Seeing is not believing, St Patrick’s snipe

I’m seeing the Dems and media in a frenzy daily to find something, anything, to blame on Trump. This is proof that seeing does not always equate with believing.

The media calls itself adversarial press. That would be an understatement, and probably require redefinition as hostile.

But even St Patrick’s Day cannot pass without a chance for MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell to take a swipe at Trump.

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell: Irish-Americans Working for Trump ‘Disgrace Their Heritage’

BY: Alex Griswold — March 17, 2017 | Washington Free Beacon

Irish-Americans on St. Patrick’s Day that they were betraying their heritage if they worked for President Donald Trump.

O’Donnell, who is an Irish-American, tweeted out on Friday that, “The Irish-Americans working for Trump disgrace their heritage.”

O’Donnell’s tweet links to an op-ed from the New York Times shaming the Trump administration’s Irish-Americans employees for being insufficiently empathic towards to the plight of immigrants.

“We Irish are not Know Nothings. We know something important: what it’s like to be feared, to be discriminated against, to be stereotyped,” wrote columnist Fintan O’Toole.

Among the notable Irish-Americans working for Trump are Vice President Mike Pence, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway, and chief strategist Steve Bannon.

Original: http://freebeacon.com/politics/msnbcs-lawrence-odonnell-irish-americans-working-for-trump-disgrace-their-heritage/

Well, Lawrence, mission accomplished. One day Rachael Maddow makes a non-bombshell tax revelation, and then along comes O’Donnell to wrap in Irish immigration.

No more shamrocks for you, Lawrence. And lay off the caffeine Maddow, it won’t pump up your ratings.

Advertisements

Al Gore okay in Paris

Well, as long as Al Gore was okay, which is what we were all wondering. He and Michael Bloomberg were both in Paris, as was someone from the Weather Channel.

Brian Williams got confirmation about their safe whereabouts in his Paris coverage.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/during-paris-attack-brian-williams-oddly-breaks-news-about-the-deftones-al-gore/

He didn’t account for the rest of Paris’s population, but at least those were okay.

Rather-be-biased takes jabs at Trump and Fox (tin foil hat zone)

Then referring to the Fox Trump dust-up, Dan Rather told the same network he could not be sure that Trump and Fox did not preplan their dispute.(conspiracy zone) Rather went on to compare Trump to George Wallace, Barry Goldwater, Perot, denying he was directly comparing them of course. (Maddow had already done a Nixon-media comparison to Trump vs. Jorge Ramos)

Too bad it went against their narrative that the Fox is in collusion with Trump and that Fox decides, or runs, elections on the right. But immediately coming to mind is Obama’s sycophant media advocates who thought it was their job to get Obama elected.

Dan Rather ‘Suspicious’ Trump and Fox Are Faking Feud

By Mark Finkelstein | August 26, 2015 | MRC Newsbusters

When it comes to fake news stories, if anyone’s an expert it’s Dan Rather . . . The disgraced former CBS News anchor has a new twist on the vast right-wing conspiracy. Instead of plotting against poor innocents like Bill and Hillary, those conspiratorial conservatives are now creating phony feuds among themselves!

On Rachel Maddow’s show tonight, Rather declared himself “suspicious” about the battle between Donald Trump and Fox News, suggesting that Trump and Roger Ailes might have “gotten together and planned out” the feud for their mutual benefit.

For good measure, Rather went on to analogize Trump to segregationist presidential candidates George Wallace and Strom Thurmond.

Note: while floating his conspiracy theory, Rather admitted that he was “without very much evidence.” But when has that ever deterred Dan from attacking a Republican?

**See video interview

RACHEL MADDOW: Could Donald Trump, or could any of these candidates win the Republican nomination while also being at war with the Fox News channel specifically? Never really had anything like the Fox News channel in a previous era in history. It seems to me, that I believe that there can’t be a nominee without Fox’s support.

DAN RATHER: I tend to agree with that. However, Trump is raising that question anew. Now, having said that, and keeping in mind that reporters such as myself get paid not to be cynical, never cynical, but to be skeptical.

I’m a little suspicious, without very much evidence, but I’m a little suspicious of this battle between Trump and Fox. What we do know is that Trump is really smart. As I said when he started this run, don’t underestimate him. And Roger Ailes, whether you agree with his politics or not, another smart guy. Whether they’ve gotten together and planned this out or not, it works to their mutual benefit right now. Fox can argue, listen, we don’t give sweetheart deals to every Republican candidate and Trump can say: I tell you I’m independent and when I say I’m independent I’m really independent. Cause look at even Fox.

