Obama loses 20 million in viewers - Fox News and Rush ratings skyrocket!
libsni...@gmail.com
April. From 9amET on, every program grew by more than 60% in the demo.
Glen beck is up 128% in viewers!
Rush Limbaugh - after being attacked by the Commander in Chimp and his
cronies, Rush's ratings have skyrocketed and "experienced a dramatic
surge in February ratings, timed precisely with the launch of
President Barack Obama and the Democrats’ anti-Rush assault."
Barrack Oafbama - Poor sap continues to slide in viewership. Over 20
million people have tuned *out* Obama's teleprompter "news"
conferences since they began and his approval after 100 days is lower
than Jimmy Carter's:
Here's the president's last three primetime news events:
Feb: 9: 49.5 million
March 24: 40.4 million
April 29: 28.8 million
Tuesday, Apr 28
April Ratings: FNC Beats CNN and MSNBC Combined
How's this for cable news domination - Fox News beat CNN and MSNBC
combined in every hour from 6amET to MidnightET in both Total Viewers
and the A25-54 demo for April 2009.
FNC had the top 11 cable news programs in Total Viewers and 12 of the
top 15 in the demo. FNC is the #2 network in Total Viewers on all of
cable.
From 9amET on, every program grew by more than 60% in the demo. The
5pmET hour, now occupied by Glenn Beck, is up 212% in the demo and up
128% in Total Viewers. Your World with Neil Cavuto is up 102% in the
demo and up 60% in Total Viewers. On the Record with Greta Van
Susteren is up 75% in demo and up 55% in Total Viewers. Also in demo:
FOX Report is up 75%, Special Report 70%, The O'Reilly Factor 74% and
Hannity 64%.
Fox & Friends has now been #1 for 90 consecutive months, Studio B with
Shepard Smith for 80 consecutive months.
http://www.thrfeed.com/2009/04/obama-press-conference-draws-288-million-viewers.html
April 30, 2009
Obama's ratings slide: press conference down 29%
Audience interest in Barack Obama’s news conferences seems to be
falling, with Wednesday’s press event drawing the president’s smallest
primetime audience since his inauguration.
The telecast to mark Obama’s 100th day in office was viewed by 28.8
million people, according to Nielsen. That's a 29% drop from the
president's last press conference, on March 24, and a 42% fall since
his first, on Feb. 9.
Ten networks carried the telecast, which is one less than last time
since Fox elected to run its detective drama Lie to Me (7.8 million,
2.3 national adults 18-49 rating) instead. Airing its regular
entertainment programming saved Fox ad dollars but didn’t help the
show much. Lie pulled the same rating it did last week. Yet, like last
week, it won the 8 p.m. hour.
Here's the president's last three primetime news events:
Feb: 9: 49.5 million
March 24: 40.4 million
April 29: 28.8 million
http://www.mrc.org/press/2009/press20090327.asp
Democrats’ Attacks on Rush Limbaugh Send Radio Ratings through the
Roof
Alexandria, VA – Talk radio titan Rush Limbaugh and stations that
carry his #1 national show experienced a dramatic surge in February
ratings, timed precisely with the launch of President Barack Obama and
the Democrats’ anti-Rush assault.
As revealed yesterday, audience numbers surged for Rush-carrying
stations across the country, including in several of the nation’s
largest markets like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and Houston.
Since the orchestrated campaign continued into March, ratings could
reach even greater heights for this month.
Media Research Center President Brent Bozell reacted to the news:
“President Obama declared war on Rush Limbaugh and his ratings went
through the roof. If that’s not a magnificent backfire, I’m not sure
what is.
“Maybe the White House has learned its lesson and will stop launching
coordinated assaults on individual members of the media who disagree
with them. Hopefully, they haven’t."
Just Asking
> Fox News - Fox News beat CNN and MSNBC combined for the month of
> April. From 9amET on, every program grew by more than 60% in the demo.
> Glen beck is up 128% in viewers!
>
> Rush Limbaugh - after being attacked by the Commander in Chimp and his
> cronies, Rush's ratings have skyrocketed and "experienced a dramatic
> surge in February ratings, timed precisely with the launch of
> President Barack Obama and the Democrats’ anti-Rush assault."
>
> Barrack Oafbama - Poor sap continues to slide in viewership. Over 20
> million people have tuned *out* Obama's teleprompter "news"
> conferences since they began and his approval after 100 days is lower
> than Jimmy Carter's:
>
> Here's the president's last three primetime news events:
> Feb: 9: 49.5 million
> March 24: 40.4 million
> April 29: 28.8 million
>
>
> Tuesday, Apr 28
> April Ratings: FNC Beats CNN and MSNBC Combined
> How's this for cable news domination - Fox News beat CNN and MSNBC
> combined in every hour from 6amET to MidnightET in both Total Viewers
> and the A25-54 demo for April 2009.
>
> FNC had the top 11 cable news programs in Total Viewers and 12 of the
> top 15 in the demo. FNC is the #2 network in Total Viewers on all of
> cable.
>
> From 9amET on, every program grew by more than 60% in the demo. The
> 5pmET hour, now occupied by Glenn Beck, is up 212% in the demo and up
> 128% in Total Viewers. Your World with Neil Cavuto is up 102% in the
> demo and up 60% in Total Viewers. On the Record with Greta Van
> Susteren is up 75% in demo and up 55% in Total Viewers. Also in demo:
> FOX Report is up 75%, Special Report 70%, The O'Reilly Factor 74% and
> Hannity 64%.
>
> Fox & Friends has now been #1 for 90 consecutive months, Studio B with
> Shepard Smith for 80 consecutive months.
>
My you must be proud of your self
You can cut and past to
alt.guitar.amps,
alt.vacation.las-vegas,
rec.music.beatles,
rec.music.artists.kiss,
comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Did Rush give your permission to do this?
Next time please get a Hall Pass from Rush!
WTF does this have to do with Vacationing in Vegas?
Just Asking.
libsni...@gmail.com
Well, when you ask the same question about all the other political
posts in avlv and quit being an ass-licking partisan shill, maybe then
you'll have your answer.
LOL
Idiot....
> Keith Olbermann rules fuking asshole!
He sure does rule "asshole".
LOL
Next....
Snit
6d41d96c-ac00-4819...@m24g2000vbp.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
9:52 PM:
Obama has a higher rating now than did the last two presidents at this time
in their presidencies. Funny how you forgot to mention that.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
libsni...@gmail.com
>
> Obama has a higher rating now than did the last two presidents at this time
> in their presidencies. �Funny how you forgot to mention that.
...but not higher than Jimmy Carter.
Even funnier you forgot to mention that!
LOL
Next...
Snit
6c3119d5-b0dc-41df...@n8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
10:20 PM:
> On May 1, 10:04�pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>> Obama has a higher rating now than did the last two presidents at this time
>> in their presidencies. �Funny how you forgot to mention that.
>
> ...but not higher than Jimmy Carter.
You already had - even in this thread. Why would I belabor the point, if I
can use the term so loosely. What is noteworthy, though, is you had to go
back to the 1970s to find a president who had, at this point in his
presidency, higher ratings than Obama:
<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30454232/>
-----
As he enters his 100th day in office, President Barack Obama
enjoys higher marks from the American public than his most
recent predecessors did at similar points in their
presidencies
...
Republican pollster Bill McInturff ... even compares Obama’s
early likeability to Ronald Reagan’s in the 1980s.
...
While the poll finds that Obama is off to a solid start in
these first 100 days, the same isn’t necessarily true for the
GOP.
...
And even though they’re no longer in office, the poll shows
that George W. Bush (with a 26 percent positive rating) and
Dick Cheney (18 percent) remain unpopular.
-----
Obama is doing well, at least as how the US public sees it.
And the comparison of having a president they think is doing a good job just
points out what an abysmal failure Bush was - his ratings continue to fall
now that there is someone else to directly compare him to.
With that said: Obama and his administration have made some pretty bizarre
errors - many dealing with international protocols of working with other
heads of state. And the flight over New York... how did that happen? Was
it *really* for a photo op? Something seems fishy there. The biggie, of
course, is the level of spending and the earmarks that should not be...
though I am not sure Obama could have pushed for anything much better.
Over time I hope he does get his desire to reduce absurd earmarks
considerably... and gets many of the other things he is working on. As the
article notes, he is taking on a lot - maybe too much. But the country is
in dire need of a lot of work after nearly a decade of such horrid
mismanagement.
> Even funnier you forgot to mention that!
>
> LOL
>
> Next...
>
>
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
libsni...@gmail.com
> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
> 6c3119d5-b0dc-41df-b51f-8140f9cd8...@n8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
> 10:20 PM:
>
> > On May 1, 10:04 pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> >> Obama has a higher rating now than did the last two presidents at this time
> >> in their presidencies. Funny how you forgot to mention that.
>
> > ...but not higher than Jimmy Carter.
>
> You already had - even in this thread. Why would I belabor the point, if I
> can use the term so loosely. What is noteworthy, though, is you had to go
> back to the 1970s to find a president who had, at this point in his
> presidency, higher ratings than Obama:
>
> <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30454232/>
LOL
MSNBC? Are you serious?
Even Ariana Huffington of the Huffington Post says approval polls are
meaningless.
It's called a "honeymoon".
You also forget Obama is still hailed as the messiah and enjoying
major ass-licking by the media, that's why more and more people are
tuning him out and tuning in to Fox News for the truth:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21883.html
100 days of media double standards
The back story — the one you won’t read about in The New York Times —
is that in just 100 days, the national media have shown they have a
clear double standard in how they cover Obama, compared with
Republican presidents.
A new study by the nonpartisan Center for Media and Public Affairs
found that network news programs gave Obama more than three times the
coverage that they gave President George W. Bush at the same point in
his presidency. And while 58 percent of all network news evaluations
of Obama and his policies were favorable, only 33 percent of
assessments of Bush were favorable.
That means networks have shown Obama to America far more often — and
in a far more favorable light — than they showed Bush early in his
presidency. It’s free advertising. And it explains the president’s
approval ratings.
Although the media tout Obama’s popularity, they rarely point out that
his approval rating is similar to most previous presidents’ approval
numbers after 100 days.... But if you read the fine print, you’ll
discover that the Times’ poll results come from a sample of voters
dominated by Democrats. Thirty-nine percent of respondents were
Democrats, compared with just 23 percent who were Republicans — a 16-
point gap.
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1206/media-coverage-of-obama-100-days
As he marks his 100th day in office, President Barack Obama has
enjoyed substantially more positive media coverage than either Bill
Clinton or George W. Bush during their first months in the White
House, according to a new study of press coverage.
Overall, roughly four out of ten stories, editorials and op-ed columns
about Obama have been clearly positive in tone, compared with 22% for
Bush and 27% for Clinton in the same mix of seven national media
outlets during their first two months in office, according to a study
by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism.
