Scott Brown praises Palin; suggests Obama born out of wedlock

[elvis]

funny. they supported a wingnut like Obama.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Good point, Elvis, but if you think he is an ideologue, you are wrong. He is pragmatic as they come, just like Clinton, who made us look like idiots at times. Obama won because (1) Bush had shot his bolt (2) and the economy went sour.

 

[oreo]

You guys are mistaking the wing nuts as conservatives. They are not. They are reactionaries and are as great a danger as are the whacko left. I knew things were going south when the Bush propaganda machine was trying to compare him with Winston Churchill after 9-11. Bush did well after the strike (certainly better than Gore), but to compare Bush to Churchill, the greatest defender of democracy and liberty in the 20th century?

We lost because of Palin, that stats are quite clear about that. If Romney had been on the ticket, with the economy beginning to sag, we would have had a fighting chance. The GOP cannot win nationally with the whacko extreme right anymore. With a conservative, program, yes. With a reactionary program, no.

You are no conservative or Republican----Nice try though. Republicans lost because of John McCain who is a moderate Republican. In fact, if it weren't for Sarah Palin---his campaign crowds would have dwindled down to around 7 people.

It was obvious that Romney wasn't that interested in winning the nomination because he didn't even campaign in the first few caucas around the nation. He threw all his eggs in one basket--& that basket was Florida & he was out.

As the liberal you really are--don't try & disguise yourself as a conservative. Your comments in no way reflect conservatism. We know now that moderate Republicans cannot win. We might as well elect democrats--LOL--because there is no difference between them.

 

[elvis]

You guys are mistaking the wing nuts as conservatives. They are not. They are reactionaries and are as great a danger as are the whacko left. I knew things were going south when the Bush propaganda machine was trying to compare him with Winston Churchill after 9-11. Bush did well after the strike (certainly better than Gore), but to compare Bush to Churchill, the greatest defender of democracy and liberty in the 20th century?

We lost because of Palin, that stats are quite clear about that. If Romney had been on the ticket, with the economy beginning to sag, we would have had a fighting chance. The GOP cannot win nationally with the whacko extreme right anymore. With a conservative, program, yes. With a reactionary program, no.

You are no conservative or Republican----Nice try though. Republicans lost because of John McCain who is a moderate Republican. In fact, if it weren't for Sarah Palin---his campaign crowds would have dwindled down to around 7 people.

It was obvious that Romney wasn't that interested in winning the nomination because he didn't even campaign in the first few caucas around the nation. He threw all his eggs in one basket--& that basket was Florida & he was out.

As the liberal you really are--don't try & disguise yourself as a conservative. Your comments in no way reflect conservatism.

The race was a virtual tie until the economic meltdown. all the swingstates were tied until sept/october.

 

[oreo]

You guys are mistaking the wing nuts as conservatives. They are not. They are reactionaries and are as great a danger as are the whacko left. I knew things were going south when the Bush propaganda machine was trying to compare him with Winston Churchill after 9-11. Bush did well after the strike (certainly better than Gore), but to compare Bush to Churchill, the greatest defender of democracy and liberty in the 20th century?

We lost because of Palin, that stats are quite clear about that. If Romney had been on the ticket, with the economy beginning to sag, we would have had a fighting chance. The GOP cannot win nationally with the whacko extreme right anymore. With a conservative, program, yes. With a reactionary program, no.

You are no conservative or Republican----Nice try though. Republicans lost because of John McCain who is a moderate Republican. In fact, if it weren't for Sarah Palin---his campaign crowds would have dwindled down to around 7 people.

It was obvious that Romney wasn't that interested in winning the nomination because he didn't even campaign in the first few caucas around the nation. He threw all his eggs in one basket--& that basket was Florida & he was out.

As the liberal you really are--don't try & disguise yourself as a conservative. Your comments in no way reflect conservatism.

The race was a virtual tie until the economic meltdown. all the swingstates were tied until sept/october.

And the ONLY time polls showed John McCain ahead is when Sarah Palin was put on the ticket.

 

[Sinatra]

It's a pretty stupid strategic maneuver unless he is trying to speak to his extreme base and not Indes, who he should be courting.

This only goes to show that the real Scott Brown is something that the voters should see before election day.

Interesting that he can't even control himself for a couple of more days.

go wingnut go. lol..

tell us all about the "pro america parts of the country". i'm sure that will go over big in massachusetts.

____

See here is yet another example of how stupid some in here are.

