NPR’s Liasson Falsely Claims “It’s Democrats, Not Just Republicans Taking Money From Abramoffâ€
NPR’s Liasson Falsely Claims “It’s Democrats, Not Just Republicans Taking Money From Abramoffâ€
Today on Fox News Sunday, NPR’s Mara Liasson asserted that members of both parties accepted money from Jack Abramoff, who has plead guilty to fraud, public corruption and tax evasion:
I think every time you hear another one of these kind of bipartisan scandal stories, where it’s Democrats, not just Republicans taking money from Abramoff, it underlines a feeling that people tell pollsters over and over again, that everybody does it.
It’s not true. Jack Abramoff has never contributed a dime to a Democrat.
Some of Jack Abramoff’s tribal clients donated money to Democrats. But an analysis commissioned by the American Prospect found that, after hiring Abramoff, most clients “dramatically ratcheted up donations to Republicans.†Meanwhile, “donations to Democrats from the same clients either dropped, remained largely static or, in two cases, rose by a far smaller percentage than the ones to Republicans did.â€
In this instance, the perception that “everybody does it†is being driven by the media, not the facts.
UPDATE: The NPR ombudsman has responded to this post and says we misinterpreted what Liasson meant. To clarify, this post was written after viewing Liasson’s comments on TV, not from the Fox transcript.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The scary thing about all this, and something that should be looked into carefully by the media, and the investigators, is the fact that Abramoffs girl Friday is now the girl Friday for Karl Rove.
The pukes play musical chairs. No one in their right mind, and evidently Rove is not in his right mind, would hire the “coverup” person for Abramoff as his personal secretary, unless of course, he badly needed a person of her talents on his staff.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:05 amFortunately, she said it on FOX so anyone who heard her already believes that anyway. Remember, FOX has defended in court its right to lie to its viewers.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:06 amIt is time for the Democrats to grow a pair and sue. Face it, this would not be a frivolous case, this is defamation on a large scale. Slander, and libel are not covered by freedom of speech.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:06 amOne would think they would get it right by now! Doesn’t she read?
May 7th, 2006 at 11:11 amTim Russert was pushing the same thing. He show that Jack and Ried tried together and Ried is as dirty as any of the Republicans.
Really sick.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:14 amGod almighty look at her. She’s a loon. This is unacceptable and it’s downright lying – a pastime that has become all to tolerated. It’s time to hold these thugs accountable and FAST, before this country is unsalvagable
May 7th, 2006 at 11:16 amIf Ms. Liasson did anything like the sort of research which her profession requires, she no doubt knows very well that it was Abramoff’s clients and not Abramoff himself who gave money to the Democrats — which means that she’s wantonly and deliberately distorting the facts for purely political reasons. How on earth do these people manage to live with themselves, knowing that they’re lying to the American public like this? I wouldn’t be able to look at myself in the mirror every morning if I made my living like that…
May 7th, 2006 at 11:19 amDid “Abramoff’s clients” give money to Reid BEFORE they hired Abramoff? If so, this means nothing – except that M. Potatohead is wearing his GOP button again.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:21 amShut up liberals, you can’t face reality! We won, you lost, and we make the truth now. Eat it.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:23 amIf someone like Mara Liasson ran a story in a newspaper where she copied a portion of a story from another author she would be fired immediately, even if she claimed she did it by accident.
Yet Mara Liasson can go on national television and purposely lie and she is not fired. How can a “reporter” deliberately lie and not be fired? It shows that journalism in America is the provence of amateurs and hacks. And it is the fault of “legitimate” news outlets like NPR that have allowed this to happen. If NPR cared 1% about journalism in this country they would fire this woman on Monday morning.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:23 amI’m sorry I didn’t realize she had left NPR — she joined Fox where truth is irrelevant. Oops.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:24 amwhat is with those eye-brows? i’m scared…
May 7th, 2006 at 11:25 amBush’s Director at A.I.D. gave alot of money to NPR employee and Mercy Corps Director Sarah Chayes in afghanistan for the second phase in Afghanistan. It could be seen as a way of paying out to dems, but then again, alot of people equate A.I.D. funding with C.I.A. funding(common knowledge in development work) , but one might ask Plame(CIA) and Wilson(Peace Corps) this.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:26 amChrist, I’m wrong again — she still does work for NPR. Yikes, forget comment 11 — my first comment stands.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:26 amIsn’t there some association to a serious medical condition when you can see the whites of someone’s eyes above their pupils? One which leads to pathalogical conditions such as paranoia and dementia? I forget what it’s called. But from that photo Liasson clearly has a serious case and needs medical attention soon. And no one should believe a word she says.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:27 amShut up liberals, you can’t face reality! We won, you lost, and we make the truth now. Eat it.
Comment by Debbie Schutstaffel — May 7, 2006 @ 11:23 am
Church out already?
May 7th, 2006 at 11:28 amDebbie Schutstaffel —- shame on you for your vulgar, shrill, stupid, and dishonest post.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:33 am#6
Who did her makeup? That right eyelash made her look wild-eyed, and her stuttering performance was like fingernails on a chalkboard.
She had a prime opportunity and she blew it; when Russert put up the graphic showing lobbyist contributions, she could have answered with her own; one showing how much money democrats “took from Abramoff” (0). She also could have taken issue with his broadbrushing all lobbyists to make a point, and by highlighting some of these lobbyists and who their clients are, like non-profit humanitarian organizations, religious-affiliated business interests, she could show the TV audience that Russert was taking a cheap shot. But noooo….
May 7th, 2006 at 11:33 amBriliant post no.. 16. Just wonderful
May 7th, 2006 at 11:35 amwhen you see fox, you can disreguard ANYTHING that is said.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:40 amDebbie Schutstaffel
Nice bit of sarcasm.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:41 amWhy should facts get in the way of the message Fox wants to project. Always remember that reality has a well known liberal bias, and this is simply one more case of it.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:47 amWasn’t it Adlai Stevenson who suggested that if the Republicans would quit lying about the Democrats…the Dem’s would quit telling the truth about the Repukes?
May 7th, 2006 at 11:47 amPersonally, I don’t care who’s ahead in the polls, and who has a (D) or an (R)–the whole political system is broken, has been broken, and is in want of a huge enema, duley administered by an angry public! Get pizzed–not partisan!
#16, unbelievable…
Thank you for that post. Now, to clean the diet pop from my monitor.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:48 amLeave Mara alone. She is just happy that she landed the lead role in the new made for TV movie:
The Jennifer Wilbanks Story-Runaway Bride Runs Amok.
Coming to FOX!
-GSD
May 7th, 2006 at 11:50 amLiasson is a dumb liar so ignore any crap she spews on FOX propaganda news!
May 7th, 2006 at 12:00 pmDEBBIES’ comment was chilling. the Repugs do invent the ‘truth’. for one of them to come out and crow about it is scary.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:03 pmStupid Question for a new century:
1: If the Neocons are the guys who get to dictate the truth, why does it reflect so badly on them?
May 7th, 2006 at 12:06 pmyes, beavercleaver… from my great state:
“I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends… that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them.â€
- Adlai E. Stevenson American Politician. Governor of Illinois (1949-53) and Ambassador to the United Nations (1961-65). 1900-1965
…but then we’d have no fun at all…
May 7th, 2006 at 12:08 pmThey (DUHbya’s 33%) lie.
They don’t know they are lying.
We know they are lying.
They don’t know that we know they are lying.
If they were smart enough to know they were lying they wouldn’t be in the 33rd percentile.
An person with an IQ in the 33rd percentile lies (pun intended) somewhere between an idiot and an imbecile which is true of the supporters of Bush and Cheney (or is it Cheney and Bush that they are in between).
Why bother? Laugh at the fools and move on!
To see Queen George the Dumbs latest award just click on Clyde.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:09 pmShe looks like she has thyroid eye disease with the white part of her eyes showing between her cornea and upper lids.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:09 pmbecause, bruce, the truth cannot be dictated…it just is…
May 7th, 2006 at 12:11 pmand that’s why it’s so simple… it just is…
Dems must not allow any lies to be unchallenged. Everyone must challenged and the speaker, or writer held accountable. Sue if necessary.
If fact sue no matter what. Even if they can not sue. SUE. The fact that they challenge and sue the liars will defeat the lies.
Stand back and not doing anything gives the liars a grain of truth to the listener or reader.
Sue the shit out them.
Drain the swamp by force these people to spend their money on lawyers.
Sue.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:16 pmI thought Juan Williams did a pretty good job of humiliating her on the whole bi-partisan culture of corruption thing right after she spoke, though he didn’t specifically address the Abramoff issue.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:23 pmKaty:
That thar be dirty lieberul thunking! Why them dirty lieberul’s would have you believing that up isn’t down if’n you ain’t careful! ;)
Easyrider:
They should have started doing that 6 years ago, but for some reason they hired a bunch of idiots as their strategists. It is time for the Dems to fire their strategists, grow some balls and start fighting.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:25 pmIt would be nice if Debbie could learn to spell “Schutzstaffel”, which were Hitler’s SS guards. By their names shall ye know them!!
