President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[Rockindeano]

Greed is a necessary function of capitalism, and Wall Street..

Ok Gordon Gecko.

By the way, isn't Wall Street 2 coming out soon?

Regulation is necessary to keep that greed from getting out of control...

A republican who admits regulation is a good thing? Nice.

[slucero]

Greed is a necessary function of capitalism, and Wall Street..

Ok Gordon Gecko.

By the way, isn't Wall Street 2 coming out soon?

Regulation is necessary to keep that greed from getting out of control...

A republican who admits regulation is a good thing? Nice.

Lol Deano...

BTW... I'm not a republican... I'm a registered Independent... and a Constitutionalist..


Back on point... people need to be angry at the folks who make laws... and neither the President or Wall Street do that..

Congress does... and thats where the blame and anger should be directed

[RocknRoll]

Don't you realize that it was corporate greed that destroyed the economy that was built by the very people who they were putting out of work and out of their homes?

The corporate greed wouldn't have been as big a deal if millions of us wouldn't have purchased homes that we couldn't afford. Sorry, but there's plenty of greed to go around. It isn't just a problem amongst the rich and corporations. Lots of middle-class folks bought not just homes they couldn't afford, but tons of stuff on credit cards that put them so deeply in debt that they couldn't afford to pay those off, either.

Yep, there were a lot of people who did those things but if you think that could have brought this economy down you've been worshiping at the altar of four headed propaganda monster HannityBeckLimbaughPalin too much. It was Wall Street Corporate gambling that killed this economy, and in fact, set the country up for all of those credit fiascoes by sending credit cards to every name and address they could get, even to kids before they even have jobs and playing fast and dirty with with mortgages like carnival barkers seeing how many they could rook in. They didn't then and still don't care what they do to this economy because it doesn't affect them. They have their Wall Street games and their off shore accounts so the rest of the country can eat cake while the Wall Street Casino gives odds on who's going to choke and die first.


Edited to add:

It doesn't matter what kind of "tax system" you have as long as the wealthy can buy the government.

I think if you get down to the root cause of this whole mess. It comes down to the American consumer. I won't argue about what you label "Wall Street" since I'm not sure we all define that the same way. The big question to me is why did we jump on these mortgage or credit card offers? I know I did like everyone else and now I'm trying to figure out why??

BTW. How do you define middle class? Stove Jobs and Warren Buffett lost billions in the meltdown. Those who depend on the government lost nothing. Anyway, it's a good point to argue.

[Lula]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

[slucero]

Don't you realize that it was corporate greed that destroyed the economy that was built by the very people who they were putting out of work and out of their homes?

The corporate greed wouldn't have been as big a deal if millions of us wouldn't have purchased homes that we couldn't afford. Sorry, but there's plenty of greed to go around. It isn't just a problem amongst the rich and corporations. Lots of middle-class folks bought not just homes they couldn't afford, but tons of stuff on credit cards that put them so deeply in debt that they couldn't afford to pay those off, either.

Yep, there were a lot of people who did those things but if you think that could have brought this economy down you've been worshiping at the altar of four headed propaganda monster HannityBeckLimbaughPalin too much. It was Wall Street Corporate gambling that killed this economy, and in fact, set the country up for all of those credit fiascoes by sending credit cards to every name and address they could get, even to kids before they even have jobs and playing fast and dirty with with mortgages like carnival barkers seeing how many they could rook in. They didn't then and still don't care what they do to this economy because it doesn't affect them. They have their Wall Street games and their off shore accounts so the rest of the country can eat cake while the Wall Street Casino gives odds on who's going to choke and die first.


Edited to add:

It doesn't matter what kind of "tax system" you have as long as the wealthy can buy the government.

I think if you get down to the root cause of this whole mess. It comes down to the American consumer. I won't argue about what you label "Wall Street" since I'm not sure we all define that the same way. The big question to me is why did we jump on these mortgage or credit card offers? I know I did like everyone else and now I'm trying to figure out why??

Because the average American is bombarded with advertising on a daily basis... there is a reason subliminal advertising is called "subliminal"... its all around you in plain sight... yet just like your front door.. you are oblivious to it consciously... but your subconscious takes everything in.. all the time..

