The Christine O'Donnell Thread

She is the summary of the right in this country.

Reality is only real if I acknowledge it and whatever I say is the truth, regardless of how outlandish it sounds.
 
So thrust, a high school education is sufficient to be in the United States Senate? You said her education is irrelevant. I wonder if you mean it doesn't matter if she went to college or not.

I don't know why politicians can't fess up when they're faced with the fact that they clearly lied.
 
lol at this response from one staffer.

One high-level official, who spoke on background before referring me to the communications staff, was quick to mention past instances where, the official said, false information about O'Donnell has been posted by her enemies in the hopes of tarnishing her image before the primary.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='mykevermin']^ any show with Cornel West on it exposes just how left wing the 'mainsteam media' ain't.[/QUOTE]
Can you elaborate on this? I know he's not Malcolm X and about as intimidating as Dr. Huxtable or is that what you're getting at? :D
 
It's more the idea that genuine progressives in this country are shut out of the media. People like West, Chomsky - they're never on the news. They're never interviewed. You have to go to a "comedy" show like Real Time to see a true left intellectual get an opportunity to present their ideas. Howard Zinn finally made the 24 hour news channels - who announced his death and little else. Same with Studs Terkel.

You can turn on Real Time and see someone who deserves far more airtime than they get, and you can turn on Fox, or CNN, or MSNBC, and see some knuckleheaded spinster, some doofus campaign manager, some so-called 'expert' helping push our country towards being 'center right.' So many people assert that "we are a center right country," and they treat that as derived from aggregate intellect, not a combination of ideology and the marginalization of genuine progressive thought.

Now, on the other hand, if you want to argue that West is not particularly progressive, well, then, you and I will have to have a whole other discussion about what progressive encompasses.
 
Michael Eric Dyson is another person who doesn't seem to get much time on the news networks. The man's oratory is incredible, to be able to speak with such force and passion (not to mention speed) is pretty rare. Yet he also appears frequently on Real Time and similar shows while being nearly ignored by everyone else.

These are intelligent, progressive, well spoken individuals, they should be the ones we see frequently on the news, they shouldn't be relegated to doing comedy shows (as much as I like those shows).
 
West got his wish though. Last time he was on he was bashing deadfish Rahmbo for always cutting backroom deals and shit with Big Phrma and such.

No evidence that Pete Rouse will be any different when it comes to undermining progressive legislation. Another wait & see thing.

Agree with myke that real progressive voices aren't as pervasive through the media the way real conservative voices are.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']It's more the idea that genuine progressives in this country are shut out of the media. People like West, Chomsky - they're never on the news. They're never interviewed. You have to go to a "comedy" show like Real Time to see a true left intellectual get an opportunity to present their ideas. Howard Zinn finally made the 24 hour news channels - who announced his death and little else. Same with Studs Terkel.

You can turn on Real Time and see someone who deserves far more airtime than they get, and you can turn on Fox, or CNN, or MSNBC, and see some knuckleheaded spinster, some doofus campaign manager, some so-called 'expert' helping push our country towards being 'center right.' So many people assert that "we are a center right country," and they treat that as derived from aggregate intellect, not a combination of ideology and the marginalization of genuine progressive thought.[/quote]

Oh ok. In that case I'm in full agreement with you.

Now, on the other hand, if you want to argue that West is not particularly progressive, well, then, you and I will have to have a whole other discussion about what progressive encompasses.
Click to expand...
Not my intention at all. I think he's actually good in a way that he makes these issues accessible. My point about Dr. Huxtable is that you have to be seen as non-threatening especially as a person of color in order to get the points across or you would me marginalized as just another angry black man.
 
