@Candyliz2003 Well then... I expect to never see anything from you again on Newsbusted because it is such a pain for you. Wow! 2:30 of it while being tortured. You did this so there must be a reason for it. Care to explain? I feel so sad for you. Go now before you are overwhelmed!
BTW, Neocon is one small segment of the Conservative World view, so don't try to paint a big picture, unless you are a paid political operative. I'm not a Neocon and don't care if you don't care about my "jive".
@DudleyaSetchellii The only reason to EVER come back here is to answer some lame post addressed to me. You asked WHY did I come here and view this trash? Because I like to see what people with differing views have to say and unfortunately I seem to be faced with this kind of trash on occasion. I do enjoy a discussion with that very small segment of the Conservative World View that is capable of recognizing that Palin is a twit, Bush was a failure and Joe Wilson is rude. Not to mention FOX sucks.
ROTFLMAO!! Another great clip! Anyone that dosen't know Bammy is a Socialist just isn't watching OR dosen't want to see (OR is lying - didn't want to leave you lefties out). ;-)
OMG, I understand this supposed to be right wing humor, but the President is a Socialist? REALLY?
Because he's slightly to the left of President Bush?
Spectrum moves right:
/watch?v=I9t2YErecWg
President Reagan VS President Obama: Who's more conservative?
/watch?v=ILg1-H6oNuM
Do mainstream righties honestly believe the president is a socialist? I know the (some) of the tea partiers do, but they also believe he travels through time.
@17R3W - slightly left of Bush? Are you kidding? Obama had the MOST Liberal voting record in the Senate (when he did vote). As a senator Obama was to the Left of Ted Kennedy - thats REALLY hard to do.
Obama is a 100% Marxist. He surrounds himself with Marxist revolutionaries in private and in the White House. He has personal ties to people that were in The Weather Underground and the old Black Panthers. All Marxist/Socialists.
Here's my issue. No one can name anything radically Liberal the President has done since he's taken office. Basically it's always; "when he was in the senate", "he has personal ties too", "one time he said", "such and such (a conservative policy) is a gateway to a socialist policy", "his long terms plans include", "he surrounds himself with...".
Name 5 things he's actually done, in the past 17 months, that are too the left of President Carter.
@17R3W - Here's the rub - he hasn't done ANYTHING in the past 17 months but campaign for other people., play golf, sit on his hands while disasters continue to happen, bad mouth police, border patrol. immigration enforcement and has tripled the federal deficit while lying about economic growth and job creation.
There's a reason his poll numbers are low and he's lost the independent vote. He's a lame duck barely 2 years into his presidency. Even Carter did better than that.
@17R3W - Not really. All you have to do is listen to what he said before, during & after the campaign, what's he written & the people he hires around the WH. Everybody around him believes in the same agenda.
He believes in progressive redistribution of wealth and "social justice". In other words, Marxism. America loving Capitalists don't pal around with or hire devout Socialists, bigots, racists and domestic terrorists.
He hasn't done much because he's too busy playing golf or vacationing.
@17R3W - don't hold your breath. Obama was marketed as this beacon of hope and change but in the end he's just a typical politician who says what he thinks will get him elected. Unfortunately, not enough people listened to the warnings of electing someone with his lack of experience (McCain was no better) and his socialist ideology.
We live in the greatest country that has ever existed in the history of the planet, why it needed change is beyond me.
@17R3W - Mainstream 'righties' absolutely believe that Obama is what is called a Social Democrat. Social Democracy (look up the definition on wiki) combines the ideologies of Traditional Democracy (as per Democrates) and the philosophy of Marx and Ingalls to form what is today known as a Progressive. A Progressive believes in social welfare programs to help the poor via redistribution of wealth through taking money from tax dollars and giving it out to the less fortunate.
That's a fair point. But the video says "Socialist" not "Socialist Democrat".
In my opinion he's more in favor of "Bush Style socialism" where wealth is redistributed the other way.
Look at Obamacare. A law that guarantees people have to by a product or service? REALLY?
