Tank Admires Pat Buchanan, Thinks He's "Fair"

That's about all you need to know if you want to know Tank's view of minorities and Jews.

Just out of curiosity what were Tank's thoughts on the presidential race and McCain?

"this presidential race is enormouuss"

That's about all you need to know if you want to know Tank's view of minorities and Jews.

Pat Buchanan cracks me up, like that zany uncle you have that is annoying at first, then has a couple of scotch drinks, becomes hysterical for awhile but you better get your coat and go home before midnight because then it just starts to get weird...

Just out of curiosity what were Tank's thoughts on the presidential race and McCain?

Francesa said he leans Republican. He has no trouble paying taxes. Thought it was the patriotic thing to do.

Said McCain should bring up the fact that the country hasn't been attacked since 9/11.

Said Obama should bring up that Bush and Cheny lied (that was the word he used) to the country regarding WMD's.

Said Obama was an excellent debater.

Francesa said he likes Sarah Palin and would like to meet her.

Pat Buchanan cracks me up, like that zany uncle you have that is annoying at first, then has a couple of scotch drinks, becomes hysterical for awhile but you better get your coat and go home before midnight because then it just starts to get weird...

PB is one smart guy. He's an excellent debater and could more than hold his own versus Obama. He could beat McCain, IMO, in a debate without trying.

Have no clue why he continues to appear on MSNBC (Ok, it's the money). As he told Sean Hannity, he was doing God's work.

Thought his book "Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War" was abit over the top. His other books were more plausible by comparison.

Very much a trade protectionist and an anti illegal immigration advocate which may have played well this election cycle.

Also, like Obama, he was against the war in Iraq from the start. Since he is a quasi isolationist that is not a surprise.

Very religious fellow. All in all, a good, decent, and honest person, even if you don't agree with him.

Would rather be sitting next to him on a plane than many other talking heads.

PB is one smart guy. He's an excellent debater and could more than hold his own versus Obama. He could beat McCain, IMO, in a debate without trying.

Have no clue why he continues to appear on MSNBC (Ok, it's the money). As he told Sean Hannity, he was doing God's work.

Thought his book "Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War" was abit over the top. His other books were more plausible by comparison.

Very much a trade protectionist and an anti illegal immigration advocate which may have played well this election cycle.

Very religious fellow. All in all, a good, decent, and honest person, even if you don't agree with him.

Would rather be sitting next to him on a plane than many other talking heads.

Agreed... Especially about sitting next to him on a plane, all those guys that were around Nixon in the 70's probably have some great stories...I have never read any of his books, I heard The Great Betrayal was good, any other suggestions?

Yeah he "leans" republican hahaha that's why he's donated to every GOP presidential campaign since they've released public tax donations records? Big Independent, Huuuu-uuge Independent dawg

Check out State of Emergency and Day of . Both are quick reads.

You can also check www.drudge.com for his weekly column.

Remember that Maureen Dowd of N.Y. Times fame has talked about the fact that her brothers use to get the stuffings kicked out of them by Buchanan and his brothers when they all went to Gonzaga Prep in D.C.

PB is one smart guy. He's an excellent debater and could more than hold his own versus Obama. He could beat McCain, IMO, in a debate without trying.

Have no clue why he continues to appear on MSNBC (Ok, it's the money). As he told Sean Hannity, he was doing God's work.

Thought his book "Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War" was abit over the top. His other books were more plausible by comparison.

Very much a trade protectionist and an anti illegal immigration advocate which may have played well this election cycle.

Also, like Obama, he was against the war in Iraq from the start. Since he is a quasi isolationist that is not a surprise.

Very religious fellow. All in all, a good, decent, and honest person, even if you don't agree with him.

Would rather be sitting next to him on a plane than many other talking heads.

agree 100%. I don't always agree with him, but i also find him to be a decent person. very smart. doesn't just pump the party line.

Pat Buchanan is a nazi. Come to think of it, so is Tank.

Thanks. I was hoping I hadn't wasted my time reading this thread, then I found the one solid, accurate post.

Good job by you. You might be being too nice though.

I enjoyed Tank saying that he was all for helping people financially and then in the next breath saying he was conservative when it came to money issues.

One other thing since we're on this topic. Does anyone else remember Tank going on and on about what a brilliant move McCain made when he said he would suspend his campaign to help with the bailout? I wish someone would call Tank and ask him if that was still a brilliant strategy by McCain.

Pat Buchanan is a nazi. Come to think of it, so is Tank.

F-ing Shocker. Another thread turns into naming calling.

F-ing Shocker. Another thread turns into naming calling.

That's not name calling. That's a politcal party. It's like calling someone a liberal, conservative, fascist, or communist.

Calling Pat Buchanan an idiot or jerk would be more in the category of "name calling", at least in my opinion.

Hitler is alive in an Elemento country. Right now...he's watching soccer

Hitler is alive in an Elemento country. Right now...he's watching soccer

Argentina scenario...

Argentina scenario...

We need Jeffrey Lyons in this thread to do a little Boys from Brazil discussion

...and funny story, Mike...did you know the cinemetographer from that movie...his brother was the Red Sox team dentist in the 70's?

Mike: I didn't know that!.....but I actually watched that in my home theater with Nance and Majeris last week. Not a good movie..a Great movie.