May 7th, 2006 at 12:27 pm#16 – Salma, you owe me a keyboard. ;)
May 7th, 2006 at 12:28 pm#15 – Are you thinking of Graves’ Disease? In 30 years this wacko is giong to look like Barbara Bush. What goes around, comes around. ;)
May 7th, 2006 at 12:30 pmThere must have been some push from Republicans this week. This is the third instance — CNN TV report and a Washington Post article were the other two — that I’ve seen in the past few days where the media is making a big effort to again peg the corruption as bipartisan.
They dropped it for a while after Dems pushed back with the facts, but something is obviously going on if this is suddenly getting air play again.
Could there be another big Repub scandal breaking this week and the forces are out now attempting to bring Dems in to the scandal discussion in an effort to minimize what’s coming next? Hmm, will it be a Rove indictment, or the real reason behind Goss’ resignation, or will more folks flip in the Cunningham or Ambramoff or DeLay scandals so that more details are released this week and more Repubs are included???
I think we’re going to see something big this week and this “Democrats are doing it too” mantra is an attempt to mitigate and / or control the damage.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:31 pmSalma, you owe me a keyboard. ;)
Comment by Zookeeper — May 7, 2006 @ 12:28 pm
I’m only calling them like a see them : ). The cons get especially nasty on Sundays, right about time the Bible thumping stops.
You know what gets me on this “Democrats took Abrahamoff money too” nonsense? It’s that it is illogical that Abrahamoff would have given money to the OPPOSING minority party. But, cons don’t run on logic – just sheer emotion and fear.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:33 pmLiasson is just high on the same meds that Rush Limbaugh uses, that Oxy stuff >lol. Her eyes denote that she is on drugs and hyper too!
May 7th, 2006 at 12:33 pmThe right wing cabal uses lying as a weapon.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:33 pmIt is part of their strategy and built into their “take over tool kit”
It is time to dismantle this weapon. It is time to defuse these “Lie your ass off Bombs” and storm the citadel. :) Really…lying is a calculated part of their offensive strategy ….totally planned. So when decent people scream “But but but…you’re lying!” They just laugh because they are way ahead. They are in the business of reframing language (lying) presenting things with their own twist ( lying) and doing so in such a comprehensive way, that people lose track of what is a lie and what is the truth. One of the victories of the right is that they have succeeded in confusing the enemy – us – the majority of decent Americans. We are not only confused at how they can lie, but have not unraveled specifically how they do so successfully day in and day out. It can be unraveled and understood, we just need to do the homework and roll up our sleeves. We have to crack the code to the safe – their psycological vault. I’ve cracked some of it. One is: They have decided that appearance can become reality if they ram it down people’s throats with enough balls. Prob is, as Ghandi said, evil can seem to win for a time, but it always collapses due to it’s own unreality.” Or something like that……
PINHOUSTAN… thanks for that info. didnt realize the connection. Now it all makes sense!! Goosesteppin’ liars!! Invent the truth.. typical Nazi ploy!!
May 7th, 2006 at 12:34 pmI just sent my email to the NPR ombudsman. Did you?
May 7th, 2006 at 12:35 pmAre you thinking of Graves’ Disease? In 30 years this wacko is giong to look like Barbara Bush. What goes around, comes around. ;)
Comment by Zookeeper — May 7, 2006 @ 12:30 pm
Exactly! You’re a virtual walking encyclopedia Pippi! Thanks – it is Graves.
Barbara Bush should change her name to Bob. She looks more like George I’s crazy Uncle Bob than his wife.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:36 pmS…. #42… Great post!! you said what i was thinking only better and without the rage :)
May 7th, 2006 at 12:36 pmMake up lie, follow by non-sequitur. That’s the recipe.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:38 pmYes, this was on Fox. However on NPR on Friday morning I heard the same thing. Fox is not the only place this trash is being inseminated. I heard it on my public radio station.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:38 pm“In this instance, the perception that “everybody does it†is being driven by the media, not the facts.” – Judd
In this “instance” that’s true. But the general public doesn’t follow this stuff as closely as the residents of Leftblogostan do. NPR did a piece on this last week and mentioned Jefferson of Louisiana and Mollohan from the Ethics Committee as being examples of compromised congresspersons. And they are. And that sucks because is gives RepubCo the ability to say, “There they are, the corrupt Democrats. It’s not just us.” And whether it’s two or twenty or whatever, the general public is going to go, Uh-huh. Throw all the bastards out.
It’s great that Mollohan stepped down and Jefferson got tossed an anchor by Pelosi, but it still looks like window dressing. I am totally convinced that money and corrupting influence has infiltrated our entire gov’t. Both sides. And RepubCo is worse than Dems by several country miles. But Dems will be open to this ongoing criticism so long as they are perceived as being the party which is less corrupt only because they currently have less power. The general public is sceptical. I’m sceptical. Detesting RepubCo is easy. Seeing the Dems as avenging angels is a bit of a stretch. There’s real work to do on the credibility front.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:38 pmYes I did.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:39 pmI can’t believe anyone tunes in to Fox’s continuous bullshit, let alone believe it.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:39 pmJack Abramoff has said repeatedly that he hates all Democrats, so he would NEVER help them with campaign donations! Now if Lieberman was found to have received cash from Jack, then that would just confirm that Joe is really a Republican > lol.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:39 pmwe just need to do the homework and roll up our sleeves.
Comment by s — May 7, 2006 @ 12:33 pm
Knowledge is power. The more we know, the more we can debunk. Unfortunately, for the sheeple, it conflicts with hanging out at Wal-Mart, super-sizing themselves, and watching desperation television.
So, we’re going to have to do the homework for them… And not be afraid to call out the answers in class. Even when we aren’t being called on.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:42 pm#45 – Exactly! You’re a virtual walking encyclopedia Pippi! Thanks – it is Graves.
I used to wrangle a personal injury attorney, and I summarized Plaintiff’s medical records. Believe me, I learned more about those people than I EVER wanted to know. I thought it was bad doing divorces, but not so much really…
May 7th, 2006 at 12:49 pmI guess this is how FNC tries to be ‘Fair and Balanced” — by lying. There are a few Democrats embroiled in ethical scandals to be sure — Mollohan and Jefferson the latest. But quit trying to tie the Dems to the Abramoff scandal. This is strictly a GOP problem, OK?
http://www.lcoliberal.blogspot.com
May 7th, 2006 at 12:50 pmGoss and the hookers: Now on LCL
unbelievable;get out from behind your computer;your crap is getting old allready.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:51 pmGet some exersize and get a life:Fatso.
#55 – Fair and Balanced.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:52 pmFair = weather.
and = a useful conjuction.
Balanced = ball on the nose.
Let’s all take bets on which Senators do the flip flop on Hayden being confirmed as CIA Director?! Which ones will say this afternoon the General stinks, but next week he is wonderful? Which ones claim they will not vote for him, but then do so?
Lieberman will say he has misgivings about Hayden, but then like Biden will claim he is an OK stand up guy > lol. Feinstein will say he is wrong guy for the job, but then claim his phony testimony at confirmation hearings reassured her > lol. ( Feinstein did the same for Porter Goss remember!)
May 7th, 2006 at 12:53 pmThe RNC must have send out orders to rough up the Dems; the Rethugs must be really tanking in internal polls. Has to be. This was all over today–I nearly got laryngitis screaming at Timmeh when we played that card.
Have they no memory? No ethics?
May 7th, 2006 at 12:54 pm#58 – I already have $5 on Hoekstra. I think I would place $1,000,000 on Feinstein. She’s been such a disappointment. I lived in the SF Bay Area when Mayor Moscone was murdered and she was a city council woman. She was great. Back then she had integrity. Now she’s too in love with her job. And has never figured out the problem with her hair.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:57 pmrussert trotted out the same friggin lies to pelosi — and she utterly was incapable of knocking it back.
May 7th, 2006 at 12:57 pmDenny
May 7th, 2006 at 12:57 pmunbelievable;get out from behind your computer;your crap is getting old allready.
Get some exersize and get a life:Fatso.
Comment by Denny — May 7, 2006 @ 12:51 pm
The only one allowed to be my stalker is I-RIGHT-I and he’s currently having posting difficulties.
So, then that would make you Presdient of my fan club?
Okay, but you should know – I get exercize every day, and am a vegan (makes it hard to be a fatso). Just has been raining this morning. But I did get out earlier. So – what’s your excuse? That iron door preventing you from leaving your cell?
May 7th, 2006 at 12:58 pm#62 – *snort* So Denny’s kept in the dark and fed bullshit?
May 7th, 2006 at 12:59 pm#63 – Padded door, more likely.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:01 pmAnd has never figured out the problem with her hair.
Comment by Zookeeper — May 7, 2006 @ 12:57 pm
The humidity? ; )
Yeah, I too am disappointed with her. But, with all of them frankly. The power is absolutely corrupting them. We need to get the damn money out of politics. And the only way I can see making that happen is to fire them all and elect third party candidates who run on the platform of disassembling PNAC, Corporate Personhood, and reforming the campaign contribution system. The only problem is the sheeple. They think elections are popularity contests.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:04 pmZookeeper
Well he does sound to be in the 33%…
May 7th, 2006 at 1:04 pmPost 60 > Feinstein’s husband is a multi-millionaire who has cashed in on the Iraq war as a war profiteer/ arms merchant! They just bought a 22 million dollar stone mansion on the coast above San Francisco! Diane has become a whore and a disgrace to the Dem party now!
