So which one is he a "d&*k" or a "pu&sy"? Just asking? They call him too nice or weak one day and a "gangsta" or "demagogue" the next. Make up your minds already! I have already made up mine. He is no pu&*y. He knows when to be a d*&k and uses that tool wisely. He knows when to be tough and when to seem nice. Whatever it takes to get the job of the President of the United States of America done "successfully" is what he portrays at any given time. That is why he has my vote.

Ah the complexities of the libbie mind.

Let's look at what offends the libbie sensibility - Halprin calls Obama a dick. Oh No! Call out the hounds.

Whereas Bill Maher calls Palin a dumb twat. That is super funny. Huh.

Oh and of course I have heard many MSNBC hosts over the years call a different president such things as a fascist, Hitler-like and many more things that in the grand scheme of things are far worse than a dick.

Oh and Feisty old gal, Halperin works for Time, he just guest stunts for MSNBC.

Let's add this to the list of growing POUTRAGE from the hypocrites on the right shall we?

While stomping his feet and holding his breath & screaming about fundraising:

Senator John Cornyn (R-Tex.) has been particularly scornful of the president for hitting the fundraising circuit, going so far as to say he thought Obama "has diminished" the office of the presidency for giving campaign like speeches about the debt ceiling while heading to Philadelphia to raise money for his reelection campaign.

It would be a seemingly more effective argument if Cornyn wasn't doing a bit of fundraising himself. The Texas Republican, who chairs the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee, is set to attend a reception for Senator Dean Heller (R-Nev.) at the NRSC's headquarters from 5:30 to 7:00 p.m. The suggested contribution is $1,000 per Political Action Committee and $500 per person.

The Heller fundraiser is actually the second one in as many days. Cornyn was listed as attending another NRSC fundraiser on Wednesday evening at the W Hotel in Washington, D.C., to raise funds for the Republican Senate Council.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/30/cornyn-set-to-fundraise-a_n_888113.html

Spanky old boy are you sure you weren't watching Fixed News about the Hitler references. That was their talking point after Obama got elected. Did you not get the memo.

Spanky,

Anyone can call anyone anything they want on TV. Bill Maher can call President Obama a d$%k if he so chose. He is late night comedy on cable. For that matter Steve Colbert and John Stewart can do likewise. However if you choose to call yourself a News program then the freedom to be disrespectful to a President, any President, goes out the window. Palin is not a President. She is not in any public office at this time. If someone wants to call her a brain dead twit, including the media, they can. She isn't even running for office yet. Although I so hope she does. Bachmann is great comedy fodder on her own but the two of them would be pure late night magic! I'd say they make women across America look bad but actually we have lots of good representation in the Senate and the House of exceptional women that are not brain dead twits.

No I surely did not get that memo, but then again I found Halprin's comment to be funny, as in Ha, ha.

Politicians get called names all the time. Comes with the territory, unless, it appears the name caller is on MSNBS, and the callee is Obama.

Is that why all the republicans are whining that Obama was mean to them. They can sure dish it out but no one can say anything about them, Cornyn, McConnell. To bad they can't(won't) do their jobs, their idea of compromise is my way or not at all.

Spanky:

Whereas Bill Maher calls Palin a dumb twat. That is super funny. Huh.

Not to this liberal. If he did that, he was dead wrong.

But I got blasted by liberals, both here and elsewhere, when I criticized David Letterman for his tasteless jokes about Sarah Palin's daughter at the Yankees game. However much Palin exploited her own children, Letterman's comments suggesting that Bristol Palin was a common whore merely because she had sex with her boyfriend were WAY out of bounds. There was nothing to suggest she was sleeping around with anyone else. Letterman's later revelations about himself gave some ironic context to this, but the damage was done, and liberals laughed their heads off at it when it happened. They even defended Letterman later when it turned out that he was a serious hypocrite about sleeping around.

That was perhaps the one time I ever defended Sarah Palin. Letterman was wrong, and so was Bill Maher, if he said what you said he did. Period. This is exactly why discourse has become so "coarse" in this country. If people don't like that sort of crassness, then people -- on both sides -- have a responsibility to stop it.