And Cap 'n' Trade, is almost as bad. Basically creating a brand new commodity (carbon) that can be traded on Wall Street. That's a very Reagan / Clinton thing to do (creating artificial bubble economies).
@17R3W - Obamacare was meant to bring the NHS to America, and right now, is the transition. That's why it must be repealed, because the NHS is a failure.
As for Cap And Trade, the intent is redistribution of America's wealth to other countries around the world. Also, both Obama and his friends, stand to personally profit off of the Chicago Climate Exhange, which is where carbon credits would be traded, not wall street. Obama would become one of the 10 richest men in the world.
Firstly, I agree with you on Cap and Trade (in terms of who it benifits) although I don't think it's going to redistribute wealth around the world. (LeeDoren did a great video about C&T).
However, you are just out to lunch about Obamacare bringing the NHS to America. Obamacare is based on the 1994 Republican comprise for President Clinton.
I have no idea how get from mandating private insurance to scraping it entirely.
3) Um, he loaned them money didn't take them over. More like the right wing bailout then anything else.
4) If your talking about Obamacare it's based on the 1994 Republican compromise that Clinton didn't even except. That actaully proves my point, that he isn't even as Liberal Clinton, let alone Carter. #SeeAbove
5) Point 2
6) A far right wing policy closer to Ragean then Carter #SeeAbove
@17R3W - I believe that the original intent was not what they got by any means. I believe they wanted to bring the NHS to the states, which is why they got a man that is such a huge fan of it to manage Obamacare. I think that Obamacare after conceding all this ground, was meant to be amended to eventually include the Public Option, and eventually it would become the only option. It's Fabian Socialism there.
Well unfortunately (or fortunately depending on point of view) Democrats in the senate are mostly right wingers.
So even though the public option would have been a great comprise, and avoided the problem of public run health care, the Democrats are too far to the right to push for it.
And if the public option was the only option, you'd end up with single payer and not the NHS.
You'll notice that P. Obama didn't exactly kick and scream over "losing" the public option.
@17R3W The intent was to create a system where you could not modify your existing coverage and would be forced into the government-run public option (this provision still exists in the text of the bill.)
NHS is basically single payer, right? You can't bypass it and go on to buy your own private coverage.
He didn't lose the public option. He argued and directly stated that no matter what the bill said, he still had it.
NHS is straight up socialized medicine. Doctors etc etc are employees of the government.
Single Payer (think Canada) is private doctors (private practices) but they bill the government.
They are both examples of Universal Coverage but only one is "socialized" in the strictness senses.
(many of ) The Tea Partiers have strong objections to "Government Run" health care so either the Public Option or Single Payer would at least meet them in the middle.
@17R3W - Single Payer has price controls that end up deteriorating care. Single payer isn't a compromise, but it becomes one hell of a problem in of itself. Rationing does become an issue, because of those price controls. Why do you think many clinics won't serve Medicare patients? It's because of the price controls. I believe that Single Payer is idiocy because of the price controls.
Also, I owe you an apology. Apparently the NHS IS an example of single payer. Sorry about my confusion.
And Canada is a mix private and public organizations.
The price control problem is an argument in favor of the public option. Price controls won't work in an open market, however prices will drop do to competition.
@17R3W - The price control issue is also an argument for the free market with no government intervention. Competition can drive down prices to levels that are good for both the market itself and the customers. I also believe that people shouldn't be forced into any health care system.
@17R3W - Public Option is Government Subsidized Public Health insurance. It's costly, noncompetitive, and a reach too far into the marketplace. I don't want that to even be present in the marketplace, because it would serve to do the exact thing that Fannie and Freddie did to the Mortgage industry. I don't want my tax dollars to fund this Public Option. That's how it works, it takes my tax money to help subsidize your care. I don't want to pay for anyone but me, and my future family.
I think the best example the post office. You can basic letter delivery for cheap, (like 50 cents), or overnight it for about $12 from Fed EX.
One hasn't killed the other.
