Open Thread | NewsBusters.org

<a href="http://harvest.AdGardener.com/noscript.aspx?s=16&c=a054f5f7-e081-2c1c-3bdc-5deb2d418cd2" target="_blank"><img src="http://harvest.AdGardener.com/noscript.aspx?s=16&w=728&h=90&c=a054f5f7-e081-2c1c-3bdc-5deb2d418cd2" width="728" height="90" border="0" /></a>
home blogs about forum contact search account “Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias”


Open Thread By NB Staff (Bio \| Archive) March 18, 2008 - 09:43 ET For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Obama to address race and Rev. Wright: An aide to Obama, whose speech will be delivered at a historic building across from Philadelphia's Liberty Bell at 10:15 a.m. EDT (1415 GMT), said the speech will have a strong personal element. Obama worked late into the night on Sunday drafting it...Of particular concern is the uproar over comments by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who served as the pastor at the Chicago church where the Illinois senator was a member for 20 years. What do you expect from this speech? Will it indeed quell concerns about Obama's connection to Wright, or will this controversy doom the junior senator from Illinois's nomination? On the flipside, is Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos -- wherein he's encouraging Republicans in Pennsylvania to re-register as Democrats in time to vote for Hillary in that state's primary next month -- now a mistake? Regardless of Hillary's polarizing nature, won't Obama, as a result of these Wright revelations, now be much easier for McCain to beat in November? Read comments <a href="http://harvest.AdGardener.com/noscript.aspx?s=16&c=122c344b-04b3-4b68-bb30-20e7a66bc14c" target="_blank"><img src="http://harvest.AdGardener.com/noscript.aspx?s=16&w=468&h=60&c=122c344b-04b3-4b68-bb30-20e7a66bc14c" width="468" height="60" border="0" /></a> Most Emailed Stories IBD: Market Dive Due to Impending 'First Socialist President,' Taxes, Protectionism Maxine Waters Caught Lying About Fannie Mae Ties on 'Real Time' Will MSM Report on Obama Membership in Socialist New Party? Mainstream Media Ignore Obama’s Radical Abortion Record In 1996, Dems Were 'Proud to be Associated with' Ayers and Dohrn Related Topics Comments Policy All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters. Viewing options Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes. Obama the Unite Rrrr.....rrrr...uhhhh..is gonna have a challenge March 18, 2008 - 10:02 ET by JayTee This Speech may require Obamarama to get down to the Details, the specifics, the Particulars, and quit circling over the issues at 40,000 feet. "I did NOT have communion with that GD Pastor" would be a start. Martin Luther King was a Republican, so Obama better start thinking like a Republican if he wants to UNITE. Login or register to post comments Email this page Jtee -- Obama missed it & the media is missing it March 18, 2008 - 11:59 ET by Gary Hall Jaytee -- I suggest that he missed it & the media is missing it. 1. Obama can claim that he didn't hear the Rev's hate filled words, however, Michelle Obama not only heard them - she took them to heart. As an adult she was not proud of America until sometime last week, and she considers America to be a mean racist country (she should check out life under the Taliban for a Christian outspoken feminist). She is of corporate America, enjoys a lofty salary and is full of hopelessness. She carries Rev. Wright's message of hate and devisivness in her heart. 2. perhaps they didn't see the clip where the pastor is screaming in hatred, as he thrusts his hips forward, stating that Hillary would as Bill Clinton had F_____ed the blacks just as he did Monica... Rev. Wright: Hillary is married to Bill and Bill have been good to us? No, he ain't! Bill did us just like he did Monica Lewinsky! Congregation: (cheers) Rev. Wright: He was riding dirty! Actually, it's not a rare statement from the black community. It was written and said a lot during and just after the Clinton era -- just was not a heck of a lot of interest from our news folks to get the information out to the voters. Shh... is the name of the game. Officially, Bill Clinton never f---ed the 37 year younger intern, a volunteer worker, who was on his staff in the office of the people in the people's house; rather he just got 10 or so bj's from her, and did the cigar thing, etc. Usually when someone publicly accuses Bill Clinton of doing something that he didn't do, other than him having a pissy tantrum (well, he does that when accused of things that he did do also) he gets the word out (via his media friends). Clinton was all over the tube yesterday - not a word. He was not asked. Why the silence? If Rev. Wright was a white pastor and was accusing President Clinton of having had sexual intercourse with Lewinski, would not we expect the MSM (and the big cheese himself) out attacking him, calling him a liar and doing all they could to destroy the associated Republican candidate. This reverend should be held accountable for spreading lies about the great Bill Clinton. Scene: Finger wagging in the air: "I did not have sexual intercourse with that woman. Reverend Wright is a liar." Login or register to post comments Email this page G.H. It's a No Sale - - DOA March 18, 2008 - 12:37 ET by JayTee I never Met David Duke, yet I "rebuke" his hate and Agenda for