May 7th, 2006 at 1:04 pmDenny
Comment by Bruce Gorton — May 7, 2006 @ 12:57 pm
Bruce… I gotta take a break until I can stop laughing… that is hysterical!
May 7th, 2006 at 1:05 pmThis talking point has been brought back again. Clearly the rethugs feel they need to hammer this issue home, based on the latest AP poll concerning the dissatissfaction with both parties in Congress. They know if they repeat this enough it will stick, but the Dems are failing in the counter attack. If you saw Pelosi on Beat the Democrats (aka Meet the Press) she fell flat on her face when the bloviator brought the issue up and tied Harry Reid to Abramof. She did not respond to the attack, just let it go. If she and the rest don’t wake up to this they will not win the seats they think they’re going too. She also didn’t not respond to the tax questions. The simple answer should have been the the rethugs are giving our treasury away to the top 1% of the richest people in this country while the rest of us pay for a failed foreign policy and energy policy. Period . Wake up Nancy!!!!!!!!!!!!!
May 7th, 2006 at 1:05 pmPost 70 > Nancy Pelosi is losing it! She thinks that Dems need to remain pro-occupation of Iraq and pro-attacking Iran too?! She allowed 8 House Dems last week to vote YES for a phony GOP lobbying reform bill! She does not know how to stand up for anything!
May 7th, 2006 at 1:11 pmI don’t think it would matter much if the dems did “fight” the country and in particular the right has been conditioned like a cult to ignore them. When the dems announced their plan for security, Tweety announced the segment while laughing. So you have a conditioned public and media which feeds them.
We have a huge national security problem here and even I though agree the dems should fight, there is a sytem in play which cripples it from the having an effect. Mialy that is because the right has demonized liberlasim while the left keeps acting like their are “good” conservatives instead of explaining to the nation that the conservative movement is in reality an unwitting treasonous movement, which is and will continue to destroy the nation.
Many people say things like “only fox viewers saw this” but that is naive thinking. Many people watch and then FOX viewers repeat the lies. That is like how liberals laughed at Limbaugh. “Oh he’s a joke, no one in their right mind believes him.” Fact is, they do believe him and he creates a reality that the rest of society feeds off of.
Like I said, this nation has a huge national security problem. You have a cult mentality running the nation, a group who has been conditioned with so much false information for so long that it will not be changed just by “fighting” them. In fact, it is set up in such a manner that fighting will more than likely only drive us deeper into the death spiral.
Simple fact is, lies are what this nation bases its reality on today.
Just because people mock FOX and Rush for lying doesn’t change what happens to millions of people’s minds – and the right, feeling they are persecuted and deserve to mislead the nation to “save it” is not going to change.
Look at THIS and ask yourself if it remotely matters to the right that they are INTENTIONALLY deceiving people.
No, they are cult. Cults believe they can lie “for the good.”
Moonies call it “heavenly deception.” They think they are saving the nation for God and therefore can do anything.
This nation has huge national security issues and they won’t be fixed overnight. Dems can speak the truth and fight but millions are CONDITIONED to blow them off and the left has no media infrastructure to stop this. Robert Parry, who many on the left won’t even quote, has been screaming this for years but no one listens to him.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:14 pm#66 – I’m thinking big rollers and hair spray. :P
#67 – True. 33% and falling….wheeee!
#68 – That explains A LOT. Maybe she was partying at the Watergate with Porter Goss? Ok, just made myself sick.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:14 pmI guess I got all you hags squawking by now,huh.LOL
May 7th, 2006 at 1:15 pm#74 – I love your picture. The plate is a lovely shade of blue and quite lovely, and the sprig of parsley is placed in such a “devil may care” manner. My hat is off to you!
May 7th, 2006 at 1:19 pmI guess I got all you hags squawking by now,huh.LOL
Comment by Denny — May 7, 2006 @ 1:15 pm
No hags in here. You want http://www.redstate.org or http://www.cc.org
May 7th, 2006 at 1:20 pmunbelievable -
May 7th, 2006 at 1:23 pmhow could you leave out freerepublic?
i’m not linking to it…no way…
Denny or is it Denny’s of restaurant unfame? LOL.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:24 pmYou call her “NPR’s Liasson”, but doesn’t she work for Fox? Can we find out
May 7th, 2006 at 1:24 pmjust who pays her salary?
The Media’s complete abandonment of its principles and the way it’s completely shirked it’s responsibilities is the real story of 2006. Not that it happened this year, but this is the year that it’s become impossible to ignore.
Is Mara Liasson too lazy to look behind the conventional wisdom that “Dems are doing it too” or is it something more sinister?
I do know that whatever has so corrupted the Media has also infected NPR. This is the first year since I left college in 1980 that I didn’t renew my membership to Chicago Public Radio, primarily because they have succumbed to the same malaise of blindness, deafness, and lack of honesty that has plagued the mainstream media.
But I choose to see this as an opportunity for new voices in the media to step forward and make a place for themselves as the standard bearers for Journalism. People like Glenn Greenwald, Digby, Wolcott, etc are reliable sources of info and insight when people like Mara Liasson refuse to be.
But it’s still sad to see this woman spout the GOP-generated “conventional wisdom” when anybody with a web browser can see that it’s a lie.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:25 pmI do know that whatever has so corrupted the Media has also infected NPR.
Comment by nittacci — May 7, 2006 @ 1:25 pm
I’m guessing money.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:27 pmthe sprig of parsley is placed in such a “devil may care†manner.
Comment by Zookeeper — May 7, 2006 @ 1:19 pm
Devil being the operative word no doubt… :)
May 7th, 2006 at 1:29 pm#79 – She works for NPR and “contributes” to Faux “News.” So they both pay her.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:29 pmWhen will someone stop russert and say…”WOAH…are you try to put words in my mouth??????”. “IF…you’ll stop INTERUPTING ME, i’ll answer your question”. Nancy pointed out several times that things change from 2 years ago….LISTEN TIM!. His nasty attitude just shows what a repub shill he is. To Nancy, we ARE the party FOR IMPEACHMENT…..WAKE UP! As long at the gang is in the WH, NOTHING will get done that’s good for America.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:31 pmMara could be the next Katherine Harris. Someone who tries to look attractive but ends up looking like a freak of nature. ICK!
May 7th, 2006 at 1:35 pmBruce says;”I have no balls:cock a doodle doo.”
Zookeeper says;”I have no sex;I’m just a frustrated housewife/office-worker.cacle,cacle.”
unbelievable says;”I live at home with my mother and my computer.Everyone else but me needs medication.caw,caw.”
May 7th, 2006 at 1:38 pmI’ve seen that face before…. Star Trek — the original series. First season. Baalok — those eyes, that distended jaw. That was the final shot in the credits for an entire season. Scared the hell out of me as a kid.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:44 pmPlease take a moment to ask Fox News to correct the error…ok the lie. As always, you get more notice by being polite.
FNS@foxnews.com
May 7th, 2006 at 1:45 pm1-888-369-4762
Post 88 FOX News asks all callers if they are Repub or Dem before responding! If you are a Dem a FOX stooge calls you names and hangs up! If you are a Repub they call you wonderful and forward your call to O’Reilly > lol.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:49 pm“All the boys think she’s fried, she’s got Marty Feldman’s eyes”. Credit to Weird Al.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:51 pmLOL. Nice try bug eyed woman, whomever you be.
Lets try this without the Political claptrap.
first;
“It’s Democrats, Not Just Republicans Taking Money From Abramoffâ€
then;
“It’s Politicicans, Just Politicians Taking Money From corrupt lobbyistsâ€
see how easy that was to sepearte the crooks from the “cloak”
May 7th, 2006 at 1:54 pmis there a republican alive that the world wouldn’t be a whole lot better and a whole lot more truthful if they would just do us all a favor and shoot themselves? “lie” and “republican” have become synonyms.
If there is such a republican; one that actually does know what truth is and facts are, one willing to stand up for America and denounce the corrupt, vacuous, scourge that their party has become, it sure would be nice to know (and a breath of fresh air) that such a person existed. We see democrats attacking democrats all the time without even having the systematic destruction of the America and the constitution on their hands. How come an honest republican doesn’t exist to stand up?
May 7th, 2006 at 1:54 pmI will say this again.
If you point a finger at someone in blame, in the palm of your hand three fingers point back at you.
Bug Eyed Woman, stop your finger pointing, it makes you a hypocrite.
May 7th, 2006 at 1:57 pmPEOPLE ARE PEOPLE before groups
why do people try to reverse that?
If there is such a PERSON; one that actually does know what truth is and facts are, one willing to stand up for PEOPLE and denounce the corrupt, vacuous, scourge that their PEOPLE has become, it sure would be nice to know (and a breath of fresh air) that such a PEOPLE. We see PEOPLE attacking PEOPLE all the time without even having the systematic destruction of the PEPOPLE and the constitution on their hands. How come an honest PEOPLE doesn’t exist to stand up?
