Keith Olbermann goes crazy on GOP crazy-Clinton-campaign

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Keep it up. The tide is turning. People are starting to realize that we can't keep being stupid. Too bad it took 6 years, but at least it's happening.

I seem to remember the democrats trying to say the same thing just before the 2004 elections. And we all know how that turned out...

Er, wasn't that the narrowest gap ANY President has ever been re-elected by? Granted, Kerry didn't win, but it's not like it was a huge ass kicking either...and 2006 is hardly 2004 in terms of Republican popularity.

 

[Craig234]

There are lots of people who would make that exact same statemet with the names reversed.

I don't think so. While there are people who will choose O'Reilly over KO because they agree with him, while there are some who prefer O'Reillys style, there are limits to delusion.

Analogously, if someone had said that Bush had a more 'folksy' speaking style than Kerry, I think most Kerry supporters would concede the point.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
That's not the heated approach, that's the crazy approach...and even THAT isn't always wrong, the Republicans got a lot of mileage out of having Zell Miller as their keynote convention speaker, and that nutbar makes Dean look like the framed picture of mental health. The real issue is how you direct the crazy. Republicans are simply good at screaming about something their voters care about...like, "IF YOU DON'T VOTE FOR US, TERRORISTS ARE GOING TO KILL YOUR CHILDREN!!!!"

ROFL

I'd like to see some logic behind your assertion that Zell Miller is a "nutbar" and worse than Howard Dean! Dean has made some of the most ridiculous statements ever uttered by a party chairman. The sad fact is that the Dems don't have any room for the moderates like Lieberman and Miller any more. They're being squeezed out in favor of the hard leftists who fall in with Michael Moore and company. And I predict that is a losing strategy.

 

[LLCOOLJ]

Originally posted by: Papsmear

Originally posted by: Rainsford
That's not the heated approach, that's the crazy approach...and even THAT isn't always wrong, the Republicans got a lot of mileage out of having Zell Miller as their keynote convention speaker, and that nutbar makes Dean look like the framed picture of mental health. The real issue is how you direct the crazy. Republicans are simply good at screaming about something their voters care about...like, "IF YOU DON'T VOTE FOR US, TERRORISTS ARE GOING TO KILL YOUR CHILDREN!!!!"

ROFL

I'd like to see some logic behind your assertion that Zell Miller is a "nutbar" and worse than Howard Dean! Dean has made some of the most ridiculous statements ever uttered by a party chairman. The sad fact is that the Dems don't have any room for the moderates like Lieberman and Miller any more. They're being squeezed out in favor of the hard leftists who fall in with Michael Moore and company. And I predict that is a losing strategy.

Yep the Dems are all over the map while the Republicans are firmly entrenched in their ideology.

 

[Craig234]

I'd like to see some logic behind your assertion that Zell Miller is a "nutbar" and worse than Howard Dean! Dean has made some of the most ridiculous statements ever uttered by a party chairman.

You can read all about Miller's craziness with google easily. Dean has made no such statements - rather, you have drunk the kool aid of the right wing's smear campaign on him.

Dean is a competent, very sharp guy who would have made a great president (not just better than the disaster in office who any of the democrats would be far better than).

The sad fact is that the Dems don't have any room for the moderates like Lieberman and Miller any more. They're being squeezed out in favor of the hard leftists who fall in with Michael Moore and company. And I predict that is a losing strategy.

Lieberman and Miller are not moderates. Your definitions reflect your own extremism and bias. Kerry and Gore are 'moderate'. The republican party has expelled most of its moderates. George Bush is likely the most radical president the nation ever elected, so your opinion on the benefits to democrats in avoiding 'radicals' has no basis.

FDR was an activist democrat, and he did pretty well as he greatly changed the country, you might remember; I'm sure you would have told the democrats to pick someone more'moderate' than him, too.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Rainsford
That's not the heated approach, that's the crazy approach...and even THAT isn't always wrong, the Republicans got a lot of mileage out of having Zell Miller as their keynote convention speaker, and that nutbar makes Dean look like the framed picture of mental health. The real issue is how you direct the crazy. Republicans are simply good at screaming about something their voters care about...like, "IF YOU DON'T VOTE FOR US, TERRORISTS ARE GOING TO KILL YOUR CHILDREN!!!!"