Control himself for "two more days"?????


The video link is from TWO YEARS ago!!!

You libs in here cannot even follow each other's own talking points - much the same way the Coakley campaign has been in complete chaos...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Wing nuts are not conservatives, they are reactionaries. They are not mainstream, and they are abhorred by the center of American politics. The center will not support teabaggers or their stupidities. They have proven it once already. What was the latest popularity poll for Palin: 25%? Yeah, we are going to win with that? Sheer stupidity ally conservatism with the reactionaries.

 

[elvis]

You are no conservative or Republican----Nice try though. Republicans lost because of John McCain who is a moderate Republican. In fact, if it weren't for Sarah Palin---his campaign crowds would have dwindled down to around 7 people.

It was obvious that Romney wasn't that interested in winning the nomination because he didn't even campaign in the first few caucas around the nation. He threw all his eggs in one basket--& that basket was Florida & he was out.

As the liberal you really are--don't try & disguise yourself as a conservative. Your comments in no way reflect conservatism.

The race was a virtual tie until the economic meltdown. all the swingstates were tied until sept/october.

And the ONLY time polls showed John McCain ahead is when Sarah Palin was put on the ticket.

that may be true, but when the swingstates were tied, it favored Mac.

 

[JakeStarkey]

[And the ONLY time polls showed John McCain ahead is when Sarah Palin was put on the ticket.

Until America got to know her. If Romney had been on the ticket, he would have torn Biden apart, and he would have chewed up Obama's talking points. That would have allowed McCain to be the wise, grandfatherly type that America needed.

 

[elvis]

Wing nuts are not conservatives, they are reactionaries. They are not mainstream, and they are abhorred by the center of American politics. The center will not support teabaggers or their stupidities. They have proven it once already. What was the latest popularity poll for Palin: 25%? Yeah, we are going to win with that? Sheer stupidity ally conservatism with the reactionaries.

Aside from nominating Palin, how do you not be a reactionary against this tailpipe of a Presidency?

 

[Yurt]

Your arguments have been demolished over and over, and all you can say is that you don't believe it.

Like I said, you proved my point.

you haven't actually addressed a single point i raised.

if you have, please show me where, and how you either: answered, agreed, or countered said point.

come on hack.....let's see it, because so far, i'm seriously laughing my ass off at you.

 

[oreo]

Brown, Coakley, And the Outrage Gap - Paul Krugman Blog - NYTimes.com



Thoughts?



My opinion: What an asshole.

For the record Scott:



Ann Dunham - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And of course you have a link to Sarah Palin making a comment that Obama was born out of wed lock---

Obviously another liberal who does not have the reading comprehension skills or the attention span of a nat to get through a 413 page book--but think they know something anyway.

I see now the video is at the first link in the OP and now I am laughing at the text below it:

But it’s clear if you watch the video that there’s a broader context: Brown is clearly aligning himself with the Limbaugh wing of the GOP, in which slurs along these lines are standard fare. And as Steve Benen points out, claims about Obama’s illegitimacy were an integral part of the birther craziness.

So will this actually make political waves? If Brown were a Democrat, it would instantly be a huge scandal. The outrage machine would be working overtime. And the news media would, of course, pick it up.

But Democrats don’t have the same kind of outrage infrastructure. Can they nevertheless find a way to use this? I guess we’ll soon find out.

It is clear that woman who posed the scenario about illegitimate children in that interview was the one being an asshole, not Scott Brown.

The interviewer interjected about the status of The President's parents' marriage at his birth. SHE brought it up and Scott Brown responded "I don't know about that" and he then immediately politely moved OFF the topic of the status of the marriage.

Scott Brown was merely trying to answer her "family values" question and illustrate that many good families face similar difficult challenges.





Now all the blogs are buzzing over this old video and wondering how they can spin this lie that Scott Brown is so EXTREME.

The Coakley people have run what sounds like the world's worst campaign, but here's a redemption tip I pass on from a friend: The Democrats should put together a radio ad featuring the Scott Brown innuendo about Obama, and stuff the airwaves tomorrow and Tuesday morning-(not least on African-American stations. Tomorrow's version should start: "A message from the Democratic Party for Martin Luther King Day." Then something about how this election isn't about Coakley, it's about Barack Obama and the misguided Americans who still can't accept that a black man is the legitimate president of the United States. Scott Brown "Doesn't Know" Whether Obama Was Born out of Wedlock | TPMCafe

Yeah figures--& I have mentioned this before. ALWAYS READ THE ARTICLE OR WATCH THE VIDEO THAT LIBERALS LINK TOO. They have a habit of picking & choosing out of an article what they want you to know--but leave out 99% of the real detail.

