Obama and Maher
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 01:40:29 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  Obama and Maher
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: Obama and Maher  (Read 3724 times)
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,085
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: March 15, 2012, 12:43:31 AM »

The double standard is in the liberal media. They're not saying anything about regulations and they give you the impression that Rush Limbaugh is a right wing biggot. Meanwhile Maher gets a pass. What Maher said was much more offensive in my take. I'm sure people will see me as bias for thinking so because I'm a conservative. Obama should still give the money back and disassociate himself with Bill Maher but I don't think Obama is experienced enough to do that in order to prevent ads like the one I posted.

And the lack of Rush's indictment is apparent in the conservative media. The 'liberals' don't magically own every single news and media outlet. Fox News, the conservative dominion, consistently outranks CNN & MSNBC combined for viewership. Do you know what the most widely circulated newspaper in the country is? The Wall Street Journal. There's plenty of double standards in the conservative media.

You're right about the bias within the separate realms of media. You're wrong about the feeling that the 'liberal media' has an infinitely-larger say over the matter within the overall conservation than the 'conservative media' does in the same regard.
Logged
Tidewater_Wave
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 519
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: March 15, 2012, 12:51:25 AM »

The double standard is in the liberal media. They're not saying anything about regulations and they give you the impression that Rush Limbaugh is a right wing biggot. Meanwhile Maher gets a pass. What Maher said was much more offensive in my take. I'm sure people will see me as bias for thinking so because I'm a conservative. Obama should still give the money back and disassociate himself with Bill Maher but I don't think Obama is experienced enough to do that in order to prevent ads like the one I posted.

And the lack of Rush's indictment is apparent in the conservative media. The 'liberals' don't magically own every single news and media outlet. Fox News, the conservative dominion, consistently outranks CNN & MSNBC combined for viewership. Do you know what the most widely circulated newspaper in the country is? The Wall Street Journal. There's plenty of double standards in the conservative media.

You're right about the bias within the separate realms of media. You're wrong about the feeling that the 'liberal media' has an infinitely-larger say over the matter within the overall conservation than the 'conservative media' does in the same regard.

What you've said is true. Viewership of Fox and purchases of the Wall Street Journal being higher shows that people are fed up with the dinosaur media. People watch Fox more because they agree with it more. In today's day and age no one that I can imagine comes home and puts on the 6:00p.m. news in order to find out what happened each day. If anything, they know what's going to be on because they've gotten text updates or heard from people who read news events online or they read it themselves or heard it on talk radio. What is known as mainstream media has lost its effectiveness. Also, I would like to point out that programs on Fox such as O'Reilly, Hannity, and Beck are not media! They are commentaries. Those who run such shows aren't jounalists or reporters either, but commentators. Anyone can watch them and realize they're just commentating on events. When someone watches the dinosaur media at 6:00p.m., they are more susceptible to be swayed because it's news being reported. Now I did mention a minute ago that people don't watch it like they used to and it has lost its effectiveness over the last 20 years. Maybe I'm being melodramatic in order to gain sympathy for conservatives a little bit here.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: March 15, 2012, 10:52:20 AM »

Might be effective fundraiser by using the implied Rush Limbaugh-as-victim card but don't see how what Bill Maher and David Letterman did is connected to Obama, even if it were offensive which I don't really see.

1) Bill Maher is no different than Foster Friese in being a superpac donor. The left tried to hold Santorum responsible for Foster Friese. If consistency matters to them, they should deem Obama responsible for Bill Maher. Obama's superpac had a simple way to disassociate Obama from Maher's remarks: return the money.

2) If Obama was sincere about the chilling effect personal attacks have to his daughters future potential participation in public life, he should be equally, or more, considered about Maher's language. At least, he should be concerned about the chilling effect on the daughters of conservatives. That is, unless, he believes that such tactics ought to be used to intimidate conservative girls to remain silent.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: March 15, 2012, 10:59:25 AM »

Might be effective fundraiser by using the implied Rush Limbaugh-as-victim card but don't see how what Bill Maher and David Letterman did is connected to Obama, even if it were offensive which I don't really see.

You don't see how donating a million dollars to Obama is connected to Obama?

