Tonight in WPitW, Keithy did it again: he went after somebody's child. In this case, he played gotcha with Meghan McCain wearing a scarf in a picture that was probably on McCainBlogette, one of my favorite sites.

My point was Keith once again proves how shameless he is in going after the children of somebody, or some group, he doesn't like.

Oh man, too funny about the many professional hats Maddow wears. We should keep track of them for a running joke. I remember this week or last she was a Gay Marriage Counselor for how McCain reacted on Ellen.
She must of started college when she was 9 years old.

As part of the O'Reilly Attack, Keith gleefully trumpeted his demo win last night. And may it be his last. Please!
Anyway: "Orally". [ding!] "Billo". [ding!] "Orally". [ding!] "Fixed News". [ding!] He didn't even show the Bernie and Jane segment video shown above. Instead, he read quotes from the segment (and pre-segment tease) out of context, with parts omitted, in that obnoxious mock hysterical Ted Baxter voice that he thinks is hilarious, followed by his snark rebuttals. "Billo"! [ding!] "Billo's"! [ding's!] That's right, Oralmann. McClellan will be on your eeevil crazy hysterical competitor, whom you are Olbsessed with, on Monday. And he'll get more viewers, especially in total, than you could hope for. Keith admits he loves reading "Billo [ding!] quotes in that Ted Baxter-y kind of voice" because BOR is sounding "more and more like that caricature." Look who's talking. Oh, there's the video of "Bernie and Jane," but out of context and mixed in with that "Inside Edition" video from 18 years ago. Merkle implies that BOR has a drinking problem by saying had to "go get a little drink" at the end of that segment. BOR's point was he worked himself up and needed to cool down in the three minutes before the "Reality Check" segment that followed.
And now, I'm done. Phew.

It's Olby that visits the shrink
Insanity? Right on the brink
His therapy sessions
And lifelong depressions
Reality? Keith's out of sync

You nailed it.

Not only is Overbite and his ilk, which is to say ANY Obama supporter, stupid but they think everybody in America is stupid.

The comparison of this priest and Pfleger are the same thing? OBAMA IS STILL A MEMBER OF THE RACIST HATING CHURCH WHERE PFLEGER SPOKE AND WHERE THE LATER RECEIVED $200,000 OF TAX PAYERS MONEY VIA OBAMA THROUGH THE CRAP-HOLE DIRTY POLITICS THAT IS CHICAGO!

Then these idiots (including Colmes of FOX) want you to believe that Wright and Hagee are synonymous?!! I'm telling you people that they REALLY believe this! It's scary as hell! The whole point is this: Odrama should have left this church and not LIED that he didn't know what was going on for 20 years. This is a character issue unbefitting to a Cub Scout leader let alone someone that wants to be the President of the greatest country on earth.

Obama is the one who dragged this shit into the political arena. These idiots want you to believe everything would have been alright if it wasn't for that eeeevil Hannity. The retards are telling me that I'm a retard! I'm white and can't understand the black experience. I've got a question being that I'm a dumb cracker - I'm thinking of joining a black church. Should I join the 'whitey injects blacks with AIDS' church of Wright or should I join the 'Barack and Wright are homosexual lovers' church of Manning?

Not until Obama denounced Wright for the final time did other black ministers come out and say only a small minority of black churches are like TUCC. But before that I was to understand I was a racist who didn't understand the black experience! I was a racist because I was going by sound bites according to the great uniters Lincolnesque speech. What happened? Now that speech is pure bullshit and weasel Obama doesn't apologize to people like me.

Obama and his shit church set back all the progress that has been made since the 60's. Obama, Overbite and every asshole Dem can kiss my ass!

Is it racist to hate all assholes?

Just two more thing, sorry about the above swearing but I'm PO'd.

1) Katy - you are brilliant!

2) How the hell can a network news show or for that matter an opinion show call Sen. McCain "McSame". Imagine if BOR or Hannity when referring to Obama called him "Osama". Olbermann is both disgusting and disturbing.

As MikeC would say, "And now, I'm done. Phew."

MikeH along with the rest of the left wanted desperately the predictions of failure to come true...those predictions of Olbermann and Snobamessiah....

KO on 1/5/07: "[McCain] is trying to pull off a 'little dance' and he'll be associated with the 'failed bloodletting that would follow a surge'."

SNOBamessiah on 1/14/07: "We can send 15,000 more troops, 20,000 more troops, 30,000 more troops: I don't know any expert on the region or any military officer that I've spoken to privately that believes that that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground."

