Hannity is unembarassable in his attacks on President Obama. there is no level to which he will not stoop.

This is another personal attack on an honorable person, just to try and make Obama look as if he did something really bad. I'm sure Bell is rolling over in his grave on this one and I hope he comes back to haunt Hannity, and fake noise nitwits.

Republicans will never bother to look at Mr. Bell in reality.....they WANT to believe the LIE.

At 2:20 Ogletree claims that this video has been on the web and youtube since 2008. He must not realize that you can go to youtube and see the date that any video was posted. The oldest posting of this video on youtube was last week. Doing a search for this information shows nothing on this video older than last week.

So my question is: Why does Ed and feel the need to lie about this video's availability and what else are they ling about in segment

Once again Ed fails to bring the real news and acts the part he does so well, the detractor.

When are you going to start telling the Whole truth, instead of just the part of the truth that forwards the DNC's agenda. We need someone that will report the truth so the people can decide what is best for the people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Much_Ado_About_Nothing

Apparently there needs to be constant conspiracies to entertain the Obama haters, or attempt to make more. Keep everyone angry.

I think there is much ado about nothing. It is not radical to many people, that which is radical to others.

I find it odd that someone might think Prof. Bell was a bad person.

Truth: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth/

I also find it odd that people find Prof, Bell a bad person. So why did Ogletree want it to stay out of the light?

Has to be a conspiracy? I don't think it means much at all. But some are looking for something that they can draw fire?

I'm not the least bit concerned.

We know what the republicon agenda is.....trying to keep Obama from being re-elected as PRESIDENT.......

They will lie and spin and pretend to themselves that Obama is to blame, Obama is this and Obama is that.....no truth in any of it. It does not matter to them, and they don't mind if they try and defame a man who spent his life working and fighting for the causes of his race. They will use any kind of scandal they can create, and get other to falsely believe it. They have no moral values about how they do it.

At 2:20 Ogletree claims that this video has been on the web and youtube since 2008. He must not realize that you can go to youtube and see the date that any video was posted. The oldest posting of this video on youtube was last week. Doing a search for this information shows nothing on this video older than last week.

yes that you've found....you are quite aware there can be multiple posts of the same video.............or videos can be taken down............

chemdmd,

Mr. Ogletree was being "sarcastic". he was laughing while he said he "hid" the video, making a "joke" out of the way he knew the radical wing nuts would react. how did he know this? because the right wing has been calling Prof. Bell a radical ever since 1990 at least, when he took a stand for minority professors. somehow, when President Obama is seen hugging the professor, the right jumps all over this sh!t, because they love it. why do they love it? because this is what they (you all) want the rest of the world (america at least) to believe about our President.

Frontline on PBS played the video in 2008, post election.

i'm sure you think their word isn't good enough.

breitbart, hannity, oreilly and other wing nuts on fox, and in washington, seem to think that when african americans fight for equal rights under the law, that they are displaying reverse racism.

i see this as justification on the part of people who do this, because they cannot defend the fact that they know that african americans in the United States have not been treated fairly. many of these people have grown up, used to the fact that african americans are second class citizens, and they want to keep them as second class.

if and when we do not need affirmative action, i hope it is for the reason that finally, we are all treated equally, and not because minorities have given up the hope that it will ever happen.

Ok i will play your game about Hitler and Nazi Germany
Did you know Nazi Germany had socialized health care just like the democrats want
Did you know the Nazis came to power by dividing the country from the haves and the have nots and then blamed the haves for all the trouble with the country just like the democrats and the occupy movement with their 99% class warfare
Did you know Hitler also silenced all opposing voices just like what the democrats are trying to do with Rush and all other conservative voices
I can keep going but i think you are starting to get the picture that Obama and the democrats have a hell of alot more in common with Nazi Germany then republicans ever did

one last thing do you even know what Nazi was short for ?

National Socialist German Workers' Party

I see socialism and even union in that title sounds more democrat then republican to me

Did you know that Nazi Germany was only recently stripped of its far right status by the tea bagged nation because Hitler wasn't far enough right for the tea bagged nation.? And we get another history lesson from Fox news and the long dead Glen Beck show rant.

Hitler was "a big government will fix everything," winger. Sounds left wing to me. What do you think?

whom: remember its the TPers that wants less government, its the Dems that want more!

And we get another history lesson from (the big government socialists) rant.

whom, you really need to get a grip on your understanding of history, and big vs. small government!

trf, capt.,

hitler, like many others ran to power on the socialist agenda. then after they got into power, they never put it in place.

hitler was a CRAZY totalitarian incompetent, and he ran on "socialism" to get into power. what we saw in germany under hitler WAS NOT SOCIALISM, WAS NOT COMMUNISM.

i will compare this to the repub governor's in power now, and the baggers in washington, who ran on a platform of "jobs". they lied about what they would do when they got elected, just as hitler lied about his "socialist" agenda. after hitler came to power, he put into place a totalitarian gov't, much like the repubs want to do today. i don't know how you don't see that. taking rights away from women, and taking away the right to collectively bargain, puts the repubs in the same place as hitler, in that it was the powerful and rich against the working class, the poor.

jon kasich and scott walker ran on "jobs". i never heard them say ONCE that they were going to abolish unions, and force other things through. i never heard the baggers say once that they were going to abolish reproductive rights for women.

i know how you all love "fair and balanced". do some research on what hitler and other totalitarian gov't's did to the people they governed.

i

will compare this to the repub governor's in power now, and the baggers in washington, who ran on a platform of "jobs". they lied about what they would do when they got elected

This is where you are wrong the tea party main goal is to reduce the size of government and eliminate the debt. The Tea party doesn't believe the government will create jobs that is up to the private sector they want the government to just get out of the way

.jon kasich and scott walker ran on "jobs". i never heard them say ONCE that they were going to abolish unions, and force other things through. i never heard the baggers say once that they were going to abolish reproductive rights for women.