Obama's exactly as responsible for "every bad joke one of his supporters makes" as Rick Santorum is.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2012/02/16/santorum-calls-foster-friesss-bayer-aspirin-comment-a-bad-joke/

Is this your way of noting you think Obama is as responsible for Maher, his superpac donor, as Santorum is for Friese?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

If all you have is equating being called "uppity" with being overweight you have nothing. The travel budget of the Obama's has been interesting to observe.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: March 15, 2012, 11:01:32 AM »

Has anybody listened to the context in which Maher called Palin a 'c*nt'? I don't see how it's sexist. If Sarah Palin came out and called Obama a 'd*ckhead', would that be sexist, too?

Well, would you care to explain in which contexts it is okay to use such language to refer to a woman?
Logged
Jacobtm
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,216


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: March 15, 2012, 11:07:59 AM »

Conservatives will be very confused in November when Obama still wins women by a big margin.

Fundamentally, it is about policy and impact on womens' lives.

Maher called individual women names, but he isn't the leader of the Democratic Party and isn't advocating a policy that would do anything negative to women.

Rush, who really is the leader of the conservative movement, if not the Republican Party, attacked policies providing women access to health-care. He denigrated all women who use birth control, which is to say, nearly all women in the country.

Yet conservatives think it was nothing but the name-calling that got everyone upset. They don't see how women's liberation relies heavily on government handouts to make them non-dependent on a man's financial support. As long as the Democrats support more government funding for things women want, women will continue to vote Democrat.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: March 15, 2012, 11:25:00 AM »

Awwww how cuuuuute.

There are many things that Bill Maher says that I strongly disagree with, the comment about Trig Palin was completely wrong and he should have been called on it. Palin is fair game.

It is one thing to say that folks that stand out in the political arena, seeking notoriety for their views, like Palin and Fluke have done, are "fair game." It is another to say that if a woman is "fair game" it is okay to call her a "slut" or a "c***."

Obama's argument against Limbaugh was that such abuse reaped upon women whom are "fair game" has a chilling effect on women who haven't entered the public square. Are you disputing Obama's position?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Intellectual consistency is intellectual consistency. What you should expect from the more prominent members you ought to from the rank-and-file. What is really a tremendous stretch is equating the language Maher has used with the language Limbaugh has used.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: March 15, 2012, 11:42:01 AM »

To cut through the minutia.

1. None of Maher's statements justify Limbaugh's.

2. None of Limbaugh's statements justify Maher's.

3. Limbaugh was out of line to repeatedly attack a woman for speaking out on the subject of birth control in such a manner. It was deeply offensive and his apology made it clear he doesn't understand the level of how wrong he was to use such an attack.

4. Maher has accepted Limbaugh's apology, which suggests he doesn't understand the level of offense Limbaugh has made.

No, it indicates Maher is cognisant of how vulnerable a position he [Maher] is in.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Conveniently evading the essential question of whether, or not, calling women the c-word is acceptable, if calling them the s-word is not.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why don't you?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Guilt by association is one thing. Guilt by sponsorship is another. If Limbaugh had donated to a campaign, like Maher did, his donation would be called into question.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That simply isn't true. While they can't call the superpac, they can hold a press conference to denounce Maher's remarks, and, his donation. Superpacs coordinate with the candidate's public statements all the time.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is delusional. Santorum immediately distanced himself from Foster Freise. It isn't "moot." It is highly germane.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's why I find it interesting how this plays out.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: March 15, 2012, 11:44:42 AM »


All you're doing is chanting the partisan line. I wish Limbaugh could get away with calling Michelle Obama the things that Maher called Palin. If we lived in that kind of world, the world would be a better place. I'll give you that they only exist for those who pay attention to a degree. Giving money to Obama expands his existence though. Shame on Obama for taking this money. So much for setting a good example. Did you even see the video?

That was seriously the least partisan comment in this whole topic. Did you just look at his state avatar color? Limbaugh can't get away with calling Michelle Obama that because he decides to air his show from 12 PM - 3 PM, Monday through Friday across airwaves that freely broadcast to virtually everyone in the country.

Bill Maher is hosted by HBO, a subscription service whose sole existence is to allow comedians and actors to do and say things that they cannot do on any other network. Bill Maher's show comes on on Friday Nights at 9PM.

Rush Limbaugh literally cannot say the things Bill Maher can, because he chooses a different broadcasting medium (one that is far more profitable, just to clarify). Rush has made his choice and must abide by the regulations of his chosen schedule and affiliates.