Original see posted at Newsbusters.org

Dan Rather is “a little suspicious.” Well, Dan, we’re more than a little suspicious of you. Keep that tin foil hat shined up,  I’ve a feeling you are going to need it.  Trust me on that,  just a feeling.

I’m learning a lot: Trump is now conspiring with Hillary Clinton, and he’s plotting with Roger Ailes at the same time. Oh, Donald is busy.  And according to some, many of  the pointy hat left, he’s conspiring with the RNC — has been since the Dark Ages.  Rachael said he was created by Fox — who is just a mediabot for RNC.  (that’s a double one) And he cannot get elected without Fox’s approval, per Maddow.(con-spir-acy)  So there we are.

So if Fox is not “rubber stamping” Donald, get ready for Trump’s crash and burn– unbeknownst to him, wait… he must know —  because, presumably if Fox made Trump, they can take him out. But so everyone throws a hissy fit if conservatives simply say, Fox tried to take Donald down. We’re nuts for suspecting that. But the rest of that Wallace, Goldwater, Perot, down the twisty road to the Fox conspiracy stuff….. woo-hoo-hoo!

They haven’t mentioned where Jeb Bush is in all this but it has to be coming. (Rather is drawing the schematic) The network who ran/runs interference for Obama. Is there a complete meltdown coming?

Ed Show

The infamous mouthpiece of MSNBC has taken his roadshow to the courtroom. I don’t know all the details, but this article explains some of them.

Ed Schultz does courtroom drama about as well as he does his TV show. (Daily Caller)

A strange thing came out, the big mouth apparently wanted (or was ready for) to get a show on Fox. This gave me a vision of him sitting in a room making a deal with Roger Ailes That gave me my laugh for the day. See article for his run around on his partnership.

I’d love to know what that dialogue would have been. A little satire:

Roger: So Mr. Schultz, can you give me at least 3 format options for a show?
Ed: ah, humma, humma, will you settle for one?
Roger: well, that was not my question. Can you?
Ed: I got peeps for that. Well, I had peeps… before I said I didn’t. They will provide that….but I’ll deny they did of course… yea, we will have at least 3. I mean I will. Sure.
Roger: Give me a name for this show you’re hawking.
Ed: Ed’s Talking-heads show…
Roger: Are you committed to that name?
Ed: Sort of
Roger: So on a slow news day, Ed, what would you do for filler.
Ed: oh, that’s easy, I pick on and attack Republicans… you know, lots of material. It’s kind of my specialty.
Roger: And you have lots of experience at that?
Ed: you bet, haven’t you heard of me on Air America or somewhere,  before I called them “rotten business people”? I was up for the syndicated personality of the year…
Roger: Can’t say I have. Now what kind of contract were you looking for?
Ed: a big one that can cover my partners and me, the one’s I won’t have once we start. You know, seven figures and up ought to work.
Roger: But we have no idea if your show would even work in any of our slots.
Ed: Well, I’m flexible on anything except politics. So whatever fits.
Roger: I have to give it some thought. Who should I contact, you or your partners?
Ed: What partners?
Roger: hey, is this some kind of joke? I know, it’s like who’s on first, right?
Ed: yea the first slot works for us….I mean me… us is my wife and I.
Roger: Okay, Ed, you’ll be the first guy I ever fired before I hired.
Ed: I’m not sure when I … I mean we start?  It wasn’t my red hair, was it?
Roger: I don’t usually do this but here’s the number and address for MSNBC, I think you are going places.

After reading the article, it seems his courtroom cabal is not a settled science, and debate is not over. And all his schmoozing with unions doesn’t seem to help when he’s trying to cut an associate out of his picture.

ESP and Liberal minds (2)

Once again the subject is language and liberals. The Baltimore Mayor did a stunning reversal, or whatever you call it, on what she clearly stated in a press conference.

“We also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well.” – Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake

She later challenged the reporter who challenged what she said. Then she said the problem was the media twisting her words that she never said. Well, she did and we all heard it, but therein is the problem.

Fox’s Megyn Kelley took on the Mayor’s denial. Go to the video tape. Yep, that’s what she said, we heard her. Then it came to pundit commentary, so the token leftist was all bent out of shape that we actually applied her words to her. How dare you! He said what she really meant by those words, and that no mayor or official in the country would allow or want destruction taking place in their city. But she said it.

