Search forums

Forums

Export thread

Anita Dunn Hearts Brutal Dictators.

Oct 16, 2009#1

Armadillo

Yes, this is from Glenn Beck's show. I BEG you, please ignore that and listen to this woman's words. She is the White House Communications Director, a person with direct access to the President of the United States. She's also the won who launched the "White House War on Fox News."

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi1zg2NOCn8[/ame]

For those who can't open the link, Dunn was giving a speech to graduating high school seniors in June, and in the speech she references her "two favorite political philosophers: Mao Tse-Tung and Mother Teresa."

That's right, the White House Communications Director, again someone with DIRECT ACCESS TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, greatly admires a man who, by all estimates, is responsible for the deaths of between 50 and 70 million Chinese during the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward. Imagine if a White House advisor came out and said he or she admired the political philosophy of Adolf Hitler. Well, this is ten times worse in terms of body count.

Oct 16, 2009#2

Krisken

Boy, it's a good thing she didn't say Sun Tzu or you'd be pissing yourself right now.

Oct 16, 2009#3

SpecialKO

What the frak?!

Yeah, that's more than a little disturbing. I feel like she could have made that point without Mao.

Oct 16, 2009#4

Armadillo

Krisken said:
Boy, it's a good thing she didn't say Sun Tzu or you'd be pissing yourself right now.

Am I to assume from your dismissive tone that you don't have a problem with an administration official listing a dictator with a 50-70 million person body count as a source of inspiration?

Oct 16, 2009#5

Krisken

Nah, I think it's a little crazy that she said that. I'm pulling your chain a little, and I'm a little not caring. We have a President who can think for himself. Those two people, Mao and Mother Teresa, couldn't be much further from each other philosophically.

I don't know about you, but I can admire someone's ideas and despise the actions they perform all at the same time.

Oct 16, 2009#6

Armadillo

Krisken said:
Nah, I think it's a little crazy that she said that. I'm pulling your chain a little, and I'm a little not caring. We have a President who can think for himself. Those two people, Mao and Mother Teresa, couldn't be much further from each other philosophically.

I don't know about you, but I can admire someone's ideas and despise the actions they perform all at the same time.

Oct 16, 2009#7

Covar

Armadillo;276037][quote=Krisken said:
Nah, I think it's a little crazy that she said that. I'm pulling your chain a little, and I'm a little not caring. We have a President who can think for himself. Those two people, Mao and Mother Teresa, couldn't be much further from each other philosophically.

I don't know about you, but I can admire someone's ideas and despise the actions they perform all at the same time.

Considering that Mao's ideas led directly to the shit ton of deaths, I have a hard time separating them.

As for Obama, during the campaign, he said this: "judge me by the people who surround me." I think that might be a case of "be careful what you wish for." There's an awful lot of wingnuts with some baaaaaaaaad ideas in this crew.[/QUOTE]
hey, Judge him by the people who surround him, except for his childhood mentors, his longtime preacher of 20 years, and now apparently his Senior Communications director.

Oct 16, 2009#8

Armadillo

Covar;276040][quote=Armadillo;276037][quote=Krisken said:
Nah, I think it's a little crazy that she said that. I'm pulling your chain a little, and I'm a little not caring. We have a President who can think for himself. Those two people, Mao and Mother Teresa, couldn't be much further from each other philosophically.

I don't know about you, but I can admire someone's ideas and despise the actions they perform all at the same time.

Oct 16, 2009#9

Krisken

What exactly did Acorn do as an organization again?

Oct 16, 2009#10

Covar

Krisken said:
What exactly did Acorn do as an organization again?

I'll let you know when the FBI finishes all their investigations on them.

Oct 16, 2009#11

Krisken

Covar;276057][quote=Krisken said:
What exactly did Acorn do as an organization again?

I'll let you know when the FBI finishes all their investigations on them.[/quote]
On the organization or individuals who apparently thought a kid that looks like he's dressed in a halloween costume is a pimp?