I'd also agree that IF they do the public option it should be paid for entirely by the people who buy into it. If it can offer basic care at a good price people will go for it.
@17R3W - First, it's interesting you bring up the post office. It's a quasi-government entity that is partially privatized, and heavily heavily subsidized. It's got multiple unions within its employment, and is losing hand over fist. Last year, the Postal Service had a budget of about 30 billion, but a deficit of 7.5 billion. Fedex and UPS would kill the USPS if it was launched into the free market without subsidy. That's my problem, we ALL pick up the bill for these shortcomings.
@17R3W - Also the point of the Public Option is to spread the cost of the program onto all taxpayers. Thus, artificially driving down the price for those that enroll in it. If it only took payments from those enrolled, the inefficiency would mean the cost would be at least triple the cost of the free market. However, you know very well that that setup you're proposing would implode, and soon, we'd be paying the subsidy to keep it alive, like we're doing with medicare.
Does everybody know that Veneuela just nationalized 11 American oil rigs? This is from Reuters. ABC, AP, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NBC and UP are ignoring this story. Can we all say 'in the tank for Obama'? What else isn't the MSM telling us?
Biden, what an idiot. Does anyone buy this. Let's remind everyone who was apposed to the surge that won that war. Oh yeah, that would be facts and the main stream cesspool can't deal with facts when they don't agree with its agenda.
This video is back! it was missing earlier due to "copyright violation of content from the Media Research Center" which was confusing since this show is produced by the Media Research Center
He was a hedge fund manager for Citigroup big winner in the bailout jackpot so you can imagine how little empathy he will show for the middle class in his cutting back on government spending. I think it is safe to assume that this appointment is in line with the Rubins, Summers and Geithner way of looking at the economy. Nov 2nd the sheet hits the fan!
First Lady Michelle Obama visits Panama City Beach to spread the word that the beaches are oil-free; "Everyone should come here!" Is that why her and President O-Tarball are vacationing in Maine?
@Slipknotyk06 - No, I meant the 45% or so democrats that might vote Obama in for a second term. It's true that his ratings are down, much lower than 45%, but when it comes to an election, they'll still vote for him, because they will consider him the best candidate available.
@andyandymax - Generic ballot data shows only about 20% consider themselves liberal. Many Democrats are backing off Obama, so I'm willing to bet my lunch money on Hillary getting the nod. Right now only about 45% of Democrats would vote for Obama again, and his approval ratings among republicans are in the low, low single digits. His approval rating is 38% of Independents, which Obama carried about 80% during the election. In any event, Obama will not serve a second term.
@Slipknotyk06 - What you're saying makes sense. But will Hillary run against Obama when she's on his cabinet? That seems tacky. Maybe she'll wait another four years instead. Of course tacky is not above and beyond a Clinton. In any case, I think that with enough of a split in the primaries, Obama could make it to the general election, in which case most libs will just vote for him again. It's not as if libs actually use logic and knowledge of history to make informed voting decisions.
@andyandymax - She smells blood, she knows that Obama is a far weaker candidate than she is. The Clintons are the pit bulls of the political world and aren't afraid to bite the hand that feeds because, after all, they are far more powerful than you. I believe MOST libs would vote Hillary over Obama because they've been exposed, and know they need a slightly more friendly face. The Clinton name even attracts some Republicans, and has a drastic edge with independents.
@andyandymax - Democrats like her because they look at the years late into her husband's second term and see a period of a surplus, though it only lasted 2 years. People forget that much of the wealth during the 90s was fueled by the sustained growth of tech stocks that got their start under Reagan, so I would argue they're misled.
@Slipknotyk06 - actually Clinton did not leave office with a surplus. Its a Myth perpetuated by the Left and the Liberal media. Its documented fact he left with a budget deficit and only had "projected" surpluses.
@RocktheStageNYC - I saw some numbers that Clinton had like a 50B 2000 surplus. However, I can't remember where, probably CNBC. Show me your numbers, and I will concede the surplus point.
They look back and believe it was Clinton that caused the strong economy during his presidency.
