Bachmanns Vetting Begins: The Dirt Surfaces---Earmarks, Farm Subsidies And Pardons.

[ABikerSailor]

The best part of this thread is that USMB's number one Palin fan just happens to bring up the 'dirt' on Palin's number one rival.

Yep, just like a nerd with a crush on the cheerleader captain.

Pathetic, really......

 

[daveman]

Ok... great... there's one. Hardly can call that equal, can we?

Your side sure does invest a lot of emotional energy into destroying Palin. You'll do the exact same thing to Bachmann. Not politically -- personally. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

And you won't see anything wrong with it.

Bullshit.... The only thing you have is the trig palin thing, and that came from an INTERNET BLOG(IIRC). Not some main stream media source.

Keep reading. I already proved you wrong.

Just about everything else is political in nature... like her complete lack of knowledge and preparedness for answering the tough questions.

You guys, on the other hand, you laud the efforts of Rush, Beck and Hannity who Always go into personal attack mode... Democrats are Communists in disguise, Obama is a freedom hating Kenyan Muslim who wasn't born in this country and is a disciple of Rev. Wright.... He also wants to kill Grandma and eats babies for breakfast(the last one I made up).

and you don't see anything wrong with it.

The fact is that Bachmann's record comes up, and you guys are already playing the "Victim" card this early speaks volumes about the candidate's actual worthiness of the job she is running for... which is quite simply.... nil.

What were Obama's qualifications? Oh, yeah -- "It's time!"

THis has nothing to do with personal vendetta... this has to do with her past... which comes up. Ask John Edwards, ask John Kerry, ask anyone that has played the political game. It's not victimization, it's bringing things to the forefront that we base our decisions upon.

And I have no problem with that. At all.

My only request is that we keep these things factual and not spread lies and misinformation through our media. Report the news straight up and leave opinion programs and columns express their opinion.... but let it be known by the home company(FOX, MSNBC, etc) that Opinion is not necessarily fact.

Again, agreed.

But the left's track record with keeping things factual and not spreading lies and misinformation through the media, especially where conservative women are concerned, is pretty damn thin.

Hell, you even ate Hillary alive once Obama announced.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you'll remember, the media didn't do it's job in checking out Obama. A lot of people had questions, and the liberal media ignored them.

The hardest-hitting question the lib media asked Senator Obama was, "So, tell us, Senator -- just exactly how awesome ARE you?"

So why did Obama feel compelled to make a speech repudiating Rev. Wright,

if the media never made anything of that relationship?

If nobody knew anything about it, because the media covered it up, why didn't he just let it go?

I expect the public's awareness of the issue was primarily due to Fox.

And you can't even see the larger question there.

Why didn't Obama repudiate Wright until he was called out on it? Do you think that was at all sincere? Hardly. "I'm sorry I got caught." That's all it was.

But it was good enough for you, wasn't it? Must not question The One!!

Since the president has yet to actually do anything that could be attributed to the alleged bad influence of the Reverend Wright,

I guess I was right then, wasnt' I?

 

[daveman]

daveman says the media didn't scrutinize Obama at ALL.

So I guess in a year of Limbaugh, Hannity, Foxnews, etc., none of them did any scrutiny of Obama. None of them put any investigative reporters on the air. None of them did any in depth stories about Wright, or Ayers, or the president's birthplace. Nothing.

lol.

Like I said, you don't consider Limbaugh, Hannity, Foxnews, etc. to be media. Do you?

You need to look up the word media and see what it consists of.

Oh, NOW you start using the dictionary.

You're denying that there was media scrutiny of the birther thing?

Seriously?

Oh, no, there was scrutiny...but not of Obama, of the birthers.

 

[daveman]

So here's the rightwing line in this thread:

Bachmann's voting record - not fair game
Obama's voting record - fair game

Bachmann's religious history - not fair game
Obama's religious history - fair game

Bachmann's personal associations - not fair game
Obama's personal associations - fair game

Personally I think it's great that the Right thinks the only thing that can crush Bachmann's presidential chances is an 'unfair' scrutiny of who and what she actually is.

That's funny.

Yeah. Who actually said any of that? Links, please, or retract.

 

[daveman]

So why did Obama feel compelled to make a speech repudiating Rev. Wright,

if the media never made anything of that relationship?

If nobody knew anything about it, because the media covered it up, why didn't he just let it go?

I expect the public's awareness of the issue was primarily due to Fox.

And you can't even see the larger question there.

Why didn't Obama repudiate Wright until he was called out on it? Do you think that was at all sincere? Hardly. "I'm sorry I got caught." That's all it was.

But it was good enough for you, wasn't it? Must not question The One!!

Since the president has yet to actually do anything that could be attributed to the alleged bad influence of the Reverend Wright,

I guess I was right then, wasnt' I?

So it looks like Obama's religious history and personal associations AREN'T fair game after all, huh?

Make up your mind.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you'll remember, the media didn't do it's job in checking out Obama. A lot of people had questions, and the liberal media ignored them.

The hardest-hitting question the lib media asked Senator Obama was, "So, tell us, Senator -- just exactly how awesome ARE you?"

So why did Obama feel compelled to make a speech repudiating Rev. Wright,

if the media never made anything of that relationship?

If nobody knew anything about it, because the media covered it up, why didn't he just let it go?

I expect the public's awareness of the issue was primarily due to Fox.

!

And is that primarily the source and due for the extraordinarily high numbers of people not believing the president was born in the US?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Damn, you're stupid. "Not nearly as viscous" doesn't mean "nice", you moron.

So someone like Olbermann was nicer to Glen Beck than to Palin?

lol

I don't know. I don't watch irrational, angry moonbats. You tell me.

Aha.

