-
Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack
May 22, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Curl is Right: Don’t Dismiss Benghazi
May 22, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Good New Book: ‘Precipice’
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
When I posted here Friday that President Obama’s demeanor was arrogant and his body-language offensive when he met with House Republicans, what I was reacting to more than anything else was the rather obnoxious way he responded to thoughtful, highly respected Rep. Jeb Hensarling. Repeatedly calling him “Jim” instead of “Jeb,” Obama cut him off and then basically called the congressman a liar. Well, Hensarling put the facts where his mouth was, and showed again that Obama’s reliability on facts is something less than admirable.
The Washington Post has the whole exchange here. It captures some of the nature of the president’s supercilious attitude towards Hensarling, but you had to see it live to see how peeved, how thin-skinned, how arrogant, and how insulting his demeanor towards Hensarling was — an attitude that, if you watched, was SO different from Hensarling’s question, which while pointed and a bit long-winded, was in both words and demeanor respectful toward the president as a person — a respect Obama did NOT return. Not only that, but Obama had no business acting as if Hensarling was obnoxiously filibustering (actually, Hensarling specifically had just said he was about to actually ask the question when Obama cut him off), when Obama himself spoke at much much much greater length than most of his Republican questioners. He himself spoke longer than Hensarling in “answering” Hensarling.
“I am happy to have any independent fact-checker out there take a look at your presentation versus mine in terms of the accuracy of what I just said.” That is what Obama said while lecturing Hensarling. Again, I’ll put the Hensarling link here and invite the president to refute Hensarling’s facts. He can’t. Hensarling’s facts are accurate.
There were other parts of the last half-hour of the session in which Obama was testy, in which he came across as belittling the GOP, and in which he made the claim again (WHY DON”T REPUBLICANS CALL HIM OUT ON THIS?!?!?) that many of their criticisms of him are mere cheap-shot politicking.
There is something so off-putting about Obama’s demeanor as to really raise the hackles of those who aren’t already convinced he is right. I think that this is why — this demeanor of his — is one big reason why he has been so polarizing. His attitude almost always is: If you are not with me, you are either stupid or ill-motivated.
Jeb Hensarling is neither stupid nor ill-motivated. And he’s a better man than Obama is.
View all comments (83) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/01/31/hensarling-strikes-back
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- Self-Righteous Republic
- Nuts to Nutter
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
jrs| 1.31.10 @ 4:27PM
I looked at his website as well as pulled data from the OMB website. His numbers are correct, but misleading at best. He chooses to use the period from 1996-2007. While it is true that the republicans had control of congress in the late 90s, I hate to say it but Clinton deserves as much credit as any Republican for the budget surplus (although, the real culprit was one of the greatest increases in productivity known to man in history). Therefore, Jim (I'll share my lack of respect for politicians) is getting the benefit of a 60 billion average budget surplus from 1996-2000 that is a real stretch. He also fails to take credit for the last bush year, 2008. If we adjust for the period of 2001-2008, the average (note, all figures are non inflation adjusted) deficit is 250 billion. 250*12= 3 trillion, significantly more than the 1.8 trillion estimate for 2009.
I don't approve of the current high deficits, but let's be honest, Republicans really need to own up for how far off course this country has gotten. We of course spent too much, but also didn't tax enough either (I hate taxes, but when you're as far in the hole as we are, cutting spending alone won't do the trick).
The unfortunate reality is that in the future, we'll need to cut spending, fix entitlements but also taxes will go up. Anyone that thinks that's avoidable is either naive or stupid. Besides, even when you cut spending going forward, it's still a tax (getting less services than I pay for (cutting spending) is rather equivalent to paying more for the services I get (taxing)).
Steve Mays| 2.1.10 @ 5:00PM
Tom Cole — former head of the NRCC, congressman from Oklahoma — said, “He scored many points. He did really well.” Barack Obama, for an hour and a half, was able to refute every single Republican talking point used against him on the major issues of the day. In essence, it was almost like a debate where he was front and center for the majority of it. … One Republican said to me, off the record, behind closed doors: “It was a mistake that we allowed the cameras to roll like that. We should not have done that.”
