CNN's Don Lemon Asks If Obama Should Run As Conservative in 2012
Channeling liberal disenchantment with President Obama, CNN anchor Don Lemon wondered Monday if the President would be "better off running as a conservative" in the next election.
"Your colleague in New York Gary Ackerman said the Republicans invited the President, quote, 'to negotiate at a strip poker table, and he showed up half-naked,' and then liberal columnist Paul Krugman calls the deal an abject surrender," Lemon quoted the two liberals downcast over the debt ceiling deal. "Would the President be better off running as a conservative in 2012?" he asked Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.)
[Video below the break.]
Lemon, like colleagues Anderson Cooper and Piers Morgan, recited the Democrat criticism that Republican Tea Party members were acting like "terrorists," and asked Republican guests to respond. At no point did CNN anchors ask Democrat guests if the remarks were out-of-bounds.
For instance, former CNBC anchor Erin Burnett outright accused the Tea Party members of Congress of playing "chicken" with the debt ceiling. Nevermind that in order to play "chicken," two participants risking a collision, not one, are needed.
9 p.m. host Piers Morgan remarked that the Tea Party members "shoved the President into a corner, made a crisis out of something that shouldn't have been a crisis really in terms of the debt ceiling being raised, and pretty much stabbed the Speaker, John Boehner, flat in the back didn't they?
Anderson Cooper asked Tea Party favorite Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) if the "terrorist" allegations by Democrats were accurate. Host Don Lemon asked Tea Party Congressman Joe Walsh (R-Ill.) to respond to the smear as well.
"What they're saying is that a small group of Tea Party Republicans, a powerful group, were willing to hold the full faith and credit of the United States essentially hostage," Cooper explained to his guest. "Is that a fair criticism?" he asked.
Anchor of CNN's American Morning, Ali Velshi, clamored that in order to substantially reduce the deficit, tax revenue increases must be on the table. "There's no way to bring that math in line and really bring the deficit down, down, withour increasing what Republicans call revenues, but taxes. There's just no math," he claimed.
A transcript of the segments is as follows:
CNN
IN THE ARENA
8/1/11
8:07 p.m. EDT
DON LEMON: Listen, before I ask you about your vote, what do you say to the Democrats who compared some Republicans to terrorists and who said Republicans held the country hostage?
Rep. JOE WALSH (R-Ill.): Again, fairly outrageous, and you know, we see often the media goes after Republicans and right-wing folks when they use this language. The other side does it as well, and they need to be called to the carpet. That's not at all appropriate. But you know, look, enough with the name calling. We're are all big boys and big girls. We're doing serious work up here. We should just focus on what we've done today and what we need to do.
LEMON: Yeah. And listen, I don't want to get our eyes off of the ball here, because I think that we in the media will do it to both sides if they name-call here. It's not just Republicans – at this network.
WALSH: I –
LEMON: I want to make that clear.
WALSH: No, I agree with you, but I do think – and again in your profession, there tends to be a bit of a bias to go after our side. I mean, the president, I think said – and I could be off – a month and a half ago that those Republicans aren't going to put a gun to our head. I mean, and I didn't hear anybody in the media, the mainstream media, go after him.
(...)
[8:10]
LEMON: (to Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.) Well, let's talk about this. Let's talk about this if you're going to bring the debt ceiling up. There are many who say the debt ceiling and the deficit talks really had nothing to do with each other and that this crisis was manufactured. All you had to do is raise the debt ceiling and then promise at least some sort of talks or at least come to a consensus that we need to bring down our deficit, we really need to talk, let's get the president involved. But by bringing in the debt ceiling that you in some way hijacked the American people for a time.
(...)
[8:24]
LEMON: (to Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) Congressman, I want the ask you this. Really it's about the president's political future and whether or not it's helped him. But let me read this first, and then you can answer. Your colleague in New York Gary Ackerman said the Republicans invited the president, quote, "to negotiate at a strip poker table, and he showed up half naked." And then liberal columnist Paul Krugman calls the deal an abject surrender. Would to president be better off running as a conservative in 2012?