ROFL

I'd like to see some logic behind your assertion that Zell Miller is a "nutbar" and worse than Howard Dean! Dean has made some of the most ridiculous statements ever uttered by a party chairman. The sad fact is that the Dems don't have any room for the moderates like Lieberman and Miller any more. They're being squeezed out in favor of the hard leftists who fall in with Michael Moore and company. And I predict that is a losing strategy.

howard dean never challenged someone to a duel over live tv?

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Craig234
Lieberman and Miller are not moderates. Your definitions reflect your own extremism and bias. Kerry and Gore are 'moderate'. The republican party has expelled most of its moderates. George Bush is likely the most radical president the nation ever elected, so your opinion on the benefits to democrats in avoiding 'radicals' has no basis.

Thanks for a great laugh :laugh:

Kerry and Gore are two of the most extreme left members of the Democrat party.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Rainsford
That's not the heated approach, that's the crazy approach...and even THAT isn't always wrong, the Republicans got a lot of mileage out of having Zell Miller as their keynote convention speaker, and that nutbar makes Dean look like the framed picture of mental health. The real issue is how you direct the crazy. Republicans are simply good at screaming about something their voters care about...like, "IF YOU DON'T VOTE FOR US, TERRORISTS ARE GOING TO KILL YOUR CHILDREN!!!!"

ROFL

I'd like to see some logic behind your assertion that Zell Miller is a "nutbar" and worse than Howard Dean! Dean has made some of the most ridiculous statements ever uttered by a party chairman. The sad fact is that the Dems don't have any room for the moderates like Lieberman and Miller any more. They're being squeezed out in favor of the hard leftists who fall in with Michael Moore and company. And I predict that is a losing strategy.

Yeah, I'm going to have to say that I do not consider someone ranting and raving, in a truly spectacular manner, about Kerry's supposed desire to disarm the military, followed by challenging someone to a duel on live television, to be the behavior of a "moderate"...in fact, I'd have to say that sounds like nutbar behavior to me. What is Dean's "crazy" behavior? An ill-advised yell? Give me a break.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Craig234
Lieberman and Miller are not moderates. Your definitions reflect your own extremism and bias. Kerry and Gore are 'moderate'. The republican party has expelled most of its moderates. George Bush is likely the most radical president the nation ever elected, so your opinion on the benefits to democrats in avoiding 'radicals' has no basis.

Thanks for a great laugh :laugh:

Kerry and Gore are two of the most extreme left members of the Democrat party.

Well, if you were to judge them as a moderate person (rather than a crazed right wing nutjob), they really are pretty moderate.

Here's a map of the candidates in 2004
http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection

and here's one of world leaders
http://www.politicalcompass.org/images/internationalchart.gif

Despite some criticisms people have against the political compass, overall it is a pretty good way to represent political views.


But let show you why the above won't convince you at all
http://www.livescience.com/othernews/060124_political_decisions.html

Researchers asked staunch party members from both sides to evaluate information that threatened their preferred candidate prior to the 2004 Presidential election. The subjects' brains were monitored while they pondered.
....
Then, with their minds made up, brain activity ceased in the areas that deal with negative emotions such as disgust. But activity spiked in the circuits involved in reward, a response similar to what addicts experience when they get a fix, Westen explained.
....
The study points to a total lack of reason in political decision-making.

"None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged," Westen said. "Essentially, it appears as if partisans twirl the cognitive kaleidoscope until they get the conclusions they want, and then they get massively reinforced for it, with the elimination of negative emotional states and activation of positive ones."

So you should thank me, Pabby. By telling you the truth, I'm getting you a little high, and I don't even charge you for it! What a nice guy I am...

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Rainsford
That's not the heated approach, that's the crazy approach...and even THAT isn't always wrong, the Republicans got a lot of mileage out of having Zell Miller as their keynote convention speaker, and that nutbar makes Dean look like the framed picture of mental health. The real issue is how you direct the crazy. Republicans are simply good at screaming about something their voters care about...like, "IF YOU DON'T VOTE FOR US, TERRORISTS ARE GOING TO KILL YOUR CHILDREN!!!!"