###
Oh the wrong view (and a rather hyperbolic one at that from SNOBamessiah with "I DON'T KNOW ANY EXPERT"?!?) on the fight for freedom and democracy in Iraq...that our great troops would fail in their mission...these poor antri-American opinions stand in stark contrast to the reports of much lower civlian and military casualties, Al Queda being defeated, Shiite militias now cooperating with the elected government, and that worse of all possible outcomes....TROOPS RETURNING HOME IN VICTORY....NOT PLANNED PHASED WITHDRAWL IN DEFEAT!

The democrats were wrong....and over the next 4-5 months there will be plenty of time and evidence to show this....they are still incapable of good judgement in protecting our country from terrorism...whether it be here or abroad....They will try to lie like this:

"On MSNBC today, David Axelrod said that Barack Obama 'never disputed the fact that if you throw a surge of American soldiers in an area that you can make a difference.'"

http://tinyurl.com/6ljmq6

...but the truth is plain and simple....The democrats with SNOBamessiah in the lead claimed the surge would fail BOTH MILITARILY AND POLITICALLY...they were wrong on both counts....Our brave troops did a great job, continue to do a great job and the security they have provided has prevented a civil war (another prediction of the left failed) and allowed Shia, Sunni and Kurd alike to move forward towards peace...The job is not done yet, but the left's predictions of 2006 and 2007 were wrong.

No endless bloodletting....no endless civil war like SNOBamessiah predicted!

The spin over WAR continues from the left....what a shame...an anti-American, and intellectually dishonest approach to a very important issue....SNOBamessiah will have to answer for his poor judgement.

Oh, and McCain....he was right in 2007 in contrast to the neophyte radical leftist, SNOBamessiah.

I checked the comments fot that day Olbermann predicted an unending bloodbath under the surge....and found many old friends who were also wrong....

"By Bob on January 8, 2007 12:09 PM

[cee posted] "And in answer to your question, Professor Honeydew....I predict, that if allowed by The Congress, a surge of 20,000 to 40,000 US troops would result in progress in security and training of the Iraqi forces. However, if The President is not allowed to follow Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno's advice, then there will not be any progress towards a secure and free Iraq.

[Bob responded] "Of course The ultimate Bush lapdog DID NOT answer my question...just like Senator Grahmam didn't yesterday.

"Let me try again, Cee.

"If this new surge does not provide the desired results, as almost everyone predicts, what do we do now Lapdog?

"Would you then admit this war was a failure, or would you continue to push for more war and death?

"Easy question , Cee, so stop avoiding it !"

####
So I responded to him....

"I will respond to Anon and Professor Honeydew (Bob) with a comment I made this morning....

"So again, I point to the radical 15% and ask why no one in Washington has yet to move forward on their agenda? STOP NIBBLING AT THE EDGES OF THE ISSUE OF WAR! These little off camera interviews with reps/former generals/pundits who, question the administration's wisdom, these opinion polls in Iraq or here and these empty threats in the form of letters and editorials have not worked to move President Bush....in fact he may increase the forces! It is his CONSTITUTIONAL right to do so, and The Congress will be voting IN FEBRUARY on the additional funds needed to sustain the Iraq policy.

"VOTING.....Yes or no to the Iraq War.

"Whether or not I admit a mistake was made in Iraq is irrelevent now, in 12 months or in 18 months. The issue is what I support now. You all know my position....everything possible to insure we keep our commitment to the Iraqi people, including conscription.

"My representative in this argument, President Bush, is pursuing policies that mirror his rhetoric.

"What are your representatives in this argument doing, Anon, professor, etc?

"TALKING, WRITING LETTERS, APPEARING IN FRONT OF EVERY CAMERA POSSIBLE.

"Big deal.

"Representative Kucinich has a great plan for phased decreases in Iraq War funding....it financially supports the redeployment of those troops already in harms way.....Why is Biden and Pelosi ignoring this plan?

"Senator Biden even lies and says Congress has no power to influence foreign policy!

"Article I, Section 8... [Congress is empowered]

"To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;"

"Additional monies deemed necessary by The Commander-in-Chief must be approved by a majority in Congress. Specific appropriations must be used for the specfied purpose, Bush cannot shuffle around the funds.

"February will see a request regarding the latest policy changes....what should Congress do?

"So, if in late 2008, no progress has been made, I will have the last 18 months to figure out why. If Bush gets everything he wants and the funding.....I would logically conclude that we could not be victorious over the radical islamists and support a plan for withdraw. If The Democratic Party and The Congress go down the same road The Watergate Congress did in 1973, then they should be held responsible for the defeat. Either way, the ball is in The Congress' court.....They have the power.