@Slipknotyk06 If that happens the far left will vote obama and hillary and whoever the republicans nominate will have to spit the rest... the democrats can't win :)
@PumpUPdaBase - The far left will vote for Obama. Moderate Democrats will vote for Hillary. However, only one can secure the nomination, therefore only one opponent to the pick for Republican. I believe that moderate Democrats and independents will pick Hillary over Obama. We need a strong conservative, but not Huckabee or Paul, in order to secure our current projections of roughly 65% of independents.
The new "National Security Strategy" reads: "International Order" "IMF" and "US Military" for instigation and enforcement. WE THE PEOPLE are now paying in lives and money, to protect China's mineral investments in AfghaniSCAM. WTF
@apyonify Dude, that's kind of the point. And I don't see many people watching Jon Stewart of Stephen Colbert and asking "Loony-Liberal-Left, much?" Do you? Comedy is comedy, and no one in the political theater is immune. If the Liberals can poke fun at the Conservatives, then the Conservatives can poke them right back in the end. (Yeah, I'll admit that was a pretty bad pun...even for me.) :P
is that... a laugh track? or just really forced laughter?
ZippoNick 1 year ago
If this is "Conservative Comedy" you guys lose!
Thank GOD for Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert!
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 That's sweet, dyliz. Why are you here then? Yea, you really like it don't you.
Yep. I'm telling Jon boy on you.
DudleyaSetchellii 1 year ago
@DudleyaSetchellii I made the mistake to waste 2:30 of my life on a YouTube video by some Neocon planktard why would I care about your jive?
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 Well then... I expect to never see anything from you again on Newsbusted because it is such a pain for you. Wow! 2:30 of it while being tortured. You did this so there must be a reason for it. Care to explain? I feel so sad for you. Go now before you are overwhelmed!
BTW, Neocon is one small segment of the Conservative World view, so don't try to paint a big picture, unless you are a paid political operative. I'm not a Neocon and don't care if you don't care about my "jive".
DudleyaSetchellii 1 year ago
@DudleyaSetchellii The only reason to EVER come back here is to answer some lame post addressed to me. You asked WHY did I come here and view this trash? Because I like to see what people with differing views have to say and unfortunately I seem to be faced with this kind of trash on occasion. I do enjoy a discussion with that very small segment of the Conservative World View that is capable of recognizing that Palin is a twit, Bush was a failure and Joe Wilson is rude. Not to mention FOX sucks.
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
I think I like anything Jodi does!!!
rick10is 1 year ago
ROTFLMAO!! Another great clip! Anyone that dosen't know Bammy is a Socialist just isn't watching OR dosen't want to see (OR is lying - didn't want to leave you lefties out). ;-)
tedm82 1 year ago
Go get em Jodie!
624787John 1 year ago
Jodi is great
kimblers 1 year ago
OMG, I understand this supposed to be right wing humor, but the President is a Socialist? REALLY?
Because he's slightly to the left of President Bush?
Spectrum moves right:
/watch?v=I9t2YErecWg
President Reagan VS President Obama: Who's more conservative?
/watch?v=ILg1-H6oNuM
Do mainstream righties honestly believe the president is a socialist? I know the (some) of the tea partiers do, but they also believe he travels through time.
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W even democrat leaders think he is socialists fuck off learn what socialism really is
MirageScience 1 year ago
@MirageScience
Name 5 Democrats that think he's a socialist. Post links...
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W - slightly left of Bush? Are you kidding? Obama had the MOST Liberal voting record in the Senate (when he did vote). As a senator Obama was to the Left of Ted Kennedy - thats REALLY hard to do.
Obama is a 100% Marxist. He surrounds himself with Marxist revolutionaries in private and in the White House. He has personal ties to people that were in The Weather Underground and the old Black Panthers. All Marxist/Socialists.
