Rosie - Newt should read a history book

[paperview]

More:

Newsday reported in an August 30 article titled "Bush not strong on diversity" that an analysis of federal personnel records for September 2000 and September 2002 concluded that "lacks held 7 percent of administration jobs under Bush, less than half of the 16 percent they held under Clinton," and blacks held only 6 percent of "senior executive posts" under Bush compared to 13 percent under Clinton. As Newsday observed, Bush "has assembled the most diverse cabinet and top-level officials requiring Senate approval of any Republican president, creating a profile that nears the record-setting diversity of Clinton.

... [But] just below those highly visible positions -- in the hundreds of little known but important appointments to senior executive posts that don't need Senate confirmation -- the diversity of the Bush administration fades.

 

[yidnar]

Rosie O'Donnell: Newt Gingrich 'Should Read a History Book' | NewsBusters.org

I kid you not. This has got to be the funniest thing I've seen today.

Rosie is just another run of the mill,anti American ,communist ,whining,bitching ,gender confused homo that makes up the vast,vast majority of the democratic party .

 

[mudwhistle]

Newt: BA, MA, PhD.
Obama.... ?

Obama: POTUS, Nobel Prize winner

For what?????

He won a Grammy too.

They just give em awards just cuz they want to feel better about their POS leaders.

 

[Lakhota]

What Bush did to McCain in the 2000 S. C. primary

 

[yidnar]

LOL, now EVERYTHING is HISTORIC with liberals..
....

It's just a fact, cumquat.

When Clinton was president he appointed more minorities than ever before.

Obama appointed even more, but the wingers seem to call that racism, when he does it.

what a surprise !!! your avatar is half nude !! the lefts proclivity towards vulgarity is another despicable trait the idiots suffer from !! AIDS IS A LIBERAL DISEASE !!

 

[Harry Dresden]

LOL, now EVERYTHING is HISTORIC with liberals..
....

It's just a fact, cumquat.

When Clinton was president he appointed more minorities than ever before.

Obama appointed even more, but the wingers seem to call that racism, when he does it.

how come you skipped over Bush?....and we were talking about Black appointees,not minorities in general.....

 

[paperview]

Eat shit yidnar.

 

[Amelia]

LOL, now EVERYTHING is HISTORIC with liberals..
....

It's just a fact, cumquat.

When Clinton was president he appointed more minorities than ever before.

Obama appointed even more, but the wingers seem to call that racism, when he does it.

how come you skipped over Bush?....and we were talking about Black appointees,not minorities in general.....

It is interesting how often liberals ignore the diversity of the Bush administration.

 

[paperview]

I see you missed my previous post.

There's also this:

"President Obama is the first American president in history appoint mostly “non-traditional” candidates — as in persons who are not white males — to judge positions in the federal courts.

While 70% of Obama’s nominees have been women or minorities, former President George W. Bush had a non-traditional appointment rate of only 32.9%.

For Bill Clinton, his non-white-male appointments stood at a respectable 48.1%. But by comparison, for the first 140 years of this country’s federal judiciary system all those appointed to lifetime judgeships were white men, and presumably straight. Obama has shifted this trend dramatically within the first three years of his presidency, even appointing the first openly gay man to a federal judge position in New York City to further tip the scales."

Obama Appoints Record Number of Minorities, Women | Madame Noire | Black Women's Lifestyle Guide

^ Used this source only as one of the quickest I could find...they quote the AP.
http://madamenoire.com/111089/obamas-bench-press-appoints-record-number-of-women-minorities/

 

[Cecilie1200]

Rosie O'Donnell is one of the single most stupid woman the left has ever idolized.

Good Lord.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Just how dumb is Newt about history?

HNN Hot Topics: Newt Gingrich | History News Network

Newt Gingrich the Galactic Historian | History News Network

Carl S. Pyrdum III: Professor Newt's Distorted History Lesson | History News Network

Jonathan Zimmerman: Newt Gingrich, Pseudo-Historian | History News Network

Michael Kazin: Newt Gingrich, America

History News Network

Laura Seay: Newt Gingrich Dissertation on Congo Sheds Light On His Jab that Obama is 'Anticolonial' | History News Network

Texas in Africa: turned into a newt​

George Will Dismisses Newt Gingrich, Scoffs At Idea That He Is A

John DeVore: Newt Gingrich Is an Author of Alternative Histories. What If He Wrote an Alternative History of Himself? | History News Network

Hi, you have received -313 reputation points from The Infidel.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
troll

Regards,
The Infidel

Note: This is an automated message.

The Infidel just negged me for the above post. Why? I simply provided some examples of Newt's questionable historical analyses.

Why is it that you think anyone is interested in your interminable, childish complaints about being negged? We already assume that numerous people think you're a complete waste of oxygen, and really don't give much of a shit.

As to why someone felt compelled to notify you at this particular moment that you're a worthless scrap of space-wasting tissue, it would be because your breathtaking ignorance led you to post "examples" which were nothing more than opinion articles. Stunningly, the opinions of leftist writers mean almost as little as yours do.

Piss off.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Infidel just negged me for the above post. Why? I simply provided some examples of Newt's questionable historical analyses.

Can I whine too....