Are you seriously suggesting unacceptable remarks become acceptable at 8PM CST?
Logged
old timey villain
cope1989
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,741


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: March 15, 2012, 11:49:39 AM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

But that's all that matters. Limbaugh would be off the air, but only at the hands of the right-wing FEC in the event he said something like that. Although, are the words "c*nt" and "sl*t" really that different?

Rush Limbaugh isn't under any more actual pressure at this point than Bill Maher; the left is calling for Limbaugh to leave and the right is calling for Maher to leave.

Rush Limbaugh knows that he cannot say that. Rush Limbaugh can say what he said about Sandra Fluke and did, and it was no more moral than what Maher said. Rush Limbaugh has no trouble or fear from saying things that are immoral; he simply can't say things that are illegal within the confines of his trade .

It's like saying there's a double standard when you cuss at work and get in trouble because your wife lets you cuss at home.

The double standard is in the liberal media. They're not saying anything about regulations and they give you the impression that Rush Limbaugh is a right wing biggot. Meanwhile Maher gets a pass. What Maher said was much more offensive in my take. I'm sure people will see me as bias for thinking so because I'm a conservative. Obama should still give the money back and disassociate himself with Bill Maher but I don't think Obama is experienced enough to do that in order to prevent ads like the one I posted.

Get the f**k over the liberal media. That attack was created in the 1990's as a way for Republicans to have a scapegoat whenever anyone called them out on their bs. The media is neither liberal of conservative. It's run by massive media conglomerations that are only concerned with making money. MSNBC and Fox may have different commentary styles, but to think that MSNBC's parents, GE and Comcast, and FOX's Australian father Ruper Murdoch, don't have the exact same objective, is ludicrous. If conservatives are so persecuted in the media, then why does Fox News have consistently higher ratings that MSNBC and CNN?
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: March 15, 2012, 12:24:24 PM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

But that's all that matters. Limbaugh would be off the air, but only at the hands of the right-wing FEC in the event he said something like that. Although, are the words "c*nt" and "sl*t" really that different?


The c-word is orders of magnitude worse, and anyone whom is intellectually honest knows that social fact.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: March 15, 2012, 12:28:13 PM »

Conservatives will be very confused in November when Obama still wins women by a big margin.

Fundamentally, it is about policy and impact on womens' lives.

Maher called individual women names, but he isn't the leader of the Democratic Party and isn't advocating a policy that would do anything negative to women.

Rush, who really is the leader of the conservative movement, if not the Republican Party, attacked policies providing women access to health-care. He denigrated all women who use birth control, which is to say, nearly all women in the country.

Yet conservatives think it was nothing but the name-calling that got everyone upset. They don't see how women's liberation relies heavily on government handouts to make them non-dependent on a man's financial support. As long as the Democrats support more government funding for things women want, women will continue to vote Democrat.


Blacks might very well vote 98-2 for the reelection of Barack Obama, but, would that whitewash Bill Maher calling Herman Cain the N-word?
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: March 15, 2012, 12:49:06 PM »

To cut through the minutia.

1. None of Maher's statements justify Limbaugh's.

2. None of Limbaugh's statements justify Maher's.

3. Limbaugh was out of line to repeatedly attack a woman for speaking out on the subject of birth control in such a manner. It was deeply offensive and his apology made it clear he doesn't understand the level of how wrong he was to use such an attack.

4. Maher has accepted Limbaugh's apology, which suggests he doesn't understand the level of offense Limbaugh has made.

5. 3 and 4 suggest that both are at some level ignorant twerps.

6. Maher's insults of Palin range from acceptable (calling Palin an idiot), to unacceptable (MILF comments are dumb), to out of bounds (going into family territory).

7. If you don't like Maher's comments, launch a campaign to get him off the air. Else deal.

8. Thanks to that lovely Supreme Court thing, if either Maher or Limbaugh want to give their money to super pacs to destroy their political opponents, then they can. Making it so they can't is a separate issues than who is a bigger jackass.

9. No one working for the Obama campaign can ask the pro-Obama pac to give the money back, to refuse it, or to give it to charity, as that would be a sign of collusion. So Obama can't really do anything to distance himself from Maher in any official capacity, just as Romney or Santorum couldn't do the same. So its kind of a moot point.

10. Finally... shock jocks like Maher and Limbaugh only exist because we pay them attention. If you don't like either one, perhaps you should step away from the one (or ones) on your side and find a source of information that isn't a misogynistic dweeb.

Congratulations, you're the only person in the last 24 hours to call something the way it is.

