Martin Bashir Implicates Bachmann in Group's Pledge: Does She Support a 'Return to the Days of Slavery?'
MSNBC's Martin Bashir on Monday wondered if Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum support "a return to the days of slavery" after the two GOP hopefuls signed a pledge on upholding traditional marriage.
Teasing a segment on the topic, the cable anchor mused, "Next, the problem with promises. Did two Republican hopefuls really sign a pledge suggesting a return to the days of slavery?"
[See video below. MP3 audio here.]
Bashir covered the language in a "marriage vow" put together by the Family Leader, a conservative social group in Iowa. In their pledge, the organization suggested, "a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American President."
Now, regardless of the historical inaccuracies in the pledge (most slave families weren't allowed to stay together), it's disingenuous to suggest Bachmann and Santorum would sit down and sign a pledge advocating for slavery to return.
Additionally, although the pledge was clearly poorly worded, it didn't advocate bringing back the institution (or anything close to that).
As Politico reported, the Family Leader has withdrawn the statement, saying that the original intent could be "misconstrued":
“After careful deliberation and wise insight and input from valued colleagues we deeply respect, we agree that the statement referencing children born into slavery can be misconstrued, and such misconstruction can detract from the core message of the Marriage Vow: that ALL of us must work to strengthen and support families and marriages between one woman and one man," the group's officials said in a statement. "We sincerely apologize for any negative feelings this has caused, and have removed the language from the vow.”
While talking with The Grio's Goldie Taylor, Bashir didn't buy this explanation, alleging outright racism from the group: "Now, this statement, and I have to say that both of the candidates have now withdrawn in the light of this pledge that they discovered, but it sounded like to me something of a Freudian slip that this organization does believe that African-American children were better off if their parents were slaves."
A partial transcript of the July 11 segment, which aired at 3:15pm EDT, follows:
3:12
MARTIN BASHIR: Next, the problem with promises. Did two Republican hopefuls really sign a pledge suggesting a return to the days of slavery?
3:15
BASHIR: President Obama pledging today to push the limits to resolve the debt ceiling crisis, but try as he may, a pledge by Republicans of no new taxes may yet thwart those plans. Meanwhile, two of the top Republican candidates, Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum are backtracking from controversial pledges of their own. Both have become the first signatories of the Iowa organization's marriage vow, a pledge to uphold the notion of a traditional family. But, the document has raised eyebrows after a portion of suggested that African American children were better off as slaves. It reads, "A child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American president." Remarkable. I'm joined now by Goldie Taylor, an MSNBC contributor and contributing editor for the Grio.com. Good afternoon, Goldie. Now, this statement, and I have to say that both of the candidates have now withdrawn in the light of this pledge that they discovered, but it sounded like to me something of a Freudian slip that this organization does believe that African-American children were better off if their parents were slaves.
GOLDIE TAYLOR: You know, who is to say what they believe or don't believe, but to say that African-American children were better off in 1860 as opposed to 2011 is, you know, a bit more than a Freudian slip, it is an outright racist slap is what it is. To say that, you know, black children living on a plantation with both parents during that time is just simply historically wrong. You know, black fathers were typically sold off away from the family, and so typically, you know, those children were not raised by two parents in 1860, let lone by two parents who give them the love and support they needed today. I will say about 1860, it was the last time in American history there was full employment by African-Americans.
BASHIR: That's true. The President, even just before he was elected made comment, did he not, of irresponsible fathers, particularly in relation to African-American families. So there is some truth in the story or none whatsoever?
TAYLOR: It is absolutely clear and critical that we talk about absentee fathers in 2011, whether they are black fathers, white father or Hispanic fathers. And, so, yes, there is a crisis today in terms of whether or not fathers can be present and accountable for the children. That's a crisis that needs to be addressed. And I would assert if there is a worthy pledge to be put out there, it should be a pledge to work on a daily basis to make sure that parents have the resources, you know, and remove the barriers that are necessary to keep the families intact as long as possible, and that is a pledge that we are willing to get behind.
BASHIR: But, not 1860.