America. Obama today, said he cannot dis-own the GD Reverend, no more than he can Dis-own the Black Community. See Duke comment above, I dis-own the KKK of A. It's real easy for me . . . Duke is White and so am I, but It's easy to do. What's the problem Obama ? You trying to be everything to everyone....Right... Login or register to post comments Email this page Jtee - if Obama March 18, 2008 - 12:58 ET by Gary Hall Jtee - if Obama wants to be everything to me, then he could start by telling his wife to shut up and to stop spreading the Rev. Wright's message of hate and hopelessness and lack of pride in America -- and furthermore, he could promise to cut my taxes. (;~> gh Login or register to post comments Email this page Uh-oh, another person March 18, 2008 - 09:54 ET by Roger the Shrubber Uh-oh, another person involved with the Clintons has disappeared… Login or register to post comments Email this page Rog, March 18, 2008 - 10:23 ET by R D Helm So I guess we just have to wait until he shows up on this list. Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy! Login or register to post comments Email this page Rog and R D...what is the March 18, 2008 - 11:29 ET by Jer Rog and R D...what is the latest figure on the Clinton body count? I may have to retract my vow not to vote for Hillary if she is the nominee. If the Clintons are so brilliant and clever that they can dispatch that many victims and still avoid the long arm of the law, then maybe their intellectual prowess is just what we need back in the White House. Jer Login or register to post comments Email this page Rog - perhaps he was involved with the train station? March 18, 2008 - 12:25 ET by Gary Hall Rog - perhaps he was involved with the demolition of the almost soon to be recognized as a historical landmark Choctaw train station? Historic Choctaw Train Station Was Railroaded for Clinton Library Better pictures can be seen here, as the old structure was actually protected within an outer building: http://www.trainweb.org/choctawterminal/builders.htm http://www.trainweb.org/choctawterminal/history.htm How the Clinton machine operated: Future Potential (September 2001) Present plans call for the Choctaw freight station to be razed and the area to be used by the Clinton Presidential Library. Serious and extensive consideration should be given to preserving this structure, incorporating it with the Choctaw passenger station to create a unique asset for the presidential library grounds. The two-story office portion of the building readily lends itself to usage as offices or research areas, while the large open space of the former warehouse area could become a public meeting area, an adjunct to the Farmer's Market, a food court, or any number of other uses. November 21, 2001 postscript: On the day before Thanksgiving, demolition crews moved onto the former May Supply Company site, quickly demolishing the old Choctaw freight station in the center of the complex at the same time that the Friends of the Choctaw Terminal were in court attempting to secure a restraining order to block the demolition. On destroying an art form and the work of recently freed black slaves over 100 years ago: The Workers Perhaps the true artists involved in the construction of the Choctaw freight station were the trades workers, particularly the brick layers and stone masons who actually executed the designs of the architects and engineers. Many of these craftsmen, their individual identities now lost with the passage of time, were African-American. The older members of this group were 'freed men,' former slaves, according to various WPA Federal Writer's Project interviews conducted in the mid-1930s. Their obvious pride in workmanship is evident upon detailed examination of the brick and stonework. Note the extremely thin mortar joints in the quoins bordering the main entry, and the perfect placement and thin mortar around the voussoirs, the wedge shaped bricks which were hand trimmed to construct the true arches over windows and doorways. Today, even when a keystone is present, arches are formed in a much more crude design using same-size brick with large, irregular mortar joints to compensate for proper arch curvature. Brickwork of the calibre seen on the Choctaw freight station, combined with the premium quality of brick used, is a now a vanished art form. Did the MSM care? Login or register to post comments Email this page Obama Always Has Been Unqualified March 18, 2008 - 09:56 ET by CGatton "...won't Obama...now be much easier for McCain to beat..." Obama always has been the easier candidate to beat in the general election. It has simply been well hidden by all the hoopla surounding "the first black with a chance." The Wright diatribes do make it a little more obvious to the middle roaders that he is unqualified to be President, and make the reporters work a little harder to try to make him palatable to the country. V/R Clyde "...the aspirants to tyranny are either the...men of the state, who in democracies are demagogues,... or those who hold great offices, and have a long tenure.." - *Aristotle, Politics,* c350BC Login or register to post comments Email this page Warrantless Wiretapping's TRUE Danger March 18, 2008 - 09:56 ET by sarcasmo Julian Sanchez is right, the problem is that political surveilance is irresistable, and history proves it. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page So help me along with this. March 18, 2008 - 10:30 ET by Gary P Jackson So help me along with this. "Warrantless wire taps" as they apply to FISA are about listening in on suspected terrorists overseas. And since many of those calls, and e-mails, end up being routed through the US, even though both parties are overseas, there has to be court oversight. And of course, if a suspected terrorist is talking to someone here in the States, it becomes even more important to know what is going on. We know that most of the data mining is done by computers, that search for key words and phrases. There are just too many communications to have a human trying to hear them all. And, as of yet, no one has been able to credibly prove they have been falsely targeted. So are you saying that America should be deaf, dumb, and blind, because libertarians are afraid that someone will hear them and Uncle Charlie talking about the baseball game? Or them talking to their dealer about a dime bag? I just want to understand the thought process. Login or register to post comments Email this page Nobody said America should be deaf, dumb, or blind. March 18, 2008 - 10:35 ET by sarcasmo I just don't trust this executive branch, or the next one, to use unlimited wiretapping powers in a solely non-political, anti-terror, way, because history says they haven't and they won't. Same as Sanchez said. That's not the same as the strawman-words you're trying to put in libertarians' mouths -- not by a long shot... "Go get a warrant" isn't too much to ask, if they really need one, and it's the right question for the Judicial Branch to ask when-not-if they don't. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page Admit It: It's About the Dime Bag! March 18, 2008 - 10:50 ET by Tinian Julian Sanchez is full of crap, as evidenced by his comment on Nixon. I'll bet you don't have a clue as to what Watergate was really about. Login or register to post comments Email this page What did he say about Tricky March 18, 2008 - 10:54 ET by sarcasmo To get your panties in a knot today?? The party about Tricky Dick seems factual & historical, to me, but I'm sure you can cite something that proves he's "full of crap" regarding Tricky and you just forgot. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page Ignorance Is Bliss March 18, 2008 - 10:59 ET by Tinian Like I said before: I'll bet you don't have a clue as to what Watergate was really about. Login or register to post comments Email this page No answer, whatsoever March 18, 2008 - 11:00 ET by sarcasmo You lose, again. Watergate was about the Dems and Tricky taking crooked money from the same guy. Read "Citizen Hughes." JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not** cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page You're Sooooo Wrong Again! March 18, 2008 - 11:10 ET by Tinian Watergate was about the Dems and Tricky taking crooked money from the same guy. Read "Citizen Hughes." Wrong book. Read Silent Coup. Login or register to post comments Email this page I'll consider it, but you have YET to answer me March 18, 2008 - 11:11 ET by sarcasmo How, exactly, is he "full of crap" about Tricky Dick??? Answer, for once, please. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page Yes -- He's Full of Crap March 18, 2008 - 11:20 ET by Tinian From the article: Few presidents were quite as brazen as Nixon, whom the Church Committee found had "authorized a program of wiretaps which produced for the White House purely political or personal information unrelated to national security. The hyper-partisan Church Commission is not a credible source to cite when evaluating intelligence practices or Richard Nixon. Login or register to post comments Email this page You're saying it's "hyper partisan" March 18, 2008 - 11:25 ET by sarcasmo Doesn't change the fact that the same Tricky Dick you now defend (who was also a bit of a racial/religious bigot from those tapes -- ironies -- or are they double-standards? -- abound with you!) was imperial and, well, Nixonian in his pursuit of political ends. Someone's full of crap regarding Tricky, but as usual it's you, not Sanchez. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page Again -- No Specifics March 18, 2008 - 11:32 ET by Tinian You can duck and dance and weave by dumping on Nixon (a particularly easy target), but you can't change the fact that Sanchez made an unsupported claim. Unless, of course, you believe the work of the Church Commission valid. Login or register to post comments Email this page It's up to you March 18, 2008 - 11:39 ET by sarcasmo To disprove the Church Commission. With specifics (go form your own investigation, I guess). You've so far failed. As usual. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page Repeating History March 18, 2008 - 12:04 ET by Tinian There were two purposes for the Church Commission: 1) Cause maximum embarrassment and damage to the Republican Party. 