[RocknRoll]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Are we not responsible for our own actions?? Do we need someone in Washington to protect us?? Also, Remember, the Wall Street bailouts were loans that have beeen pretty much paid back with billions in interest that should go to the taxpayer. Unfortunately, that won't happen.

[slucero]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Interesting math...

$797,000,000,000 Billion divided by 57,412,714 Million (only 1/2 of all households pay taxes) = $13, 882 per household...

[RocknRoll]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Interesting math...

$797,000,000,000 Billion divided by 57,412,714 Million (only 1/2 of all households pay taxes) = $13, 882 per household...

This is the stimulus bill which has nothing to do with "Wall Street"

[slucero]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Are we not responsible for our own actions?? Do we need someone in Washington to protect us?? Also, Remember, the Wall Street bailouts were loans that have beeen pretty much paid back with billions in interest that should go to the taxpayer. Unfortunately, that won't happen.

Right... except the government has committed to pouring nearly $7.7 TRILLION in bailouts... not $797 Billion...

read it here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... refer=home

[slucero]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Interesting math...

$797,000,000,000 Billion divided by 57,412,714 Million (only 1/2 of all households pay taxes) = $13, 882 per household...

You need to seperate TARP from the supposedly stimlulus bill.

No - my post answers Lula's postulation.. she said bailouts...

TARP purchases assets and equity from financial institutions = bailout

[RocknRoll]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Are we not responsible for our own actions?? Do we need someone in Washington to protect us?? Also, Remember, the Wall Street bailouts were loans that have beeen pretty much paid back with billions in interest that should go to the taxpayer. Unfortunately, that won't happen.

Right... except the government has committed to pouring nearly $7.7 TRILLION in bailouts... not $797 Billion...

read it here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... refer=home

OK. I'm lost. I don't see where an article from 2008 applies today. Have you checked bank stocks lately?

[conversationpc]

Yep, there were a lot of people who did those things but if you think that could have brought this economy down you've been worshiping at the altar of four headed propaganda monster HannityBeckLimbaughPalin too much. It was Wall Street Corporate gambling that killed this economy, and in fact, set the country up for all of those credit fiascoes by sending credit cards to every name and address they could get, even to kids before they even have jobs and playing fast and dirty with with mortgages like carnival barkers seeing how many they could rook in. They didn't then and still don't care what they do to this economy because it doesn't affect them. They have their Wall Street games and their off shore accounts so the rest of the country can eat cake while the Wall Street Casino gives odds on who's going to choke and die first.

I don't like three of the four you listed there and it doesn't even really matter anyway. Predatory lending practices aside, no one forced those folks to accept the loans. If you take a loan, you're responsible for it. Is it wrong to prey on people in that way? Certainly, but there's responsibility on the other side as well.

It doesn't matter what kind of "tax system" you have as long as the wealthy can buy the government.

The Fair Tax would make it a LOT harder to game the system. It's not perfect but it closes up most loopholes.

[conversationpc]

I think if you get down to the root cause of this whole mess. It comes down to the American consumer. I won't argue about what you label "Wall Street" since I'm not sure we all define that the same way. The big question to me is why did we jump on these mortgage or credit card offers? I know I did like everyone else and now I'm trying to figure out why??

Because were financially stupid and greedy. We didn't want to pay for things we didn't have money for. My wife and I got ourselves pretty deep in the hole and ended up having to make payments every month that were more than our mortgage. We did that for four years and, fortunately, never missed a payment and ended up paying off all our credit cards. We're still not the best financial experts in the world but we're in a lot better place now than we were for a long time.

[Rockindeano]

I don't like three of the four you listed there and it doesn't even really matter anyway.

I am dying to know which one you DO like? Palin? Hannity? Limbaugh? The Beckster? Please let me know which one it is. Me thinks you're too embarrassed to name the one, or you would have done so already.

[conversationpc]

I don't like three of the four you listed there and it doesn't even really matter anyway.

I am dying to know which one you DO like? Palin? Hannity? Limbaugh? The Beckster? Please let me know which one it is. Me thinks you're too embarrassed to name the one, or you would have done so already.

