Chuck Roberts Apologizes For Calling Lamont The ‘Al Qaeda Candidate’
Chuck Roberts Apologizes For Calling Lamont The ‘Al Qaeda Candidate’
Last week, Think Progress documented CNN Headline News anchor Chuck Roberts’ reference to Ned Lamont as “the al Qaeda candidate.†Arianna Huffington then appeared on CNN and, referring to Roberts’ statement, called on news stations to demand more accountability for comments made by their anchors. And yesterday, MediaMatters CEO David Brock wrote a letter to CNN President Jonathan Klein urging him to discipline Roberts.
The progressive community’s efforts have paid off. Today, Roberts issued an apology, saying he had posed the original question “badly” and “stupidly.” Roberts then gave Lamont a chance to correct the record about his views on terrorism and Iraq. Watch it:
Full transcript:
ROBERTS: I owe you an apology. Last week I led into an interview with a guest analyst and really botched the set-up. The guest had wanted to discuss the Dick Cheney and Joe Lieberman statement suggesting that terror groups, al Qaeda types, to use Cheney’s word, would be buoyed by your win. But I posed it badly, stupidly, ad-libbing about some saying the al Qaeda candidate. No one, in fact, used that construction. Anyway, I wanted to correct the record. I’m glad we had this chance to do it.
Now, let’s get to the insinuations that were lobbed. Here’s what they were trying — here’s what we were trying to spotlight a week ago. First of all, from The Washington Post: Democratic primary and (ph) is now running as an independent, said the anti-war views of primary winner Lamont would be ‘taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up those planes in this plot hatched in England.’ The comments from Joe Lieberman.
And then, in the New York Times, this from the vice president: “The attacks came in searing remarks from, among others, Ken Mehlman, chairman of the GOP and Vice President Cheney, who went so far as to suggest that the ouster of Mr. Lieberman might encourage ‘al Qaeda types.’â€
What do you make of that?
LAMONT: Look, I thought those were incredibly unfortunate comments, demeaning to the voters of Connecticut. I think the voters of Connecticut last Tuesday said, ‘We need a change.’ And having 132,000 troops stuck in the middle of a civil war over in Iraq is not helping us fight the terrorists, is not making us safer, is not protecting our shorelines.
I salute Scotland Yard and I look at what the British were able to do in thwarting that terrorist attempt. And I think we’re much stronger as a country when we work in concert with our allies, we have shared intelligence and we go forward together with good old-fashioned police work.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
84 Responses to “Chuck Roberts Apologizes For Calling Lamont The ‘Al Qaeda Candidate’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Nice. Chalk one up for us.
Instead of worrying about photoshopped photos and typography, we’re demanding accountability.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:03 pmkeep it up!
Push ‘em back. Push ‘em back. Wa-ay back!
August 15th, 2006 at 3:04 pm“Old-fashioned police work”?! Who is he kidding? We’ve got to bomb Britain! They are clearly harboring terrorists!
August 15th, 2006 at 3:05 pmIssued an apology? Didn’t say it on air? That’s as half-hearted as putting a bumper sticker on the inside of the car.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:05 pmHuffington, Media Matters, Think Progress, Crooks and Liars, and a barrage of Emails from ordinary people forced this necessary apology.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:06 pmWe must not let anchors get away with outrageous comments - not even one - because they are insidious - they stay in people’s minds subconsciously.
Now let’s get started on BO, Hannity, et al.
Hmm, I was going to correct my grammar and clarify that the comments are insidious, not the anchors - but on second thought I will leave it as it is because they each are insidious.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:08 pmAwesome! Way to go guys. This is definitly a sign that the MSM is looking over their shoulder and directy at the net’s progressive movement.
Now don’t forget to support your local candidate with some volunteer time!
August 15th, 2006 at 3:08 pmWow and Huzzah for us! I know sometimes things get posted that are inflammatory and from the hip and thats ok…we have alot to be inflammed about. The correction of this slur on Lamont also proves that when we unite for truth, things can get done. Bravo to all of us and I shall hoist one high this eve in our honor.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:10 pmseemed like a sincere apology
August 15th, 2006 at 3:11 pmSyria made a hostile step towards Israel today by Assad announcing that Israel will never make peace.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:12 pmThe German foreign minister cancelled his visit to Damascus thus.
