Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So I'm home now watching MSNBC, rewound my DVR to about 3 hours and luckily caught the better portion of Rachel Maddow's show. She's now in Alaska to interview Joe Miller and others.
Still watching, but just before this commercial break she asks some angry, clearly, RW voters some things and they start shouting out things like "Get rid of Eric Holder" She asks why are they against Eric Holder. One shouts back, "He's against guns." She asked the lady why? "What has Eric Holder specifically done that is against guns?" She responds with "he's voted down the line that are all anti-gun. Rachel then explains to her that Eric Holder has never had to vote on anything, he's not in Congress or in Senate. Some back and forth, with Rachel sincerely trying to figure what exactly do they have that tells them that Eric is "anti-gun." She ends up saying that she doesn't have all the facts on hand, but she just KNOWS he's anti gun.
Then a younger male, white, as well as the lady above, BTW, chimes in spewing the same nonsense. Again Rachel asks the young man, "What specifically has Eric done that is against the 2nd Amendment." He starts to flutter, then says, "Rachel, just Google Eric Holder and 2nd Amendment and Guns and you'll see all the ammo there." She responds, I will, but why are you currently so angry, what specically has he done that has you so angry....he says, he doesn't have all the facts on hand, but if she Googles it she will find it. And he was sincerely asking her to do so.
Then another older lady who's REALLY angry now, again, white, tells her "The black panthers is why I'm mad at Eric Holder." She's visibly livid on camera and ready to shout and Rachel asks her what about the Black Panthers, the lady replies "Voter Intimidation...not being prosecuted!" Rachel informs her that it was decided by the Bush Administration that there was nothing to prosecute the lone 2 New Black Panthers for. Then she cuts the camera back to where she was at the time, live, and then tells the audience that s he continued to question the woman, who got even more angry. Then told that she cut off the camera and had another very long convo with the lady who then calmed down. The lady told her that she's voting for Miller because Obama's not prosecuting the NBPs because they are black...so she's voting for Joe Miller.
This, folks, is the atmosphere that FOXNews has created. FOX LOVES the Low Information Voter.
WoW!!
*SMH*
So you are gonna sit here and tell us you had ALL the information on obama and you STILL voted for him? You are the idiot.
Obama is a good man and anybody that bothered to find out about him would know that. As opposed to people like you who chose up front not to vote for him and didn't even bother finding out anything about him. A democrat was bad enough, right? But a black democrat??? Oh, my!!
Mr. Shaman, I like you chopper(s)No, this is not what I'm doing. A "regular person" doesn't just get livid with NOTHING factual or reasonable backing it up. If this is what a "regular person" in America is today. We got some MAJOR problems.
These people are drunk on FOXNews, and FOXNews has PURPOSELY fed them a steady diet of lies and propoganda. These people are people who already leaned a certain way, and what FNN has done is spread the sickness from those with absolutely no sense to those with a little bit of sense to those with some sense...all on the right.
I don't appreciate you suggesting that I outright have something against "regular people," the facts just doesn't bear that out.
Edit:
Oh, and to suggest that Rachel Maddow's interview style is somehow..."abrasive" I think that's near laughable. I'd like to know what and how you define abrasive, also, what examples do you have on her being such as well. You want to know whats abrasive, or who...Bill O'Reilly...that's abrasive if I ever seen it.
Provide a list of the alleged lies and propaganda that Fox News spreads.
WHICH day's lies were you interested-in?????
I miss Walter a Whole bunch! I liked it when they had only a few hours a day to make the story count and it had to be factual and well researched! It was true journalism and not this journaltainment!No, this is not what I'm doing. A "regular person" doesn't just get livid with NOTHING factual or reasonable backing it up. If this is what a "regular person" in America is today. We got some MAJOR problems.These people are panicked by economic and environmental ruination (there has been leaks/spills in Alaska of late), they have been jerked all over hell and back by the finest propaganda machine man ever created, they are preoccupied trying to stay afloat and cannot study on every issue like a PhD candidate........
Rachel Maddow has an abrasive style (at least when I watched her) and a calm conversation with any of these people about what concerns them most could have been had, Marc. Maddow made time and place choices that maximized their ignorance and fear.