CNN
PIERS MORGAN
8/1/11
9:04 p.m. EDT
PIERS MORGAN: And Erin Burnett, let me turn to you. I mean, just an impartial observer watching all this slightly aghast might think the Tea Party have done well politically, but in terms of their behavior, and they shoved the president into a corner, made a crisis out of something that shouldn't have been a crisis really in terms of the debt ceiling being raised, and pretty much stabbed the speaker, John Boehner flat in the back, didn't they?
ERIN BURNETT, CNN anchor: I think that's a pretty good way of putting it. I mean you could say, Piers, that in a sense they were playing chicken with this whole situation. If they had ended up getting out of it massive cuts that really moved the needle – which the cuts that are on the table now do not, and they don't address the major entitlement programs – well, if they had accomplished that, then you could say, well, yes, it was worth it. But all of that storm for, well, frankly not very much.
So I would say, yes, not very much was accomplished that was positive from this and now you still have great uncertainty about the economy, as Wolf indicated, that's by far the top story. You saw the market rally today on news of a deal, then we had some terrible data on manufacturing, back in recessionary territory, and the markets gave all that back.
CNN
ANDERSON COOPER 360
8/1/11
10:07 p.m. EDT
ALI VELSHI: And there's no way – we've done the math – there's no way to bring that math in line and really bring the deficit down, down, without increasing what Republicans call revenues, but taxes. There's just no math.
(Crosstalk)
ANDERSON COOPER: No way to do it?
VELSHI: The only way to that – well, the only way to do it is have grow like India grows and grow like China grows. That's not going to happen in America. That's the only way you can get your way out of this. So there has to – this has to happen. President Obama, as John said, wanted a $4 trillion deal. That's what the ratings agency said we needed. He got half of that. You can't get to that $4 trillion without tax increasing.
(...)
[10:34]
COOPER: According to multiple sources, in a meeting with Vice President Biden today Democrats were venting anger about Republicans saying that they negotiate like terrorists.
Sen. RAND PAUL (R-Ky.): (Laughs)
COOPER: What they're saying is that a small group of Tea Party Republicans, a powerful group, were willing to hold the full faith and credit of the United States essentially hostage. We're willing to risk the full faith and credit and not realizing that at a certain point, you know what, we're not getting what we want so we have to compromise. Is that a fair criticism?
- Matt Hadro's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
He should do himself a favor
Submitted by kbTexan on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 6:53pm.
Obama should do himself a favor and resign now while he still has some dignity.
Did I miss something
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 11:09pm.
Did I miss something somewhere along the line, kb??? I've NEVER noticed that Boy Blah-Blah ever HAD any class, style, or dignity............along with integrity, honesty, and ethics.
Too late.
Submitted by johnsonl on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 8:10am.
He never had any dignity to begin with, just a really lame campaign slogan and darker skin than the other loser.
The best part of that was that most of us fell for it. Not me, but enough to get him elected POTUS.
He'll never go away. He will return to Chicago like a conquering hero, to be reannointed and given any elected position he wants.
His legacy will be the worst presidential administration ever.
Sure, I'll believe it!
Submitted by jon_torlin on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 6:58pm.
Just as much as I'll believe Lemon if he decides to be straight after all this nonsense he made about "coming out."
-Jon
No, Donald, he should run as a Cambodian lesbian.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 7:16pm.
That would be much more believable.
Plus---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 7:23pm.
Obama would be much more proficient in that career field than he is in his current one.
MD
He could run as a yeti but it
Submitted by jessieH on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 7:29pm.
He could run as a yeti but it won't get him re-elected.
And for Halloween Don Lemon will dress up as....
Submitted by jdripper on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 7:30pm.
Edward R. Murrow and pretend to be a journalist.
Jack
Well
Submitted by Tjexcite on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 7:55pm.
With the other talking point that is no mater who the opponent is they are terrorist, O does not even have to try. The MSM will just call his opponent terrorists and then crack it up from there as that is the starting point.
What?!? Not a racist?
Submitted by needle on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 10:27pm.
How about a "bigoted homophobic racist terrorist?"