Come on...How long have you been here now? I've talked about Beck plenty of times. Pay attention already!

[RocknRoll]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Interesting math...

$797,000,000,000 Billion divided by 57,412,714 Million (only 1/2 of all households pay taxes) = $13, 882 per household...

You need to seperate TARP from the supposedly stimlulus bill.

No - my post answers Lula's postulation.. she said bailouts...

TARP purchases assets and equity from financial institutions = bailout

Absolutely it was a bailout. But it was a loan paid back with billions in interest with the exception of AIG.

Heard the gov is selling shares in CITI today

[slucero]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Are we not responsible for our own actions?? Do we need someone in Washington to protect us?? Also, Remember, the Wall Street bailouts were loans that have beeen pretty much paid back with billions in interest that should go to the taxpayer. Unfortunately, that won't happen.

Right... except the government has committed to pouring nearly $7.7 TRILLION in bailouts... not $797 Billion...

read it here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... refer=home

OK. I'm lost. I don't see where an article from 2008 applies today. Have you checked bank stocks lately?

Those same banks that have been taking the bailout money and using it to trade equities on Wall Street?...

Those same banks who should have gone out of business... due to their own miss-management.. like any other business NORMALLY would?

THose same banks who the government suspended the mark-to-market rule for, so they wouldn't have to revalue and WRITE DOWN the bad asset debt on their balance sheets which would have rendered them bankrupt?


"Lost" is the correct word..

[slucero]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Interesting math...

$797,000,000,000 Billion divided by 57,412,714 Million (only 1/2 of all households pay taxes) = $13, 882 per household...

You need to seperate TARP from the supposedly stimlulus bill.

No - my post answers Lula's postulation.. she said bailouts...

TARP purchases assets and equity from financial institutions = bailout

Absolutely it was a bailout. But it was a loan paid back with billions in interest with the exception of AIG.

Heard the gov is selling shares in CITI today

It was no bailout... it's legalized theft... we are being robbed by the very industry we trust our money to...

Who do you think Fanny and Freddie bought all that toxic mortgage debt from? The Banks created this mess... then offloaded the "never to be repaid" DEBT on the TAXPAYERS, exchanging bad debt for good.. all via government bailout and Federal Reserve buying toxic assets...

The government GSE's and the Federal reserve now currently own 90% of all mortgages... and nearly ALL the toxic debt... and there's an article in todays Bloomberg that estimates "Bailing out" Freddie and Fannie at as high as $1 Trillion... yup.. there's that "Bailout" word again... makes that $15 Billion profit on the TARP a little less important... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-1 ... llion.html


We're on the hook...

The banks are off the hook...

[RocknRoll]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Are we not responsible for our own actions?? Do we need someone in Washington to protect us?? Also, Remember, the Wall Street bailouts were loans that have beeen pretty much paid back with billions in interest that should go to the taxpayer. Unfortunately, that won't happen.

Right... except the government has committed to pouring nearly $7.7 TRILLION in bailouts... not $797 Billion...

read it here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... refer=home

OK. I'm lost. I don't see where an article from 2008 applies today. Have you checked bank stocks lately?

Those same banks that have been taking the bailout money and using it to trade equities on Wall Street?...

Those same banks who should have gone out of business... due to their own miss-management.. like any other business NORMALLY would?

THose same banks who the government suspended the mark-to-market rule for, so they wouldn't have to revalue and WRITE DOWN the bad asset debt on their balance sheets which would have rendered them bankrupt?


"Lost" is the correct word..

So these same banks that have paid back their bailout money with billions in interst are trading in equties. Isn't that kind of what we need to turn this econoy around?

I understand mark to market so where is the issue?

[slucero]

people take the credit cards and mortgages because they can. if regulation were in place many would not have been able to get in upside down over their heads.

i had my dance with credit cards years ago and now pay cash, pretty much always. i'm saving my down payment for a house. i don't excuse the practices of the consumers, but the predatory lending practices are the bigger problem, not the consumer. wall street bailouts really pissed me off. i'd much rather the bailouts go to main street and the responsible consumers.