Margie| 1.31.10 @ 4:37PM
Obama. The perfect Icon of the Left. Hates conservatives, has nothing but utter contempt for them, has to insult, demean, and ridicule them.. is able to do nothing but!
The Left Machine. And all the Leftists said, "Amen."
wbfrank| 2.1.10 @ 11:05AM
I could not agree more. Of course you know what kind of attitude this president has: NPD. Said it before he was elected and will continue to say it.
This is a very real psychological problem or even mental defect Obama has.
And, the attitude and his many statements are something else: racist!
Martin j smith| 1.31.10 @ 4:43PM
The topic in this article or part of, seems to be the behavior of Obama towards a particular Republican and In my view from the SOTUS all opponents. Lets be honest, we all have our "facts"--but i think the real issue is how Obama behaves and what is his policy ? He does not like or respect the rights of his opponents to disagree with him. That is no sec5ret. And, he Blames everyone else but himself. Whatever foolishness Bush and his administration did, Obama MUST TAKE RESPONSIBILITY for the results or lack of same for his policies. If not, then he is no leader.
His and the Democrat left are consciously worsening our economy. Obama is the one that talked about "wealth redistribution" during the campaign--recall Joe the Plumber. Obama is the one who insults his opponents. Obama is the one who apologizes for this nation. Obama is the one whose idea it was ( not Eric Holder the AG ) to have a show trial for KSM in NYC. Obama is the one who wants healthcare done in secret ( buying off votes with bribes or threats ). It about who Obama is --that is what this piece is about.
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 5:32PM
So the main beef here is the President's demeanor? It sounds more like the writers at AmSpec are the thin-skinned ones. One person's arrogance is another person's confidence. I'm sure some would prefer a bowing and scraping Obama when it comes to dealing with the GOP. I never heard this sort of criticism being leveled at GWB when he was in the WH.
Regardless, the fact that most of the outspoken Republicans (and blogs/websites/journalists with a "conservative" bent) consistently fail to acknowledge their part in creating the current fiscal situation suggests a certain level of arrogance that is quite unforgivable in the context of the current political jockeying. The commentary in this critique is emblematic of of what is actually wrong about the "Right" today. It is why I've changed my affiliation from Republican to Independent.
Warrior | 1.31.10 @ 9:10PM
You were as close to being a Republican as Michelle Obama was to being homecoming queen. If you never hear that criticism of W, then you are deaf or retarded.
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 10:20PM
Ok, "Warrior." You are also omniscient? I find it hilarious that your first line of rebuttal is to doubt my party affiliation. Trite and predictable. Re: Dubya, refer me to the links on AmSpec and I'll gladly recant. Regardless, my criticism of the crybaby tenor of the commentary above will stand.
Patriot| 1.31.10 @ 5:48PM
Last year Obama bowed and scraped to a 4' tall Japanese Emperor, a Saudi King and various Marxist thugs and despots around the world.
Say what you want about GWB, but at least he didn't embarrass his office and country by behaving like a common country bumpkin among other world leaders.
It's painfully obvious that Obama is in over his head as POTUS.
noncompos| 1.31.10 @ 10:48PM
You are clearly a racist moron who has midget-phobia.
Patriot| 2.1.10 @ 2:31PM
You a midget? Definitely a mental midget--but all liberals are.
Michael| 2.1.10 @ 3:08AM
You're right Patriot, GWB only held hands with and frolicked in flowers with the King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. Don't believe me?
1. http://noliberty.com/bandar-bush.jpg
2. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi.....ullah1.jpg
Yes, instead of acting as a "common country bumpkin among other world leaders", he acted like an effeminate pansy.
Patriot| 2.1.10 @ 2:36PM
But I thought 'effeminate pansies' were a protected class for you liberals. Beta males define you losers.
At least GWB didn't grovel all over the ground like the limp-wristed Obammy.
Michael| 2.1.10 @ 3:09AM
And 2 more since there is a limit of 2 links on each post.