Well, it is still just 2011. By next year they might add "Christian" and "conservative" to their paroxysms of rage.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
That question is about as pointless
Submitted by djwolf12 on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 8:39pm.
as asking Lemon to be a not-gay political activist TV anchor.
Can a gay journalist be ....
Submitted by jmigyanka@msn.com on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 8:48pm.
.......... unbiased in presenting the news? It seems he is trying to be normal, but his dyed hair gives him away.
Better Yet...
Submitted by bigdaddy on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 9:40pm.
,,,Why not have Oblamer come out of the closet and testify about his undying love for Joe Biden and his new book "Brokeback Country"...
I thought it was called
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 11:08pm.
I thought it was called 'Cracked-head Country'...............
Of course he's conservative!
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 10:08pm.
I think Don Lemon thinks Barack Obama and Anderson Cooper are both extremely conservative, for the same reason.
In fact, Don Lemon saw himself as a rigid conservative until just a couple of months ago.
Ooooo.....
Submitted by almostacowboy on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 4:16pm.
he said "rigid". Yummy.
- Don Lemon
Yeah, good luck with that
Submitted by fitzfong on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 10:12pm.
Yeah, good luck with that strategy, Pinkobama.
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best
tactics
Submitted by xraynova on Tue, 08/02/2011 - 11:47pm.
COOPER: "What they're saying is that a small group of Tea Party Republicans, a powerful group, were willing to hold the full faith and credit of the United States essentially hostage."
Standard liberal deflection tactic: blame your opponent for the evil that you, yourself, are committing.
Only to a liberal, is the demand for a balanced budget a terrorist, hostage taking act... zzzzzzzz
There are paperclips with more political insight than Lemon
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 12:02am.
Does this guy actually have an audience?
And Morgan's coment about the Tea Party Republicans -- a minority even among Republicans in the House -- "shoved Obama into a corner" indicates just how politically impotent this President is. Add to that the President's own lame comments, and it's understandable that Democrats are beginning to write Obama off.
Obama had virtually no leverage since, as President, he does
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 2:13am.
have an obligation to the nation to avoid what most experts believed would be the enormously grave consequences associated with a debt default. That potential risk, even if it were only 50-50, crippled his bargaining power while creating a clear vulnerability which could be exploited by a Congressional minority if they so chose. They so chose. Their strategy was mostly shaped by two unelected individuals: Grover Norquist to whom many had signed no-tax pledges, and Rush Limbaugh who was issuing not so subtle threats that any action which even vaguely hinted of caving in to Obama was unacceptable. The possibility of immediate, serious harm to the economy occasioned by a default was a secondary concern. The President would be wearing the albatross of failure for such eventuality anyway. And, after all, it's his failure which is and has always been the ultimate objective.
Thus the American public was subjected to this sad, absurd spectacle which accomplished very little other than furnishing an arena for the Tea Party influenced GOP freshmen to flex their muscles in a rigged mud-wrestling match.
Jer
Having an obligation to the nation is not---
Submitted by matthewdean on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 2:35am.
something Obama seems to be aware of.
His only obligation so far appears to have been, and continues to be, to his overweening narcissistic personality.
Grover Norquist and Rush Limbaugh sabotaged Obama and subjected the American public to a sad, absurd, spectacle, eh?
Obama and the Dems had nothing to do with the situation, eh?
Implying they had no control, are you?
Are you also saying that if Obama fails it will only be because those who do not worship him wished it so?
The lengths you Lib-Dims will go to to alibi for and excuse the mind boggling ineptness of the worthless fool at the head of your Party would be hilarious but for the calamitous nature of the actions of this jug-eared jackass.
MD
Obama and the Dems erred by failing to submit a budget
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 2:54am.
months ago. But that was water under the bridge. In the just concluded debt ceiling negotiations, what leverage did the Dems have, other than to plead with the Tea Party folks to agree to a fair compromise if they were going to insist on preconditions for raising the debt ceiling? Fat chance. Btw...if he were such an overweeining narcissistic personality, he would have most likely opted for the 14th amendment remedy and told the Repubs to kiss his ass.