Yanno, one criticism of the left is that we look down on "regular people". Ain't that more or less what you are doing?
These people are drunk on FOXNews, and FOXNews has PURPOSELY fed them a steady diet of lies and propoganda. These people are people who already leaned a certain way, and what FNN has done is spread the sickness from those with absolutely no sense to those with a little bit of sense to those with some sense...all on the right.
I don't appreciate you suggesting that I outright have something against "regular people," the facts just doesn't bear that out.
Edit:
Oh, and to suggest that Rachel Maddow's interview style is somehow..."abrasive" I think that's near laughable. I'd like to know what and how you define abrasive, also, what examples do you have on her being such as well. You want to know whats abrasive, or who...Bill O'Reilly...that's abrasive if I ever seen it.
Here's the thing: these people are 100% correct when they rage about what is happening to them. The Big Lie propaganda machine has fed them bullshit about how government caused their problems, and Big Business will make these problems all go away if only voters will push government away/disempower Washington. The average nurse, teacher or truck driver is not an economist and these people are not good at sifting information when in a panic because no human is.
It is unfair to complain that the Big Lie propaganda campaign has worked. Of course it has worked. What we need to be attacking instead are the rich bastards (and nations) responsibile for the Big Lie Machine, not our fellow Americans who have been seduced/bullied into buying it.
As for Rachel Maddow....the woman screams at the audience on her show, at least the few times I have watched it. Seems to me that all the newscasters are doing this now, to one degree or another (Anderson Cooper just gets all misty-eyed). Pardon me, but that is emotional manipulation, not news, and would/should make a real journalist cringe.
I miss Walter Chronkite, Marc.
Wow, were you in a beauty contest, too? That is drama, what was your talent?No, this is not what I'm doing. A "regular person" doesn't just get livid with NOTHING factual or reasonable backing it up. If this is what a "regular person" in America is today. We got some MAJOR problems.These people are panicked by economic and environmental ruination (there has been leaks/spills in Alaska of late), they have been jerked all over hell and back by the finest propaganda machine man ever created, they are preoccupied trying to stay afloat and cannot study on every issue like a PhD candidate........
Rachel Maddow has an abrasive style (at least when I watched her) and a calm conversation with any of these people about what concerns them most could have been had, Marc. Maddow made time and place choices that maximized their ignorance and fear.
Yanno, one criticism of the left is that we look down on "regular people". Ain't that more or less what you are doing?
These people are drunk on FOXNews, and FOXNews has PURPOSELY fed them a steady diet of lies and propoganda. These people are people who already leaned a certain way, and what FNN has done is spread the sickness from those with absolutely no sense to those with a little bit of sense to those with some sense...all on the right.
I don't appreciate you suggesting that I outright have something against "regular people," the facts just doesn't bear that out.
Edit:
Oh, and to suggest that Rachel Maddow's interview style is somehow..."abrasive" I think that's near laughable. I'd like to know what and how you define abrasive, also, what examples do you have on her being such as well. You want to know whats abrasive, or who...Bill O'Reilly...that's abrasive if I ever seen it.
Yeah!
How DARE people listen to other news outlets than what Obama allows! How dare there be freedom of the press and the freedom of people to read and listen to other news outlets than our "fearless leader."
This is for you MarcATL. It definitely suits you. You have those quotes of me saying Obama is half black yet?
Obama has shown to be neutral on guns. He doesn't plan to give automatic weapons, but he also isn't advancing any anti gun legislation and doesn't plan too, guns are the least of the President's worries! It is just a money raises for the NRA! We get the mail!The liberal media, nbc, abc, cbs, and cnn, lie 99.9% more than foxnews. You lefties just do not like the truth getting out to regular people. Truth; Obama, Holder, and the left are anti-gun.No, this is not what I'm doing. A "regular person" doesn't just get livid with NOTHING factual or reasonable backing it up. If this is what a "regular person" in America is today. We got some MAJOR problems.These people are panicked by economic and environmental ruination (there has been leaks/spills in Alaska of late), they have been jerked all over hell and back by the finest propaganda machine man ever created, they are preoccupied trying to stay afloat and cannot study on every issue like a PhD candidate........
