direct question in a court of law.

You being the trained barrister, and all.

Or is all your ponderous word-hoard  whining about my view of Scarborough a way of smoke screening the fact that you stepped on your pecker when telling me how I must reply in a courtroom scenario?

MD

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

Matthew, if you engaged in

Submitted by Jer on Sat, 03/26/2011 - 12:30am.

Matthew, if you engaged in the type of deflective word games you have repeatedly played on this thread, your ass would be thrown under the jail. If you don't understand the question, or a term or phrase within the question, you are certainly entitled to a clarification. But your answers must be responsive to the questions asked. And your sidestepping equivocations, oblique inferences, feigned ignorance, calculated evasions, and sarcastic retorts have been invariably unresponsive and at times flat-out contradictory.

Yes, in this case you could start out with an "I don't know"--"Scarborough is not a conservative" , however, was not a direct response to the specific question asked--and I may continue to press you until you can no longer avoid an appropriately definitive reply.

[Don't worry.  I'd bail you out.] ;-)

Jer

  • Login to post comments

In no case would I need bailing out, Jer---

Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 03/26/2011 - 4:32am.

and you are talking absolute trash.

You can continue to "press" until your ass falls off for all I care.

Dodging again, you are.

You stated a yes or no answer must be given to a direct question in court and that is NOT TRUE.

That subject, as covered, has nothing to do with this dribble drabble nonsense you keep going on with about my thoughts on Scarborough's political affinities or leanings.

When the subject of Scarborough comes up you immediately lose any and all credibility with your labored insistence that he is a conservative.

Re-read your first paragraph and see if you can acquaint yourself with the realization that it is nothing more than an exercise wherein you string together some words for pedantic effect.

"--sidestepping equivocations, oblique inferences, feigned ignorance, calculated evasions, and sarcastic retorts have been invariably unresponsive and at times flat-out contradictory."

Oh, my!

What, you testing out a possible script segment for a courtroom scene on one of the current bell ringers on television?

MD

.

"The credibility of the story is undermined by the selection of sources." - (h/t Jer)
  • Login to post comments

More hawkish, but better at carrying out policies than Bush

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 3:02pm.

say Morning Joe pundits.

Where is that said, and which and how many of the panelists say it?

The only person I can locate thus far who said it is Mr. Hadro.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

I Wish Joe ...

Submitted by GeneralAl on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 12:26pm.

I wish Joe would just come out of the closet and embrace the Democrat Party. Quit the fakery, Joe!

"Old Soldiers never die, they just fade away"!

  • Login to post comments

Obama has become such an embarassment to . . .

Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 12:32pm.

. . . the Left and the MSM that they can't even agree on the spin anymore.

Libya is embroiled in a civil war, and we have intervened on behalf of the anti-Qaddafi side of that war (though we're still not certain just who is in that anti-Qaddafi side). We've launched over 160 cruise missiles at Libyan targets, and our aircraft are engaging Libyan ground forces.

Yet, the lame-brained Mika Brzezinski tables the WH spin that this is somehow a "humanitarian" operation.

It's a scenario that only Stalin or Kafka could concoct.

  • Login to post comments

I agree, Gal. And when you

Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 1:02pm.

I agree, Gal.

And when you see the contortions Obama has gone through in just a week, you have to  wonder.

Have we ever had a more inept and clueless president?

He really has no idea how to do the job he so badly wanted.

He does love the luxurious travel and all the perks that come with the job, though!

  • Login to post comments

In answer to your question, mb...

Submitted by PrairieSky on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 2:10pm.

"Have we ever had a more inept and clueless president?"

No...Never. And just as you said, he truly doesn't have any idea of how to do his job...Every single day that passes makes that more and  more clear. Obama is completely in over his head, and for the first time, I think he might just be beginning to finally realize that fact. Even his elephantine ego and hubris can't continue to deny how clueless he really is. This Libya mess I think has forced him to see that he's really out of his element. Unfortunately for the rest of us, we're stuck with this empty suit pretender at least until 2012...I just hope that whatever damage he does until then can be minimized and hopefully fixed by the next president. (Assuming he or she is not a Democrat, that is).

And you're also correct that he does love all the top drawer perks that go with being the POTUS, doesn't he? What a fool. 