Even the times the Dems voted against hiking the debt limit during the Bush years, they never attached take-it-or-leave-it demands. Fyi, significant blocs of Lib/Progressives are abandoning Obama in droves rather than defending him. There is serious talk of running a liberal against him in 2012.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Par for the Course on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 6:16am.
I thought Obama did submit a budget, one that didn't receive one vote in the senate.
Anyway, the Democrats could have passed a debt ceiling increase at the end of 2010, but, Harry Reid didn't want to:
I don't think the Tea Party wanted a "buy-in on the debt" that Reid wanted them to have. A miscalculation on Reids part in my opinion.
The Obama budget you're referring to, Par is the one . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:57am.
. . . for FY2012, which begins on October 1, 2011. The Senate rejected that one 97-0.
The budget that didn't get passed was for FY2011, the current fiscal year ending on September 30. The Federal government has been funded under continuinig resolutions, known in the Beltway as CRs.
The Democratic Congress had time to pass all kinds of frivilous legislation, but the FY2011 budget just wasn't important enough to handle.
So, the current Congress was sworn in last January, and the Dems blamed the new Tea Party Republicans for risking the shutdown of the government through lack of funding. As usual, the disingenuous MSM echoed their masters, never really questioning why a Democratic Congress serving with a Democratic President failed in its Constitutional duties. Instead, they fingered the Republicans.
Oh c'mon Jer
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 7:15am.
The dems hadn't passed a budget in 800+ days. That is inexcusable. They could have raised the debt ceiling, taxes, and anything else they wanted. \
They didn't want to own the consequences alone. They are cowards. At least the Tea Party folks were ready to stand by their principles and take the blame for whatever disaster might have occurred. They certainly would not have received any credit if the economy had boomed under their proposals.
And the 14th amendment remedy, which it is no remedy, would have delayed implementation of debt ceiling raise, as it would certainly have been challenged in court.
Jer, I agree with you about
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 10:13am.
Jer, I agree with you about the Democratic Congress's failure to pass the FY2011 budget. It reflects a total abdication of their Constitutional responsibility in the midst of an economic crisis, and it generated the battles fought over the subsequent continuing resolutions required to keep the Federal government funded. That was a total lack of leadership.
But where was the President? Why didn't he get Pelosi and Reid in the Oval Office and demand that they do their jobs? I think it's because he's uncomfortable filling an executive role.
I'm a bit surprised that you echoed the claims of an alleged Presidential authority under the 14th Amendment to circumvent the Congress in order to pay the debts of the United States. The Democrats -- especially the Congressional Black Caucus -- were fond of citing Section 4 of that amendment but conveniently ignored the key language that puts it all in the context of Civil War debt. This is what the Dems and the MSM parrots read:
Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, shall not be questioned.
Sounds straight forward enough. However, the language of Section 4 is this:
Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
But rather than argue about that context, I direct attention to the final section of the 14th Amendment which puts the question to rest once and for all:
Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
In other words, not only is there an absence of language empowering the President, the amendment specifically authorizes the Congress to enforce it.
But all of the Democrats, all of the liberal pundits, and all of the networks, CNN, and MSNBC anchors and hosts conveniently missed it.
The Dems and MSM mocked Boehner when he had the Constitution read aloud before the assembled House of Representatives on the first day of the new Congress. But we can see now that Boehner understands the problem.
As for the impending doom of August 2, I'll refer to one of the most far left officials on the Hill, Sen, Bernie Sanders (I-VT), a self-described socialist, who was quoted last week as admitting that servicing the national debt, Social Security and Medicare checks, and military payrolls were not -- I repeat, NOT -- at risk because the Treasury had the resources to cover them for a while.
In other words, the President wasn't boxed into a corner by 23 Republicans, Grover Norquist, Rush Limbaugh, Karl Rove, or any other conservative boogey-men the Democrats blame for their own failures. He was boxed in by the factions of his own rudderless party, which has grown despondent over his lack of leadership ability.