And here you are wrong again those states where going broke and they campaigned to reduce the states debt and for them to beable to do that with out raising taxes which would drive more companies out of the state they had to reduce cost and to do that they had to eliminate collective bargaining for state employees. If they didn't do something about collective bargaining they would have had to lay off thousands of teaches and them not raising taxes it brought businesses into those states which created jobs so yes they helped with jobs like you said the campaigned for and they also kept the state from going broke which they also campaigned for

The folks over there at Fox are degrading a dead man revered by many people, not just President Obama for actively working for social justice.

People need to really stop thinking if someone tries to discuss racial inequality or womens inequality or LGBT inequality, that is not radical.

It's my understanding Prof. Bell was discussing specific things that are examples of furthering the oppression or ways to awaken people to the struggles of racial minorities, women and probably LGBT. The person that stands up and brings issues into the open does a great service. That person may reach someone that was under the impression there was no hope for them and they must be happy with their "place". These people speak about things to awaken thoughts that someone of privilege may not be aware. These leaders are lighting the path for many people to find their way and have confidence that they can get through the struggle and reach their goals.

Germany has a health care system now that is based on payroll tax:

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/health-reform-without-a-public-plan-the-german-model/

And reading about doctors in Europe here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/themes/doctors.html

we start out with information about the cost of schooling and cost of malpractice insurance is much higher in the U.S. than in Europe.

I think we are on the right track to bring down insurance premiums and employer and taxpayer costs with the ACA.

I also think the dragging Prof. Bell through the mud to get people that will believe anything about Obama being radical is a witch hunt and just disgusting. Especially when there is nothing radical about it. Just tapping into fears again.

It's funny how this nation became an economic giant using all of the principles that the Republican party despises, and then collapsed when they decided government had to "get out of the way."

And all the Teabaggers want is to make a lot of noise and be noticed. They don't have a single plan or idea that doesn't consist of "government sucks."

then, WHY, in a state by state comparison of job growth is wisconsin DEAD LAST?

yea you stupid republicans, Reagan the Dem was the president that made everything better after that Idiot Republican Jimmy Carter.

Look at the many cities that are having financial difficulty right now. All, yes ALL of them are under a Democratic leadership.

You want to talk about good economic policies that have helped the American people look at Solyndra, The Chevy Volt, pond scum as the solution to our high gas prices.

My new favorite Democratic freedom symbol the American flag that has the stars that represent the individual states, replace by the face of President Obama or should I say dictator Obama. Shame on you.

If I had the money, I would get a Chevy Volt and solve my problems with gas prices.

OPEC is the problem with oil. The embargo was the problem, we were all victims of OPEC. The glut was in the 80's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPEC

Republican paranoia:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1x1-qpqyqAI&feature=related

Note his accusation and his inconsistencies. I think of accusing Obama of the death of brietbark is treason. Especially since we know that brietbark did have problems and dies of natural causes. not to mention the rest of this guys accusations. Do these people do not see how dangerous they are. They are the one's who are guilty of a crime.

Thanks for posting the link, Mom. After listening I do have some questions.

And you would be laughed off air about the same as your hero Glen Beck, because you don't know a thing about history or historic events to pass a third grade history test.

TRFjr~~Dems are very capable of reading an article, and forming an independent opinion based on non-racist, non-bigoted, non-hypocritical, well educated, patriotic American integrity. Unlike rabid, radical low-information republicans, who have to depend on the likes of Rush, Beck and fox propaganda, to tell them what their opinion is.

GG101: If:

Dems are very capable of reading an article, and forming an independent opinion based on non-racist, non-bigoted, non-hypocritical, well educated, patriotic American integrity.

why are they so quick to sink into the gutter, calling conservatives -

FRAUD, the tea bagged, and rabid, radical low-information republicans?

Seems one side isn't able to articulate their points. What do you think?

capt.,

ever hear of rush limbaugh?

TRFjr~~Dems are very capable of reading an article, and forming an independent opinion based on non-racist, non-bigoted, non-hypocritical, well educated, patriotic American integrity. Unlike rabid, radical low-information republicans, who have to depend on the likes of Rush, Beck and fox propaganda, to tell them what their opinion is.

I'm not asking you to read articles written my someone other then Prof Bell himself, Because you will just gravitate towards the left leaning ones just like a conservative would gravitate towards the right bias ones

Read Bells writing and you will see that he doesn't want you to be color blind he wants you to see a persons color. He wants to keep America divided along racial lines, because it reinforced his cause and his ideology. He believed and campaigned heavily for affirmative action its one of the major reason he came up with CRT

If America was color blind there wouldn't be a need for affirmative action, because a person would be judged on the content of his character not the color of his skin. its what MLK spoke about. Bell wanted blacks to see whites as racist who will do what they can to keep blacks down to oppress them and he wanted whites to feel guilty of it this way he can justify and campaign for programs like affirmative action which is racial in its self

As long as people like Bell and the democrats keep you from being color blind. as long as they keep this racial divide in this country they can use it to their benefit and push their programs and ideology. But if America is color blind there will never be a need for Pro Bells or even the democrat party

I will use this for example if a drug company found a cure for all the disease in the world would they market it? would they sell it? hell no they wouldn't it would shut down their business there wouldn't be a need for drug companies any more

That is the same reason democrats and all the Prof bells out there doesn't want America to be color blind they want you to see the color of the person to hopefully keep racism alive so they themselves would still be needed

This courtiers racism is not a guilt to be placed on a black person fighting for his rights, or an American Indian, or anyone from any culture who HAS TO fight for their rights in the LAND OF THE FREE.