He went on to interpret what she intended or “meant to say”.(which requires revision) But that the mayor’s heart and concerns were in exactly the right place. It wasn’t just one Democrat pundit, many of the left said the same thing. So they could reinterpret her words into a harmless intent of goodwill, which she really meant. (we all know what she meant) Except for one thing, what the mayor actually said — in her own press conference, not behind doors in private. Though it makes one wonder what she says behind closed doors?

She also used the word thug to describe criminals, but then later revised her words to “misguided young people who need our support.” Apparently that revision satisfied the perpetually-peeved protestors because I haven’t heard any more rev interpretations.

It turns out that Liberals have the gift of telepathy on demand. Yes, they can read minds and intentions. They are good at it, too, because their powers are limitless. Then it’s treated as an official translation and reported that way. For example, if someone says “the sky is blue”, liberals can go out to translate what he meant was it is some color other than white or red, never mind clearly calling it blue. Media would report his intentions. Leftists say if Mayor Blake had it to do over again, she would have said something else. So they can just go ahead and fill in all those blanks for her.

Like Hillary goes out to say they were dead broke leaving the WH and people come out to translate what she really meant by that. So actually dead broke can mean a whole lot of things, I just thought it meant dead broke. Hillary has a village of interpreters.

What about when Obama goes out of his way to make some sort of racial or stereotypical slur? That is fine, the problem was your ears. Libs will rush out to say what he really meant. They say he was right to say those who “cling to guns and religion” with “antipathy” toward others, and it needed to be said. Since he is right, they say he should not apologize but be congratulated. But when you are correct about the term thugs — when even Obama used it — you should be shamed, scolded and forced to apologize… for being right and using the correct term. (no ESP interpretations allowed)

And it turns out the media that can do telepathic interpretations, and police language the rest of us use, runs prison TV on a loop on weekends. We should be shamed and cast as racists for using the word “thug,” while Baltimore’s Mayor Chaos must be given wide birth to telepathic interpretations on whatever she says. Having MSNBC’s #1 race-baiting anchor for a spokesperson, and running the translation efforts for the Mayor, should settle any outrage or dispute over what she says. I’m glad for their ESP expertise. Without their telepathic translators we would never know what looney leftists really say. And often the translations are worse than their actual statements.

RightRing | Bullright

Par for Obama’s course

Even some MSNBC hosts were having a laugh over IRS explanations.

John Koskinen told a hearing that:
“We are not going to dribble out the information and have it played out in the press.”

Don’t accuse the IRS of dribbling!

The IRS, Koskinen had told them earlier, hasn’t even had the funds to move all its employees from Windows XP, which is no longer generally supported by Microsoft, to Windows 7.

The IRS said in a statement that it has gone to great lengths cooperating with congressional investigations, spending nearly $10 million to produce more than 750,000 documents.

Famous quote

I’m never surprised by controversies that are whipped up in Washington…. alright? That’s par for the course.” – Obama

Who’s doing the “whipping up” here?

RightRing | Bullright

Benghazi played?

Just when you think you have witnessed the bottom, out pops someone to probe the depths. In this case Lawrence O’Donnell (MSNBC host). It’s really nothing new for him but it does tell you something about modern, socialist progressives.

The other day Krauthammer made a statement that Benghazi, the issue, is about played out. Well, I always appreciate his insight but I cringed when he said it. Sure, he had his reasons but that’s a whole other matter. Along comes the Left to ride that side-car as long and hard as they can. Sort of like the Iraq war. Here’s the clip:

So there I was flipping through the channels Thursday night, and O’Donnell plays the clip as a highlight — but only that particular part. The camera returns to Lawrence who is grinning ear to ear. Facial expressions do say it all, in this case. ‘It’s over, ha ha.’

Whatever you think of Benghazi or him, it said it all about the Left. As insulting as his smiling face is, Benghazi is just about politics to the left. Just as I said many times, everything is only politics to the Left. That’s all it ever was. The four dead Americans, the heroes, the negligence of government response, the lying and coverup, the lack of accountability and responsibility…. only politics matter in the end, beginning, middle, or investigation. All politics all the time.

But soon after they turned their attention to another important real issue, Bridgegate and Chris Christie. So bury Benghazi, but Bridgegate has more legs than a centipede to them.

This comes as the left declared another story dead in the last few weeks: the IRS scandal. But may “Bridgegate” live on in infamy forever. This says all anyone needs to know about the Progressives — or whatever name they call themselves today.

So a pundit makes the gloomy point about Benghazi fading and the left stands up, cheers and jumps for joy. Says all you need to know.

Never forget.

