pulling out the race card this early?
I smell fear.
I watched that confrontation as it unfolded on MSNBC. And priebus should hang his head in shame the way he allowed the rabid Chris Matthews to walk on him. Instead of sitting there and shaking in fear all he had to do was ask one question. What percentage of Obama ads talk about his accomplishments as opposed to attacking Romney personally.
He would have won it with that one line.
He should resign his post after such a pitiful performance. Chris Matthews is nothing but an attack dog for the Obama administration. Those who followed the 2008 election will remember Matthews now famous line “I get a chill up my leg when I hear Obama speak…” For Priebus to step on stage with Matthews and not expect him to try to take a bite out of his leg was unrealistic.
As Chairman of the RNC that was the perfect opportunity to staunchly defend Mitt Romney and point the finger at the Chicago style tactics that Obama has brought to this Presidential race.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I watched that confrontation as it unfolded on MSNBC. And priebus should hang his head in shame the way he allowed the rabid Chris Matthews to walk on him. Instead of sitting there and shaking in fear all he had to do was ask one question. What percentage of Obama ads talk about his accomplishments as opposed to attacking Romney personally.
He would have won it with that one line.
He should resign his post after such a pitiful performance. Chris Matthews is nothing but an attack dog for the Obama administration. Those who followed the 2008 election will remember Matthews now famous line “I get a chill up my leg when I hear Obama speak…” For Priebus to step on stage with Matthews and not expect him to try to take a bite out of his leg was unrealistic.
As Chairman of the RNC that was the perfect opportunity to staunchly defend Mitt Romney and point the finger at the Chicago style tactics that Obama has brought to this Presidential race.[/quote]
This is how one handles Matthews and his racism crap.
They need Barbour back. This is bad, but on election day 80 plus percent (at least) of the voting public won’t be able to tell you who the committee chair of either party is. This is wonk stuff.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
They need Barbour back. This is bad, but on election day 80 plus percent (at least) of the voting public won’t be able to tell you who the committee chair of either party is. This is wonk stuff.[/quote]
No Tirib it was a debate about racism and who is actually running the dirty campaign! And it was on national TV. While most don’t know the name of either Chair those who were watching could have been influenced by this debate. And as long as you have race baters like Matthews, who is himself racist for associating welfar with African Americans, winning these skirmishes the truth is not being told.
He should have handled Matthews the way Gingrich did on Sloth’s clip.
Well that’s fair enough, but I just don’t see it as having that great an influence come election day. You just have to listen to Joshua’s Trail ZEB. Seriously. You would love it. I don’t know why I can’t get you to listen to one show.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
And as long as you have race baters like Matthews, who is himself racist for associating welfar with African Americans,
.[/quote]
I noticed this irony as well.
I assumed it was the selective outrage epidemic, but maybe people are that dumb.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Well that’s fair enough, but I just don’t see it as having that great an influence come election day.[/quote]
Okay, up to this point you were fine…
…then you wrote this which doesnt’ have anything to do with the thread. Can you see how this stuff would irritate some people. Not me…don’t get me wrong. But this is a thread about the election and how close it is and how everything that anyone says can make a difference.
Then…BLAM you post something out of left field.
Try to stop doing this my friend. People will be much happier with you and then actually listen when the time comes to talk about such things.
Joshua’s trail is ALL about the election. You’d know that if you’d just listen once. =] Racism among liberals is what reminded me to mention it. Nobody can spell that out better than Elder Levon Yuille. It is a political show hosted by black Christian men who REALLY REALLY get it.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Joshua’s trail is ALL about the election. You’d know that if you’d just listen once. =] Racism among liberals is what reminded me to mention it. Nobody can spell that out better than Elder Levon Yuille. It is a political show hosted by black Christian men who REALLY REALLY get it. [/quote]
You mean to tell me that it is all about politics and not ONE word about religion?
What an awful racist
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
What an awful racist[/quote]
Dumb video… The guy said that dinosaurs didn’t exist, what???
[quote]stefan128 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
What an awful racist[/quote]
Dumb video… The guy said that dinosaurs didn’t exist, what???[/quote]
One of the two of us isn’t hearing what was said correctly…
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]stefan128 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
What an awful racist[/quote]
Dumb video… The guy said that dinosaurs didn’t exist, what???[/quote]
One of the two of us isn’t hearing what was said correctly…
[/quote]
Haha, im confused now…
[quote]stefan128 wrote:
Haha, im confused now…[/quote]
What you said he said, is not what he said.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]stefan128 wrote:
Haha, im confused now…[/quote]
What you said he said, is not what he said.[/quote]
Oh, my mistake. I guess I heard wrong.
In this article the most influential economics source in the world discusses how the GOP’s plan of record as of today would make Medicare insolvent by 2016, ~a decade sooner than the current (bipartisan developed) plan of record. The Democrats say it would be long term solvent with their proposed changes. The jury remains out on if that is true of course, but I understand their numbers are not in major dispute outside of the political arena.
Is there anyone out there still foolish enough to think the GOP have the slightest credibility on economic issues to anyone who can read a balance sheet and knows deficit and bankruptcy are not good ideas?
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
In this article the most influential economics source in the world discusses how the GOP’s plan of record as of today would make Medicare insolvent by 2016, ~a decade sooner than the current (bipartisan developed) plan of record. The Democrats say it would be long term solvent with their proposed changes. The jury remains out on if that is true of course, but I understand their numbers are not in major dispute outside of the political arena.
Is there anyone out there still foolish enough to think the GOP have the slightest credibility on economic issues to anyone who can read a balance sheet and knows deficit and bankruptcy are not good ideas?
[/quote]
Are you forming your entire opinion of the plan based on that one article?
I really cannot believe that shit passes as journalism, but that is besides the point.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
In this article the most influential economics source in the world discusses how the GOP’s plan of record as of today would make Medicare insolvent by 2016, ~a decade sooner than the current (bipartisan developed) plan of record. The Democrats say it would be long term solvent with their proposed changes. The jury remains out on if that is true of course, but I understand their numbers are not in major dispute outside of the political arena.
Is there anyone out there still foolish enough to think the GOP have the slightest credibility on economic issues to anyone who can read a balance sheet and knows deficit and bankruptcy are not good ideas?
[/quote]
Are you forming your entire opinion of the plan based on that one article?
I really cannot believe that shit passes as journalism, but that is besides the point.[/quote]
Sorry, that whole post should have been in qoutes. I didn’t write that; I pulled it off of a friends review of the article.
I thought it was relevant to the discussion.
Edit - and there are actually quite a few things in the article that I’m in disagreement with.
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
Sorry, that whole post should have been in qoutes. I didn’t write that; I pulled it off of a friends review of the article.
I thought it was relevant to the discussion.
[/quote]
No worries, and it is.
But I have read a very different review in the Journal (op-ed section for full disclosure). I’ll see if I can find it.