Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
GOP Rep. Jean Schmidt’s Birther Sentiments Caught On Tape
September 8th, 2009
51 Comments
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
C’mon, now. Is that really a surprise?
Jane Hamsher says 35% of Democrats are Truthers.
You want me to look over where?
Quaker,
Apparently WAAAAAAY over there. Dennis isn’t appaled by this nonsense so can I suppose he is a birther?
Weak, even for Dennis.
I almost added the ‘Look, over there’ myself, but I didn”t want to steal anyone’s thunder.
I’m just trying to figure out how many 35%ers hang out here.
Dennis, two questions: What’s a 35%er? I really don’t know what that is.
Second question: Do you also find Schmidt attractive?
I’m just trying to figure out how many 35%ers hang out here.
That’s nice. What do you think about Ms. Schmidt’s birther sympathies? Personally, the only way I could excuse that sort of nonsense is if she was just trying to avoid provoking her insane, shrieking constituent long enough to get away.
Hmmm… this site doesn’t seem to be a good place to be in the dark about something?
What is a 35%er?
Never mind. I found it myself. Man, that was pretty obscure, even if it was from 2008.
Here, Wilfredo.
Jane Hamsher argues that Van Jones being a truther is simply like 35% of the rest of Democrats who are also Truthers, and that really, he’s no crazier than the rest of the Left. Just like Oliver is attempting to do on his ‘fight back’ day by trying to lump in all of the right with birthers.
Just like Oliver is attempting to do on his ‘fight back’ day by trying to lump in all of the right with birthers.
Around here that’s every day. Why? Because birthers are righties. And all of a sudden now you a) Jane speaks for the left and b) believe her word is lord. Funny
What do you think about Ms. Schmidt’s birther sympathies?
Hmmmm… thanks, Dennis. Not living in the U.S. I don’t know enough about the Van Jones situation, although the environment affects everybody, but I won’t comment on this particular subject for the sake of credibility.
Well, O Dubya, she claims to be speaking for at least 35% of y’all. And no, I don’t believe anything she says, just that her reasoning for defending Van Jones is about as hilarious as it gets.
That was, until Zsa Zsa wrote her column on Van the Man this morning. I still haven’t stopped laughing from that one.
That’s all well and good, but what’s your thoughts on the Republican elected official in our House of Representatives who thinks that the President is a secret Kenyan? You know, the person who actually votes on legislation affecting the lives of these folks we refer to as Americans.
Any wingers here care to comment on Schmidt?
Dennis is in love with Jean Schmidt. What a truly disturbing mental image.
Heh. 35% tracks to a Rasmussen poll – What. A. Sur. Prise.
I myself, have never met a ‘truther’. I’ve debated one or two on forums, back when I cared what they thought. I hang around with some pretty liberal folk, and none of them ever mentioned it as a possibility. I have met creationists and moon hoaxers, but not a truther. So, it’s odd that for the number 35% to show up to represent Democrats, since I’d expect at least a half dozen of my friends would have mentioned it.
Not that the plural of ‘anecdote’ is ‘data’, but this poll is ‘probably’ ‘crap’.
So, Dennis, have any opinion about an elected congressional republican tossing her hat in with the loonies?
35% in that poll is interesting, but the question is pretty vague (did Bush know in advance), the percentage is not as telling as you might think, as 14% of Repubs and 18% of independents also said yes. Considering the publicizing of the PDB entitled “Bin Laden determined to strike inside US”, it’s likely the number is high as people who think “he should have known” answer that “he did know”.
All of which is a distraction from the fact that we still have no comment from Dennis about a prominent GOP rep stating that she believes the president was born outside the US.
Yeah, funny how silent Dennis is about that. He must be like Schmidt: he agrees with the birthers but is afraid to say so in public because it would shatter the Mr. Moderate persona that he works so hard to maintain.
Go ahead, Dennis, let the howling loon inside you have a breath of fresh air just once.
‘Well, O Dubya, she claims to be speaking for at least 35% of y’all.’
Well that tears it; it must be true if someone SAYS it.
