Okay. So, we know that Chris Matthews is out of his mind. Or- we should know this. Some people, I’m sure, sit gleefully in front of the TV when Hardball comes on, unaware that the guy is completely off his rocker insane.
So, Chris is chatting away with a guy from Newsweek, a woman from Salon.com, and Noah D. Oppenheim, the author of the new book, The Intellectual Devotional.
Chris claims Bush raised the stakes by “scaring” people into the thought of WWIII with Russia. The Newsweek guy went along with it, and the Salon.com lady went along- claiming that Bush somehow threatened “puty” (Putin). Noah Oppenheim, tho, actually made some sense (unlike the other 3 buffoons) and rightly said that Bush surely wasn’t picturing a nuclear war between Russia and the US. Obviously, he was saying that if Iran got nukes, it might lead to a global crisis which could rightfully be called World War III.
Matthews countered, (and I paraphrase), ‘look, I know what WWIII is Noah. I grew up with the prospect of WWIII. WWIII is a nuclear war involving ICBMs between the US and Russia.’…”dumping our silos” (that last part was an exact quote.)
I haven’t actually read any news in 2 days, so I checked the web for information on Bush’s speech to see what the facts were. Matthews, of course, is, as usual, out of his mind wrong (or more likely- just making shit up) once again. Bush never warned of a nuclear war between Russia and the US, and it was obvious he was speaking of nuclear war with Iran, and not the kind involving direct ICBM attacks from Iran on the US mainland. Rather, terrorist attacks involving nukes, nuclear strikes on Israel, etc. Situations that could easily lead to what could easily be labeled WWIII.
Matthews is becoming the sort of foaming at the mouth, liberal Bush-hater that Keith Olbemann has been all along. Maybe his ratings aren’t as stunning (and that’s as “stunning” as one can possibly get on low-rated MSNBC) than Olby, so he’s trying to ratchet the crazy up a notch or two?
By the way. Here’s what AFP (France) had to say about Bush’s warnings:
US President George W. Bush said Wednesday that he had warned world leaders they must prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons “if you’re interested in avoiding World War III.”
“We’ve got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel,” Bush said at a White House press conference after Russia cautioned against military action against Tehran’s supect atomic program.
“So I’ve told people that, if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon,” said Bush.
Oddly enough, I don’t see any major news of a warning of nuclear ICBM attacks from Russia against the US mainland. Weird…
Blogged with Flock
Liberals never cease to amaze. They bitch and moan about demanding that you tiptoe around “women’s issues” because dammit women are just as good as men in every level at every job. But, these idiots will gladly invite a terrorist to their college campuses to speak. A terrorist who presides over a regime that routinely stones to death women for any reason they so choose. Liberals are all for feminism and similar ideas, as long as it doesn’t get in their way of hating the US or appeasing terrorists.
Yes, by now I’m sure you’ve heard that prestigious (read: snooty and insane) Columbia University has invited terrorist president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of terrorist nation Iran to come and speak to (gullible and dazed) college students on campus. Yes, folks, as William Kristol pointed out in his piece in The Weekly Standard, Columbia Univ President Lee Bollinger’s reasoning behind the event makes little to absolutely zero sense. Bollinger claims it’s good to have a debate and to ask pointed questions of people, even if you might not fully agree with them (I have a sense these idiots agree more than they disagree with ol Iranian almond joy). This doesn’t make a whole heck of a lot of sense, because it just gives terrorists legitamacy they don’t deserve.
As the guest on The O’Reilly Factor pointed out, and it was my first thought as well- this is akin to inviting Adolph Hitler to talk or having Zawihiri live in a video teleconference for the campus.
There’s absolutely no reason to have Ahmadinejad on campus. Zip, zero, nada. Would they invite the KKK to campus to speak? Hardly. As Kristol points out- Columibia University will glady invite Ahmadinejad to speak, but they refuse to allow the ROTC on campus. Backwards? Only if you’re in the real world outside of the walls of the modern day liberal college campus.
Shame on President Bollinger and shame on Columbia University. Remind me to make sure none of the young adults I know never consider your university.
Chris Matthews has always been a complete lunatic, but it’s always nice to see video where he continues to prove that on a near daily basis.
