Can someone tell the pundits to please shut up?

bobbymcgill

Member
Aug 23, 2008
92
11
6
What in the heck is going on with the Republican punditry? From Rupert Murdoch's Obama/Monkey cartoon, to Rush Limbaugh's epileptic fits of invective, to bloggers going off the deep end, you would think that Obama was building GOP internment camps or outlawing NASCAR.

They are as bad as the loud-mouthed left when Bush was president.

It is kind of embarrassing to see adults flailing around like tantrum-throwing children, all the while bemoaning, "Obama is a socialist! Obama is a socialist!" That being the trendy new catch-phrase to describe the president --as if he wasn't simply continuing the economic recovery plan initiated by the Bush administration just months before.

Where were the catcalls from the right then? And if Jim Cramer is to be believed then the big, bad socialist rhetoric is literally coming from the mouths of babes.

"I don't know about you but I felt it everywhere I went this weekend," said Cramer. "A young kid took me aside. He said I was right when I said we've elected a Leninist."

I find there is little in the way of reassurance to see where Cramer is getting his reassurance. And Obama a "Leninist?" Come on. What kind of moronic comparison is that?

While I agree that Obama is going a bit overboard (the auto industry, the banks, etc.) with his stimulus spending, the conservative punditry will go nowhere in winning converts with whining and name calling. Sure, the red-state-choirs are enthralled, but they had them anyway

The bloggers have by far been the worst. I read the Gateway Pundit regularly due to its good read on the Right during the election. But since Obama won, GP has been attacking anything and everybody on the left. In a recent post he called Sean Penn and Kevin Spacey, "commie-homo-lovers."

What the hell is that? My uncle is gay and I love him, should I be penned up and left with minimal rations for my digressions? I mean, with that kind of language, and the reasoning behind it, internment or death are the logical end-game, right?

Then their is Michelle Malkin, the Asian-Ann Coulter gone rabid. Malkin, who actually wrote a book defending World War II internment camps, unleashes a daily bluster-barrage in her blog and on TV, cleverly calling the president "D'oh-bama," in reference to Homer Simpson. What happened in her childhood to unleash such hatred? And what is she hoping to accomplish?

The problem with these right-wing lug nuts, and for those on the far left, is that they constantly hammer on the negative with no mention of the positive. It's as if their targets, Obama for the right or Bush for the left, were the devil-incarnate.

And while some may say that they are right to defend their beliefs, in the end they will not advance their cause with caustic attacks. It makes for good copy and their readership numbers will rise, but in the long run it will turn people off. Nobody likes a whiner.

The fact that Obama is doing the same thing that Bush (who was then slammed by the left) was doing to rescue the economy, shows that their arguments are more about character and little about the issues themselves. Remember when the far right went on a tirade against Bill Clinton for co-opting Republican initiatives? Where were the pundits saying, "Hey, finally he is getting it right and doing something our way?"

Sure, Obama has and will make many a disagreeable decision, but he will also do some good. The same goes for Bush during his two terms.

On a deeper level, what good does all this divisive drivel do for the cohesiveness of the country? I say we clear out a large space in Texas and let the right and the left wing extremists battle it out mano y mano. And then once one kills off the other, the rest of us step in an wipe out the victor. Done. Not to mention the jobs that will be created, cleaning up, embalming and burying the bodies. Could make it a government-run pay-per-view event.

But, seriously. The days of being on one side or the other, of simplifying complex problems into "good" or "evil", "right" or "wrong" are days that should be left to the relics of history. We have since our existence been a child race, directed by the whims of a childlike, simplified reasoning of diametric opposites in a gray area world. Why can't the far left and the far right get over the name-calling and simply evolve? Or in the very least, grow up.

Idle Wordship
 
Do you think it would do any good?

Do you think they would listen?

Immie
 
What in the heck is going on with the Republican punditry? From Rupert Murdoch's Obama/Monkey cartoon, to Rush Limbaugh's epileptic fits of invective, to bloggers going off the deep end, you would think that Obama was building GOP internment camps or outlawing NASCAR.

They are as bad as the loud-mouthed left when Bush was president.

It is kind of embarrassing to see adults flailing around like tantrum-throwing children, all the while bemoaning, "Obama is a socialist! Obama is a socialist!" That being the trendy new catch-phrase to describe the president --as if he wasn't simply continuing the economic recovery plan initiated by the Bush administration just months before.

Where were the catcalls from the right then? And if Jim Cramer is to be believed then the big, bad socialist rhetoric is literally coming from the mouths of babes.

"I don't know about you but I felt it everywhere I went this weekend," said Cramer. "A young kid took me aside. He said I was right when I said we've elected a Leninist."

I find there is little in the way of reassurance to see where Cramer is getting his reassurance. And Obama a "Leninist?" Come on. What kind of moronic comparison is that?

