This is huge loss to the Democratic Party with the passing of Russert. Especially at such a critical juncture of the 2008 campaign season. This blow to Democratic strategy spells even further disaster for Senator Hussein to come.

Rico, whatever Russert's faults might have been, don't you consider it likely that anyone they put in his place is even going to be a stronger apologist for the Democrats? Or did you perceive that Russert had even more pull because of his likeability and perception of integrity, even if he wasn't a rabid apologist?

And that's assuming that this campaign is about issues. I mean, even if you liked Obama, why would you like him? What's he going to do for you? I seriously doubt there's an Obama supporter in existence who can answer that question with any substance. Listen, I understand the appeal of the Kennedy era. I wasn't old enough to respond to it when I was just five years old, but later I saw the footage of a handsome, articulate war hero with a good sense of humor. There was a lot to like with Kennedy. But behind Obama's veneer is William Ayers, Pastor Wright, the most leftwing politics in the Senate, and other icky stuff. Should Obama win, it's not a win for the Democrats, per se. It's a win for almost complete and total abandonment of even a pretense to reason. Mussolini and all fascists tend to be a cult of personality. And I don't see Obama as having anything more than that, and should he become president, it's going to be a rough ride for this rube.

Russert foremost was a Democratic insider. He worked for a powerful Democrat in Patrick Moynihan. Russert was very good at seeming to not be partisan. All the people you just mentioned that are connected to Senator Hussein who did he go to to put out the fire. Senator Hussein appeared on Meet The Press were Russert made it seem as though it was perfectly acceptable that belonging to a racist bigoted separatist church for 20 years was anything to worry about in Presidential candidate.

Now without Russert were can Senator Hussein go to legitimize himself? The Chris Mathews show? Larry King Live? Keith Oberdummy? Senator Hussein has no where to go now. Stephonopoluos was the evil moderator that asked to many tough questions of Senator Hussein.

There is no one the Democrats can replace Russert with that has the 17 year savy to pull off what Russert did every Sunday morning without seeming partisan.

Russert was also moderator of many of the debates this primary season. Russert assured Senator Husseins win by asking Senator Hillary would she be supporting Governor Spitzers proposal to give illegal immigrants driver licenses. She never recovered from that question.

Senator Hussein appeared on Meet The Press were Russert made it seem as though it was perfectly acceptable that belonging to a racist bigoted separatist church for 20 years was anything to worry about in Presidential candidate.

I'd like to see that interview, Rico.

Russert was also moderator of many of the debates this primary season. Russert assured Senator Husseins win by asking Senator Hillary would she be supporting Governor Spitzers proposal to give illegal immigrants driver licenses. She never recovered from that question.

I didn't watch any of the debates. The only formats worth a damn are the townhall-style ones where private citizens (hopefully not plants) ask the questions. Their questions are ten times as good as the so-called professional journalists, and I really mean that. It's really awful what passes for journalism these days. But take your average citizen at random and you'll get something of much higher quality. Bill Buckley once said, " I'd rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University." It's sort of the same thing.

When Wright became a problem Senator Hussein went on Meet the Press. Russert wasn't asking any questions like Senator Hussein what US Citizen is going to want to vote for a candidate that participated in a racist bigoted separatist church for 20 years. Or wouldn't a white candidate who had a 20 year participation in a racist bigoted separatist church rightly be driven from the primary?

Instead Senator Hussein was feed question only to keep his image intact as a nice guy in suit.

McCain is asking for Townhall type of debates

.
We should go back to discussing comedy and fantasy movies. That makes more sense than THIS bullshit.
.

So to you Markle the truth is bullshit?

When Wright became a problem Senator Hussein went on Meet the Press. You deny this took place? It is bullshit? Senator Hussein wasn't given the full hour? All bullshit? Or how about Senator Hussein back on January 22 2006 formally announcing his candidacy for president on Meet the Press with Tim Russert. That was bullshit too?

.
For starters, there is no such person as "Senator Hussein," you dipshit.
.

Russert wasn't asking any questions like Senator Hussein what US Citizen is going to want to vote for a candidate that participated in a racist bigoted separatist church for 20 years. Or wouldn't a white candidate who had a 20 year participation in a racist bigoted separatist church rightly be driven from the primary?

Yes, the liberal bias of the mainstream media is laid bare by such things, Rico. They're cheerleaders for the Democrats instead of trying to fulfill their two main functions: make money and inform the public. Their viewership has been dropping for over a decade now, so goal #1 isn't being achieved. And goal #2 has become a bit of a joke to all but the Kool-aid drinkers.

For starters, there is no such person as "Senator Hussein," you dipshit.