----
As time goes on and people realize that Obama will cost the avg person
an extra $110,000 in taxes over a lifetime, he will tank harder than
Carter.
Next...
Snit
83a538f8-7870-4422...@t11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
10:38 PM:
> On May 1, 10:24�pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
>> 6c3119d5-b0dc-41df-b51f-8140f9cd8...@n8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
>> 10:20 PM:
>>
>>> On May 1, 10:04 pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Obama has a higher rating now than did the last two presidents at this time
>>>> in their presidencies. Funny how you forgot to mention that.
>>
>>> ...but not higher than Jimmy Carter.
>>
>> You already had - even in this thread. �Why would I belabor the point, if I
>> can use the term so loosely. �What is noteworthy, though, is you had to go
>> back to the 1970s to find a president who had, at this point in his
>> presidency, higher ratings than Obama:
>>
>> <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30454232/>
>
> LOL
>
> MSNBC? Are you serious?
>
> Even Ariana Huffington of the Huffington Post says approval polls are
> meaningless.
Ok, then your poll data about Obama in comparison to Carter is, as you say,
"meaningless."
> It's called a "honeymoon".
What makes this "honeymoon" so much better than any since the 1970s?
> You also forget Obama is still hailed as the messiah
Name one person who thinks he is as you say.
Oops.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
83a538f8-7870-4422...@t11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
10:38 PM:
> 100 days of media double standards
>
> The back story � the one you won�t read about in The New York Times �
> is that in just 100 days, the national media have shown they have a
> clear double standard in how they cover Obama, compared with
> Republican presidents.
>
> A new study by the nonpartisan Center for Media and Public Affairs
> found that network news programs gave Obama more than three times the
> coverage that they gave President George W. Bush at the same point in
> his presidency. And while 58 percent of all network news evaluations
> of Obama and his policies were favorable, only 33 percent of
> assessments of Bush were favorable.
Do you think the media had an obligation to not show the mistakes of Bush?
Seems you are assuming equality in your rant about not being reported the
same... and that assumption is completely unsupported.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
83a538f8-7870-4422...@t11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
10:38 PM:
> The back story � the one you won�t read about in The New York Times � is that
> in just 100 days, the national media have shown they have a clear double
> standard in how they cover Obama, compared with Republican presidents.
>
> ... President Barack Obama has enjoyed substantially more positive media
> coverage than either Bill Clinton or George W. Bush during their first months
> in the White House, according to a new study of press coverage.
Clinton was not a Republican.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
It's Big Mikey
I do not refer to the President (Bush or Obama) as "Chimp"
His first 100 days have irritated me, but have not surprised me. This is
exactly what he said he would do. Now it is MY responsibility to maturely
oppose him. I believe we call that a democracy.
Limbaugh has his opinion. Garafalo has her opinion. Somewhere in the
middle may lie the truth. Or both may be just full of shit.
The point here is that all have an agenda. Read from ALL sides and then do
the following:
Toss it all aside. Hug your children and/or grandchildren. Do some charity
work. Contribute to some charity. Teach.. Tudor. Sweep the sidewalk.
Hand the garbage man a cold Orange Juice. ( I did this morning.)
And most of all---stop bitching so much. Tip O'Neil said it so well when he
said, "All politics is local" If you really give a shit, take some interest
in your local community.
Did any of you see the "Gorilla Gardners" Story on ABC news? We are
cleaning and clearing up the yard at the two foreclosed houses near our
street this weekend. All it needs is a little watering, mowing and
sweeping.
In a few weeks we are going to blast away some tagging. Enough of all this
depression and recession talk. Obama has his priorities and we all have
ours.
As my father said in his last 'speech' back in December, "THIS IS NOT THE
GREAT DEPRESSION. I lived through the great depression when a carrot was
dinner. That was it. A carrot."
Ironic that he was born a month before FDR took office and left a few months
after Obama. Her never stopped believing in the American Dream. Lord
knows he loved money, but only for one reason: What he could do with it .
He understood its only purpose was when you spent it.
M
.
<libsni...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:36c371f4-5d18-46ac...@s28g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> Fox News - Fox News beat CNN and MSNBC combined for the month of
> April. From 9amET on, every program grew by more than 60% in the demo.
> Glen beck is up 128% in viewers!
>
> Rush Limbaugh - after being attacked by the Commander in Chimp and his
> cronies, Rush's ratings have skyrocketed and "experienced a dramatic
> surge in February ratings, timed precisely with the launch of
> President Barack Obama and the Democrats� anti-Rush assault."
> Audience interest in Barack Obama�s news conferences seems to be
> falling, with Wednesday�s press event drawing the president�s smallest
> primetime audience since his inauguration.
>
> The telecast to mark Obama�s 100th day in office was viewed by 28.8
> million people, according to Nielsen. That's a 29% drop from the
> president's last press conference, on March 24, and a 42% fall since
> his first, on Feb. 9.
>
> Ten networks carried the telecast, which is one less than last time
> since Fox elected to run its detective drama Lie to Me (7.8 million,
> 2.3 national adults 18-49 rating) instead. Airing its regular
> entertainment programming saved Fox ad dollars but didn�t help the
> show much. Lie pulled the same rating it did last week. Yet, like last
> week, it won the 8 p.m. hour.
>
> Here's the president's last three primetime news events:
>
> Feb: 9: 49.5 million
> March 24: 40.4 million
> April 29: 28.8 million
>
>
>
> http://www.mrc.org/press/2009/press20090327.asp
>
> Democrats� Attacks on Rush Limbaugh Send Radio Ratings through the
> Roof
>
> Alexandria, VA � Talk radio titan Rush Limbaugh and stations that
> carry his #1 national show experienced a dramatic surge in February
> ratings, timed precisely with the launch of President Barack Obama and
> the Democrats� anti-Rush assault.
>
> As revealed yesterday, audience numbers surged for Rush-carrying
> stations across the country, including in several of the nation�s
> largest markets like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and Houston.
> Since the orchestrated campaign continued into March, ratings could
> reach even greater heights for this month.
>
> Media Research Center President Brent Bozell reacted to the news:
>
> �President Obama declared war on Rush Limbaugh and his ratings went
> through the roof. If that�s not a magnificent backfire, I�m not sure
> what is.
>
> �Maybe the White House has learned its lesson and will stop launching
> coordinated assaults on individual members of the media who disagree
> with them. Hopefully, they haven�t."
>
>
>
>
AJ
know....
Something happened... H.R. 1388 was passed yesterday, behind our
backs. You may want to read about it. It wasn't mentioned on the
news... just went by on the ticker tape at the bottom of the CNN
screen.
Obama funds $20M in tax payer dollars to immigrate Hamas Refugees to
the USA . This is the news that didn't make the headlines...
By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure
of $20.3 million in "migration assistance" to the Palestinian refugees
and "conflict victims" in Gaza .
The "presidential determination", which allows hundreds of thousands
of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States,
was signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on
February 4.
Few on Capitol Hill, or in the media, took note that the order
provides a free ticket replete with housing and food allowances to
individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support to the
Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the parliamentary election of
January 2006.
Let's review...itemized list of some of Barack Obama's most recent
actions since his inauguration:
His first call to any head of state, as president, was to Mahmoud
Abbas, leader of Fatah party in the Palestinian territory.
His first one-on-one television interview with any news organization
was with Al Arabia television.
His first executive order was to fund/facilitate abortion(s) not just
here within the U. S. , but within the world, using U. S. tax payer
funds.
He ordered Guantanamo Bay closed and all military trials o! f
detainees halted.
He ordered overseas CIA interrogation centers closed.
He withdrew all charges against the masterminds behind the USS Cole
and the "terror attack" on 9/11.
Now we learn that he is allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinian
refuges to move to, and live in, the US at American taxpayer
expense.
These important, and insightful, issues are being "lost" in the
blinding bail-outs and "stimulation" packages.
Doubtful? To verify this for yourself: www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488
Bruce Morgen
Now if those people would
get off their asses and
vote instead of staring
slack-jawed at their TVs
-- the Dems would still
win. Too bad elections
aren't determined by
cable TV and AM radio
ratings, eh?
Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth
It's about *time* the USA from State Department to White House...
*LEARNED*
and ... *CHANGED* :-) mvm
1. THE US MILITARY AND CIVILIAN PRESENCE IN THE ARABIAN PENINSULA.
THE issues radical Islam has with the U.S. are not so much with the
�American way of life�, as with �the American way of life on THEIR
ancient, ancestral lands�. Akbar the suicide bomber doesn�t really give
a fat baby�s ____ what filthy Phil, pygmy the man-whore and that stolen,
hapless sheep do with each other in a Las Vegas hotel room under the
influence of shooters and crystal meth. He just doesn�t want US soldiers
or McTransfats in Saudi Arabia or anywhere else Mosques hollah several
times a day. WHAT is so hard about THAT? Your answer may involve oil and
US national economic security�well it�s TIME FOR A CHANGE. Nuclear
plants and NIMBY? Tell me why we can�t we put all new nuclear plants
DEEP on US FEDERAL LANDS? Ever heard of power transmission lines? The
oil-sands in CANADA. The oil sands beneath N. Dakota and surrounding
areas. Lastly, American ingenuity at its BEST and most timely: ISOBUTANOL.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isobutanol Scale it UP!
We absolutely MUST get off the Arab Oil Teat, ASAP.
2. END UNQUALIFIED US SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL
OMG! You just knew it didn�t you?! I�ve touched the �3rd Rail�! Now call
me an anti-Semite! Bull___. I�m an American. If you�re Jewish and an
American, then act like an American. If you�re Jewish and an Israeli,
you�ve got a vested interest in controlling your own government�s
actions with regard to settlements, the Palestinians, etc. I attend bar
mitzvahs and bat mitzvahs all the time. Jews and Italians are both very
family-oriented cultures. But religion is religion and it had NO place
in our founding fathers inception of the USA. They KNEW a thing or two
about human nature and the founding of this wonderful nation. They took
a great deal from Athens and Rome, forward. They weren�t perfect, yes
they were slave holders, but we�ve come a LONG way in that regard. They
wrote the US Constitution with a deep understanding of what a flawed
creature man is. Washington D.C. is NOT Tel Aviv, Israel. Washington,
DC needs to e �joined at the hip� with the 50 capitols of her own
nation. Not Israel, not the EU, America.
��She [America] well knows that by once enlisting herself under banners
other than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence,
she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the
wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and
ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The
fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to
force. She might become a dictatress of the world. She would no longer
be the ruler of her own spirit��
-John Quincy Adams, 1821
3. END US SUPPORT FOR NATIONS SUPPRESSING MUSLIMS and CONDEMNATION OF
THOSE DOING SO, INCLUDING CHINA, INDIA AND RUSSIA.