Are we not responsible for our own actions?? Do we need someone in Washington to protect us?? Also, Remember, the Wall Street bailouts were loans that have beeen pretty much paid back with billions in interest that should go to the taxpayer. Unfortunately, that won't happen.

Right... except the government has committed to pouring nearly $7.7 TRILLION in bailouts... not $797 Billion...

read it here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... refer=home

OK. I'm lost. I don't see where an article from 2008 applies today. Have you checked bank stocks lately?

Those same banks that have been taking the bailout money and using it to trade equities on Wall Street?...

Those same banks who should have gone out of business... due to their own miss-management.. like any other business NORMALLY would?

THose same banks who the government suspended the mark-to-market rule for, so they wouldn't have to revalue and WRITE DOWN the bad asset debt on their balance sheets which would have rendered them bankrupt?


"Lost" is the correct word..

So these same banks that have paid back their bailout money with billions in interst are trading in equties. Isn't that kind of what we need to turn this econoy around?

I understand mark to market so where is the issue?

The Mark-to-Market rules were suspended, allowing the banks to carry the bad loans at original value... the rules have yet to be reinstated... so the banks have not had to take the charge for the loss... and FAIL...

Since the rules were suspended... then what was the point of bailing them out then... because on their balance sheets... they'd still show those "bad" assets as "good"... and they'd (at least on paper) be solvent... but wait... they've ALREADY sold most of those bad assets, in exchange for bailout money...

Banks exist and can only make money one way... by lending it... YET... all the news is how banks aren't LENDING... so just how are banks showing all these profits??

They are using the massive bailout money on the equities markets... because FINREG did not out law trading desks at the banks.. (the bank lobby got it removed)

Further they are also getting money from the Fed at 0% (what's the Fed lending rate?... ZERO PERCENT), then they are buying Treasuries with a guaranteed return... talk about EASY PROFITS.... and that profit is paid by the taxpayers...

and there's your bank earnings growth...


Banks taking government money and buying equities & Treasuries does not translate into "turning the economy around"... it just turns the DOW into a monetary washing machine...

Investment/Loans in new business
Investment in R&D

THAT turns economies around..

[donnaplease]

I checked out some of the Rachel Maddow show on tv earlier. I used to listen to her some when she was on Air America. Guys, she is EQUALLY as bad as Beck, Hannity, etc. She also has the nerve-grating habit of talking in that horrible monotone that makes me want to reach through the TV and wrap my hands around her neck. Apparently she has engaged in some kind of nanny-nanny-boo-boo ad campaign war with Marco Rubio. They both should be smacked up side the melon! (I wish I had the wit of TNC to make some kind of hilarious comment, but the air in my head is deflating tonight)

The media bias IS on both sides, folks. The liberals on MSNBC are as bad as the conservatives on Fox. Two wrongs don't make a right, but as much as you guys want to scour Fox and it's commentators, there are others out there just as guilty. For every Hannity, there's a Maddow. I guess until WE call for OUR side to behave themselves, it's not going to improve. Bummer.

[Rockindeano]

I checked out some of the Rachel Maddow show on tv earlier. I used to listen to her some when she was on Air America. Guys, she is EQUALLY as bad as Beck, Hannity, etc. She also has the nerve-grating habit of talking in that horrible monotone that makes me want to reach through the TV and wrap my hands around her neck. Apparently she has engaged in some kind of nanny-nanny-boo-boo ad campaign war with Marco Rubio. They both should be smacked up side the melon! (I wish I had the wit of TNC to make some kind of hilarious comment, but the air in my head is deflating tonight)

The media bias IS on both sides, folks. The liberals on MSNBC are as bad as the conservatives on Fox. Two wrongs don't make a right, but as much as you guys want to scour Fox and it's commentators, there are others out there just as guilty. For every Hannity, there's a Maddow. I guess until WE call for OUR side to behave themselves, it's not going to improve. Bummer.

You're too much donna. MSNBC is bias alright, but two things make them different than scum Fox News.

1- They don't call themselves "Fair and Balanced."

2- They don't run stories to fit their agenda. They don't purposefully engage some scumbag like a Breitbart, and joyfully run the story in order to hurt someone to fulfill their agenda.

BIG Difference.