"Birds of a Feather flock together"
RocktheStageNYC 1 year ago 7
@RocktheStageNYC
Here's my issue. No one can name anything radically Liberal the President has done since he's taken office. Basically it's always; "when he was in the senate", "he has personal ties too", "one time he said", "such and such (a conservative policy) is a gateway to a socialist policy", "his long terms plans include", "he surrounds himself with...".
Name 5 things he's actually done, in the past 17 months, that are too the left of President Carter.
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W - Here's the rub - he hasn't done ANYTHING in the past 17 months but campaign for other people., play golf, sit on his hands while disasters continue to happen, bad mouth police, border patrol. immigration enforcement and has tripled the federal deficit while lying about economic growth and job creation.
There's a reason his poll numbers are low and he's lost the independent vote. He's a lame duck barely 2 years into his presidency. Even Carter did better than that.
RocktheStageNYC 1 year ago
@RocktheStageNYC
Well that's an entirely different story from being a socialist. But I will agree, Yes P. Carter was much much better than P. Obama.
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W - Not really. All you have to do is listen to what he said before, during & after the campaign, what's he written & the people he hires around the WH. Everybody around him believes in the same agenda.
He believes in progressive redistribution of wealth and "social justice". In other words, Marxism. America loving Capitalists don't pal around with or hire devout Socialists, bigots, racists and domestic terrorists.
He hasn't done much because he's too busy playing golf or vacationing.
RocktheStageNYC 1 year ago
@RocktheStageNYC
Yeah he said a lot of things during the campagn, I'm still waiting for him to live up to what he's said.
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W - don't hold your breath. Obama was marketed as this beacon of hope and change but in the end he's just a typical politician who says what he thinks will get him elected. Unfortunately, not enough people listened to the warnings of electing someone with his lack of experience (McCain was no better) and his socialist ideology.
We live in the greatest country that has ever existed in the history of the planet, why it needed change is beyond me.
RocktheStageNYC 1 year ago 2
@17R3W - Mainstream 'righties' absolutely believe that Obama is what is called a Social Democrat. Social Democracy (look up the definition on wiki) combines the ideologies of Traditional Democracy (as per Democrates) and the philosophy of Marx and Ingalls to form what is today known as a Progressive. A Progressive believes in social welfare programs to help the poor via redistribution of wealth through taking money from tax dollars and giving it out to the less fortunate.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06
That's a fair point. But the video says "Socialist" not "Socialist Democrat".
In my opinion he's more in favor of "Bush Style socialism" where wealth is redistributed the other way.
Look at Obamacare. A law that guarantees people have to by a product or service? REALLY?
And Cap 'n' Trade, is almost as bad. Basically creating a brand new commodity (carbon) that can be traded on Wall Street. That's a very Reagan / Clinton thing to do (creating artificial bubble economies).
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W - Obamacare was meant to bring the NHS to America, and right now, is the transition. That's why it must be repealed, because the NHS is a failure.
As for Cap And Trade, the intent is redistribution of America's wealth to other countries around the world. Also, both Obama and his friends, stand to personally profit off of the Chicago Climate Exhange, which is where carbon credits would be traded, not wall street. Obama would become one of the 10 richest men in the world.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago 2
@Slipknotyk06
Firstly, I agree with you on Cap and Trade (in terms of who it benifits) although I don't think it's going to redistribute wealth around the world. (LeeDoren did a great video about C&T).
However, you are just out to lunch about Obamacare bringing the NHS to America. Obamacare is based on the 1994 Republican comprise for President Clinton.
I have no idea how get from mandating private insurance to scraping it entirely.
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W
How about seven?
1) Remove the soldiers from Guantanamo Bay.
2) Stimulus and Son of Stimulus (neither of which worked)
3) Taking over the car companies.
4) Health care, i.e - a taxpayer funded scheme to create dependency on the government.
5) Tax funded abortions
6) Cap-n-Trade
7) Refusing to prosecute black on white crime. (Not only leftist, but racist too!)
If your reply includes the words "Bush administration" you will be immediately disqualified from having credibility.
KDxLiberty 1 year ago
@KDxLiberty
1) Did that ever actually happen? (link please)
2) That's good for 1 point!