Edit: Can't wait for the BS voter fraud accusation.

Oct 16, 2009#12

Armadillo

Wall Street Journal: BS source, apparently.

Oct 16, 2009#13

Krisken

It is, because it neglects to mention that all cases of incorrect forms are reported by ACORN as possibly fraudulent. ACORN is REQUIRED BY LAW to turn in any and all filled out forms, even if they think they are fraudulent. They are to report those forms as suspicious.

Let me say it again so people stop repeating the stupidity here...

ACORN IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO TURN IN ANY COMPLETED FORM, EVEN IF THEY BELIEVE IT TO BE FRAUDULENT.

I really hope this makes things more clear. Even if the person signs it Mickey Mouse. Even if the person is already registered. Must. Be. Turned. In.

Oct 16, 2009#14

Iaculus

Armadillo said:
Wall Street Journal: BS source, apparently.

Depends. Was that before or after Rupert Murdoch bought it?

Seriously, that guy reacts to good journalism the way a vampire reacts to sunlight. Just look at what he did to the Times over here.

Oct 16, 2009#15

Armadillo

Krisken said:
It is, because it neglects to mention that all cases of incorrect forms are reported by ACORN as possibly fraudulent. ACORN is REQUIRED BY LAW to turn in any and all filled out forms, even if they think they are fraudulent. They are to report those forms as suspicious.

Let me say it again so people stop repeating the stupidity here...

ACORN IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO TURN IN ANY COMPLETED FORM, EVEN IF THEY BELIEVE IT TO BE FRAUDULENT.

I really hope this makes things more clear. Even if the person signs it Mickey Mouse. Even if the person is already registered. Must. Be. Turned. In.

I understand that, but if they're following the law as written, then where is all of this coming from? Groups don't just get the bright spotlight on them for no reason. For such a law-abiding, community-based group, ACORN sure is surrounded by shenanigans. Either their standards for employment are appallingly low, or the organization is just plain corrupt from the top down.

Oct 16, 2009#16

Covar

Krisken said:
It is, because it neglects to mention that all cases of incorrect forms are reported by ACORN as possibly fraudulent. ACORN is REQUIRED BY LAW to turn in any and all filled out forms, even if they think they are fraudulent. They are to report those forms as suspicious.

Let me say it again so people stop repeating the stupidity here...

ACORN IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO TURN IN ANY COMPLETED FORM, EVEN IF THEY BELIEVE IT TO BE FRAUDULENT.

I really hope this makes things more clear. Even if the person signs it Mickey Mouse. Even if the person is already registered. Must. Be. Turned. In.

Oh so the charges were made because they followed the law? I see.

Oct 16, 2009#17

DarkAudit

Still, it's Glenn Beck. The guy who called the US a fascist country because of a design on a coin that's been out of circulation for nearly 100 years.

I must consider the source. The source is fail.

Oct 17, 2009#18

Frankie Williamson

You know the opposite of a good way to deliver a speech into a mic? Keep licking your face loudly into the mic in between sentences. Fuck, I have no tolerance for irritating noises.

Also, Glen Beck is such a drama queen.

Oct 18, 2009#19

Armadillo

DarkAudit said:
Still, it's Glenn Beck. The guy who called the US a fascist country because of a design on a coin that's been out of circulation for nearly 100 years.

I must consider the source. The source is fail.

Oct 19, 2009#20

DarkAudit

Armadillo;277567][quote=DarkAudit said:
Still, it's Glenn Beck. The guy who called the US a fascist country because of a design on a coin that's been out of circulation for nearly 100 years.

I must consider the source. The source is fail.

Oct 19, 2009#21

Dave

How many people did Obama have to vet and put into position?

I doubt anyone could sufficiently weed out the crazy.