You are the one who wants to engage the republicans against the liberals, and to do that you want people to believe lies. It is funny when I have read Bell, I do not see what you claim?

trf,

i would like to know where YOU got your information about Derrick Bell, because the research i have done does not show Mr. Bell as a "radical".

Derrick Bell was born in the 1930's, he LIVED the bigotry and racism directed at african americans, and he LIVED through the convolutions of the civil rights movement. of course you will have explanations and reasonings for why african americans like Bell are radical, but have you ever thought that maybe they APPEAR radical to you because you have never had to fight for rights that we take for granted?

i understand why an african american might feel the way Derrick Bell does about minorities, (women included). he wasn't fighting only for himself, but for all other minorities.

CRT seems logical to me. your train of thought seems to suggest, that like women, Mr. Bell shouldn't "complain" so much. "look how far african americans have come", you might say, "be thankful you're not slaves anymore", "after everything we have done for you, you're not showing appreciation". what the civil rights movement did was outlaw "obvious" discrimination. but it still continues, and continues to this day. racism and bigotry ARE NOT DEAD in america just because we elected an african american president.

CRT is the result of an african american who feels that racism is so much more than how we INDIVIDUALLY react. it is a part of who we are, it has been embedded in "our" thinking, and how "we" react to african american's who want their "come-uppins". this is the reason for affirmative action, because what Bell and others like him saw, is that many whites will not do anything for minorities unless it benefits them.

Bell isn't saying that "white supremacy" is the 'heart and soul' of CRT. can't you put yourself in the position of african americans, who dealt with discrimination, who saw it in their lives, and the lives of their family and friends, and of other african americans, EVERY SINGLE DAY, DAY IN AND DAY OUT. imagine how you might feel if bigotry had been directed at YOU.

as a woman, whose rights Bell was fighting for, i understand and appreciate Mr. Bell for fighting for the rights of minorities.

you take your civil rights for granted, african americans, women, gays and other minorities STILL HAVE TO FIGHT FOR THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS.

in everything i have read about Derrick Bell, i have seen nothing 'radical".

this is much to do about nothing, just as the Shirley Sherrod story was. trying to make a big deal, to make President Obama look "radical", when he is not.

this is propaganda from fox news.

Those "color blind" statements are really terrible. It means you can't deal with someone if you notice they're a different color than you. What you should be able to do is treat them with respect while noticing they are a different color.

Derrick Bell was born in the 1930's, he LIVED the bigotry and racism directed at african americans, and he LIVED through the convolutions of the civil rights movement. of course you will have explanations and reasonings for why african americans like Bell are radical, but have you ever thought that maybe they APPEAR radical to you because you have never had to fight for rights that we take for granted?

That is a form of racism right there he is judging all whites because of his past experiences by him and his race, To be free of racism you cant and or shouldn't judge a race for the action of some from another race past and present

Would it be right for me to say once a black person stole my bike so then that makes all blacks thieves

CRT is the result of an african american who feels that racism is so much more than how we INDIVIDUALLY react. it is a part of who we are, it has been embedded in "our" thinking, and how "we" react to african american's who want their "come-uppins". this is the reason for affirmative action, because what Bell and others like him saw, is that many whites will not do anything for minorities unless it benefits them

So basically he is saying all whites are racist no mater if they mean to be or not. its a fact of life and to overcome that inherent racism which whites have no control over because it is in their subconscious preferential treatment needs to be given to minorities. hence affirmative action .

Bell isn't saying that "white supremacy" is the 'heart and soul' of CRT. can't you put yourself in the position of african americans, who dealt with discrimination, who saw it in their lives, and the lives of their family and friends, and of other african americans, EVERY SINGLE DAY, DAY IN AND DAY OUT. imagine how you might feel if bigotry had been directed at YOU

I'm not saying racism didn't exist or that it still doesn't exist but does to wrongs make a right? does past and present discrimination gives you the right to reverse discriminate ?

I will use the stolen bike analogy again. Since a black person stole my bike from me in the past does that then make it right for me to steal a bike from another black person even if he wasn't the one who stole my bike to begin with

Discrimination is wrong period, past or reverse

affirmative action and its reverse discrimination component is what started the debate at Harvard at that time Bell came up with CRT. Bell used CRT to justify the reverse discrimination in affirmative action

Ps i want to thank you for engaging me in this civil intelligent debate it is refreshing to be able to do so with out the verbal abuse and hate you get from most liberal bloggers. See right there you have shown me that all liberal bloggers are not hate filled vile mouths who rather wish death apon you then to engage in a discussion

Suzzette (3.4): Yes, we have been discussing him for 2 weeks. I (and most of America) saw his name for Fluke a little over the top, but fitting. After all, she seemed to be asking for us to support her sexual exploits by providing her birth control. Did we get something wrong?

The Dems "war on women," seemed to help Santorum didn't it! He has been standing up for those of us that have great respect for women, unlike so many liberals here. We worry about the promiscuity that Fluke seems to advocate!