You deserve a Gold Medal.
Logged
Tidewater_Wave
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 519
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: March 15, 2012, 03:53:56 PM »

Conservatives will be very confused in November when Obama still wins women by a big margin.

Fundamentally, it is about policy and impact on womens' lives.

Maher called individual women names, but he isn't the leader of the Democratic Party and isn't advocating a policy that would do anything negative to women.

Rush, who really is the leader of the conservative movement, if not the Republican Party, attacked policies providing women access to health-care. He denigrated all women who use birth control, which is to say, nearly all women in the country.

Yet conservatives think it was nothing but the name-calling that got everyone upset. They don't see how women's liberation relies heavily on government handouts to make them non-dependent on a man's financial support. As long as the Democrats support more government funding for things women want, women will continue to vote Democrat.


Blacks might very well vote 98-2 for the reelection of Barack Obama, but, would that whitewash Bill Maher calling Herman Cain the N-word?

That happened in 2008 but isn't necessarily the case for 2012. Remember last time was the very first time that we could have a black president and even conservative blacks voted for him because of it. To say that a certain race will vote based on the color of someone's skin is misleading. The same should be said with women wanting free handouts. I can crack all the jokes I want about women mooching off of their husbands but alot of women are offended when they're singled out as if they're different from the average voter.

As for the liberal media, I've said what the case is and anyone who is capable of watching and observing each network can tell which way they are slanted. Yea I get it Fox leans to the right.

When it comes to Super Pacs, most posters on this forum seem to be sophisticated enough to understand that they're nothing more than a way around having to admit to one's dirty politics. Democrats hammered Mitt Romney for not telling the Super Pacs to stop airing commercials that were misleading but now Obama can't "legally give back the money?" Give me a break. Let's all grow up and admit that the candidates have the power and status to stop a Super Pac or at least stand up to one publicly. I still haven't heard Obama criticize Maher for what he said about Palin.
Logged
Jacobtm
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,216


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: March 15, 2012, 06:01:25 PM »
« Edited: March 15, 2012, 06:03:53 PM by Jacobtm »



Blacks might very well vote 98-2 for the reelection of Barack Obama, but, would that whitewash Bill Maher calling Herman Cain the N-word?


Bill Maher insulting someone doesn't matter for Obama's chances, is the point.

I mean, he regularly insults the entire United States of America. He has a movie out blasting Christians as being imbeciles.

It's beside the point, because Democrats don't look to Maher for guidance or leadership, and his positions don't really matter to any important bloc of voters. He isn't the leader of liberal thought, as Rush really is one of the leaders of conservative thought.

Well, I dunno if you could call it thought, but at least the leader of conservative gut reaction.
Logged
Tidewater_Wave
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 519
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: March 15, 2012, 07:52:13 PM »

Don't look to Maher for leadership? Could've fooled me. LOL
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,386
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: March 15, 2012, 08:10:03 PM »

Bill Maher has less influence in the Democratic Party than Noam Chomsky, fer Chrissake. The equivocation of Maher with the sack of slime that is known more diplomatically by the name "Rush Limbaugh" is ridiculous.
Logged
Bull Moose Base
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,488


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: March 15, 2012, 08:19:14 PM »

Don't look to Maher for leadership? Could've fooled me. LOL

Well his views on Islam for example are more consistent with those of the GOP than with Democrats.  And his views on religion more broadly, fit neither party, each of which is majority Christian.
Logged
Tidewater_Wave
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 519
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: March 15, 2012, 09:08:25 PM »

Don't look to Maher for leadership? Could've fooled me. LOL

Well his views on Islam for example are more consistent with those of the GOP than with Democrats.  And his views on religion more broadly, fit neither party, each of which is majority Christian.

Oh yes Bill Maher is so conservative and right in line with the GOP on Islam. How is this so? He hates religion period.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: March 16, 2012, 12:25:30 AM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

But that's all that matters. Limbaugh would be off the air, but only at the hands of the right-wing FEC in the event he said something like that. Although, are the words "c*nt" and "sl*t" really that different?

Rush Limbaugh isn't under any more actual pressure at this point than Bill Maher; the left is calling for Limbaugh to leave and the right is calling for Maher to leave.

Rush Limbaugh knows that he cannot say that. Rush Limbaugh can say what he said about Sandra Fluke and did, and it was no more moral than what Maher said. Rush Limbaugh has no trouble or fear from saying things that are immoral; he simply can't say things that are illegal within the confines of his trade .