But I agree with your posts emote in general =)
Comment by serious question — May 7, 2006 @ 1:54 pm
May 7th, 2006 at 1:59 pmWe really need to demand a thorough investigation of the Bush administration once Congress returns to the Dems…
May 7th, 2006 at 2:07 pmDoes she not know of Tom Delay, Bob Ney, and the other GOPers that are implicated in the Abramoff scandal? Come on. Quit trying to do what the right-wingers do and speak the truth.
http://www.lcoliberal.blogspot.com
May 7th, 2006 at 2:11 pmPorter Goss surfaces, and a 10-year-old girl is bashed by the right:
Right now on LCL
serious question
It is because they are cowards, and a coward is a pack animal. They cannot contradict the leaders of their pack, because to do so would risk being alone.
May 7th, 2006 at 2:12 pmPressure on Blair to step down grows
[ Saturday, May 06, 2006 08:36:12 pmIANS ]
LONDON: Pressure on British Prime Minister Tony Blair to resign following his Labour Party’s stinging defeat during local elections this week, grew as supporters of prime minister-in-waiting Gordon Brown were reported on Saturday to be calling for a clear timeline for Blair’s departure.
The BBC reported that Blair and Chancellor of the Exchequer Brown, long considered his designated successor, had agreed to meet for talks this weekend, while the Left-leaning Guardian newspaper reported that a letter calling on Blair to step down had been circulated among a group of Labour MPs.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1518847.cms
May 7th, 2006 at 2:12 pmIt is because they are cowards, and a coward is a pack animal. They cannot contradict the leaders of their pack, because to do so would risk being alone.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — May 7, 2006 @ 2:12 pm
Good way of putting it. And basically true. They are so into cronyism that you commit career suicide if you turn your back on the pack.
May 7th, 2006 at 2:16 pmIt would be naive to think Democrats don’t have their problems too, but on scale of 100 looking at quantity and magnitude, the Republicans are 95, if not more in sheer number, money, and negative impact on our Democracy here and abroad, and our way of life.
It does concern me greatly a story I heard that the Republicans and Democrats in the House agreed not to file ethics complaints against one another. I hope that is not true. As senator Lindsey Graham said when asked about the tortore at Abu Ghraib, as painful as it is to have it public it is good, because now we can correct it. When Americans see a problem they fix it and do better. And we provide a positive example to the world. I thought that was a noble think to say.
The negative aspect of capitalism is showing at Fox. If capitalism is ruthless and only motivated by profits, that seems to work against Democracy, our way of life, which needs to survive, transparency and accurate information. Honesty, integrity, morals and ethics take hard work and don’t come free. Should Fox be honest, ethical and moral or do profits supercede that. Our President can talk all he wants about his religion and morals, but how does he act. How do Republicans get away with ignoring their own problems and then turn around and use broad generalizations, nonspecifics against others? 60 Minutes ran a story on a lobbyist who was dying from cancer from smoking all his life. He was a lobbyiest for the tobacco industry, but no longer. He spoke about his tactics and lies, and now his regrets. Even though people were dying from his employers product, he had done all that for money.
I am very thankful for Think Progress, The Daily Show, and Colbert Report for making these people accountable for their lies, exaggerations, and “matter of emphasis”-tactics. The Republicans have a lot of media outlets of all sorts and this stuff is being repeated over and over. It is like a Republican brainwashing.
It seemed we had a relentless attack on Clinton in the media, and I don’t understand why the same is not true with Bush given the severity of his actions and those of his cronies and administration, on our way of life. In the past couple of days whenever I turned on the news I heard about Kennedy. I don’t have a problem with that (I recognize the value to our way of life a fair and balance media), but with all that is going on in our country, in this Republican party, where are all those stories. Its an insult to our sensibilities and damages our Democracy and our way of life.
May 7th, 2006 at 2:25 pmCome on NPR. Where’s your honest reporting?
May 7th, 2006 at 2:31 pmIf you point a finger at someone in blame, in the palm of your hand three fingers point back at you.
Comment by Killer Khristol — May 7, 2006 @ 1:57 pm
But what if you are pointing AT YOURSELF, oh, grasshopper? Then you are blaming three others, are you not? (according to your criteria)
May 7th, 2006 at 2:37 pmYou caught someone lying on Fox? Unbelievable!! I’m shocked!!
May 7th, 2006 at 2:39 pmEveryone who responded to post # 9, from “Debbie,” as if it were a serious post … you’ve lost your minds. Seriously. Take out an ad or something. It is OBVIOUSLY a joke. Making fun of it because you missed the joke just makes you look stupid.
As for Liasson, she has long been a GOP hack, even on NPR. She did one of those stories on Delay’s troubles that featured ONLY Republicans, many of whom asserted that the problem with Delay is that he made the GOP seem as corrupt as the Democratic party. Of course Liasson didn’t interview any Democrats, so they didn’t get a chance to respond to this insulting spin. Surprisngly, none of the Republicans suggested that the problem with Republican corruption is that the Republicans ARE corrupt: the fault always lay elsewhere. Liasson didn’t raise the possibilty either. Listening to her story made me feel as if I was living in a one party state.
May 7th, 2006 at 2:40 pmEveryone who responded to post # 9, from “Debbie,” as if it were a serious post … you’ve lost your minds. Seriously. Take out an ad or something. It is OBVIOUSLY a joke. Making fun of it because you missed the joke just makes you look stupid.
As for Liasson, she has long been a GOP hack, even on NPR. She did one of those stories on Delay’s troubles that featured ONLY Republicans, many of whom asserted that the problem with Delay is that he made the GOP seem as corrupt as the Democratic party. Of course Liasson didn’t interview any Democrats, so they didn’t get a chance to respond to this insulting spin. Surprisngly, none of the Republicans suggested that the problem with Republican corruption is that the Republicans ARE corrupt: the fault always lay elsewhere. Liasson didn’t raise the possibilty either. Listening to her story made me feel as if I was living in a one party state.
May 7th, 2006 at 2:46 pmSorry for the double post. Damn browser kept hanging.
May 7th, 2006 at 2:48 pm#16: Love it!
What the FOX “News” Republican traitors are saying is that it’s okay to commit treason against America provided Democrats are doing it, too.
The fact that not a single Democrat was involved in the Republican felonies is irrelevent when the rightards are trying to claim it’s okay if everyone does it.
May 7th, 2006 at 2:52 pmEveryone who responded to post # 9, from “Debbie,†as if it were a serious… made me feel as if I was living in a one party state.
Comment by James — May 7, 2006 @ 2:40 pm
Everyone who responded to post # 9, from “Debbie,†as if it were a serious… made me feel as if I was living in a one party state.
Comment by Bob Smith — May 7, 2006 @ 2:46 pm
Although I didn’t respond to Debbie with a serious response, I would like to point out that people who go by more than one screen name, really shouldn’t chastise other people for considerably less. You do see the hypocrisy in that don’t you?
May 7th, 2006 at 3:05 pmRe: inability to tell truth on FOX “News”
I can’t imagine anyone being willing to commit treason against America for money like FOX “News” people are — hell, like most of the mainstream media is. There was at one time a duty to the American people to present the news truthfully, factually, and accurately, and a duty to America to dig in and uncover the truth before presenting it to Americans.
Now with the Republican owned and Republican operated mainstream media, it’s treason against America from end to end.
And they do it for money.
May 7th, 2006 at 3:07 pmThis is what happens when you have a right wing bias in the media.
May 7th, 2006 at 3:14 pmSwitch to decaf, Liarsson.
May 7th, 2006 at 3:26 pmShut up liberals, you can’t face reality! We won, you lost, and we make the truth now. Eat it.
Comment by Debbie Schutstaffel
It’s OK to respond to parody trolls.
May 7th, 2006 at 3:28 pmThis kind of GOP talking points tool needs to be fired from NPR. NOW.
May 7th, 2006 at 3:35 pmOoops. I thought she was still working at both outlets. If she’s not, then stop describing her as ‘NPR reporter Mara Liasson’.
May 7th, 2006 at 3:37 pmWe are way beyond questions regarding who is worse, the Democrats or Republicans. It’s also not a matter of IF Abramoff gave money to this one or that one either! It’s beyond that by a long shot.
One reason why reps from both Parties are shouting is to draw attention that their party is better. Most of the US population is totally ignorant with what is really happening and want someone else (FOX News?) to tell them what to do. This is why we all have to be careful about what NEWS groups we are watching.
The reason why we are seeing all of this corruption and scandals, which by the way is only the tip of a huge iceberg yet to fully reveal itself, is the result of a Mammoth Criminal Element that’s Organized within our Government. It extends from the local areas all the way up to the Federal areas, including the White House. I know this because I was in a family for more than 26 years who is part of the criminal element as they launder money straight into property for them and are one of many. How they hide property ownership is by using Mortgage Fraud techniques, corrupt Recorder of Deeds Departments, large corrupt Bank Trust departments and much more. Believe me, this is entirely true, but sadly there is much more to this also.
