Barack Hussein Obama

[rabbitproof]

Looks like my Hussa got his inbox cracked, too...

Wtf happened to decency?

[aquaadverse]

Yeah, those nasty taxcuts caused a recession. It took 7 years, 9/11, record hurricanes and natural disasters but like that old adage of the broken clock...

I seem to remember something about heading into the biggest depression since the big one, being the first President to lose jobs since Hoover and all manner of gnashing teeth and rendering clothes post 2000 election . If there wasn't a problem, it was the noisiest vacuum I've ever heard.

[dude1394]

So what exactly does this guy belive in?

http://www.pajamasmedia.com/instapun...es2/024617.php

DAVID WEIGEL: Obama's Wars: Liberal Interventionism Makes a Comeback. "Obama believes all of what he said six years ago in Chicago. He has called for, or retroactively endorsed, interventions in Zimbabwe, Pakistan, and Sudan. He has advocated a humanitarian-based foreign policy for his entire public career. Since coming to the U.S. Senate in 2005, he has built up a brain trust of academics and ex-Clintonites who, like him, challenge the logic of the Iraq war but not the logic of wars like Iraq. John McCain looks at American military power and sees a way to 'roll back' rogue states. Obama looks at American military power and sees a way to solve international and intranational conflict, regardless of the conflict's immediate impact on national security. McCain seeks to aggressively confront imminent threats. Obama wants to do the same, while forestalling threats of tomorrow with just as much military vigor." Hmm.

[dude1394]

Keep it classy Obama.
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/...ppen-to-it.php

A reader sent this link to an exclusive CBS 2 HD report that says Democrats threatened the tax exempt status of Jewish organizations involved in the rally if they didn't pull Sarah Palin's invitation:

Sources tell CBS 2 HD that a decision to disinvite Palin from the high profile rally after Clinton pulled out in a huff came as the result of intense pressure from Democrats...The groups sponsoring the rally against Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaking at the UN were reportedly told, "it could jeopardize their tax exempt status" if they had Palin and not Clinton or Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden on hand.

So all politicians were disinvited, most prominently, Palin.

"It's an absolute shame that this has happened," Hikind said. "To threaten organizations ... to threaten the Conference of Presidents that if you don't withdraw the invitation to Gov. Palin we're going to look into your tax exempt status ... that's McCarthyism."

Another Jewish group tried to step into the breach by inviting Palin to a different protest a day earlier.

"I'm absolutely appalled at the behavior of the Democrats," said Bob Kunst of Defenders.net. "I'm a Democrat and for the first time in my life I'm going to vote Republican. I can't take it anymore."

This is the politics of thuggery and intimidation. Let's not forget, Obama recently told his followers to argue with political opponents and get in their faces. Also, he's all for trampling his critics' free speech rights. When David Freddoso and, separately, Stanley Kurtz were on WGN radio to discuss his book The Case Against Barack Obama, Obama instructed his followers to interfere with the shows by flooding the radio station with phone calls and emails in an effort to prevent these two men the right to express their views. He doesn't have any problem with shutting down those he disagrees with because he thinks his ideas are so important that he's morally justified in shutting up his critics.

Steve Schippert wrote a great post earlier today in which he writes that Democrats, Obama ops specifically, were behind Palin's being disinvited from the rally. He was right.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Keep it classy Obama.
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/...ppen-to-it.php

why did you leave out this line from the very same article?

"I have never seen such raw emotion -- on both sides," said someone close to the situation.

and bob kunst isn't with defenders.net, he's a wannabe politico from miami.

also, is it wrong to "argue with political opponents and get in their faces"? seems that has been the mantra for the right for many, many years now.

for someone who rails agaionst one-sided news reporting, this is darn ironic.

[dude1394]

Typical democrat demagoguery. No wonder NOTHING will be done about social security in our lifetimes...until the bankrupt ponzi scheme is gone. Yup...new kind of politician allright, racism and social security demagoguery...sounds like what's been going on for decades.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...g_seniors.html

A new Obama ad characterizes the "Bush-McCain privatization plan" as "cutting Social Security Benefits in half." This is a falsehood sure to frighten seniors who rely on their Social Security checks. In truth, McCain does not propose to cut those checks at all.