People say they wish Obama would get fired up over issues sometimes, I think he doesn't for the very reason you listed above, because if he does then he's an angry black man and the GOP would be all over it.
 
right clak. see jeremiah wright for how the media treats black people who aren't overly accommodating and demure.

as for advertising, well, thrust, isn't the purpose of news to inform? to provide perspective? i somehow don't think that donna brazille or michele malkin bring in the ratings. I'm not talking about hosts, i'm talking about the breadth of perspectives offered.

you're also suggesting that the media is more concerned with revenue than informing people, as well as acknowledging that, by virtue of being so focused on revenue, they simply can not be as liberally biased as people claim (when their foundation is free market capitalism). How about that? A revelation from thrust. I knew you were capable of it.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']If there was enough of an audience for so-called progressive comentators to pull in advertising, wouldn't it be common?[/QUOTE]
Here's the thing, the Left is now the Big Tent. Also, progressives don't go lockstep with eachother. As seen in the Sanchez thread, there's plenty of disagreement with certain issues. It's not about the money, it's about diversity and its something that one network can't provide.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Most news stations would probably increase viewership by showing funny cat videos for an hour everyday. Seriously, most people don't want to listen to anyone too deep, it requires too much thought. They'd either rather be spoon-fed information or just check out the disaster of the day. Only public television/radio ever seem to have anyone of much substance on.
 
O'Donnell said China plotting to take over US

She said China had a "carefully thought out and strategic plan to take over America" and accused one opponent of appeasement for suggesting that the two countries were economically dependent and should find a way to be allies.

"That doesn't work," she said. "There's much I want to say. I wish I wasn't privy to some of the classified information that I am privy to."
Click to expand...
 
Yeah that's the kind of thing that to me is valid criticism of O'Donnell. The meatball-Hare Krishna thing sounded like she was joking to me, it's funny but not really that important.
 
I like Gregg Easterbrooks remark in this weeks NFL TMQ.

[quote name='"Gregg Easterbrook"']The Perfect Halloween Candidacy: Monday, Delaware senatorial candidate Christine O'Donnell declared, "I am not a witch." Even by the low standards of American politics, this is bizarre. The National Association of Witches and Warlocks promptly denounced O'Donnell, saying she is giving sorcery and spell-casting a bad name. A spokesperson said, "Let's put her on trial under terms of the Witchcraft Act of 1524, then we'll see if she's not a witch." The strangest part of O'Donnell's television ad is not its denial of witchcraft but her twice declaring, "I'm you." What the hey is that supposed to mean? Witches were said to be able to seize other people's bodies -- and now she declares, "I'm you." [/quote]
 
Man, why couldn't she be running in Massachusetts? If she were from Salem this would be a riot.
 
[quote name='depascal22']What classified information does she have access to?[/QUOTE]

I was going to say that, even if the woman wasn't an obvious loon to be dismissed out of hand there is no way she would be privy to something like that and think she could get away with blabbing about it.
 
[quote name='Clak']Man, why couldn't she be running in Massachusetts? If she were from Salem this would be a riot.[/QUOTE]
HAHA...no thanks, we have enough libtard teabagging crazies here.
 
[quote name='Clak']She supposedly got the info from some missionaries who do work in China.[/QUOTE]

You mean the people that are trying to take over China with the power of Christ?
 
Every time you masturbate, God kills a kitten and Christine O' Donnell has to take another shot of lacewing fly potion. I'm doing my part.
 
I want to get tickets for her debate at UD on Wednesday. But they become available at 10 am on Mondya and I have to go on a business trip in the morning. I'll be back by the afternoon but I'm sure they'll be sold out by then.

In other news, The Uqhart Carney debate was last night. My God, it was awful. I think Urqhard won, but it was like mephistopheles debating a 2x4. Urqhart spoke so many mistruth that if he was against a competent opponent, he would have been ripped a new asshole. It was so bad, the first question was if Urqhart was a Tea Party candidate and he said no. The Moderator did a double take. And poor John Carney took three ambien before the debate started.
 
[quote name='Strell']Every time you masturbate, God kills a kitten and Christine O' Donnell has to take another shot of lacewing fly potion. I'm doing my part.[/QUOTE]

every time I masturbate I'm watching that vid.
 
"Small minds discuss people, average minds discuss events, great minds discuss ideas"

I wonder where all of you fall
 
I'm watching it now. With all this witch nonsense I'm surprised nobody has started calling her the wicked witch of the east.
 
Ah tivo. Good quote.

I wonder where you stood on Obama and Jeremiah Wright. William Ayers. Farrakhan. I'm sure you never discussed those people and Obama's associations with them and what that says about his character. You don't have a small mind.