Many of us do not see Palin as particularly intelligent, and I think the "dumb" part of that comment is probably fair game, but the rest of it is misogynist and certainly beneath my own understanding of common decency. If people choose to laugh at it and sanction it, they are free to do so, but I won't be one of them.

Bag Boy has reminded me sharply this week of the perils of overwrought discourse. Today I see, after all that we have gone through out here over the past week, that people are still choosing consciously to elevate the vitriol by calling other people liars. Call them out on their lies, if you want, and say that they habitually do not tell the truth. But labels inflame, and when we use them ourselves, as Maher did, we have no standing to complain when others use them on us, too.

In short, I have some difficulty understanding how Mark Halperin calling the President a d*ck on an early morning cable political news show is intellectually separable from Bill Maher calling Sarah Palin a dumb tw*t on a late night cable talk show that has a distinct political edge to it.

So, please separate me from this discussion.

Thus endeth my personal week from Hell. I sure hope there's a Heaven to follow.

Well let's see just the facts, those fellas are in the Senate.

The senate is controlled by the democrats, right? So you agree that the democrats have not done their job.

Like Harry Reid. Still no budget. And as I recall Pelosi, when she controlled the House didn't produce on either. IN fact she flat out said one was not needed.

Say, didn't the House pass a budget?

So just the facts, how is it they can start to talk about deficit reduction when they don't even have a viable budget?

Sounded to my that the republicans were complaining about the lack of Obama's involvement. Would yu agree that 3-4 hours of actual involvement really is not sufficient? Or delegating to Joe B, is not involvement?

A AnaB - Morning Joe is hardly a news program. It is a hybrid of many things, including a "morning zoo" type format. You know zaniness and all that fun. Just listen to Minka.

Good golly Anna Molly - "overwrought discourse?"

Oh no, this is light banter and fun.

I have a steaming pile of overwrought discourse on my desk in the form of multiple demurrers in the same case all dealing with the corporate standing of my client that was suspended by the tax board. Thinnk that might have been nice of them to tell me? Naaa, much more fun this way.

That's overwrought discourse. You are a lovely ray of [misguided, but passoinate] sunshine.

But I totally agree with your points about vitriol and calling liars. At least the points I actually can understand.

Only a few more hours till happy fun time. :)

Spanky-

Ah the complexities of the libbie mind.

Just be grateful libbie minds have the ability to detect lies; unlike righties whose BS detecter is non functional.

Congratulations Steeler Fan yours was truly the best question.

Spanky's relentless "old gal" tack with Feisty:

Can only think of "old man" for an equivalent, but it doesn't quite capture it.

"Old gal" is a sexist and offensive way to address women. Does he know that?

I don't give any more credibility to MSNBC or Fox than I do to Comedy Central.

They are all quasi-news.

They all have the same goal: divide us to boost ratings.

Should Chris Mathews be suspended by MSNBC? There's seems to be no doubt that Mark Halpern should be suspended for calling the President a dick (a decision I happen to agree with), but what about the other side of the coin. Chris Mathews has said that the President caused a tingle to run up his leg (sexual innuendo?) He has claimed that the President is the smartest ever (a claim that in no way can be objectively verified), not an insult but what if he said he's the stupidest ever? Would that rate as grounds for suspension. If yes then I would argue that unsupported praise should also remove you from the air.

Yeah, Backhouse it sure could be. Let's see - she is a gal, and by all accounts she is old. So by my account it is an accurate statement.

But I do so appreciate the fact that you are objecting to my referring to Feisty in what you deem to be an offensive manner.

Feisty. Offensive comments. Oh my.

Say did you happen to read how the Libs r us gang refers to other in their off board e mail exchanges?

And Alan - you just shut up! Do. Not. Take. Away. My. Favorite. Clown.

I think spanky has an unhealthy fascination with FR.

Take it easy, Backhouse. You have to admit: It's kind of fun watching the girls beat up on ol' Spanker, isn't it?