Like it or not, Hussein is his middle name, just like Bushie is George W's last name. Oh, wait. It isn't. Sorry.

Rico complained about Russert not asking Obama the tough questions, then proceeded to post the transcript, which has Russert asking important questions like "are you still a member of the church?" and then catches him with his own words a couple of times. The Meet the Press interview back in May, was certainly not a liberal jerk-off session for Russert.

This is one thing Russert used to do, just lay out things that "the other side" was saying, to avoid having the guest think that Russert himself was asking that. But it always ended up sounding like a question and the guest was always given the opportunity to respond:

quote:

The critics have said he can attack the United States of America, he can do all sorts of things that divide the country, but only when he made it politically uncomfortable for you did you finally separate himself from him.

That's pretty devastating. I remember watching that interview and thinking no WAY would I ever vote for this guy. I don't think Russert cut him that much slack... just the same he did to everyone, enough to get them to talk as openly as they'd decide to. Barry began answering questions in a fairly straightforward way here. It was among his more honest interviews. The problem is, it revealed many of the holes in the man's armor. Some of the things that would make him a crappy leader.

It was a moment like I remember for Kerry, where the guy wouldn't shut up, these big convoluted, trying to argue both sides of an issue... working things out rhetorically... and it hit you, this man will never be able to make a decision.

It was a moment like I remember for Kerry, where the guy wouldn't shut up, these big convoluted, trying to argue both sides of an issue... working things out rhetorically... and it hit you, this man will never be able to make a decision.

One of the drawbacks of the TV age is that we relate to these people so visually. They say that people who watched it on TV thought Kennedy was the winner. Those who heard the debate on the radio thought Nixon did best. It's been argued that he was so ugly, Lincoln could never have been elected in the modern TV age. So, if all our candidates (keep writing your short story, by the way) are simply fashioned to appeal to us superficially visually, it's no surprise we should end up with these very smooth, charismatic (Kerry charismatic?) people who honestly can't think themselves out of a wet paper bag. And do not think that I suppose McCain to be a rocket surgeon. I don't think he is at all.

I don't think McCain is a dummy, either. But number one in his plus column is that he's a warrior, and brave. And if it's anything we need now, it's somebody who's seen war firsthand. They are going to be uniquely qualified to lead us in wartime. I don't shortchange that experience. Having seen the darkest sides of human nature is probably the most important experience any leader can have.

Obama has seen the darkest sides of human nature too, in his own Pastor of 20 years. And by his own admission, I don't think he stood up to it. Whereas nobody can possibly say McCain didn't stand up to the people that crippled him. His captors beat the living crap out of him over days and days (and that's beating on top of multiple broken bones from being shot down and ejecting, and injuries--included being bayoneted--from capture) to the point where they FINALLY broke him and he signed a stupid confession. Something that still haunts him. But I like that about him. He was tough, but had to come to terms with his breaking point under torture. Most people don't ever experience that kind of testing of their limits. He could have died the brave war hero and NOT signed, but he chose to live. All kinds of broken bones, stab wounds, no medical attention until he'd "confess", and beaten silly for a week. A WEEK went by where he ignored the pain and still told these guys to go fuck themselves.

Obama still hasn't told Wright to go fuck himself. He's distanced, apologized, spoken out against the words "but never the man"... Oh fucking please, will you? What a wus.

McCain has some terrible attitudes about free speech, which totally irritate me. But I think we don't have to worry about him ever wussing out. He's never going to sign any stupid shit now, without having a flashback about signing that lame confession. Which right there is enough for me.

House Democrats want to nationalize the oil refineries. Maxine Walters was not joking when she said the Oil industry should be socialized.

This is a follow up on thalo's response to Senator Hussein on Meet the Press.

Senator Hussein was never asked a single serious question on Meet The Press. Senator Hussein framed his reaction to Wright by saying that oh but I joined a Church not a Pastor. Why didn't Russert frame his questions around the fact that Trinity Church is a Black Separatist church. A chruch that wants to set up separate states just for black people. This is the church Senator Hussein was a participant in for 20 years.

After Senator Husseins May 4 appearance on Meet the Press his 20 year involvement in a racist bigoted separatist church has become buried by the press.