This guy is just out of his mind. We’re damned fascists for going into Iraq (we weren’t “invited” he says) and free the people from a murderous tyrant. I really fear for the sanity of these people. They harp all day long about situations like Darfur, but when we take out a brutal monster they go insane and blame America for the problems in a far away land. Yes, because we know Iraq was a friggin paradise under the Butcher of Baghdad! They called the “president” of the nation a butcher!!! Hello- wake up crazy folk!
He goes on about how Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch who owns Fox News…so, clearly in Matthews’ eyes- there’s some sort of evil conspiracy afoot. They censored Sally Field when she said “god damned”. The report from Hardball implies this is crushing free speech!! And why? Well, because Murdoch owns Fox which is more conservative than the commies like Matthews at MSNBC (the lowest rated cable news net on TV). News alert for dear Chrissy- ALL broadcast nets I know of censors the use of “god damned”. No conspiracy, idiot. You and ol’ Schuster are just out of your minds as usual.
ABC News is a joke.
First off, I saw this story from HOT AIR this afternoon. ABC News’
website has the misleading headline “Iraq Like Vietnam… Bush’s New
Talking Point as 14 Ameircans Die”.
This wasn’t what Bush said at all. Speaking at the national
convention of the VFW, Bush said that leaving Vietnam was a mistake
that caused the deaths of millions, and lead to horrors that
created new vocabulary like “boat people” and “killing fields.”
Retreat in Iraq would lead to the same sort of thing. So, ABC News
shows it’s obvious bias with a completely misleading headline,
and why on earth mention an accidental copter crash in Iraq
as support for this phony headline?
ABC News covers the story as well with the text “Vietnam and Iraq”
on the screen. They mention how Bush talked to the VFW, and they
aired his actual points to the audience.
The first thing they did after showing a snippet of Bush’s speech?
Well, they of course said that “historians” countered his points
after they heard the speech. Who are these supposed “historians”?
Well, they had exactly ONE historian on, who said that Bush’s point
was (I’m paraphrasing) silly…what is Bush suggesting, that we
should have stayed in Vietnam forever? Invaded North Vietnam?
These comments are followed by Joe Biden attacking Bush’s plan,
complaining that unless we change course immediately, we’re all
doomed as a nation. Nonsense, of couse, and reports show the
surge is working, so a change of course wouldn’t make any sense,
Putting two and two together- I notice the lone historian attacking
Bush is fairly anti-Bush to begin with. The historian, Robert Dallek,
actually wrote a piece in the Washington Post basically outlining a case for
Impeachment, but saying that it would never happen, and that Bush
should resign like Nixon did.
So, Bush speaks- ABC News posts false headlines on their site
to attack the president…then, on their news cast, they show
their bias again by touting a list of historians attacking Bush’s
analogy, but it turns out they only have one historian who is
already a Bush-hater? Why do they even pretend and call it
“ABC News” when it’s pure propaganda?
As Kos (the despicable thug who approves of murdering innocent contractors in Iraq) himself says in this video- DailyKos, a disgusting hate website, controls the democratic party.
The Democrats are screwing themselves when they attend the conventions of hate sites. The media won’t play this story out tho…they’re too liberal. The liberal dominance in the media will make sure this story gets no play. If Republicans attended a yearly KKK convention, the media would create a firestorm and cover it 24 hours a day.
Hopefully the American people are smarter than most in the media and the Democratic candidates themselves. You can’t attend a hate website’s convention, then claim you can lead this nation. Clinton and Obama are lost souls hell bent in gaining power…their candidacies have little to nothing to do with making anything better or doing things right. If there was any of that present, they would have avoided this convention like a plague.
Speaking to experts on the middle east (despite the fact that Ajami kept mentioning the nation “palestine” that has never existed), Alan Colmes gasped when former PLO terrorist, Walid Shoebat, said that Abbas is a terrorist himself.
I just had to sigh at Colmes’ sheer ignorance. The leader of fatah (a TERRORIST organization- the word “terrorist” is a big hint) is called a terrorist, and somehow that shocks Alan Colmes? I guess he doesn’t consider Abbas a terrorist…in that case, you have to wonder when he hit his head and when he’ll be back in the real world with the rest of us.