3. http://macsmind.com/wordpress/.....olding.jpg
4. http://i96.photobucket.com/alb.....diKing.jpg
Next time, actually think before you spew talking points.
Patriot| 2.1.10 @ 2:37PM
Pot call kettle, troll. How's your boss, Axelrod, today?
Wow| 2.1.10 @ 2:31PM
OMG! Utterly amazing. Did you watch last Friday's meeting or it's interpretation (fox- because it's viewers aren't smart enought to reach their own conclusion). Those asking questions (aka making speeches w/out REAL questions - Ms Tennessee and all her cohorts) looked really foolish. They all had buckered you-know-whats. They all sounded like pundits not members of Congress. I did not see any leadership at those tables. They all gave speeches and then attempted to start arguments, unsuccessfully!!!
Nobama| 2.1.10 @ 2:39PM
Put down the bong, Wow, and stop slurping the Marxist Kool-Aid--and get a job, loser.
martin j smith| 1.31.10 @ 6:14PM
Anna Merkin troll. nuff said.
martin j smith| 1.31.10 @ 6:15PM
Anna Merkin troll. nuff said.
Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 1.31.10 @ 6:53PM
Come on now Martin, Anna can't be a Troll, she says she's an Independent. And I'm positive that Anne, acknowledges the Democrats part in creating the current fiscal situation too, like Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac, so as not to be accused of showing a certain level of arrogance, that would be quite unforgivable in the context of the current political jockeying. Right Anna?
wbfrank| 2.1.10 @ 11:11AM
Aren't Independents a lot like the Moderate?
Kinda sitting on the pole not knowing which way to go...
Become a Conservative and take back the country!
If you got them.... lock and load!
Franklin| 1.31.10 @ 6:40PM
I wondered when someone was going to bring this up. I saw a clip of the "exchange" on Fox and almost lost my lunch.
You can read the words, but seeing little o shaking his head, rolling his eyes and then speaking like he was talking to a 4-year-old caught behaving badly was so revolting that I turned off the TV.
He just can't tolerate anyone who dares to suggest that maybe he isn't correct.
I'm sorry for anyone who was abused as a child, but little o's behavior reeks of an intimate knowledge of abuse. He fears rejection, so he reacts to others the way he was treated.
He needs help.
Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 1.31.10 @ 7:00PM
Franklin: MSLSD (I love that name) said that the President, kicked the Republicans collective asses in that Q & A. But does this come as a surprise to anybody?
And I believe that he did this Q & A, without his prized teleprompter's, and he sounded almost eloquent, when he was able to put four or five words together at a time, which happened twice.
Michael| 2.1.10 @ 3:11AM
Is that why Trace Gallagher on Fox News cut off 20 minutes early from Obama's Q&A to give "analysis" to the event, when it was obvious that their dog in the fight, was getting it's ass handed to them on their own turf? "Fair and Balanced" as always.
Nobama| 2.1.10 @ 2:29PM
Do you work for Media Matters, clown? You must need more lotion. LOL!
wbfrank| 2.1.10 @ 11:13AM
Look up NPD! Obama has all the symptoms. And he is a racist!
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.31.10 @ 6:54PM
Hi Franklin.
We gonna' he'p him, to a very early retirement, albiet at taxpayer's expense. heh.
We can afford his retirement package easier than his "expense acount" actively on the job.
I just hope for minimum damage until we can "lame duck him" with a strong conservative congress in November.
DrTomVoter| 1.31.10 @ 6:57PM
1. What you saw was a duck of of water. Name the last time that he faced unorchestrated questions.
2. jrs - Your statement that cutting government spending results in less services is dependent on the function performed and with how much effciency. It is not a fact.
3. Anna - buh,buh, buh but Bush.
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 10:23PM
Miss Reading Comprehension much? If that's all you understood from my post then today's so-called Republicans are in worse shape than I thought. The GOP needs to counter with facts, legitimate proposals, and credible criticisms. Avoid the lowbrow, small-minded attacks and stick to the substance and we might have a chance at making headway.
wbfrank| 2.1.10 @ 11:21AM
"Avoid the lowbrow, small-minded attacks and stick to the substance and we might have a chance at making headway."