Do you really believe we should buy young girls birth control? Just askin'.

BTW: most of the racism in this country today is demonstrated by those who call anyone who opposes Obama a "racist." Just look at all Obama has done to blacks, and yet ~97% still support him! MLK must be turning over in his grave. He advocated judging by the content of character,Dnot color of skin!

Most racism in this country now resides in the Democratic Party, can't you see?

Oh the poor little tea bagged republican is being discriminated against because no one buys into their BS but they ignore that they are the ones coming over to a liberal blog spreading their racist sexiest homophobic nonsense which if any of us did on a right wing blog we would get a IPS ban for life.

ignore that they are the ones coming over to a liberal blog...

LOL make that four times.

IPS = Irritable Penile Syndrome? No wonder you're so cranky.

I love the description TeaBagger, because it refers to a WINNER. Yes the term teabag came from the video game Halo. When you defeat your opponent you kneel down and rub your genitalia in the losers face thus tea bagging them. So by all means keep calling the right by their true name Winner.

As for Glen Beck, even if you hate him the man is brilliant. I remember all the left winger that thought they were winners when Beck left Fox and the other loser network because they felt that they had used their advertisers warfare to get him off the air.

before he got even one advertiser for GBtv that he started when he left Fox News He had already made 17 million more in subscriptions then Fox was paying him in a year. Like TRF stated go find the facts for your self, Beck asks you to challenge everything he says and find the truth for yourself. However, I find that most libs think what Ed says is gospel.

Your right Face, they have nothing but lies and invectives. Guess we just have to cut them some slack!

Always remember folks that the GOP is not conservative and wants to expand...decrease the size..just increase the power of it's penetration in our lives......so the effect is the same

Remember te tea party thinks america should be a theocracy, they are pseudo conservatives

Anyone hwo thinks we've ever had a president like Hitler doesn't know $hit about what kind of damage Hitler did...this is absurd and last I checked no one here is a comedian and has no real need or talent at answering absurdity with absurdity.

Remember also that those who believe the white race is under attack share that belief with all neo-nazi groups and white nationalists like CPAC speaker Peter Bremilow

And by the way Glenn Beck is a disgrace to conservatism and the GOP in general. The reason he's not on FOX is because he was embarassing the network with his claims about how the white race was under attack, or that current and past presidents were not bombing Baghdad to make it the capital of a global nwo caliphate and lets not start about the guests like David Barton who he repeatedly introduced as a history expert which he is not he is a theologian nothing more, or Anita King who compared gay marriage to genocide...............

not brilliant a joke

And before pretend that I love Ed I will remind you he is by far my least favorite host, he fumbles his words to often, talks way to much about phony racism, and the poll questions are always stupid. Now go look at the comments by Mr. Beck's fans and see if your pleased with what they believe...............

Always a good post.

Always remember folks that the GOP is not conservative and wants to expand...decrease the size..just increase the power of it's penetration in our lives......so the effect is the same

You hit the nail on the head here. It's effect is the same.

Remember te tea party thinks america should be a theocracy, they are pseudo conservatives

Just because someone says they're a tea-partier doesn't mean they represent in any way what the tea party movement really is about. Most of these people (the ones you hate) are posers who use that phrase to scoop up true conservative independent voters. They're really GOP and in that respect you're right about them being pseudo conservatives.

I hate 'em too, because they are lying about what their allegiances are.

So you admit to hating someone because of what you think they believe, not what they say they believe? Any you cast aspersions on TPers? Think about what you are saying (pun intended).

trf,

your post #3.5-

...democrats and all Prof. Bells out there doesn't want america to be color blind they want you to see the color of the skin to hopefully keep racism alive so they themselves would still be needed

i am slackjawed at your statement above. i do not understand how Professor Bell fighting for his civil rights and for those of other minorities is because they (we) want to keep racism alive.

your post #3.9-

i am feeling from you a lack of empathy for the racism and bigotry directed toward Professor Bell, and other minorities, including women, when you compare his experience of years of hate-filled bigotry to having a bicycle stolen? your statements in this regard show me how far apart we are. i'm not even sure if i know how to respond to that.

but i will try, not that i will convince you of anything.

when someone responds to bigotry, racism and hatred (hatred that has gone on for years and years, and by many many people, just not one person stealing a bike), by trying to get FAIR treatment (it is the law) that is NOT REVERSE RACISM.

...he is saying all whites are racists, no matter if they mean to be or not. its a fact of life and to overcome that inherent racism which whites have no control over because it is in their subconcious preferential treatment needs to be given to minorities. hence affirmative action

some of what you write above is true. part of CRT, according to Prof. Bell, is that racism IS a part of who we are. when i was a young woman, i lived in savannah goergia in the early 70's. i saw water fountains that said "whites only", doors that had "whites only" signs on them. where i grew up, i never had contact with a black person, i had only heard that racism exists, i was taught about the civil rights movement, but very far removed from it. it came to life for me in a small way when i moved to georgia, i was shocked when i saw those signs, and other evidence that racism was alive and well. i have come to understand how living among that bigotry, especially before, but also during the civil rights movement, when racism was accepted as as "normal", growing up with ideals that didn't even have to be taught, it just beomes a part of who people are by the fact that they are exposed to it every single day. people are not making the "choice" to be racist, per say, they are just doing what they always have done, and will continue to do so if they are not reminded that what they are doing is racist.