What he really said.

For the record, McCain has said that he would seek a bipartisan deal with Congress to fix Social Security's financial problems.

During a Republican candidate debate last year in Orlando, Florida, he said:

McCain, Oct. 21, 2007: Look, what Americans need is some straight talk. They need to know -- every man, woman and child in America needs to know that both of these are going broke. They're going broke and we've got to do the hard things. We've got to fix it for the future generations of Americans. Don't we owe that to young Americans today? I say we do. ... It's got to be bipartisan. ... And you have to got to the American people and say we don't -- we won't raise your taxes. We need personal savings accounts, but we got to fix this system.

The system isn't exactly "going broke." But the latest official projection is that the trust fund will be exhausted by the year 2041, after which current tax rates will finance only 78 percent of currently scheduled benefits. We agree that "straight talk" is needed and that finding solutions will be hard. Ads like this, however, misinform the public and make the job of fixing the system more difficult.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

why did you leave out this line from the very same article?

"I have never seen such raw emotion -- on both sides," said someone close to the situation.

and bob kunst isn't with defenders.net, he's a wannabe politico from miami.

also, is it wrong to "argue with political opponents and get in their faces"? seems that has been the mantra for the right for many, many years now.

for someone who rails agaionst one-sided news reporting, this is darn ironic.

Sure argue all you want....Send out obama-alerts to shout your opponents off the stage, threaten law-suits when needed. Typical democrat thuggery.

Please link to the McCain campaign sending out alerts to shout his opponents off the stage...I'll wait.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

So what exactly does this guy belive in?

http://www.pajamasmedia.com/instapun...es2/024617.php

odd for the writer to make the case that "intervention" equates to "invasion".

I've never read a single statement by obama that he would attack or invade another country that has not attacked the us. have you?

[aquaadverse]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

odd for the writer to make the case that "intervention" equates to "invasion".

I've never read a single statement by obama that he would attack or invade another country that has not attacked the us. have you?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=3434573&page=1

"I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges," Obama said, "but let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."

Don't know if unapproved military incursions count as attack or invade, but it will make some bad folks nervous.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by aquaadverse

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=3434573&page=1

"I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges," Obama said, "but let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."

Don't know if unapproved military incursions count as attack or invade, but it will make some bad folks nervous.

didn't al queda attack us?

yeah, I thought so....

[chumdawg]

A new Obama ad characterizes the "Bush-McCain privatization plan" as "cutting Social Security Benefits in half." This is a falsehood sure to frighten seniors who rely on their Social Security checks. In truth, McCain does not propose to cut those checks at all.

Maybe it will stick as well as "Obama will raise your taxes" has.

[Mavdog]

I'm referring to the call in show at wgn in chicago.

imo people should be allowed to speak, and if others have the ability to expose them as idiots they should.

the biography is weak. it has many, many inaccuracies and uses rumour as fact.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

I'm referring to the call in show at wgn in chicago.

imo people should be allowed to speak, and if others have the ability to expose them as idiots they should.

the biography is weak. it has many, many inaccuracies and uses rumour as fact.

Review of Fredosi's book from Ben Smith of the Politico.
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.c...90F74D5579425E

The first serious negative biography of Senator Barack Obama casts the Democratic nominee as a fake reformer and a real liberal.

“The Case Against Barack Obama,” by National Review’s David Freddoso, blasts Obama for failing to take on the Chicago machine, for listening to “radical advisors,” and for backing “doctrinaire liberal” causes from teachers unions to abortion rights.

It does not, however, compare him to Paris Hilton, or dwell at length on his religion or race – making the substance of “The Case Against Barack Obama” sound a bit unfamiliar amid a campaign cacophony of hyperbolic web ads, alleged race cards, and viral smears.

Freddoso says John McCain’s campaign and Republicans at large are making the wrong case against the Illinois senator.

“I don’t think you beat Obama by saying that he’s Paris Hilton,” said Freddoso, a reporter for the conservative magazine National Review, referring to McCain’s latest advertising campaign. “The more important thing is really to look at is he who he says he is? Is he really this great reformer?”