The Democrats told us in 2008 that the Republicans were an endangered species, and obviouosly they weren't. They tell us that the Republicans are fracturing between the old GOP and the Tea Partiers, yet that hasn't happened.
But what is happening is that the coalition of special interest groups that drive the Democratic Party aren't as solidly bound as they just two years ago.
The President already wears the albatross of failure.
- Conservative have always been displeased, and Obama will never satisfy them (not that he ever wanted to)
- Independents are abandoning Obama in droves. The promises of Hope & Change have evaporated.
- The Far Left is angry Obama for not being progressive enough. Even Democratic Senators and Representatives publicly criticize his policies and actions (or in many cases, inactions).
2012 Campaign is underway
He can't run on his record -- even the DNC acknowledges that -- so he must convince voters that he really can change the future, though he's demonstrated that he's personally and organizationally ill-equipped to do that, and second term Administrations rarely accomplish any of the agenda set forth in the first term.
His only option is to convince the majority of voters that his opponents will only make things worse, and that will be a hard sell.
Just ask Jimmy Carter.
Don't forget...
Submitted by almostacowboy on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 4:18pm.
the labor unions.
Airhead
Submitted by apodoca on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 12:11am.
Don Lemon has blank space between his ears. Does he know what is a Conservative? Does he know anything about Conservatism? Does he understand that Obama is a Communist? Does he know that the American public know Obama is a Communist?
This remarkably stupid comment of Lemon's just goes to show that the LSM really think the voters are as stupid as the media.
Amazing!
Anchor of CNN's American
Submitted by redfish on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 12:40am.
Anchor of CNN's American Morning, Ali Velshi, clamored that in order to substantially reduce the deficit, tax revenue increases must be on the table. "There's no way to bring that math in line and really bring the deficit down, down, without increasing what Republicans call revenues, but taxes. There's just no math," he claimed.
There's no way to fix our long-term debt problem with tax increases, given the projected growth of Medicare. At some point, we'll run out of our ability to raise taxes.
There are two things we need to do: make sure entitlement programs are self-sustaining, that takes care of non-discretionary spending. Second, bring down discretionary spending. I'm sure some of that can include military spending , now that we've been on a schedule to reduce our presence overseas.
"What they're saying is that a small group of Tea Party Republicans, a powerful group, were willing to hold the full faith and credit of the United States essentially hostage," Cooper explained to his guest. "Is that a fair criticism?" he asked.
The problem with the analogy is that its much more accurate to say that people who want to spend a lot of money and incur debts want to hold everyone as hostages to their spending spree. After all, we're all going to shoulder the debt that they create for us.
I saw tax increases coming
Submitted by johnsonl on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 8:57am.
as soon as the stimulus passed.
The time has truly come to knock back the fed and start making the states accountable for taxation and delivery of services. There is no reason for the fed to collect taxes and give money to the states for anything, there is simply too much room for mismanagement, waste and abuse. Education, health care, etc. should be paid for and managed by the states. People will gravitate to the states with the best standards of living. Congress has demonstrated that they are incapable of adminstering our country. We must return government to the state/local level.
We must have a flat tax. Everybody pays. No more free rides. Pare the IRS down to the minimum staffing necessary to collect a flat tax. The entire tax industry (lawyers, accountants, H&R Block) will find something to do. We could shutter half of the federal agencies in existance and we would not suffer for it.
We must have everyone working, especially those who take a handout. With the advent of the internet, anybody can work at home.
We must have rule of law. Eric Holder cannot decide to be racist and get away with it.
We must secure and protect our borders. We must redefine the 14th amendment in regards to birthright citizenship. We must have REAL I.D. We must eject all illegal aliens. We must have an immigration policy that makes sense and we must enforce it. We must pare the deportation process down to 48 hours from apprehension. We have the technology to identify who is a legal resident/visitor and who is not. Deportation should be instantaneous. Any property or money illegally gained should be seized. The money we spend supporting illegal aliens with social programs should be spent on our citizens, legal residents/visitors.
We can do this. We must do this, if we are to remain the freeest nation on earth. Being an American citizen is a right. It must be earned.