it is only logical to me that someone (prof. Bell, Martin Luther King and many others) HAS TO RESPOND to racism, even if it is "innocent", otherwise things will never change. i don't know about you, but it would be very difficult for me to work around, and see the same racist attitudes being played out before me as i did my job.

i do not understand how you see this as blacks wanting "preferential treatment". they are clearly responding to the fact that even after the civil rights movement, many white people were reluctant, and even "dead-set-against" giving up their favorable treatment, their favorable standing, to those whom they were used to seeing as second class citizens.

i feel that blacks are dealing with the world of discrimination as it is. they feel the need to deal with the world AS IT IS, and that is unfortunately that they have to FIGHT for their right to have equal footing. i DO NOT SEE THIS AS REVERSE DISCRIMINATION. when we do not need affirmative action, then we will have proven as a society that blacks and women and other minorities do not have to fight for FAIR TREATMENT UNDER THE LAW. this is something that MANY WHITE MEN JUST DO NOT GET, AND A FEW WHITE WOMEN.

Bell was not justifying "reverse discrimination".

i have heard pat buchanan talk about affirmative action, and reverse discrimination. he is absolutely disrespectful to our president when he speaks about advantage that he feels went to President Obama that should have gone to some "white boy".

were it not for affirmative action, President Obama might well have been another african american that fell between the cracks simply because he is black (i do not know if our President had benefit of affirmative action, i am basing my comments on the fact that i have heard pat buchanan rant about that benefit, because he feels the same way you do.

i appreciate the civil debate also, even though i have no idea where you are coming from.

i do not understand how you see this as blacks wanting "preferential treatment". they are clearly responding to the fact that even after the civil rights movement, many white people were reluctant, and even "dead-set-against" giving up their favorable treatment, their favorable standing, to those whom they were used to seeing as second class citizens

i feel that blacks are dealing with the world of discrimination as it is. they feel the need to deal with the world AS IT IS, and that is unfortunately that they have to FIGHT for their right to have equal footing. i DO NOT SEE THIS AS REVERSE DISCRIMINATION. when we do not need affirmative action, then we will have proven as a society that blacks and women and other minorities do not have to fight for FAIR TREATMENT UNDER THE LAW. this is something that MANY WHITE MEN JUST DO NOT GET, AND A FEW WHITE WOMEN.

First off im getting the impression that you don't understand what affirmative action is about or even its definition

Affirmative action is a policy or a program providing advantages for people of a minority group who are seen to have traditionally been discriminated against. This consists of preferential access to education, employment, health care, or social welfare

Affirmative action allowed minorities admission to colleges with lower test score and GPA then what was required by whites
Affirmative action made business hire minorities even if they was less qualified then a white person who applied for that same job
Affirmative action allowed minorities to obtain jobs like fireman policeman teachers and other government jobs even though they failed the admission exam
affirmative action under the fair housing act required banks to give loans to minorities even if they didn't qualify for that loan
Affirmative action required the government to give contracts to a minority businesses even if their bid was higher and or its product or service wasn't as good as a non minority business.

Even Obama benefited from affirmative action he gained admission to Harvard with way below average GPA score then other non minorities would have been required to have

During the time Bell was a professor at Harvard the main discussing around campus revolved around affirmative action and if it was a form of reverse discrimination. This prompted Bell to come up with the theory of CRT to explain and justify affirmative action and of coarse the reverse discrimination component of it

Now you and others will argue that affirmative action was needed because minorities are at a disadvantage and i agree a lot of minorities are at a disadvantage but it was more to do with their economic status then their skin color, I understand percentage wise more minorities are more likely to be poor but number wise there are more poor whites so they also have as much of a disadvantage as minorities but they gained nothing from affirmative action as a mater of fact they was harmed by it

By the laws and policies of the last 4 decades a poor white male is the most discriminate person and has the most disadvantages. now before you get in a uproar about that statement I said by the countries laws and policies maybe not so much in reality

You tube gives you the choice......but I find if I have to watch a commercial to watch a clip, it gives me time to nibble, or sip my tea. There might be some info I want to see after the commercial.....we artist have to learn to be patient. So how is live treating you Bud.

Right and put in the egotistical morons that will just do what GWB did and all will be well until its is time for the GOP to pay the bills that is then you will find them missing in action. Sorry but the GOP contenders aren't fit to clean toilets in a public restroom let alone be in charge of anything. So go back to your Sarah Palin fantasies and do the country a big favor and don't procreate. NO GOP no no no no no no no no we don't need a bunch of Gomer Pyle's running lose.

Jerry, you are beginning to sound like a liberal, just calling names! Don't sink to their level, remember you have plenty of facts on the conservative side. All Obama and most liberals can do is call names and attempt to discredit their opposition.

Just look at what whom, and other liberals here, have been reduced to. Pathetic, don't your think?

jeff,

capt. is right.

remember what happened to rush limbaugh when he "stooped" to the level of the left? remember what happened when rush HAD to blame the left for his assault on Sandra Fluke and all women?

limbaugh's assault on Fluke was pathetic, don't you think?

Why, you sink below everyones level on this vine and you follow Whom around like a little puppy so you can get in your digs. Obvious Whom has been very successful in getting under your skin. The only person who thinks he has reduced us to his level is caus. Jerry, did a great job of representing the two of you. Pathetic don't you think?

It has been a real pleasure to open you up and see what I am not missing.

nobuma is an inept, incompetent boob, with a dislike of America, and the liberal left wing media reports none of his un-american, muslim tendencies. To save this country he has to be sent packing in 2012.......