The Iranians arent better and Bush knew in advance that his case for a war against Iraq is foiled if somebody brings up more impacting evidence and proof against Iran, as Plame could do.
Bush was very late with his announcement that the US is threatened by Muslim Fascists and the hypocrites around Cheney were eager to start another war with the US not necessarily on the left side of the war.
The right drumming ebbed and after 3 years of Iraq war were suddenly experiencing truth.
Thats a tat bit late cause Bush caused 50000 dead Iraqis.
Bloggers in action demanding accountabilty. Keep up the good work.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:12 pmGood on Chuck Roberts. As oldtree said, he seemed rather sincere.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:13 pmAre you freakin kidding? Someone on TV just showed some humility and that their ego is not rule #1?
August 15th, 2006 at 3:16 pmI don’t know why he apologized. As far as I know, Ned Lamont certainly belongs to a party that’s the new Taliban. Maybe Cal Thomas was right!!!!!
August 15th, 2006 at 3:17 pmI didn’t hear him apologize. Saying one wants an opportunity to apologize is not the same as apologizing.
Also, I doubt he “botched” the opening. He knew exactly what he was saying. If he “botched” the opening, then he is too incompetent to have the job. Also, he shouldn’t have the job for calling Mr. Lamont the “al-Qaeda” candidate.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:18 pmLamont nailed this.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:19 pmChuck is not a republican…they never admit to making mistakes…they just continue to lie and blame others for their actions.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:23 pmI’m sure the story will be in On the Media, NPR, which I can’t recommend highly enough.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:25 pmI was waiting to see when a troll would jump in. Then 11 came in and stole the show.
You win the dipshit prize….
August 15th, 2006 at 3:26 pmgreat news!
but, payson, when you say “progessive community efforts have paid off,” why didn’t you link to my list of hnn advertisers and contact info (not that i have anything against the wonderful bob harris…i literally had lunch with him a couple weeks ago).
i would like to think that the efforts of my readers in contacting the sponsors of headline news network had more than a little to do with the pressure brought to bear on mr. roberts.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:26 pmexcellent. thanks for busting up the media bs and getting the truth out there. truth is what the current administration fears.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:31 pm[…] After a sharply worded letter from Media Matters’ David Brock, CNN’s anchor Chuck Roberts apologized on-air directly to Ned Lamont. Earlier this afternoon, Roberts told Lamont, “I owe you an apology … I posed [my question] badly, stupidly, ad-libbing about some saying the al Qaeda candidate. No one, in fact, used that construction.” […]
August 15th, 2006 at 3:33 pmNow we know, thanks toNed Lamont, that the Main Stream Media is watching US. We’ve adapted to WIN
Hard To Be A Republican
August 15th, 2006 at 3:40 pmThis is one small victory. But stay on alert. As we get closer to the election I expect many more “accidents”.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:40 pmExcellent.
Maybe there is a human side to the Rabid Right.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:41 pmI didn’t hear him apologize. Saying one wants an opportunity to apologize is not the same as apologizing.
Comment by Jeffrey Stewart — August 15, 2006 @ 3:18 pm
I agree… I heard no apology just an IOU.
Ned - I owe you one apology… which I may or may not actually deliver some time in the near or distant future.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:41 pmcool
August 15th, 2006 at 3:42 pmI call bullshit.
What Chuck Roberts said:
And what he apologized for:
That isn’t ‘correcting the record’ at all, you lying scum. That’s called ‘weaseling out of your earlier statements’…a practice that has been elevated to the status of fine art by this administration.
Don’t accept this bogus apology. Roberts attempted the ’some people say’ gambit to pass off the perception of Lamont as the ‘al Qaeda candidate’. And now he says that ‘no one, in fact, used that construction’? He ought to be fired, but we all know that won’t happen….style is so much more important than substance these days…
August 15th, 2006 at 3:43 pmYou guys left of the first two words form the bob harris site. That IS “You know” That makes a big difference in actualy saying that you appologize. So all he said was the they knew he owed them an apology. Great posting of facts not present! Judd!!!
August 15th, 2006 at 3:44 pmBullshit@11
I appreciate your truth in advertising.