Backhouse:

"Old gal" is a sexist and offensive way to address women. Does he know that?

Probably not, and you're certainly right. But I was challenged to step up by speaking out to my own side, including myself. I did that, notwithstanding that I've never claimed to be the police here, and also notwithstanding how painfully destructive it probably has been to my own standing.

Spanky, charming as he may or may not be, is simply not my responsibility. Conservatives need to take some responsibility for themselves, too.

@ Alan ~ The answer is of course, not. As I said about Sarah Palin, criticism of President Obama's intellect -- e.g., by calling him stupid -- is within bounds. He is a public figure whose intellect is open to criticism, even if I don't agree with the criticism, as you no doubt don't agree with me about Palin. I am, in the same way, free to call her stupid, which I have certainly done.

The tingle up Matthews' leg comment was bizarre -- but it wasn't meant to be pejorative, as Halperin's comment surely was. Both were tasteless, and I'm sure Matthews is still paying for that, even without a suspension. But Halperin's comment was pejorative, and not merely pejorative; it was crudely sexual, and sexist, as was Bill Maher's comment about Sarah Palin, as Spanky relates it.

Tom Cronyn said yesterday that President Obama had "diminished" his office. He doesn't have a lot of standing to make that comment, in my opinion, but it's fair game. We debated it here, as others have. That's not in any manner the same as calling the President of the United States a "d*ck" on national television, or calling Sarah Palin a dumb tw*t.

And by the way, calling the President "stupid" is also not the same as calling a fellow blogger a "liar." Bloggers are not public figures, and the level of decorum that ought to apply here with regard to what we say TO each other is higher than what we say ABOUT the politicians. And it's also higher than what bloggers who think they're speaking to each other in private should be held to. I'm sure it's higher than what YOU would like to be held to when chatting about us wherever your side does that.

@AM

I realize it was a facetious argument. The point I was trying to make was that gratuitous praise should be punished the same way as gratuitous insults. Neither has a place in political commentary. I agree with a poster above about Conkrite and Huntley. Right now I'm missing David Brinkley.

By the way, I assure everyone that I'm done now on this topic. I'll leave further discussion to others.

Calgon, take me away.

I have a lot of love for FR;

both First Read and Feisty. And I know she feels the same about me.

Spanky

Despite your prating, belittling is an old tactic, old lad.

Who you calling tactical?

So when the old gal refers to Mitch "the turtle" McConnell is she being tactical or belittling?

Theeself, old lad.

Anna Molly-

Honestly, I believe that very few of the regular posters at First Read are liars. That would suggest deliberate intent that I don't feel is present in all but the tiniest number of comments that appear here. Virtually everyone here is speaking their own versions of what they fervently believe to be the truth.

That said, it's sad when anger and elevated emotion leads to the use of the word "liar", or some other epithet which amounts to the same thing, to describe a fellow blogger.

If one is so upset that they're unable to express an opinion in a more articulate, and less heatedly aggressive fashion, perhaps that individual might want to consider delaying a comment until they are able to do so.

Just a thought.

I never put it together before this moment. FR and FR are one in the same. First Read and Feisty Redhead. Hmmmmm... think there's a correlation? Maybe Carrot Top chose her name based on the FR initials.... probably from some arguable sense of self identification. Every time Carrot Top reads FR she has visions of grandour, thinking how nice it is to be remembered all across the FR boards... and by saying FR boards, I was referring to First Read and not Feisty Redhead, AKA Carrot Top in drag.

While you're thinking about it, Bag Boy, maybe you could do something about Brianb -- he appears not to get the point, and sadly, it would appear from the forward threads that others have missed it, too.

I gave it my best. I always have.

The ball is now firmly in YOUR court.

Have a wonderful holiday weekend.

I'll resume calling out individuals when you begin to, Anna Molly.

So...still in your court, I'm afraid.

Likewise on the holiday wishes.

;-)

Indeed. You can start anytime, Bag Boy. I'll be right behind you.

Should make for an interesting week ahead. If you really mean it. ;-)

The Republicans are a bunch of commie loving traitors who should be prosecuted and jailed for their crimes against the American people.