When my ex-wife’s family got involved, they first laundered money for the Iran/Contra Affair. Remember that? If you thought it ended, forget it! All if did was morph into something else. The same players are still around and actively pursuing stealing money leaving only a few who got caught. It’s grown into something mammoth in size to where it is today. There are MOB connections all over the place as I can tell you more than what has been in the news. Also, drugs are a huge part of this. This criminal group is involved in International Drug Distribution all over the US. Chicago as an example, is a major hub redistributing drugs to the East Coast and Florida among other states. But where does the money go? The money is mainly laundered through Real-estate Development companies, big Banks and others. BUT remember that there is a huge Political Corruption connection that’s the biggest part of their criminal system! Furthermore, my ex-in-laws bragged constantly that they are the World’s Largest Criminal System as it extends beyond our shores to other countries.
Corruption isn’t a local problem anymore! Money is easily traced, so the importance is on Laundering to make it useable. I know of more than a few Laundromats, but I don’t think anyone has heard of one surfacing yet, have you? Why is that?
Both Political parties are tainted unfortunately. Out of every 10 involved, 7 are Republicans and 3 are Democrats. It’s not a matter who’s clean, they all share the same problem. The criminal element within our Government is cancerous that is everywhere unfortunately.
What we really need is for someone to keep an active list of all Politicians who have repeatedly lied, voted for Bills and voice support for known criminal projects that are part of this criminal system. This is how we can get closer to identifying who is really who.
As an example, I know from the family that the Worlds Largest Corruption Laundromat is called “Mandarin Oriental Group†which is owned by “Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum” who also owns “Dubai Ports World of Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co“. If you look at where Mandarin’s hotels are, that should start everyone thinking about where the other corruption areas are! Next, think more about when the US Government had an obsession to SELL our seaports to Dubai. Look closer at who supported it and you’ll see what I’m trying to tell you. I know all of this is on this blog as well as my never ending posts about Dubai, so I won’t worry about offering links.
Please don’t forget, I was in this criminal system for more than 26 years. We laundered their stolen money and when you take care of a criminal’s money, they treat you extra special. They told us just about everything.
May 7th, 2006 at 3:38 pmDo we have to look at that weird pic of Liasson on TP all day? She is not attractive unless you take prozac > lol.
May 7th, 2006 at 3:54 pmIsn’t there a better link than a Bloomberg article demonstrating Abramoff only gave to Republicans? What about OpenSecrets? Anyone know?
May 7th, 2006 at 4:14 pmThanks
We need to hold these “reporters” accountable for spreading lies.
#80 I’ve struggled with my public radio renewal also for the same reason. It seems like a Catch-22: If the repug “influence” on NPR continues to grow, it will cease to be (already has?) an alternative news source. If enough people stop supporting it, then “they” can say “see, the majority doesn’t want this kind of programming anymore” and kill it. Can you earmark donations to your local public radio station to only cover local programming or only specific programs? I need to look into that before renewing next time.
I tried to find a way to email Liasson directly (her bio is at NPR.org) but couldn’t find a way to do that on the webpage. Here’s the link to her bio at NPR.org:
There is a “contact us” page at NPR.org, but the categories of comments are limited to those about specific on-air shows and technical issues. Is continuing to employ a republican shill a technical issue? LOL!
Peace,
May 7th, 2006 at 4:51 pmAlthough I didn’t respond to Debbie with a serious response, I would like to point out that people who go by more than one screen name, really shouldn’t chastise other people for considerably less. You do see the hypocrisy in that don’t you?
No, no I don’t see it. But perhaps you’d care to enlighten me. How is using more than one screen name the same as being too stupid to realize when someone is clearly joking? In what way are they the same? Or, more to the point, how is using more than one screen name worse than being too stupid to realize when someone is joking – which seems to be the point of your post? If I had been accusing someone of using more than one screen name, or something along those lines, then yes, by using more than on screen name myself, I would be a hypocrite. But I wasn’t accusing anyone of any such thing. I was accusing them of being stupid.
I can see why you responded.
By the way, the reason I used more than one screen name is because I couldn’t get my damn browser to post my message. After getting five or six error messages I just started typing randomly in frustration.
May 7th, 2006 at 5:07 pmMarty, sweetie, you could othat on your booty and dance nude five times a night and nobody would do a damn thing about it. Put out all of the details – names, dates, locations and if possible amounts and MAYBE in five or ten years somebody from DoJ will mosey through your evidence. If we’re lucky.
Everybody sent email to NPR already? Thank you!
The Debbie thing – why do you think it’s a joke? I have many email acquaintances who post stuff like that all the time, and they are not stupid or otherwise informationally disadvantaged. Just ‘cuz this Debbie is makin’ like a snack cake on Think Progress and Strangelove doesn’t mean “she’s” not on to a riff popular with the hard-core alternate-reality GOPsters.
May 7th, 2006 at 5:07 pmEDIT: Whoops. Screwed up my post again. I’m responding to post 108, by “unbelievable,” who wrote:
Although I didn’t respond to Debbie with a serious response, I would like to point out that people who go by more than one screen name, really shouldn’t chastise other people for considerably less. You do see the hypocrisy in that don’t you?
No, no I don’t see it. But perhaps you’d care to enlighten me. How is using more than one screen name the same as being too stupid to realize when someone is clearly joking? In what way are they the same? Or, more to the point, how is using more than one screen name worse than being too stupid to realize when someone is joking – which seems to be the point of your post? If I had been accusing someone of using more than one screen name, or something along those lines, then yes, by using more than on screen name myself, I would be a hypocrite. But I wasn’t accusing anyone of any such thing. I was accusing them of being stupid.
I can see why you responded.
By the way, the reason I used more than one screen name is because I couldn’t get my damn browser to post my message. After getting five or six error messages I just started typing randomly in frustration. Do you think you are somehow more “honest” than me because you consistently post under the same made up name?
May 7th, 2006 at 5:12 pmNo, no I don’t see it. But perhaps you’d care to enlighten me. How is using more than one screen name the same as being too stupid to realize when someone is clearly joking?
But I wasn’t accusing anyone of any such thing. I was accusing them of being stupid.
Comment by Bob Smith — May 7, 2006 @ 5:07 pm
How did you know whether or not Debbie was joking… unless you are Debbie? We get raving lunatics in here all the time that mean whatever psychotic hate nonsense they spew. And several that do it on a regular basis. Have you met Mighty Aphrodite? And it seems to increase on Sundays, when apparently the mental health facilities let their more lucid patients go online.
In fact, there’s a nasty little turd laboring to harras me today, should you happen to notice Denny.
But what gives you the right to call anyone stupid based on inconclusive evidence? Especially when you yourself aren’t entirely being honest. Multiple screen names are deceptive. I get why you don’t get it. Holier-than-thou types never do. Good luck with that.
May 7th, 2006 at 5:17 pmFOX PROBABLY PAID HER TO SAY THAT.
May 7th, 2006 at 5:23 pmThe Debbie thing – why do you think it’s a joke? I have many email acquaintances who post stuff like that all the time, and they are not stupid or otherwise informationally disadvantaged. Just ‘cuz this Debbie is makin’ like a snack cake on Think Progress and Strangelove doesn’t mean “she’s†not on to a riff popular with the hard-core alternate-reality GOPsters.
Well, here’s what “she” wrote:
Shut up liberals, you can’t face reality! We won, you lost, and we make the truth now. Eat it.
Comment by Debbie Schutstaffel
One of the core criticisms that real conservatives make about the left is that leftists believe in the idea of a “subjective truth” – i.e. the idea that what is true for one person might not be true for another. They believe that George Bush is a real “straight talker” who just “tells it like it is,” etc etc, as opposed to a communist like Bill Clinton who quibbles over the definition of what “is is.” This belief is, of course, total bullshit, but that’s not the point – the point is that they actually believe this.
So for a “conservative” to say “we make the truth now” is to assert that there is no, real, objective truth – just whatever they choose to “make up.” This assertion is actually an accurate attack ON conservatives, rather than a conservative talking point. In fact, it has become a popular attack FROM the left, with various leftist bloggers calling themselves proud members of the “reality-based community,” ie the one that doesn’t believe truth is just something you make up. Yes this was inspired by an actual comment that an unnamed Bush administration figure was quoted as saying – i.e. “we make reality now” – but that line is one that has been picked up and widely mocked by the LEFT, not by the right.
If that argument seems too subtle, consider the last name “Debbie” used. While the right often accuses the left of slandering those they disagree with by calling them nazis (which, like nearly every conservative argument, is the exact opposite of the truth) they tend not to apply the nazi label to THEMSELVES.
As “Debbie” has done both of these things, she is clearly parodying conservatives. I thought her post was funny, and it was annoying to see other posters fail to get it. It would be like watching Stephen Colbert parody right wing talking points, and believing that he actually believed the stuff he was parodying.
May 7th, 2006 at 5:32 pmIt would be like watching Stephen Colbert parody right wing talking points, and believing that he actually believed the stuff he was parodying.
