Only thing I saw in this video worth noting it as a scolding, is the fact that Sununu told Matthew’s that he was an agenda. Something that Matthew’s did not really deny! I saw it as a good old fashinioned political sparring. They were nice about it; they hollered at each other and were friendly about it in the end.
You know it is a slow news day, when the blogging world calls this, of all things, a saber match! 😉 😛 😀
Man, and I thought the Clinton’s were dysfunctional:
Then-White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel offered his resignation to President Barack Obama in the winter of 2010 after a series of columns appeared depicting him as the lone element keeping the Obama presidency intact. According to then senior adviser David Axelrod, Emanuel understood that the stories “were an embarrassment” to the president. The president, already suffering from a setback to his health care reform effort, declined Emanuel’s offer to resign, despite being convinced that his chief of staff was the main source for the columns.
“I’m not accepting it,” Obama replied. “Your punishment is that you have to stay here and get this bill done. I’m not letting you off the hook.”
That revelation is one of the more explosive included in “The Obamas,” a new book by Jodi Kantor of The New York Times about the first few years of the Obama administration and the strains that it produced on the president’s marriage — strains that were ultimately overcome.
The dramatics that surrounded the passage of health care reform — culminating in Emanuel’s near-resignation — reflect the type of struggles that routinely pitted Emanuel against the first lady during the first two years of the Obama administration. The two jockeyed for influence over the president even before he formally took office. — Via ‘The Obamas’: Book Reveals Friction Between Rahm Emanuel, Michelle Obama (UPDATE)
Bet that would make a very interesting read.
Get the Book:
Update: As much as I hate to admit it; this guy does have a point. This is why I watch the comment section around here, like a hawk.
I wonder what Jesse Vantura would say about that? I mean, after all, he does support Ron Paul. Not only that, but Ron Paul has a lot of damned nerve even bringing up betrayal; considering the fact that Ron Paul has repeatedly betrayed the United States Military of which he served. All so he can remain true to his leftist ideology of isolationist utopia and foriegn policy disenguagement. Here is hoping that Rick Santorum fires back and fires back hard on this point. Not only that, I also hope Rick Santorum brings up his racist and Anti Semitic friends too.
I’m not defending Rick Santorum the presidential candidate. From what little I know about him, he seems to have his own issues with moralizing and judging. To the extent he has used his family’s experience to make a point about abortion, I object.
But I am defending the right of the Santorums and all families to grieve an infant’s death in accordance with their personal needs and beliefs. My plea is for a little more respect regarding the way people deal with loss, and a little more maturity about physical contact with the dead. If that puts me in sympathy, for a moment, with this right-wing politician, so be it.
I would recommend you to go read that whole thing; a very touchy story about a Father who also lost his child as well. Charles Lane is a brave man for standing up to his fellow liberals and objecting to the idea that loving a dead child is “Weird.”
There’s phrase that comes to mind to describe this man.
….and it is not “Smart Liberal Black Man” either.
Click the picture to watch the video:
That is about all I can truly say about this little incident. I made a promise that I would keep it out of the gutter on this new blog. I’m gonna try to stick to it.
Only other thing I will truly say is this; if the Democrats actually think this sort of tripe is going to help thier cause; they are very highly mistaken. Insulting the parents of a dead child, yeah you boys keep on plucking that little chicken and see what it gets you.
I’ll keep the rest of my thoughts to myself. 😡 …..least I get accused of being a racist, a Klansman or whatever else those mentally depraved buffoons call people like me. (blanco)
(CNN) — Home alone with her 3-month-old son, Sarah Dawn McKinley of Blanchard, Oklahoma, said she decided to make a stand when two men tried to break into her home on New Year’s Eve.
McKinley, who had been widowed less than a week before, placed a couch in front of one door and went to the bedroom and put a bottle in her baby’s mouth before calling 911, she said on HLN’s “Dr. Drew” on Wednesday.
A 911 operator calmly spoke with McKinley, who asked if it was permissible to shoot an intruder, officials said.
“I’ve got two guns in my hand. Is it OK to shoot him if he comes in this door?” asked McKinley, 18.
My friends, my question to you is simple this; since when, do we as Americans, who are guaranteed the right to own a gun to defend ourselves against such things, as presented in this story — ask for permission to defend ourselves from the Government? This is not a criticism of this woman at all, but of the mentality of the Government must make all decisions for us. Whatever happened to telling a 9/11 operator, “I am going to kill this idiot and I hope you got plenty of body bags, because when I get done, y’all going to need a few.” Whatever happened to mentality of doing for yourself, and not waiting the Government to do your work for you?