"Go Bush's way providing the resources for the increased troops.....

"or stop the surge by withholding funding."

###
We have been victorious over Al Queda in Iraq and the radical Shia are losing their influence....PROGRESS! No thanks to the twittling of thumbs the likes of Bob, FLUCKER, MikeH and their democrat party twits lead by SNOBamessiah!

The dems did nothing to stop the surge then, said it would fail, and now LIE about their actions and predictions! All for personal political gain.

And then I said this to Bob....

"IF your brave Democrats cut the funding, it's over....Bush cannot pursue the increase....redeployment will have to take place.
The results will come....perhaps I am wrong and there will be peace in Iraq after the US leaves....then politically The Dems are golden and they were right.

"IF your cowardly Dems only call for troop reductions but vote in the end for the requested fund to increase numbers....then we'll see....I admitted to forseeing a mea culpa on my part in 2 years if things get worse....but I believe the opposite will occur and Iraq will slowly improve.

"Allow me to remind you, presently, the second scenario is AGAINST what you want, professor, and puts you in the difficult position of having to hold your nose and support people who really never did what they said they would do.....bring the troops home"

What did SNOBamessiah and the dems do...they allowed Bush to have 100% of what he wanted!...They did nothing to fulfill their promise to bring the troops home! And what happened since....slow but real progress in Iraq under the Bush plan!

The lack of leadership in risking their political lives by not standing firm and refusing funding of Bush's surge says a lot about SNOBamessiah and the dems as well.....Lack of judgement and confidence!

Testify, cee!

It was the big political story Friday night on every news channel--except of course on OlbyPlanet. Bathtub Boy carefully avoided any mention of the Pfleger controversy, though he managed to bring up Hagee [Ding!], a story that he flogged for days. And after BtB left the air, Abrams showed up to attack Fox for reporting the Pfleger story, conveniently overlooking the point that it wasn't Fox but ABC News that broke the story (just as they did with Rev Wright). But attacking Fox is more important than getting the facts right.

Now in the wake of the Pfleger flap it has just been reported that Obama is quitting the Trinity United Church, effective immediately. Imagine that. It was so unimportant that Edward R Olbermann spiked it completely. It was so irrelevant that Dan Abrams had to smear Fox for reporting it. Only it turns out to have been so important that a Presidential candidate left his church of twenty years as a result of it.

Just another demonstration of how the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann slants, manages, filters, and spins the news so that you only hear what he wants you to hear, even if it means leaving out one of the most important political stories of the campaign.

What congregation will Obama join next? Will he swear his allegiance to Allah and join his neighborhood masjid? Maybe he'll synch up with Farrakhan and become a member of the Nation of Islam. Hmmm....

B. Hussein is about to speak. All hail the Obamessiah, master of the politically convenient.

The racially charged hate speech coming from the extremist church is a big story in this campaign. Those apologists who wish to ignore it because of their political affiliations show their true lack of integrity. I am thrilled that finally these very radical people will no longer have a spot light on them, however, SNOBamessiah still must contend with his associations with them and his use of them to start and enhance his political career in Chicago....I am amazed such hate mongers were used by him in the first place.

Olbermann ignoring the story does not surprise me....he has zero integrity.

Obama won't be shopping for churches anytime soon, nor will he be seen in church anytime soon.

This is a perfect opportunity to sleep in every Sunday morning for the rest of his life. By doing this he...

1) protects any future church he joins from criticism
2) gets a "get out of church card" for free.

Lets be clear.....This man has Zero interest in going to church

"Lets be clear.....This man has zero interest in going to church"

You may be right about that - or you might just as easily be wrong......

However.....I personally don't believe there has been a true Christian in the White House for MANY years. It would be poltical suicide for anyone to admit that they had doubts or didn't believe, even though it would highlight their honesty.

MikeH said: "However.....I personally don't believe there has been a true Christian in the White House for MANY years."

So, exactly who do you personally believe was the last "true Christian in the White House"?

Upon what do you base your assertion that President X was the "last true Christian in the White House"?

Upon what do you base your corrollary that all succeeding Presidents from the last anointed by you as a Chrisian President (inquiring minds want to know) are not Christians?

Well Grammie, I would more be far more inclined to provide the answers you demand if your inquiry were not dripping with so much un-neccessary and self defeating sarcasm.

Suffice to say that if you accept that every other president was a christian because they SAID they are (as they ALL have done), then you have no choice but to accept that Obama is as well for exactly the same reason.

Furhtermore Grammie, it took a direct rebuke from Robert Cox for you to accept the absurdity of your attempting to hold me responsible for the comments of others.