Comment by Bob Smith — May 7, 2006 @ 5:32 pm
No, not even close. Stephen Colbert is coherent,and brilliant. Debbie wasn’t even using proper grammar. There was nothing tongue in cheek about what she said. It was just a bunch of vitriolic blather. No humor to get ’cause there was no humor intended.
Besides, even if it was a ‘joke’, so what that people didn’t like it. Still doesn’t give you the right to call anyone stupid. Especially when you posted the same thing twice under two different names (I’m not buying your excuse because it isn’t logical. And because, when you bothered to apologize for your two posts, you would have said so).
Any ambulatory monkey with internet access and a keyboard can come in here and post comments. Debbie included. It was no joke. It was an insult. As is your condescention and name-calling.
May 7th, 2006 at 5:43 pmAny ambulatory monkey with internet access and a keyboard can come in here and post comments. Debbie included. It was no joke. It was an insult. As is your condescention and name-calling.
You’re not going to cry, are you? You seem a little sensitive.
Speaking of hypocrisy, don’t you think refering to someone as an “ambulatory monkey” in the same sentence that you deplore “name-calling” is just a wee bit … Oh, I don’t know – hypocritical?
So – one last time – please explain how my making the exact same post under two different false names is more dishonest than making the exact same post under just one made up name? Do you think I was trying to fool people into thinking I was two different people? By making the EXACT SAME POST each time?
I can see why your lack of intelligence is a sensitive issue for you, but accusing me of dishonesty is a poor way of covering up for it.
May 7th, 2006 at 5:50 pmJust stopped over at her blog on NPR to give her a piece of my mind….
May 7th, 2006 at 5:59 pmYou’re not going to cry, are you? You seem a little sensitive.
No, you’re just projecting. I grew up with brothers and currently teach high school. My threshold is very high.
Speaking of hypocrisy, don’t you think refering to someone as an “ambulatory monkey†in the same sentence that you deplore “name-calling†is just a wee bit … Oh, I don’t know – hypocritical?
Nope. Wasn’t name calling. We are apes. Apes are monkeys. And we are able to walk. Was factual. Here – http://www.dictionary.com. Check it out – it’s free.
So – one last time – please explain how my making the exact same post under two different false names is more dishonest than making the exact same post under just one made up name?
Like your real name is Bob Smith? My real name doesn’t belong to anyone else in the country. No way I’d post with it. Don’t want and Dennys or Santos showing up in my driveway.
The problem I have in explaining anything to you is that you cannot consider that you are ever able to make an error. As long as you remove yourself from every and any equation, it’s not possible to explain anything reality based to you. But I did explain it above. I don’t need to repeat myself, I wrote it down. Go scroll back and re-read it.
Sure, you probably think you can fool people you consider to be stupid. Problem is, majority of the people here are not stupid. It’s why they are here and not infront of the television.
I can see why your lack of intelligence is a sensitive issue for you, but accusing me of dishonesty is a poor way of covering up for it.
Comment by Bob Smith — May 7, 2006 @ 5:50 pm
Funny, I had four or five people compliment me for a witty comment made to Debbie. Wouldn’t have happened if I were intellectually challenged. Faulty logic, Debbie. And transparent.
May 7th, 2006 at 6:01 pmTO Bob Smith:
Youre going to find out that’unbelievable’ has some real problems.
May 7th, 2006 at 6:01 pmA real nasty scag she is.A know it all.Real Mensa type;not.
Thanks Denny for validating my claim about you. I knew you had nothing to intelligent to debate or offer. Just wanna see if you can get me upset by following me from forum to forum. So far, not even warm. And too bad that you spent a whole day trying. Was probably even nice where you are too.
May 7th, 2006 at 6:04 pmun……….
May 7th, 2006 at 6:31 pmYou should listen to what Bob Smith said to you.
That’s him talking,not me.
Those 4 or 5 people compliment each other every day.
It’s called self-aggrandizement.
FOX has defended in court its right to lie to its viewers.
Elaborate? Thxz =]
I can see why your lack of intelligence is a sensitive issue for you, but accusing me of dishonesty is a poor way of covering up for it.
Comment by Bob Smith — May 7, 2006 @ 5:50 pm
I always find these people Bob, whom use the intelligence card, so quickly, are often not as intellectual as they think they may be.
What I think you mean to say Bob, is that you have ‘Credentials’ in certain fields. You paid someone to teach you a subject because you were ‘STUPID’ and after you passed the test, you got a STUPID piece of paper. And likely paid alot of STUPID money for.
That about right?
See Bob, I can’t say your stupid, because that would be false.
You Bob, though intelligent, are ‘untrained’ in alot of areas.
IF, people are generally 70% untrained in ALL subjects, THEN we could say ALL people are 70% ‘STUPID’.
May 7th, 2006 at 7:02 pmAgain thats not a fair statement because its not stupidities fault you call people stupid, its YOURS =)
FOX has defended in court its right to lie to its viewers.
Elaborate? Thxz =]
I can see why your lack of intelligence is a sensitive issue for you, but accusing me of dishonesty is a poor way of covering up for it.
Comment by Bob Smith — May 7, 2006 @ 5:50 pm
I always find these people Bob, whom use the intelligence card, so quickly, are often not as intellectual as they think they may be.
What I think you mean to say Bob, is that you have ‘Credentials’ in certain fields. You paid someone to teach you a subject because you were ‘STUPID’ and after you passed the test, you got a STUPID piece of paper. And likely paid alot of STUPID money for.
That about right?
See Bob, I can’t say your stupid, because that would be false.
You Bob, though intelligent, are ‘untrained’ in alot of areas.
IF, people are generally 70% untrained in ALL subjects, THEN we could say ALL people are 70% ‘STUPID’.
Again thats not a fair statement because its not stupidities fault you call people stupid, its YOURS =)
???
I have no idea what you’re trying to say here. Really – I’m not just trying to be insulting. You’ve lost me completely.
Are you accusing me of being a college graduate? Is that what the line about the “piece of paper” is supposed to mean? A diploma?
If that’s the accusation, does it change your opinion about me to know I didn’t graduate from college and never claimed to? My guess is that this will just be fodder for you to insult me as “uneducated.”
May 7th, 2006 at 7:27 pmLike your real name is Bob Smith?
WTF are you talking about?!?
I’ve said REPEATEDLY that this is a made up name. You called me dishonest for making the same post under two different names. That’s your argument, such as it is. My argument is that making the SAME post under two FALSE names is no more dishonest than making ONE post under a name like “unbelievable.” I wasn’t trying to fool anyone, you idiot. How could they be fooled? The same post? Under two different names? If I made a post under one false name and then pretended to respond to that post under another false name, THAT would be dishonest. Making the same post twice under different names could not “fool” anyone accept for the truly, criminally stupid, and “Unbelievable,” if the shoe fits …
But you are worse than stupid. You are dishonest as well. You accuse me of being dishonest and then respond to things I NEVER said, never typed, never wrote, the classic strawman argument.
Stupid and dishonest, do not make for a good combination.
May 7th, 2006 at 7:37 pmWTF are you talking about?!?
Comment by Bob Smith — May 7, 2006 @ 7:37 pm
See, you can’t even follow a simple exchange.
Stupid and dishonest, do not make for a good combination.
Comment by Bob Smith — May 7, 2006 @ 7:37 pm
Which you are repeatedly proving today with each of your posts.
Can’t we get any intelligent trolls for a change? Sheesh. More fun to watch paint dry than converse with this guy.
On another note, after watching 60 Minutes, can anyone give a valid reason why Ethanol wouldn’t be our best alternative toMiddle Eastern oil? It seems to be a bit less toxic toteh environment, sometihng we could use to liberate ourselves from pure oil, and support our own economy by growing our own source – corn or cellulose…
May 7th, 2006 at 7:56 pmTim Russert pulled this same old crap out the bag this morning. He badgered Nancy Pelosi mercilessly. I have never seen him so rude with a guest. He must have been hungover, or something. He refuses to see the facts, and they are, Indian tribes represented by Aramoff gave money to some democrats, but he did not give money to democrats himself.
May 7th, 2006 at 8:33 pmI’d like to see the neo-fascists come up with one like the Bob Ney story: Meddling in affairs of a business in the state of Florida, when he represents a district in Ohio. And, the fact that people he was assisting, are either directly, or indirectly involved in the gangland-style muder of the business. Top that one.
These corporate whores will never stop their lies, smears, diversions, and bullying as long as, well, they stay corporate whores.
The truth is highly endangered in this media spin age.
May 7th, 2006 at 8:43 pmHello #16:
News Flash………………….this is a new day, and the American public will not stand in the bread line waiting for political crumbs. The public will bake their sweet loaf of bread, fresh and hot in the November 2006 elections.
Peace is better than aggression,
Famous
May 7th, 2006 at 8:51 pmHello #16:
News Flash………………….this is a new day, and the American public will not stand in the bread line waiting for political crumbs. The public will bake their sweet loaf of bread, fresh and hot in the November 2006 elections.