President Obama is the hardest, most dedicated working president we have ever had.

True, but his job is being President not a pro golfer or professional campaigner.

Seems I heard he has spent about 6 total hours with repubs and Biden's boys on the debt.

Did the 2 rounds he played last weekend take less time than that?

Didn't I hear they invited him for a get together and he had a couple more important fundraisers to attend?

So much to squeeze in before the Martha's Vineyard appointment, huh?

Amen! We need to be more supportive of the president! He has accomplish allot! It may not be everything that we want, but that is how the world works! Let us pull together as a team! We can defeat the party of Hate!!

Bob-180,

As of the end of May, 2011 our president has been in office 29 months and has played 71 rounds of golf or an average of one round every other week. Anyone that is an avid golfer averages at least 1.5 rounds a week plus a couple hours a week at the practice range. The President played a dozen of these rounds while vacationing in Hawaii and Martha’s Vineyard. President Eisenhower averaged 2 rounds a week and President Clinton averaged 1 round a week.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56305.html

Pat - so glad to see the attention you gave Carter. Is there anyone who can hold a candle to the tireless work he (and the former First Lady) have continued since his presidency? Is he the greatest former President we've ever had?

Bob - ever spent any time on a golf course? Do you have any idea 1) how many deals are done on the links or 2) how much stress is relieved before/during/after a round? I think I already know the answers to these. So...are you just jealous that this President is able to work tirelessly on our behalf, be completely devoted to his own family AND MAKE IT LOOK EASY...or what? (If Ann Richards was around she'd have a clever quip for this!)

Dennis,

Yea, I know ot sounds like a cheap shot, but did Clinton have 9% unemployment year after year? Did Clinton spend less time in meeting with a committee that is trying to solve a problem that would sink the country than he spent in weekend on the golf course?

A lot of the rich, a lot of small business play a lot of golf.

But were they playing golf when their companies were tanking?

Doesn't look good Dennis ...... especially from someone who is supposed to be the leader.

Yeah, so true Vermont Girl.

But let's see you walk that talk. What say you go tell you boss that you are hitting the links today, and every other Friday from here on in. You know cause you can get an awful lot of work done, while relieving stress.

Yep, that ought to work out well for you. Me, seeing how we don't have a BUDGET, let alone a viable plan to tackle the astronomical debt and deficit, and realizing the economy is in the tank and getting worse by the minute, I'd like to see the BOSS at work doing his job.

Not golfing, and not running for the job he already has, but doesn't seem to want to do.

Oh, and it was odd that the "devoted family man" doesn't seem to know the ages of his kids, no?

Bob-180,

Eisenhower had a jobs problem – there was a net job loss 5 of his 8 years.

Bush 43 spent on average spent 15 hours a week on his mountain bike.

Presidents need stress relief.

Vermont,

So how many deals has Obama done on the golf course?

Ever find a budget in the bunker after swinging that sand wedge for 2 1/2 years?

What has the Senate done this year other than sink the Patriot Act putt. Obama is the President right....the leader right......dems control the Senate right.....name a piece of legislation that has passed.....or a serious piece presented.

Dennis,

I thought guys always touted FDR not Dwight.

So how much golf did FDR play?

He play a lot of wheel chair basketball with Churchill and Stalin during WW II?

I don't know you, Pat, but methinks you and I would get along great when it comes to talking about politics. As a thirty-something, I never understood the disdain so many have for President Carter. Granted, I was nothing but a little kid at the time, but from what I understand of his presidency now, he strikes me as nothing but a very thoughtful and rational man who maybe was president at the wrong time in history.

As far as President Obama is concerned, I don't think I can improve on what you said, so I won't try. Do I agree with 100% of what he does, no, but then again I don't agree with my wife 100% of the time on anything either. For the most part, I agree with most everything he does and see him as a person who is truly trying to look out for the best interests of the country even when the positions he takes earns him grief (genuine or not) from both sides of the political spectrum. Nevertheless, I do believe history will look back very favorably at him although his full history as POTUS has yet to be written.