China�Tibetan genocide, Uighur Muslims
Russia�Chechnya, etc.
India�Pakistan / the Kashmir region.
4. US SUPPORT, PROTECTION AND FUNDING OF ARAB POLICE STATES
Egypt�and that�s just for starters. The history of the CIA�s actions in
the name of anti-Communism was messy, but long-run, just. Reagan had it
right about the �Evil Empire�. But now, finding a new enemy -and on the
insidious basis of religion- the wrong enemies at that, just to keep the
industrial-defense complex profitable and people employed at guns
instead of butter�it�s Evil as well. Mirror time.
America CAN change her foreign policy. America CAN achieve LIBERTY and
FREEDOM from foreign OIL dependence.
We need to quit lying to ourselves, take back OUR government from
McCorporate interests who sold/outsourced it for profit to their own
CEO�s etc, and unite behind a new, US President who MIGHT JUST BE
ATTEMPTING TO DO JUST THIS. This ship is on the rocks and when the next
tide comes in, it will be a slow turn but turn it must, away from
certain disaster. We are being warned, from our wallets to flag-draped
coffins landing at Andrews AFB.
It�s NOT about being right or being wrong for your ego or mine. It�s
about doing the right thing, with conviction. The fact is, as a culture,
we give lip service to our �nation under God� and to some extent, many
of us hit the church or temple on weekends, often for social purposes.
Muslims hit their knees several times A DAY. They live and breathe
their religion, cradle to grave. I�m not passing judgment on it, I�m
saying that�s the truth and it�s dangerous. Many of the world�s 1.5
billion Muslims justify suicide blood as a sound defense strategy. They
believe that �we�, the �infidels� are out to invade and crush them out
of existence. They are, like China, 1.5 billion strong yet they�re
dispersed globally. The Islamic jihadists in their midst have got the
world�s most powerful �shock and awe� military stretched thin to the
breaking point and bleeding like a stuck pig. If the neocons had been
allowed to continue down the wrong path they were taking us, globally
attempting to export our form of government like Christian missionaries
on a crusade, I am convinced that suicide bombings and eventually, a
nuclear follow-up to 9/11/01 would have occurred in ether New York City
(the center of US $ power), or Washington, DC.
Fred
>
> I do not refer to the President (Bush or Obama) as "Chimp"
>
> middle may lie the truth. Or both may be just full of shit.
>
>
Well said.
Although judging from Lush's recent photo, he appears
to be about 450 lb of shit.
Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth
...you're _too_ kind to Limpball... :-) mvm
slaz...@stargate.net
Snit
ed961866-89c9-485d...@d7g2000prl.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
7:49 AM:
> Cross Posted
Would Jesus approve?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Bob in new york
April. From 9amET on, every program grew by more than 60% in the demo.
Glen beck is up 128% in viewers!
Rush Limbaugh - after being attacked by the Commander in Chimp and his
cronies, Rush's ratings have skyrocketed and "experienced a dramatic
surge in February ratings, timed precisely with the launch of
President Barack Obama and the Democrats� anti-Rush assault."
http://www.thrfeed.com/2009/04/obama-press-conference-draws-288-million-viewers.html
Audience interest in Barack Obama�s news conferences seems to be
falling, with Wednesday�s press event drawing the president�s smallest
primetime audience since his inauguration.
The telecast to mark Obama�s 100th day in office was viewed by 28.8
million people, according to Nielsen. That's a 29% drop from the
president's last press conference, on March 24, and a 42% fall since
his first, on Feb. 9.
Ten networks carried the telecast, which is one less than last time
since Fox elected to run its detective drama Lie to Me (7.8 million,
2.3 national adults 18-49 rating) instead. Airing its regular
entertainment programming saved Fox ad dollars but didn�t help the
show much. Lie pulled the same rating it did last week. Yet, like last
week, it won the 8 p.m. hour.
Here's the president's last three primetime news events:
Feb: 9: 49.5 million
March 24: 40.4 million
April 29: 28.8 million
http://www.mrc.org/press/2009/press20090327.asp
Democrats� Attacks on Rush Limbaugh Send Radio Ratings through the
Roof
Alexandria, VA � Talk radio titan Rush Limbaugh and stations that
carry his #1 national show experienced a dramatic surge in February
ratings, timed precisely with the launch of President Barack Obama and
the Democrats� anti-Rush assault.
As revealed yesterday, audience numbers surged for Rush-carrying
stations across the country, including in several of the nation�s
largest markets like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and Houston.
Since the orchestrated campaign continued into March, ratings could
reach even greater heights for this month.
Media Research Center President Brent Bozell reacted to the news:
�President Obama declared war on Rush Limbaugh and his ratings went
through the roof. If that�s not a magnificent backfire, I�m not sure
what is.
�Maybe the White House has learned its lesson and will stop launching
coordinated assaults on individual members of the media who disagree
with them. Hopefully, they haven�t."
I guess them time he converted Airforce 1 into Scareforce 1 it turned a few
new yorkers away, the bowing to superiors from Saudi was a good one, the
smiling at chavez when Chavez gave eme book about how awful america was...
WWJD (What Would Judd Do)
>
>
>> Cross Posted
>
> Would Jesus approve?
>
>
Unlikely.
Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth
Aint no thang- but it's amusing to watch you cretins attempt to make it
one...B.H. Obama is the duly elected CEO of the US Government's
executive branch as well as Commander in Chief of the US armed forces.
Deal :-) mvm
Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth
> In article <C6212269.2D4C3%cs...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <cs...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> Obama has a higher rating now than did the last two presidents at this time
>> in their presidencies. Funny how you forgot to mention that.
>
>
> STFU Snot... Keep your ignorant ass in the CSMA group with the rest of
> the leftist cunts.
>
> (FWIW while you are factually correct you're comment isn't relevant and
> you're still a fucking cunt)
*H88* much? ;-)
Snit
evadnikufesin-3B0...@mara100-84.onlink.net on 5/2/09 1:07 PM:
> In article <C6212269.2D4C3%cs...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <cs...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> libsni...@gmail.com stated in post
>> 6d41d96c-ac00-4819...@m24g2000vbp.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
>> 9:52 PM:
>>
>>> On May 1, 9:42?pm, Just Asking <mthu...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> My you must be proud of your self
>>>> WTF does this have to do with Vacationing in Vegas?
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, when you ask the same question about all the other political
>>> posts in avlv and quit being an ass-licking partisan shill, maybe then
>>> you'll have your answer.
>>>
>>> LOL
>>>
>>> Idiot....
>>>
>>>
>>>> Keith Olbermann rules fuking asshole!
>>>
>>> He sure does rule "asshole".
>>>
>>> LOL
>>>
>>>
>>> Next....
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Obama has a higher rating now than did the last two presidents at this time
>> in their presidencies. Funny how you forgot to mention that.
>
> STFU Snot... Keep your ignorant ass in the CSMA group with the rest of
> the leftist cunts.
>
> (FWIW while you are factually correct you're comment isn't relevant and
> you're still a fucking cunt)
You claim I am "ignorant" for quoting the reported facts. This shows your
bias. You also use foul language. This shows your lack of faith in
yourself.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
libsni...@gmail.com
> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
> 10:38 PM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 1, 10:24�pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
> >> 6c3119d5-b0dc-41df-b51f-8140f9cd8...@n8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
> >> 10:20 PM:
>
> >>> On May 1, 10:04 pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> Obama has a higher rating now than did the last two presidents at this time
> >>>> in their presidencies. Funny how you forgot to mention that.
>
> >>> ...but not higher than Jimmy Carter.
>
> >> You already had - even in this thread. �Why would I belabor the point, if I
> >> can use the term so loosely. �What is noteworthy, though, is you had to go
> >> back to the 1970s to find a president who had, at this point in his
> >> presidency, higher ratings than Obama:
>
> >> <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30454232/>
>
> > LOL
>
> > MSNBC? Are you serious?
>
> > Even Ariana Huffington of the Huffington Post says approval polls are
> > meaningless.
>
> Ok, then your poll data about Obama in comparison to Carter is, as you say,
> "meaningless."
>
> > It's called a "honeymoon".
>
> What makes this "honeymoon" so much better than any since the 1970s?
Obama is half-black. That protects him from criticism, otherwise you
are labeled a *racist* if you do criticize him. Libs are living the
dream - a lib that do that do whatever he wants and no one can do shit
about it.... until it's too late.
Obama will be more popular than Carter for a longer period of time
because of this. It will take a long time for lib whites that hate
their white skin to turn agianst him, until they finally realize
having no home and no job is not a good thing.
They only good thing is this might open the eyes of stupid whites that
vote with their heart instead of their minds. Maybe they'll start
voting for thier own and those that represent them like blacks and
other races do. How silly does Keith Olbermann look constantly sucking
up to Al Sharpton and betraying his own race?
> > You also forget Obama is still hailed as the messiah
>
> Name one person who thinks he is as you say.
Farakhan.
>
> Oops.
Big fucking oops for you....
libsni...@gmail.com
> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
> 10:38 PM:
>
> > 100 days of media double standards
>
> > The back story ‹ the one you won¹t read about in The New York Times ‹
> > is that in just 100 days, the national media have shown they have a
> > clear double standard in how they cover Obama, compared with
> > Republican presidents.
>
> > A new study by the nonpartisan Center for Media and Public Affairs
> > found that network news programs gave Obama more than three times the
> > coverage that they gave President George W. Bush at the same point in
> > his presidency. And while 58 percent of all network news evaluations
> > of Obama and his policies were favorable, only 33 percent of
> > assessments of Bush were favorable.
>
> Do you think the media had an obligation to not show the mistakes of Bush?
THREE TIMES THE COVERAGE IN THE FIRST 100 DAYS!
"Look at the black man get a dog!"
"Look at the black man get a book from Chavez"
"Look at the black man without a shirt on!"
"It brings a tear to my eye, back to you, Keith..."
Hello, you in there???
>
> Seems you are assuming equality in your rant about not being reported the
> same... and that assumption is completely unsupported.
Seems like you're not readng what is posted.
The media is in Obama's pocket. Did you even watch the last news
conference?
WAKE UP!
libsni...@gmail.com
> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
> 10:38 PM:
>
> > The back story ‹ the one you won¹t read about in The New York Times ‹ is that
> > in just 100 days, the national media have shown they have a clear double
> > standard in how they cover Obama, compared with Republican presidents.
>
> > ... President Barack Obama has enjoyed substantially more positive media
> > coverage than either Bill Clinton or George W. Bush during their first months
> > in the White House, according to a new study of press coverage.
>
> Clinton was not a Republican.
He wasn't black, either.
This lib is learning something new everyday!