Jerry, Jerry, Jerry...

I don't think Obama dislikes America or is un-American. The Muslim comment wasn't too cool either.

There are plenty of valid reasons to dislike Obama.

These two things are not.

Crappedon America's plan is to print propaganda and lies, and then chastise people when they get fed up with him.

Politely lying isn't anything to be respected, Crappedon.

And neither are you.

When have I followed whom around, Mom? My last comment was an ancillary comment to Jerry's. I use whom's comments to demonstrate the liberal's propensity to call names and spread lies.

Much like I use you to demonstrate the left's ignorance by ignoring whatever you don't agree with.

I have always said you and I are just alike (caring about others, SS, abortion, women, morals, etc.), we just come from different ends of the political spectrum. Oh, and also you have the liberal attitude to ignore what doesn't fit your limited viewpoints. You also project your own attitude, thanks for the example! It is -

obvious (I) been very successful in getting under (Mom's) skin!

Always fun to visit with liberals, especially as typically liberal as you seem to be!

Even funnier is if you just replace the name Bell with Bill Ayers you can almost read word for word the Fox news attacks on Obama for being at a block party With Ayers repeated non stop by the idiot from Alaska. That you come on a liberal leaning blog spewing your racist, anti woman, homophobic while insulting your hosts MSNBC by trying to say Fox news is above MSNBC when Fox news is a whole new level of stupidity. capt reminds me of that kid back in grade school that copied and pasted together a bunch of book reports then handed them in, when teacher read them, she/he decided to show the class capts errors by telling capt to read his work out loud capt being the egotistical type proudly reads his work out loud thinking he aced the book report, then gets offended when the class laughs at his lame report for being the dumbest most uninformed book report in the history of 3rd grade. That capt then tries to blame his short comings onto others because his poor little ego got hurt, it just shows that capt never learned to behave like an adult, he is still the same as he was when he wrote that bad book report.

edited.

why bother.

Right and put in the egotistical morons that will just do what GWB did and all will be well until its is time for the GOP to pay the bills that is then you will find them missing in action.

President George W. Bush took office, our national debt was 5.768 trillion. By the time Bush left office, it had nearly doubled, to $10.626 trillion. So Bush’s record on deficit spending was not good at all: During his presidency, the national debt rose by an average of $607 billion a year. That's pretty bad numbers for Dubya indeed.

How does that compare to Obama? During Obama’s presidency to date, the national debt has risen by an average of $1.723 trillion a year — or by a jaw-dropping $1.116 trillion more, per year, than it rose even under Bush.

Deficit spending per day (Bush) $607 billion/365 days = $1.66 billion per day.

But compared to Obama’s $5 BILLION of deficit spending per day? Obama spent well over three times more per day every single day than did Bush.

So blame everything on Bush if you want and ignore the numbers. Obama's deficit spending makes Bush look like a choir boy. Where are we going to find the dems when the tab comes due for this current spending spree?

This is exactly the kind of information you love to ignore because it doesn't fit your rhetoric.

I just can't wait for the dumb ass response that says "Bush's war spending was off budget." This is a total and complete load of BS.

Who controls the spending? Congress. Congress always had the power to cut off funding for the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars any time it wanted.

The simple fact of the matter is that your heroes Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi – who controlled the Senate and House respectively – agreed on how to handle the funding of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. They did not want to be in the position of having to support war funding because it would anger their base, so they took it off the budget.

So it was NOT George Bush who took war funding “off budget,” it was Democrats who were afraid to be held accountable. Ultimately every cent of what George bush spent showed up in his spending and in his debt.

Lastly, let's get something straight right now. I think George Bush is an imbecile, so I hope you don't read this like I'm defending him. I also know that you probably will ignore this and respond with more anti-GOP BS, and that's fine with me but just know I won't argue with your points that the GOP is bad. They are.

I think the invasion of Iraq was a colossal mistake... actually I think George Bush himself as a president was a colossal mistake.

But let's get real about your party's culpability in all of this.

Oh whats that why its Ron Paul to the rescue with his doddering old fool insanity. Once again our little RP supporter leaves out the GWB tax extensions that RP voted for as well as the borrow and spend interests that keep rolling over again never mind that RP voted for those borrow and spend GOP programs why we will just take the RP supporters word that he actually knows something that his post clearly shows he is about on the same level as Sarah that woman is an idiot Palin.

Oh whats that why its Ron Paul to the rescue with his doddering old fool insanity. Once again our little RP supporter leaves out the GWB tax extensions that RP voted for as well as the borrow and spend interests that keep rolling over again never mind that RP voted for those borrow and spend GOP programs why we will just take the RP supporters word that he actually knows something that his post clearly shows he is about on the same level as Sarah that woman is an idiot Palin.

Really? That's the defense you offer up when I call Obama out on spending? To throw Ron Paul under the bus (who is not even part of this discussion and wasn't mentioned once in this thread by me?)

Nice try but as usual you're conveniently ignoring the numbers and with no defense you're launching a tirade against.... Ron Paul?

You've failed to divert this conversation into a pissing match about Ron Paul. I'm not going to engage that with you because what you think about him has nothing to do with this conversation.

How about a real response to the topic at hand? If anything I've stated in this thread is incorrect, enlighten me.

You are a tea bagging republican RP supporter on a left leaning blog trying to spread misinformation as well as cherry picked numbers so I'm treating you with the same respect you are treating us with none. You insult us with your nonsense thats been debunked more times then RP has been shown as a typical right wing racist republican.