3) Um, he loaned them money didn't take them over. More like the right wing bailout then anything else.
4) If your talking about Obamacare it's based on the 1994 Republican compromise that Clinton didn't even except. That actaully proves my point, that he isn't even as Liberal Clinton, let alone Carter. #SeeAbove
5) Point 2
6) A far right wing policy closer to Ragean then Carter #SeeAbove
7) (Link please)
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W - I believe that the original intent was not what they got by any means. I believe they wanted to bring the NHS to the states, which is why they got a man that is such a huge fan of it to manage Obamacare. I think that Obamacare after conceding all this ground, was meant to be amended to eventually include the Public Option, and eventually it would become the only option. It's Fabian Socialism there.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06
Well unfortunately (or fortunately depending on point of view) Democrats in the senate are mostly right wingers.
So even though the public option would have been a great comprise, and avoided the problem of public run health care, the Democrats are too far to the right to push for it.
And if the public option was the only option, you'd end up with single payer and not the NHS.
You'll notice that P. Obama didn't exactly kick and scream over "losing" the public option.
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W The intent was to create a system where you could not modify your existing coverage and would be forced into the government-run public option (this provision still exists in the text of the bill.)
NHS is basically single payer, right? You can't bypass it and go on to buy your own private coverage.
He didn't lose the public option. He argued and directly stated that no matter what the bill said, he still had it.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06
NHS is straight up socialized medicine. Doctors etc etc are employees of the government.
Single Payer (think Canada) is private doctors (private practices) but they bill the government.
They are both examples of Universal Coverage but only one is "socialized" in the strictness senses.
(many of ) The Tea Partiers have strong objections to "Government Run" health care so either the Public Option or Single Payer would at least meet them in the middle.
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W - Single Payer has price controls that end up deteriorating care. Single payer isn't a compromise, but it becomes one hell of a problem in of itself. Rationing does become an issue, because of those price controls. Why do you think many clinics won't serve Medicare patients? It's because of the price controls. I believe that Single Payer is idiocy because of the price controls.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06
Also, I owe you an apology. Apparently the NHS IS an example of single payer. Sorry about my confusion.
And Canada is a mix private and public organizations.
The price control problem is an argument in favor of the public option. Price controls won't work in an open market, however prices will drop do to competition.
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W - The price control issue is also an argument for the free market with no government intervention. Competition can drive down prices to levels that are good for both the market itself and the customers. I also believe that people shouldn't be forced into any health care system.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06
Well I'm with you 100% about people not being forced into a system.
I say repeal and replace with the public option. (Not ever gonna happen) but that's just my feeling.
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W - Public Option is Government Subsidized Public Health insurance. It's costly, noncompetitive, and a reach too far into the marketplace. I don't want that to even be present in the marketplace, because it would serve to do the exact thing that Fannie and Freddie did to the Mortgage industry. I don't want my tax dollars to fund this Public Option. That's how it works, it takes my tax money to help subsidize your care. I don't want to pay for anyone but me, and my future family.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago 2
@Slipknotyk06
I think the best example the post office. You can basic letter delivery for cheap, (like 50 cents), or overnight it for about $12 from Fed EX.
One hasn't killed the other.
I'd also agree that IF they do the public option it should be paid for entirely by the people who buy into it. If it can offer basic care at a good price people will go for it.
17R3W 1 year ago
@17R3W - First, it's interesting you bring up the post office. It's a quasi-government entity that is partially privatized, and heavily heavily subsidized. It's got multiple unions within its employment, and is losing hand over fist. Last year, the Postal Service had a budget of about 30 billion, but a deficit of 7.5 billion. Fedex and UPS would kill the USPS if it was launched into the free market without subsidy. That's my problem, we ALL pick up the bill for these shortcomings.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@17R3W - Also the point of the Public Option is to spread the cost of the program onto all taxpayers. Thus, artificially driving down the price for those that enroll in it. If it only took payments from those enrolled, the inefficiency would mean the cost would be at least triple the cost of the free market. However, you know very well that that setup you're proposing would implode, and soon, we'd be paying the subsidy to keep it alive, like we're doing with medicare.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06
In terms of weather it would actaully become the only option, let me ask you this?