It is a sad state of affairs in this Country, when its own citizens are too scared to defend themselves and feel the need to have to ask the Government for permission to do so. This is what happens, when progressives are allowed to govern, control our media and our schools.
No American citizen, at any point, should ever have to ask permission to defend his or her personal property. This is not a mentality of a free American citizen, this is a mentality of a slave to Government, and it is what the progressives promote — in their media, in the schools — everywhere.
My hat goes off to this young woman, for having the courage to defend herself, when it counted most.
First Lady Michelle Obama is to make a guest appearance on an upcoming episode of the popular Nickelodeon show iCarly.
In the episode, which airs on January 16, the First Lady helps the show’s title character Carly get in touch with her father, an Air Force colonel who can’t make it home for his birthday.
Obama surprises the girl and her friends, which leads to her being called “Your Excellency” by Carly’s friend Sam Puckett.
After being corrected by a friend that you don’t call the First Lady that, Michelle Obama jumps in and says “No, no, I kind of like it.”
As if right on cue, the right-wing blogosphere is condemning this; do some of these people drive? It is humor folks, something that many of us actually could use right now. 🙄
I just have to wonder aloud, would they be that shrieking in their criticism of Michelle Obama if she were a white woman? It is to wonder.
…and Gingrich does not disappoint with this shot across Romney’s bow: (Via CBS News)
Video:
Of course, the bad part was that Gingrich sort of stuck his own foot in his mouth, when he called Romney a liar and then turned right around and said he would support him if he were the GOP nominee. D’oh! 🙄
Lord Edward Morrissey, who knows this stuff better than anyone, I think, saith the following:
Hey, not to rain on Gingrich’s parade, but how is that different than any other PAC or super-PAC? I’m pretty sure that Gingrich-supporting PACs aren’t run by disinterested strangers, nor are those for Rick Perry or any of the other candidates in the race. That’s a problem in the structure of the campaign finance regulations that impose artificial divisions on contributions. If those were removed, the same money would flow into these races, but the candidates themselves would be responsible for its use instead of hiding behind PACs and super-PACs — and that includes Newt Gingrich.
As I’ve written earlier, there is nothing wrong with so-called “negative” campaigning. Candidates should draw contrasts between their positions and those of their opponents, and their records as well. As long as that is being done honestly, there is nothing wrong or dishonorable about it; in fact, that’s why we have primaries. Gingrich chose to eschew that strategy and now wants to claim some kind of victimization because the rest of the field chose not to follow in his footsteps. On top of that, Gingrich has descended to name-calling, which looks more like a dog-in-the-manger ploy than a way to gather support in the few short hours before Iowa voters trudge to precincts tonight. A confident candidate wouldn’t have sunk to the level of this conversation the morning of a caucus.
Indeed.
Also too, I say this as a kid, who grew up in the inner city of Detroit; there is nothing funnier than watch to rich, white old guys fighting it out like school kids. I find it quite amusing. 😉 😛
Again, as it is has been written many times over in the right-wing political blogosphere and also said by others on Fox News; Gingrich is a thinker, a Conservative intellectual, if you will — but he is also a bomb thrower, who is not apt to thinking on his feet. This video above proves that. In other words, it is okay to be a bomb thrower, you just have to be able to run from the bomb, in the right direction! 😯 😛 😉 😀
Cookie Consent
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By using our site, you consent to cookies.
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests
10 minutes
__utmb
Used to distinguish new sessions and visits. This cookie is set when the GA.js javascript library is loaded and there is no existing __utmb cookie. The cookie is updated every time data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
30 minutes after last activity
__utmc
Used only with old Urchin versions of Google Analytics and not with GA.js. Was used to distinguish between new sessions and visits at the end of a session.
End of session (browser)
__utmz
Contains information about the traffic source or campaign that directed user to the website. The cookie is set when the GA.js javascript is loaded and updated when data is sent to the Google Anaytics server
6 months after last activity
__utmv
Contains custom information set by the web developer via the _setCustomVar method in Google Analytics. This cookie is updated every time new data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
2 years after last activity
__utmx
Used to determine whether a user is included in an A / B or Multivariate test.
18 months
_ga
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gali
Used by Google Analytics to determine which links on a page are being clicked
30 seconds
_ga_
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gid
ID used to identify users for 24 hours after last activity
24 hours
_gat
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests when using Google Tag Manager
1 minute
_gac_
Contains information related to marketing campaigns of the user. These are shared with Google AdWords / Google Ads when the Google Ads and Google Analytics accounts are linked together.