Hmm... do you mean like the Democrats?
Remember the Republicans have been shut out of all major meetings... Remember also that the NPD-In-Chief said: "I won!"
The only headway that the Dems understand is getting their way; no compromise. Any Repub who does try to compromise with their expensive ideas needs to be thrown out of office: Hear that Olympia Snow, Arnold Spector?
What needs to be done is scrap the current Crap & Trade (is has been proven that so called Global Warming is crap with NASA deep in it with false data); Comprehensive Health Care Reform.
Start with small proposals once every quarter. Debate them, promise no pork, let the public see what is being done then vote... oh, also listen to the American Public.
If I remember correctly candidate Obama said he would like the emissions data to have improved by 17%. This has already happened under the last administration's actions.
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 10:23PM
Miss Reading Comprehension much? If that's all you understood from my post then today's so-called Republicans are in worse shape than I thought. The GOP needs to counter with facts, legitimate proposals, and credible criticisms. Avoid the lowbrow, small-minded attacks and stick to the substance and we might have a chance at making headway.
Patriot| 1.31.10 @ 10:29PM
Problem double-posting much, moron?
What's lowbrow is pretending you're a republican when you're not.
Another Axelrod Astroturf Concern Troll--YAWN.
Thanks but no thanks (credit to Sarah Palin).
noncompos| 1.31.10 @ 10:52PM
Hey stupid.. why do you have to say stuff like "you're pretending you are a Republican".. what does Republican mean to you?
How about what is Right is Right and What is Wrong Is Wrong whether it's Republican or not?
Grow up. Stop believing the shit Mommy and Daddy told you.
noncompos| 1.31.10 @ 10:52PM
Hey stupid.. why do you have to say stuff like "you're pretending you are a Republican".. what does Republican mean to you?
How about what is Right is Right and What is Wrong Is Wrong whether it's Republican or not?
Grow up. Stop believing the shit Mommy and Daddy told you.
Patriot| 1.31.10 @ 11:50PM
More double-posting from another liberal idiot--no wonder you stupid clowns are tanking in the polls and losing all those elections to us republicans!!
Why would I believe anything from a lying liberal moron who has shit for brains like you?
You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the butt, fool.
Michael| 2.1.10 @ 3:15AM
"Thanks, but no thanks" for a bridge that she was actively lobbying for, even wearing the T-shirt of the zip code of the place that would get it, until it was a HUGE failure and disgrace?
PALIN FOR PRESIDENT!! 2012| 2.1.10 @ 2:26PM
You've thrown everything you morons had at Sarah Palin and she's still standing--and doing quite nicely, I might add.
Slither back under your slimy rock, troll. EPIC FAIL!!
Loser.
jrs| 1.31.10 @ 7:20PM
DrTom,
While I agree efficieny is important (and definitely not to be used in the same sentence as government) it is irrelevant for my discussion. Let me explain.
Using simple math, let's assume that we have a deficit of $20 in period 1 and must repay it in period 2 (simple two state world).
In state 2, we would normally have $100 of government spending, so the budget neutral tax number is $100. But to make up for the previous deficit we can:
1. Raise taxes by $20. This is the traditional liberal idea. We pay $120 and get $100 of services.
2. Cut spending by $20. The conservative answer. We pay $100 and get $80 of services.
I argue that 1 and 2 are rather similar. In both cases we paid $20 more than the services rendered part, so spending too much today results in a future increase in taxes (in real economic terms) regardless of how we chose to nominally fund it.
Now, DrTom, by efficiency, I assume you mean to say you choose idea number 2, since government is much less efficient with their money than you or the private sector. One could make a strong argument for that (in most, but certainly not all cases). The problem is that, we would be even better if we could choose option #3 which is to pay $80 and get $80 of services. If government spending was say 70% efficient and private was 100% (just making up numbers), we would have the following.