Freddoso’s book, released today by the conservative publishing house Regnery and provided exclusively to Politico by the publisher, occupies a small island in the often-shrill sea of criticism of Obama. As a range of conservatives suggest that Obama is a closet radical, and as McCain’s campaign aims to disqualify him from the White House on the grounds of his international fame, Freddoso makes a case that conservatives should look at the presumptive Democratic nominee's record.
See also

* Dear 44: Education matters
* VP pick may chafe Hillary supporters
* Obama calls for 'clean energy' nation

His thesis: “It’s not that Obama is a bad person. It’s just that he’s like all the rest of them. Not a reformer. Not a Messiah. Just like all the rest of them in Washington. And just like all the other liberals too.”

Freddoso’s is one of two new books harshly attacking Obama. The other, by Jerome Corsi, reportedly covers some of the same terrotory as the viral emails that have plagued the Democratic candidate, making much of his slender connections to Islam and his teenage drug use.

Freddoso opts largely for a fact-based critique, and writes that the viral and overt smears have allowed Obama to evade substantive criticism.

“Too many of those criticizing Obama have been content merely to slander him,” he writes. False rumors about Obama's religion and ancestry have produced, Freddoso writes, “an intellectual laziness among the very people who should be carefully scrutinizing Obama.”

His book comes with Republican popularity at a historic low, amid widespread disenchantment with Republican ideals of limited government and hawkish foreign policy. Many – including, apparently, McCain’s strategists – doubt a Republican can win a policy face-off. But as the real campaign hones in on the character of the candidates, Freddoso’s book attempts to build an alternate case against Obama.
Freddoso’s argument begins in Chicago, and focuses largely on his ties to Mayor Richard M. Daley’s political organization. Though Obama’s first political steps were in Hyde Park’s reformist politics, Freddoso focuses on the smooth accommodation he made to the machine.

Freddoso recalls a Chicago Sun-Times story from 2005, after a wave of indictments of Daley aides in a patronage scandal. “Obama almost said something mildly critical of Daley,” Freddoso writes, quoting Obama as saying that the reports gave him “huge pause.”

“An hour later, he was already calling [the Sun-Times] back to ‘clarify’ his comments,” Freddoso writes, and to lavish praise on Daley’s record.

Freddoso also indicts him for standing on the sidelines of a bitter battle between reformers and the machine for the presidency of the Cook County Board. The African-American incumbent, John Stroger, faced a rare, real challenge from a united reform front, led by Forrest Claypool. Obama stayed out of the race, despite the pleas of his reformist supporters.

“Obama’s silence had probably saved Cook County’s political kingpin,” he writes, detailing the incumbent Stroger’s patronage operation.

And I guess Stanley Kurtz should also be shouted down because his "argument" is weak.

In the next few hours, we have a crucial opportunity to fight one of the most cynical and offensive smears ever launched against Barack.

Tonight, WGN radio is giving right-wing hatchet man Stanley Kurtz a forum to air his baseless, fear-mongering terrorist smears. He's currently scheduled to spend a solid two-hour block from 9:00 to 11:00 p.m. pushing lies, distortions, and manipulations about Barack and University of Illinois professor William Ayers.

Tell WGN that by providing Kurtz with airtime, they are legitimizing baseless attacks from a smear-merchant and lowering the standards of political discourse.

Call into the "Extension 720" show with Milt Rosenberg at (312) 591-XXXX. (I edited the number.)

(Show airs from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. tonight)

Then report back on your call at http://my.barackobama.com/WGNstandards

I'm starting to get it, ANY criticism of theMessiah is baseless and smear-mongering. I get it.

[dude1394]

Murdoch on Obama's economics. Socialist comes to my mind also.

Rupert Murdoch was a guest on Your World w/Neil Cavuto today (September 19, 2008). He and Cavuto talked about a wide range of things but mostly the Wall Street mess and politics. This is what he said about Barack Obama:

Cavuto: "Your New York Post, very early on, endorsed the McCain/Palin ticket. Since that endorsement, we have heard a lot of this populist talk. We've heard a lot of this corporate railing, which again, seems to resonate in the polls. Do you regret that?"