Peace is better than aggression,
Famous
May 7th, 2006 at 8:51 pmPoor Bob Smith just didn’t seem to get my joke. And it was so terribly obvious. Oh well. I guess that had I been him, I might just have called him, oh, what was his word – stupid.
Good thing I’m not him.
May 7th, 2006 at 8:55 pmMust be something in the water or coffee offered to guests at Fox News. Although key to form, she was completely surrounded by three Fox News regulars and Bill Kristol – 4 against 1. Maybe she’s angling for a lucrative Fox contract? Time to cash in after starving at NPR all these years.
May 7th, 2006 at 8:57 pmAn NPR personality shilling for the shitbirds. That’s it. Nothing’s sacred anymore. Perhaps Bob Edwards saw this coming and that’s why he bailed when he did. I am very disappointed in Mara Liasson. I shit you not, this is a black eye on NPR.
May 7th, 2006 at 9:21 pmUnbelievable:
It requiress more energy to manufacture ethanol than the energy that you receive,
May 7th, 2006 at 9:36 pm
“These strategies are not sustainable.â€
Comment by Bluein Texas — May 7, 2006 @ 9:36 pm
Thanks Blue…
Then maybe our cars should make ethanol if there is more energy to be harnessed in doing that : )
Too bad. Seemed like a good way to start weening ourselves off our oil dependence to the Middle East.
May 7th, 2006 at 9:45 pmOnce again the cons have hijacked a post…We need to boycott them like we need to boycott fox and all it’s advertisers….Since this is all about money hit them where it hurts in the pockets…Too much talking not enough action!
May 7th, 2006 at 9:49 pmShe’s gotta be related to the runaway bride..er I mean the she must be the bride of Frankenstein.
May 7th, 2006 at 10:10 pmShe lives in the Fox echo chamber. (She’s had excellent plastic surgery, btw.)
May 7th, 2006 at 10:39 pmdear bob smith:
i think you’re stupid for wasting so much time defending a vague, one-off post. if it was meant to be funny or sarcastic, it was an extremely poor attempt — and the fact that the poster never returned to qualify the intent tends to suggest that it was vitriolic (the sarcastic ones almost always stick around to see if anyone “got” it).
nevertheless, whether you had a point or not, you certainly lost any magnitude you may have had by hijacking this thread for the purpose of defending someone, with more than 10 posts, of which only two things can honestly be said:
a) none of us knows who “debbie” is
b) none of us knows what “her” intent was with the post
so quit wasting everyone’s time, already!
–AND–
dear denny:
May 7th, 2006 at 10:46 pmhow’s it feel to be BACKWASH?
I sent her an email at NPR that I did not appreciate her lying.
May 7th, 2006 at 10:53 pmCan’t we get any intelligent trolls for a change? Sheesh. More fun to watch paint dry than converse with this guy.
On another note, after watching 60 Minutes, can anyone give a valid reason why Ethanol wouldn’t be our best alternative toMiddle Eastern oil? It seems to be a bit less toxic toteh environment, sometihng we could use to liberate ourselves from pure oil, and support our own economy by growing our own source – corn or cellulose…
Comment by unbelievable — May 7, 2006 @ 7:56 pm
That would be an oxymoron. Ethanol,methanol, whale blubber it makes no difference. We need Conservation and proveing and viable alternative energy sources. Like photo voltaics (solar panels ) they really work. Still too costly for the average joe but, we need the preznit to push this to get volume up that will bring price down. Ya right! Wind power and biomass can help but, we need much more. The hydrogen economy is 20 years away.
May 7th, 2006 at 10:56 pm“a) none of us knows who “debbie†is
b) none of us knows what “her†intent was with the post
so quit wasting everyone’s time, already!”
Comment by Progressaurus Rex — May 7, 2006 @ 10:46 pm
The name is a parody of Debbie Schluessel , so-called “liberal” at Fox – I guess the attempt at humor was a little dry for some intellects; Schluessel purports to be liberal occasionally on FOX (and yet bashes libs every chance she gets). It was the comparison of Liasson and Schluessel (that Liasson is a liberal like Debbie Schluessel that was intended by the author of the post (and no, it wasn’t me). I’d say an attempt at ironic humor.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:29 pmthat all may be true, barfly, but it was still a colossal waste of time.
May 7th, 2006 at 11:43 pmBush loving trolls really plastered this thread with steaming globs of baloney > lol. Hopefully TP will post a new thread in the morning!
May 8th, 2006 at 12:18 amWTF are you talking about?!?
Comment by Bob Smith — May 7, 2006 @ 7:37 pm
See, you can’t even follow a simple exchange.
Don’t you get dizzy, “Unbelivable?”
Doing all that ducking?
May 8th, 2006 at 1:20 amHer surname was also a referrence to the SS. Kinda why I took it as being sarcasm, though I have heard cons say exactly the same sort of thing in all seriousness. Catapulting the propaganda anyone?
Bob Smith
Right, you have been defending that post for a while now, and not really contributing anything else to the discussion. A lot of effort for a 2 line post, which leaves me thinking it was yours and you are kind of pissed off at the fact that not all that many people found it funny. I know the feeling, but you really shouldn’t let it get to you that much. Sarcasm on the Internet is largely neutralised by the number of loons on the internet who say the exact same stuff with all sincerity as you say in parody, so when people take you more seriously then you intended, don’t sweat it.
May 8th, 2006 at 4:46 amMaybe Mara belongs on Fox. NPR has become just another shill for the White House over the years (with a few exceptions). It’s time they clean house and restore some credibility.
May 8th, 2006 at 6:32 amDon’t you get dizzy, “Unbelivable?â€
Doing all that ducking?
Comment by Bob Smith — May 8, 2006 @ 1:20 am
You sure did get upset over a joke. Cursing and yelling. Bob, by your very own standard that makes you the ’s’ word (stupid).
Don’t you have anything to contribute to the discussion, or are you just here to get attention?
May 8th, 2006 at 7:04 amYou sure did get upset over a joke. Cursing and yelling. Bob, by your very own standard that makes you the ’s’ word.
“Cursing and yelling?”
Are we even posting in the same thread?
I don’t know who you think you’re talking to, but it sure isn’t me.
May 8th, 2006 at 7:16 amI don’t know who you think you’re talking to, but it sure isn’t me.
Comment by Bob Smith — May 8, 2006 @ 7:16 am
You just have no sense of humor Bob.
Still have nothing of value to offer, I see. Figures.
May 8th, 2006 at 7:26 amThe hydrogen economy is 20 years away.
Comment by Joefriday — May 7, 2006 @ 10:56 pm
Why so long? I suppose I could google it… Will do later when I get a chance.
I know ethanol isn’t ‘the’ answer, but if it were sustainable, it would be a nice next step to get us away from Middle Eastern dependence (and associated conflict). We do need a next step. Any ideas as to what that could be?
May 8th, 2006 at 7:31 amOne of the few reasons I love mondays is because that’s tag team day with Bob Herbert and Paul Krugman.
May 8th, 2006 at 7:44 amWhat about coal? I mean, SASOL has using the stuff for years, it suplies about a third of our petrol, couldn’t America, with its vast base of scientists and advanced technical know how take our means of conversion and figure out a cheaper way of doing it?
I know it isn’t THE solution, but it might be a step in the right direction.
May 8th, 2006 at 9:39 amI know it isn’t THE solution, but it might be a step in the right direction.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — May 8, 2006 @ 9:39 am
Isn’t coal the reason so many miners have lung disease? I thought coal was a far worse pollutant than gasoline.
Maybe solar or wind powered vehicles? Probably couldn’t go 90 m.p.h. But it’s something we have an abundant and sustainable amount of.
May 8th, 2006 at 9:51 amOOOooooooooH, Liasson. I’d like to stick it to her until eyebrows go puffy again!
May 8th, 2006 at 10:16 amIt’s odd no one has talked about Delays appearance yestereday.
May 8th, 2006 at 10:41 amHe was wearing his best ‘Christian Fake Smile’, and promptly blamed
Clinton for current gas prices. He mentioned the ‘frivolous’ law suits
filed against him, and named Jefferson, among others, as proof that
Dems are just as corrupt as (him) the Republican’ts.
Howard Dean followed him, (I wish they would have been on together,
but T.D. wouldn’t allow it, I guess), and proceeded to ream him a new one.
BTW, do you think Delay will try to snuff out the proposal to not allow
former congressmen to work in K Street for at leat 2 years? Chris, he’s go
a family to feed! Maybe they can eat bugs.
That Debbie Schelussel is a liberal is as big a laugh as when they say Tammy Bruce is a liberal who is a lesbian yet on Faux, she bashes all liberals and Democrats and praises Bush and the Republicans even though they are hostile to her lifestyle as a lesbian. She says “President Bush bases decisions on what he thinks is right. He is not poll driven like Bill Clinton.” Yeah, I see the liberal there, what a joke Faux is.
May 8th, 2006 at 11:23 amYEs, I fear that the WH has had a very negative effect on the freedom of the reporting on NPR by appointing political shills, and getting rid of head shill did not clean house sufficiently. This woman is supposed to be a reporter of repute, so write to NPR and point out her lie. Demand an explanation! Don’t let her get away with it!