RightRing | Bullright

Axelrod: look at the Republicans, not Obama

Trot out the political guru, Axelrod, and the diversion campaign. Obama has more problems on his plate than a Chinese buffet but somehow “it’s the Republicans, stupid”. Thus sayeth Axelrod. That’s the condensed message. He told Chris Mathews:

David Axelrodent
Misinformation Department

I think a lot of this emanates from the nature of the Republican base, and a lot of these guys are throwing red meat to the base. … You mentioned Speaker Boehner, the real question is the Republican leadership going to tolerate that? Boehner has yet to really stand up to these folks, and this is something that really deserves to be repudiated and you’d hope he would. One thing I would say though, Chris, delegitimization of presidents is something that we’ve seen now. It happened under the Clinton administration. We all remember how vituperative those times were and there were people on the left who aimed some of that at George W. Bush. Now, admittedly, it’s spun out of control now, because these folks are in control of the Republican party. So it’s at a fevered pitch now.

Of course, what else can he say. Its a broken record. Now reincarnate the Clinton years to show how bad they were, after running on Bill Clinton’s legacy and record. The bipartisan, unifier in chief resorts to straight partisan politics and attacks. Well, it is all they know.

His statement leaves lots of room for anyone who hasn’t yet had an Obama lobotomy to remember the truth. The truth about Bill Clinton and George Bush for starters. “Some of that at Bush”? And now “it’s spun out of control” because the Chicago thugster-in-chief  is having to face some inconvenient truths, chased with a miserable record. Can’t have that. So attack Republicans rather than deal with the truth and his record of failure. Now he runs around the country to rally his same old, low-info voter base.

But take a closer look at Axelrod’s words: (italics)

I think a lot of this emanates from the nature of the Republican base, and a lot of these guys are throwing red meat to the base.

That “nature of the Republican base”–whatever that is — must be super busy, in its lack of real power; but no way could it cause all these problems. Then, supposedly it uses them as fodder against Obama? – crazy. The “red meat” is just the scandals and problems your boss created all over the place. Now he wants to blame his opponents for both. If you want to blame them for something…(read on)

You mentioned Speaker Boehner, the real question is [is]the Republican leadership going to tolerate that?

That’s right, except is he going to tolerate what the out of control liar in chief is doing? Just how much and how long will the GOP leadership tolerate that?

Boehner has yet to really stand up to these folks, and this is something that really deserves to be repudiated and you’d hope he would. – that needs repudiated.

No, wrong again. The problem is not Boehner standing up to these folks. If anything when will he listen to them? You have it backwards. It’s his job to represent the people, and not for the people to represent them.

But when is he going to stand up to this dictator hell bent on ruining the country and the Constitutional process, just for his twisted ideology? That’s what the people want to know — not “is Boehner going tell people to shut up?” when the problems emanate from the White House and all around it. And when are we going to hold Boehner accountable for the failure to stand up, and not doing more to prevent it? That’s what people want to know.

One thing I would say though, Chris, delegitimization of presidents is something that we’ve seen now.

Did you happen to notice George -“not our president”-Bush in the last decade anyplace, or how he was treated? Delegitimized from election day on.

Oh now you have to reach back to Clinton to make your appeal. Clinton at least did work with Congress. But Obama’s reelection was all about the 2nd coming of Clinton. It was about how he would work with others. It was about following Clinton’s lead, wasn’t it? He even enlisting Clinton to deliver the closing arguments because the thugster couldn’t.

It happened under the Clinton administration. We all remember how vituperative those times were and there were people on the left who aimed some of that at George W. Bush.

Oh it did, poor Clinton. Everyone but you remembers, even the left. I think the verbal abuse and attacks leaving ugly scars was mostly on Bush.

Now, admittedly, it’s spun out of control now, because these folks are in control of the Republican party. So it’s at a fevered pitch now.

Still do not remember the Bush years or history, do you?. Now “admittedly it’s spun out of control”? A super-sized admission! How big of you. Now it’s at a “fevered pitch”, really?

Where were you the eight years preceding Obama? Right, in Chicago planning. Remember the “insurgent campaign” you ran. Heck, Dubya was Obama’s entire target of it. Obama decided to run against the guy that wasn’t running. Are you really talking “fever pitch” now?

He also told  MSNBC earlier that Syria images were compelling and hard to ignore.

“There’s nothing more impactful than film, pictures, images, and those images are searing. Everyone has seen them,” David Axelrod, former senior adviser to Obama and MSNBC contributor, said on Morning Joe. “Plainly, there needs to be action. The question is, what action?”