Jean Schmidt will apparently say and do anything to ingratiate herself with people who will believe any damn lie, as long as they vote Republican.
If this doesn’t bother you Dennis, then explain why people shouldn’t believe that the Right wing is not only devoid of ethics and morality, but utterly hypocritical as well?
“I still haven’t stopped laughing from that one.”
You took the gun barrel out of your mouth long enough to do that?
Why don’t you try explaining to me how you and your cohorts think the use of a video of a very mentally-challenged young child to portray Republicans in general is ethical and moral and not in any way hypocritical for the values liberals try to say they stand for? Or the use of a picture of flag-draped coffins to make some kind of incoherent argument that conservatives have no right to question the lack of vetting of an avowed communist Truther who claimed America deserved what happened to them on 9/11. You guys laud the use of that image, but you don’t back up the reason for the blogowner’s use of it in his argument. How is that moral or ethical, jrfunkenstein? You have no leg to stand on when it comes to morals, ethics, or hypopcrisy….not as a Canadian and certainly not as an advocate for American liberalism. Honestly, dude, you’d probably make a better advocate for your batshit insane conspiracy theory that there were no black singers before Michael Jackson came along.
“avowed communist Truther who claimed America deserved what happened to them on 9/11.”
Maybe when your side of the aisle stops with the ridiculous, out-of-context, flaming rhetoric, we can have some meaningful dialogue in this country. Until then stfu.
your batshit insane conspiracy theory that there were no black singers before Michael Jackson came along.
Michael Jackson was Black? Who knew?
Unreal, this post is supposed to address the nutcase Schmidt and all some people are posting about is another totally off topic subject. Lets address the post and the nutjob in the video. When there is a “truther” thread, feel free to post, Dennis…until then, either speak to the issue at hand or go to McDonalds and order a Whopper…see what response you get there when you keep insisting.
S Quaker, sometimes you seem rational, and then other times, not. If you are upset about Van Jones’ quiting his job, you should first direct your anger at either him for his lack of willpower in the face of criticism, much as you and your cohorts here did gleefully with Sarah Palin. And if not him because you feel he was forced out, which is more likely the case, your anger should then go to Barack Obama, for another one of his famous tosses under the bus for someone who has caused him a great deal of embarrassment. If there is nothing wrong with his being an avowed communist and nothing wrong with Barack Obama knowing this, then you should be mad at them long before you should be mad at me.
That is, if you were intellectually honest, which I would like to believe you are.
My problem, Dennis, is with the blatant, politically motivated distortion of Van Jones’ record. He is not an “avowed Truther.” He naively signed a petition without reading the entire text. He helped organize a rally to call for congressional hearings into the War on Terror and what went wrong prior to 9/11. You know what? I’ve done the same. I’ve even signed a petition or two along those lines. Does that make me a “Truther?” (Hint: I don’t think it was an inside job. I DO believe there were plenty of warning signs before hand that MIGHT have prevented the disaster. And I certainly believe that the “War on Terror” has been a FUBAR ever since.)
And he did NOT claim America “deserved” what happened to it on 9/11. Nor did any of the myriad other people who suggested that the roots of terrorism might be a tad deeper than “they hate us for our freedoms” schtick that Bush was pushing, and that perhaps our foreign policy contributed in some way both to the anger of the Muslim world and to the arming of the terrorists. Both of those questions deserved looking at if we want to prevent this kind of situation in the future.
But the right loves to simplify complex problems to the point of idiocy, and then vilify the opposition with scary words like “communist” and “terrorist sympathizer.” And “hater,” let’s not forget “hater.”
I don’t, personally, have a problem with Van Jones being a communist, “avowed” or otherwise, if he is not actively plotting the violent overthrow of the U.S. government. Do you? If so, why? Whatever happened to freedom of speech and association? Besides which, no one has explained how his political leanings are at all relevant to the job he was asked to do for the administration.
Yes, I wish Van Jones & the administration had stood up to the bullying. And yes, I’m a bit pissed that Obama keeps caving to the same. But most of my anger is rightfully aimed at the bullies themselves, and I have no intention of not calling bs when I see it.