You are a tea bagging republican RP supporter on a left leaning blog trying to spread misinformation as well as cherry picked numbers so I'm treating you with the same respect you are treating us with none. You insult us with your nonsense thats been debunked more times then RP has been shown as a typical right wing racist republican.

Is the fact that this is a "left leaning blog" a canned answer for you or something? Do you have a keyboard shortcut for that?

As for the rest of this, it's you're typical canned dismissal of facts that you can't dispute. If you had a valid point you wouldn't mind debunking them again with FACTS that you yourself claim are readily available, but you won't, because you can't. This is the third time you've offered up one of these "you don't respect us so right back atcha" bull$@&t responses. It's not going to work on me anymore. I've got you totally figured out.

Thanks for admitting you don't have a clue how to debunk what I just posted, and your boilerplate say nothing response is proof of it.

Nope its a fact. Whats to debunk? You are a right wing troll spreading misinformation on a blog provided by shows you don't watch and no matter what people debunk you are back within the hour repeating the same garbage that was debunked so we just laugh at you and make jokes about you. Because honestly we can't believe that anyone can be so stupid as to support a party that has failed at everything they have done since 1970.

Whats to debunk?

How about Obama's annual deficit spending for openers. If my number is wrong, what's the correct one?

You can follow up with exactly what you think in my posts are "misinformation." Just because you call it that doesn't make it so, and since you're throwing the accusations, I would think the least you could do is back up your talk with some walk for a change.

Finally, if these things I'm saying have been debunked so many times, it should take you a matter of five seconds to debunk them again. Why haven't you?

Hmmm.

The correct 1 is Obama has spent less then 2 trillion since taking office, the 13 trillion is the GOP borrow and spend nonsense plus the interest on that borrowed money. We have today you righties this time after time and you keep repeating garbage cherry picked to omit GOP fault. So yes it has been thoroughly debunked a few hundred times and people like you keep coming back with the same old Obama spent 15 trillion lie. So know we don't even bother because that is like telling Sarah Palin shes an idiot.

Today should have told, SO was yacking and I wrote what she said, lol.

The correct 1 is Obama has spent less then 2 trillion since taking office, the 13 trillion is the GOP borrow and spend nonsense plus the interest on that borrowed money. We have today you righties this time after time and you keep repeating garbage cherry picked to omit GOP fault. So yes it has been thoroughly debunked a few hundred times and people like you keep coming back with the same old Obama spent 15 trillion lie.

LOL I don't know whose ass crack you pulled that < 2 trillion number out of or how you attribute the other 13 trillion to "GOP borrow and spend".

Deficit spending is deficit spending.

How about Obama's annual deficit spending for openers. If my number is wrong, what's the correct one?

Didn't you just say congress controls the spending.....I think you can see how that could be considered inconsistent however I would add that congress legally is supposed to control the money but I think it's rather self evident that they stopped doing their jobs a long time ago. Where does that lead more executive powers....

Now on dealing with those issues zero of the leading Republican candidates have a plan to change the budget around and the righties still believe that their plans are great...so the right isn't actually concerned about the budget in the way it claims they are too busy futhering their radical theo-con agenda

No it is not as clearly you seem to think that deficit spending only matters when democrats do it or get left to figure out how to pay for the GOP not paying their bills, GOP party of dead beats.

Dude I'm not disputing the fact that nobody's paying the bills. All we're doing (both parties) is spending ourselves into the abyss.

My original post said that Bush's deficit spending was bad. What part of that didn't you understand? In fact, I would say that Bush's spending is in a way WORSE because he passed himself off as CONSERVATIVE and if that was the truth, he would have not spent anything we didn't have. OK?

It's no shocking revelation that liberals spend, so I would argue that regardless of what Obama is spending, anyone with any common sense knew what we were getting. That still doesn't make me happy because we're headed in exactly the opposite direction of the way we should be going.

Now on dealing with those issues zero of the leading Republican candidates have a plan to change the budget around and the righties still believe that their plans are great.

I agree (and I don't think their plans are great either.)

Obama wants you to believe he has an answer too, but the last three years have shown exactly the opposite. The state of our economy is abysmal.

What I see ahead are things just getting a whole lot worse. This is a problem we can't spend our way out of.

Didn't you just say congress controls the spending.....I think you can see how that could be considered inconsistent

Not really, I'm aware that congress controls spending, and they are not doing their job by voting yes to debt increases and quantitative easements.

Everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that at some point we have to **stop** spending money we don't have. We can do it now, voluntarily and rebuild the economy with sound currency that is backed by something other than a lie, or we can wait until everyone in the rest of the world wakes up one day and sees that our entire monetary policy is a complete farce. I personally think we should take our lumps now because the monster we've created is going to be four times larger than it is right now in less than a decade. I'll take the skinned knee now instead of losing my whole leg later.

The truth is, it's probably already too late.

I'm certain this sounds to some people like "gloom and doom" forecasting, but the predictions they were making about these things (debt) in the 70's are coming 100 percent to fruition and then some.

And right on clue more say nothing spin.

So you think everything's fine and we're not beyond broke?

And I don't really want to hear about how the GOP doesn't seem to be worrying about whether or not we're broke. Any of the one percenters you despise so much have already moved the bulk of their wealth elsewhere, or will when the plug is about to be pulled. (Just like Rockefeller did in 29 before the stock market crashed.) He knew then and they know now exactly when this whole thing is going to come crashing down.

When expenditures dwarf revenue, you're broke.