1. Option 1, spend $120 and get $70 of value
2. Option 2, spend $120 and get $76 of value (120 in taxes vs 80*70% + 20*100%)
3. Option 3, spend $120 and get $120 of value.
Whether 1 or 2 is better is dependent on multipliers and is really hard to pin down. In both cases I must pay more for the same basket of goods as in number 3, therefore it is effectively a tax. While we're currently spending too much today, we also piled up approximately $12 trillion before Obama's watch. The result is in the future, only options 1 and 2 or a combination (the most likely) of the two exists. Hence, we've effectively raised real taxes in the future regardless of how we'd like to nominally label it.
Billy T| 1.31.10 @ 8:47PM
Jeb Hensarling is beyond obnoxious. For anyone to accuse someone else of being obnoxious with Jeb in an exchange is just flat out wrong. Jeb is the most smug, self-righteous, uptight Republican I have ever seen. And I like Republicans. Did I mention sanctimonious, too? That's Jeb as well. As much as he dislikes the French, he really is a little Napoleon figure.
derryl| 1.31.10 @ 8:48PM
How exactly is it "respectful" for Hensarling to deliver a preamble that was a bunch of numerical nonsense that a 4th grader could have corrected and then demand that the president defend himself against absurd assertions. Yea, Obama basically called him a liar because basically, he lied. Hensarling is disrespectful of the public when he thinks he can spout nonsense because we're all too stupid to know the difference. Funny, but it turns out that some people can actually count. If the Republican party ever wants to lead again they'll have to stop assuming we're all morons.
wbfrank| 2.1.10 @ 11:31AM
I have to commend you and all of the other Dems, aka. Socialist Party, for the humour that you all have in these postings. Sometimes I have to log off I am laughing so much!
Come on class: look up NPD.
Also Obama knows you and all US Citizens are morons. That is why he talks down to all of us.
Quin| 1.31.10 @ 9:14PM
Derryl,
How, pray tell, did Hensarling lie? He provided, in the link I posted, ample backing for every one of the facts he stated in his "preamble." And why shouldn't he take 3 1/2 minutes to explain the basis of his question, when Obama was so regularly taking four or five minutes each time he had the chance to talk?
derryl| 1.31.10 @ 10:01PM
Easy - did you actually download the OMB data? It simply doesn't say what Hensarling claims it does. Only if you cherry pick like mad can you come close. 2001-2008 saw a cumulative deficit of of $1.5 trillion. 0.4 trillion of the 09 deficit is falling revenues - the biggest drop ever. The 09 deficit is awful - how much is Bush vs Obama isn't an argument that is worth having. But Hensarling's claim that Obama's monthly deficit = Republican annual deficits is nonsense. I'm an independent and I do math - and I'm tired of being treated like a dope. If you look at the 40 year history , deficit spending is primarily practiced by Republican presidents - until now.
2Anglico| 2.1.10 @ 9:31AM
Congress spends ALL the money. Obama voted against which spending bill while he was in congress? Dope.
Tillie| 1.31.10 @ 10:31PM
Incredible! The liar Obama called someone out for lying!
Pot call kettle.
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 10:31PM
Derryl, that's bullshit and you know it! Quin's figures are right, yours seem to have been totally made up. I am an independent too but it doesn't mean fighting Republicans with preposterous garbage and utter nonsense...
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 11:08PM
This is obviously from someone imp'ing me.
Tammy| 1.31.10 @ 11:52PM
No one cares, dumbass; you're a legend in your own very tiny mind.
derryl| 1.31.10 @ 10:36PM
One more point - jrs is right, the OMB numbers do NOT include the war funding and they are further reduced by counting the social security "surplus" as a "revenue". The real rate of debt creation from 2001-2008 averaged about $575 billion per year - go to the Treasury department web sites to verify this if you like (I did). Apparently Hensarling thinks the war spending doesn't count. This is simple - you take in x dollars each year and spend y. It doesn't matter if you call it a "supplemental appropriation". The national debt increased from $5 trillion to $10 trillion from 00 to 08. Yes, it's about to increase a bunch more, and that's bad. But for Hensarling to claim that this is an Obama invention is plain dishonest. Don't believe what a rep (any party) puts on his web site - check the numbers. Otherwise you're just shilling.