Oct 19, 2009#22

Armadillo

DarkAudit;277714][quote=Armadillo;277567][quote=DarkAudit said:
Still, it's Glenn Beck. The guy who called the US a fascist country because of a design on a coin that's been out of circulation for nearly 100 years.

I must consider the source. The source is fail.

Ignore Beck. Listen to her words. Absorb them, analyze them. She cited Mao Tse-Tung as a source of philosophical inspiration. I don't care if that clip came from Glenn Beck or Dora the Explorer. MAO TSE-TUNG.[/QUOTE]

So did John McCain, Ralph Reed, and Newt Gingrich.[/QUOTE]

I never said I was OK with any of those guys quoting Mao. Are you saying you're OK with Dunn admiring Mao because the three of them quoted Mao?

---------- Post added at 05:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:59 PM ----------

Dave said:
How many people did Obama have to vet and put into position?

I doubt anyone could sufficiently weed out the crazy.

Yeah, but God DAMN there's a lot of crazy going on around here. Van Jones, Anita Dunn, Cass Sunstein, Mark Lloyd, all of them in positions that carry some heft, if not the full weight of a Cabinet post. In Jones's case, Obama's long-time close friend Valerie Jarrett was quoted as saying that she'd been following Jones for quite a few years, so they were familiar with each other. Either no vetting was done AT ALL, or Obama at the very least shares some political ideology with these whackadoos.

Oct 19, 2009#23

Covar

Dave said:
How many people did Obama have to vet and put into position?

I doubt anyone could sufficiently weed out the crazy.

About as much as every other president.

Oct 19, 2009#24

DarkAudit

Armadillo said:
I never said I was OK with any of those guys quoting Mao. Are you saying you're OK with Dunn admiring Mao because the three of them quoted Mao?

I'm saying your clip is what Glenn Beck wants you to see. And he's a goddamned idiot.

Oct 19, 2009#25

Armadillo

Covar;277900][quote=Dave said:
How many people did Obama have to vet and put into position?

I doubt anyone could sufficiently weed out the crazy.

About as much as every other president.[/QUOTE]

About 30-40 more if you count the "czars."

---------- Post added at 05:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:13 PM ----------

DarkAudit;277907][quote=Armadillo said:
I never said I was OK with any of those guys quoting Mao. Are you saying you're OK with Dunn admiring Mao because the three of them quoted Mao?

I'm saying your clip is what Glenn Beck wants you to see. And he's a goddamned idiot.[/QUOTE]

So he's an idiot. Does that invalidate the clip itself, which is three minutes, uncut, with no commentary during her speech? Those are HER WORDS, nobody else's.

You're attacking the messenger, not the message.

Oct 19, 2009#26

Covar

Armadillo;277916][quote=Covar;277900][quote=Dave said:
How many people did Obama have to vet and put into position?

I doubt anyone could sufficiently weed out the crazy.

About as much as every other president.[/QUOTE]

About 30-40 more if you count the "czars."

---------- Post added at 05:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:13 PM ----------

DarkAudit;277907][quote=Armadillo said:
I never said I was OK with any of those guys quoting Mao. Are you saying you're OK with Dunn admiring Mao because the three of them quoted Mao?

Oct 19, 2009#27

ElJuski

haha, Glenn Beck.

Oct 19, 2009#28

DarkAudit

ElJuski said:
haha, Glenn Beck.

Yep. The tape wasn't meant for public airing, yet somehow Beck got hold of a copy. it's no secret that Fox in general and Beck in particular have a vendetta against the Obama administration, especially after the Obama camp decided to treat Fox like the right-wing mouthpiece they are.

The tape is crap, because the source is crap.

Oct 19, 2009#29

Rob King

Am I the only one who takes issue with her citing Mother Teresa? I was not aware that Mother Teresa had a political philosophy.

Oct 19, 2009#30

Armadillo

DarkAudit;278309][quote=ElJuski said:
haha, Glenn Beck.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Oh yeah, there's that little thing.