Lyons: Majeris wife actually did make up on another Nazi movie, Mike..Marathon Man.

Mike: Wow!

Best posted (http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/watchdog/blog/2008/10/pat_buchanan_is_fair_and_balan_1.html) about this fyi.

Pat Buchanan is fair and balanced; WatchDog is mute

My favorite moment of Tuesday's Francesa/Jones/Carlin experiment on WFAN was when the discussion turned to politics - always dangerous! - and Mike said his favorite commentator is Pat Buchanan because of his fairness and balance.

"I understand what his politics are," Mike said, "but I really think he actually at least is somewhat down the middle where he'll actually give the other side credit once in a while. So I actually think he is fairly fair."

I wish I were a political commentator this month. I really, really do. But I am not. So I hereby swear on the Baseball Encyclopedia that I will not do another post about the Presidential election until it is over . . . and preferably not even then.


Posted by Neil Best on October 8, 2008 10:57 AM | Permalink

I enjoyed Tank saying that he was all for helping people financially and then in the next breath saying he was conservative when it came to money issues.

One other thing since we're on this topic. Does anyone else remember Tank going on and on about what a brilliant move McCain made when he said he would suspend his campaign to help with the bailout? I wish someone would call Tank and ask him if that was still a brilliant strategy by McCain.


At least Francesa writes quite a few checks and is known (by his own admission) to be very charitable. Compare him, for example, with Joe Biden who has averaged $300 annually in charitable contributions over the last 10 years.

It's amazing how many so-called liberals have short arms when it comes to charity.

Thanks. I was hoping I hadn't wasted my time reading this thread, then I found the one solid, accurate post.

Good job by you. You might be being too nice though.


Comparing PB with a Nazi is totally absurd. You lose all credibility with that statement. You sound like a raving lunatic. Come on, your know better than that.

I have no problem with the fact that you seem to be a liberal. That's OK, but to imply or explicitly state that PB should be fitted for a brown shirt is a little bit over the top.

One of the biggest problems we have in this country (on BOTH sides of the aisles) and why everyone is fed up with politics is that some make these outlandish statements and personal attacks without any merit.

One can disagee, on the merits, with someone without resorting to over the top, 6th grade, name calling.

Tank is the same guy who said Imus did a "funny", "outrageous", and "ground breaking" radio program. His opinions outside of sports mean even less to me...

Comparing PB with a Nazi is totally absurd. You lose all credibility with that statement. You sound like a raving lunatic. Come on, your know better than that.

I have no problem with the fact that you seem to be a liberal. That's OK, but to imply or explicitly state that PB should be fitted for a brown shirt is a little bit over the top.

One of the biggest problems we have in this country (on BOTH sides of the aisles) and why everyone is fed up with politics is that some make these outlandish statements and personal attacks without any merit.

One can disagee, on the merits, with someone without resorting to over the top, 6th grade, name calling.


I didn't make the statement, I said the guy made a solid post. The post also said Mike was a Nazi. I have 4000 posts on this board dedicated to Mike and Chris. Do you really think that someone who listens to Mike regularly and has 4000 posts on a board about him thinks he's a nazi? Really?

I didn't make the statement, I said the guy made a solid post. The post also said Mike was a Nazi. I have 4000 posts on this board dedicated to Mike and Chris. Do you really think that someone who listens to Mike regularly and has 4000 posts on a board about him thinks he's a nazi? Really?

The poster said Buchanan was a Nazi. You agreed with him. Calling someone a Nazi is saying that they support things like mass murder, genocide, eugenics, extreme racism, etc etc. If he was called a bigot that's one thing, but saying someone is a Nazi is over the top and sensational. "Nazi" is not a word that should be used lightly in my opinion, unless you are talking about soup.

unless you are talking about soup.

umm...jambalaya.

I like mavericky mavericks, but I also like change. Who do I vote for? I need Mike "Mr. Independent" Francesa to guide me through the murky waters of 2008 politics.

And Mad Dog is beyond idiotic railing against independents. Pick a side? Ok, Mad Dog. Maybe some people enjoy making up their own minds and not being pigeonholed into blindly voting "Row B" every Novembah.

The poster said Buchanan was a Nazi. You agreed with him. Calling someone a Nazi is saying that they support things like mass murder, genocide, eugenics, extreme racism, etc etc. If he was called a bigot that's one thing, but saying someone is a Nazi is over the top and sensational. "Nazi" is not a word that should be used lightly in my opinion, unless you are talking about soup.

I didn't mean to be "over the top" and "sensational". Sorry if my post offended you, or anyone else. I don't really think PB is a nazi. I think he's wrong about a lot of things, although I agree with him sometimes too, I was with him on not invading Iraq.

My bad. I'll avoid using that term (or saying "good post" to someone else that does) in the future.

I didn't mean to be "over the top" and "sensational". Sorry if my post offended you, or anyone else. I don't really think PB is a nazi. I think he's wrong about a lot of things, although I agree with him sometimes too, I was with him on not invading Iraq.

My bad. I'll avoid using that term (or saying "good post" to someone else that does) in the future.

Godwin's law.