While I agree that Obama is going a bit overboard (the auto industry, the banks, etc.) with his stimulus spending, the conservative punditry will go nowhere in winning converts with whining and name calling. Sure, the red-state-choirs are enthralled, but they had them anyway

The bloggers have by far been the worst. I read the Gateway Pundit regularly due to its good read on the Right during the election. But since Obama won, GP has been attacking anything and everybody on the left. In a recent post he called Sean Penn and Kevin Spacey, "commie-homo-lovers."

What the hell is that? My uncle is gay and I love him, should I be penned up and left with minimal rations for my digressions? I mean, with that kind of language, and the reasoning behind it, internment or death are the logical end-game, right?

Then their is Michelle Malkin, the Asian-Ann Coulter gone rabid. Malkin, who actually wrote a book defending World War II internment camps, unleashes a daily bluster-barrage in her blog and on TV, cleverly calling the president "D'oh-bama," in reference to Homer Simpson. What happened in her childhood to unleash such hatred? And what is she hoping to accomplish?

The problem with these right-wing lug nuts, and for those on the far left, is that they constantly hammer on the negative with no mention of the positive. It's as if their targets, Obama for the right or Bush for the left, were the devil-incarnate.

And while some may say that they are right to defend their beliefs, in the end they will not advance their cause with caustic attacks. It makes for good copy and their readership numbers will rise, but in the long run it will turn people off. Nobody likes a whiner.

The fact that Obama is doing the same thing that Bush (who was then slammed by the left) was doing to rescue the economy, shows that their arguments are more about character and little about the issues themselves. Remember when the far right went on a tirade against Bill Clinton for co-opting Republican initiatives? Where were the pundits saying, "Hey, finally he is getting it right and doing something our way?"

Sure, Obama has and will make many a disagreeable decision, but he will also do some good. The same goes for Bush during his two terms.

On a deeper level, what good does all this divisive drivel do for the cohesiveness of the country? I say we clear out a large space in Texas and let the right and the left wing extremists battle it out mano y mano. And then once one kills off the other, the rest of us step in an wipe out the victor. Done. Not to mention the jobs that will be created, cleaning up, embalming and burying the bodies. Could make it a government-run pay-per-view event.

But, seriously. The days of being on one side or the other, of simplifying complex problems into "good" or "evil", "right" or "wrong" are days that should be left to the relics of history. We have since our existence been a child race, directed by the whims of a childlike, simplified reasoning of diametric opposites in a gray area world. Why can't the far left and the far right get over the name-calling and simply evolve? Or in the very least, grow up.

Idle Wordship

I'll keep it light, and mainly short. I was against the first 700 billion stimulus package that Bush started. Most people on both sides of the isle would agree. Having said that, it didn't work, now we want to spend another 800 billion, and another 400 billion after the 800 billion. This isn't the way to dig us out of a recession. It is a way to get Pelosi's socialism going, though. Power to the politicians...that's what I see. Just a thought.
 
You're right in part. It's both sides. When President Bush was in office, we had 8 years of main stream media attacks--even politicians referring to him as "betraying this country"--playing on our fears". Al Gore. However, the best statement that Al Gore ever made--which is true: "There is more that keeps us together than tears us apart." And we saw that togetherness right after 9/11. We weren't separated by democrat or republican--we were Americans.

In reality there's not a 1/8" difference between a republican & democrat. We all want the same things. We all want to breath clean air, drink unpoluted water, drive economical vehicles, become energy independant, raise great kids with a good education, & basically achieve the pursuit of happiness.

Where our differences & arguments come from is how to achieve all of the above. The main difference between a liberal & a conservative is:

While a liberal is concerned about distributing the golden egg that the Golden Goose produces, a conservative is more concerned about the health of the Golden Goose.

And the battle continues.
 
Last edited:
Do you think it would do any good?

Do you think they would listen?

Immie

Nah, probably not. Can't get them to stop talking long enough to listen.:eusa_whistle:


duct-tape.jpg
 
Am i gathering here that no one complained While dubya was in office??? Lol

I admire the OP for hitting just about every libby talking point imaginable.....you liberals truly are the masters of the fear mongering.

Did you ever stop to think that maybe , just maybe this IS socialism?? Or is your mind to clouded , and your ears too stuffed with partisan bullshit??

Wake up people.....your government is selling your freedom.
 
Am i gathering here that no one complained While dubya was in office??? Lol

I admire the OP for hitting just about every libby talking point imaginable.....you liberals truly are the masters of the fear mongering.

Did you ever stop to think that maybe , just maybe this IS socialism?? Or is your mind to clouded , and your ears too stuffed with partisan bullshit??

Wake up people.....your government is selling your freedom.

not really socialist.....but very heavy on govenrment programs and government regulations and government micromanagement......
 
The title of this thread leads me to believe that only the right can be pundits. Hell, with that novel written in the first post leads me to believe that he is a pundit on the left. Maybe he should have taken his own advice. :razz:
 
The title of this thread leads me to believe that only the right can be pundits. Hell, with that novel written in the first post leads me to believe that he is a pundit on the left. Maybe he should have taken his own advice. :razz:

maybe you should try reading the entire post.
 

Forum List

Back
Top