If you are not redirected automatically, follow at http://dennert.blogs.vcstar.com/

Presidential Campaign Open thread

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar

Here is a new rule:

Do not joke about Barack Obama getting assassinated.

Fox News really messed up here when their reporter joked about taking out Osama Bin Laden and Barack Obama:

It wouldn't be so pathetic but at the time they were discussing Hillary's poor wording. How about this Fox News? When discussing poor word choices, choose your words wisely!

If you haven't seen Hillary's comments for yourself you really should before you form an opinion:

Was it as bad as the way people are describing what she said? What was she thinking?

Of course, there was Mike Huckabee's comments also:

Mike Huckabee did apologize for his joke too.

And of course there was the employee of Salem Communications who thought it fit to include Michelle Obama's response to a question about if she had fears about her husband being killed:

Anyways, New rule: Do not joke about Barack Obama getting murdered. It isn't funny.

What are your thoughts on the presidential campaign?

Liberal Commentator Keith Olberman's reaction. Do you watch Countdown?


Here is what they do on Faux Fake News. They bring someone on to give the "other side". Then everytime that person tries to speak, the newscaster and the other guest, ususally a neocon, begin to scream as loud as they can and berate the person and they don't even let them complete a sentence. That is what the GOP calls fair and balanced.

Have you ever watched Keith Olberman's political talk show, lizard lips? They do exactly the same thing in reverse.

Faux News is to journalism what professional wrestling is to sports.

So what's up with "Straight Talker" McCain? He's now pushing for mortgage-related deregulation while lobbyists for United Swiss Bank are advising him on mortgage policy. Problem is, USB is one of the firms hardest hit by plummeting home equity values AND they've just warned a key group of their advisors to NOT travel to the USA for fears of subpoenas & possible indictments.

Do you trust your Oval Office in the hands of ANOTHER incompetent and possibly corrupt liar?

A new book is coming out by former Bush Press Secretary Scott McClellan. In it he claims Bush used propaganda to sell the Iraq war and that Bush totally screwed up the war. He also said that the week after Katrina was spent with Bush in complete denial and looking like a deer in the headlights. Of course now we can listen to Mango and Bubba cry about how it is a big lie, etc etc. Funny though how all these ex-Bush aides say the same thing. So what has 7 years of Bush and the GOP given us? 4$ gas and a crumbling economy, way to go W!

Stop whining about gas. It all starts with personal responsibility. If you really want to do something about global warming and dependence on foreign oil then buy a Prius, or take the bus. If you really hate oil companies and think that gas is overpriced, then don't buy their product. But griping about it changes nothing.

What a typical liberal response, sitting around complaining while expecting the government to solve the problem for you.

Gosh Bubba, seems to me that almost every Republican in the House and Senate just voted to order your good buddy Bush to quit putting oil in the Strategic Reserve. A few months ago you blogged that Bush wasn't putting oil in the reserve. I guess you either don't know your facts or you will tell any lie to defend Bush and the GOP. So will you be calling Scott McClellan a liar for all the things in his new book? Or do you believe Bush used propaganda to sell the war in Iraq?

Scott McClellan is trying to sell a book. Am I wrong? These guys will sell their souls for marketing leverage. Enough said on the issue.

This is just like the national security guy, Richard Clarke's, book that was critical of the White House's handling of the war. Do you think he'd sell one copy if he was supporting the Bush Administration in his book?


All those years he was getting paid to sell a candidate and a president. So according to you when should have ignored him then too, yes?

He did attack the media for not asking tough questions. Do you think they asked enough questions before the war? McCain thinks we didn't send in enough troops at the start. Why wasn't the press more focused on asking for proof the war plan made sense?

Brian, unfortunately, the press doesn't lead the way, it follows. With all the nationalist fervor that had spread across the country after the 911 attacks, the press was happy to go along for the ride.

To ask the hard questions would have ruffled public opinion and the press can't afford to do that. They would lose newspaper sales and television market share faster than you can blink an eye.

On your first point, again, the man was doing what he was paid to do. The job of all press secretaries is to cast their boss in the best light possible. I'm not saying we should ignore what they say 100%, but, again, it's the job of the media to ask the tough questions and they just weren't willing to do that.

I am surprised you agree with his major point that The White House exploited public feelings to push for an optional war based off of propaganda designed to keep people in fear.

You are more independent minded than I gave you credit for.

He also said something about so much for the "liberal media" being that they went easy on this president when the war was being pushed.

This morning you have Bush and all his minion's attacking McClellan. But not one of them, even Bush, is saying that McClellan is not telling the truth. Instead they are saying things like "This is not the guy I knew" or "He sounds like a liberal blogger". McClellan is telling the truth that Bush sent over 4,000 american kids to die in Iraq because Bush wanted to view himself as great. I'm sure the parents of all these kids who have been killed and injured are feeling good that Bush did this to prove himself a man, at least in his own eyes. If you want more of this vote for McCain in November. If you want real change vote out all republicans in November!