2) Cause maximum damage U.S. intelligence agencies. Wait until Hillary is president with a majority in both houses of congress. We'll have another Church Commission, devastating our intelligence gathering capabilities. The Democrats will put up dozens of walls, each higher than the one built by Jamie Gorelick. And if Hillary really wants listen in on someone, she'll break every law in the book to do it. We all know the law means nothing to the Clintons. Login or register to post comments Email this page In the past, enthusiasm for March 18, 2008 - 12:19 ET by Jer In the past, enthusiasm for laws such as this is largely determined by two factors: 1.) the party in control of the executive branch and 2.) the party in control of Congress. In the mid-90's, Republicans were primarily responsible for blocking and/or stalling Clinton's anti-terrorism measures. Also, Gorelick was not responsible for building any new walls between intelligence agencies. She did attempt to clarify what was already in existence. The Bush administration continued to observe and rely upon that clarification. Jer Login or register to post comments Email this page Sarc: I will support March 18, 2008 - 10:52 ET by BD Sarc: I will support your "Just get a warrent" position if you will support mine. That being - appoint and officially swear in all 35G O-3's as judges in the Fisa court. Login or register to post comments Email this page Huh?? March 18, 2008 - 10:56 ET by sarcasmo Who ARE these proposed judges? And I don't screen 'em, the Senate does, so the provision's irrelevant. The constitution you swore to uphold doesn't mention military jargon entities, and it does mention warrants, for a reason. Plus I'm told ("proof" coming shortly, I assume) Julian Sanchez is "full of crap" about Tricky Dick... JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page Who are these March 18, 2008 - 11:02 ET by BD Who are these judges? Do you mean who currently makes up the FISA Court/ Or are you discussing my proposition to appoint all 35G O-3's to the judiciary? The constitution you swore to uphold doesn't mention military jargon entities, So, there is no prohibition in appointing all 35G of a certain rank to the FISA Court, right? I mean, the constitution simply states that judges be appointed, not who should be appointed, right? Login or register to post comments Email this page No constitutional prohibition March 18, 2008 - 11:10 ET by sarcasmo But still Senate confirmation. And under FISA you can get a warrant after the fact. The important part is to get them on record getting the warrant, so if later it's political (as history proves such a power always might-be abused, absent constant* oversight) the political corruption can be tracked. Imagine a vengeful Hillary with the exact same powers you now advocate for the Executive Branch. (I kept saying this, without intellectual effect, to Democrats as partisan as you during the Clinton administration.) JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not* cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page Another Nutty Idea March 18, 2008 - 11:14 ET by Tinian Okay -- let's get your position straight. You would require a warrant to listen in on an Israeli talking to an Australian. Right? Why? Login or register to post comments Email this page Read the article March 18, 2008 - 11:15 ET by sarcasmo You're trying to get by with just the strawman...Dud. Again. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page Run Away -- Again March 18, 2008 - 11:25 ET by Tinian I just want to know your position. Do you believe The Constitution requires a warrant for a U.S. intelligence agency to listen in on an Israeli talking to an Australian? What do you think? P.S. -- the answer isn't in the article. Login or register to post comments Email this page The article correctly states March 18, 2008 - 11:30 ET by sarcasmo That history says widespread surveilance powers WILL be politically abused. Thus, like it or not, the answer is in the article. Does your specific case require a warrant? No, I don't think so. Does the electronic equivalent of a gill-net, which WON'T just get the damfurriners, require one? Yeah, I'd say it does. I don't "run away," and everyone here who's seen me take you & others on toe to toe knows you're full of it if you try to claim I do. And speaking of running away, once-again, like Democrats in the '90s, your side is running away from my "imagine a vindictive Hillary with the powers you now advocate" statement, because it's just as inconveniently-true for you now as it was for them then. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page MARK THIS DAY!!!!! March 18, 2008 - 11:46 ET by Tinian You actually answered a question! But then you had to ruin it by trying to muddy things up. My question wasn't about an elctronic "gill net". We actually do have information on specific individuals and specifically target their communications. Do you still think it would be constitutional for a U.S. intelligence agency to listen on a targeted Israeli talking to a targeted Australian if both of them were outside of the U.S., but their communication was routed through facilities inside the U.S.? These are the kinds of specific questions that have to be addressed when dealing with proposed changes to FISA. And Sanchez doesn't address them. Login or register to post comments Email this page Since the senate already March 18, 2008 - 11:49 ET by BD Since the senate already appoints the 35G's the point is moot. Since the judiciary is already hyper politicized (Being selected strictly from members of the hyper politiciized "Legal Caste" how could it not be.) You want oversight? How about appointing all 35G O-4's the FISA appeals court? That