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan 

  • Login to post comments

Mika has officialy become a joke.

Submitted by Texndoc on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 12:34pm.

She didn't start out as one . I think she was meant to be taken seriously. Now they just laugh at her and she's a set of t**s on the panel. I saw her slamming Gingrich "ha!ha!ha!" and Halprin said "well, you know he might have meant..." and Mika and Joe would not even listen, because it interfered with their childish "ha!ha!ha!" which they just went back to. And I do Not like Gingrich.

I watch this show some times and I just think if I could read ANY body's mind on the set at any time, any guest, it would be "you two (Joe and Mika) are such idiots".

  • Login to post comments

It's so high school there!

Submitted by amyshulk on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 3:37pm.

It's so high school there! Did you catch the "WE DON"T AGREE" that Mika threw at Joe about what Trump said on The View? It showed who REALLY runs the show, and it isn't Joe!!!

The government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
Ronald Reagan
  • Login to post comments

<sound of duct tape ripping off roll>

Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 12:45pm.

Is there no limit to their fantasy???

Halperin labeled Obama a "muscular executive" due to his continuation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the present military action in Libya.

Liberals opposed both Alito and Gonzalez because they thought they would favor a "muscular executive" branch under Bush.

Now all of a sudden that and being hawkish are good things.

 

 

  • Login to post comments

Obama is so muscular

Submitted by Comrade Jim on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 1:34pm.

that he can lift his Nobel Prize over his head. However, he is still looking for a way to show that he has a muscular brain.

  • Login to post comments

Obama has a brain??

Submitted by PrairieSky on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 3:41pm.

Who knew?

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan 

  • Login to post comments

Oh, man.....

Submitted by almostacowboy on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 1:08pm.

The Mourning Schmoe has become the ultimate comedy show.......without the laughs.

  • Login to post comments

Meeeeka such nice..........................

Submitted by Tomorama on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 1:31pm.

I watch this for the leftist Smother Brothers/Laugh in appeal.

Watching liberals fall all over themselves to portray this gutless lying fraud to be anything less than a gutless lying fraud is worth it.

Obama is a hawk for NOT GOING THROUGH CONGRESS and instead the cowardly and corrupt UN?

He continues the Bush plan in Iraq and he continues the Patriot act and he continues GITMO all things he was against by the way, but yet HE IS THE HAWK?

Sounds more like a lying gutless fraud who has NO CLUE AND NO NEW IDEAS.

If you make poverty easy, you will have more of it. Benjamin Franklin
  • Login to post comments

Hawk? Chicken Hawk!

Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 1:59pm.

Anyone remember the Foghorn Leghorn cartoons where there was a Chicken Hawk trying to kill Foghorn?  I would never call the Chairman a hawk unless it's in reference to hawking up a loogey.  Yeah, respect that!

Seriously though, a hawk for bypassing Congress?  In blatant violation of the Constitution?(nevermind the others, this is the worst yet)  Um, people, that makes someone a traitor(if he were a US Citizen, which he's not) and a dictator and needs to be dealt with.

All this nonsense that the MSM is doing for him will prove his undoing.

-Jon

  • Login to post comments

I think Obama's going to war

Submitted by stratman on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 11:27pm.

I think Obama's going to war against a country that was not endangering our Union makes him a tinpot warmonger.

To quote Obama in 2007:

  • "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."

Obama was referring to the possibility of Bush attacking Iran, a nation that then and now threatens the United States with its support and export of world terrorism and development of enriched nuclear material. 

According to himself, Obama has overridden the Constitution in making war on Libya.  So, Obama was wrong before and wrong now, for different reasons, on his application of Constitution Law despite being a so-called Constitutional scholar.

  • Login to post comments

YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP.......

Submitted by Herbster on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 2:22pm.

We have the MSM. Now we have the MJM.....Morning Joke Morons. You can't make this stuff up. Totally clueless and historically ignorant. Could anyone on that show even FIND Libya on a map? To think that there are people who get their "News and information" from a show like this is frightening. Mediapimps all. I'm off to fix myself a kinetic ham sandwich for lunch!

  • Login to post comments

CANCEL THE KINETIC HAM.......

Submitted by Herbster on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 2:37pm.