I think Russert was a bit more objective than the rest of the mainstream press. But the larger question would be whether or not an overtly conservative press which had gone to colleges and universities where every professor indoctrinated them thoroughly in Reagan, Burke, Lincoln, the Founding Fathers, and Adam Smith would give fair and balanced coverage of all politicians, despite whatever their party affiliation was. Well, if you've ever listened to the way Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly regularly rip Republicans a new one, you'd know the answer to that. You can hold conservative views without turning into a kook. But the same does not seem to apply to the media who overwhelmingly hold liberal (or leftist) views and who use their positions to advance a cause rather than fulfilling their duties of fairly and objectively disseminating the news. It's been argued by Rush and others that these people aren't always aware of their bias, so insular have they become, their political views rarely challenged among their back-slapping brethren and sistren. And I think there's some truth to that. And I think that there's a lot of truth to the idea that if you are a true conservative, that you will have reached this position after first having come to know the liberal position quite well. A conservative can potentially (but not always, of course) have both sides of the argument mastered, while a liberal is, for the most part, still sucking the rarified air of an opinion that was garnered during their yute and that holds up only if one is surrounded with back-slappers and those who deem other opinions unworthy even of consideration (which is a great cult-like mentality, well known in religion).

I haven't read the Russert transcript, nor have I watched much Russert these last few years -- probably in part because he was too softball. But Russert seems like a really nice man.

quote:

Like it or not, Hussein is his middle name

Don't insult our intelligence with crap like this. Who else do you call by his middle name, other than Dubya, who was called that his whole life because he had the same first and last names as his father. We didn't call President William Jefferson Clinton "President Jefferson," and you wouldn't be calling Barack Obama "Hussein" if it wasn't Muslim-sounding. So don't give me that "Hussein is his middle name" bullshit. It's this casual, offhand visciousness that's putting me off the site. I didn't expect much from Rico, but I thought Brad was better. We don't censor people here, but people on their own can choose to be less of an asshole.
.

quote:

A conservative can potentially (but not always, of course) have both sides of the argument mastered, while a liberal is, for the most part, still sucking the rarified air of an opinion that was garnered during their yute and that holds up only if one is surrounded with back-slappers and those who deem other opinions unworthy even of consideration (which is a great cult-like mentality, well known in religion).

Another example of blind tunnel vision. And you hold up thugs like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilley as responsible journalists???

And on the Fox News Channel, which put up a graphic on the screen June 11, referring to Obama's wife as his "Baby Moma"??
.

Holy crap, Markle, are you still on that? They call him Hussein to poke fun and irritate liberals. It's like any nickname. The ones that stick aren't always the most flattering.

You should have HEARD some of the nicknames of kids we had when I was growing up. Fat Larry, Meat-nose, pizza-face, Billy the queer, Tits <last name> (daughter of a famous singer, double D-cups at age 12), Splash (a guy who barfed a lot). I mean there was only one cool nickname, "Ace"... and it was a kid who called everyone Ace. His father called everyone Ace too. In my neighborhood, Barack Obama would have been Barry the A-rab, and if we had known who Osama bin Ladin was back then, we would have called him Osama.

I can't believe it still drives you nuts when people call Barry Hussein. Just call McCain SIDNEY. That's fair. That's what I'm going to call him.

Don't insult our intelligence with crap like this.

No, really. Hussein is his middle name, although there's some honest disagreement about whether he's really authentically "Barack" or "Barry."

Who else do you call by his middle name, other than Dubya, who was called that his whole life because he had the same first and last names as his father.

Sorry, it's his middle name. Barry Obama's middle name is "Hussein." The middle name of Senator Barry is "Hussein."

and you wouldn't be calling Barack Obama "Hussein" if it wasn't Muslim-sounding.

Yeah, it is Muslim sounding, but it would have been more poetically accurate if it were "Karl" or "Trotsky." Although Barry has abundant connections with Islam (his father was a Muslim), religiously he would appear to be more of a Black Liberation Theology Christian. His politics, we all know, are about as far left as you can get and not have been sworn into his Senate seat with his right hand, not on a Koran, but on "The Communist Manifesto."

But Daniel Pipes certainly thinks Barry if far more Muslim than he's letting on.

quote:

I surveyed available evidence and found it suggests "Obama was born a Muslim to a non-practicing Muslim father and for some years had a reasonably Muslim upbringing under the auspices of his Indonesian step-father."

Be that as it may, his real danger to this country is not his religious beliefs but his political and social beliefs. I think it's quite possible a practicing Muslim (a reformed, Western one, at least) could be a friend of freedom, democracy, toleration of individual rights and differences, and capitalism (have to ignore much of Islamic teaching, but it's theoretically possible). But that's not really the issue with Senator Hussein. The issue with Senator Hussein is that he's really Senator Marx. There's quite a difference between the normal, decent Americans like (now) Bush and (now) McCain who think we ought to produce more energy as a solution to what ails us rather than demonizing corporations and wanting to nationalize them as some crank Democrats do. And I would put Senator Marx clearly in the corner of the cranks who are hostile to business and thus hostile to freedom because they see government as the solution to everything.