TAYLOR: But to apply it to 1860 and the plight of people of color in 1860s is a flat out racist statement.
- Scott Whitlock's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
→ Bashir
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:20pm.
Of course she's against Slavery. She's not a Democrat.
Santorum and Bachmann are not Republican "hopefuls"
Submitted by Texndoc on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:26pm.
They are the "Republican hopeless". In this economy with this country and world crisis the last thing a Republican needs to be doing is "signing documents" that are divisive and hateful about marriage and slavery and gays. I saw Santorum on CNN - guy basically came off as NOT HAVING read the whole thing and WISHING he hadn't signed it. Nice.
I'll be glad when they're both back where they came from and we have serious contenders. And - I like both of them. But grow up and act what you both are - as likely as me to be on the ticket.
Agreed
Submitted by paragrouper on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:39pm.
Neither has demonstrated they are the right person for the job.
Anything a Conservative,
Submitted by tcm14 on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 5:17pm.
Anything a Conservative, says, does, or signs will be portrayed by the left as divisive and hateful about marriage, slavery, gays, minorities, etc., etc., so your advice that this is the last thing they need to be doing is pointless. ANYTHING they do will be portrayed that way.
You're right. Anyone that
Submitted by Immortal Fish on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 5:24pm.
You're right. Anyone that holds themselves accountable for what they believe in by signing their name to a pledge has obviated themselves to be unworthy.
::eyeroll::
It is with this language that we help them destroy our potential candidates.
Again, the Dems fall back on
Submitted by robert108 on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:32pm.
Again, the Dems fall back on their tried and true tactic: lying smear and namecalling.
Really? Time to drag out the
Submitted by Snappy on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:40pm.
Really?
Time to drag out the tired old canard of racism? Dont the dems have any other tricks in their bag this election cycle?
Slavery?
Submitted by Curly on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:41pm.
Bashir is one incredibly stupid, s.o.b.!
Oh, we're going back to the racist meme again?
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:46pm.
Okay, fine. Funny how the research paper cited by the Family Leader included three black authors. And funny how Bashir and others are mischaracterizing the original statement to mean something other than what it said. -It never suggested that black babies would be better born into slavery, it simply stated that black babies born today are more likely to be born into a single parent (mother) household than a two parent household. They may have misinterpreted the dates noted in the research, but they were only implying statistics, not merit. But, this is par for the course and Bashir is doing his level best to out Olbermann both Schultz and Matthews. Gotta give him credit for pursuing his goal, I guess.
On another note...
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:49pm.
Is there anything angrier -right of center- than hardcore libertarians? Geeze dudes, smoke a blunt and chill.
Sorry for the OT comment- but the caps are becoming too frequent for my taste.
Fight back of charges of racism
Submitted by nkviking75 on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 5:05pm.
I've read the language of the original pledge. (I failed to find a record of it anywhere. Libs aren't likely to quote it accurately for fear someone might think for themselves.) It may not have been the best paragraph written, but it was not racist and certainly did not advocate slavery. The latter is such a ridiculous charge that it's a wonder anyone falls for it. And yet, they do.
Conservative candidates who the libs see as a threat are going to get slimed. They've got to bring nuclear weapons to this knife fight. They've got to blast the left for using minorities, particularly blacks, as their pawns. They've got to quit caving every time someone screams "racism" They've got to explain how crazy these accusations are.. They've got to talk directly to minority voters and show them how liberalism has failed them.
Though I haven't made up my mind, the thought of Obama taking on a plain spoken black man like Herman Cain is appealing. His presence would go a long way toward neutralizing the race card.
“Always love your country — but never trust your government!" -- Bob Novak (1931-2009)
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
GOLDIE TAYLOR: You know, who
Submitted by Galvanic on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 5:20pm.
GOLDIE TAYLOR: You know, who is to say what they believe or don't believe, but to say that African-American children were better off in 1860 as opposed to 2011 is, you know, a bit more than a Freudian slip, it is an outright racist slap is what it is."