In essense--DOGBERT--just did a big doo-doo. He took this article completely out of context--somehow added Palin's name to it--& then MADE UP a conspiracy theory using the above linked source.

 

[Sinatra]

I suggest you all actually view the video that begins the thread.

Scott Brown does and excellent job of supporting Palin's right to be a candidate, as well as defending her daughter's decision to have a child. He states that like Palin's daughter, Obama's own mother had him when she was 18, thus attempting to show the inherent bias of the other guest who is dragging the Palin family through the mud.

Scott Brown sticks up for women - while the Democrat guest is attempting to run them into the ground.

His reasoned response was one of class and respect - and it is just such examples that make Scott Brown the great candidate he has proven to be.

 

[garyd]

Wrong starkey it was a dead heat until two weaks after the palin Nomination then McCain beagan talking aobut TARP and the numbers began to tumble at that point and never recovered. That's the facts. Obama appeard to distance himself from TARP and the american people went for any port in a storm. to think otherwise is absurd.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your arguments have been demolished over and over, and all you can say is that you don't believe it.

Like I said, you proved my point.

you haven't actually addressed a single point i raised.

if you have, please show me where, and how you either: answered, agreed, or countered said point.

come on hack.....let's see it, because so far, i'm seriously laughing my ass off at you.

Many, many times I have shown you the error of your ways, and you simplistically say you disagree and ask for more "proof". Own your own idiocy, Yurt.

 

[elvis]

And of course you have a link to Sarah Palin making a comment that Obama was born out of wed lock---

Obviously another liberal who does not have the reading comprehension skills or the attention span of a nat to get through a 413 page book--but think they know something anyway.

I see now the video is at the first link in the OP and now I am laughing at the text below it:










It is clear that woman who posed the scenario about illegitimate children in that interview was the one being an asshole, not Scott Brown.

The interviewer interjected about the status of The President's parents' marriage at his birth. SHE brought it up and Scott Brown responded "I don't know about that" and he then immediately politely moved OFF the topic of the status of the marriage.

Scott Brown was merely trying to answer her "family values" question and illustrate that many good families face similar difficult challenges.





Now all the blogs are buzzing over this old video and wondering how they can spin this lie that Scott Brown is so EXTREME.

The Coakley people have run what sounds like the world's worst campaign, but here's a redemption tip I pass on from a friend: The Democrats should put together a radio ad featuring the Scott Brown innuendo about Obama, and stuff the airwaves tomorrow and Tuesday morning-(not least on African-American stations. Tomorrow's version should start: "A message from the Democratic Party for Martin Luther King Day." Then something about how this election isn't about Coakley, it's about Barack Obama and the misguided Americans who still can't accept that a black man is the legitimate president of the United States. Scott Brown "Doesn't Know" Whether Obama Was Born out of Wedlock | TPMCafe

Yeah figures--& I have mentioned this before. ALWAYS READ THE ARTICLE OR WATCH THE VIDEO THAT LIBERALS LINK TOO. They have a habit of picking & choosing out of an article what they want you to know--but leave out 99% of the real detail.

In essense--DOGBERT--just did a big doo-doo. He took this article completely out of context--somehow added Palin's name to it--& then MADE UP a conspiracy theory using the above linked source.

I didn't realize it was a Paul Crockman blog.

 

[Sinatra]

And of course you have a link to Sarah Palin making a comment that Obama was born out of wed lock---

Obviously another liberal who does not have the reading comprehension skills or the attention span of a nat to get through a 413 page book--but think they know something anyway.

I see now the video is at the first link in the OP and now I am laughing at the text below it:










It is clear that woman who posed the scenario about illegitimate children in that interview was the one being an asshole, not Scott Brown.

The interviewer interjected about the status of The President's parents' marriage at his birth. SHE brought it up and Scott Brown responded "I don't know about that" and he then immediately politely moved OFF the topic of the status of the marriage.

Scott Brown was merely trying to answer her "family values" question and illustrate that many good families face similar difficult challenges.





Now all the blogs are buzzing over this old video and wondering how they can spin this lie that Scott Brown is so EXTREME.