Pat I agree. but I am also very upset with the Democrats in office. They could band together also and defend the president. Where are all our democratic leaders,and where do they stand? Obama was left standing alone, except for the few voices on TV and radio. Some democrats stand with the Republicans even though the people get mad as hell. How many Democrats are left, that stand by the people?

I am so fed up, Michelle Bachman`s husband should be brought up on fraud charges, and made to pay back everything they took from the federal government. Medicare payments made her family rich. When is anyone going to help us fight these crazies?

bob,

So much for "managing your blog time", eh? :o)

Spanky - Is not the legislature an equal part of the governmental triumvirate? Do you believe that the Congress is not at fault for not providing a budget? I blame Congress, by the way that includes Pelosi and Reid for deeming a budget passed last session. I also blame this Congress for producing the GOP backed Ryan plan knowing full well that it would never pass in the Senate.

Obama did propose a budget, it got no votes but he outlined his vision, set his priorities etc. As you all point out daily liberals are the minority in the country we need help from serious, reasonable politicians to get things done. It used to happen, but know it seems the parties would rather see things go up in flames so that they can blame the other side and score political points. I see it that the GOP are the problem and unwilling to compromise. I understand you see it that the Dems need to be stopped etc. It is probably somewhere in the middle but whoever is at fault we both will suffer if compromises are not made. "A house divided can not stand."

At the end of the day, it is up to Congress to work out a budget. The Dem Senate should work to propose their own budget and pass it. Then leaders should try to reconcile theirs with the House budget.

Hi Pat,

I see your point. Somehow I think progressives like me will miss Obama if he loses in 2012. I don't blame Obama for his stance on gay marriage or his inability to deal with comprehensive immigration. Some of those things are out of his hand or need Congressional legislation. What I call him on are his choices that he alone as CIC and president has made. If I disagree, I will disagree but in a civil respectful way. Even comprehensive immigration reform something I feel strongly about, gun control, etc. everything except environmental reform, IMO, they all have to be put on the back burner until the economy improves.

If the economy doesn't improve Obama will loose the election 55% to 45% and lose by over 80 or 90 electoral votes. Perhaps our complaints from the progressive side hurt his polling but that said, I think progressive voices challenging the president on policy waffles are an important part of being an American. Putting your country first, however a person decides for themselves what that means, is more important than being a party member.

Dennis, I haven't responded to any of your post for awhile, hard to find you since you have deleted all of your post from your vine page. I remember Eisenhower when he was President and don't really recall the big unemployment problem he inherited. Remember the Korean War had just ended and he reduced the size of the military and defense spending. We also did not have the large number of government programs that we have now, so it's hard to compare the Eisenhower Era with now.

Clinton's term is a little easier to compare, for instance the first two years of Clinton and a democratic controlled congress was somewhat of a disaster in that he spent a lot of time and failed on his health care reform and had one of the largest, if not the largest, tax increases in history with any republican votes, I believe VP Gore had to cast the tie breaker. I have more credit to the republican congress for forcing Clinton to the center. The welfare reform passed with republican votes, NAFTA signed by Clinton with republican votes, balanced budget put together with a republican congress, etc., etc.,.

I also remember Clinton cutting the defense budget in this first few years and everyone calling it the "peace dividend" since Reagan had caused the collapse of the USSR. Clinton's main problem was he couldn't keep it in his pants, with most people didn't really care, except he lied on oath (perjury) which caused the biggest problem. Being retired military, I did not like Clinton nor did I vote for him, however, I don't think he was that bad of a President mostly thanks to a split government. (Republican controlled congress and a Democrat President.)

Hope you have a nice 4th of July holiday and I am sure we will chat again. Damn I don't normality make my comments this long, sorry.

Nash,

Dang it .... you are right again.

But honestly, flip little reponses between phone calls is not the same as the serious and thoughtful response your comments deserve.

Regardless, I'm gone for a while - see ya on Tuesday or over the weekend.

Thanks for busting me on not wasting anymore time today.