Hate Bush all you want, he never tried to bring the hammer down on MSNBC.

Oct 19, 2009#31

Krisken

Armadillo;278350][quote=DarkAudit;278309][quote=ElJuski said:
haha, Glenn Beck.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Oh yeah, there's that little thing.

Hate Bush all you want, he never tried to bring the hammer down on MSNBC.[/QUOTE]
Horse shit.

Oct 19, 2009#32

DarkAudit

Armadillo said:
Hate Bush all you want, he never tried to bring the hammer down on MSNBC.

Oct 19, 2009#33

Rob King

Armadillo said:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah, there's that little thing.

Hate Bush all you want, he never tried to bring the hammer down on MSNBC.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It seems you missed something important.

Oct 19, 2009#34

Armadillo

DarkAudit;278356][quote=Armadillo said:
Hate Bush all you want, he never tried to bring the hammer down on MSNBC.

No, he just lied to get us into an unnecessary war, resulting in thousands of lost American and Iraqi lives and untold billions of dollars wasted. Not to mention the loss of respect and prestige around the globe.[/QUOTE]

Relevant to the discussion...

---------- Post added at 02:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:48 AM ----------

"Krisken;278352][quote=Armadillo said:
DarkAudit;278309 said:

ElJuski said:

haha, Glenn Beck.

Click to expand...

Yep. The tape wasn't meant for public airing, yet somehow Beck got hold of a copy. it's no secret that Fox in general and Beck in particular have a vendetta against the Obama administration, especially after the Obama camp decided to treat Fox like the right-wing mouthpiece they are.

The tape is crap, because the source is crap.

Click to expand...

Good to know you have no problem with the US government taking action against a media outlet they disagree with.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah, there's that little thing.

Hate Bush all you want, he never tried to bring the hammer down on MSNBC.

Horse shit.

[/QUOTE]

Never saw that video before. I would say that also is wrong. I will say the key difference is Obama's guys asking the other networks to alienate Fox and possibly get them tossed from the press pool. That takes it a step above, even though I would criticize the Bush White House for freezing out MSNBC.

---------- Post added at 02:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:51 AM ----------

Rob King said:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Click to expand...

It seems you missed something important.

Constitutional limitations apply to all levels and branches of government.

Oct 19, 2009#35

DarkAudit

Armadillo;278364][quote=DarkAudit;278356][quote=Armadillo said:
Hate Bush all you want, he never tried to bring the hammer down on MSNBC.

Oct 19, 2009#36

Krisken

The next time I pull out the "They did it worse" argument and someone calls me on it I'm coming back here and posting it.

Oct 19, 2009#37

Rob King

Armadillo;278364][quote=Rob King said:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Click to expand...

It seems you missed something important.

Constitutional limitations apply to all levels and branches of government.[/QUOTE]

Alright. Maybe I bolded too much. Allow me to try again.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

No law has been made here. The media dicks around with the government in most countries. And in pretty much every one of those countries, the government dicks right back. It's when laws are passed in the midst of all of the dicking, that we start crossing lines, as confirmed by your constitution, apparently.

Oct 19, 2009#38

Armadillo

Rob King said:
Alright. Maybe I bolded too much. Allow me to try again.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Click to expand...

No law has been made here. The media dicks around with the government in most countries. And in pretty much every one of those countries, the government dicks right back. It's when laws are passed in the midst of all of the dicking, that we start crossing lines, as confirmed by your constitution, apparently.

You're right, no law has been passed here, and therefore there has not been a clear First Amendment violation. My point is that they're starting to skirt the line, with the push to have Fox "alienated" and pressuring the other networks to maybe toss them from the White House Press Pool.