derryl| 1.31.10 @ 10:44PM
Anna - check the numbers, and do the math. Then, and only then, say "bullshit". Did you actually download the OMB historical data? Did you actually check the Treasury Dept. debt numbers. No, I am sure you did not. Everyone is entitled to their opinion - bit not to his/her facts. As I just posted, even the OMB data are misleading in this context, as jrs pointed out. Do the math. It's really not that hard. And if you haven't figured out the "supplemental appropriation" trick by now, I'm not sure what to say to help you. Just for fun, make a graph of OMB deficit numbers for the last 40 years, and color in Republican presidencies in red and Democratic presidencies in blue - really, just try it. Then do the same for the National debt. Then say "bullshit" if you like - it's your right, but you may as well have the facts first. Thats all I have to say on the subject. We get the government we deserve.
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 10:45PM
Derryl, what's wrong with you pal? You don't make any sense! Your silly figures pop out of nowhere whereas our real criticism of Republicans should focus on their lack of credibility after 8 years of GWB rule. Don't embarrass me in front of these morons, please!
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 11:09PM
So sad that folks here have decided to result to puerile behavior like imp'ing a handle just because they disagree with the person. Shameful.
Tammy| 1.31.10 @ 11:53PM
LMAO!! Looks like Anna's schizoid.
noncompos| 1.31.10 @ 10:46PM
I started to read your post but after about 4 words into it I decided that you were just a stupid twat.
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 10:52PM
This just a sexist slur that only deserves contempt and shows you for the fascist pig you are.
noncompos| 1.31.10 @ 10:56PM
you don't even know what Facism is twat.
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 11:10PM
Imp. Really, grow up. I'm out of here.
noncompos - I didn't post the message above re: "fascist pig."
Tammy| 1.31.10 @ 11:54PM
The idiot liberal trolls are eating their own!!! Hahaha!
derryl| 1.31.10 @ 10:53PM
my silly figures come from the OMB historical data Table 1.1 to be found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/ (the same link provided by Hensarling)
and the Treasury Department Historical Debt Outstanding tables at http://www.treasurydirect.gov/.....isto5.htm. If you think that is "out of nowhere" where, exactly should I get them? Goodnight.
derryl| 1.31.10 @ 10:55PM
Dumb broad, you're just a troll.
derryl| 1.31.10 @ 11:01PM
woa, somebody just copied my user name and posted the "dumb broad" comment. I did not - that's a low blow toward both you and me. Most sites have flags to prevent this kind of nonsense. I'm outta here before any other crap comes down, and Anna, I'd advise yo to do the same. These people are insulting. I was willing to argue about budget numbers, but not with clowns like that.
derryl| 1.31.10 @ 11:05PM
Just not to be misunderstood, Anna, my last post was dirested towards Noncompos; she is a lesbian troll that haunts many forums and blogs and talks nonsense. I have no patience with crazy dikes.
Tammy| 1.31.10 @ 11:56PM
Wow! I thought you liberals were into all sorts of nasty, kinky stuff. A decent liberal? Who knew?
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 11:11PM
Well, Derryl you got me confused here! Whoever is playing this silly game must be pretty sick and I'm not surprised this has to happen in a conservative blog...
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 11:13PM
"AnnaMerkin" - you're obviously imp'ing me. Why? Is your ability to articulate your own views so limited that you have to engage in this sort of puerile behavior?
I'm out, as I've posted below.
AnnaMerkin| 1.31.10 @ 11:12PM
derryl - I'm gone too. It is apparent that few here actually want to have a discussion. They'd rather hurl insults, behave like teenagers, and live in an echo chamber. I remember why I'd once deleted AmSpec from my RSS feeds. Guess I should do it again.
Quin| 1.31.10 @ 11:23PM
Anna and derryl, you definitely should not leave. This unpleasant matter will be taken care of ASAP. According to the IP addresses we just collected, we're dealing with a bunch of pranksters based in Harvard -of all places-
Guess it beats astroturf any day.