Did the pledge actually infer that the slave child of 1860 was better off in slavery, or were they just stating (erroneously it seems) that the slave child was more likely to have been raised by both parents? Taylor makes a convenient leap of logic.
TAYLOR: ". . . I will say about 1860, it was the last time in American history there was full employment by African-Americans."
If that sarcastic statement was uttered by Palin, Bachmann, or Limbaugh, it would be headlined as a racist call for a return to slavery.
BASHIR: That's true.
Whoops! Is that not a confirmation of a racist statement? Or is he merely confirming a fact?
TAYLOR: ". . . And I would assert if there is a worthy pledge to be put out there, it should be a pledge to work on a daily basis to make sure that parents have the resources, you know, and remove the barriers that are necessary to keep the families intact as long as possible, and that is a pledge that we are willing to get behind."
What exactly are the barriers that are preventing families from remaining intact? Court judgements? Restraining orders?
And what does "as long as possible" mean? Who determines that? The parents? The government?
This isn't a resourcing issue. This is a social fabric issue. Changes in social mores (defining deviancy downward as Moynihan put it), acceptance of moral relativism, and the redefining of "rights" have created millions of Americans who decouple consequences and responsibility from personal behavior. Casey Anthony is an extreme example of the result -- give birth, leave baby with parents, go out have a good time, and if parenting gets to be a drag or an obstacle to happiness, dump the baby on somebody else (or kill it).
Taylor seems to believe that we have an obligation to remedy or compensate for the poor choices of others out of our own pockets. She's wrong.
ThinkProgress
Submitted by Fredy on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 5:19pm.
This entire story is based on a total LIE by ThinkProgress.
ABC, and other propaganda outfits, repeated the ThinkProgress LIE without ever reviewing anything for themselves.
Politico LIED about the statement by the originator of the pledge. He has not removed the original statement in any way, shape, or form. This LIE is being spread to cover for the LIE by ThinkProgress.
This is propaganda on top of propaganda. They are now LIEING about the LIE in order to obfuscate their underlying LIE!
Bashir is promoting the msnbc continuation of the ThinkProgress LIE! Notice how Bashir NEVER once has ANYONE from the underlying pledge involved in this FRAUDULENT discussion.
To hell with CNN
Submitted by ebayer on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 5:23pm.
I've said it before and i'll say it again:
After what this media and this government and this President has said and done to and about this country over the last two years and continues to do,I'll vote for Palin or Bachmann no matter what they say,do or sign.
It has been demonstrated over and over again that these people in office now will not be held accountable for ANYTHING they have said or done in the past or present.
To hell with CNN (partisan bastards)
They're not a news organization,they're part of the propaganda wing of the White House.
This clown is a slave to
Submitted by the struggler on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 5:27pm.
This clown is a slave to stupid.
No common sense at all
Submitted by GregE on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 5:51pm.
Just his talking about someone being for slavery in the context of her statement, is pure stupidity. I don't know what's worse........the Left knowing the context but playing to their audience to create and stir up something that doesn't exist..........or that they may truly not understand what she said.
"It is absolutely... critical
Submitted by ant on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 5:57pm.
"It is absolutely... critical that we talk about absentee fathers in 2011, whether they are black fathers, white fathers, or hispanic fathers."
Remember a brief time in the heart of true conservative liberalism (that word has been hi-jacked) that we were all just American fathers or just plain fathers? "Progressive" idealology has come a long way in splitting us into groups.
OK, suggesting that this
Submitted by JasonC on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 5:58pm.
OK, suggesting that this pledge advocates a return to slavery is utterly ludicrous.
However, the pledge itself - the phrases in question here as well as many of its other sections - is disgusting. The suggestion that a black child in 1860 had a better chance of being raised by both parents than a black child in 2011 is absolutely deserving of scorn, regardless of its rhetorical intent. This is not a matter of "being misconstrued," this is a matter of the drafters of this document being idiotic. And the other issues that it addresses - homosexuality and women in combat roles - are similarly insidious and backward-thinking. Bachmann's insistence on aligning herself with groups that proudly advocate rolling back hard-fought rights of women and gays is not going to get her to the White House.