Obama was elected partly because of his skepticism about the war in Iraq and his belief of not becoming involved with issues of unknown cost, consequences, and duration, said Axelrod, who added the president needs to consider all options before taking action.

“I expect that they will take action, whether it’s the no-fly zone…or surgical strikes, we’ll see,” Axelrod said.

Partly? Oh, stop it David, he was elected on that premise. It was his whole campaign. It is where he differentiated himself from Hillary. He was the anti-Bush, anti-war, anti-action candidate. As irony and reality would have it, here he is combating weapons of mass destruction in Syria.That while we are busy dealing with this WMD in the White House, along with the media’s complacency about it.

Now I am waiting to hear how Republicans are responsible for this, or maybe Bush. I think Axelrodent is the proper name for him.

photo

Jarrett thanks MSNBC

BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
January 21, 2013 8:40 am

Senior Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett took time to thank MSNBC for its coverage before her interview about his second term agenda ended on “Morning Joe” Monday.

“Thanks for covering it, and thanks for everything,” Jarrett said. “It’s been a good four years with you all as well.”

http://freebeacon.com/jarrett-thanks-msnbc/

Gush… Benghazi what? Fast and furious who?

Obama, Assad and ugly realities of evil

 

America, you elected Obama and now we’re getting class warfare on steroids; and dividing America from sea to shining sea. Ignorance is no excuse. When the administrations’ secret bureaucrat-written laws of ObamaCare kick in, America you asked for it. You wrote him a blank check to use however it wants. Thanks.

You said Americans didn’t have enough government in our lives, you wanted it to control your healthcare and everyone else’s. You wanted it America. You wanted a guy who will interpret the election however he wants to his benefit, at his whim; that’s okay with all the stooges that voted for him.

Some may think this analogy is over the top hyperbole, but I disagree. Syria mixed, loaded and is ready to gas people. It’s the same thing Obama is preparing to do.(metaphorically) Assad wants to target dissenters, his resistance, and let it be an example to any others who dare oppose him. It is the same tactics Obama applies.

This is politics, sorry if you don’t like the comparative analogy. What’s the difference between Assad and how Obama operates? The same mentality and power drive both. Assad is willing to go to any limit – or line — to make his point. Do you think Obama cares about a fiscal cliff or spending? The will of the people does not matter to either one, all that matters is his will.

Part of his agenda uses social justice as the motive. And the base thinks this is the cause. He calls in his media minions on MSNBC for a secret meeting. (they are just some of the operatives) These are the like-minded hacks and operatives, his soldiers. Obama and the left want us to think think his soldiers are average working class people you see at his rallies. All Marxists need lots of useful idiots. And the ignorant, misinformed, and brainwashed are to be used and manipulated however they choose. These media are just another layer in the hierarchy.

Hacks like Schultz made the case that Democrats should not engage in good faith, that they should play this class warfare for all they can, right through next election. Blaming and using Republicans all the way. They don’t care about consequences. They don’t care about the real damage. All they care about is power and control.

Left caught in rat trap again

 


Dems pounced on Ryan’s statement in his speech about the GM plant.

CNN and MSNBC jumped all over it like a pack of wolves even descending on WI governor, Scott Walker, in a feeding frenzy led by Schultz Maddow, Al Sharpton. In a free-for-all trying to rip the governor apart cutting him off and talking over him.

But even CNN now has to correct its coverage with this:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/30/politics/pol-fact-check-ryan-gm/index.html

CNN was finally corrected by Ari Fliescher on air, while Ed Schultz at MSNBC dramatically still hammered away.

On a related note, Howard Fineman said Team Obama has to turn Ryan into a big liar asap. That sure sounds like its a problem for Obama.
———————————————–

Tea Party at Perrysburg

Thursday, August 30, 2012

Janesville GM Plant Closed April 23, 2009

 

For those of you who insist that Paul Ryan misstated the the details surrounding the closing of the GM plant in Janesville, Wisconsin wipe the egg off your face, turn off MSNBC and follow this link. Immediately after Ryan’s speech Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, and Al Sharpton ganged up on Scott Walker in an on air interview to make the point that the plant had closed in late 2008, during the Bush administration. Not so.

“General Motors will end medium-duty truck production in Janesville on April 23, four months to the day after the plant stopped building full-size sport utility vehicles.

About 100 employees associated with the line learned of the layoffs Wednesday.

April will mark the end of vehicle production at the Janesville plant that traces its roots to 1919 and the Samson Model M tractor. Chevrolet production started in Janesville in 1923.”

http://teapartyatperrysburg.blogspot.com/2012/08/janesville-gm-plant-closed-april-23-2009.html