It's like saying there's a double standard when you cuss at work and get in trouble because your wife lets you cuss at home.

The double standard is in the liberal media. They're not saying anything about regulations and they give you the impression that Rush Limbaugh is a right wing biggot. Meanwhile Maher gets a pass. What Maher said was much more offensive in my take. I'm sure people will see me as bias for thinking so because I'm a conservative. Obama should still give the money back and disassociate himself with Bill Maher but I don't think Obama is experienced enough to do that in order to prevent ads like the one I posted.

Get the f**k over the liberal media. That attack was created in the 1990's as a way for Republicans to have a scapegoat whenever anyone called them out on their bs. The media is neither liberal of conservative. It's run by massive media conglomerations that are only concerned with making money. MSNBC and Fox may have different commentary styles, but to think that MSNBC's parents, GE and Comcast, and FOX's Australian father Ruper Murdoch, don't have the exact same objective, is ludicrous. If conservatives are so persecuted in the media, then why does Fox News have consistently higher ratings that MSNBC and CNN?

The bias against conservatives, especially social conservatives, in the media is a well-documented fact. A functioning democracy requires three key elements: politicians whom are honest and forthright about how they are and what they will do, an electorate that takes the time and exerts the effort to know those candidates and their platforms, and, an objective press that allows the electorate to know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. By that standard, our media is a disgrace.

As long as our media acts in a completely disgraceful manner, expect conservatives to note that fact.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: March 16, 2012, 12:31:11 AM »



Blacks might very well vote 98-2 for the reelection of Barack Obama, but, would that whitewash Bill Maher calling Herman Cain the N-word?


Bill Maher insulting someone doesn't matter for Obama's chances, is the point.



The point is that calling women in politics the c-word is misogynistic, and has a chilling effect on women interested in pursuing public service. Obama has noted exactly that, but, refuses to practise what he preaches when the misogynist is a large donor to his superpac. It begs the question, what other his principles will Obama ignore/bend/violate if the donation is large enough?
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,220


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: March 16, 2012, 12:36:11 AM »

Has Obama said anything about this at all? Is he even anything more than dimly aware of it?

How's Mitt Romney's stipulation that he can't be held responsible for anything his SuperPAC does or doesn't do working out?

The comparison of Bill Maher to Rush Limbaugh in terms of influence and to be quite frank flat-out relevance to anything is absolutely absurd. Of course Obama should disclaim him if he has to do anything whatever about it but if this is the best line of attack you guys can come up with I have to say I'm feeling pretty good about our chances in November unless something horrid happens.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: March 16, 2012, 12:41:14 AM »

Bill Maher has less influence in the Democratic Party than Noam Chomsky, fer Chrissake. The equivocation of Maher with the sack of slime that is known more diplomatically by the name "Rush Limbaugh" is ridiculous.


If the largest donor to Obama's superpac had contributed $100,000,000, would the fact that he was a misogynist matter then? It would seem that a man who was allegedly concerned about the chilling effect misogynistic language would have on his daughters won't want to be associated with folks whom used such language. That is, unless, he was the type of hypocrite whom had no problem directing such language at other father's daughters.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,220


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: March 16, 2012, 12:43:53 AM »

Bill Maher has less influence in the Democratic Party than Noam Chomsky, fer Chrissake. The equivocation of Maher with the sack of slime that is known more diplomatically by the name "Rush Limbaugh" is ridiculous.


If the largest donor to Obama's superpac had contributed $100,000,000, would the fact that he was a misogynist matter then? It would seem that a man who was allegedly concerned about the chilling effect misogynistic language would have on his daughters won't want to be associated with folks whom used such language. That is, unless, he was the type of hypocrite whom had no problem directing such language at other father's daughters.

Again, is there any evidence at all that Obama is even aware more than dimly that this is a thing, or for that matter that anybody considers it a thing except for people like you who, one imagines, would not be voting for Obama anyway?
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: March 16, 2012, 12:48:13 AM »

Has Obama said anything about this at all? Is he even anything more than dimly aware of it?

Yes. The White House has commented on the issue.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Falling flat. Noone believes it.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, consistency matters.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

What Obama should do is publicly repudiate Maher's remarks until his superpac understands the hint to return Maher's money. This issue isn't going well for Obama, and it not going to go away. It will end with Obama's superpac returning the million, or donating it to some female-oriented charity. They might as well do it tomorrow.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.066 seconds with 13 queries.