Yes, we must scorn it
Submitted by ckc1227 on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 6:14pm.
"The suggestion that a black child in 1860 had a better chance of being raised by both parents than a black child in 2011 is absolutely deserving of scorn, regardless of its rhetorical intent."
Who cares if it might be historically accurate? What's really disgusting is that it might be correct.
Actually JasonC
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 8:13pm.
Add 20 years to your date and that is what the research -not conducted by the authors of the Marriage Vow, by the way- indicates. The Family Leader may have misinterpreted the dates, but not the data. This is the document that was cited in the Marriage Vow footnotes.
Awww. Binky manages to both whine and lie in the same post.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 10:15pm.
You go girl. You suntin special.
Binky: ...suggesting that this pledge advocates a return to slavery is utterly ludicrous.
Binky 20 seconds later: Bachmann's insistence on aligning herself with groups that proudly advocate rolling back hard-fought rights of women and gays....
Let's see, saying these people want to bring back slavery, Binky is on board in denouncing that. Saying these people want to roll back the rights of women and gays, why bring on the PUDDIN', it is Pee-arteeeee time!
Oh BInky, it has been 12 days since you brought the completely discredited study claiming 45,000 people die every year in this country DUE TO lack of insurance. I respectfully asked you to name one. Still waiting BInky. Name one Binky. You bought into the lie. Name one. Now. We are waiting.
You buy the lie, name someone that died because he/she did not have insurance. 45,000 divided by 365 is 123 people DYING from lack of insurance EVERY SINGLE DAY.
You made the claim Binky. I told you we want to help. 12 days Binky. 12 days of 123 people dying horrible painful deaths and yet Binky won't name one that we can help out and send some money to. Painful agonizing deaths. ONE HUNDRED TWENTY THREE EVERY DAY.
12 days Binky.
1476 deaths Binky Braveheart is now responsible for because he will not name one person dying from lack of insurance that we could help as a community. Not one name in 12 days.
Here's the thing Sporty. I
Submitted by JasonC on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 10:07am.
Here's the thing Sporty. I didn't say 45,000 people die per year due to unreasonably high COBRA premiums. You've taken that fantasy and run with it on account of my saying that poor people in need of expensive treatments are basically told to Fuck off & Die.
Ohh, I get it. I used the word "die" in the imperative. Well, see, "FO&D" is what's known as a figure of speech. The person told to do so doesn't immediately die any more than a person told to go to hell immediately sojourns off to some make-believe underworld overseen by a red nymph with a hayfork.
I literally posted the first Google article to arise, not because I have any strong belief that X number of people died who would now be the picture of health if they'd had insurance - hell, not even the article says that - but to demonstrate that the idea that health insurance and, you know, HEALTH may be correlated (note I do not suggest causality) has been the subject of actual medical field research and is not merely the deluded fantasy of Obamaniacs and Binkys alike. As for your hysterical claim that that study has been "debunked" - well, you cited a hard-right source that has little in the way of credibility itself and that seeks to "debunk" a claim that the article is not making.
Not that any of this matters. C'mon cowboy, fire up the boldface font and let me know how much I suck teh Binkyz.
JasonC,
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 10:19am.
And there are doctors who say the worst thing many patients do is go to the hospital - see the 'Dead Doctors Tell No Lies" lecture series. Oddly enough those doctors are trying to sell something too.
Medical care is far less important when it comes to saving lives than common sense, good physical habits and moderation. The only real correlation between the number of people with health insurance and actual health of the patient, IMHO, is that the more insurance there is available - the more people get treated with only minor changes in the over all health of the society.
Improved diets (due to many, many reasons), exercise (once increasing but now on the decline though the number of insured hasn't declined significantly) and a greater societal value being placed on the elderly have been the main societal attributes that have led us to a longer expected life. Most of these will disappear, if they haven't started already, once we have the wonders of a social system in place - IMHO.
Binky Braveheart plays the troll by lying right to your face.
Submitted by The Vet on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 11:35am.
Iz notta troll honext.