Cancel the kinetic ham sandwich.......I think I'll flip and have a kinetic tuna on toast instead........no, make that a kinetic turkey and bacon on rye.......no, let's do a kinetic egg salad on white bread..YES! That's it! A kinetic egg salad on white with a kinetic pickle and some kinetic potato chips and a kinetic coke!..........................O.K. Who's the wise guy that locked me out of the kitchen.......? Now I'm feeling almost kinetically presidential!

  • Login to post comments

Herbster's sarcometer's gone all kinetic

Submitted by Blonde on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 3:40pm.

Someone, please, fix it!

Locked you out of the kitchen? Bawahahah. That was great.

Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)

  • Login to post comments

Don't look now, ....

Submitted by Prester John on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 4:23pm.

.....but the White House just changed the "kinetic military action" to a, "time limited, scope limited military action".

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/03/24/general-us-us-libya_8373420.html

Lord have mercy.

  • Login to post comments

BLONDE'S "LOCKOUT" COMMENTS.......

Submitted by Herbster on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 4:28pm.

Blonde. FYI. I climbed in through the kitchen window. When I got to the Kinetic 'fridge to make my kinetic egg salad, all the eggs were gone. In their place was a note on White House stationery stating, "We've redistributed your eggs to someone who had none because of George Bush." It was signed Barack Kinetic Obambi. They also redistributed my bread, pickles, chips and coca cola. I suppose the 'fridge is next. All this in the name of "Kinetic justice." Signs of things to come?

  • Login to post comments

Spam links and Spammer deleted

Submitted by wwwmm on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 11:41pm.

は、スポーツ・フィットネス・ウィメンズウェアで強い地位と信頼性を築き、


  • Login to post comments

FINALLY, strat...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/24/2011 - 11:47pm.

You're making sense.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Excellent, Jer!

Submitted by stratman on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 12:07am.

Drat! You beat me to it!

That may well be the funniest post of yours ever. I'm still laughing out loud.

Honestly, how could anyone stay upset with the Jerbot.

Speaking of robots... which one were you on Mystery Science Theater 3000?

  • Login to post comments

ROFL

Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 12:34am.

-Dave

Vote for the American in November

  • Login to post comments

Crap!

Submitted by Patriot II on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 12:41pm.

Whoever wrote this tripe is mentally deranged!!!

  • Login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Editors' Picks

  • Deputy kills PBS NewsHour staffer (Washington Examiner)
  • Oklahoma disaster was tragic, but larger ones have occurred (USA Today)
  • Mainstream Media Scream: Today’s Savannah Guthrie questions GOP ‘overreach’ (Paul Bedard, Washington Examiner)
  • Desperate Carney complains asking about scandals like asking about birth certificate (RCP)
  • Look at NYT's partisan-hack rewrite of the IRS hearing (Draw and STRIKE!)
  • Study: Christians who tithe have better finances than those who don't (TGC)
  • The media are willing accomplices to Obama (PolitiChicks)
  • FBI has suspects in mind in Benghazi; Obama prefers to try them in court (AP)
Chuck Norris's picture
Chuck Norris
Chuck Norris Column: Why Tim Tebow Is an Ultimate Clutch Player
Walter E. Williams's picture
Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams Column: Hating America
Michelle Malkin's picture
Michelle Malkin
Malkin Column: Obama's Emptiest Benghazi Talking Point
Ann Coulter's picture
Ann Coulter
Coulter Column: Sorry, Sen. Rubio, But Your Immigration Plan Is Still Problematic
David Limbaugh's picture
David Limbaugh
David Limbaugh Column: Partisan Obama Culture Spawned a More Abusive IRS
More >

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Stop Censoring The News!

Gosnell's Just the Tip of the Iceberg
more cartoons
  • IRS Charged With Unfair Scrutiny of Pro-Life Groups' Prayer Events, Protest Signs
  • Ex-AccuWeather's Bastardi Slams 'Ambulance Chasing' by Global Warming Theory Activists
  • Howard Dean Dismisses Benghazi Scandal as ‘Laughable Joke’
  • Letterman: 'Obama's in So Much Trouble Politically He's Thinking of Killing Bin Laden Again'
  • NYT Gets Sen. Cruz's Opposition to Marketplace Fairness Act Dead Wrong
More >
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

 

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2013 NewsBusters.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use