Murdoch: "Not in the least. Ah, I'm very worried. I like ah, ah, Senator Obama very much. I've met him. He's a very intelligent man, but his policy of anti-globalization, protectionism, he's going to, ah, and card checks (?), are going to do two or three things. They're going to give us a lot of inflation. They're going to ruin our relationships with the rest of the world, and the, and they're going to slow down the rest of the world too, and they're going to make people frightened to add to employment. Um, you're going to find companies leaving this country if it's, if you could put a protectionist wall around it. You're gonna get, he, his policy is really very, very naive, old fashioned, 1960's socialist."

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Murdoch on Obama's economics. Socialist comes to my mind also.

really? when does "socialism" equate with "protectionism"?

not that I see the obama platform actually proposing either -ism, but they are not philosophies that run parallel to each other, they are very seperate.

can you outline what "socialist" platforms if any are proposed by obama?

here's a link to his issues page, good luck.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

[Mavdog]

review of freddoso's book by media matters:

Citations in Freddoso's anti-Obama book rife with misinformation
Summary: The first few pages of David Freddoso's book, The Case Against Barack Obama, are marked by false and misleading assertions about Sen. Barack Obama, accompanied by dubious citations. A Media Matters review of the endnotes reveals that the rest of the book is little different from these first few pages, as throughout the book, Freddoso misrepresents or distorts his sources and even makes assertions that are actually refuted by sources he cites.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200808050011?f=h_top


hey, freddoso is just trying to make a buck on the back of conservative dislike of obama. he should do it with more substance abd acccuracy tho.

again, the note you posted was a message to dial into a call in radio program. what's wrong with that?

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

review of freddoso's book by media matters:



http://mediamatters.org/items/200808050011?f=h_top


hey, freddoso is just trying to make a buck on the back of conservative dislike of obama. he should do it with more substance abd acccuracy tho.

again, the note you posted was a message to dial into a call in radio program. what's wrong with that?

You are going to criticize his book by quoting media matters? You've got to be kidding.

[Mavdog]

oh yeah, like politico.com is MUCH better...

[Mavdog]

are you kidding?

why would I want a review from a conservative site?

if what media matters says is wrong, tell us why.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

are you kidding?

why would I want a review from a conservative site?

if what media matters says is wrong, tell us why.

So if left leaning sites believe that obama criticism is weak, wrong, etc., then the authors should be shouted down.

I don't really know how wrong/right it is (nor do you I imagine unless you've read it) but if anyone dares criticize the one, we do know that his campaign will try to shout them off the stage. With meet-up help from the obama campaign.

In general I don't feel that the national review magazine is a screaming right-wing rag. If you do then you do. Seeing as how both of those authors are respected contributors to that magazine, then I believe that the smear that is being perpetrated is by obama and yourself.

[dude1394]

Keep it classy democrats.

More Hope and Change...
Actress comedienne Sandra Bernhard is the latest Obama supporter to lash out at conservative Governor Sarah Palin. Ms. Bernhard's latest comedy sketch includes Sarah Palin gang rape jokes.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Keep it classy democrats.

she's a COMEDIAN. she may not be that funny, but it's a stich.

here's her x-rated act

wow, the thin-skinned right is just getting to be such a bunch of whinners....

[92bDad]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

she's a COMEDIAN. she may not be that funny, but it's a stich.

here's her x-rated act

wow, the thin-skinned right is just getting to be such a bunch of whinners....

I have enjoyed comedians over the years, Richard Pryor, Eddie Murphy, George Carlin, Brad Stine, Carlos Mencia...but Sandra Bernhard has always been lame.

She thinks that using foul language is funny...there is not content in her so-called humor. She thinks that name calling is funny...she is a legen in her own mind.

She is not funny, she is just vulgar and her brand of humor is...well, ummm...NOT Funny.

Tina Fay...she's funny, heck, the majority of the SNL folks over the years have been funny, poking fun at any and all Dems or Reps.

Sandra Bernhard is a woman with anger issues who doesn't know how to express herself, but rather lashes out in desperation.

If one is to do comedy by being insulting, then insult all, not just a select few.

Sorry Mavdog, but that link was worthless and only goes to show how far in left field some of this stuff really is. It's as if the Dems are the party of HATE!!!