Here, Southern Quaker, please read this:
Emergency Action Against Racism and War (Oakland)
A recurring theme of the speakers was the brutal violence committed by or supported by the United States government on a daily basis. “The bombs the government drops in Iraq are the bombs that blew up in New York City,” said Van Jones, director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, who also warned against forthcoming violence by the Bush Administration. “The US cannot bomb its way out of this one. Safety at home requires justice abroad.”
Just two days after 9/11.
I hate to say this, but if Obama and Van Jones couldn’t stand up to Glenn Beck, and really, that’s all it was along with later Fox News and a few conservative bloggers since the State-Controlled Media left it alone, then you have to question each one of their respective testicular fortitudes, Southern Quaker. Glenn Beck responded to Van Jones attempt to take him down by boycotting his advertisers. Beck was not the bully.
And Van Jones lost. So did Obama.
This is awesome:
http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1333/
Haha! Joey Doughnut’s right. We totally got steered off course. I blame you, Dennis! But I can dig it, you were trying to protect your woman. Hahahaha!
Hey Dennis! Schmidt?
Dennis is objectively pro-Birther.
I will agree with you on one point, Dennis. Beck is one of the loudest and most obnoxious bullies on the right.
It’s hard for me to think of that guy as a bully, but to each his/her own I guess, S. Quaker.
And anyway, why would he need to be a bully when you guys say he can do mind control and make people in his audience just off any of his enemies by using any one of his various secret ring-decoder dog whistles?
Beck is nothing but a coward who would absolutely piss in his pants if he were to encounter any individual whom he had threatened with violence on his radio show. He is a worthless rat turd, and so is Schmidt and her ilk.
I apologize to rat turd for the comparison.
Oh, Wilfredo, since you mention it, I guess Beck can do mind control on Obama’s czars, too.
Or maybe Obama himself. Make them turn into total wimps.
But he’s a coward. Or a bully. Or something.
Dennis, let me understand this: you actually admire someone like a Beck?
For the record, I don’t think the administration has been tough enough on their opponents. The more I think about it, the more I’m beginning to agree with OW on his post regarding Conley.
I admire certain characteristics about just about everyone, Wilfredo. I just don’t think Beck is a coward, nor a bully, nor someone who wants his audience to commit violence that includes murder. Van Jones and the liberal blogs did everything they could to boycott Beck’s advertisers. If Beck was a coward he would’ve done what Van Jones did and just folded and said he was becoming a distraction to Fox. Instead, his audience has grown by leaps and bounds. And fighting back isn’t bullying, either.
Dennis,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-KGukuety0
I suppose that woman had it coming. I can give you more, if you want. Let me tell you he screams at me like that…
Let me know if you want more, okay?
Dennis: Schmidt?
I’ll join in.
Dennis: Schmidt?
What a complete coward you are Dennis. In so many different ways.
Jaim,
When the going got tough, you bailed, and you ran. You live in a 500 s.f studio apartment in Korea doing a job that anyone who can speak English is qualified to do. You pay no federal taxes and you bitch about people who do, because you want what they have without doing what they did to earn it. You’ve led an easy life of privilege, and you want that to continue, only you don’t want to have to pay for it. You want other people to keep footing your bills.
You, my friend, are the coward here.
Wow. Dennis is hitting this thread hard.
I think you’re right Jaim. He really does have a thing for Ms. Schmidt.
Still avoiding the topic, Dennis? Schmidt?
Dennis: Schmidt?
Dennis, are you capable of typing a single thing that isn’t false?
Do you have access to my tax records? Have you ever been in my apartment? Do you know where I work?
I mean, your crush on me is pretty obvious, but the fact is you don’t know these things. And you’re wrong.
“You want other people to keep footing your bills.”
What? I have a real job, unlike you Dennis. I get up every day and work. You should try it some time, you cowardly little punk-ass bitch.
Also, Schmidt?
Wow. What a freaking punk-bitch you are, Dennis.