Putting aside hypothetical constitutional crises for a second, it's just plain unseemly for the White House to be getting involved in a public "war" with Fox. It makes the WH sound like a bunch of thin-skinned amateurs, and probably isn't the best thing to be doing when we're supposed to be dealing with more important matters (Afghanistan, anyone? Almost two months since McChrystal's troop increase request.) Krisken's link showed that some elements in the Bush White House wanted to publicly call out MSNBC, but the idea was shelved due to it being "unpresidential."

I really think this is going to backfire on Obama in a big way. Even liberal commentators are questioning the wisdom of going after Fox like this, and Fox's ratings are continuing to go up.

Oct 19, 2009#39

Krisken

The Obama administration is in a tough spot in this one. Either they let Fox keep up their antics and not call them out on it, or they let it go and people start to believe it. John Kerry learned that lesson the hard way when he got swift boated.

Oct 19, 2009#40

Rob King

Armadillo said:
You're right, no law has been passed here, and therefore there has not been a clear First Amendment violation. My point is that they're starting to skirt the line, with the push to have Fox "alienated" and pressuring the other networks to maybe toss them from the White House Press Pool.

Putting aside hypothetical constitutional crises for a second, it's just plain unseemly for the White House to be getting involved in a public "war" with Fox. It makes the WH sound like a bunch of thin-skinned amateurs, and probably isn't the best thing to be doing when we're supposed to be dealing with more important matters (Afghanistan, anyone? Almost two months since McChrystal's troop increase request.) Krisken's link showed that some elements in the Bush White House wanted to publicly call out MSNBC, but the idea was shelved due to it being "unpresidential."

I really think this is going to backfire on Obama in a big way. Even liberal commentators are questioning the wisdom of going after Fox like this, and Fox's ratings are continuing to go up.

I see. I don't think this could really lead to a constitutional crisis at all, which is why I don't take this as seriously, I guess, but I can see what you're saying now.

My only concern here is whether it would backfire, but Fox has been under pressure from the White House for a while, hasn't it? Didn't one of the linked articles mention that they haven't been granted any interviews with Obama recently, when the other networks have? Maybe being as explicit as the White House has been this time might be unwise, but I certainly don't think it's undue. And it's certainly not unconstitutional.

Oct 19, 2009#41

Espy

You know, if an administration want to piss off and alienate the viewers of Fox/CNN/MSNBC, then by all means, they can go nuts. I don't really care if they never give Fox or NBC or Cartoon Network an interview. It's their gamble to make and they can live with what comes from it, regardless of whom the administration is at the time.

In the end people need to watch a hell of a lot less 24 hour news networks anyway.

Oct 20, 2009#42

Armadillo

Espy said:
In the end people need to watch a hell of a lot less 24 hour news networks anyway.

I think everyone can agree on this point.

Oct 20, 2009#43

Krisken

Armadillo;278503][quote=Espy said:
In the end people need to watch a hell of a lot less 24 hour news networks anyway.

I think everyone can agree on this point.[/QUOTE]
:tea: I'll join ya's on that one.

Oct 20, 2009#44

Rob King

Krisken;278504][quote=Armadillo;278503][quote=Espy said:
In the end people need to watch a hell of a lot less 24 hour news networks anyway.

I think everyone can agree on this point.[/QUOTE]
:tea: I'll join ya's on that one.[/QUOTE]
Here too.

To the pub!

Oct 20, 2009#45

SpecialKO

Rob King;278505][quote=Krisken;278504][quote=Armadillo;278503][quote=Espy said:
In the end people need to watch a hell of a lot less 24 hour news networks anyway.

I think everyone can agree on this point.[/QUOTE]
:tea: I'll join ya's on that one.[/QUOTE]
Here too.

To the pub![/QUOTE]

I see what you di- eh, whatever.

:falldown:

Oct 20, 2009#46

Terrik

A friend of mine forwarded me this video and I found it mildly interesting. There are a few points that made me raise my eyebrows, although I'm hard pressed to to come up with a campaign that doesn't try to do this.