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

So if left leaning sites believe that obama criticism is weak, wrong, etc., then the authors should be shouted down.

I don't really know how wrong/right it is (nor do you I imagine unless you've read it) but if anyone dares criticize the one, we do know that his campaign will try to shout them off the stage. With meet-up help from the obama campaign.

In general I don't feel that the national review magazine is a screaming right-wing rag. If you do then you do. Seeing as how both of those authors are respected contributors to that magazine, then I believe that the smear that is being perpetrated is by obama and yourself.

if there are errors and an agenda, imo the author should be confronted and challenged. if there's "shouting", does it matter? the line drawn is when the author is not allowed to publish or to speak. did that happen?

you are hung up with that word-"shout"-like it means "silence". it's not.

if you "don't feel that the national review magizine is a screaming (isn't "screaming" the same as "shout" btw) right-wing rag", well, it is...maybe the problem is those blinders you're fond of wearing.

[chumdawg]

I am sensing that folks aren't as head-over-heels for the Princess Warrior as they were two weeks ago.

[dude1394]

Ah another child moleting, incest practioner pitching for theMessiah.

US filmmaker Woody Allen, best known for divorcing his daughters mother, screwing his 14 year old daughter and marrying her, says it will be no laughing matter if Barack Obama fails to win the race for the White House.

"It would be a disgrace and a humiliation if Barack Obama does not win," he told Spanish journalists at the ongoing 56th San Sebastian film festival, where his latest film "Vicky Cristina Barcelona" is being screened.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Ah another child moleting, incest practioner pitching for theMessiah.

US filmmaker Woody Allen, best known for divorcing his daughters mother, screwing his 14 year old daughter and marrying her, says it will be no laughing matter if Barack Obama fails to win the race for the White House.

"It would be a disgrace and a humiliation if Barack Obama does not win," he told Spanish journalists at the ongoing 56th San Sebastian film festival, where his latest film "Vicky Cristina Barcelona" is being screened.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

oh, so a comedian making jokes about palin is out of bounds, but defaming woody allen by making false claims about "screwing his 14 year old daughter" is ok.

"best known for divorcing his daughter's mother"? you mean like the republican candidate for pres who must also be "best known for divorcing his daughter's mother"?

don't know about you, but woody allen is best known to me by his 3 academy awards, his 18 academy award nominations,and dozens of other awards for his woks.

wow. I'd say what a joke, but it's not funny. it's ridiculous

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

oh, so a comedian making jokes about palin is out of bounds, but defaming woody allen by making false claims about "screwing his 14 year old daughter" is ok.

"best known for divorcing his daughter's mother"? you mean like the republican candidate for pres who must also be "best known for divorcing his daughter's mother"?

don't know about you, but woody allen is best known to me by his 3 academy awards, his 18 academy award nominations,and dozens of other awards for his woks.

wow. I'd say what a joke, but it's not funny. it's ridiculous

Not according to his son.

Woody Allen's son has slammed his father - saying he can never forgive him for marrying his own adopted daughter.

Seamus Farrow has branded the film director "immoral" after he married Soon-Yi Previn, who Allen's ex-lover, Mia Farrow, adopted when she was seven years old.

Seamus, Allen's only biological son with Mia, said: "He's my father married to my sister. That makes me his son and his brother-in-law. That is such a moral transgression. I cannot see him. I cannot have a relationship with my father and be morally consistent."

Allen, who is 35 years older than Soon-Yi, justifies his relationship with his young wife on the grounds that she is not his real daughter.

But Seamus, 18, has blasted that justification, saying that it is an "insult" to other children who have been adopted.

He said: "I lived with all these adopted children, so they are my family. To say Soon-Yi was not my sister is an insult to all adopted children."

Mia adopted Soon-Yi with ex-husband Andre Previn in 1980 but they split soon after and Mia began her relationship with Allen.

However, they broke-up in 1992 when she found nude photographs of Soon-Yi, then 19, on the mantelpiece of Allen's Manhattan apartment.

Mia has never forgiven Allen for the affair, once saying: "It was such a sense of betrayal. Soon-Yi was a kid on the streets of Korea. She was seven when Woody met her."