Next...
libsni...@gmail.com
> Look, I am no friend of President Obama, but this cross posting is bullshit.
>
Yup, might get the swine flu... or worse, AIDS!
> I do not refer to the President (Bush or Obama) as "Chimp"
...but a lot of other people do.
> His first 100 days have irritated me, but have not surprised me. �This is
> exactly what he said he would do. �Now it is MY responsibility to maturely
> oppose him. �I believe we call that a democracy.
Yep, and now the libs can't stand it.
> Limbaugh has his opinion. �Garafalo has her opinion. �
Garafalo is a hateful lib and cannot be compared to Limbaugh, who has
a distinguished career in radio - something Garahollow failed
miserably at.
> The point here is that all have an agenda. �
And so do you and here it comes:
> Read from ALL sides and then do
> the following:
>
> Toss it all aside. �Hug your children and/or grandchildren. �
<rest of BM rant snipped>
Should of thought about that when you spammed the Vegas group with
Chuck "hate" posts and you were urinating on people's lawns.
Anyway, good to see you posting, BM!
So PPPORTLYPUSSY Masarsky......
No house in your name
Clark County Assessor never heard of you
HOA at the Lakes never heard of you
Nevada Power never heard of you
Las Vegas Valley Water district never heard of you
and (wait for it)
Nevada DMV never heard of you
Uh huh..... We believe you live here..................
libsni...@gmail.com
>
> Obama funds $20M in tax payer dollars to immigrate Hamas Refugees to
> the �USA . This is the news that didn't make the headlines...
Shades of Jimmy Carter letting all the Cuban prisoners in the US.
These people never learn....
libsni...@gmail.com
> AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:
> > Whether you are an Obama fan, or not, EVERYONE IN THE U. S. needs to
> > know....
>
> > Something happened... H.R. 1388 was passed yesterday, behind our
> > backs. You may want to read about it. It wasn't mentioned on the
> > news... just went by on the ticker tape at the bottom of the CNN
> > screen.
>
> programs!!! �What's next, "Deutschland Uber Alles"?
>
> p.s...You might want to read print media. �Mainstream stuff like the
> Times and the Post. �Those of us who read such socialist diatribes are
> well aware of what's going on in Congress. �You might try C-SPAN if
> reading is over your head. �"Behind our backs" - uh huh.
>
> > Obama funds $20M in tax payer dollars to immigrate Hamas Refugees to
> > the �USA . This is the news that didn't make the headlines...
>
> > By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure
> > of $20.3 million in "migration assistance" to the Palestinian refugees
>
> Nuts.http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-palestine-refugees.htm
>
> According to published reports, in January, 2009, by the Associated
> Press, President Obama authorized an emergency contribution of $20.3
> million solely for "urgent relief efforts in the Gaza Strip."
>
>
>
> > The "presidential determination", which allows hundreds of thousands
> > of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States,
> > was signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on
> > February 4.
>
>
> > Few on Capitol Hill, or in the media, took note that the order
> > provides a free ticket replete with housing and food allowances to
> > individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support to the
> > Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the parliamentary election of
> > January 2006.
>
>
>
>
> > His first executive order was to fund/facilitate abortion(s) not just
> > here within the �U. S. , but within the world, using �U. S. �tax payer
> > funds.
>
>
> > Now we learn that he is allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinian
> > refuges to move to, and live in, the �US �at American taxpayer
> > expense.
>
> > These important, and insightful, issues are being "lost" in the
> > blinding bail-outs and "stimulation" packages.
>
> > Doubtful? To verify this for yourself:
> >www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488
>
> about assisting refugees *within* Gaza, fool.
>
> Thanks for playing.
Who you talking to, DickL?
AJ can't reply and defend himself if you cowardly cut his group and
then pound your chest like a big bad lib because he didn't answer.
Is this guy for real?
Fucking DickL.... PWN3D again!
libsni...@gmail.com
> libsnightm...@gmail.com wrote:
> >Fox News - Fox News beat CNN and MSNBC combined for the month of
> >April. From 9amET on, every program grew by more than 60% in the demo.
> >Glen beck is up 128% in viewers!
>
> >Rush Limbaugh - after being attacked by the Commander in Chimp and his
> >cronies, Rush's ratings have skyrocketed and "experienced a dramatic
> >surge in February ratings, timed precisely with the launch of
> >President Barack Obama and the Democrats’ anti-Rush assault."
>
> >Barrack Oafbama - Poor sap continues to slide in viewership. Over 20
> >million people have tuned *out* Obama's teleprompter "news"
> >conferences since they began and his approval after 100 days is lower
> >than Jimmy Carter's:
>
> >Here's the president's last three primetime news events:
> >Feb: 9: 49.5 million
> >March 24: 40.4 million
> >April 29: 28.8 million
>
>
> >Tuesday, Apr 28
> >April Ratings: FNC Beats CNN and MSNBC Combined
> >How's this for cable news domination - Fox News beat CNN and MSNBC
> >combined in every hour from 6amET to MidnightET in both Total Viewers
> >and the A25-54 demo for April 2009.
>
> >FNC had the top 11 cable news programs in Total Viewers and 12 of the
> >top 15 in the demo. FNC is the #2 network in Total Viewers on all of
> >cable.
>
> >From 9amET on, every program grew by more than 60% in the demo. The
> >5pmET hour, now occupied by Glenn Beck, is up 212% in the demo and up
> >128% in Total Viewers. Your World with Neil Cavuto is up 102% in the
> >demo and up 60% in Total Viewers. On the Record with Greta Van
> >Susteren is up 75% in demo and up 55% in Total Viewers. Also in demo:
> >FOX Report is up 75%, Special Report 70%, The O'Reilly Factor 74% and
> >Hannity 64%.
>
> >Fox & Friends has now been #1 for 90 consecutive months, Studio B with
> >Shepard Smith for 80 consecutive months.
>
Where the fuck were the "Dems" the last 8 years when Bush made you
cry???
Obama has only been in power 100 days, bfd.....
Oh, those mighty Dems, they showed the world!
LMFAO
Jimmy Carter had higher polling and more Dem senate seats and *still*
lost 4 years later, sandwiched between 20 years of Nixon, Ford, Reagan
and Bush!
Libs - where has their mighty lib machine been?
libsni...@gmail.com
wrote:
Remember the last 8 years when you said Bush wasn't your president?
Deal....
;-)
libsni...@gmail.com
>
> I guess them time he converted Airforce 1 into Scareforce 1 it turned a few
> new yorkers away, �
Wasn't that cool how the media said "Obama was very angry" about that?
Bush would have been crucified if he had said the same and held 100%
responsible.
> the bowing to superiors from Saudi was a good one, �
Yes, Muslims always bow to thier kings.
> the
> smiling at chavez when Chavez gave eme book about how awful america was...
And remember the last 8 years when all the libs cried about Rumsfeld
being pictured shaking Saddam's hand? At least he was an ally then and
Rummy wasn't the President.
Stupid libs...
Claude V. Lucas
Three great campaign commercials...
for somebody.
The one with Obama bowing to Abdullah ought to be worth 10 electoral votes.
Snit
30e92980-f207-4174...@g20g2000vba.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
2:51 PM:
> On May 1, 10:52 pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
>> 83a538f8-7870-4422-baa2-5a7b4c459...@t11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
>> 10:38 PM:
>>
>>> 100 days of media double standards
>>
>>> The back story ‹ the one you won¹t read about in The New York Times ‹
>>> is that in just 100 days, the national media have shown they have a
>>> clear double standard in how they cover Obama, compared with
>>> Republican presidents.
>>
>>> A new study by the nonpartisan Center for Media and Public Affairs
>>> found that network news programs gave Obama more than three times the
>>> coverage that they gave President George W. Bush at the same point in
>>> his presidency. And while 58 percent of all network news evaluations
>>> of Obama and his policies were favorable, only 33 percent of
>>> assessments of Bush were favorable.
>>
>> Do you think the media had an obligation to not show the mistakes of Bush?
>
> THREE TIMES THE COVERAGE IN THE FIRST 100 DAYS!
>
> "Look at the black man get a dog!"
>
> "Look at the black man get a book from Chavez"
>
> "Look at the black man without a shirt on!"
>
> "It brings a tear to my eye, back to you, Keith..."
>
> Hello, you in there???
Your bizarre rants did not answer the question. Again: Do you think the
media had an obligation to not show the mistakes of Bush?
>> Seems you are assuming equality in your rant about not being reported the
>> same... and that assumption is completely unsupported.
>
> Seems like you're not readng what is posted.
>
> The media is in Obama's pocket. Did you even watch the last news
> conference?
>
> WAKE UP!
I have read your paranoid rants... but when asked to support your views you
fold.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
ed25c16c-2af4-44de...@o14g2000vbo.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
2:55 PM:
Irrelevant to the facts written above. You are dodging your mistake.
>
> This lib is learning something new everyday!
>
> Next...
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
025d03da-25e4-4e00...@x6g2000vbg.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
2:47 PM:
You started by babbling about how Carter's rating were higher than Obama's,
but when you found out Obama's ratings are the highest since the 1970s you
decided ratings are "meaningless" and then babbled off topic about race.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
4ee2d9f1-4ecd-4d0f...@n4g2000vba.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
3:34 PM:
> On May 2, 10:00�am, "Bob in new york" <B...@experian.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> I guess them time he converted Airforce 1 into Scareforce 1 it turned a few
>> new yorkers away, �
>
>
> Wasn't that cool how the media said "Obama was very angry" about that?
>
> Bush would have been crucified if he had said the same and held 100%
> responsible.
Bush was not held responsible for illegally overthrowing a foreign nation..
and you think he would have been held accountable for such a relatively
minor lapse of judgment? That is absurd.
>> the bowing to superiors from Saudi was a good one, �
>
> Yes, Muslims always bow to thier kings.
Please try to stick to the topic.
>> the
>> smiling at chavez when Chavez gave eme book about how awful america was...
>
>
> And remember the last 8 years when all the libs cried about Rumsfeld
> being pictured shaking Saddam's hand? At least he was an ally then and
> Rummy wasn't the President.
>
> Stupid libs...
You are a very angry person.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
19e3eecb-e2ae-490b...@z19g2000vbz.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
3:31 PM:
I was listening to one of the right wing whacko radio folks the other day as
he complained about some of the Democratic senators having questions tied to
their winning elections and thus should be considered illegitimate and not
count toward a possible 60 Democrat votes. One of the most ironic things I
have ever heard.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Bruce Morgen
Getting their act together,
something of which they're
apparently capable -- now
it's the GOP's turn.
>
>Obama has only been in power 100 days, bfd.....
>
>Oh, those mighty Dems, they showed the world!
Indeed they did -- best start
for any president since Saint
Ronny Ray-Gun too.