Lemon ~ "Chicago's Out?????"
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 12:55am.
"Chicago's Out???? Chicago's OUT???
"CHICAGO'S OUT?"
CHIIIIICAGOOOO's OOOOOOUUUUTTTT?"
'nuff said about this fool.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
No, But...
Submitted by HardRightTurn on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 1:15am.
Tea Party Democrats need to run a conservative against Obama in the primaries if they want to retain the presidency. True Democrats need to take their party back from the liberal progressive socialists. I'm serious. Obama has already lost.
To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html
Don Lemon
Submitted by spinOzone on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 1:56am.
Two words......PETER PRINCIPLE
Just one of those words does it for Don.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 10:35am.
.
CNN is really pathetic. What
Submitted by Martin2717 on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 3:09am.
CNN is really pathetic. What a joke they've become.
Obama running as a conservative..........
Submitted by Qtaug on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 7:03am.
is about as likely as Lemon having moral fiber!
Oh please let him try
Submitted by ohio granny on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 4:11pm.
He would then lose in all 50 states.. 57 states according to the "Won".
Does this mean that the Annointed One
Submitted by johnsonl on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 8:12am.
has lost the gay AND blaque vote? Is there any more of his former support base that he could pi$$ off at this point? He's got 15 months to do it!
This fool ( democrat/liberal
Submitted by pitter43 on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 8:57am.
This fool ( democrat/liberal ) thinks obama should run as a conservative? I wonder what color the sky is on the planet that he's from.
Sky?
Submitted by Boudin on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:03am.
This libtard takes 30 min to pick out his underwear.
Obama should run as who he is.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 11:22am.
A Fascist.
Simple answer to all this mess. Obama is supposed to be the leader. Truth is he couldn't lead a pack of starving wolves if he was wearing lady Gaga's meat dress. He is absolutely pitiful!
Dims argue that He didn't get us to this point. Truth is He did. Bush spent too much, than Bambi spent exponentially more and increased our debt more than Bush and all the other presidents back to George Washington.
Leadership is seeing what is coming and preparing for it, not waiting for it to happen then whining that Congress is being mean to you. Better yet, it's shaping the future to fit your vision. If it doesn't get done t's nobody's fault but yours.
Hitler was an asshole, but he was a leader. Same is true of Stalin, Mao, and Castro. Didn't make them good people, but they got people to follow them, sometimes in a not-so-pleasant way.
If Bambi wants to go down in history with the other "great" Fascist and commie leaders, he needs to take Leadership 101 this summer, and skip the golf.
LOSER!
There is nothing, absolutely NOTHING Obama could do
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 4:57pm.
which would induce Limbaugh to say "Well, I don't agree with the President, but at least he's acting like a leader." And what Rush says also speaks for tens of millions of his followers. When you are thoroughly invested in someone's failure, you're not going to be looking for reasons to hand out compliments on leadership abilities--unless it were some cynical, backhanded slap like "the angry black man-child is learning to lead like his heroes Stalin and Mao".
Jer
So "Thank God for President Obama" wasn't effusive enough?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 5:07pm.
– Rush Limbaugh
SoL...You do realize--well, I guess not-- that Limbaugh's
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 5:55pm.
"effusive praise" was absolute, 100% pure sarcasm--very similar to his mockery after the Somali pirate episode which Rush at first appeared to be applauding Obama's handling of the crisis, but then quickly began ridiculing it as a racially motivated incident resulting in the murder of three black teenagers.
Rush will never compliment Obama--unless it's a pretext to slam him or mock him.
Jer
Opinions being what they are, Jer,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 6:42pm.
and being for the most part the cumulative result of a person's upbringing, experience, education, and, if truth be told, 'druthers' and preferences ---
It still amazes me that anyone outside people having a vested interest in continuing their existence as welfare lottery winners could possibly have anything good to say about Obama.
The man is a complete waste of skin, regardless of what color it is; and those, who by choice, support him, are people who are anathema both to the lifestyle I want to maintain and to the future security of this country.