So don't give me that "Hussein is his middle name" bullshit.

Hussein is his middle name.

It's this casual, offhand visciousness that's putting me off the site.

Oh, bullshit, Markle. You're the one who can't quit interjecting (in any discussion, and at the oddest times) your anti-Bush stuff. I don't mind, but you're pretty much the pot calling the kettle black at the moment. My advice to you is too just rip off that bandage in one quick pull. It must be tough defending some of these oddball Democrats. Well, what if you didn't have to because you no longer believed the crank stuff they were selling? Just yank it off. Give it a good, quick tug like you were starting an Evinrude.

And on the Fox News Channel, which put up a graphic on the screen June 11, referring to Obama's wife as his "Baby Moma"??

I went over to the Urban Dictionary to get a definition of baby moma: The person who gave birth to your child. Who you are typically no longer dating / banging.

I would say in that regard, it is incorrect to say that Obama's wife is his "baby moma" since they are both married.

And you hold up thugs like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilley as responsible journalists???

Oh my. Thugs? Man, you seem to be channeling Keith Olberman lately. I had no idea that you were that enamored with liberal dogma. I just don't get it. I mean, yeah, I have my differences with O'Reilly and sometimes even with Hannity. But they have a point of view and are generally extremely eloquent when espousing it, and quite specific in the details. When you dismiss them as mere "thugs" you sound like the monkey who is trying to see no evil and hear no evil. Have you really drank the leftist Kool-aid to the extent that even O'Reilly (hardly the hardcore conservative) is a thug? That just sounds like you've been brainwashed, Markle, and instead of questioning the junk someone dumped into your head, you're sort of acting out, Muslim-style, and pounding on those who challenge your narrow point of view.

Markle, brother, don't fall into the trap of getting worked up over nothing. I mean seriously, thugs? Last time I checked, the worst thing Hannity or O'Reilly did was raise their frikkin' VOICE.

Anyone who uses words rather than fists or guns to communicate can't rightly be called a thug. Stalin? Saddam? OK, yeah, thuggalicious. Ann Coulter? Nah-ah. Humorist. Just because she pushes buttons, does not mean she'd go to your house and beat up the democrats therein. Grrr... vote Republican or else! Pow pow.

The fact that Democrats always get bent out of shape when people don't choose the right words, is basically what's wrong with this country. Liberals want people to be nice, civil, kind, caring, supportive. But call them a batch of wussy do-gooders, and they can't take it. They completely flip out.

The Republican opinionists and humorists have the Democrats' number. And the Democrats can't ever seem to turn it back around, because if they go tit-for-tat, they lose cred.

Meanwhile, almost everything in government that's come from Democrats since and including the New Deal, has been a total disaster. While everything the Democrats CALL a total disaster, like the Iraq war, has been a total success.

The Democrats have become like that guy in your office that says "supposebly" instead of "supposedly"... and keeps getting it wrong.

Listen, if Barry is the great black hope of the Democratic party, who am I to rain on that parade? But man, it really does all seem like same-old same-old. After I every speech I check my wallet, like I do when I think pickpockets are around. He spouts great intentions, only words. Change is not something I fear or shy away from. But holy crap it's never sounded hollower coming from Barry.

I think the trouble with Dems, they're NICE. And then they try to force nice on a country that sets free speech as a priority. And it conflicts. If the world were always nice, they'd be fine.

One of my most dreaded PC catchphrases is "celebrate"... it literally makes my skin crawl. Oh, let's celebrate this culture, this achievement... what you will NEVER hear from a liberal, is "let's celebrate the spunky wiseass free speech of Ann Coulter." Nope. "Celebrating," apparently, is something you do for cripples and minorities and immigrants, people you feel superior to.

The free exchange of ideas using language is never celebrated by the Democratic party. The Republicans aren't champions of it either, when it conflicts with some stupid outdated religious ideas of THEIRS... but they at least seem to be able to see through the tax-and-spend con job that we're in store for.

The government is always the problem, never the answer, with very very few exceptions... and that's one thing the Republican party has got right. While the Democrats have got it dead wrong.

Take any Democratic pet issue. OK, healthcare. Listen, my healthcare bills are ridiculous. If I could pay less and get guaranteed coverage by the state... fine. But you'd have to be living on another planet to believe that the SECOND the government gets their mitts on healthcare, they're going to screw it up. Providers will realize they won't be making as much money, except by doing x, y, and z, to adapt to the new system, and you watch... just watch what happens to us.