The lesser of 2 evils one of the men said…the lesser of two terrorist groups we’re choosing. It’s a shame, when we could go in and route out these thugs and take control over these areas once and for all. Israel hasn’t done a very good job with all of this either- they constantly capitulate to absurd international demands in the name of this imaginary state known as “palestine” that wants to take control of the land mass that was given to the Jewish people in 1948 (before the UN, ignorantly, tore it in half and offered only part of it to the Jewish people and part of it to the arabs who already have large nations on all sides of Israel. Israel pulls settlers out- what happens? Rocket attacks from hamas and others…they give a little bit more this time and a bit more next, what do they get? Terrorist explosions killing innocent Israelis.
I’d say we’re all pretty much cowards when it comes to this issue. The world, if it would band together to fight islamic radicalism (I personally think all islam is radical, as the founder of the religion was a mass murderer- you don’t get much more radical than that!), we could go it much more effectively. Unfortunately, very few people have the will to fight this global war, and it’s unfortunate…the unwillingness to fight will eventually lead to the destruction of all of us.
Reid and Pelosi are touting a failure in Iraq. The surge has failed. Why? Well, according to the AFP story, no one knows. Well- it does include a mention of the claim that the past 2 months were the deadliest for US troops. I hadn’t heard this claim until now, so who knows if that’s true.
Either way, look at the facts- if a nation loses a dozen soldiers in 1 month- I can assure you that is miraculous in the history of warfare. We would lose ten times as many men in WWII in 1 hour, and the nation wasn’t losing the will to fight then. Furthermore- we fought rough back then…today we’re hampered by whiny sissies who demand we can’t use this tactic or that because an innocent might perish as the result. In WWII we actually FOUGHT- our hands weren’t tied by crazy rules of engagement to appease the liberal PC crowd.
Not that every life lost isn’t a tragedy- it is, but this nonsense of saying 2 soldiers died, so now we better pack up and leave is downright insane. People die in war. Is this a newsflash to ANY person with a working brain??!
They seemed to agree (the dems, I mean) that they would wait until the report from the commanders on the ground on how the surge is working or not working…but, as we all knew- they had no intention of taking any of this seriously. They didn’t have the votes or the veto override necessary to stop this, so they’re playing games. The Democrats want us to lose- this letter from Reid and Pelosi are proof enough of that fact. A loss for the US is a victory for Dems- that’s precisely how many of them see it.
In part of the letter, the two declare failure months before they claimed they would wait to give judgement:
Pelosi and Reid told Bush in the letter that they planned to send him new legislation to “limit the US mission in Iraq, begin the phased redeployment of US forces, and bring the war to a responsible end.”
On Tuesday, Reid said that Senate Democrats would attach troop withdrawal deadlines to a Defense Department Authorization bill, due to be debated within weeks.
Playing to the far left (which is now, in my opinion, the actual base of the party)- in their vision- we lose and that’s good for the nation…because it will allow them to toss aside what the military says and politically force a troop withdrawal. “Phased redeployment”- that’s just too funny…the Dems really think you’re all a bunch of fools with secret code like this that means nothing but “remove the troops.” The troops don’t agree with this, the US people don’t, even the Iraqis and their government don’t want the troops to get out now.
If the Democrats have their way- US troops will be forced out, the nation will turn to complete chaos, and a hardline islamic government will find its way in, joining forces with Iran to develop nukes to send to terrorists to destroy ALL of us. Thanks Dirty Harry and Madame Pelosi.
This stuff is actually sort of a joke…ten candidates on a stage is absurd. I was sort of torn on this- why allow only the top candidates? I feel the media is partly responsible for the top spots as it is…they push a few candidates all the time, no wonder they have the most support in current polls. All should get a chance to give their opinions and share their views. But, when you see them all together- you see this just doesn’t work.
A few thoughts- Giuliani…don’t much like him. The fact that he’s on his third marriage is upsetting to me personally. The fact that he’s pro-abortion is another aspect of his views I dislike a lot. I don’t think I can vote for a supporter of abortion. I also find his evasion of questions annoying. McCain and Romney are guilty of this as well. Sadly- the most open and honest candidates are those on the bottom of the polls. I’m sick of seeing a question asked and the top 3 guys dancing around with their answers.
Ron Paul- this guy is out of his mind. He doesn’t want us to lead the world basically…that’s the feeling I got from him. He wants an America that doesn’t intervene in international fights? Too bad our actions doing just that in WWII lead us to the spot as super power! I’d never support an anti-war “conservative.”