Would you have bought it?
Assuming at least some people weren't interested then there would be a market for private insurance.
I'm really surprised (more) conservatives aren't in favor of the public option.
- it avoids Government run health care
- it avoids raising taxes
- it's the free market solution
- it provides care for those who couldn't get it before, with out increasing costs on every1
17R3W 1 year ago
There was no winner in the war between Tupac and Biggie, unless you count Suge Knight .
squidb8 1 year ago
Does everybody know that Veneuela just nationalized 11 American oil rigs? This is from Reuters. ABC, AP, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NBC and UP are ignoring this story. Can we all say 'in the tank for Obama'? What else isn't the MSM telling us?
MusicEqualsMemories 1 year ago 2
Jodi will you marry me?
jackson2809 1 year ago
@jackson2809 I called first!
andyandymax 1 year ago
Ya Ya Give Me My My Newsbusta!
mykol13v 1 year ago
the latest polls show Obama sinking fast. Can we say one term president.
the NY Times is jusy about holding on. can we say all the news that will never be printed.
dirtyblondny 1 year ago 3
A ban on prosperity, ha ha!
seanseanseanseansean 1 year ago 3
The socialist administration in Washington will very soon put the NASA engineers to sell tickets at Walt Disneys attractions!
RobertRobls 1 year ago
NYT, LOLOLOLOLOLOLO
dewerbylhserf 1 year ago 2
Ah - brunette's, gotta luv their minds!
yonvunega2000 1 year ago
@IamaZionistGoy g-d?
Ps3Jasonisonfire 1 year ago
you'll never see Kathy Griffen and Carrot top in the same room think about it
scootosan 1 year ago 2
Biden, what an idiot. Does anyone buy this. Let's remind everyone who was apposed to the surge that won that war. Oh yeah, that would be facts and the main stream cesspool can't deal with facts when they don't agree with its agenda.
usejwat 1 year ago 4
dude, i really dont think theres a wh conspiracy to silence this corny ass show... im sure its just some jackass being a troll.
hoosherdaddy 1 year ago
Liberal flagging losers! I'm glad it's back up.
kkilo34 1 year ago 2
So some liberal douche bag flagged the video. Well Google is in bed with the WH so it was most likely those liberals who did it.
LordAtrocities 1 year ago 3
So, who was the asshole who flagged this as copyright violation?
HaikenEdge 1 year ago 3
@HaikenEdge I'll give you 2 guesses starting with the clowns who gave it a thumbs down.
Desperate liberal progressives, silencing the opposition is their biggest defense.
mykol13v 1 year ago 2
This video is back! it was missing earlier due to "copyright violation of content from the Media Research Center" which was confusing since this show is produced by the Media Research Center
robhkycc 1 year ago 5
He was a hedge fund manager for Citigroup big winner in the bailout jackpot so you can imagine how little empathy he will show for the middle class in his cutting back on government spending. I think it is safe to assume that this appointment is in line with the Rubins, Summers and Geithner way of looking at the economy. Nov 2nd the sheet hits the fan!
dkkght46 1 year ago 2
Sharia on the moon....LMBO!!
usgop 1 year ago
Wow, YouTube must be pissed newsbusted is growing into a popular channel without the necessity for YT to cram it down our throats!