Oh and Maddow? She does her homework. She is biased to be sure, but she talks in fact, not emotional bullshit. She doesn't cry either like the Beckster.

PS- Rubio, along with Angle, is a fucking scumbag. He deserves all Maddow's wrath.

PPS- I would love to see a debate between Olberman, Maddow and Ed Shultz vs Hannity, Palin and the Beckster. Man tht would be fun to watch. No ear monitors like Bush had when he debated Kerry, no talking points. Have CNN moderate it. I would pay to see that ass kicking.
You'd have Palin writing notes on her hand, the Beckster crying, and Hannity trying to go to commercial. It wouldn't be close.

PPPS- donna, you aren't the only one who does it, but I notice when the Cons know that they are cornered, like the Fox News guilt of two days ago, they immediately go to the "BOTH" sides do it card. I find the diversion funny, yet predictable. Why can't you all be like Rip Rokken, and just come clean and say "Fox was wrong?" You just can't do it.

[conversationpc]

I checked out some of the Rachel Maddow show on tv earlier. I used to listen to her some when she was on Air America. Guys, she is EQUALLY as bad as Beck, Hannity, etc. She also has the nerve-grating habit of talking in that horrible monotone that makes me want to reach through the TV and wrap my hands around her neck. Apparently she has engaged in some kind of nanny-nanny-boo-boo ad campaign war with Marco Rubio. They both should be smacked up side the melon! (I wish I had the wit of TNC to make some kind of hilarious comment, but the air in my head is deflating tonight)

I watch her show every once in a while. She's a lot easier to stomach than Olbermann, that's for sure.

[conversationpc]

1- They don't call themselves "Fair and Balanced."

Let's get real here. If you asked the individual employees at MSNBC, I guarantee you they would say they're fair and balanced. They may not use it as a slogan but I bet you they think it nonetheless.

PPS- I would love to see a debate between Olberman, Maddow and Ed Shultz vs Hannity, Palin and the Beckster. Man tht would be fun to watch. No ear monitors like Bush had when he debated Kerry, no talking points. Have CNN moderate it. I would pay to see that ass kicking. You'd have Palin writing notes on her hand, the Beckster crying, and Hannity trying to go to commercial. It wouldn't be close.

Hannity is a tool. I listened to part of his radio show on the way home tonight and he got his clock cleaned by some liberal dude who called in.

PPPS- donna, you aren't the only one who does it, but I notice when the Cons know that they are cornered, like the Fox News guilt of two days ago, they immediately go to the "BOTH" sides do it card. I find the diversion funny, yet predictable.

Well, you folks on the left NEVER seem to realize it. Regardless of political ideology, people on all sides of the fence have one thing in common...A propensity to screw up, do dumb things, get caught doing something illegal, etc.

Why can't you all be like Rip Rokken, and just come clean and say "Fox was wrong?" You just can't do it.

I called out O'Reilly, Hannity, and Breitbart on my blog the other day, so Rip isn't the only one... Context Matters

[conversationpc]

I'm not a big fan of Bernanke but I agree with him here...

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said extending at least some of the tax cuts set to expire this year would help strengthen a U.S. economy still in need of stimulus and urged offsetting the move with increased revenue or lower spending.

[conversationpc]

2- They don't run stories to fit their agenda. They don't purposefully engage some scumbag like a Breitbart, and joyfully run the story in order to hurt someone to fulfill their agenda.

Let's not be so quick here to acquit MSNBC. I read about this a while back but had forgotten about it...

http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-1982 ... aten-Obama

Contessa Brewer, a host on virulently pro-Obama biased MSNBC network television, accused “white people” of showing up with guns to health care reform protests.

Brewer was referring to President Obama's speech in Arizona earlier this week. But as has been pointed out before, one of the men carrying an assault rifles at that event was black.

The black fellow has since defended his right to bear arms in public, which is not against the law in Arizona anyway.

Ignoring all this, it appears Brewer and MSNBC deliberately attempted to stir up racial tension by deliberately withholding from her viewers that the gun-toters in question included a black man, choosing instead to label them as “white people.”