Golf to relieve stress?

Naw, I got this. Plus golf takes an awfully long time to play. THis, not so much. :)

Sargent,

Hi and thanks for your comment. I haven’t been around much the last month or so.

I didn’t say he had a big unemployment problem. I said he had a jobs problem.

Net job losses in thousands: 53=462, 54=371, 57=545, 58=297, 60=432.

For his 8 years he lost over 2 million jobs not a lot compared to 80+81 and 08-09.

The only point that I wanted to make is that regardless of what is going on all of us including executives and national leaders need stress relievers. It makes us better.

Beautifully said, Pat, Boston! I agree. I am reminded of an editorial written late last year with the title, "What if we have a great president and no one notices?" We do have one and history will show that to be true.

The 24/7 media feeds the public nonstop "fair and balanced" chatter; factless negativity is allowed to be spun as truth. The GOP Congress has determined that rather than govern and do what is right for the American people, their #1 priority is to defeat President Obama and make him a one-term president, as stated clearly by Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor and yet those same legislators are treated as if they have credibility and they have none.

Happy July 4th!

Pat Boston MA.

President Barack Obama

I sometimes get ticked off at progressive tv hosts – Keith and Rachel and others. But I get over it – quickly. I would never ever turn them off for good as they're too valuable a voice. Such is not the case I'm afraid with many in the progressive arena. When they get mad at President Obama, it lasts for years. Never is the larger picture at stake with them. Never do I see much in the way of activism whether it be for gay marriage, anti-war or anything. They just seem to pout – forever. Day in, day out. It's become addictive they say. Markos/DKos I don't see eye to eye with too often. But if he were to attempt to put together something constructive about immigration, I would support him 100% and do whatever I could. He's very passionate about immigration reform, as am I.

Thank you so much Pat;

I am just fed up with them. You'd think they would have learned when they told people to say home in 2010 to teach President Obama a lesson. So who learned the lesson; not them? They are getting paid to whine with reckless abandonment while the real people who are the ones suffering without jobs; under-employment, homelessness, or facing foreclosure have nothing.

If these angry whiners on the progressive left would just realize, first of all President Obama can't be any one but himself. Secondly, change does not come easily as we are seeing. Did the progressive left expect the birthers, T-baggers, tenethers, faux constitutionalist and other nut jobs to crop up? These rich non- tax payers do not want to let go and the progressive left is giving reasons for the nutjobs on the right to use their petulance against President Obama. If one watches FOX NOISE one can easily see how it is being used to further the causes of the radical right wind.

If they were to take up worthy causes at least could stop the detrimental language.

I'll share these with you because I said months ago I was through with Jan Hamster and Arinia Huffington.

Is Hamsher the left's Limbaugh?

Let's not let Hamsher do to the Democratic Party what Limbaugh has done to the Republicans

http://immasmartypants.blogspot.com/2011/06/is-hamsher-lefts-limbaugh.html
===============================================================
Since, I'm on a rant, why is the liberal media not talking about the witch hunt Fox Noise has duped its audience into? I saw some dolt with a southern accent on Fox& Fiends this morning bragging about the e-mails he sent for the IRS to investigate Media Matters.

Fox is a devil and is encouraging its dumb audience to e-mail IRS because according to Fake News Media Matters is taking our tax dollars . If the IRS investigates Media Matters; then investigate Breibart, Eric Erickson, Brent Bosell et al.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1033280554001/viewers-stand-up-to-media-matters

===============================

You don't know, no one could know who difficult it is. but we must forge on.

Another excellnet Bevism.

Will there be another before the weekend?

Bev. - did you not see the ratings that can out this morning? Stop watching Fox. Poor Rachel is the best we have got and she is a pitily 13th.

Please support MSNBC. Don't let them take my happy funtime shows. I need Schultz. I want O'Donnel. And I must have Maddow.

Anna Molly -

Your above posts are why I love you. I often disagree with you and you (not me, of course) can get a bit testy now and then. But, after all is said and done you will call out either side for their wrongs and will agree with those that have valids pro or con arguments.