Attention Conservatives: Risking Star Here?

Malkin is a retarded mouthpiece parroting extreme Republican (not conservative) viewpoints and she wouldn't know an original idea if it punched her in those buckteeth of hers. The only positive she brings to the table is that she sends liberals into absolute hysterics.

Interesting that you don't refute anything sha said though.:eusa_think:

She does get a little excited at times, but she calls it the way she sees it, and I can respect that. Her being right most of the time helps as well.:eusa_whistle:

Refute what? Malkin is a demagogue who makes a living affirming what people already believe. You can't be right when you have never had a critical thought in your life...
 
I like Michelle Malkin. She knows what she's talking about and has her ducks in a nice neat row. I think people should listen to what she has to say. That is, if you believe in the truth.
 
No, we didn't have eight years of that.

What we had was eight more years of Bubba with much more spending and a much lower IQ.

It was Congress that increased the budgets and was Bush stupid or the people who elected him?
The people who were, and continue to be, stupid are the dupes who think there's any difference of significance between the remocrats and depublicans.

Should there be? Both want the same thing and none were elected to be our representatives but to block the other side. Does that make us stupid or simply afraid?
 
Malkin is a retarded mouthpiece parroting extreme Republican (not conservative) viewpoints and she wouldn't know an original idea if it punched her in those buckteeth of hers. The only positive she brings to the table is that she sends liberals into absolute hysterics.

Interesting that you don't refute anything sha said though.:eusa_think:

My comment was on the woman herself, not her specific position. I didn't even listen to what she said. I'm conservative and she is half the time as well. So there's at least a 50/50 shot that I would agree with her on this issue.

Her status as a parrot is what condemns her in my book.
 
Malkin is a retarded mouthpiece parroting extreme Republican (not conservative) viewpoints and she wouldn't know an original idea if it punched her in those buckteeth of hers. The only positive she brings to the table is that she sends liberals into absolute hysterics.

Interesting that you don't refute anything sha said though.:eusa_think:

My comment was on the woman herself, not her specific position. I didn't even listen to what she said. I'm conservative and she is half the time as well. So there's at least a 50/50 shot that I would agree with her on this issue.

Her status as a parrot is what condemns her in my book.

:beer:
 
I like Michelle Malkin. She knows what she's talking about and has her ducks in a nice neat row. I think people should listen to what she has to say. That is, if you believe in the truth.

She's a political propagandist. Truth does not center around ideology. If I believe in truth someone paid to tell me what I want to here is the last place I would look...
 
Should there be? Both want the same thing and none were elected to be our representatives but to block the other side. Does that make us stupid or simply afraid?
How is enacting the agenda of the reputed opposite party, for no apparent better reason than you have the power to do so, "blocking" them??

What are you talking about?
 
I find you guys interesting in an absurd way. First Palin's fumblings aren't her fault but the fault of the questioner. That is like the child given a test who fails but blames the test or teacher. This is a modern phenomenon, common today.

Malkin's comments should send any thoughtful person's head spinning. She knows that a question was planned and planned to prop up a question period that was mostly about healthcare. That must give any sensible human wonder. A plant? Consider what Malkin knows. She knows the give and take would go bad and so at the end a question is posed to divert. Now if you can believe that, do I have some prime land for you.

Malkin then gives the perennial reactionary answer to Obama as change agent all change, it really isn't new, but old, or it is pretence. Amazing that she has all this insight - from where does she get such insight? Consider her insight above, she is something. Malkin is a boorish partisan and a dumb one, if there is any wonder why conservatism and republicanism is dying the reasons are too obvious. She stands as a why.

The story behind my Obama press conference question - Lynn Sweet

"No conspiracy, folks.

When President Obama called on me, he had no idea what I would be asking. I had not written or blogged about the Gates incident, so no one in the White House had any clue that I was particularly interested in Obama's reaction." LS
 
That Obubblehead (allegedly) didn't know that the specific reporter in question was going to ask the question doesn't preclude what seems rather obvious, given his normal "uuuuhhh...annnnd" fumbliung; that he was prepared to say what he did beforehand.

Looking at his demeanor during that incident, side-by-side with his non-apologetic apology, makes that quite obvious.
 
Ah, the little rhymes-with-punt who argued that detaining Japanese citizens during WWII was a good thing, among other things...





You cons can are welcome to her.
 

Forum List

Back
Top