Hi, you have received -28 reputation points from Lakhota.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
Shame on you...

Regards,
Lakhota

Note: This is an automated message.

You pussy

You negged me for no logical reason, and I negged you back for that reason. I only neg for that and personal attacks.

No, dipshit. You negged him back for the reason that you're a pathetic juvenile loser who is hugely emotionally involved with the rep on this board and ALWAYS runs out and finds a random post by someone who negged you so you can neg them back.

Grow the fuck up. Or play in traffic, whichever is easier.

 

[kaz]

How is Healthcare run by private insurance companies socialist?

Oh..I forgot.....Glenn Beck said so

Sure, I'll explain this to you...again... Private companies are not what makes a free market. Competition makes a free market. There is little to no difference between government agencies and healthcare companies under tight government control as we have now. You can quibble over the definition of socialism, but there is no practical difference between socialism and what we have today.

 

[rightwinger]

How is Healthcare run by private insurance companies socialist?

Oh..I forgot.....Glenn Beck said so

Sure, I'll explain this to you...again... Private companies are not what makes a free market. Competition makes a free market. There is little to no difference between government agencies and healthcare companies under tight government control as we have now. You can quibble over the definition of socialism, but there is no practical difference between socialism and what we have today.

Ummmmmm....not exactly

Socialism is the government controlling the means of production. Any privately owned insurance company is not socialism because a private entity is making decisions on your coverage. Having hundreds of insurance companies competing for healthcare dollars is not socialism

Now....go explain it to Glenn Beck

 

[kaz]

How is Healthcare run by private insurance companies socialist?

Oh..I forgot.....Glenn Beck said so

Sure, I'll explain this to you...again... Private companies are not what makes a free market. Competition makes a free market. There is little to no difference between government agencies and healthcare companies under tight government control as we have now. You can quibble over the definition of socialism, but there is no practical difference between socialism and what we have today.

Ummmmmm....not exactly

Socialism is the government controlling the means of production. Any privately owned insurance company is not socialism because a private entity is making decisions on your coverage. Having hundreds of insurance companies competing for healthcare dollars is not socialism

Now....go explain it to Glenn Beck

Free market doesn't just mean price. When government is specifying the product removing consumer choice then it's still not free. Sorry. I do concede you cannot explain government to someone who inherently trusts it. Politicians are just looking out for you Right Winger. If that helps you sleep at night, so be it.

 

[bripat9643]

Ummmmmm....not exactly

Socialism is the government controlling the means of production. Any privately owned insurance company is not socialism because a private entity is making decisions on your coverage. Having hundreds of insurance companies competing for healthcare dollars is not socialism

Now....go explain it to Glenn Beck

Under Obamacare, government makes all the decisions. Private firms simply execute government orders. That's called "fascism." It's a variety of socialism.

 

[rightwinger]

Sure, I'll explain this to you...again... Private companies are not what makes a free market. Competition makes a free market. There is little to no difference between government agencies and healthcare companies under tight government control as we have now. You can quibble over the definition of socialism, but there is no practical difference between socialism and what we have today.

Ummmmmm....not exactly

Socialism is the government controlling the means of production. Any privately owned insurance company is not socialism because a private entity is making decisions on your coverage. Having hundreds of insurance companies competing for healthcare dollars is not socialism

Now....go explain it to Glenn Beck

Free market doesn't just mean price. When government is specifying the product removing consumer choice then it's still not free. Sorry. I do concede you cannot explain government to someone who inherently trusts it. Politicians are just looking out for you Right Winger. If that helps you sleep at night, so be it.

We have free market healthcare which disproves your histrionics about socialism. The Government setting rules for insurers is not socialism

Save it for Glenn Beck

 

[kaz]

Ummmmmm....not exactly

Socialism is the government controlling the means of production. Any privately owned insurance company is not socialism because a private entity is making decisions on your coverage. Having hundreds of insurance companies competing for healthcare dollars is not socialism

Now....go explain it to Glenn Beck

Free market doesn't just mean price. When government is specifying the product removing consumer choice then it's still not free. Sorry. I do concede you cannot explain government to someone who inherently trusts it. Politicians are just looking out for you Right Winger. If that helps you sleep at night, so be it.

We have free market healthcare which disproves your histrionics about socialism. The Government setting rules for insurers is not socialism

Save it for Glenn Beck

What's with the new obsession over Beck? Up until now it was a black prick that's been superglued to your mouth. You find him kinda hot now, eh?

 

[rightwinger]

Ummmmmm....not exactly

Socialism is the government controlling the means of production. Any privately owned insurance company is not socialism because a private entity is making decisions on your coverage. Having hundreds of insurance companies competing for healthcare dollars is not socialism

Now....go explain it to Glenn Beck

Under Obamacare, government makes all the decisions. Private firms simply execute government orders. That's called "fascism." It's a variety of socialism.

Only in rightwing fantasyland they do

 

[bripat9643]

We have free market healthcare which disproves your histrionics about socialism.

No, we don't have free market healthcare. For one thing, government is responsible for over half of all healthcare spending. For another, government makes most of the important decisions for so-called "private" healthcare providers.

The Government setting rules for insurers is not socialism

Depending on the extent of the rules, yeah it pretty much is socialism.