So tell me Janet; why did you accept such a logical premise from him so readily from him while repeatedly rejecting it from me?

Think about it!

First, MikeH, I did NOT demand anything but rather asked that you identify who you believe was the "last true Christian in the White House"? I think that you would agree that the time frame you used of "many years" can cover a lot of ground.

MikeH. you brought the subect up in a very loosey goosey general way, not me. You gave no hint of what you meant by "Christian" or "Non Christian". You used a time frame so broad that it could encompass both Washington and Jefferson through Clinton and Bush.

You made the assertions that were so broad as to be incomprehensible to everyone except you.

Either you were blowing smoke or you can put some meat on the bones that you so casually threw out.

Which is it?

"MikeH you brught the subject up in a very loosey goosey general way, not me."......No, I did NOT bring the subject up. The poster names Quads brought it up at 7:14 PM. My post was a direct response to him and was not intended as a provacation to you.

In case you missed it, there WAS a very real point to my post entirely removed from exactly who I personally think was the last president who happened to also be a devout Christian. Since you often miss my points, I suspect that you probably missed that one as well.

Finally, it is hardly my fault if you don't have sufficient mental acuity to grasp the point I was actually making.

Thanks, MikeH! It is obvious that as usual you were blowing smoke.

By Grammie on June 1, 2008 11:58 PM
Thanks, MikeH! It is obvious that as usual you were blowing smoke.

Why do you think he only pops in once a week, now? He has at least 20 posts on other threads he can't back. Shocker!

Mr. "There is nothing to win in Iraq." mikeh

Cover you eyes and ears, mikeh. We're winning, prick!

Grammie, instead of trying to wiggle out of the box that you unwittingly placed yourself in, would you like to now try to address the ACTUAL point I was making at 9:33 PM?.....Or would you rather keep right on trying to open another pandora's box of irrelevancy instead.....like you're already famous for doing?

It is SO typical of you to try to divert any and every discussion you have with me so far away from it's starting point that the final product has virtually no resemblance to what we started with. That said, I'm SURE that you would delight in igniting a tit for tat argument about which president actually was or was not a Christian, and why, but that was NEVER the point, and if you REALLY don't understand that, then you simply aren't worth arguing with.

And while you're at it, how about addressing my question at 10:54 PM as well.

OS: "Why do you think he only pops in once a week, now?"......Because there are too many blind partisan, and very dumb pricks like yourself on here calling other people "pricks" because you don't like their viewpoints.....instead of making intelligent counter arguments.

"Cover you eyes and ears, mikeh. we're winning, prick!"

What are we "winning"?

What are we "winning"? mikeh

"if you REALLY don't understand that, then you simply aren't worth arguing with." mikeh

OS: Obviously, you can't answer my question...that isn't surprising.

And, after we finally finish "winning" in Iraq, it will be up to the same people who started this war to explain to the American People just exactly what it is they have 'won'?

It'll take yet another fantastic spin job to pull that one off.

Two interesting things about MikeH:

1) He cannot see the success of the surge in both security (lowest US troop death levels since the war, the Iraqis are now on the front lines in all of the remaining hot spots in the country) AND political (extremist terrorists like Shiite Al Sadr and Sunni AQI are losing influence over the population and/or basically defeated militarily AND politically)....this would mean having to admit his radical left leaders like SNOBamessiah were wrong in 2006 when they predicted defeat with the surge even stating there would be continuous, increased "bloodletting" etc....

2) He makes a pretty unsupported remark about the spiritual state of other human beings....Hey, I do think it is interesting that a once devout Christian and member of a radical black congregation drops his affiliation after 20 years after only about 2 months of controversy.....especially since that same church has had the same rhetoric, theology AND bad actors like Wirght and Pfleger all that time!...But I do not come to the conclusion that I can judge a man's soul and know how his relationship with The Almighty is currently......I can only note the huge contradictions in his behavior and what his supposed beliefs are and make a CHARACTER judgement of the person....but his soul....soory, I pass on that one....

BTW, if SNOBamessiah was not a believer in black liberation theology he would have left TRINITY UCC a long time ago....he did not and in fact was a big donator to the organization. This theology is radical and another sign of the "out on the mainstream" candidate a slim majority of the democrat party has decided to put into the GE....

The issues from Trinity are not over, the radical nature of SNOBamessiah's rise to power in Chicago politics is fair game and most normal Americans will be shocked at his beliefs and associations.

This, on top of his poor judgement in 2006, his gaffes and poor perofrmance in unscripted events, and lastly his elitist attitude towards others will make this a very competitive GE.