50 Ways To Dump The Dubya
August 15th, 2006 at 3:44 pmSome might say that fighting back is finally working.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:47 pmI didn’t hear him say he was sorry, the fact is, he said what he did and now it is out there. The 50% of bafoons who believe Iraq had WMD’s still believe what he said originally. This is no victory for the left. He needs to loose his job and the veiwers need to be informed as to why. Although it is no victory, at least we are moving in the right direction. Let the advertisers on CNN know how you feel. Hit them where it hurts.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:47 pmThis proves that Faux is not a reputable network
Chuck Roberts apologized after making those comments, even though he wasn’t making the accusation.
Faux has been taking every chance to practice bigotry against Muslims for the last few days, and they are proud of it.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:50 pmAs little as two years ago this apology would not and could not have happened.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:52 pmI really don’t know what you all are getting giddy about. What Chuck Roberts said was factual. Bin Laden continues recruiting troops, and the Democrats, especially in Ct. gave him more ammo to work with.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:55 pmAll I want is the truthiness! Just give me the truthiness!
August 15th, 2006 at 3:56 pm#35 In America we can vote for the candidate of our choice. Apparently you can’t in your country. I feel sorry for you.
August 15th, 2006 at 3:57 pmApology not enough. I urge all to contact CNN directly and tell them, we’re not taking it anymore.
CNN needs to apologize and retract. They have a link to report errors, call them on it.
CNN
Cheney News Network
August 15th, 2006 at 3:59 pmRoberts is a typical, lazy newsreader, handed stuff by his producers, who were handed it by others and glad for getting something considered newsworthy without much work. The bosses okay it because it doesn’t require work on their parts, either.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:01 pmLazy, just lazy.
#35. Are you kidding? If soon-to-be terrorists find out that some people in America don’t want to kill their people, maybe they will calm down and do some date farming or something. The more aggressive American military policy is, the easier it will for Bin laden to recruit troops. The international community can, however, significantly increase security with vigilant police work.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:02 pmAccording to what I just read Bush, Inc. feels that America is not “allowed” to go into Pakistan to get Osama… I wonder if the Democrats feel the same way?
August 15th, 2006 at 4:03 pmBin Laden has no better recruiter than George Bush. Attacking an Arab country who did not threaten us plays right into Al Qaeda’s recruitment message regarding American imperialism.
Holding the news media responsible for their words is a step in the right direction. Hope it makes the folks on TV more conscious about contributing to partisan spin, even when it’s unintentional.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:06 pmThis may not be the popular position here – but does anyone else here think that maybe ol Chuckie Boy really didn’t need to apologize?
His statement was “Might some argue as some have that Lamont is the Al Qaeda candidate?â€
This is different than him calling Lamont the Al Qaeda candidate. It is asking the question will others i.e., Cheney, Mehlman and Liberman try to make the case that a Lamont victory helps Al Qaeda?
This seems to be a legitimate question considering the fact that Cheney, Mehlman and Liberman all made statements that suggested this very thing.
To me it is not Roberts so much that needs to apologize as it is the three stooges that actually made statements equivocating Lamont’s victory to a victory for Al Qaeda.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:07 pmhis apology is not enough. I doubt the price of his job is enopugh.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:07 pmmike
#35 That’s right, as long as Arabs are convinced that all Americans stand together in our desire to destroy them, they won’t be motivated to join jihad.
So when is Bush going to put a stop to this “open debate” and “democratic process” that presents such a threat to the Homeland?
August 15th, 2006 at 4:08 pmAmerica can not lose a military war if we are commited to a WWII style all out genocide and destruction.
America can and IS losing the war of reason, of intellect, of right and wrong judgements, of hope, of swaying the masses…. if BOMB the masses they will instinctually turn away from you … PERIOD… no amount of chest thumping and tooting your own horn is going to change that. Al Qeada outsmarts the republicans continuely by convincing people that he was right about America… and the republicans are just as lame at convincing people in the ME that Osama is wrong as they are when they got on this site as trolls and blather on about BS leaving everyone shaking their heads at them and turning against them.
America … follow a fool… and you WILL suffer a fools fate… the fools have had their turn… it is time for someone else to take over … because Osama IS wrong … and it really is not that hard to prove it to the people of the ME… if we only tried.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:09 pmG.W.SuperChrist
August 15th, 2006 at 4:15 pmIf anyone else used the phrase “Al Qaeda candidate”, then they should have been specifically named and the “some say” line abandoned. Accountability requires assignment of action first. Roberts is not responsible for the actions of others but he is responsible for how he reports. He deserved the criticism - as do others who used the phrase.