McCain- he just looks like a zombie to me. He’s constantly got this weird stare on his face- looks as if he’s staring at one spot or something. It’s a bit creepy. That and I forgot he voted against Bush’s tax cuts twice.
Tancredo has good ideas on immigration.
Personally- I think the best bet would be a Fred Thompson candidacy.
The top 3- McCain, Giuliani, and Romney are stepping over each other whining they wall want 30 seconds. Ugh…
I’m not very impressed at all. Out of this group- I’d vote for tough talking Tancredo.
UPDATE: I should mention I find Giuliani’s adoption blathering stupid when asked about abortion. He refuses to be clear and straight on his support for abortion, instead going on a tangent about how adoptions in NYC rose when he was mayor. I see that in the May 3 debate he claimed a 70% increase- I think tonight he said it was a 130% increase. It turns out, he’s full of it either way. FactCheck.Org has more info.
Note to Rudy- when asked about your support of killing soon-to-be-born babies…don’t go on and on about fictional adoption rates! ‘I support mothers killing babies, but hey- I’ll claim adoptions were up when I was mayor!’ Insulting.
Barack, ‘I opposed the war from the start, because removing brutal despots is something I just don’t support’, Obama recently got his facts very wrong at a fundraising event (when you’re a fool whose only goal is to take millions of dollars from other wealthy fools, you sometimes go stupid)- he claimed that the tornado that hit Kansas killed 10, 000 people, and he parroted the bogus claim from Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius that the state only has 40% of its national guard equipment available to help with the disaster.
Here’s Barack’s comment:
“In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died—an entire town destroyed,”
Well- he was wrong on both counts. First, only 12 people died. VERY far off from his claim of 10, 000. Also- several reports from many sources have shown that the governor is just wrong- she’s a political hack using a bad situation to attack the president (what a shocker…I thought democrats were all about love, kindness, and compassion?), and that the state actually has 70% or more available. Remember- the town hit was a mere 1, 500 (which makes you wonder how on earth Obama came up with 10, 000- which is what? 7 or 8 times the entire city?)
So, Obama panders like an idiot, the Kansas governor abuses disaster victims to make political attacks. This is the current state of one of the Democratic frontrunners? This is how politicians act now?
Wow. I’ve been following traitor Harry Reid’s comments about the war being lost, but I didn’t see the full transcript of his appearance on CNN.
Watch this and try to NOT scream the word “scumbag” at the monitor. This guy is either the biggest idiot in Congress or the biggest scumbag there. He literally claims that the war IS lost, and not only that but that General Petraeus himself has said the war is lost. He claims that Petraeus has told all the soldiers that the war is lost!
When the CNN reporter calls him on the carpet for his obvious distortion of what Petraeus actually said, he plays stupid. I have a feeling he’s not this stupid, but rather he’s playing to the lunatic crowd of the Democratic party (aka the base of the party, unfortunately.)
Reid needs to step down, and he needs to do it now. He has no business speaking for us, let alone occupying the majority seat he does that speaking from.
It’s time we demand our so-called leaders actually lead and stop pandering to the fringe of the country. It’s time we demand that they concentrate on making us safer not assuring they get elected. Reid’s time as Senate leader is done with- he needs to, for once, act honorably and step aside to allow a sensible Democrat take his place.
If you notice, in the video from CNN, Reid states that the war is lost. He tries to back up this bogus statement by looking to statements from Petraeus. Statements that he took out of context, to be sure, but he’s still trying to use Petraeus to back him up. Oddly tho- when the reporter asks if Reid will sit down and listen to Petraeus when he comes to Capitol Hill to brief members of Congress on how the surge IS working, what does Reid say? He says he won’t believe a word Petraeus says.
So- Reid claims that Petraeus says the war is lost (to back up his own foolish statements) when Petraeus never said any such thing…but when asked if he will listen to Petraeus, he declares he won’t believe what the general on the ground says! Worse- when asked if his ‘this war is lost’ declaration hurts the troops- he claims that the boots on the ground (namely Petraeus) are saying the war is lost! So, he looks to the boots on the ground one second, because he’s not there in person…then he suddenly says he won’t trust those who are actually in Iraq.
This man is mindboggling stupid in one way- he can’t stop putting his foot in his mouth.