Rachel Maddow has an abrasive style (at least when I watched her) and a calm conversation with any of these people about what concerns them most could have been had, Marc. Maddow made time and place choices that maximized their ignorance and fear.
Yanno, one criticism of the left is that we look down on "regular people". Ain't that more or less what you are doing?
These people are drunk on FOXNews, and FOXNews has PURPOSELY fed them a steady diet of lies and propoganda. These people are people who already leaned a certain way, and what FNN has done is spread the sickness from those with absolutely no sense to those with a little bit of sense to those with some sense...all on the right.
I don't appreciate you suggesting that I outright have something against "regular people," the facts just doesn't bear that out.
Edit:
Oh, and to suggest that Rachel Maddow's interview style is somehow..."abrasive" I think that's near laughable. I'd like to know what and how you define abrasive, also, what examples do you have on her being such as well. You want to know whats abrasive, or who...Bill O'Reilly...that's abrasive if I ever seen it.
Not diesel?No, this is not what I'm doing. A "regular person" doesn't just get livid with NOTHING factual or reasonable backing it up. If this is what a "regular person" in America is today. We got some MAJOR problems.These people are panicked by economic and environmental ruination (there has been leaks/spills in Alaska of late), they have been jerked all over hell and back by the finest propaganda machine man ever created, they are preoccupied trying to stay afloat and cannot study on every issue like a PhD candidate........
Rachel Maddow has an abrasive style (at least when I watched her) and a calm conversation with any of these people about what concerns them most could have been had, Marc. Maddow made time and place choices that maximized their ignorance and fear.
Yanno, one criticism of the left is that we look down on "regular people". Ain't that more or less what you are doing?
These people are drunk on FOXNews, and FOXNews has PURPOSELY fed them a steady diet of lies and propoganda. These people are people who already leaned a certain way, and what FNN has done is spread the sickness from those with absolutely no sense to those with a little bit of sense to those with some sense...all on the right.
I don't appreciate you suggesting that I outright have something against "regular people," the facts just doesn't bear that out.
Edit:
Oh, and to suggest that Rachel Maddow's interview style is somehow..."abrasive" I think that's near laughable. I'd like to know what and how you define abrasive, also, what examples do you have on her being such as well. You want to know whats abrasive, or who...Bill O'Reilly...that's abrasive if I ever seen it.O.K., either one o' you....define "regular".
The 'Baggers (here) are badly in-need of a lesson on point-of-reference.....'cause theirs' seems to keep movin'-around.
Educated woman with opinions have that effect on some people.
or is it affect, or maybe both?Educated woman with opinions have that effect on some people.
It is cyclical, I have seen it most of my voting life.Obama won because he is not Republican.
Go figure.
Those areas are so general! It is like one of those phone polls they give you a very general question, and the ask if you are more likely to agree, a four, or less likely to agree, a one...I hate polls. There is no black and white, there is always shades of pale...oh, sorry, tripping out, shades of gray!Seems the voters have a pretty good idea of where they want change:
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Email a Friend Email to a Friend ShareThis
With midterm elections scarcely a month away, voters continue to view the economy, government ethics and corruption and health care as most important on a list of 10 issues regularly tracked by Rasmussen Reports.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that the economy easily remains in the top spot as it has nearly every month. Eighty-six percent (86%) rate the issue of the economy as Very Important.
Health care gained six points from last month, ranking it second, with 76% who think it is Very Important. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
The survey of 1,000 Likely U.S. Voters was conducted on September 22-23 & 26-27, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Yes, and too bad it always has to be, we the people, you don't think they are suffering on the "hill" do you?So I'm home now watching MSNBC, rewound my DVR to about 3 hours and luckily caught the better portion of Rachel Maddow's show. She's now in Alaska to interview Joe Miller and others.