Woah. Some of you are crazy. This apology was fine.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:18 pm[…] Chuck Roberts has issued an on the air apology for his comments about Ned Lamont. […]
August 15th, 2006 at 4:19 pm#35
Let me play the Devil’s advocate, while quoting Bin Laden:
Bin Laden:” Israelis get all their weapon from America, so they can kill Muslims”
two weeks ago the Bush Administration gave Israel smart bombs to attack Lebanon.
Bin Laden: ” America wants to take over the Middle East”
Bush invades Iraq
Bin Laden: ” They want to control our oil”
The U.S. forces secured the oil fields in Iraq first, and didn’t care the looters.
Bin Laden: “the rulers of Jordan and Egypt are imprisoning and torturing your brothers, and they are kept in power by America”
The US has a rendition program that sends suspects to Jordan and Egypt to be tortured. The US also calls Jordan a modern democratic state.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:21 pmThis is what’s giving Bin Laden more Ammo.
C’mon. Take a breath. The guy apologized. You can get into the semantics of “I owe you an apology”, but that’s an apology. And I don’t think he was trying to weasel out of what he had said before. He plainly said that he botched the way he wanted to ask the question. It’s a legit question ( albeit a stupid one): “Mr. Lamont, are you the al Qaida candidate?” In fact, it’s a great question because it gives Ned a chance to knock it out of the park. What Roberts did was to fall back on a journalistic hack-phrase, “some say”. It’s phony and he acknowledged it.
Great job to all those who helped force some accountability.
And kudos to Chuck Roberts for having the strength of character to fix his mistake on-air.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:23 pmApology is first step, but now Roberts must resign, or be fired!
August 15th, 2006 at 4:32 pmJebus Loves Me …nice devils advocate…..
but that is the main tenet of most “progressives” on this site….its americas fault!!!!
We should stop and listen (maybe change our ways?) to these individuals that protest in the streets (of ENGLAND not even the middle east) while holding signs that say…..
“slay those that insult islam”
“behead those that insult islam”
“europe is the cancer..islam is the answer”
“islam will dominate the world”
“freedom goto hell”
“be prepared for the REAL halocaust”
I am sorry but—-there is no “peace conference” with people like this….we could fart and they (you or some “progressives”) would say we are giving them ammo…
August 15th, 2006 at 4:35 pmDave sez:
And I don’t think he was trying to weasel out of what he had said before. He plainly said that he botched the way he wanted to ask the question.
Yes, and that is plainly a LIE. There was nothing ‘botched’ about that question. Just watch OutFOXed sometime, and you can see that the ’some people say’ gambit is a taactic FOX News has honed to perfection. It’s rather pathetic to see CNN following in FOX’s poisonous footsteps, but I guess ratings are more important than integrity these days.
Chuck Roberts was clearly trying to perpetuate the ‘a vote for Lamont is a vote for the terrorists’ meme, and he got caught doing so. His apologizing for ‘botching the question’ is analogous to a muggere claiming that his act of beating you senseless and stealing your wallet was a ‘botched’ attempt at asking for a handout. It’s bullshit, pure and simple, and it should be seen for what it is.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:38 pm#53. I guess we better starting bombing England then in keeping with Bush’s foreign policy. In fact, time to get out the nukes and kill most of the people in the middle east before they nuke us. In fact, let’s destroy everybody so there are no more people to hate the U.S. and we can return the planet to it’s pre-human stage when there were no terrorists.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:40 pmthere is no “peace conference†with people like this….
Im betting you have never talk with a Muslim.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:44 pmIm betting you have never talk with an Arab
Im betting you have never read much.
Im betting you are writing all this from mommy´s basement.
Oh, that was talked…I was going to use present tense…then forgot to add “ed”.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:45 pmIf anyone else used the phrase “Al Qaeda candidateâ€, then they should have been specifically named and the “some say†line abandoned. Accountability requires assignment of action first. Roberts is not responsible for the actions of others but he is responsible for how he reports. He deserved the criticism - as do others who used the phrase.
Comment by PLC (PatrioticLiberalChristian) — August 15, 2006 @ 4:15 pm
I agree that he should have been more specific in naming names – but I don’t know that exact phrasing is necessary for ascribing intent.