ROFL

I'd like to see some logic behind your assertion that Zell Miller is a "nutbar" and worse than Howard Dean!

For a start, like you, he was "nutbar" enough to fall for the Bushwhackos' fear mongering and lies about Iraq and publicly sell out every shred of whatever personal intellectual and moral integrity he may once have had by backing them.

Haven't you embarrassed yourself enough? :roll:

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Rainsford
That's not the heated approach, that's the crazy approach...and even THAT isn't always wrong, the Republicans got a lot of mileage out of having Zell Miller as their keynote convention speaker, and that nutbar makes Dean look like the framed picture of mental health. The real issue is how you direct the crazy. Republicans are simply good at screaming about something their voters care about...like, "IF YOU DON'T VOTE FOR US, TERRORISTS ARE GOING TO KILL YOUR CHILDREN!!!!"

ROFL

I'd like to see some logic behind your assertion that Zell Miller is a "nutbar" and worse than Howard Dean! Dean has made some of the most ridiculous statements ever uttered by a party chairman. The sad fact is that the Dems don't have any room for the moderates like Lieberman and Miller any more. They're being squeezed out in favor of the hard leftists who fall in with Michael Moore and company. And I predict that is a losing strategy.

Yeah, I'm going to have to say that I do not consider someone ranting and raving, in a truly spectacular manner, about Kerry's supposed desire to disarm the military, followed by challenging someone to a duel on live television, to be the behavior of a "moderate"...in fact, I'd have to say that sounds like nutbar behavior to me. What is Dean's "crazy" behavior? An ill-advised yell? Give me a break.

qft

I don't think ol' Zel has ever been accused of moderation, though perhaps he is to a guy like you Pab

 

[Moonbeam]

Howard Dean never was or did anything insane like all this BS screaming he was tagged with. That was a media hatchet job they did on him because he was pushing ideas that threatened the media. Dean continues to be mangled by anybody pro war. He had the moral integrity and intelligence to oppose it, which makes him a freak. The war has done huge damage to the US and the Republicans are guilty and most Democrats are complicit. It is in all their interest not to see the people of the US become enraged at their leaders. Your leaders screw your country in the ass and we should remain calm. We should be rioting in the streets for impeachment. You can take your God Damned calm and shove it.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Obviously this guy is either a mod or a friend to the mods.... Who else would get away with this sort of garbage? Fart smellers? Damn. I truly have seen it all. The thing is, that is about the intellectual capacity of the people running the U.S. right now. It stands to reason their followers would share the same characteristics... Or is that you, dubya?

Allow me to paraphrase for the benefit of the so-called dim: Waaaaah!

....and since when is biting sarcasm and acidic humor not allowed on this forum? If that were the case this place would be a ghost town. Funny how you so-called intellectuals miss nuance so easily and instead fall victim to the obvious.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Corn
LOL, the "heated" approach worked sooo well the last time around. Just ask Howard Dean.

I agree with Rainsford. More liberals should rant and rave. As a matter of fact, every liberal candidate should scream at the top of their lungs: "Bush is a dictator, Nazi, and his henchmen are out to get you!!!11!!!!11!!11111"

That would be great.

What would be great about it is that they would be right and morons would still dismiss them.

It's sad when all people can do is rubber stamp a failing presidency that is bringing the rest of the country down with it. Great job guys!

Cry me a friggin' river. It must be really frustrating for you fart smellers....err, smart fellers to have to live with the fact that people lesser than you also have the right to an opinion and the right to vote. The liberati has no one to blame for their recent impotent election campaign results but themselves. The "Bush is stupid and so are you, you damned red staters" approach didn't work out too well the last few elections. But please do try that approach again!

What are you talking about? That was the closest election in a long time, and Bush and the Republicans are becoming a lot less popular now than they were in 2004.

Yeah, the closeset elections since like....2000....

LOL, silly liberati.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Howard Dean never was or did anything insane like all this BS screaming he was tagged with. That was a media hatchet job they did on him because he was pushing ideas that threatened the media. Dean continues to be mangled by anybody pro war. He had the moral integrity and intelligence to oppose it, which makes him a freak. The war has done huge damage to the US and the Republicans are guilty and most Democrats are complicit. It is in all their interest not to see the people of the US become enraged at their leaders. Your leaders screw your country in the ass and we should remain calm. We should be rioting in the streets for impeachment. You can take your God Damned calm and shove it.