So your opinion on the matter is not based on evidence.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

So why did Obama feel compelled to make a speech repudiating Rev. Wright,

if the media never made anything of that relationship?

If nobody knew anything about it, because the media covered it up, why didn't he just let it go?

I expect the public's awareness of the issue was primarily due to Fox.

!

And is that primarily the source and due for the extraordinarily high numbers of people not believing the president was born in the US?

I dunno about that, but, save a few questions as to what sport Obama likes or what is his favorite pizza is, no media outlet save Fox raised any question of substance about the man. If not for Fox, we'd know nothing of the fact that Obama was personally mentored by a hardcore, avowed Communist, or that he spent 10 years soaking up Black Separatist theology preached by a racist, or that he was involved in a sleazy land deal with a convicted crook, or that he started his political career on the coattails of an unrepentant domestic terrorist.

 

[daveman]

So why did Obama feel compelled to make a speech repudiating Rev. Wright,

if the media never made anything of that relationship?

If nobody knew anything about it, because the media covered it up, why didn't he just let it go?

I expect the public's awareness of the issue was primarily due to Fox.

!

And is that primarily the source and due for the extraordinarily high numbers of people not believing the president was born in the US?

Beats me. If you want to make a case for it, feel free. Be advised that just because you say so is not sufficient.

 

[daveman]

So someone like Olbermann was nicer to Glen Beck than to Palin?

lol

I don't know. I don't watch irrational, angry moonbats. You tell me.

Aha.

So your opinion on the matter is not based on evidence.

Are you really picking out Keef Moonbatman as a representative of the entire liberal media?

Really?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I don't know. I don't watch irrational, angry moonbats. You tell me.

Aha.

So your opinion on the matter is not based on evidence.

Are you really picking out Keef Moonbatman as a representative of the entire liberal media?

Really?

Yeah... it;s not like Olberman hasn't been roundly exposed as a unhinged lunatic with zero credibility.

 

[USArmyRetired]

Why should Palin be scrutinized? She's not running for anything. She's a private citizen.

So you finally jumped off the Palin for President bus eh?

Told you that dumb bitch would never run.

For Army, this must be just like getting a new months Penthouse in the mail.

The latest and greatest spank material.

Absolutely not. I hope Bachmann goes down. When she hired Ed Rollins last week and she let him attack Palin, that was it and was the wrong thing to do. I'm more than excited from the news just released.


PALIN DECISION ON PRESIDENCY EXPECTED NEXT WEEK!!

The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Palin Decision Expected Next Week

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is expected within a week to make a decision on whether to enter the 2012 presidential campaign, according to one Republican source.

Vendors of campaign services who hope to work for Team Palin have been told that Palin, the 2008 GOP vice-presidential candidate, will decide soon one way or another on mounting a 2012 campaign.

 

[ABikerSailor]

So you finally jumped off the Palin for President bus eh?

Told you that dumb bitch would never run.

For Army, this must be just like getting a new months Penthouse in the mail.

The latest and greatest spank material.

Absolutely not. I hope Bachmann goes down. When she hired Ed Rollins last week and she let him attack Palin, that was it and was the wrong thing to do. I'm more than excited from the news just released.


PALIN DECISION ON PRESIDENCY EXPECTED NEXT WEEK!!

The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Palin Decision Expected Next Week

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is expected within a week to make a decision on whether to enter the 2012 presidential campaign, according to one Republican source.

Vendors of campaign services who hope to work for Team Palin have been told that Palin, the 2008 GOP vice-presidential candidate, will decide soon one way or another on mounting a 2012 campaign.

Hey..........USA Retard.........she's not gonna run, no matter how many times you beat off to her picture.

And............if you're poor, the bitch won't even look in your direction.

 

[daveman]

Aha.

So your opinion on the matter is not based on evidence.

Are you really picking out Keef Moonbatman as a representative of the entire liberal media?

Really?

Yeah... it;s not like Olberman hasn't been roundly exposed as a unhinged lunatic with zero credibility.

You hush. He has leg tingles for The One. How much more credibility does a lefty need?

 

[Anachronism]

What year is it? 2011?

Oh, yeah. You're an idiot.

No, I'm a Conservative; which in part means I'm a Traditionalist, dave. Doesn't matter if it's 2011, 1011, 11 AD, 989 BC, etc.... it's still not appropriate for a woman to be involved in politics.

 

[daveman]

Ok... great... there's one. Hardly can call that equal, can we?

Your side sure does invest a lot of emotional energy into destroying Palin. You'll do the exact same thing to Bachmann. Not politically -- personally. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

And you won't see anything wrong with it.

i fail to see how the right doesnt do this as well.
You guys are getting upset over the normal process.

change your tampons

So, instead of wanting to do better, you choose to wallow in the filth. Good job.

 

[daveman]

What year is it? 2011?

Oh, yeah. You're an idiot.

No, I'm a Conservative; which in part means I'm a Traditionalist, dave. Doesn't matter if it's 2011, 1011, 11 AD, 989 BC, etc.... it's still not appropriate for a woman to be involved in politics.

Well, hell, why not just go ahead and put 'em in burkhas? You and Sunni would get along great.

 

[Anachronism]

Well, hell, why not just go ahead and put 'em in burkhas? You and Sunni would get along great.

Not a big fan of the burkha, personally. Though I would have no problem with mandating limitations on public dress for BOTH genders, if I thought we could get away with it. Sunni and I have some commonalities of opinion, but I think you'd find that he and I have a fair number of differences of opinion as well.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What year is it? 2011?

Oh, yeah. You're an idiot.

No, I'm a Conservative; which in part means I'm a Traditionalist, dave. Doesn't matter if it's 2011, 1011, 11 AD, 989 BC, etc.... it's still not appropriate for a woman to be involved in politics.