Here is part of what Brewer said:

"A man at a pro-health care reform rally...wore a semiautomatic assault rifle on his shoulder and a pistol on his hip....there are questions about whether this has racial overtones....Here you have a man of color in the presidency and white people showing up with guns strapped to their waists."

After Brewer presented this misleading information, fellow MSNBC talking heads went on to further link the incident with white racism, pontificating about white supremacist “anger about a black person being president....we see these hate groups rising up and this is definitely part of that.”

Moreover, footage accompanying MSNBC’s report creatively edited out the black man in question, so as to fool viewers into believing he was white.

Is this what Obama meant when he was talking about a post-racial, sky opening, celestial-choirs-singing, honest, edifying national conversation on race?

MSNBC's shameless and unethical deployment of the race card is not only dishonest but dangerous. Contessa Brewer and MSNBC are more interested in racialist drama and ratings than in telling in truth, and in doing so they are endangering lives by inciting racial hatred.

This is not the first time MSNBC's bigots have played fast and loose with images of racial violence; remember last year's backlash when Keith Olbermann accused Hillary Clinton of wanting Obama assassinated?

This type of prejudiced incitement is not funny. And it needs to stop before somebody gets hurt.

Contessa Brewer and MSNBC owe President Obama, white people, and America an apology for their shoddy, racist reporting.

That page has the video in question, selectively edited so that you can't tell the guy with the gun is a black man. Sounds kinda similar to this situation with Fox News, doesn't it?

[Rockindeano]

I called out O'Reilly, Hannity, and Breitbart on my blog the other day, so Rip isn't the only one... Context Matters

Good on you Dave. Now why can't Lie Finder RWF or donna just admit that Fox was guilty and behaved in an disgusting manner? I don't get how they can still think Fox News is legitimate source? I thought conservatives were all about values? Unless something bad happens to Fox, then it doesn't count, right?

donna is a sweetheart of person, a real good egg, but goddammit if she doesn't piss me off politically.

[conversationpc]

I called out O'Reilly, Hannity, and Breitbart on my blog the other day, so Rip isn't the only one... Context Matters

Good on you Dave. Now why can't Lie Finder RWF or donna just admit that Fox was guilty and behaved in an disgusting manner? I don't get how they can still think Fox News is legitimate source? I thought conservatives were all about values? Unless something bad happens to Fox, then it doesn't count, right?

donna is a sweetheart of person, a real good egg, but goddammit if she doesn't piss me off politically.

On another note, you do realize that the edited Sherrod video wasn't aired on Fox until AFTER she was forced to resign? That doesn't excuse O'Reilly and Hannity for airing it anyway but no one can claim with a straight face that Fox News had anything to do with her being ousted.

[Rockindeano]

I called out O'Reilly, Hannity, and Breitbart on my blog the other day, so Rip isn't the only one... Context Matters

Good on you Dave. Now why can't Lie Finder RWF or donna just admit that Fox was guilty and behaved in an disgusting manner? I don't get how they can still think Fox News is legitimate source? I thought conservatives were all about values? Unless something bad happens to Fox, then it doesn't count, right?

donna is a sweetheart of person, a real good egg, but goddammit if she doesn't piss me off politically.

On another note, you do realize that the edited Sherrod video wasn't aired on Fox until AFTER she was forced to resign? That doesn't excuse O'Reilly and Hannity for airing it anyway but no one can claim with a straight face that Fox News had anything to do with her being ousted.

No, but they couldn't wait to get in there and run that video nonstop. They were so happy to pin reverse racism on the black lady. oops. They were giddy. Also, your front runner Newt Gingrich piled on and insisted she should have been fired.

The point is Fox was aligned with Breitbart and that sucks. Hannity was beaming when he had that scumbag on the set. Why is it Fox associates itself with bad people? G Gordon Liddy, Oliver North, Mark Furman, Karl Rove, Andrew Breitbart......Jesus, who's next, Satan?

[Rhiannon]

The point is Fox was aligned with Breitbart and that sucks. Hannity was beaming when he had that scumbag on the set. Why is it Fox associates itself with bad people? G Gordon Liddy, Oliver North, Mark Furman, Karl Rove, Andrew Breitbart......Jesus, who's next, Satan?

Hey, leave Ann Coulter out of this.