So riot already Moonie. What are you waiting for?

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Am I the only one who thinks that KO is the anti-Bill O'Reilly? He's every bit as bombastic and sensational in what he says... he just takes the opposite view. In a cosmic sense, it's as if they need each other to exist. (Well... at the very least KO needs Bill. What else would he have to talk about half the time? )

I think you are right. And just like matter and anti-matter if you put the two of them together you'd get a huge explosion.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Corn

LOL, silly liberati.

Is that Limbaughtista for Liberal?

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Corn

LOL, silly liberati.

Is that Limbaughtista for Liberal?

They're refreshing their election terminology to make old tricks appear new.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Corn

LOL, silly liberati.

Is that Limbaughtista for Liberal?

Something like that....

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Keep it up. The tide is turning. People are starting to realize that we can't keep being stupid. Too bad it took 6 years, but at least it's happening.

I seem to remember the democrats trying to say the same thing just before the 2004 elections. And we all know how that turned out...

Er, wasn't that the narrowest gap ANY President has ever been re-elected by? Granted, Kerry didn't win, but it's not like it was a huge ass kicking either...and 2006 is hardly 2004 in terms of Republican popularity.

errr.... wasn't 2004 the first time the winner got over 50% since 1998, Clinton never got 50% and niether did Gore, so that would mean that Bush has a wider base of support than Clinton ever had huh?

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Keep it up. The tide is turning. People are starting to realize that we can't keep being stupid. Too bad it took 6 years, but at least it's happening.

I seem to remember the democrats trying to say the same thing just before the 2004 elections. And we all know how that turned out...

Er, wasn't that the narrowest gap ANY President has ever been re-elected by? Granted, Kerry didn't win, but it's not like it was a huge ass kicking either...and 2006 is hardly 2004 in terms of Republican popularity.

errr.... wasn't 2004 the first time the winner got over 50% since 1998, Clinton never got 50% and niether did Gore, so that would mean that Bush has a wider base of support than Clinton ever had huh?

Hush, yer gonna ruin his day!

 

[ProfJohn]

liberati:
Reserved intellectual who reads but mostly writes breakthrough thoughts. Sits in cafes with notebooks sprawled everywhere. Likes blazers and grandpa's closet.

"I think that Liberati only wears glasses so he can take them off and rub his forehead like a tormented intellectual."


I think we all know people like this, or at least see them in bookstores trying to impress each other with thier brilliance.

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
liberati:
Reserved intellectual who reads but mostly writes breakthrough thoughts. Sits in cafes with notebooks sprawled everywhere. Likes blazers and grandpa's closet.

"I think that Liberati only wears glasses so he can take them off and rub his forehead like a tormented intellectual."


I think we all know people like this, or at least see them in bookstores trying to impress each other with thier brilliance.

Holy crap you guys have your own dictionary? That's awesome!

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: jjzelinski

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
liberati:
Reserved intellectual who reads but mostly writes breakthrough thoughts. Sits in cafes with notebooks sprawled everywhere. Likes blazers and grandpa's closet.

"I think that Liberati only wears glasses so he can take them off and rub his forehead like a tormented intellectual."


I think we all know people like this, or at least see them in bookstores trying to impress each other with thier brilliance.

Holy crap you guys have your own dictionary? That's awesome!

It would explain "losses".

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: jjzelinski

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
liberati:
Reserved intellectual who reads but mostly writes breakthrough thoughts. Sits in cafes with notebooks sprawled everywhere. Likes blazers and grandpa's closet.

"I think that Liberati only wears glasses so he can take them off and rub his forehead like a tormented intellectual."


I think we all know people like this, or at least see them in bookstores trying to impress each other with thier brilliance.

Holy crap you guys have your own dictionary? That's awesome!

It would explain "losses".

Thanks for reminding me Pens
I'll admit that my speeling sucks, which is why I normally put all my posts through Word to check for mistakes.

BTW: that's from the urban dictionary, not the rightie dictionary