should do better than what we currently have. Login or register to post comments Email this page No, it's not. March 18, 2008 - 11:52 ET by sarcasmo Is a "35G" a lifetime appointment mentioned in the Constitution? I didn't think so. And from what I've heard, FISA is about as close as the Federal Judiciary has ever come to a rubber stamp, anyway. I know that under Clinton you could count denials among 1000s of warrant requests on one hand, and it's probably a similar ratio today. What do you want changed about it?? JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page It Only Takes One Time March 18, 2008 - 12:33 ET by Tinian Back in August of 2001 a certain FBI agent repeatedly tried to get permission from the FISA court to examine the contents of a certain laptop. The FISA court said no. What was in that laptop? The plans for 9/11. There was no rubber stamp by FISA that time. Login or register to post comments Email this page Yep, I still hold my March 18, 2008 - 12:30 ET by BD Yep, I still hold my appointement as a 35D. I will after I enter the "Retired Reserve" and will until the day I die. Is it mentioned in the consitution? Yep, see section 8. What do I want changed about it? I want the option to get the warrent granted in real time as the collection is ongoing by a person trained in the art on the scene. In order to do this we will need to appoint vast new numbers of the court to operate 24 hours approriately and there fore we will use the approrirate people trained for the task. Currently, member of the FISA court do not do any of that. Login or register to post comments Email this page Here's the problem with March 18, 2008 - 11:31 ET by Gary P Jackson Here's the problem with "get a warrant". By the time you jump through the hoops, it will be irrelevant. Plus, the way it would work, is you would have to get a warrant for both the caller, and the one he is calling. It doesn't work. It's too slow. The original FISA laws were written before everyone on the planet had a cell phone, and a PC. The FISA law never foresaw the world's communications being routed through America. As you know, no warrant is required to surveil two parties who are not in the US. However, the fact their calls are routed through America changes that. It's as if they were both standing on American soil. Now unless I'm wrong (and everyone will tell me if I am) even though the "warrantless wire taps" can happen, they are still subject to FISA court review. I know everything can be abused. Even the most honorable of people can suffer lapses in judgment. But it is foolish to destroy a system that has worked well, caught terrorists, and kept America safe. And as of yet, has not had a provable case of abuse. Had we been aggressively using FISA, during the Clinton years, 9/11 might have been prevented. You bring up Nixon. Well, there is a lot more to the story. But, if we take it at face value, Nixon paid the price. He was forced to resign. For a long time he was shunned. That's not inconsequential. And, Jerry Ford was even tainted, because he pardoned Nixon. So, there was a "check and balance" that came into play. On could even go back to J Edgar Hoover, who it seemed had an FBI file on everyone. Just how legal was that? And he didn't need FISA to do this stuff! I guess my point is this. If someone is gonna abuse a system. If someone is gonna be dirty, no law on the books will stop them. They will figure out a way. So why make an entire Nation vulnerable to terrorist attack, over some theoretical situation, that has not happened. We are blessed to live in a country that grants so many rights to it's citizens. The American experiment changed the world, and is still the most successful form of government there is. But it would be fool hearted to let this theoretical argument sink this experiment. While our freedoms are sacred, none of them matter, if we are not safe. Login or register to post comments Email this page But as I said March 18, 2008 - 11:38 ET by sarcasmo Under FISA, you've ALWAYS been able to "get a warrant" after the fact. I want the court review you claim they're subject to, but the administration has been fighting. I'd prefer more-proactive "checks and balances" than Tricky Dick got, thanks. That hurt this nation, whether partisan Republicans like admitting it or not. No excuses for criminality (which did, like it or not, involve suitcases of cash to both Tricky and "the Happy Warrior" from Howard Hughes, IMO). And this fight for Executive Branch power predates the Bush admininstration. As I mentioned to a less-mature poster, Democrats said very similar things (right down to the BS drug accusations as a first line of offense attempting to substitute for "argument") under the last Democrat President, so I'm somewhat used to these arguments via deja-vu. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page Wrong Again March 18, 2008 - 12:18 ET by Tinian Under FISA, you've ALWAYS* been able to "get a warrant" after the fact.