Gentleman:
Alas, I am the woman responsible for the nazi reference. Sorry if I offended anyone. You are right. Pat Buchanan is not a nazi. He's more of a run of the mill anti-semite, white supremacist, misogisnist . Sorry for the error.

It's okay. And we all know RD is a bleeding liberal that will support 99 percent of democrats and 1 percent of republicans. It's part of his charm. The name calling was supposed to be just a jest but some people took it to heart so apologies were made and that's the end of that. I am still waiting for IABS to lay the raft on RD though.

At least Francesa writes quite a few checks and is known (by his own admission) to be very charitable. Compare him, for example, with Joe Biden who has averaged $300 annually in charitable contributions over the last 10 years.

It's amazing how many so-called liberals have short arms when it comes to charity.

TANK > THAN YOUR FAVOITE LIAR.

At least Francesa writes quite a few checks and is known (by his own admission) to be very charitable. Compare him, for example, with Joe Biden who has averaged $300 annually in charitable contributions over the last 10 years.

It's amazing how many so-called liberals have short arms when it comes to charity.

That's because in the Liberal Bible it clearly states they want to spend everyone else's money, just not their own.

It's okay. And we all know RD is a bleeding liberal that will support 99 percent of democrats and 1 percent of republicans. It's part of his charm. The name calling was supposed to be just a jest but some people took it to heart so apologies were made and that's the end of that. I am still waiting for IABS to lay the raft on RD though.

I will not engage him this time but thanks for thinking of me I appreciate it.
However just out of curiosity could you explain to me the logic of being offended to the point of self expulsion by use of the term gook yet it's ok to use Nazi?

Gentleman:
Alas, I am the woman responsible for the nazi reference. Sorry if I offended anyone. You are right. Pat Buchanan is not a nazi. He's more of a run of the mill anti-semite, white supremacist, misogisnist . Sorry for the error.

I'll go with "great post" and "good job by you" on this one Georgia. I am clearly not making the mistake of endorsing a post where Pat is being called a Nazi in this spot. In fact, this post clearly states, "Pat Buchanan is NOT a nazi". We should be clear of any repercussions.

I'm glad we straightened that out. Apparently you (we) offeneded at least one racist, and a few conservatives.

I'll go with "great post" and "good job by you" on this one Georgia. I am clearly not making the mistake of endorsing a post where Pat is being called a Nazi in this spot. In fact, this post clearly states, "Pat Buchanan is NOT a nazi". We should be clear of any repercussions.

I'm glad we straightened that out. Apparently you (we) offeneded at least one racist, and a few conservatives.


All this crap does is prove my point about liberals like you. Hypocracy to the enth degree. You should have left when I said gookadome it would have saved you the embarrassment, but I knew eventually you would expose yourself.

All this crap does is prove my point about liberals like you. Hypocracy to the enth degree. You should have left when I said gookadome it would have saved you the embarrassment, but I knew eventually you would expose yourself.

Well Georgia, you (we) upset the racist guy again. Bad job by us!

Poorly produced!

You should have left when I said gookadome it would have saved you the embarrassment, but I knew eventually you would expose yourself.

Lets sum up:

Several weeks ago this guy "In a Big Spot" uses a bull **** slur that casts aspersions on all Asian people. When numerous people call him on it, In a Big Spot half heartedly apologizes, making it clear that he is too dense to understand what he did wrong.

Now everyone has moved on and forgotten about what a dope "In a BigSpot" is. So "In a Big Spot" brings up the whole thing again complaining that he should be allowed to use the word "gook" with retribution.

You can't make this stuff up.

Lets sum up:

Several weeks ago this guy "In a Big Spot" uses a bull **** slur that casts aspersions on all Asian people. When numerous people call him on it, In a Big Spot half heartedly apologizes, making it clear that he is too dense to understand what he did wrong.

Now everyone has moved on and forgotten about what a dope "In a BigSpot" is. So "In a Big Spot" brings up the whole thing again complaining that he should be allowed to use the word "gook" with retribution.

You can't make this stuff up.

You liberals will just never learn will ya.

You want the same beating I gave to some of the others?

Can you guys just once come up with something, anything of substance to discuss without calling names or personally attacking someone? Is that too much to ask from the so called "non judgemental" "understanding" thought process?

If you really must know muteman It was a sincere apology.
Also show me where I'm asking to be allowed to use the word gook?
You can't because it doesn't exist but I'm sure if you bother to replay I'll get another personal attack which is ok because its all you guys can do.
Did you object to the use of the word Nazi in describing someone? Don't know if you did or not but somehow I doubt it, which once again proves all the points I made about people like you.
Do me a favor bro, put your Taliban rally cap back on and call it a day, ok?

what the world needs now is love, sweet love...

what the world needs now is love, sweet love...

LOL Good point. I really wish this hadn't come to this and I'm usually not this much of a firebrand on stuff like this but when I keep reading the same drivel over and over again, week in and week out I feel the need to state an opposite opinion just as a matter of fact.

I really don't think RD or Muteman are bad people. I'm sure their great guys, All I ask is for people to be fair.

You liberals will just never learn will ya.

You want the same beating I gave to some of the others?

Can you guys just once come up with something, anything of substance to discuss without calling names or personally attacking someone? Is that too much to ask from the so called "non judgemental" "understanding" thought process?