BLKMANH8TESOBAMA 1 year ago 5
First Lady Michelle Obama visits Panama City Beach to spread the word that the beaches are oil-free; "Everyone should come here!" Is that why her and President O-Tarball are vacationing in Maine?
dkkght46 1 year ago 3
@dkkght46 What do you mean they are vacationing? Obi said he "would not rest" until this mess was cleaned up.
frogsoda 1 year ago
I think 45% don't CARE that Obama's a socialist. :(
andyandymax 1 year ago 3
@andyandymax - But those 45% are not likely voters :-)
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06 - No, I meant the 45% or so democrats that might vote Obama in for a second term. It's true that his ratings are down, much lower than 45%, but when it comes to an election, they'll still vote for him, because they will consider him the best candidate available.
andyandymax 1 year ago
@andyandymax - Generic ballot data shows only about 20% consider themselves liberal. Many Democrats are backing off Obama, so I'm willing to bet my lunch money on Hillary getting the nod. Right now only about 45% of Democrats would vote for Obama again, and his approval ratings among republicans are in the low, low single digits. His approval rating is 38% of Independents, which Obama carried about 80% during the election. In any event, Obama will not serve a second term.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago 2
@Slipknotyk06 - What you're saying makes sense. But will Hillary run against Obama when she's on his cabinet? That seems tacky. Maybe she'll wait another four years instead. Of course tacky is not above and beyond a Clinton. In any case, I think that with enough of a split in the primaries, Obama could make it to the general election, in which case most libs will just vote for him again. It's not as if libs actually use logic and knowledge of history to make informed voting decisions.
andyandymax 1 year ago
@andyandymax - She smells blood, she knows that Obama is a far weaker candidate than she is. The Clintons are the pit bulls of the political world and aren't afraid to bite the hand that feeds because, after all, they are far more powerful than you. I believe MOST libs would vote Hillary over Obama because they've been exposed, and know they need a slightly more friendly face. The Clinton name even attracts some Republicans, and has a drastic edge with independents.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06 - I hear you. But it boggles my mind that people could still like her.
andyandymax 1 year ago
@andyandymax - Democrats like her because they look at the years late into her husband's second term and see a period of a surplus, though it only lasted 2 years. People forget that much of the wealth during the 90s was fueled by the sustained growth of tech stocks that got their start under Reagan, so I would argue they're misled.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago 3
@Slipknotyk06 - actually Clinton did not leave office with a surplus. Its a Myth perpetuated by the Left and the Liberal media. Its documented fact he left with a budget deficit and only had "projected" surpluses.
RocktheStageNYC 1 year ago 2
@RocktheStageNYC - I saw some numbers that Clinton had like a 50B 2000 surplus. However, I can't remember where, probably CNBC. Show me your numbers, and I will concede the surplus point.
They look back and believe it was Clinton that caused the strong economy during his presidency.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06 If that happens the far left will vote obama and hillary and whoever the republicans nominate will have to spit the rest... the democrats can't win :)
PumpUPdaBase 1 year ago
@PumpUPdaBase - The far left will vote for Obama. Moderate Democrats will vote for Hillary. However, only one can secure the nomination, therefore only one opponent to the pick for Republican. I believe that moderate Democrats and independents will pick Hillary over Obama. We need a strong conservative, but not Huckabee or Paul, in order to secure our current projections of roughly 65% of independents.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06 I really want Jindal... but he needs more experience. Palin will not do. I'd be all over a Jan Brewer/Bobby Jindal ticket though...
PumpUPdaBase 1 year ago
The new "National Security Strategy" reads: "International Order" "IMF" and "US Military" for instigation and enforcement. WE THE PEOPLE are now paying in lives and money, to protect China's mineral investments in AfghaniSCAM. WTF
bigc028282 1 year ago
nice! :)
rulllar 1 year ago
You never fail to put a smile on my face. Keep up the great work! ;)
modernfreestyle 1 year ago 2
conservative much?
try a better camera
apyonify 1 year ago
@apyonify Dude, that's kind of the point. And I don't see many people watching Jon Stewart of Stephen Colbert and asking "Loony-Liberal-Left, much?" Do you? Comedy is comedy, and no one in the political theater is immune. If the Liberals can poke fun at the Conservatives, then the Conservatives can poke them right back in the end. (Yeah, I'll admit that was a pretty bad pun...even for me.) :P
modernfreestyle 1 year ago 9
@modernfreestyle lol it was all in fun, im a conservative myself
apyonify 1 year ago