Her statements, as well as Obama's statements, say a lot about their character, which is a factor in public service. I could understand that if there are questions about their character or finances or wacky statements, you'd want to change the discussion to policy, and act like you're above the fray. I would want to do this too.

I thought she didn't do as bad as I thought she would. I was pretty disappointed that she pulled a Palin with the SCOTUS thing, but hey, maybe she agrees with all the recent rulings and none of em pissed her off enough to learn more about them.
 
I didn't expect her to do badly ebcause she's a good public speaker and she's been probably prepping since Saturday. If you expected her to self destruct, you'd be mistaken.

But she did a lot of her stick. She told a lot of basic lies and mistruths of the facts. And I am tired, tired of her doing the whole, "People are stalking me" shit. She says that all the time to get sympathy. If she feels threatened, the police need to get involved. Yet she talks all about intimidation but it's her people that behave in bizzare fashions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zO4E1SDY3-g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3vSLLEZZrM&feature=related
 
This woman's way of thinking scares me, it scares me even more that there are others like her. It's funny that she says that something is irrelevant, yet it's something people want to know about her. Isn't that basically insulting those people? Saying that want they want to know about her doesn't matter?
 
[quote name='Admiral Ackbar']I didn't expect her to do badly ebcause she's a good public speaker and she's been probably prepping since Saturday. If you expected her to self destruct, you'd be mistaken.

But she did a lot of her stick. She told a lot of basic lies and mistruths of the facts. And I am tired, tired of her doing the whole, "People are stalking me" shit. She says that all the time to get sympathy. If she feels threatened, the police need to get involved. Yet she talks all about intimidation but it's her people that behave in bizzare fashions.
[/QUOTE]

the word is "shtick"
 
Oh my god. I'm so sorry I messed that up. I'll try to do better.

Edit: Here we go. She's already laying the foundation of blame if she loses.

Delaware GOP Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell claims the national Republican Party has abandoned her.

At a post debate party at an Irish pub, O’Donnell called out the National Republican Senatorial Committee for not helping her campaign.


"The Democratic senatorial committee is running ads against me. The Democratic Party is running ads against me,” O'Donnell said, according to Fox News. “The Republican Party on the state level, or on the national level, neither have come in to help me close the gap in the polls.

"And my opponent, there’s so much to attack him on, yet the NRSC refuses to play, and that, that baffles me," she added. "Because he’s a – he’s a sitting duck.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good, I hope they leave her on her own.

So, once again, we have the power. We’ve got this man in office. I think we’re all proud of Barack and his accomplishments. Everybody I know in our communities are praying for us. Every day we feel that. And let me just tell your listeners that it means all the world to us to know that there are prayer circles out there and people who are keeping the spirits clean around us.
Click to expand...

I lol'ed.
 
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/.../news/feature/2010/10/19/us_delaware_senate_2

Republican Senate nominee Christine O'Donnell of Delaware is questioning whether the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from establishing religion.

In a debate at Widener University Law School, O'Donnell criticized Democratic nominee Chris Coons' position that teaching creationism in public school would violate the First Amendment by promoting religious doctrine.

O'Donnell asked where the Constitution calls for the separation of church and state. When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"

The exchange Tuesday aired on radio station WDEL generated a buzz among law professors and students in the audience.
Click to expand...

:shock:
:shock:
:shock:

And to think both Glenn Beck and Dom Giordano (the only two programs I listened to parts of, so there are surely others) were lambasting Meghan McCain's assessment of O'Donnell during Sunday's "This Week":

My problem is that, no matter what, Christine O'Donnell is making a mockery of running for public office," McCain said on Sunday. "She has no real history, no real success in any kind of business."

Continuing the attack, McCain added that "what [O'Donnell's success] sends to my generation is: one day you can just wake up and run for Senate, no matter how [much of] a lack of experience you have. And it scares me for a lot of reasons. I just know, in my group of friends, it turns people off because she's seen as a nutjob.
Click to expand...

Meghan, while young, inexperienced, and the beneficiary of nepotism most certainly, was not by any means incorrect in her assessment of O'Donnell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top