Although the exact phrase “Al Qaeda Candidate†was not used by Cheney, Mehlman, or Liberman – they all certainly suggested - in a not so sublet way - that the interests of Al Qaeda were aligned with the interests of Lamont e.g., the Al Qaeda Candidate.
This is equivalent in my mind to Cheney, Mehlman, or Liberman saying that Lamont is member of a primitive people that lives in caves, dens, or holes and Roberts saying “Might some argue as some have that Lamont is a troglodyte?â€
They don’t need to use the exact phrase to be credited with making the argument.
They are guilty of arguing that Lamont is the Al Qaeda Candidate and Roberts is guilty of not naming names – but he is not guilty - in my opinion - of creating an original knock against Lamont.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:49 pmNEOCON sez:
We should stop and listen (maybe change our ways?) to these individuals that protest in the streets (of ENGLAND not even the middle east) while holding signs that say…..
“slay those that insult islamâ€
“behead those that insult islamâ€
“europe is the cancer..islam is the answerâ€
“islam will dominate the worldâ€
“freedom goto hellâ€
“be prepared for the REAL halocaustâ€
I am sorry but—-there is no “peace conference†with people like this….we could fart and they (you or some “progressivesâ€) would say we are giving them ammo…
Interesting, but what you failed to mention was that these people are followers of Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, one (1) radical preacher in London. Condemming the entire Islamic faith based upon the actions of a few extremists is a bit like condemming the entire Christian faith based upon the actions of these guys.
Nice try, neocon, but you’ll find we tend to do our homework here.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:49 pmJeez guys, I know you want blood, but you’re asking for it from the wrong person. Roberts’ apology was fine. It was direct, to the point, and amazingly, straight to Lamont. As much balls as it took him to call Lamont “the al Qaeda candidate”, it took bigger ones to apologize directly to Lamont for it. And he gave Lamont airtime to explain his position.
We have bigger fish to fry than parsing words over whether he apologized correctly.
August 15th, 2006 at 4:55 pmG.W.SuperChrist
August 15th, 2006 at 5:00 pmNo argument from me - I’m convinced.
Tread sez:
Roberts’ apology was fine.
NO, Tread, it wasn’t. Please see my earlier reply to Dave (currently post #54) for why it is so inadequate.
August 15th, 2006 at 5:04 pm#62,
I’m satisfied that he apologized directly to Lamont and then gave him airtime to rebut Cheney and Lieberman.
August 15th, 2006 at 5:09 pmDespite the apology, everyone is going to remember that Lamont = al Qaeda candidate. You can’t take back words once spoken. It’s like having an elephant in the house — you can get him out, but the smell will always linger.
August 15th, 2006 at 5:11 pmI dont think that apology was enough. There is still little accountability on TV news. Newspapers at least run a section in their paper for corrections. There is nothing like that on TV. I will still refuse to watch CNN till the “he said she said” style reporting ends. or at least until i can afford cable.
August 15th, 2006 at 5:32 pm# 61 - Cool!
# 64 - I agree you may never get the smell out of your house - but you can however walk the elephant over to your neighbors house and lock him in so that his house smells worse than yours.
So how does Lamont hang this albatross… I mean elephant around Liberman’s neck?
Simple… every time he gets a mic in front of him - he should make the point that Liberman’s decision to support a war of choice against a country that had no Al Qaeda contingency has cost America incredible amounts of money and man power that could have been better spent fighting the terrorist that attacked us on 911… ongoing support for the diversion of funds from the “true war on terror” helps Al Qaeda execute it’s deadly campaign against America.
A vote for Liberman is a Vote for Al Qaeda!!!
August 15th, 2006 at 5:36 pmPolice work?
August 15th, 2006 at 5:47 pmIsn’t that a pre-9/11 mindset?
Alright already! The moot society is taking over this thread again. “I owe you an apology” or “I apologize”. It does not matter. He straightened the record face to face with Lamont and as a previous post wrote, this would never have happened two years ago or two months ago on CNN.
August 15th, 2006 at 5:51 pmOh, goody, the ‘non-apology apology’. All this guy ‘apologized’ for was how his question was presented, not the actual content of the question. And then he so kindly allowed Mr.Lamont the ‘opportunity’ to ‘correct the record’, regarding his views on terrorism and Iraq. Wow, how nice of him, he participates in a rightwing ’slander circle-jerk’, at Mr.Lamont’s expense, no less, then basically asks him to prove him wrong. Mr.Lamont is no fool. He does not acknowledge any ‘apology’, because there wasn’t one. His response showed alot of class, and showed why Joe lost the primary to him.