The Coakley people have run what sounds like the world's worst campaign, but here's a redemption tip I pass on from a friend: The Democrats should put together a radio ad featuring the Scott Brown innuendo about Obama, and stuff the airwaves tomorrow and Tuesday morning-(not least on African-American stations. Tomorrow's version should start: "A message from the Democratic Party for Martin Luther King Day." Then something about how this election isn't about Coakley, it's about Barack Obama and the misguided Americans who still can't accept that a black man is the legitimate president of the United States. Scott Brown "Doesn't Know" Whether Obama Was Born out of Wedlock | TPMCafe

Yeah figures--& I have mentioned this before. ALWAYS READ THE ARTICLE THAT LIBERALS LINK TOO. They have a habit of picking & choosing out of an article what they want you to know--but leave out 99% of the real detail.

In essense--DOGBERT--just did a big doo-doo. He took this article completely out of context--somehow added Palin's name to it--& then MADE UP a conspiracy theory using the above linked source.

Quite correct - the actual video shows Scott Brown sticking up for women, while the Democrat guest is attempting to drag them through the mud for purely partisan reasons - the worst form of politics.

Scott Brown comes off sounding the far more reasonable and responsible individual on the video, which is why he is doing so well in his race for Senate...

 

[Yurt]

Your arguments have been demolished over and over, and all you can say is that you don't believe it.

Like I said, you proved my point.

you haven't actually addressed a single point i raised.

if you have, please show me where, and how you either: answered, agreed, or countered said point.

come on hack.....let's see it, because so far, i'm seriously laughing my ass off at you.

Many, many times I have shown you the error of your ways, and you simplistically say you disagree and ask for more "proof". Own your own idiocy, Yurt.

alright....got it....you are hack

you can't actually take a single point and discuss it or debate it.

tbo, i am not surprised. but, i wanted to give you the chance since you so adamantly proclaim you're this non partisan ex gop person. i've asked you 3 times now, you still offer this shite. this is 4X in this thread jake. you're done.

you're bogus and nothing but a hack/troll.

 

[Maple]

And of course you have a link to Sarah Palin making a comment that Obama was born out of wed lock---

Obviously another liberal who does not have the reading comprehension skills or the attention span of a nat to get through a 413 page book--but think they know something anyway.

I see now the video is at the first link in the OP and now I am laughing at the text below it:










It is clear that woman who posed the scenario about illegitimate children in that interview was the one being an asshole, not Scott Brown.

The interviewer interjected about the status of The President's parents' marriage at his birth. SHE brought it up and Scott Brown responded "I don't know about that" and he then immediately politely moved OFF the topic of the status of the marriage.

Scott Brown was merely trying to answer her "family values" question and illustrate that many good families face similar difficult challenges.





Now all the blogs are buzzing over this old video and wondering how they can spin this lie that Scott Brown is so EXTREME.

The Coakley people have run what sounds like the world's worst campaign, but here's a redemption tip I pass on from a friend: The Democrats should put together a radio ad featuring the Scott Brown innuendo about Obama, and stuff the airwaves tomorrow and Tuesday morning-(not least on African-American stations. Tomorrow's version should start: "A message from the Democratic Party for Martin Luther King Day." Then something about how this election isn't about Coakley, it's about Barack Obama and the misguided Americans who still can't accept that a black man is the legitimate president of the United States. Scott Brown "Doesn't Know" Whether Obama Was Born out of Wedlock | TPMCafe

Yeah figures--& I have mentioned this before. ALWAYS READ THE ARTICLE OR WATCH THE VIDEO THAT LIBERALS LINK TOO. They have a habit of picking & choosing out of an article what they want you to know--but leave out 99% of the real detail.

In essense--DOGBERT--just did a big doo-doo. He took this article completely out of context--somehow added Palin's name to it--& then MADE UP a conspiracy theory using the above linked source.

Palin was not even brought up in this interview, yet he throws it in there anyway. Talk about desperation and deception. Palin derangement syndrome on display for all to see.

 

[US Army Retired]

Your arguments have been demolished over and over, and all you can say is that you don't believe it.

Like I said, you proved my point.

you haven't actually addressed a single point i raised.

if you have, please show me where, and how you either: answered, agreed, or countered said point.

come on hack.....let's see it, because so far, i'm seriously laughing my ass off at you.

Many, many times I have shown you the error of your ways, and you simplistically say you disagree and ask for more "proof". Own your own idiocy, Yurt.

Do you believe Obama's father was a British National?