Even allowing for personal opinion and/or intelligence, I find it perilous that there are such as yourself, avowed liberal Democrat or not, who not only support this pos, but defend him.
MD
"Never trust a man with purple lips."
md...You keep saying that and I have to keep reminding you that
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 6:51pm.
I have neither supported nor defended him unconditionally, unlike Rush who has criticized him unconditionally.
Jer
So, Jer---
Submitted by matthewdean on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 8:04pm.
by peeking out from behind the word "unconditionally", you consider yourself to now be absolved, on a conservative site, of any connection whatsoever with being a liberal Democrat and Obama fan-voter-enthusiast-supporter-apologist, and water carrier?
Well, at least you can still shoot zingers at Rush Limbaugh, nemesis of liberals world-wide because he skewers them unmercifully with truths that just cause them to go batsh*t crazy when he he cuts loose on their sorry butts.
So, just offhand, there, Jer, what has your albatross adorned Adonis done that you feel should exempt him from conservative diatribes?
MD
edit for:
And, of course, you, Jer the lib, don't "unconditionally" support and/or defend the purple-lipped puke, but ol' Rush is definitely a bad person because he does nothing BUT criticize Obama.
I detect a sllght odor of self-aggrandizement wafting through the area.
Maybe Mr. Limbaugh never got an answer either.
Submitted by The Vet on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 12:17am.
What did then Senator Obama mean when he said he was going “to fundamentally transform America”.
Vet, ol'
Submitted by killa37 on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 12:30am.
Vet, ol' buddy.................that might be the last totally HONEST thing that Boy Barry has said.
Jer, that statement is not
Submitted by fitzfong on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 11:34pm.
Jer, that statement is not only hyperbolic, it's lazy. Rush Limbaugh is as invested in Obama's failure as Obama is invested in his own bankrupt ideology. In other words Rush Limbaugh is invested in the failure of Obama's bankrupt ideology, because any success in the advancement of Obama's bankrupt ideology comes at the cost of individual freedom and the potential for real economic growth.
Having interacted with me for the better part of 4 years, you know that I detest Hillary Clinton. Why? Sure, her personality is grating and she makes herself an easy target because she pretends to be an accomplished person when her "accomplishments" have come almost exclusively because she hitched her trailer to a superior intellect. But that's not why I find her so insufferable. It's because of her "I know what's best for you", nanny-state, finger-wagging, "it takes a village" ideological conceit. It's because, at heart, she believes the heavy hand of government is preferable both in practice and outcome to the free exercise of individual will...and because she uses her gender as a shield...framing any criticism of her imbecilic policy positions as an attack on women at-large. However, if she had an ideological epiphany, realizing that the key to economic growth and cultural advancement in this country is limited taxation, limited regulation and an environment that allowed free markets to reflect and satisfy the needs and tastes of as many people as possible, I would be her biggest supporter. And, if Obama had a similar epiphany, Limbaugh would not be "thoroughly invested in his failure". Rather, Limbaugh would be Obama's biggest supporter.
In all the storytelling, messaging, positioning and framing that comes from media and political campaigns, we need to realize that politicians are nothing more than the vessels for delivering on our ideological wishes. Most of them are extremely imperfect people, but their positions are reflective of the values of the people who elected them...at the time they were elected. This is why people like Barney Frank, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Charlie Rangel, Maxine Waters, Barbara Boxer, Chuck Schumer, Sheila Jackson Lee, Nancy Pelosi, George Miller and the like continue to get elected despite their real deficiencies in character and intention.
But since you present something of a strawman argument relative to Rush Limbaugh and whether or not he would praise Obama for "acting like a leader" (whatever that means), why don't you enlighten me? Assuming Limbaugh is genetically predisposed to see nothing of value in Obama's leadership qualities, why don't you make Obama's case? Exactly what about Obama's leadership are we supposed to be impressed with?
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best
Hard Pill To Swallow
Submitted by countmein5050 on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 5:14pm.
Conservatives don't want him. He lacks a spine. They can have him...they created him...they nurtured him and enabled him...now that he's broken they want us to fix him. Typical. But you can't fix stupid.