Tammy| 1.31.10 @ 11:58PM
Good riddance to rancid garbage--perverted liberals all stink the same way.
Yosemeti Sam| 2.1.10 @ 12:37AM
I demand to see some BHOs' SAT scores!
I demand to see BHOs' Harvard school grades!
I demand to see BHOs' Columbia school grades!
I demand to see an MRI of BHO's head!
Etc.
Not in any special order!
Michael| 2.1.10 @ 3:00AM
Good lord Ms. Hillyer, but you seem to be very thin-skinned. Jeb went on longwinded for a while, before actually getting to his question. It's like it would never end. Big deal, so he called him Jim instead of the unusual name Jeb who was all the way in the back (Obama only said Jim once). Please start acting like a grown human being instead of wanting to play victim.
Visitor| 2.1.10 @ 5:33AM
The answer is simple. Hillyer and other Right Wing white Southerners find something "off-putting about Obama's demeanor " because he is a black person who is much smarter than they are and knows it.
noncompos| 2.1.10 @ 6:40AM
Visitor, from troll to troll, I have to tell you that your post is so dumb that you should be sodomized in front of your children -Saddam Hussein era treatment of dissidents- and have your Blackberry confiscated. How would you deal with reality, dumb liberal turds, without playing the race card again and again? Why don't you think your messiah despises Republicans just because most of them happen to be white? Liberal faggot! Oops, that's a pleonasm.
Nobama| 2.1.10 @ 2:21PM
Visitor would probably like it--it's a liberal after all.
Richard Baker| 2.1.10 @ 7:13AM
Visitor:
That's the extent of your intellectual rigor? What year is this, by the way? Do you know?
Martin j smith| 2.1.10 @ 7:17AM
Obama's "performance" at the SOTU and at the Republican retreat were meant for his base. ( trolls ). For some one who is actually the President of the United States, he has shown himself to be un-cool, a liar, and currupt up to his earballs. So, how anyone in the Republican Camp can sit there and listen to his garbage is beyond me. I know its decorum. But, sooner or later unless he changes his tune, the decorum will come off as it should.
As for trolls--they are the foot soldier of the base of Obama's support. They are propagandists thru and thru-- the " true believers". For non trolls I can only say, identify, and act accordingly.
Becky| 2.1.10 @ 8:39AM
It does seem the trolls are out. The old I was a republican lead in attempt to be taken seriously to defend Obama and bash Bush.
I would take the arguments more seriously without the qualifyer. It is as dishonest as political correctness, but what can you expect from the followers of that doctrine.
Yes, both parties are to blame, and it seems that we do better with a Democrat President and Republican Congress. The congress is more crucial in spending that the president. Clinton had big government inclinations, but was tempered by the 94 election. The level of one party control spending was less under Bush than it appears it will be under Obama.
Deborah D | 2.1.10 @ 9:57AM
The bloom seems to be off the rose that is Obama. A really interesting article written by Fouad Ajami at the Wall Street Journal here:
http://online.wsj.com/article/.....72360.html
And, all the troll traffic is a compliment to you, Quin. You must be making points they don't like. I wonder how much they're getting paid with our tax dollars?
Oldefarte| 2.1.10 @ 3:29PM
Neither are Palin, Bush, etc 'STUPID', but Democrats are semi-successful in portraying that impression to Americans due to their control over the MSM and their brainwashing techniques!!!!!
Pingback| 2.1.10 @ 4:49PM
Rep Hensarling Strikes Back After Exchange With Obama At Republican Retreat « Nice De links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
FactCheck.org | 2.2.10 @ 2:47AM
"A Texas-Size Whopper"
http://FactCheck.org/2010/02/a-texas-size-whopper/
Dave| 2.5.10 @ 3:32PM
http://factcheck.org/2010/02/a-texas-size-whopper/
Jeb Hensarling, is a LIAR, LIAR pants on fire. Let the conservative excuses begin (like first accusing Factcheck.org of having "lib-ruhl" bias, like with everything else)