If you really must know muteman It was a sincere apology.
Also show me where I'm asking to be allowed to use the word gook?
You can't because it doesn't exist but I'm sure if you bother to replay I'll get another personal attack which is ok because its all you guys can do.
Did you object to the use of the word Nazi in describing someone? Don't know if you did or not but somehow I doubt it, which once again proves all the points I made about people like you.
Do me a favor bro, put your Taliban rally cap back on and call it a day, ok?

Yikes! Calling a public personality a Nazi is taboo, but calling calling somebody a Taliban sympathizer is fair game. Boy, your're right, those liberal a-holes are real hypocrites.

Mongoloid Caller noticed this before me. Good job outta him.

Yikes! Calling a public personality a Nazi is taboo, but calling calling somebody a Taliban sympathizer is fair game. Boy, your're right, those liberal a-holes are real hypocrites.

Mongoloid Caller noticed this before me. Good job outta him.

Glad you picked up on it Hut.

Had I not done that the post would have been ignored.

PB in his weekly column (you can read it on Drudge) wrote: Can you imagine the outrage from the main stream media if the Republican presidential nominee was introduced to politics, and worked with someone who was an admitted bomber of black churches and that this same person said he wished he bombed more churches and had no regrets on the same day as the Oklahoma City bombings??

I think we all know the answer to that one.

Have to admit Obama must be the dumbest guy in Chicago if he is truthful in saying he didn't know of Ayers domestic terrorism in the 1960's.

Does anyone actually believe that some one who is a Columbia U. undergrad and past president of The Harvard Law Review never heard of Bill Ayers and his wife (who the FBI callled the most dangerous woman in America at the time).

Does anyone really believe Obama was that oblivious ??

I don't think so!

Heck, Michelle Obama, and Ayer's wife, Bernardine Dohrn (a para legal who was not able to become a lawyer due to her terrorist activities) even worked together in the same law firm.

It's not as if he only met him once he had continued ALLIANCES (which is not nearly as casual as a so-called "association") with Ayers and his wife.

One wonders what Ayers and his wife, both unrependant, hard Left bomb throwers, saw in Obama to hand the chairmanship of the Ayers foundation to Obama and then share their home and friends with him in an effort to jump start Obama's political career??.

PB in his weekly column (you can read it on Drudge) wrote: Can you imagine the outrage from the main stream media if the Republican presidential nominee was introduced to politics, and worked with someone who was an admitted bomber of black churches and that this same person said he wished he bombed more churches and had no regrets on the same day as the Oklahoma City bombings??

I think we all know the answer to that one.

Have to admit Obama must be the dumbest guy in Chicago if he is truthful in saying he didn't know of Ayers domestic terrorism in the 1960's.

Does anyone actually believe that some one who is a Columbia U. undergrad and past president of The Harvard Law Review never heard of Bill Ayers and his wife (who the FBI callled the most dangerous woman in America at the time).

Does anyone really believe Obama was that oblivious ??

I don't think so!

Heck, Michelle Obama, and Ayer's wife, Bernardine Dohrn (a para legal who was not able to become a lawyer due to her terrorist activities) even worked together in the same law firm.

It's not as if he only met him once he had continued ALLIANCES (which is not nearly as casual as a so-called "association") with Ayers and his wife.

One wonders what Ayers and his wife, both unrependant, hard Left bomb throwers, saw in Obama to hand the chairmanship of the Ayers foundation to Obama and then share their home and friends with him in an effort to jump start Obama's political career??.

Wow...Good point...fair point. If it's true, its the best quote I've heard linking Obama to Ayers since this whole contrversy started. I kind of always liked Buchanan too. I liked Southside's analogy of the cool uncle...that rings true for me.

As an Obama supporter...I simply can't disagree. He's way too smart not to know that. I also had no idea of the wives working connection either.

But I'm still voting for Obama. He's the better candidate and everyone knows it. He's presidential. He's a good and decent man and even McCain knows that too. Race is the 800 pound gorilla in this election and you can tell based on the contempt of the Palin-McCain rallies and the venom the audiences spew at them. To his credit...McCain...also a good and decent man is trying to curb it. But in crunch time...the GOP will go back to dirty tricks and "swift boat" Barack...we all know it. Thats the only way they have ever won an election since the Reagan era.

But I'm still voting for Obama. So if Bill Ayers and his wife blow up a building during the Obama presidency...then I guess you can blame me.

But in crunch-time...when it's time to pull the lever...whites won't vote for a black man...no matter what the polls say. It's really that simple. Thats what I feel bad about.

PB in his weekly column (you can read it on Drudge) wrote: Can you imagine the outrage from the main stream media if the Republican presidential nominee was introduced to politics, and worked with someone who was an admitted bomber of black churches and that this same person said he wished he bombed more churches and had no regrets on the same day as the Oklahoma City bombings??


It's easy to assume this analogy is somehow valid when you're a white guy who hasn't had to go through socioeconomic injustice.

This comparison reeks of racism and ignorance of events of the past century. No wonder you like PB. Or read Drudge. Bad job outta you.

It's easy to assume this analogy is somehow valid when you're a white guy who hasn't had to go through socioeconomic injustice.

This comparison reeks of racism and ignorance of events of the past century. No wonder you like PB. Or read Drudge. Bad job outta you.

