• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BOMBS AWAY... WH Insider drops a Nuke... confirming what R's have said all along

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I couldn't believe what I was reading.

This is a nuke job of the first order, confirming EVERYTHING R's have said about Obama and much, much, much more... and hits also on the fringes of Michelle's hating the First Lady role... a quote that does not seem out of character after plugging through this.

It is sure to piss off Democrats beyond their wildest dreams, as it strips away all the veneer. Every bit of the facade is laid bare.


.
 
Last edited:
white guilt, black racism and people being tired of BUsh are why this moron was elected
 

Holy **** batman! A smear piece written right before election time! That's amazing!
 
The thing doesnt even name its source, or give any hint to his position and/or role. Heck the author doesn't even identify himself, tell me you can't be taking this seriously. There's absolutely nothing to back up anything that's written there.
 
More nukes...

 

Several things:
1. I've never HEARD of "newsflavor" so...

2. Such a juicy article isn't on Drudge...

3. It's too... perfect. Like an affirmation of everything the right believes is wrong with O.

4. I've never head of "newsflavor".
 
Several things:
1. I've never HEARD of "newsflavor" so...
2. Such a juicy article isn't on Drudge...
3. It's too... perfect. Like an affirmation of everything the right believes is wrong with O.
4. I've never head of "newsflavor".

When Mr. V is the voice of reason you know something is wrong. Dude you are spot on.
 
white guilt, black racism and people being tired of BUsh are why this moron was elected

And the Journolists fomenting a culture of Cult around this guy. Flawed to the core, but the Journolists were there to deflect and impugn others like Joe the Plumber, who did the Journolists job... asked one question (that desperately needed to be asked by them and wasn't) and let Obama speak, and speak and speak until the truth eked out. Then... WHAM! Out come the Journolists their Smoke, Mirrors and Daggers Brigade as they investigated Joe.

The guy is so hollow and in over his head. He reminds me of Hazlnut without the entertainment value.

.
 
Last edited:
Several things:
1. I've never HEARD of "newsflavor" so...

2. Such a juicy article isn't on Drudge...

3. It's too... perfect. Like an affirmation of everything the right believes is wrong with O.

4. I've never head of "newsflavor".

There was a story about a week or so ago about someone talking to an unnamed fox exec in a bar that confirmed that fox news does what it does for purely business reasons and said unnamed exec knew it was all crap.

I give this bomb as much credit as I give the other story, which is none.
 

So you're equating this to The Daily Kos and CNN's pre-Iraq war coverage and CBS's forged documents?

How about this one?
L.A.: $111M in Stimulus Saved Just 55 Jobs

.
 
Last edited:
So you're equating this to The Daily Kos and CNN's pre-Iraq war coverage and CBS's forged documents?

How about this one?
L.A.: $111M in Stimulus Saved Just 55 Jobs

.

How about you explain first how we are supposed to sake seriously a 'report' from an unnamed 'journalist' who 'interviews' an unnamed 'source' with no evidence what-so-ever to back this 'source' up.

By the way I just heard that Zimmer man is a closet homosexual, I was told by a friend who knows him.

If you are going to believe what an unnamed author says he heard from an unnamed source, if that is YOUR standard, then you are going to have to agree with that above statement, and every other thing I say that I heard from a guy, or you're going to have to admit you have two standards and just jumped on this thing because it said what you wanted to hear.

Which is it? And dont dodge the question.
 
So you're equating this to The Daily Kos and CNN's pre-Iraq war coverage and CBS's forged documents?

I am saying that I do not believe the credibility of this, unless I see sufficient evidence. Until than, I will categorize in the domain of rumor and urban legend.

How about this one?
L.A.: $111M in Stimulus Saved Just 55 Jobs

.

This has nothing to do with your op as far as I can tell, which seems to be about Obama's temperment and disposition.
 
What a bunch of crap. How anyone who has any standards for journalism at all could read this and applaud it is a testimonial to blind partisan ideology triumphing over the same standards they would apply if this were coming from the other side and a pan of Palin.
 
ROTFLMFAO...

:2wave:

.
 
I would exercise a great deal of caution, if not near dismissal. "Insiders", especially those not named, are not going to be the only ones writing the story of the inner mechanics of an administration. For instance, Richard Clarke versus Douglas Feith. Donald Regan versus Howard Baker. The media portion is not out of the realm of typical media coverage techniques. That does not mean that the media wasn't in the hole for Obama...they were, but this is a vague statement. Now, I personally like a person who takes a slightly more enthusiastic perception of the job. That being said, a tremendous track record for American idealism was the fact that many of our greatest figures did not enjoy the work of being such a public figure and would rather retire to private life. A temper tantrum from the President of United States is immensely common for anyone in such a position. I do not find fault with a single President for yelling at his staff and becoming frustrated over the situation. Lastly, the story carried with it the implication that the President is perhaps changing his management style. Now, I was under the impression that the way he structured the mechanics made it so that a large number of individuals would feed the information to the President in order to keep him more involved. This is in contrast to George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan whose approach was delegation. Both techniques have their benefits and drawbacks. If the President switched the mechanics, it may be working for him. If he has not and had become more distant, it may clog the form of management.

At any rate, I'm waiting. It's the history student inside of me that exercises more caution that gut reaction.
 
Last edited:
I can just picture Zimmer drooling at this piece as he read it from a news source that apparently nobody but him has ever heard of.
 
I caught wind of this one last night. It is a very weak article.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…