>
>LMFAO
>
>Jimmy Carter had higher polling and more Dem senate seats and *still*
>lost 4 years later, sandwiched between 20 years of Nixon, Ford, Reagan
>and Bush!
Obama is no Carter, wishful
thinking to the contrary
notwithstanding. He's a
younger, smarter Reagan --
a "Teflon" president and a
shoo-in for a second term
already. There's nobody on
the right who's even close
-- the thing about talent
is you can't buy it or
steal it, you either have
it or you don't. Ray-Gun
had it and so does Obama.
>
>Libs - where has their mighty lib machine been?
In the gym, pumping iron
for a few decades of
smacking down the ignorant
hillbilly hate machine.
Get used to it -- it's
just barely begun.
Snit
5/2/09 5:45 PM:
>> Where the fuck were the "Dems" the last 8 years when Bush made you cry???
>>
> Getting their act together, something of which they're apparently capable --
> now it's the GOP's turn.
>
>> Obama has only been in power 100 days, bfd.....
>>
>> Oh, those mighty Dems, they showed the world!
>>
> Indeed they did -- best start for any president since Saint Ronny Ray-Gun too.
>
>> LMFAO
>>
>> Jimmy Carter had higher polling and more Dem senate seats and *still* lost 4
>> years later, sandwiched between 20 years of Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Bush!
>>
> Obama is no Carter, wishful thinking to the contrary notwithstanding. He's a
> younger, smarter Reagan -- a "Teflon" president and a shoo-in for a second
> term already. There's nobody on the right who's even close -- the thing about
> talent is you can't buy it or steal it, you either have it or you don't.
> Ray-Gun had it and so does Obama.
>
>> Libs - where has their mighty lib machine been?
>>
> In the gym, pumping iron for a few decades of smacking down the ignorant
> hillbilly hate machine. Get used to it -- it's just barely begun.
Libsnightmare started ranting about Obama's low rating... noting how they
were lower than Carters. When he was told that Obama had the *highest*
ratings since the 1970s, suddenly Libsnightmare were "meaningless" and that
they were all about race anyway... a claim that is completely unsupported.
He also babbled about how unfair it was that the media called Bush out on
some of his BS... even though he got more of a pass after 9/11 than any
president in modern history.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
libsni...@gmail.com
They still are.... LOL
> but when you found out Obama's ratings are the highest since the 1970s you
> decided ratings are "meaningless"
Never said anything like that. Ariana Huffington said approval polls
were meaningless when Bush at 92%. That's how libs are...
> and then babbled off topic about race.
You wanted to know why Obama's honeymoon was different and why he
could fuck up so bad and still be liked.
Plus you got your ass handed to you when you asked me to name just one
person who called Obama the messiah.
You lost, on every level and then changed the subject.
Next...
libsni...@gmail.com
> 2:55 PM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 1, 10:53 pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
> >> 83a538f8-7870-4422-baa2-5a7b4c459...@t11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com on 5/1/09
> >> 10:38 PM:
>
> >>> The back story ‹ the one you won¹t read about in The New York Times ‹ is
> >>> that in just 100 days, the national media have shown they have a clear
> >>> double standard in how they cover Obama, compared with Republican
> >>> presidents.
>
> >>> ... President Barack Obama has enjoyed substantially more positive media
> >>> coverage than either Bill Clinton or George W. Bush during their first
> >>> months in the White House, according to a new study of press coverage.
>
> >> Clinton was not a Republican.
>
> > He wasn't black, either.
>
> Irrelevant to the facts written above. You are dodging your mistake.
Even your cut-and-pasting of two different articles fails to distort
anything I said.
Thanks for admitting it's a fact that Obama got 3x the coverage of
Bush and more than Bush and Clinton combined in his first 100 days.
Gee, I wonder if Obama got 3x more coverage than Bush because::
a - it's because the press hated Bush.
b - Obama is hailed as the first "black" president.
c - Obama's a liberal
d - all of the above
You're not the smartest lib in the welfare line, are you?
Next....
Snit
b5fb1c92-8dc1-4ada...@v4g2000vba.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
6:51 PM:
Two of the big complaints about Obama are how he is taking on too much and
how he is doing too many interviews and the like.
Gee, why is he in the news a lot? This is hard! LOL!
Oh, and the things you quoted in your claims that I questioned:
... the national media have shown they have a clear double
standard in how they cover Obama, compared with Republican
presidents...
... President Barack Obama has enjoyed substantially more
positive media coverage than either Bill Clinton or George
W. Bush ...
Have you figured out, yet, that Clinton is not a Republican?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
The Boss of Space
> Gee, I wonder if Obama got 3x more coverage than Bush because::
>
> a - it's because the press hated Bush.
> b - Obama is hailed as the first "black" president.
> c - Obama's a liberal
> d - all of the above
>
> You're not the smartest lib in the welfare line, are you?
>
> Next....
Or maybe it's because Obama is actually working instead of setting
presidential vacation time records.
The press hated Bush? LMFAO! The press gave that fuck a free ride.
They asked him *NO* hard questions whatsoever. Not that there'd have
been an intelligible answer given. And I love how Cheney is so visible
now - but when it mattered, he couldn't be found.
You are Rush Limbaugh's wet dream.
NEXT!
The Boss of Space
<evadnikufe...@gmail.invalidcom.domain> wrote:
> STFU Snot... Keep your ignorant ass in the CSMA group with the rest of
> the leftist cunts.
>
> (FWIW while you are factually correct you're comment isn't relevant and
> you're still a fucking cunt)
> --
> "We are living in a gelded age..." -Savage
*yawn*
Are you still here? Shoo, fly.
Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth
I'm not a govt. employee, ________ :-)B.H. Obama is the duly elected CEO
of the US Government's executive branch as well as Commander in Chief of
the US armed forces.
The Supreme Court had to install that last bimbo, 5-4.
That's your deal.
libsni...@gmail.com
> libsnightm...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On May 2, 12:15�am, Bruce Morgen <edi...@juno.com> wrote:
> >> libsnightm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >Where the fuck were the "Dems" the last 8 years when Bush made you
> >cry???
>
> Getting their act together,
> something of which they're
> apparently capable -- now
> it's the GOP's turn.
>
>
>
> >Obama has only been in power 100 days, bfd.....
>
> >Oh, those mighty Dems, they showed the world!
>
> Indeed they did -- best start
> for any president since Saint
> Ronny Ray-Gun too.
Spending trillions more than any President in history in the first 100
days, holding fake press conferences, apologizing to the world for
everything since JFK, overwatching the worst violence in Iraq in over
a year, bowing to Muslims and tin pot dictators, and getting the
ugliest-ass dog the White House has ever seen are not any sort of
accomplishments.
> >LMFAO
>
> >Jimmy Carter had higher polling and more Dem senate seats and *still*
> >lost 4 years later, sandwiched between 20 years of Nixon, Ford, Reagan
> >and Bush!
>
> Obama is no Carter, wishful
> thinking to the contrary
> notwithstanding. �He's a
> younger, smarter Reagan --
> a "Teflon" president and a
> shoo-in for a second term
> already. �There's nobody on
> the right who's even close
> -- the thing about talent
> is you can't buy it or
> steal it, you either have
> it or you don't. �Ray-Gun
> had it and so does Obama.
Obama is a half-black Jimmy Carter, period. It's the only thing saving
him from his constant mishaps and gaffes. The sad thing is America may
never be able to tackle his blackness and discuss him in an open and
honest way. Anybody who challenges him is instantly branded a racist
by the lib hate machine.
He may do much worse than Carter and is already well under way, but
his black skin will protect him from scrutiny and he very well may win
the white guilt vote again in 2012... if there is still a United
States left.
> >Libs - where has their mighty lib machine been?
>
> In the gym, pumping iron
> for a few decades of
> smacking down the ignorant
> hillbilly hate machine.
> Get used to it -- it's
> just barely begun.
That's the saddest part - trillions in debt and it's "just barely
begun".
Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth
>
> That's the saddest part - trillions in debt and it's "just barely
> begun".
Your personal angst is the personal joy of many. :-) mvm
TPS
> Obama will be more popular than Carter for a longer period of time
> because of this. It will take a long time for lib whites that hate
> their white skin to turn agianst him, until they finally realize
> having no home and no job is not a good thing.
>
> They only good thing is this might open the eyes of stupid whites that
> vote with their heart instead of their minds. Maybe they'll start
> voting for thier own and those that represent them like blacks and
> other races do.
You really don't understand.
We *did* vote for one of our own. You, even if your skin is the same
color as mine, don't belong in that category. A traitor would turn
against his own conscience and wisdom in order to take sides with
someone whose only similarity is cosmetic. If your heart was a little
smarter, you might understand that.
libsni...@gmail.com
>
> Libsnightmare started ranting about Obama's low rating...
And the fact stands - over 20 million have stopped viewing his fake
news conferences while Fox News and Rush have surged.
> noting how they
> were lower than Carters. �
And his approval is still lower, no matter how much you cry, you
cannot change this fact.
> When he was told that Obama had the *highest*
> ratings since the 1970s,
Since Jimmy Carter in 1977. I said that in my original post.
> suddenly Libsnightmare were "meaningless"
Never said that. Again, Snot here can't read. I quoted the Huffington
Post thoughts on approval ratings - when Bush was at 92%.
> and that
> they were all about race anyway...
> a claim that is completely unsupported.
Sure. If you don't think Obama benefits from being labeled a black
president you're not very bright or understand politics. Even Dems Joe
Biden and Geraldine Ferrraro have said as much.
> He also babbled about how unfair it was that the media called Bush out on
> some of his BS...
Never said any such thing. I did post some research done by Pew and
Politico that showed Obama got 3x the coverage of Bush and more than
Bush and Clinton combined in the first 100 days. I also showed how
Obama's press was much more favorable - and you *still* can't figure
out why. LMFAO
> even though he got more of a pass after 9/11 than any
> president in modern history.
Which you cannot prove in any way, shape or form.
Damn, what's happened to you? Steve Carrol must have really worn you
down since we last met. You used to be somewhat intelligent in your
responses, now your constantly grasping for straws and making shit up.
Don't worry, it's not your fault. The president is black and liberal
and he will always get a free pass. No need to try and hide it... it's
an impossible task.
Next...
Snit
c3de66c3-1409-46dd...@e14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
6:44 PM:
...
>> You started by babbling about how Carter's rating were higher than Obama's,
>
> They still are.... LOL
>
>> but when you found out Obama's ratings are the highest since the 1970s you
>> decided ratings are "meaningless"
>
> Never said anything like that. Ariana Huffington said approval polls
> were meaningless when Bush at 92%. That's how libs are...
So now you think it is meaningful that Obama has the highest ratings since
the 1970s. OK.