I'm not getting into this any further. My political beliefs have been well (too well probably) chronicled here. I talk politics elsewhere, I just want to talk sports and radio here.

But I have to say.....GREAT SCREEN NAME!!!

Good job outta you!!

It's easy to assume this analogy is somehow valid when you're a white guy who hasn't had to go through socioeconomic injustice.

This comparison reeks of racism and ignorance of events of the past century. No wonder you like PB. Or read Drudge. Bad job outta you.

That's right when all else fails, play the "race card". How weak is that ?? Sounds like the tactic of a lazy mind.

When Obama is elected are you going to have any credibility when you continue to play "race card" ploitics. If one's disagrees with a President-elect Obama will you still be called out for so-called racism?? If we can look forward to that for the next 4 or 8 yrs. this country will be more polarized than ever. You can take it to the bank !!

Let's see Michelle was a beneficiary of affirmative action. That is how she got into Princeton. That's the truth. She is a grad of Harvard Law. You can look it up. So much for socioeconomic injustice.

Obama went to a private school in Hawaii, graduated from Columbia and Harvard Law.

Michelle worked at a "white shoe" law firm in Chicago (along with Ayer's wife). Obama worked there as a summer intern.

I think you are the one ignorant of the facts.

Wow...Good point...fair point. If it's true, its the best quote I've heard linking Obama to Ayers since this whole contrversy started. I kind of always liked Buchanan too. I liked Southside's analogy of the cool uncle...that rings true for me.

As an Obama supporter...I simply can't disagree. He's way too smart not to know that. I also had no idea of the wives working connection either.

But I'm still voting for Obama. He's the better candidate and everyone knows it. He's presidential. He's a good and decent man and even McCain knows that too. Race is the 800 pound gorilla in this election and you can tell based on the contempt of the Palin-McCain rallies and the venom the audiences spew at them. To his credit...McCain...also a good and decent man is trying to curb it. But in crunch time...the GOP will go back to dirty tricks and "swift boat" Barack...we all know it. Thats the only way they have ever won an election since the Reagan era.

But I'm still voting for Obama. So if Bill Ayers and his wife blow up a building during the Obama presidency...then I guess you can blame me.

But in crunch-time...when it's time to pull the lever...whites won't vote for a black man...no matter what the polls say. It's really that simple. Thats what I feel bad about.


Good post by you. I would disagree that white's will not vote for Obama. No way he can win if they don't vote for him. I personally think Obama will win, which may surprise some, by a few points, at least .

Trust me, I'm not all that thrilled with McCain. In fact I will hold my nose when I pull the lever.

Obama is the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate. He is a tax and spend leftist who is also a trade protectionist.

I don't think that is a policy the country needs in this enviornment.

I would prefer that the campaign was centered on the economy, but neither candiate is capable of talking about their future plans to any meaningful degree. All they do is describe a situation we are already aware of without proposing any realistic solutions.

For these expecting major "tax cuts" and an increase in spending programs, I think you will be a bit disappointed.

As it pertains to foreign policy, McCain is the best of the two. Obama cannot admit he was wrong on the surge and despite popular myth NEVER voted against the war in Iraq since he was not a sitting U.S. Senator at the time.

If he does become POTUS, Obama better keep this country safe (as 43 has done since 9/11, if nothing else). If Obama doesn't there will be hell to pay for electing a relative unknown to become POTUS.

That is an outcome none of us, Democrat or Republican, are rooting for.

PB in his weekly column (you can read it on Drudge)

You get your facts from the Drudge Report?

<handwave>

The funny thing to me is Republicans that are incredulous as to why someone would vote for Obama. These are the same people that voted for Bush. Why would any Obama voter care what they think? I would liken it to Eric Mangini calling Herman Edwards with two minutes left in a Jets game for clock management advise. Edwards proved himself to be terrible in that spot, as Bush voters proved themselves to be in Election scenarios.

Bush voters should pipe down about other people picking candidates.

You get your facts from the Drudge Report?

<handwave>

I am writing this as slow as I can so that you will understand: PB's column on Drudge is an OPINION column. Drudge links to all points of view. It is not the only site that I read.

Everyone has an agenda to some extent and I take everything I read with a grain of salt.

As an aside, Drudge is not the only "thing" I read. I also read realclearpolitics, realclearmoney on the net and subscribe to: The Wall Street Journal, Barrons, The New York Times, The Economist, Newsweek, Biz Week, The NewYorker, and the New York Observer.

The funny thing to me is Republicans that are incredulous as to why someone would vote for Obama. These are the same people that voted for Bush. Why would any Obama voter care what they think? I would liken it to Eric Mangini calling Herman Edwards with two minutes left in a Jets game for clock management advise. Edwards proved himself to be terrible in that spot, as Bush voters proved themselves to be in Election scenarios.

Bush voters should pipe down about other people picking candidates.

Politics is a free exchange of ideas, with people trying to convince others that there views will result in a better outcome than their opponents.

One would think there are still a few that will listen to other points of view.

One can be a Republican and agree that the way the war was fought early one was a gross error (an understatement).

One, I would hope, one can be a Democrat and admit (unlike Obama) that the surge worked.