Still watching, but just before this commercial break she asks some angry, clearly, RW voters some things and they start shouting out things like "Get rid of Eric Holder" She asks why are they against Eric Holder. One shouts back, "He's against guns." She asked the lady why? "What has Eric Holder specifically done that is against guns?" She responds with "he's voted down the line that are all anti-gun. Rachel then explains to her that Eric Holder has never had to vote on anything, he's not in Congress or in Senate. Some back and forth, with Rachel sincerely trying to figure what exactly do they have that tells them that Eric is "anti-gun." She ends up saying that she doesn't have all the facts on hand, but she just KNOWS he's anti gun.
Then a younger male, white, as well as the lady above, BTW, chimes in spewing the same nonsense. Again Rachel asks the young man, "What specifically has Eric done that is against the 2nd Amendment." He starts to flutter, then says, "Rachel, just Google Eric Holder and 2nd Amendment and Guns and you'll see all the ammo there." She responds, I will, but why are you currently so angry, what specically has he done that has you so angry....he says, he doesn't have all the facts on hand, but if she Googles it she will find it. And he was sincerely asking her to do so.
Then another older lady who's REALLY angry now, again, white, tells her "The black panthers is why I'm mad at Eric Holder." She's visibly livid on camera and ready to shout and Rachel asks her what about the Black Panthers, the lady replies "Voter Intimidation...not being prosecuted!" Rachel informs her that it was decided by the Bush Administration that there was nothing to prosecute the lone 2 New Black Panthers for. Then she cuts the camera back to where she was at the time, live, and then tells the audience that s he continued to question the woman, who got even more angry. Then told that she cut off the camera and had another very long convo with the lady who then calmed down. The lady told her that she's voting for Miller because Obama's not prosecuting the NBPs because they are black...so she's voting for Joe Miller.
This, folks, is the atmosphere that FOXNews has created. FOX LOVES the Low Information Voter.
WoW!!
*SMH*
Same thing happened in 2006 and 2008... It was Bush's fault for everything....
Payback is hell isn't it...
He is sneaking small groups of Muslims over the border is the one that "done me in", I thought, REALLY, come on...Low information voters is a disntinctly ringtwing nut thing, I again refer to this example as the most glaring example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YIq5Q15L1o
Some of them are my family, feel my pain!When you have a swath of society that spews every. single. talking point that comes out of FNN it doesn't take rocket science to ascertain where it came from.
These people were mad as hell from the point they lost as evidenced here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/media/85023-right-america-feeling-wronged-hbo-documentary.html
I don't care what anybody says otherwise, its simply not true. They're like angry retarded robots/Frankensteins...."Obama...BAAAAD! Must SMASH!!!"
Their knowledge, information or mindset doesn't get far past that analysis or thought. Only FNN PUMPS that into the society on a minute-by-minute, hour-by-hour, day-by-day, week-by-week basis. And of course the rest of the RepubliCON News Network in the form of RW talk radio shows, who are the majority of that particular form of media. They all feed off each other.
So you are gonna sit here and tell us you had ALL the information on obama and you STILL voted for him? You are the idiot.
Obama is a good man and anybody that bothered to find out about him would know that. As opposed to people like you who chose up front not to vote for him and didn't even bother finding out anything about him. A democrat was bad enough, right? But a black democrat??? Oh, my!!
Oh dear gawd, play the itty bitty violins..
and of course it's because he is
half white and half black.
the people ain't falling for the RACIST bullshit anymore. try something new. lol
Without a doubt...one of the dumbest threads in a while.....MSNBC is your source of news? Really? And you call OTHERS mis-informed? I'll refrain from saying anything at all about the fact that you base your useless thread on the ramblings of one of their finest anchor men...Rachel Madcow... did it used to be Richard? Who knows...
OK...so the woman from Alaska mis-spoke about Eric Holder...big deal. I bet if you asked her how many states there are in the U.S., she wouldn't say 57. But that's not an indication of a low information president, now is it?
And I don't think we EVER saw that mentioned on the Madcow's show...did we? No...I don't believe we did.
It cracks me up to see livid people rant about other livid people...I think you know who you are.
But why are you so livid? What is it about RW media outlets that gets you so angry? Their success? Their longevity? Their power? Their message? All of the above?