Oh.
You will back pedal on that. 100% predictable.
>> and then babbled off topic about race.
>
> You wanted to know why Obama's honeymoon was different and why he
> could fuck up so bad and still be liked.
>
> Plus you got your ass handed to you when you asked me to name just one
> person who called Obama the messiah.
>
> You lost, on every level and then changed the subject.
>
> Next...
The sad thing is you think you are being clever.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
9fdd2e7e-4f60-4952...@o27g2000vbd.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
7:08 PM:
You obsess over race... to hide your fear, I would bet.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
The Boss of Space
> Sure. If you don't think Obama benefits from being labeled a black
> president you're not very bright or understand politics.
And Bush didn't benefit from being labeled a cowboy or from being
favored by evangelicals?
Douchenozzle.
NEXT!
The Boss of Space
> AJ can't reply and defend himself
This is all you needed to type.
libsni...@gmail.com
> 3:34 PM:
>
> > On May 2, 10:00 am, "Bob in new york" <B...@experian.net> wrote:
>
> >> I guess them time he converted Airforce 1 into Scareforce 1 it turned a few
> >> new yorkers away,
>
> > Wasn't that cool how the media said "Obama was very angry" about that?
>
> > Bush would have been crucified if he had said the same and held 100%
> > responsible.
>
> Bush was not held responsible
Give me a break. Bush was held for every little thing responsible. He
was blamed from everything from Abu Ghraib to homeless vets to black
crime. Barack "I Inherited This" Obama is *still* blaming everything
on Bush. Get real....
> for illegally overthrowing a foreign nation..
> and you think he would have been held accountable for such a relatively
> minor lapse of judgment? �That is absurd.
You mean the Senate vote by people who backed Bush like Clinton,
Biden, Kerry, Daschle and Edwards was illegal? Why aren't these libs
who gave him the power to do so in prison?
Funny how Saddam invades Kuwait, then saves his ass with a cease-fire,
than breaks the truce and 18 UN resolutions (part of the cease-fire
agreement) and somehow Bush is the criminal for deposing a muderous
dictator and setting up an elected Gov of the people.
And you wonder why people hate and despise libs?
LOL
>
> >> the bowing to superiors from Saudi was a good one,
>
> > Yes, Muslims always bow to thier kings.
>
> Please try to stick to the topic.
Uh, that was the posters topic.
>
> >> the
> >> smiling at chavez when Chavez gave eme book about how awful america was...
>
> > And remember the last 8 years when all the libs cried about Rumsfeld
> > being pictured shaking Saddam's hand? At least he was an ally then and
> > Rummy wasn't the President.
>
> > Stupid libs...
>
> You are a very angry person.
Nope, just call'em as I see'em.
Next....
libsni...@gmail.com
> On May 2, 7:22�pm, libsnightm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Sure. If you don't think Obama benefits from being labeled a black
> > president you're not very bright or understand politics.
>
> And Bush didn't benefit from being labeled a cowboy
No, he wasn't. If you were paying attention that was actually an
insult by libs and Euros.
> or from being
> favored by evangelicals?
Of course the candidate that is against abortion and stem cell
research is going to be "favored" by evangelicals. If Obama wants to
be favored by them, he can change his views... unfortunately Bush
can't change the color of his skin. Geez...
And being a "cowboy" or "favored by evangelicals" never protected him
from anybody.
Back to Mike Moore University for re-education for this lib....
>
> Douchenozzle.
Goodbye, Douchenozzle. Tell Mike hello for me!
Next...
libsni...@gmail.com
>
> You obsess over race... to hide your fear, I would bet.
Thanks for proving my point. You fell right into my trap.
And here folks is the reason you cannot talk about race in the US -
you will be labeled a "racist" by some PC lib with no backbone that
hates the whiteness of his skin.
Next....
libsni...@gmail.com
Holy shit - are you still denying that Obama's blackness and libness
has played no hand in this???
He's gotten 3x the coverage of Bush and you think it has nothing to do
with anything???
ANSWER THE QUESTION LITTLE MAN!
LMFAO
What a complete joke this guy is....
"Clinton is not a republican"
NEWSFLASH FOR DUMB PEOPLE - CLINTON WAS NOT A REPUBLICAN!
We know this already, kid.
Is that the best you got?
"Clinton wasn't a republican, that's why Obama got 3x the coverage
Bush got." - do you even read what you write?
Is that the best you can do? Snip, snip away, babbling man!
Next...
Snit
bcf6b4df-696d-4c7d...@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
7:44 PM:
> On May 2, 7:24�pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> You obsess over race... to hide your fear, I would bet.
>
>
> Thanks for proving my point. You fell right into my trap.
You trapped me into calling you on your obsession on race. Wow. How clever
of you.
Whatever.
> And here folks is the reason you cannot talk about race in the US -
> you will be labeled a "racist" by some PC lib with no backbone that
> hates the whiteness of his skin.
>
>
> Next....
One: I did not call you a racist.
Two: You are clearly obsessing over race.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
libsni...@gmail.com
> On May 2, 6:51�pm, libsnightm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Gee, I wonder if Obama got 3x more coverage than Bush because::
>
> > a - it's because the press hated Bush.
> > b - Obama is hailed as the first "black" president.
> > c - Obama's a liberal
> > d - all of the above
>
> > You're not the smartest lib in the welfare line, are you?
>
> > Next....
>
> Or maybe it's because Obama is actually working instead of setting
> presidential vacation time records.
>
> The press hated Bush? LMFAO! The press gave that fuck a free ride.
Is that why they gave Obama 3x the coverage and more positive coverage
- because they loved Bush?
"They loved Bush, because I say so" doesn't get it, little man.
LMFAO
> They asked him *NO* hard questions whatsoever.
You mean they didn't ask him "hard questions like "What will you name
your dog" and "What do you think about A-rod doing steriods"?
LOL
> Not that there'd have
> been an intelligible answer given. And I love how Cheney is so visible
> now - but when it mattered, he couldn't be found.
WTF? Cheney has always been on Fox News and Rush. You need to quit
listening to MSNBC all day.
>
> You are Rush Limbaugh's wet dream.
You are Rush Limbaugh's seed he ejaculates during his wet dream.
>
> NEXT!
Libs - no brain and no originality at all.
Next...
libsni...@gmail.com
So the 95% of blacks that voted for Obama are the race traitors.
Got it.
I knew there was some race-traiting going on somehere....
Snit
c55fd681-e946-43d4...@o14g2000vbo.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
7:35 PM:
> On May 2, 5:43�pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
>> 4ee2d9f1-4ecd-4d0f-a0eb-33cda2158...@n4g2000vba.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
>> 3:34 PM:
>>
>>> On May 2, 10:00 am, "Bob in new york" <B...@experian.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> I guess them time he converted Airforce 1 into Scareforce 1 it turned a few
>>>> new yorkers away,
>>
>>> Wasn't that cool how the media said "Obama was very angry" about that?
>>
>>> Bush would have been crucified if he had said the same and held 100%
>>> responsible.
>>
>> Bush was not held responsible for illegally overthrowing a foreign nation..
>
> Give me a break. Bush was held for every little thing responsible.
Oh, please, I look forward to your support for this. Start with the name of
the jail he is in.
> He
> was blamed from everything from Abu Ghraib to homeless vets to black
> crime. Barack "I Inherited This" Obama is *still* blaming everything
> on Bush. Get real....
Yeah, Obama has not changed the world in 100 days. The louse!
>> and you think he would have been held accountable for such a relatively
>> minor lapse of judgment? �That is absurd.
>
> You mean the Senate vote by people who backed Bush like Clinton,
> Biden, Kerry, Daschle and Edwards was illegal? Why aren't these libs
> who gave him the power to do so in prison?
What? I was talking about the flight over New York. You know, the thing
you said Bush would be held accountable for if he was in office ... as Obama
has been held accountable now.
You then said Bush was held accountable for overthrowing a nation illegally,
but you have not figured out what jail he is in.
> Funny how Saddam invades Kuwait, then saves his ass with a cease-fire,
> than breaks the truce and 18 UN resolutions (part of the cease-fire
> agreement) and somehow Bush is the criminal for deposing a muderous
> dictator and setting up an elected Gov of the people.
The fact others outside of the US do bad things is not an excuse for you,
me, or Bush to ignore the law. Nice try!
> And you wonder why people hate and despise libs?
Thanks for the tip Mr. Popular.
>
> LOL
>
>
>
>>
>>>> the bowing to superiors from Saudi was a good one,
>>
>>> Yes, Muslims always bow to thier kings.
>>
>> Please try to stick to the topic.
>
> Uh, that was the posters topic.
>
>
>>
>>>> the
>>>> smiling at chavez when Chavez gave eme book about how awful america was...
>>
>>> And remember the last 8 years when all the libs cried about Rumsfeld
>>> being pictured shaking Saddam's hand? At least he was an ally then and
>>> Rummy wasn't the President.
>>
>>> Stupid libs...
>>
>> You are a very angry person.
>
>
> Nope, just call'em as I see'em.
>
> Next....
You are clearly angry. Do not think it does not come through your posts.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
libsni...@gmail.com
> 6:44 PM:
>
> ...
>
> >> You started by babbling about how Carter's rating were higher than Obama's,
>
> > They still are.... LOL
>
> >> but when you found out Obama's ratings are the highest since the 1970s you
> >> decided ratings are "meaningless"
>
> > Never said anything like that. Ariana Huffington said approval polls
> > were meaningless when Bush at 92%. That's how libs are...
>
> So now you think it is meaningful that Obama has the highest ratings since
> the 1970s. �OK.
>
> Oh.
>
> You will back pedal on that. �100% predictable.
Nope. I pointed out the hypocrisy of libs and will never back pedal
from that fact.
>
> >> and then babbled off topic about race.
>
> > You wanted to know why Obama's honeymoon was different and why he
> > could fuck up so bad and still be liked.
>
> > Plus you got your ass handed to you when you asked me to name just one
> > person who called Obama the messiah.
>
> > You lost, on every level and then changed the subject.
>
> > Next...
>
> The sad thing is you think you are being clever.
Nope, just winning another argument with the facts on my side.
One day you'll figure it out and learn how to win a debate without
quoting people out of context.
Next...
Snit
5cfe2306-c8cc-4e5b...@v4g2000vba.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
7:22 PM:
> On May 2, 6:21�pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Libsnightmare started ranting about Obama's low rating...
>
> And the fact stands - over 20 million have stopped viewing his fake
> news conferences while Fox News and Rush have surged.
Look how you now run from the topic of ratings... when you realized your dig
was a total bust due to Obama having the highest rating since the 1970s you
just folded.
You are just not very good at supporting your point. Below you snip
sentences to pieces to try to avoid points. Yipee... you win the prize of
proving not even you believe the BS you spew.