I keep hearing that Obama wants to "reach across party lines for the good of the country" (I'll believe it when I see it. He has never gone against his party and he has no "Profile In Courage" type of votes, either as an Illinois State Senator or as a U.S. Senator from Illinois). I guess we will see what Obama thinks of the half the country that didn't vote for him if he elected, or if he will only listen to the 50% or so of those that voted for him.

PS - I realize that the final outcome will not be 50/50 but as of this moment I donot think it will be closer than it currently appears.

Your post is nonsensical, Drudge does not write any of the content on his site, he simply links to news stories, the only editorial part of his website is the choices he makes and an occasional headline that might not exactly be in line with the tenor of the article.

Drudge's power lies in the fact that to many of the people that cover news and politics, his website is visited multiple times per day, so he has the ability to shape the coverage, but he doesn't link to blogs, he only links to stories written by credible news sites.


Good post. I wonder if he knows that Drudge links to The New York Times and The Washington Post. In fact he can go to Drudge right now and read the latest opinion columns by Frank Rich and Maureen Dowd, hardly card carrying Conservatives.

Guys, i dont wanna sound like a ******, but can we keep the politics talk in the politics forum?

Thanks.

I am writing this as slow as I can so that you will understand: PB's column on Drudge is an OPINION column. Drudge links to all points of view.

That's the funniest thing I've ever read on this board.

Politics is a free exchange of ideas

Keep thinking that.

Your post is nonsensical, Drudge does not write any of the content on his site, he simply links to news stories, the only editorial part of his website is the choices he makes and an occasional headline that might not exactly be in line with the tenor of the article.

Drudge's power lies in the fact that to many of the people that cover news and politics, his website is visited multiple times per day, so he has the ability to shape the coverage, but he doesn't link to blogs, he only links to stories written by credible news sites.

That doesn't mean that the columns that he posts doesn't come with a political slant, or an article that doesn't put Republicans/conservatives in a favorable light.

I prefer getting my news from BBC, to be honest.

That's the funniest thing I've ever read on this board.

Buy a clue! Drudge links to Jonathan Alter, Elenor Clift, Craig Crawford, Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich, Susan Estrich, Howard Fineman, Joe Klien, Paul Krugman, Ana Quindlan...shall I go on or do you think these folks are all Republicans and/or Conservatives.

Keep thinking that.


Gee, I thought that is what we are doing here.

Unless you are referring to certain segments of Team Obama who are trying to stiffle free speeech such as when Stan Kurtz appeared on WGN radio in Chicago when they jammed phone lines, or when those supporters in St. Louis threatened critics of "THE ONE" with criminal prosecution, or when libs are threatening to repeal The Fairness Doctrine, or card check legislation which would abolish secret ballot elections in determining whether employees are represented by unions.

I guess a free exchange of ideas is OK in the world of political discourse. so as long as Team Obama agrees with them.

That doesn't mean that the columns that he posts doesn't come with a political slant, or an article that doesn't put Republicans/conservatives in a favorable light.

I prefer getting my news from BBC, to be honest.

And the BBC doesn't have a political slant????

And the BBC doesn't have a political slant????

The BBC makes MSNBC look like FOX.

The funny thing to me is Republicans that are incredulous as to why someone would vote for Obama. These are the same people that voted for Bush. Why would any Obama voter care what they think? I would liken it to Eric Mangini calling Herman Edwards with two minutes left in a Jets game for clock management advise. Edwards proved himself to be terrible in that spot, as Bush voters proved themselves to be in Election scenarios.

Bush voters should pipe down about other people picking candidates.

Thank you Gator, thank you. I'm staying out of this crap (as much as I can), it's way too polarized right now, and I have other places to talk politics and I want to just talk sports on these pages. But this idea that somehow Obama could be a worse president than our current puppet/moron is patently ridiculous.

<self imposed handwave to RD talking politics here> but it was half hearted.....

And the BBC doesn't have a political slant????

They are an independent (at least independent from the US) broadcaster. How and why would you think they would favor any American political party or have an agenda regarding the US political system? Why would you think they even care about the American version of Liberal thought and Conservative thought and then be biased one way or another?

I know you all think (because Rush tells you to) that everyone in the media is biased against the conservatives, but you think the BBC has conspired against you as well?

Hell, my father in law, a hard core conservative, reads only BBC news because he doesn't trust the American media, including FOX and pundits like Rush and Coulter.

Gee, I thought that is what we are doing here.

Unless you are referring to certain segments of Team Obama who are trying to stiffle free speeech such as when Stan Kurtz appeared on WGN radio in Chicago when they jammed phone lines, or when those supporters in St. Louis threatened critics of "THE ONE" with criminal prosecution, or when libs are threatening to repeal The Fairness Doctrine, or card check legislation which would abolish secret ballot elections in determining whether employees are represented by unions.

I guess a free exchange of ideas is OK in the world of political discourse. so as long as Team Obama agrees with them.

Well, if it makes you happy to think along black and white lines of liberals vs. conservatives, don't make me stop you. If Drudge tells you something, don't let me tell you to stop reading it. If you're into Orwellian principles of people telling you what's wrong or right in the world, awesome.

Wow, thanks for pointing out to me political stronghold tactics from the Democrats. I never ever thought that would happen. How totally ignorant of me. I thought the party was all peaches and candy, and that they would never lower their standards to win elections.....NO WAY!!!!