August 15th, 2006 at 5:52 pmI worked with Chuck for over 10 years. He has
August 15th, 2006 at 6:27 pmalways gone out of his way to be unbiased. I am
sure he was horrified by his choice of words.
It was a big move on chuck’s part. I have respect for someone who says that on air. It seems like things are changing a bit; how the hell did they ever get so far to the right though?
August 15th, 2006 at 6:31 pmTo all the people that don’t think he apologized. I think you are asking too much. He said his choice of words was stupid — that IS an apology. What do you want this guy to do? Get on his hands and knees… What he did was big for television “news.”
August 15th, 2006 at 6:33 pmSome might say that CNN is trying to boost ratings by copying Fox’s style….
August 15th, 2006 at 6:37 pm#35 Bin Laden continues recruiting troops
Who was in charge for the last six years you dope?
August 15th, 2006 at 7:02 pm“I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn’t do my job.” -George Bush, AntiChrist (July 9, 2004)
August 15th, 2006 at 7:04 pmThat was pretty lame, Chuck. Try again! No weasel words!
August 15th, 2006 at 8:54 pmI LOVED what Ned said… Keep reminding people that it’s about ending a pointless civil war in Iraq to fight terrorism.
I had a co-worker today ask me why we’ve spent three years in Iraq and then we have more terrorists trying to attack us. I said “Because Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.” I repeated myself because I wasn’t sure she heard me. She then nodded and said “Oh.”
The evil witch’s spell is wearing off the sheep… They are waking from their induced slumber. I only hope it’s not too late.
Hello and good night all. Just wanted to check in and see what was going on in the world today. This was a nice follow up to great efforts on TP’s part. Keep up the good fight!
August 15th, 2006 at 9:13 pmPlease hold the praise for Chuck Roberts — save it for the real journalists at C&L, Huffington Post, Think Progress, Media Matters, and all those those who passed along the story (and the evidence), causing the immense pushback that must have been generated for CNN to have forced out this statement. Roberts did not apologize, and even if he had issued a full and complete apology on CNN (which was carried on a regular basis for a week), his next paycheck should be for asking questions like, “want fries with that?”
August 15th, 2006 at 9:19 pmOOOOpppppssss — sorry I got caught being a right wing shill…That’ll never happen again — I mean I won’t get caught the next time…Excuse me, time to lob some softballs at a Repub…Hey, how’d you like my non-apology apology???? Kinda’ like non-denial denial…Thanks for tuning in…
Chucky Baby
August 15th, 2006 at 9:54 pmWhat a sensitive, New Age kind of guy - and up-Chuck the Idiot thinks progs will like him???? They hate their own relatives who don’t vote the Party apparatchik line - why would they give Chuckie another glance?? How many of prog-wacks have referred to delusional, crazy, moronic Repub relatives - who God forbid - are RELIGIOUS, too??
August 15th, 2006 at 11:50 pm(My apologies to the three or four of you who don’t hate your 75 year old Republican mothers -However, they would like out of the roach infested “nursing” homes you’ve parked them in immediately!!)
Chuck’s just shilling for a job on Fox News! Another lowlife, useless corporate media scumbag.
August 16th, 2006 at 3:12 am[…] I know I’ve been calling the Bush Era a re-do of the 50’s (though not as open-minded), but this pathetic attempt at bringing back McCarthyism at the expense of Ned Lamont is pathetic. At least Chuck Roberts had the balls to apologize to Ned Lamont for being a brainless dick. […]
August 16th, 2006 at 8:16 amThe truth is that Creepy Lamont is not only al-Qaeda’s candidate, but the entire Democrat Party is the al-Qaeda/Hezbollah/Hamas Party.
They sympathize with these Islamic terrorists, do what they can to support them or make sure they can operate without restrictions, and want to surrender to them in as many places around the world as possible.
Creepy Lamont is probably getting campaign contributions from bin Laden, Zawahiri, and Nasrallah.
August 18th, 2006 at 1:07 amChuck Roberts is one of the few “Readers” decent enough to never reveal a persoal bias.
Mike
August 22nd, 2006 at 9:33 pm