You also cried about how Bush was treated so poorly by the press... but
ignored the fact that the press and the world as a whole gave Bush more
support after 9/11 than any president in US history. Heck, most of the
world was behind the US (and Bush)... and Bush threw that out with
incompetency.
Oh well. Now we have someone better... not that better than Bush is a high
standard. Get over it and move on.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
37f78ffa-f943-470a...@o14g2000vbo.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
8:01 PM:
>> Two of the big complaints about Obama are how he is taking on too much and
>> how he is doing too many interviews and the like.
>>
>> Gee, why is he in the news a lot? �This is hard! �LOL!
>>
>> Oh, and the things you quoted in your claims that I questioned:
>>
>> � � ... the national media have shown they have a clear double
>> � � standard in how they cover Obama, compared with Republican
>> � � presidents...
>>
>> � � ... President Barack Obama has enjoyed substantially more
>> � � positive media coverage than either Bill Clinton or George
>> � � W. Bush ...
>>
>> Have you figured out, yet, that Clinton is not a Republican?
>
> Holy shit - are you still denying that Obama's blackness and libness
> has played no hand in this???
Being that Clinton was a Democrat since *long* before Obama was on the
national scene, yes, I absolutely deny that Clinton being a democrat has
*anything* to do with Obama's skin color and his political leanings.
You try to tie everything to Obama's skin color. You are obsessed with his
skin color. Why?
> He's gotten 3x the coverage of Bush and you think it has nothing to do
> with anything???
With anything? What? You are lost.
> ANSWER THE QUESTION LITTLE MAN!
>
> LMFAO
>
> What a complete joke this guy is....
>
> "Clinton is not a republican"
>
> NEWSFLASH FOR DUMB PEOPLE - CLINTON WAS NOT A REPUBLICAN!
>
> We know this already, kid.
You know it but think it is because of Obama. That is just absurd.
> Is that the best you got?
>
> "Clinton wasn't a republican, that's why Obama got 3x the coverage
> Bush got." - do you even read what you write?
What? I did not write that. You did.
> Is that the best you can do? Snip, snip away, babbling man!
>
> Next...
I accept your white flag.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
5316921c-7c3e-4755...@z19g2000vbz.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
8:14 PM:
> On May 2, 7:23�pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
>> c3de66c3-1409-46dd-9325-0141fa1ff...@e14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
>> 6:44 PM:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>> You started by babbling about how Carter's rating were higher than Obama's,
>>
>>> They still are.... LOL
>>
>>>> but when you found out Obama's ratings are the highest since the 1970s you
>>>> decided ratings are "meaningless"
>>
>>> Never said anything like that. Ariana Huffington said approval polls
>>> were meaningless when Bush at 92%. That's how libs are...
>>
>> So now you think it is meaningful that Obama has the highest ratings since
>> the 1970s. �OK.
>>
>> Oh.
>>
>> You will back pedal on that. �100% predictable.
>
>
> Nope. I pointed out the hypocrisy of libs and will never back pedal
> from that fact.
How do you think your back pedaling, obsession with Obama's skin color, and
running from your own claims about popularity proved anything about anyone
other than yourself?
Face it: you have waved your white flag. You cannot undo that. You know
you have no point to make and are just babbling, now hoping beyond hope
someone - anyone - will take you seriously.
Good luck finding someone who will.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Bruce Morgen
>libsni...@gmail.com stated in post
>bcf6b4df-696d-4c7d...@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
>7:44 PM:
>
>> On May 2, 7:24?pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You obsess over race... to hide your fear, I would bet.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for proving my point. You fell right into my trap.
>
>You trapped me into calling you on your obsession on race. Wow. How clever
>of you.
>
>Whatever.
>
>> And here folks is the reason you cannot talk about race in the US -
>> you will be labeled a "racist" by some PC lib with no backbone that
>> hates the whiteness of his skin.
>>
>>
>> Next....
>
>One: I did not call you a racist.
>Two: You are clearly obsessing over race.
A typical whitebread wuss,
cringing in fear of his
wife or his sister getting
jiggy with an educated man
of another "race." Obama
is his nightmare -- a mixed
race guy with an Ivy League
education and a sky-high IQ
doing a better job than the
pseudo-cowboy WASP frat boy
he succeeded. He feels his
imaginary grip on the
country slipping away
forever -- he really
believes he's one of the
rightful ruling class. Too
bad America doesn't have
any such thing as a ruling
class.
Faux Noise Channel and AM
talk radio are the only
lifeboats of the sinking SS
GOP -- and the fool thinks
those lifeboats getting
crowded is a sign of a fine
ship. Good luck with that,
Popeye -- basic cable and
AM radio are all you have
left.
Snit
5/2/09 8:46 PM:
Libwhatever does not even argue his views well... he seems to be trying to
echo Rush or someone and just failing. Badly. Hence his tattered white
Snit
3151c0cb-7a6e-432d...@r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
8:11 PM:
What?
What?!?!
Where do you even come up with this BS?
>
> Got it.
>
> I knew there was some race-traiting going on somehere....
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Bob in new york
"Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth" <P...@9689.com> wrote in message
news:sZqdnc1j346FYWHU...@giganews.com...
Right Obama is the commander in cheif, he even said the buck stops here with
the president, Williams Jefferson Clinton signed derrivatives into law
ultimately costing America Billions in Bailouts, several times more than the
Iraq war. His staff looked the Bill over before he signed it into law. I
hold democrats directly resonsible. Understand?
Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth
The Nice Mean Man
>
> - Show quoted text -
But they're all lead by a blue-gummed spade. So what did you expect?
The average black IQ is 80. Idiot level. So when one comes along who's
a tad bit smarter than the rest, all of the white apologists go ape-
shit and elect him fucking president. The problem is, blacks are ALL
one-dimensional thinkers, as anyone who has been forced to work with
one can attest.
And this bastard isn't even from the American strain of coon that we
have led-booting us down over here. His father was a tom-cat african
and his mother was an afrophile. So he got the grain of sense from her
and the one-dimensionalism from the same source as our locals did. So
what did we expect from this guy? To be the writer of the next
Gettysburg fucking-address? He should be down his bended knee every
night thanking an overly-forgiving God for people like Abraham
Lincoln.
The Nice Mean Man
Snit
9:46 PM:
> On Sat, 02 May 2009 19:16:57 -0700, "Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth"
> <P...@9689.com> wrote:
>
>>> libertys...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>> That's the saddest part - trillions in debt and it's "just barely
>>> begun".
>>
>> Your personal angst is the personal joy of many. :-) mvm
>
>
> You Republicans can help reduce the amount of debt by returning your
>
> stimulus money to the government.
And get businesses to stop taking tax breaks and other wealthfare.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Dale Houstman
>
> Right Obama is the commander in cheif, he even said the buck stops here
> with the president, Williams Jefferson Clinton signed derrivatives into
> law ultimately costing America Billions in Bailouts, several times more
> than the Iraq war. His staff looked the Bill over before he signed it
> into law. I hold democrats directly resonsible. Understand?
Derivatives were created and instituted during the senior Bush's term. I
even listened to one of the men who created them talking (at length and
quite regretfully) on the radio. Bush and Greenspan were quite excited
by the financial prospects. After a few months, the creator tried to
tell the White House (and Greenspan) that regulations and oversight
should be put in place to forestall massive economic problems that could
arise from the use of derivatives. Greenspan told him that the men using
them were responsible and capable enough to oversee the trade themselves
- this is the moment Greenspan was referring to when he (belatedly)
apologized for being blind to greed and incompetence.
It's not that there isn't a lot of blame to go around - Clinton
continued Reagan's disastrous tax and trade policies ('Reaganism" is
actually at the root of most of this), and far too many Dems turned a
blind eye to the concerns. But to blame it on one person and one party
is sheer idiocy.
dmh
George Leppla
<libsni...@gmail.com> wrote
>Libs - where has their mighty lib machine been?
Hmmmmm....... it seem like the "mighty lib machine"...
Elected a President
Holds a Majority in House
Holds a Majority in Senate
May nominate and install 3 or 4 judges on the Supreme court.
Majority of governors are Dems.
Pretty much doing whatever they want to do.
Doesn't matter if you look at it from the Right or from the Left..... the
"mighty lib machine" has been steamrolling all over the Republican Party.
Thank you Mr. Libsnightmare for a very enjoyable morning. Your anguish at
being a member of the minority party is palpable and I have to admit,
enjoyable. Almost as enjoyable as a Michele Bachman interview.
But sadly, you are indicative of what is happening with the Republican Party
right now. There is a whole lot of pissing and moaning but no one has
enough leadership abilities to take control and try to put the pieces back
together again and no one is offering any leadership or viable alternatives.
The closest they have come so far is Romney, Cantor and Jeb Bush meeting in
a pizza joint in VA and talking to an absolutely HUGE crowd of 100 people.
Wow. The best sound bite they could muster was Jeb Bush saying "You can't
beat something with nothing... and the other side has something". Is this
the "mighty Republican machine" at work? No wonder they are getting
pounded.
Right now, the Republican Party is immaterial and irrelevant. They need a
leader, a plan and they need to quit whining and get to work.
George L
Snit
on 5/3/09 4:28 AM:
The very, very low interest rates that pushed investors away from
traditional investments and into, at first, prime mortgages and then, later,
subprime also is tied to this. Investors thought they were getting
low-risk, high-interest returns.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
AM:
Libsnightmare is just freaking out... and he obsessed over color. He is,
sadly, not unique among those that deeply miss Bush.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
slaz...@stargate.net
Snit
1e96d3d5-e8b7-4305...@d19g2000prh.googlegroups.com on 5/3/09
7:36 AM:
> Cross Posted
|
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hope that helps.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> slazar19 stated:
>
>> Cross Posted
>
>
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> -------------------------------
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
>
> Hope that helps.
... and you criticise Christians. [rest of crossposted links
snipped]
--
HPT
Snit
on 5/3/09 7:48 AM:
Where do I criticize Christians? Please, be specific.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth
Actually, the 'structured investment vehicles' came about over the past
10 years, but I sold high yield collateralized mortgage obligations
(CMO's) in the '80's while with Merrill Lynch. As manufacturing has died
in America and the MBA and services became the ticket, the whole finance
paper push 'n shuffle got more and more ludicrous. Rating agencies
currying favor for commish $$$ was clearly *the* final straw... mvm
Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth
Accurate, Honest & Timely Truth
Greenspan held interest rates too low long after the 9/11/01 attacks. mvm
GreyCloud
Creating a division are you? It is only *you* that is calling racism here.
When people realize that Obama is backing out on a lot of promises and
become
disenchanted, will they turn their backs on him.