Please, the exchange of ideas both stops and ends with who has money and the most power, no matter what political party. Brainwashing the masses into thinking who's party is more right, or pit people against each other in terms of "ideologies" and taking sides....not so much a novel concept. You fell right into that trap. And now you're trying to preach to us on a sports message board; Good for you.

IMHO this thread should be moved to the political forum.

There are those of us who want to come here to escape politics. I know the mod writes mostly about political stuff on his blog, but the vast majority of us come here to escape politics and talk about sports and WFAN and just have some fun reading and posting.

There are thousands of other sites you can go to to talk politics. There is only one site dedicated to sports and WFAN. That's what makes this site special, not the political garbage. But if you must, absolutely must talk politics on this board there is a political forum. Go there.

Just a thought...

What if John McCain were a former president of the Harvard Law Review? What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?

What if McCain were still married to the first woman he said 'I do' to? What if Obama were the candidate who left his first wife after she no longer measured up to his standards?

What if Michelle Obama were a wife who not only became addicted to pain killers, but acquired them illegally through her charitable organization? What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?

What if Obama were a member of the Keating-5? What if McCain were a charismatic, eloquent speaker?

If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?

You are The Boss... which team would you hire?

With America facing historic debt, 2 wars, stumbling health care, a weakened dollar, all-time high prison population, mortgage crises, bank foreclosures, etc.

Educational Background:

Obama:
Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna c u m Laude

Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)

vs.

McCain: United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899

Palin: Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism

Again, just a thought. No harm intended.........

As a side point funny how Obama had no problem campaigning with former Ohio Senator and American Icon John Glenn, also part of The Keating 5. So much for a consistent message (which is to be expected by both candidates).

Perhaps someone can share with everyone why Obama has not released his academic record/standing at Columbia, compared with McCain's well publized Naval Academy record.

Perhaps someone knows, but didn't Joe Biden have some issues at Syracuse Law that he doesn't like to be reminded of?

As a minor point the $ has reversed a 7 yr. slide since late April to rally approx. 15% versus the euro. This rally will likely continue.

You raise some good issues however. Obviously race plays a meaningful role (so-called Tom Bradley affect).

That said, one must admit there is a double standard here, Obama can launch personal attacks against McCain (erratic is code word for senile, unstable) while calling for a end to these tactics. At the same time McCain can tell his audience that Obama is a good man yet run commercials that link Obama with a domestic terrorist.

The good news is that Mccain has personally refrained from using Rev. Wright in this campaign.

Either way, this will be a sharply divided country after the election as many will simply not accept the verdict on the first Tuesday after the first Monday this November.

They are an independent (at least independent from the US) broadcaster. How and why would you think they would favor any American political party or have an agenda regarding the US political system? Why would you think they even care about the American version of Liberal thought and Conservative thought and then be biased one way or another?

I know you all think (because Rush tells you to) that everyone in the media is biased against the conservatives, but you think the BBC has conspired against you as well?

Hell, my father in law, a hard core conservative, reads only BBC news because he doesn't trust the American media, including FOX and pundits like Rush and Coulter.

Would certainly agree with you father in law regarding Ann Coulter (she is way too over the top for me) and Rush, at times, also goes a bit overboard as well.

Be interested to know his opinion of The Weekly Standard, National Review, Wall Street Journal and Investors Business Daily.

Certainly, there are just as many of these type of personalities on the other side.

Personally, I enjoy reading folks such as Tom Sowell or Larry Kudlow for example.

Well, if it makes you happy to think along black and white lines of liberals vs. conservatives, don't make me stop you. If Drudge tells you something, don't let me tell you to stop reading it. If you're into Orwellian principles of people telling you what's wrong or right in the world, awesome.

Wow, thanks for pointing out to me political stronghold tactics from the Democrats. I never ever thought that would happen. How totally ignorant of me. I thought the party was all peaches and candy, and that they would never lower their standards to win elections.....NO WAY!!!!

Please, the exchange of ideas both stops and ends with who has money and the most power, no matter what political party. Brainwashing the masses into thinking who's party is more right, or pit people against each other in terms of "ideologies" and taking sides....not so much a novel concept. You fell right into that trap. And now you're trying to preach to us on a sports message board; Good for you.

Can undertand your bitterly cynical perspective. People are disgusted with Congress (who, as you are aware, has an approval rate less than half of 43's) and politics overall.

Overall it speaks to the lack of overall leadership in this country. What has either McCain or Obama offered during this financial crisis (other than vote for the bailout bill and that is arguable. What else have they given us ?? Warren Buffet or Meg Whitman for Treasury Secretary) ???

We can agree to disagree.

Sorry, I'm new here. Seemed like what was going on here. Rick told me about the political forum, but I just read the thread and went with it.

My bad.......

Dude, don't sweat it. It's a heated time, and I wish I could say I had never brought politics into a thread here.

Anyway, for those of you that might care, MLBC is a friend of mine. And yes, another left wing radical like me, sorry to bring another one in here.....;)

Would certainly agree with you father in law regarding Ann Coulter (she is way too over the top for me) and Rush, at times, also goes a bit overboard as well.