Here's a little secret...they are successfull, long running, powerful messengers only because they say the things that most Americans either A - already know or had considered or B- find the message more believable and trustworthy.
You see, if liberal radio or liberal TV was worth a shit and focused on policy rather than another way to blame Bush, there might be a few shows that could compete.
Obama is a good man and anybody that bothered to find out about him would know that. As opposed to people like you who chose up front not to vote for him and didn't even bother finding out anything about him. A democrat was bad enough, right? But a black democrat??? Oh, my!!
Oh dear gawd, play the itty bitty violins..
and of course it's because he is
half white and half black.
the people ain't falling for the RACIST bullshit anymore. try something new. lol
It is tiring, isn't it? These damned racists bitching about how the poor black guy in the white house. Sad thing is they don't actually believe it. They're just too fucking stupid to argue on merit, so they play their stupid race card. Rinata is a fatassed bitch who's too stupid to argue on anything other than race.
So I'm home now watching MSNBC, rewound my DVR to about 3 hours and luckily caught the better portion of Rachel Maddow's show. She's now in Alaska to interview Joe Miller and others.
Still watching, but just before this commercial break she asks some angry, clearly, RW voters some things and they start shouting out things like "Get rid of Eric Holder" She asks why are they against Eric Holder. One shouts back, "He's against guns." She asked the lady why? "What has Eric Holder specifically done that is against guns?" She responds with "he's voted down the line that are all anti-gun. Rachel then explains to her that Eric Holder has never had to vote on anything, he's not in Congress or in Senate. Some back and forth, with Rachel sincerely trying to figure what exactly do they have that tells them that Eric is "anti-gun." She ends up saying that she doesn't have all the facts on hand, but she just KNOWS he's anti gun.
Then a younger male, white, as well as the lady above, BTW, chimes in spewing the same nonsense. Again Rachel asks the young man, "What specifically has Eric done that is against the 2nd Amendment." He starts to flutter, then says, "Rachel, just Google Eric Holder and 2nd Amendment and Guns and you'll see all the ammo there." She responds, I will, but why are you currently so angry, what specically has he done that has you so angry....he says, he doesn't have all the facts on hand, but if she Googles it she will find it. And he was sincerely asking her to do so.
Then another older lady who's REALLY angry now, again, white, tells her "The black panthers is why I'm mad at Eric Holder." She's visibly livid on camera and ready to shout and Rachel asks her what about the Black Panthers, the lady replies "Voter Intimidation...not being prosecuted!" Rachel informs her that it was decided by the Bush Administration that there was nothing to prosecute the lone 2 New Black Panthers for. Then she cuts the camera back to where she was at the time, live, and then tells the audience that s he continued to question the woman, who got even more angry. Then told that she cut off the camera and had another very long convo with the lady who then calmed down. The lady told her that she's voting for Miller because Obama's not prosecuting the NBPs because they are black...so she's voting for Joe Miller.
This, folks, is the atmosphere that FOXNews has created. FOX LOVES the Low Information Voter.
WoW!!
*SMH*
It turns out gay voters swing both ways.
According to exit polls conducted by CNN, 31 percent of gay balloteers went for the GOP on Tuesday, a slap in the face from a group traditionally married to Democrats in the past.
Back in 2008, only 19 percent of gays voted Republican, CNN says.
Why the falling out? Blind party loyalty is a dope's game -- something gay voters figured out after Dems failed to advance gay marriage or repeal the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy for the military.
And some things were even more important in this year of economic distress.
"Everyone needs a job -- doesn't matter if you're gay or straight," said R. Clarke Cooper, director of the Log Cabin Republicans.
That shouldn't surprise: People who thought the economy was in bad shape voted Republican. People who thought the stimulus package failed voted Republican. And people unhappy with Congress voted Dems out -- meaning they all voted Republican.
This election should be a wake-up call for gay-rights organizations, which have become "little more than a subsidiary of the Democrat Party," said Jimmy LaSalvia, head of GOProud.
Maybe no longer.
Read more: Gay voters come out for GOP--Editorial - NYPOST.com