* Really? Ask Colleen Rowley. Login or register to post comments Email this page I've been wire tiapped March 18, 2008 - 11:41 ET by FastEd and I can't prove it - and that goes for everyone I know, have met and will meet in the future, and we all ask the same question, how have we been affected, personally, professionally, and how much have we lost, monitarily, etc.? There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V Login or register to post comments Email this page Not the point -- see article March 18, 2008 - 11:47 ET by sarcasmo You're not politically interesting enough to be affected. The article's conclusion (which I'd wager few here got-to...) fits here: Your personal phone calls and e-mails may be of limited interest to the spymasters of Langley and Ft. Meade. But if you think an executive branch unchecked by courts won't turn its "national security" surveillance powers to political ends -- well, it would be a first. It's hard to measure freedom, but we seem to be losing a bit of it by ignoring our own Bill of Rights. Once again, my life-experience of the '90s with Clinton's defenders causes me to await the differing tune from my conservative friends the millisecond a Democrat takes power. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page Too little, Too late March 18, 2008 - 09:57 ET by sms5217 Sorry, Barry, but too little, too late. This "Reverend" is going to be a granite block around your neck for the rest of the campaign. Those of us who think you are a complete and utter fraud will not let you weasel your way around this one. Ever. Further, your halo of inevitability and inpenetrability are now officially gone. You are simply a tired, old-school, race-baiting huckster, a typical leftist pol, a snake-oil salesman for the aggrievances of losers, and the only people who have your back are the people of the pews in that abomination of a church, and the leftist media. Having said all that, given the wide distribution and penetration of the drive-by media, and the vacuousness of the general public, I STILL will not be surprised if he somehow pulls it off, much to my chagrin. It is the "audacity" of hope, after all. Trial lawyers are the scum of the earth Login or register to post comments Email this page Obama's fundamental problem March 18, 2008 - 11:26 ET by TruthMonger Obama's fundamental problem has always been Kerry and algore... Those guys were way more qualified and they couldn't even win... So what can Obama do about that - MSM spin? Great speeches? Flashy ads...? That's what Kerry and Gore tried... I really don't think we will need "operation chaos" or the Rev. Wright - they may even help Obama's cause if we're not careful... Login or register to post comments Email this page Al Sharpton and Fox News March 18, 2008 - 10:10 ET by ThisnThat Does anyone know why Al Sharpton is the most frequent guess on Fox News these days, and why Fox News thinks this man's brand of racism is meaningful in the discussion of Obama or anything else? What a windbag. And, he is very dismissive of any opinions contrary to his own. He doesn't allow a discussion to take place -- only his own dogma statements. I, for one, am tired of hearing his voice. ___________________________________ If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber Login or register to post comments Email this page I was asking about the same thing..... March 18, 2008 - 10:13 ET by Prester John ....with regard to Hannity always having him on. Reverend Al must have pics of Hannity with McGreevey and his wife or gives him a kickback after each appearance. There's no other way to explain it. Login or register to post comments Email this page TnT... Having this March 18, 2008 - 10:34 ET by bigtimer TnT... Having this hypocrite on Fox regarding anything to do with Wright/Obama is outrageous...he has made his own racist remarks in the past that he has never apologized for... It is maddening when Fox or any network puts this POS on to tell us out here in the real world anything...about anything. Login or register to post comments Email this page Court Jester March 18, 2008 - 10:53 ET by Gothampc My guess is that they know he is like a Court Jester and that by putting him on, people will see how foolish he looks. Same with Geraldo. Why does Fox give that moron Geraldo his own show and then allow him to appear on every other show? Login or register to post comments Email this page What? No live chat for the message from the "messiah?" March 18, 2008 - 10:15 ET by R D Helm LOL-Too bad. And what is Al doing on FNC yet again? Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy! Login or register to post comments Email this page RD -- yeah. I see March 18, 2008 - 10:20 ET by Jack Bauer RD -- yeah. I see Sharpton so many times on Fox, I qualify as an honorary member of his Church. Well.. till they find out I'm white. Vote 4 change. Vote 4 anything. See Jack & Mr Shy's first campaign ad for the ONLY viable 3rd party candidate. Login or register to post comments Email this page Jack, March 18, 2008 - 10:32 ET by R D Helm LOL-I bet if you were to make a monetary contribution to Al's "church," he would still gladly take it anyway. Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy! Login or register to post comments Email this page I see Sharpton so many March 18, 2008 - 10:38 ET by Jer I see Sharpton so many times on Fox... Me too, Jack. Hannity and O'Reilly love to portray him as the face and voice of the Democratic party. Scares away the moderates and indies. Jer Login or register to post comments Email this page Jer, March 18, 2008 - 10:40 ET by R D Helm LOL-It just scares me, period. :-O Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy! Login or register to post comments Email this page R D...Reverend Al has March 18, 2008 - 10:46 ET by Jer R D...Reverend Al has actually toned down his act in recent years. Still, call me cynical, but I think Fox knows exactly what it's doing. Jer Login or register to post comments Email this page Jer, March 18, 2008 - 10:52 ET by R D Helm LOL-Well, being a bit of a cynic myself, you might have a point. Actually, I only watch Special Report w/ Mr. Hume on that network. Its the only TV news show I can stand. Besides, I can read much faster than crap moves on TV or video. Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy! Login or register to post comments Email this page True... and have you March 18, 2008 - 10:49 ET by Jack Bauer True... and have you noticed Al is only half the Al he used to be? He looks like he's on the Kvorkian Diet. Vote 4 change. Vote 4 anything. See Jack & Mr Shy's first campaign ad for the ONLY viable 3rd party candidate. Login or register to post comments Email this page Cindy Sheehan is back March 18, 2008 - 10:20 ET by ricklail Can you believe that this moonbat is defending Wright? I refuse to reconize him as a reverend. No true man of God is going to say the things he said. If you ain't the lead dog, the scenery never changes.-Lewis Grizzard Login or register to post comments Email this page Oh you go girl! Maybe March 18, 2008 - 10:30 ET by bigtimer Oh you go girl! Maybe some more of this pathetic blather will help her beat the blinky-eyed leftist leader Pelosi in Nov. ROFLMAO... Login or register to post comments Email this page I need a hot scalding March 18, 2008 - 10:32 ET by Dan The Man 2 I need a hot scalding shower now with plenty of disinffectanct after opening that link. Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. Login or register to post comments Email this page I won't matter what Obama says. March 18, 2008 - 10:32 ET by Missouri Conservative Obama can say literally say anything with his oratorial style and the MSM will lap it up. He could honestly read from the Philadelphia phone book and various "pundits" would be panting and having heart palpitations. As far as the voting public goes in flyover country....I think the genie is out of the bottle, so to speak. Virutally no one is going to be listening to this speech - and the ones that are will be only a tiny fraction of those that heard Rev Wright. Mitt Romney's much hyped "Mormon speech" was touted highly, but in the end, didn't really change much for his candidacy. "women and minorities hardest hit" Login or register to post comments Email this page MC March 18, 2008 - 10:44 ET by Noel Sheppard MC, So, are you changing your mind about which candidate will be easier for McCain to beat? Think the Wright revelations alter the equation a bit? ns Login or register to post comments Email this page Still not convinced, but feeling more confident. March 18, 2008 - 10:53 ET by Missouri Conservative Again, the difference I see is in the down-ballot races. With HRC at the top of the ticket, EVERY Republican in the country will be running against her, and it will likely work. I don't think Obama will have that kind of drag effect on congressional & senate races. "women and minorities hardest hit" Login or register to post comments Email this page Okay, so where is he? Its 10:32am March 18, 2008 - 10:35 ET by R D Helm Still rehearsing, perhaps? I will say the flags are a nice touch, though. Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy! Login or register to post comments Email this page Seems Obama is going on March 18, 2008 - 10:35 ET by bigtimer Seems Obama is going on Clintoon time.... I'm waiting...and waiting... Login or register to post comments Email this page bt, March 18, 2008 - 10:38 ET by R D Helm LOL-This is starting to look like a government operation. Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy! Login or register to post comments Email this page RD... I'm chucklin' March 18, 2008 - 10:42 ET by bigtimer RD... I'm chucklin' too...after I posted Isaw your post right above mine...talk about funny. I also like your definition above...govt. operation indeed. No matter what he says you can be sure the majority of the msm will be all a twitter with their kudos and talking points at the ready. Login or register to post comments Email this page bt, March 18, 2008 - 10:48 ET by R D Helm At this rate, they are going to have to order pizzas for the media people. LOL-Maybe that's what Obama is doing. Too bad they won't fire up a live chat for this. This is the sort of thing that is made for. Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy! Login or register to post comments Email this page Hey RD... LOL...I'm glad March 18, 2008 - 10:55 ET by bigtimer Hey RD... LOL...I'm glad it is kind of slow...I'm just learing to use Firefox today, I cannot use IE anymore for this site...so I am forced to learn this program or whatever the correct term is...hope I catch on quick. Here comes 'da man! Login or register to post comments Email this page Tick...tick...tick... March 18, 2008 - 10:54 ET by jpatch 10:52 AM Tick...tick...tick... Login or register to post comments Email this page He's gettin' late-enough March 18, 2008 - 10:59 ET by sarcasmo To become a nominee for the "Rudy G., famously-late for no apparent reason" category. JMR A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover. Login or register to post