Be interested to know his opinion of The Weekly Standard, National Review, Wall Street Journal and Investors Business Daily.
Certainly, there are just as many of these type of personalities on the other side.

Personally, I enjoy reading folks such as Tom Sowell or Larry Kudlow for example.


I'll ask him.

He's and interesting guy, a conservative, but he thinks the republican party has completely caved to rich people and huge corporations over the last several years, and he was a heli pilot (3 tours) in Nam, also caught the tail end of Korea (yes, he's old), and thinks this war (the iraq part) is the dumbest thing in the history of the world.

He also hates George Bush. So I suppose he is not the "typical" conservative, but he had never pulled the lever for a democrat in his whole life, unless he's lying, until the last election. And he's about to for the 2nd time this November.

I'll ask him.

He's and interesting guy, a conservative, but he thinks the republican party has completely caved to rich people and huge corporations over the last several years, and he was a heli pilot (3 tours) in Nam, also caught the tail end of Korea (yes, he's old), and thinks this war (the iraq part) is the dumbest thing in the history of the world.

He also hates George Bush. So I suppose he is not the "typical" conservative, but he had never pulled the lever for a democrat in his whole life, unless he's lying, until the last election. And he's about to for the 2nd time this November.

This is certainly not the Republican Party of yesteryear. Wow !! That's for sure!!!


your father in law is a true patriot !!!! A buudy of mine is a West Point grad and he would agree with just about everything you r father in law believes.

This is certainly not the Republican Party of yesteryear. Wow !! That's for sure!!!


your father in law is a true patriot !!!! A buudy of mine is a West Point grad and he would agree with just about everything you r father in law believes.

Yeah, he's a true patriot, no question, and a really interesting character. He doesn't talk about his service time much, but I fed him a bunch of scotch's one night and got him to talk some. He said the hardest time of his service was IN BETWEEN TOURS in Nam. He was flying guys 10-15 years younger than him out of the "jungle" and he'd get home and could only think of getting back to fly more guys out. He'd chain smoke and drink for a few months, and bam, head back to do another tour. I've never met a guy (a lifetime military guy for that matter) that hates the war in Iraq more than him. My mother in law says that from time to time, after reading a news report or seeing one on TV from over there, he gets sick, and tries to pretend it's from something he ate.

One other thing about Jim, My father in law....

I'm not accusing you of this Mohawk, or any other poster here for that matter. But when I hear conservatives and/or republicans say or insinuate (and some have, no question about it) that if you are against this war, you are somehow unpatriotic, or anti-soldier, or anti the US military, or anti American, I'm disgusted by it. And I can't imagine how someone like Jim, who like you said, is a great patriot, and spent more of his life in the military than as a civilian feels when he hears that stuff.

One other thing about Jim, My father in law....

I'm not accusing you of this Mohawk, or any other poster here for that matter. But when I hear conservatives and/or republicans say or insinuate (and some have, no question about it) that if you are against this war, you are somehow unpatriotic, or anti-soldier, or anti the US military, or anti American, I'm disgusted by it. And I can't imagine how someone like Jim, who like you said, is a great patriot, and spent more of his life in the military than as a civilian feels when he hears that stuff.

Totally agree with what you said.

One other thing about Jim, My father in law....

I'm not accusing you of this Mohawk, or any other poster here for that matter. But when I hear conservatives and/or republicans say or insinuate (and some have, no question about it) that if you are against this war, you are somehow unpatriotic, or anti-soldier, or anti the US military, or anti American, I'm disgusted by it. And I can't imagine how someone like Jim, who like you said, is a great patriot, and spent more of his life in the military than as a civilian feels when he hears that stuff.

FWIW, my political views lean slightly to the right. (I can't stand too much gov't, and I loath all of the BS and grandstanding by ALL politicians. UN is right...just follow the money because that is what runs the gov't)

However, I do agree with your statement, and you make a good point - one can be a patriotic American and disagree with this war. I'm sure many Republicans and Veterans agree with your F-in-law, and for good reason.

It is a tragedy of mega proportions that all of these people have lost their lives (and their families will never be the same) because W and his staff insisted upon nation-building in place where it is nearly impossible. His Father had commisioned a report about a possible invasion and taking out Sadam, and he decided against it because the 400+ page report said we could never win the type of war it would become, in a place where we had no knowledge of the people, their tactics, and the terrain/logistics.

GW is certainly no conservative, because a true conservative would NOT have initiated this senseless war.
(Not to mention his fiscal irresponsibilty.)

One other thing about Jim, My father in law....

I'm not accusing you of this Mohawk, or any other poster here for that matter. But when I hear conservatives and/or republicans say or insinuate (and some have, no question about it) that if you are against this war, you are somehow unpatriotic, or anti-soldier, or anti the US military, or anti American, I'm disgusted by it. And I can't imagine how someone like Jim, who like you said, is a great patriot, and spent more of his life in the military than as a civilian feels when he hears that stuff.

I completely agree with this. My father served in Vietnam and is completely against the war and hates George Bush. I would not call him unpatriotic or anti-military. You are right RD, a lot of conservatives have this idea as well that everyone in the military supports Bush, which is completely untrue. Of all of the candidates that ran for office, Obama received the most donations from active duty troops. I think people will be surprised on election day on how many veterans and active duty troops are voting for Obama.