May 8th, 2006 at 11:29 am#162, clean coal technologies are all in a way more expensive than refining oil, both in terms of energy release and cost per unit energy. Which ever way you look at it, the days of cheap energy from fossil fuels is coming to an end. Additionally, unless you spend the money to capture and sock away the CO2 and other nasties from the gasification or liquefaction process, you are just drinking a more exotic cocktail from the bar on the Titanic. Coal provides at best a way to transition to something else, but not an end in itself.
May 8th, 2006 at 11:46 amFor those that continue to insist this is a bipartisan scandal, ask the follow up question:
How many Congressional staffers have pled guilty in the Abramoff scandal? How many were Republicans and how many were Democrats? How many have been indicted on charges related to the Abramoff scandal? How many people have pled guilty on charges related to the Abramhoff scandal? Starting with Abramoff, what party affiliation were they?
Ney’s former chief of staff has joined the group of other GOP staffers pleading guilty so far.
May 8th, 2006 at 12:18 pmCoal provides at best a way to transition to something else, but not an end in itself.
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — May 8, 2006 @ 11:46 am
But that’s where we are… looking for the life raft until we can get back on dry land, so to speak. I think we can’t be choosy about it too much, simply because we let it go too far without doing anything about it.
May 8th, 2006 at 12:39 pmThat look say’s it all…
…That bi*ch is going to the “bunker”…
…come November…
…she and Brit Hume will do the Hitler-Braun thing…
…I can hardly wait…
…maybe they should make reservations early?…
May 8th, 2006 at 12:47 pm#170 – well would you trust the Captain of the Titanic to build and sail your raft for you? Frankly, going from oil to coal is more of the same, a high cost solution which does little to address and may even exacerbate the two main problems (1) energy demand (2) climate change. And climate change is going to strain what we call civilization in ways we have not even thought of yet. You questioned ethanol earlier – the fertilizer to make all that call comes from synthetic ammonia products mainly – synthesized from natural gas and the harvesters, ploughs, trucks, railways that manage the production – gasoline-diesel power. Ethanol and hydrogen etc etc are all just stores of energy, not sources of energy… you’d better start learning how to grow your own veggies and mend bikes.
May 8th, 2006 at 2:18 pmyou’d better start learning how to grow your own veggies and mend bikes.
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — May 8, 2006 @ 2:18 pm
Done and done.
May 8th, 2006 at 3:09 pm#173 Can you fix mine?
May 8th, 2006 at 4:33 pmFinal shot on the ethanol story – 60 minutes held out on the miracle of ethanol on Sunday night – here’s what Dan Rather did not talk about:
http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/2006/05/60-minutes-ethanol-solution.html
You’re still better off drinking it….
May 8th, 2006 at 7:21 pmYou just have no sense of humor Bob.
Still have nothing of value to offer, I see. Figures.
Quack quack quack quack.
You’ve got nothing to say, and you just keep saying it.
May 8th, 2006 at 8:35 pmYou’ve got nothing to say, and you just keep saying it.
Comment by Bob Smith — May 8, 2006 @ 8:35 pm
Oh, and you’re nasty and ugly as well? Not surprising.
I haven’t seen you offer one single political argument yet. Just a bunch of insults, hypocrisy, and yelling. You must be a very unhappy boy, Bob.
May 9th, 2006 at 8:25 amCan you fix mine?
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — May 8, 2006 @ 4:33 pm
What’s wrong with it?
May 9th, 2006 at 8:26 amOh, and you’re nasty and ugly as well? Not surprising.
I haven’t seen you offer one single political argument yet. Just a bunch of insults, hypocrisy, and yelling. You must be a very unhappy boy, Bob
Actually, I’ve offered several. I could cut and paste them here, but there wouldn’t be any point, because you would only ignore them again. You’re not actually interested in debating anything.
The only thing you seem to be interested in, is trying to insult me, because I commented on your obvious lack of intelligence. For some reason this really seems to have sent you over the edge. There can only be one reason for that — I’ve hit a nerve. So, in your infantile way, you try to cover up for this by saying I’m “ugly” etc etc.
But you can’t cover up what you know inside to be true. Can you, unbelievable?
May 9th, 2006 at 12:33 pmThere is a theory in Psychology called the “false consensus effectâ€. Basically, it occurs when a group of like minded individuals isolate themselves such that they reinforce the false perceptions they each hold.
–
Sounds more like liberals than people with moral values like Bush.
Comment by Debbie Schutstaffel — May 9, 2006 @ 2:45 pm
Another post from Debbie (newer forum). And she ISN’T joking, but genuinely bashing liberals. Gee Bob, hope you’ll shut up now.
May 9th, 2006 at 3:05 pmYou’re not actually interested in debating anything.
Nonsense, I’ve been debating all kinds of legitimate political issues for teh last 6 months in here. The archives validate that.
The only thing you seem to be interested in, is trying to insult me, because I commented on your obvious lack of intelligence.
You or every I.Q. test I’ve ever taken? I’m not picking you Bob.
Besides, you didn’t insult me directly, as I didn’t respond to Debbie with a serious answer. Just made fun of her. So, you weren’t actually talking about me. I just did like people who insult people becuase they think they are better than others.
Turns out, you were wrong. Debbie is a raving loonie who just like s to insult liberals. Seems you should apologize to the people you called stupid now. But, we know you won’t.
For some reason this really seems to have sent you over the edge. There can only be one reason for that — I’ve hit a nerve. So, in your infantile way, you try to cover up for this by saying I’m “ugly†etc etc.
There can only be one reason? You are arrogant. The nerve you hit is your holier-than-thou attack on people. I feel compelled to stand up to those who are wrongfully accused. Call me crazy for wanting to defend people who do not deserve to be attacked. Most would not. But we’re talking about you. And I cannot stand smug assholes who think they have the right to attack others just because they believe that they are somehow more enlightened. It’s what the neocons stand for and why this country is out of control.
But you can’t cover up what you know inside to be true. Can you, unbelievable?
Comment by Bob Smith — May 9, 2006 @ 12:33 pm
That you’re an arrogant ass? Don’t think I tried Bob. Don’t think I will.
May 9th, 2006 at 3:15 pmBoy, I REALLY got under your skin, didn’t I “unbelievable?” You just keep quacking. Quack quack quack. And you indite yourself every time. To say that I’m arrogant, and to read back over your posts in which you repeatedly compliment yourself, is to know the true meaning of hypocrisy. Now I could respond directly to your last post, take the time to come up with a reasoned argument, etc, but since YOU like to pick and choose which of my arguments to respond to, I’ll do as you do and just ignore it. Or maybe I’ll adopt another play out of your book and respond with a childish insult. Yes, let’s try that. Here we go:
You’re ugly.
There. How’s that for a response? Pretty stupid, huh? But you must admire it, since I borrowed it directly from you. No doubt the connection will sail far, far over your head as you are–sorry for the pun–unbelievably stupid. But hey, don’t let that stop you, You go girl. Just keep on quacking.
May 9th, 2006 at 4:28 pm:)
Bully Bob,
I see you failed to respond to the real issue – Debbie’s current rant that disproves your humor theory. Figures you would ignore it.
I’m totally messing with you Bob. I thought you knew hunor when you saw it. Apparently not.
Only people who can get to me are people I care about. You do not qualify.
Haven’t seen you in the forums up front discussing politics with the rest of us. Too scared? I can see why after your bust on Debbie being sarcastic… I figure calling people names is really all you have in your bag o’ tricks. I dare you to prove yourself to the contrary Bob. Let’s see what happens in a real debate and not just one based on your off-base opinion.
May 9th, 2006 at 5:19 pmWow. Look at all this love, tolerance and compassion.
May 11th, 2006 at 2:32 pm[...] It’s just not true, Mara. Today on Fox News Sunday, NPR’s Mara Liasson asserted that members of both parties accepted money from Jack Abramoff…. [...]
May 12th, 2006 at 1:43 pm[...] A quick fact check: 1. ThinkProgress never encouraged anyone to contact NPR, nor did we criticize them for allowing their contributors to appear on Fox. We noted that one of their contributors, Mara Liasson, falsely claimed “it’s Democrats not just Republicans taking money from Abramoff.” In fact, only Republicans accepted campaign contributions from Abramoff. [...]
May 23rd, 2006 at 10:20 amMaking a Liberal Look Like an Idiot…
I love this: Isn’t there some association to a serious medical condition when you can see the whites of someone’s eyes above their pupils? One which leads to pathalogical [sic] conditions such as paranoia and dementia? I forget what it’s……
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:28 pm[...] TP has more. [...]
July 26th, 2006 at 1:06 amSarah chayes was already working with the Green Berets befroe, during, after the invasion. She then went on to Mercy Corps running hundreds of millions for USAID(CIA). She now trains US troops on Afghanistan. The intelligence funding after the Green Berets were done is why they call her a Democrat whore rather than a Republican whore. NPR is jealous of the money and how she worked it out of the Intelligence committee.
November 11th, 2006 at 11:30 am[...] If she’s gonna start making shit up, I will, too. [...]
November 29th, 2006 at 1:08 am