[dude1394]

Keep it classy democrats.

the NBC comedyshow returned to making fun of the Alaskangovernor in a skit where New York Times reporters sought to probe the possibility Palin’s husband was having sex with the couple’s own daughters.

“What about the husband?” asked a Times reporter during a mock assignment meeting for the paper. “You know he’s doing those daughters. I mean, come on. It’s Alaska.”

The assignment editor for the Times, portrayed by actor James Franco, responded: “He very well could be. Admittedly, there is no evidence of that, but on the other hand, there is no convincing evidence to the contrary. And these are just some of the lingering questions about Governor Palin.”

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Not according to his son.

just read the comments from his son, and it doesn't say anything about woody allen "screwing his 14 year old daughter".

keep it classy republicans....or don't as this case clearly shows 'em NOT to be.

[dude1394]

double post

[rabbitproof]

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Li...s-open/669582/

lol

[Flacolaco]

Could you guys tell your boy to stop trying to scare old people? He's obviously going to win anyway, he doesn't need to lie to these people.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/160179

[92bDad]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

Could you guys tell your boy to stop trying to scare old people? He's obviously going to win anyway, he doesn't need to lie to these people.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/160179

Thanks for bringing this one up.

I find that I am FOR privatizing my social security. Even going so far as to be willing to be the generation that sacrifices a bit more in order to ensure that future generations will have 100% private accounts.

IMHO, the seniors who are currently retired, should receive the benefits as has been promised to them throughout their lives.

Those getting ready to retire should also be covered...honestly, I'm only 40 years of age and thus I believe my generation is the perfect starting point. As much as I would like for 100% of my Social Security to go to a private account, I understand that there are some who retire before that will need my social security income to survive, thus allow me to volutarily sign up for a plan that keeps my current social security for the current plan, but allows me to invest into my private account as a percentage with incramental growth.

At the same time, putting a road map so that when my sons, who are now 17 and 18 can have their social security going completely to their own private accounts. The Fed does NOT need the social security from 17 and 18 years olds...let them begin to invest in their own future retirement and allow private accounts to be transferred as the individual sees fit in a will or some other transfer document.

Social Security is a broken system and regardless of how politicians use it to scar retired folks, it's time, if not way past time to change how the system works.

Private Social Security is a win-win for everyone as we become individually responsible for our own golden years...heck, had I had this when i was 16 and started working, I would have several hundred thousand dollars in my account...as it is now, I have ZERO in my account.

This seems like an easy no brainer, but for some reason some politicians chose to avoid doing something good for the American People.

This is yet another solution that John McCain was correct in supporting!!!

[Mavdog]

first, I agree there was no humour in the skit. it was tasteless.
(as an aside, there is truly very little humour in most of the snl skits...)

second, the skit was making fun of the ny times, trying to show just what they will do to get a story. it parallels what the conservatives have been screaming about for years.

third, I doubt that snl has "a signifigant influence over some voters". it's a comedy show isn't it?

[mary]

I watched that SNL skit Saturday night. Of course it's ludicrous to suggest that Mr. Palin is sleeping with his daughter....that was the point. The media was the butt of the joke in that skit...not Palin.

Edit: Mavdog beat me to it...I agree it wasn't particularly funny.

[sike]

though SNL didn't bash Palin pretty hard last Sat...without making fun of Obama at all. Probably something like 12+ Palin Jokes to 0 Obama jokes.

sure they made fun of Hilary...but she is out.

[92bDad]

Then again...do we make as much fun about the weak and the oppressed? Perhaps that is why nobody cuts jokes about Obama...they feel sorry for him and he has sufferred enough.

[Flacolaco]

Guys....the media has no time to spoof Obama.

He is really busy spoon feeding my money to the lower upper middle class. They need his help. How in the hell are they supposed to pay for their new pool/spa AND pay for their ARM they shouldn't have bought? Please send your tax dollars.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

Guys....the media has no time to spoof Obama.

He is really busy spoon feeding my money to the lower upper middle class. They need his help. How in the hell are they supposed to pay for their new pool/spa AND pay for their ARM they shouldn't have bought? Please send your tax dollars.

That...was a little disjointed.