comments Email this page He's on now (11:10) March 18, 2008 - 11:17 ET by ThisnThat "Past discrimination explains the disparities now existing between the African American community and the Greater American Community at large". Hey, Obama -- this disparity wouldn't have anything to do with Black attitudes, would it? Things like "don't be like Whitey"; don't be caught studying; have to learn "Ebonics"? He's got to stop complaining about the past, and start recognizing true cause-and-affect in the current world. This is a speech that only serves to justify continued white-wash by the MSM. ___________________________________ If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber Login or register to post comments Email this page Quick Question March 18, 2008 - 10:46 ET by candance If Obama cares so much and so deeply for the people of Chicago, why is he giving this speech in Philadelphia? Login or register to post comments Email this page Are you kidding me? March 18, 2008 - 10:49 ET by candance Is this guy comparing Obama to George Washington? Is this a joke? Login or register to post comments Email this page yes, he did try that March 18, 2008 - 10:56 ET by jpatch Yes, not only is Barack compared to George Washington, but Abraham Lincoln of course...the most peaceful President. Here we go... Login or register to post comments Email this page Candance, March 18, 2008 - 10:57 ET by R D Helm He is what you might call a true believer. Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy! Login or register to post comments Email this page Something's wrong. March 18, 2008 - 10:54 ET by R D Helm And who is this clown? The set-up man? Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy! Login or register to post comments Email this page Down With DST! March 18, 2008 - 10:56 ET by CGatton As I grow older, the twice yearly time manipulation known as Daylight Savings Time (DST) becomes harder and harder. My gut has always told me it was nonsense, after all conservation as a physical principle does not apply to time, and hence it cannot be 'saved,' 'stored,' 'banked,' or anything else. Lately I've been tempted to move to Arizona just to avoid such shenanigans - but my better sense always intrudes, for if you associate with a lot of old people, pretty soon you start to think you're old! A few days ago I saw the headline of an article on DST, but only got around to reading it this morning. Shazzam! DST doesn't save energy, but instead costs more. Oh, some small saving is realized in the spring, but is more than offset (several times offset) by the excess used in the late summer/early fall. Rather than link the article, I provide one to the actual study here for your perusal. (Oops - I did both - oh well) Down with daylight savings time! Join the crusade today! Abolish this bi-annual madness, this useless drain on energy, both electrical to run all that AC equipment, and biological that upsets my sleeping patterns. (And it upsets my stomach too, such utter foolishness!) :o) V/R Clyde "...the aspirants to tyranny are either the...men of the state, who in democracies are demagogues,... or those who hold great offices, and have a long tenure.." - *Aristotle, Politics,* c350BC** Login or register to post comments Email this page Mornin' Clyde... Hey for March 18, 2008 - 11:02 ET by bigtimer Mornin' Clyde... Hey for once.... in this instance I could not agree with you more! LOL... Login or register to post comments Email this page A Start March 18, 2008 - 11:10 ET by CGatton "...in this instance I could not agree with you more!" lol - Of such small beginnings are mighty alliances forged! Have a good day chasing dragons. V/R Clyde "...the aspirants to tyranny are either the...men of the state, who in democracies are demagogues,... or those who hold great offices, and have a long tenure.." - *Aristotle, Politics,* c350BC** Login or register to post comments Email this page Original Sin? March 18, 2008 - 10:58 ET by candance Slavery was original sin? What is that supposed to even mean? And his campaign is all about finishing the work of the abolitionists? He can't say jack about Hillary making this a racial issue. Login or register to post comments Email this page cd... He's getting into March 18, 2008 - 11:05 ET by bigtimer cd... He's getting into the meat of Wright now...and making excuses so far...okay now he said Wright is wrong, but going on to other things, now he is back to Wright, saying no matter what he says about his condemnation for his words it still won't be enough....now he is back to excuses, and if I hear Wright was a marine one more time! I cannot wait to hear what Rush has to say. Login or register to post comments Email this page What do I expect from it? March 18, 2008 - 11:02 ET by ksimm81 I expect him to brush over the fact that he KNEW what his reverend stood for despite his implying that he never heard his Pastor say thosse harsh things. I am black and I lifelong attender of black churches. But I have never heard any black preachers spew the nonsense that 'Reverend' Wright spewed. If I did, or ever do, there is an excellent chance that I will walk right out of that church. Here we are trying to heal racial tensions and that nut job of the cloth is flaming them. He is no more relevant than Jackson and Sharpton. Obama becoming our next Commander in Chief would be a huge mistake.