Surviving on credit is going to end, maybe soon, maybe later, but there's no way it can't end. So dance now while you can, but sooner or later the fiddler is going to want to get paid.

But don't worry, I won't be around to bother you here and say I told you so when it happens. I'll be long gone and you'll be scratching your head wondering what happened.

Everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that at some point we have to **stop** spending money we don't have. We can do it now, voluntarily and rebuild the economy with sound currency that is backed by something other than a lie, or we can wait until everyone in the rest of the world wakes up one day and sees that our entire monetary policy is a complete farce

Yes buts thats really point that we haven't lost anything, because the money never existed to begin with.....is anyone mind boggled that we are rguing about things that only exist because we say they do

The truth is, it's probably already too late.

Without a doubt there is no chance america will be able to pay off its fictional hypothetical debts, it's just not going to happen, but that also brings out the brightside that it's all fake in the first place. None of it is real. All the money we owe is imaginary.

I like to say that the ultimate solution to the whole American/Europena world debt issue will have ot be a disolving of the current world banking system so that it can be replaced with something that makes sense. When a nation as tiny as Greece which hasn't been important in a thousand years is having world wide global impact or when the richest nations in the world are in debt up to their eyeballs....thats a sign the system doesn't make sense......

a disolving of the current world banking system so that it can be replaced with something that makes sense

AMEN brother.

You think our rabid righties actual care about their racism? That they want to take the country back to Jim Crow has been documented since Nixon first started his racist agenda. They aren't afraid of being racist they just don't like people calling them racists because that means they can't hide behind code words and pretending they are just concerned about the darkies, which we have all seen them repeat non stop since Obama won the primaries, darkies is another word they can no longer use in public because it makes them look bad. After all we know how feeding the darkies without applying the whip to their backs makes them lazy. What our little rabid righties think, trust me they say it among themselves but in public they try to pretend they don't feel that way.

One can always hope that someone will listen.

These are people who refuse to admit that they are not exceptional superior human beings even though nothing in their lives have shown either trait. That GOP economics have been nothing but failures since 1970, a provable fact, they keep insisting that given enough time their economics will work, that they model their economics on the failures made since 1892 by the GOP just shows that they are incapable of learning from mistakes. They keep looking to the past for solutions that we face today just shows they ignore that history in the favor of stupidity.

I think one of the problems with racism is that on a local level, people seem to get along pretty well. (I know there are a lot of instances of violence, but proportionately, they're pretty small.) So a lot of people think things are getting better.

Unfortunately, where real money and power are centered, it's still pretty much in the hands of white people, (As exemplified by the Republican party, which is 90% white.) What is called institutionalized racism. So you have people of color trying to break through that barrier, saying how difficult it is, and you have people who aren't on that level, saying how it isn't so bad. I think it's basically two different spheres of society. Both facts are true.

Unfortunately.

Sandy, most of us have stopped trying to answer whom, his responses are just lies and invectives. You post just validate the conservative's point, that the real racism is taught and practiced by liberals wanting to divide this country.

Chris, this country has a wonderful record of helping all races. It has been the liberals that have impoverished so many minorities by advocating separate programs for certain races. My favorite example is the Native Americans, a proud and great race destroyed by the liberals in this country. Starting with Andrew Jackson's decision to defy the Supreme Court, sent them on the "Trail of Tears", have them publicly supported, eventually destroying their culture and way of life.

Sandy, look back on the comments at this, or most other sites, liberals can never accept the blame for the damage done to this great country and its people. I like the way Mom put it (although she was trying to implicate me), whom chases others around:

like a little puppy so (he) can get in (his) digs,

devoid of any meaningful ideas other than calling people liars or worse.

whom, the economy grew from 1983 to 2000 because of Art Laffer's economic theories put in place by Ronald Regan. That prosperity has finally been broken by Obama and is opulent spending of $5 Trillion in only 3 years!

To use your own words, whom, you keep ignoring the great accomplishments in history (Reagan's reversal of Carter's poor economic decisions) and instead repeating the current failures (stimuli)! Talk about stupidity!

Crappedon, give it up!

My favorite example is the Native Americans, a proud and great race destroyed by the liberals in this country. Starting with Andrew Jackson's decision to defy the Supreme Court, sent them on the "Trail of Tears", have them publicly supported, eventually destroying their culture and way of life.

It wasn't going on the reservations that killed the native cultures it was the war to wipe them out entirely by the army. It was the governments attempt to wipe out their entire culture that hurt them most.

And what Buzzfeed fails to tell you that when the original clip was released they didn't play the audio so we didn't here Obama say "open you heart and mind to the words of Prof Bell"

Also what Buzzfeed fails to tell you there is more to the clip. the speech by Prof Bell was also recorded and the news station that is in procession of it refuse to release it

Now lets talk about Obamas thesis and published work while he was at Harvard, but we cant because either it was sealed or hidden now why was it sealed or hidden ? He had to have published something hell he was the president of the law review what is in it that he doesn't want us to see

Just more proof that the tea bagging nation have lost their freaking minds and are becoming droolers like Glen Beck.

Just more proof that the tea bagging nation have lost their freaking minds and are becoming droolers like Glen Beck.

If you cant discredit the message you insult the messenger

There is no message there is just a lot of slander and misinformation par to norm for the tea bagged nation. If you think you are a messenger then you had better seek professional help for your delusions of grandeur. You are just a right wing supporter spreading lies and distortions made up by GOP talking heads nothing more then that.