And color has nothing to do with it, but rather his broken promises. He
is nothing more
than a puppet being manipulated. Business as usual. All that happened
was a change in
sock puppets.
--
"It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument."
William G. McAdoo.
American Government official (1863-1941).
Uppy Downy
wrote:
>Fox News - Fox News beat CNN and MSNBC combined for the month of
>April. From 9amET on, every program grew by more than 60% in the demo.
>Glen beck is up 128% in viewers!
Fox....America's RedNeck Network!!!
UD
TPS
> On May 2, 7:18 pm, TPS <the...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Obama will be more popular than Carter for a longer period of time
> > > because of this. It will take a long time for lib whites that hate
> > > their white skin to turn agianst him, until they finally realize
> > > having no home and no job is not a good thing.
>
> > > They only good thing is this might open the eyes of stupid whites that
> > > vote with their heart instead of their minds. Maybe they'll start
> > > voting for thier own and those that represent them like blacks and
> > > other races do.
>
> > You really don't understand.
> > We *did* vote for one of our own. You, even if your skin is the same
> > color as mine, don't belong in that category. A traitor would turn
> > against his own conscience and wisdom in order to take sides with
> > someone whose only similarity is cosmetic. If your heart was a little
> > smarter, you might understand that.
>
> So the 95% of blacks that voted for Obama are the race traitors.
>
> Got it.
>
> I knew there was some race-traiting going on somehere....
No, you don't get it, but that's no surprise.
Snit
5/3/09 11:07 AM:
> libsni...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On May 2, 7:18�pm, TPS <the...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>>> Obama will be more popular than Carter for a longer period of time
>>>> because of this. It will take a long time for lib whites that hate
>>>> their white skin to turn agianst him, until they finally realize
>>>> having no home and no job is not a good thing.
>>>> They only good thing is this might open the eyes of stupid whites that
>>>> vote with their heart instead of their minds. Maybe they'll start
>>>> voting for thier own and those that represent them like blacks and
>>>> other races do.
>>> You really don't understand.
>>> We *did* vote for one of our own. �You, even if your skin is the same
>>> color as mine, don't belong in that category. �A traitor would turn
>>> against his own conscience and wisdom in order to take sides with
>>> someone whose only similarity is cosmetic. �If your heart was a little
>>> smarter, you might understand that.
>>
>> So the 95% of blacks that voted for Obama are the race traitors.
>>
>> Got it.
>>
>> I knew there was some race-traiting going on somehere....
>
> Creating a division are you? It is only *you* that is calling racism here.
As he obsesses over race... his every post turns back to the irrelevant
topic of skin color.
> When people realize that Obama is backing out on a lot of promises and become
> disenchanted, will they turn their backs on him. And color has nothing to do
> with it, but rather his broken promises. He is nothing more than a puppet
> being manipulated. Business as usual. All that happened was a change in sock
> puppets.
The areas I am concerned about Obama's actions - mostly international
protocol and levels of spending - have nothing to do with his skin color.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
libsni...@gmail.com
> libsnightm...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On May 2, 7:18 pm, TPS <the...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> >>> Obama will be more popular than Carter for a longer period of time
> >>> because of this. It will take a long time for lib whites that hate
> >>> their white skin to turn agianst him, until they finally realize
> >>> having no home and no job is not a good thing.
> >>> They only good thing is this might open the eyes of stupid whites that
> >>> vote with their heart instead of their minds. Maybe they'll start
> >>> voting for thier own and those that represent them like blacks and
> >>> other races do.
> >> You really don't understand.
> >> We *did* vote for one of our own. You, even if your skin is the same
> >> color as mine, don't belong in that category. A traitor would turn
> >> against his own conscience and wisdom in order to take sides with
> >> someone whose only similarity is cosmetic. If your heart was a little
> >> smarter, you might understand that.
>
> > So the 95% of blacks that voted for Obama are the race traitors.
>
> > Got it.
>
> > I knew there was some race-traiting going on somehere....
>
> Creating a division are you? �It is only *you* that is calling racism here.
You don't get the news much, do you?
"This is about hating a black man, straight up" - hateful libs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IeRxVMpyDg
> When people realize that Obama is backing out on a lot of promises and
> become
> disenchanted, will they turn their backs on him.
They already realize this. Mike Moore has even said so on his site...
but since he's black and and a lib, he doesn't get the "Bush
treatment" from fat boy and others.
Cindy Sheehan has been a lot more consistent, but still doesn't come
as close with her insults as she did with Bush.
> And color has nothing to do with it, but rather his broken promises. �
True, but it's a lib PC world and black people cannot be criticized
like whites.
Just ask Imus and the NY Post cartoonist.
> He
> is nothing more
> than a puppet being manipulated. �Business as usual. �
BINGO!
> All that happened
> was a change in
> sock puppets.
Say what you want about Bush, but he was always his own man and called
his own shots and didn't give a fuck about polls or anybody else's
opinion.
The Nice Mean Man
wrote:
> George Leppla wrote:
>
> > <libsnightm...@gmail.com> wrote
>
> - Show quoted text -
F- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
libsni...@gmail.com
>
> As he obsesses over race... his every post turns back to the irrelevant
> topic of skin color.
>
Who brought up race, dumbass?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IeRxVMpyDg
Listen, watch and weep....
I didn't see one racist sign or sentiment at those tea parties.
Next...
libsni...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
No you don't get that many blacks said they voted for obama because
"he looks like me".
Tuned out again, eh raceboy?
No fucking surprises here, that's for damn sure.
Listen, watch and weep for me....
Snit
4131bcec-0bcb-40e1...@l5g2000vbc.googlegroups.com on 5/3/09
3:11 PM:
> On May 3, 2:26�pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> As he obsesses over race... his every post turns back to the irrelevant
>> topic of skin color.
>>
>
>
> Who brought up race, dumbass?
In this thread: you.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IeRxVMpyDg
irrelevant to this thread.
>
>
> Listen, watch and weep....
>
> I didn't see one racist sign or sentiment at those tea parties.
>
>
> Next...
The tea parties are irrelevant to this thread. Please, stop waving your
white flag.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
libsni...@gmail.com
> slaza...@stargate.net stated in post
> 1e96d3d5-e8b7-4305-bd6d-0af05a607...@d19g2000prh.googlegroups.com on 5/3/09
> 7:36 AM:
>
> > Cross Posted
>
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � �-------------------------------
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
> � � � � � � � � � � |
>
> Hope that helps.
"I told my family, don't crosspost on the Usenets. It's a lot easier
to catch and spread the swine virus when you're posting to multiple
groups" - Joe Biden
Biden is a complete idiot.
Snit
2113c797-63ac-4a1c...@l5g2000vbc.googlegroups.com on 5/3/09
3:08 PM:
> On May 3, 11:07�am, GreyCloud <cumu...@mist.com> wrote:
>> libsnightm...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On May 2, 7:18 pm, TPS <the...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>>>> Obama will be more popular than Carter for a longer period of time
>>>>> because of this. It will take a long time for lib whites that hate
>>>>> their white skin to turn agianst him, until they finally realize
>>>>> having no home and no job is not a good thing.
>>>>> They only good thing is this might open the eyes of stupid whites that
>>>>> vote with their heart instead of their minds. Maybe they'll start
>>>>> voting for thier own and those that represent them like blacks and
>>>>> other races do.
>>>> You really don't understand.
>>>> We *did* vote for one of our own. You, even if your skin is the same
>>>> color as mine, don't belong in that category. A traitor would turn
>>>> against his own conscience and wisdom in order to take sides with
>>>> someone whose only similarity is cosmetic. If your heart was a little
>>>> smarter, you might understand that.
>>
>>> So the 95% of blacks that voted for Obama are the race traitors.
>>
>>> Got it.
>>
>>> I knew there was some race-traiting going on somehere....
>>
>> Creating a division are you? �It is only *you* that is calling racism here.
>
> You don't get the news much, do you?
>
> "This is about hating a black man, straight up" - hateful libs
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IeRxVMpyDg
No claim was made that race was not talked about *elsewhere*.
In this thread, though, only you are talking about it... over and over and
over and over and over. You are obsessed with it.
When you realized that Obama has the highest ratings since the 1970s you
jumped to the topic of race.
>> When people realize that Obama is backing out on a lot of promises and
>> become
>> disenchanted, will they turn their backs on him.
>
>
> They already realize this. Mike Moore has even said so on his site...
> but since he's black and and a lib, he doesn't get the "Bush
> treatment" from fat boy and others.
>
> Cindy Sheehan has been a lot more consistent, but still doesn't come
> as close with her insults as she did with Bush.
>
>
>> And color has nothing to do with it, but rather his broken promises. �
>
> True, but it's a lib PC world and black people cannot be criticized
> like whites.
>
> Just ask Imus and the NY Post cartoonist.
>
>
>> He
>> is nothing more
>> than a puppet being manipulated. �Business as usual. �
>
> BINGO!
>
>
>
>> All that happened
>> was a change in
>> sock puppets.
>
> Say what you want about Bush, but he was always his own man and called
> his own shots and didn't give a fuck about polls or anybody else's
> opinion.
You are paranoid and obsessed with race.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
0ba1370f-1ed4-4ea0...@l5g2000vbc.googlegroups.com on 5/3/09
3:15 PM:
Odd how obsessed with race you became once you realized Obama has the
highest ratings since the 1970s.
Wow... you just cannot deal with simple facts.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
libsni...@gmail.com
> libsnightm...@gmail.com stated in post
> 5cfe2306-c8cc-4e5b-bdd0-93b8da3fb...@v4g2000vba.googlegroups.com on 5/2/09
> 7:22 PM:
>
> > On May 2, 6:21 pm, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> >> Libsnightmare started ranting about Obama's low rating...
>
> > And the fact stands - �over 20 million have stopped viewing his fake
> > news conferences while Fox News and Rush have surged.
>
> Look how you now run from the topic of ratings... when you realized your dig
> was a total bust due to Obama having the highest rating since the 1970s you
> just folded.
WTF are you talking about????
Obama LOST 20 million viewers at the same time Fox News and Limbaugh
GAINED viewers!
Glenn Beck, the most rabid anti-Obama person on TV has increased his
audience by 128% and has been number 1 in his time slot since he
joined Fox!
Huffington Post says approval polls are meaningless and even James
Earl Carter had a better approval at this time!
Babble away for me....
You can change the subject but you *can't* change the facts
libsni...@gmail.com
wrote:
> > libertysnightm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > That's the saddest part - trillions in debt and it's "just barely
> > begun".
>
> Your personal angst is the personal joy of many. :-) mvm
WTF?
I'm not the sap that's gonna pay back the trillions, you schmuck.
Try "future generations". And in the future the US will be run my
Mexicans and they'll pay while I laugh my ass off.
LOL