Oct 20, 2009#47

Armadillo

Krisken;278504][quote=Armadillo;278503][quote=Espy said:
In the end people need to watch a hell of a lot less 24 hour news networks anyway.

I think everyone can agree on this point.[/QUOTE]
:tea: I'll join ya's on that one.[/QUOTE]

Now, the new question is, can we all agree that the Minnesota Gopher hockey team rules all?

I'll hang up and listen.

Nov 4, 2009#48

WolfOfOdin

Considering I'm a pragmatic socialist in favor of a mixed-system, I still find the woman to be a bit of an idiot.

Now to see if I'm going to be called a traitor or an irredeemable fool for believing in socialism >_>

Nov 4, 2009#49

Adammon

WolfOfOdin said:
Considering I'm a pragmatic socialist in favor of a mixed-system, I still find the woman to be a bit of an idiot.

Now to see if I'm going to be called a traitor or an irredeemable fool for believing in socialism >_>

Er, why? The entire western world is mixed-system, with varying degress of socialism. In fact, off the top of my head I can't think of any pure capitalist societies out there; maybe some in Africa but that's probably more anarchist than capitalist.

Nov 4, 2009#50

WolfOfOdin

Eh, there's a tea party group at Rutgers that's been picketing the main campus with "Socialism is Treason!" and "Disband the Democratic Party!" signs as of late when I go to speak to the admins there. I get accosted every time for my views haha.

Nov 4, 2009#51

Adammon

WolfOfOdin said:
Eh, there's a tea party group at Rutgers that's been picketing the main campus with "Socialism is Treason!" and "Disband the Democratic Party!" signs as of late when I go to speak to the admins there. I get accosted every time for my views haha.

I hope these aren't Rutgers students! Because if they were, the irony would be thick - demonstrating against socialism at a public university...

Nov 4, 2009#52

WolfOfOdin

Adammon said:
I hope these aren't Rutgers students! Because if they were, the irony would be thick - demonstrating against socialism at a public university...

I dunno, but they ARE insanely annoying. I made a crack about the inevitability of empires to fall and a very angry, very big man got in my face and screamed that I was a traitor and should be deported to cuba with my commie buddies.

Nov 4, 2009#53

Adammon

WolfOfOdin;290585][quote=Adammon said:
I hope these aren't Rutgers students! Because if they were, the irony would be thick - demonstrating against socialism at a public university...

Nov 4, 2009#54

Rob King

Adammon said:
Dang.. I'm glad Canadian politics are a little less cut-throat.

Is it?

Nov 4, 2009#55

Adammon

Rob King;290656][quote=Adammon said:
Dang.. I'm glad Canadian politics are a little less cut-throat.

Is it?[/QUOTE]

Dude also took down a burglar in his own house. At 62, he was still kicking ass

Nov 5, 2009#56

Rob King

Adammon said:
Dude also took down a burglar in his own house. At 62, he was still kicking ass

I wonder who would win in a fight between Jean Cretien and Dick Cheney ...

Nov 5, 2009#57

Timmus

Rob King;290673][quote=Adammon said:
Dude also took down a burglar in his own house. At 62, he was still kicking ass

I wonder who would win in a fight between Jean Cretien and Dick Cheney ...[/QUOTE]

I think we all would.

Nov 5, 2009#58

SpecialKO

Timmus;290678][quote=Rob King;290673][quote=Adammon said:
Dude also took down a burglar in his own house. At 62, he was still kicking ass

I wonder who would win in a fight between Jean Cretien and Dick Cheney ...[/QUOTE]

I think we all would.[/QUOTE]

/thread :cool:

Nov 5, 2009#59

Rob King

Timmus;290678][quote=Rob King;290673][quote=Adammon said:
Dude also took down a burglar in his own house. At 62, he was still kicking ass

I wonder who would win in a fight between Jean Cretien and Dick Cheney ...[/QUOTE]

I think we all would.[/QUOTE]

hahah.

The Shrubber speaks truth.

Forums