Mongo Flamo continues his comments offering only his opinion, unsubstantiated conclusions, broad generalizations and, of course, his predictable predictions.

Think about what Mongo wrote 5 comments above, "These guys will sell their souls for marketing leverage. Enough said on this issue." What? Who are "these guys." Mongo doesn't tell us.

Mongo offers no suppport for his conclusion about the selling of souls; he only gives us his visceral raw assertion. And, then, Mongo's final touch, after that brief outburst, he closes the door on the issue, "enough said." Therein we see Mongo's admission of his closed mind. Life is not so simple; life is not so complete.

Whenever one reads Mongo comments, one should consider how Mongo makes the same bankrupt arguments over and over. Take a look at him, he is a one-trick pony.

More proof of Mongo's simplicity. In the next sentence of his comment above he wrote, "This is just like Richard Clarke." For Mongo, everything is either black or white, on or off, right or wrong; there is no middle ground. He's using the George W. Bush argument, you're either with us or against us. It is a fallacy that each of them has embraced repeatedly and one which the readers of this blog should carefully avoid.

Thanks for the free psychoanalysis, Sgt. Friday. It's so open-minded of you to enclose my whole personality and entire being in a nutshell.

You're living proof of the closed-minded attitude of liberals. You're all for diversity, tolerance, and acceptance, except, of course, if I happen to be someone who disagrees with you. Thank you for verifying this once again.

Regarding your comments on not telling you who I was referring to in the "these guys will sell their souls for marketing leverage" remark. I guess I am assuming you are bright enough to follow the string of comments on the thread that preceded that remark, but apparently not.

"These guys," of course, are the people who write kiss and tell books after they leave office or a high level position in government. It's an easy thing to do for a disgruntled ex-employee and there's usually a lot of money in it. Capiche?

Poor Mongo, he has suffered so much psychologically that he sees psychoanalysis everywhere; even when my own comments about him were limited to what he has written on these pages and had nothing to do with Freud, Mongo's defective development as a child, or illicit love for his mother.

It's a real shame (and worthy of true and lengthy psychoanalysis)that Mongo accepts that his "whole personality and entire being" can be described in a few words.

(NB: When Mongo responds that he was just being satirical or facetious, I will then take the time to show him that he was neither.)

Mongo, thanks for the additional proof about your over-simplification and use of overly broad generalizations with your references to diversity, tolerance and acceptance. I well accept the notion of diversity of cultures (the usual meaning of diversity which escapes Mongo) and ideas---I'm just showing that in the public arena of ideas, your ideas are illogical, personal or bankrupt. They just do not further any meaningful discussion.

BTW, tolerance does not mean acceptance. If I have to explain that to you, let me know.

As for your claim that I disagreed with you, I have to admit that I do disagree with you on that one. However, the important point is not that you're wrong; the important point is that you're just meaningless.

My mind is indeed closed to meaningless comments which will explain why you think my mind is closed to your comments. I have this policy and practice that I will only deliberate on meaningful ideas.

Your characterization of McClellan's book as a "kiss and tell" and further similar characterizations of other books reveals your negative view of those books. From a thinking persons point of view, there was no "kissing" between George W. and Mr. McClellan; there was simply no implied promise to keep silent. And as Mr. McClellan revealed today he had a obligation to a higher authority to tell the truth. An objective description of the book would say that it was Scott's view of what transpired at the White House while he worked there.

Finally, for me, the real question of the McClellan book is whether it told the truth, not whether it revealed something about George W. that George W. did not want the public to know.

Three words for your buster - blah, blah, blah. Oh wait, one more - zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

“BestAntivirusSoftware.co.nz is New Zealand’s No. FREE"

Leave a comment

Brian Dennert here

This blog is dedicated to Ventura County politics. Send in ideas for posts to briandennert@gmail.com
Follow me on Twitter Twitter.com/dennert The Facebook page for this blog is facebook.com/briandennerthere You do not need to register to comment but keep it classy. Report abusive language to me at my email address.

  • cigarettes wholesale online: “BestAntivirusSoftware.co.nz is New Zealand’s No. FREE" read more
  • Mongo Flamo: Three words for your buster - blah, blah, blah. Oh read more
  • Sgt.Friday: Poor Mongo, he has suffered so much psychologically that he read more
  • Mongo Flamo: Thanks for the free psychoanalysis, Sgt. Friday. It's so open-minded read more
  • Sgt. Friday: Mongo Flamo continues his comments offering only his opinion, unsubstantiated read more
  • Mongo's Daddy: This morning you have Bush and all his minion's attacking read more
  • Brian: I am surprised you agree with his major point that read more
  • Mongo Flamo: Brian, unfortunately, the press doesn't lead the way, it follows. read more
  • Brian: Mongo, All those years he was getting paid to sell read more
  • Mongo Flamo: Scott McClellan is trying to sell a book. Am I read more