Binky Braveheart: I didn't say 45,000 people die per year due to unreasonably high COBRA premiums.
Didn't say you did, did I, LIAR? You made a claim that people had to f--- off and die because they did not have insurance. I said name one. Rather that actually naming people you posted this ---
Binky Braveheart: Not talking about literal dying, dude. It's an expression. Though obviously, without access to proper healthcare, not out of the realm of possibility.
But since you asked, here. It's from Reuters. It cites Harvard Medical School research. "Growing ranks of uninsured."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/17/us-usa-healthcare-deaths-idUST...
Binky Braveheart: ...I used the word "die" in the imperative. Well, see, "FO&D" is what's known as a figure of speech.
Another LIE. You meant it exactly for what it was. No insurance = death. And to prove it, you brought forward a completely discredited study.
Binky Braveheart: ...X number of people died who would now be the picture of health if they'd had insurance - hell, not even the article says that...
Another LIE. From the article, The ACTUAL HEADLINE - Study links 45,000 U.S. deaths to lack of insurance. From the article itself --- Nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year -- one every 12 minutes -- in large part because they lack health insurance and can not get good care... And more --- researchers said American adults age 64 and younger who lack health insurance have a 40 percent higher risk of death than those who have coverage ... Again --- The Institute of Medicine later used that data in its 2002 estimate showing about 18,000 people a year died because they lacked coverage.And again --- For any doctor ... it's completely a no-brainer that people who can't get health care are going to die more from the kinds of things that health care is supposed to prevent
Binky Braveheart: As for your hysterical claim that that study has been "debunked" - well, you cited a hard-right source that has little in the way of credibility itself and that seeks to "debunk" a claim that the article is not making.
Another LIE. I linked to 3 NewsBusters articles, MRC, NCPA, , and the American Thinker.
You want to continue to buy into a LIE, it is on you troll. The study is garbage. You continue to push it as the truth, it is on you. But I now have the justifiable right to call you for exactly what you are, a TROLL.
And now I got more LIAR ---
Faulty science
Special agenda
More - A list of the absolute bias of the study's author over the years
Crackpot Dr. Releases Study On Mortality & Lack of Insurance… State-Run Media Gladly Spreads the Propaganda
Yep. And Binky Braveheart as well.
Another day. Another 123 dead with no name from Binky.
Submitted by The Vet on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 11:32am.
Binky Braveheart: ...your hysterical claim that that study has been "debunked"...
If it ain't debunked, then that means another 123 people died and Binky still can't come up with one single name.
Name someone that died because they lack health insurance Binky like I asked you 2 weeks ago after you claim people had to f--- off and die because of lack of insurance then brought a bogus study to double down.
Where is that name?
Another day. Another 123 dead on Binky's Bloody hands.
Submitted by The Vet on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 3:54am.
Where is that name Binky?
One single person that died from the lack of health insurance.
45,000 year after year after year after year. You would think Binky could come up with one single name by now.
But you can't, can you Binkotrollicus? You know it is a lie.
One. Name. Dr Binky "Bloody" Braveheart.
One.
Name.
Now.
Oh Binky. Yoo-hoo. Binktard.
Submitted by The Vet on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 7:27am.
Binky: ...women in combat roles - are similarly insidious and backward-thinking.
What are you talking about now Binky? From the document that Binky says sets back women's rights -
Support for the enactment of safeguards for all married and unmarried U.S. Military and National Guard personnel, especially our combat troops, from inappropriate same-gender or opposite-gender sexual harassment, adultery or intrusively intimate commingling among attracteds (restrooms, showers, barracks, tents, etc.); plus prompt termination of military policymakers who would expose American wives and daughters to rape or sexual harassment, torture, enslavement or sexual leveraging by the enemy in forward combat roles
Oh dear. That is one nasty scary... Wait, huh? Safeguards against sexual harassment is insidious how? Backward thinking how? Tell us Binkotrollicus.
Woo-hoo Binky. You go girl. You keep that hard fought right of gay men to shower with the sex they are attracted to. I have said for years we need to get co-ed showers so I get to shower with the womens. Boy I want to shower with the womens and I would gladly have signed off on insidious and backward-thinking documents back in the day for that bit o' fun.
Keep dropping the soap Binky. It is just like fishing. Maybe you will find the name of one of those people you claim are dying from lack of insurance down there on the floor. Lord knows you haven't found one anywhere else yet.
Has anyone else seen the horror of this document?
Submitted by The Vet on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 9:40am.
By the hammer of the great Trolljegeren above, has anyone else seen this disgusting, idiotic, insidious, backward-thinking document that advocates ---
My Gawd people. I am shaking after reading that. The absolute horror. Poor Binky. He is not nearly as strong as I. I can only imagine the revulsion and psychic pain he must have felt after reading a document advocating all of the above.
"Now, regardless of the
Submitted by ckc1227 on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 6:06pm.
"Now, regardless of the historical inaccuracies in the pledge (most slave families weren't allowed to stay together)"
But that's not what the pledge stated, at least not the part referenced here in the main post.
"In their pledge, the organization suggested, "a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American President."
It didn't say most children born into slavery were raised by the mother and father, it said it was more likely to happen then than today. Two different things.
At any rate, dumb move by Bachmann and Santorum to sign this pledge. There's nothing to gain, and plenty to lose.
Only an imported muslim commie like Bashir could connect...
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 6:14pm.
...support of traditional marriage with somehow supporting slavery.
I bet his three brain cells were pretty sore after that move.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
BASHIR
Submitted by greatj on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 6:41pm.
Bashir is just another M.S.N.B.C.weasel working for Obama and the Democratic Party trash.Anybody surprised? Bear in
Submitted by Reaver on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 6:42pm.
Anybody surprised? Bear in mind this is the guy who said Palin’s tour bus was in violation of federal law for having a flag painted on it!
It would have been simpler
Submitted by eaglewingz08 on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 7:16pm.
It would have been simpler for this conservative group to just say that in the 50s and 60s most black families stayed together but after the liberal democraps' ruinous welfare, marriage and crime policies, 70 percent of african american families have been destroyed.
Interesting how some folks love to twist words
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 9:45pm.
I put in the subject line a few days ago asking if blacks were better off as a family unit in the slave days and I had a poster accusing me of suggesting Bachmann thinks we should go back to the slave days
As a Bachmann supporter, her signing this pact was a turn off for me
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/07/09/weekend-open-threa...
This is what happens to you when you spend
Submitted by SickofLibs on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 10:09pm.
six months poring over blowups of Michael Jackson's penis.
Bashir pronounced, "Yes, I can personally verify that Jacko is a pinto."
American history
Submitted by Injest on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 5:58am.
but it sounded like to me something of a Freudian slip that this organization does believe that African-American children were better off if their parents were slaves."
That's probably due to the fact you don't know or understand American history.
It reads, "A child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American president."
1861 the was the start of the Civil War, by wars end, 1865, slavery no longer existed.
A child born into slavery in 1860 would be 5 years old in 1865, and no longer in a slave family subject to being sold as soon as they were old enough (10) to actually do productive work.
Bashir
Submitted by jessieH on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 10:28am.
Only the liberal left could read slavery into this. Looks like Bashir and his buddies are the true racists. They can't stop pushing racism.
Is Martin Bashir in a
Submitted by Free Stinker on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 7:16pm.
Is Martin Bashir in a competition with Rachel Maddow for Dumbest man on TV ?
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Leftwing panic just beginning
Submitted by ChuckySchmucky on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 8:52pm.
This is fantastic. The more Barack Obama's fortunes crater, the more his policies fail, the more the left's political prospects sink, the more deranged, hateful Marxist left will become.
And we're still 14 months from the election. Imagine how demented they'll be this time next year. It's going to be great sport watching the crack up.
Can't wait.
Democrat party=party of slavery, segregation, affirmative racism
Submitted by ChuckySchmucky on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 8:55pm.
It's not Bachmann and Santorum that favor hiring, admissions and parceling out taxpayer-funded goodies based on race and skin color.
That's you and your racist ilk, Martin.