Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz on the chopping block with the DNC?

[240 is Back]

False - you got busted in yet another blatant lie and cant back it up .

eh, others might remember the getbigger who said he doesn't care about the meican side of it - it's the US agents that he cares about.

[Soul Crusher]

eh, others might remember the getbigger who said he doesn't care about the meican side of it - it's the US agents that he cares about.

STFU - you claim you remember who that was - name that person. 

[MCWAY]

Both Maddow and Maher have opposing points of views on their shows every week and have detailed and nuanced discussions with them and they do so in a polite and respectful way

Beck, Rush and their ilk do not and most likely are not capable of doing so

Now THAT was comical.

This would be the same Bill Maher, that talked about Santorum's wife using a vibrator, who called Sarah Palin a c*#t, who got bludgeoned and called out on his own misogyny to the point where he ended up defending Rush Limbaugh, after all that Sandra Fluke flap.

That is, after the right pointed out the hypocrisy of being mush-mouthed about his comments, while demanding Limbaugh's head for his remarks about Fluke. Of course, Obama's PAC took $1 million from Maher, as the president wagged his finger about Limbaugh and his words.

[240 is Back]

STFU - you claim you remember who that was - name that person.  

what would be the point?  So he/she could say "prove it" and I'd have to go shuffle thru many many threads on it.  

i'd rather knock one out and then go make a sandwich.

[dario73]

maddow is good at debating when she has the winning position. 

Really? Newsflash. Even you could win such a debate. Winning position? HEHEHEHE!!

Yeah.

She looked like a babbling idiot after Wisconsin.

[240 is Back]

Really? Newsflash. Even you could win such a debate. Winning position? HEHEHEHE!!

Yeah.

She looked like a babbling idiot after Wisconsin.

when she is right...
when she has found a big contradiction in someone's past positions, or someone screws up...

maddow is a master at delivering the owning.

Rush, on the other hand, can argue a wrong position and actually look right - but he's not exactly the point-by-point pwner.  He's just brutal overpowering emotion.

[MCWAY]

Why are there pics of Ice-T's wife on a thread about Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz (unless you're implying that's how she looked 20 years ago)?

If you're in the mood to knock one out that much, 240, just find your Obama poster as usual and go to work.

[Straw Man]

Now THAT was comical.

This would be the same Bill Maher, that talked about Santorum's wife using a vibrator, who called Sarah Palin a c*#t, who got bludgeoned and called out on his own misogyny to the point where he ended up defending Rush Limbaugh, after all that Sandra Fluke flap.

That is, after the right pointed out the hypocrisy of being mush-mouthed about his comments, while demanding Limbaugh's head for his remarks about Fluke. Of course, Obama's PAC took $1 million from Maher, as the president wagged his finger about Limbaugh and his words.

Are you having a hard time paying attention

Just because Maher makes jokes you don't like doesn't change the fact that he has thoughtful and nuanced discusstions with people who have opposing points of view.  I don't "win" anything by pointing this out.  These are objectively verifiable facts.  The same goes for Maddow.   She had polite and in depth discussions with people that don't share her point of view.    She doesn't interrupt them or put them down or turn off their microphone, etc.. She acts like a normal mature adult

Beck and Rush (and others) have daily pep rallies for a like minded audience of simpletons, paranoid delusionals, and crybabies.  No opposing points of view are ever heard and certainly there is never a thoughtful and respectful debate of ideas.   

It's just two different formats

nothing to get upset about or try to defend

It's just the way it is

[MCWAY]

Are you having a hard time paying attention

Just because Maher makes jokes you don't like doesn't change the fact that he has thoughtful and nuanced discusstions with people who have opposing points of view.  I don't "win" anything by pointing this out.  These are objectively verifiable facts.  The same goes for Maddow.   She had polite and in depth discussions with people that don't share her point of view.    She doesn't interrupt them or put them down or turn off their microphone, etc.. She acts like a normal mature adult

Beck and Rush (and others) have daily pep rallies for a like minded audience of simpletons, paranoid delusionals, and crybabies.  No opposing points of view are ever heard and certainly there is never a thoughtful and respectful debate of ideas.   

It's just two different formats

nothing to get upset about or try to defend

It's just the way it is

Maher's discussions are nothing of the sort. If anyone is having the pep rallies, it's he and Maddow (though with much smaller attendance for both).

No opposing views are ever heard there? That's a laugh!! You'll find more liberals on Hannity than you'll find conservatives on Maddow.

[Straw Man]

Maher's discussions are nothing of the sort. If anyone is having the pep rallies, it's he and Maddow (though with much smaller attendance for both).

No opposing views are ever heard there? That's a laugh!! You'll find more liberals on Hannity than you'll find conservatives on Maddow.

you must have never watched his show

anyone who watches either Maddow or Maher know that what I've said is true

It's not the ONLY thing they do but it is true that they have people with opposing points of view and they have polite and often spirited discussions.   

[Soul Crusher]

you must have never watched his show

anyone who watches either Maddow or Maher know that what I've said is true

It's not the ONLY thing they do but it is true that they have people with opposing points of view and they have polite and often spirited discussions.   

Mahr is an idiot.   Economically he is a brain dead as you are.   His has at best a surface understanding of most issues and hides his ignorance w smug insults in front of a capitve friendly audience. 

[Straw Man]

Mahr is an idiot.   Economically he is a brain dead as you are.   His has at best a surface understanding of most issues and hides his ignorance w smug insults in front of a capitve friendly audience. 

you're certainly entitled to your opinion and since Maher audience probably pays to be there and viewers definitely pay to get his show it make sense that they would be a friendly audience

that doesn't refute the fact that he has opposing voices and points of view on his show and does so every week

[MCWAY]

you must have never watched his show

anyone who watches either Maddow or Maher know that what I've said is true

It's not the ONLY thing they do but it is true that they have people with opposing points of view and they have polite and often spirited discussions.   

I have seen his show. The mere fact that you refer to Maher as "polite" is a certifiable JOKE.

Again, you will find more liberals on Hannity's show than you would on Maddow's show.

Of course, that doesn't touch the issue of the reports that Schultz is on her way out, something you never addressed at all.

[Straw Man]

I have seen his show. The mere fact that you refer to Maher as "polite" is a certifiable JOKE.

Again, you will find more liberals on Hannity's show than you would on Maddow's show.

Of course, that doesn't touch the issue of the reports that Schultz is on her way out, something you never addressed at all.

again, what is it with you and reading comprehension

I didn't say Maher was ALWAYS polite or never impolite

I said he has people with opposing points of view and has polite and nuanced discussion with them

Of course he still tells "dirty" jokes and makes fun of idiots like Palin and of course that gets simple minded people such as yourself in a dither but that doesn't change the facts of what I've said

why don't you just find something else to delude yourself about

[MCWAY]

again, what is it with you and reading comprehension

I didn't say Maher was ALWAYS polite or never impolite

I said he has people with opposing points of view and has polite and nuanced discussion with them

Of course he still tells "dirty" jokes and makes fun of idiots like Palin and of course that gets simple minded people such as yourself in a dither but that doesn't change the facts of what I've said

why don't you just find something else to delude yourself about

Nary a fact has come from your pathetic posts. His discussions are hardly polite as are his jokes. That's what I've said at least TWICE. So, the reading comprehension (or lack thereof) falls on YOU.

As usual, to excuse his relatively low ratings (along with those of Maddow), in typical liberal fashion, you claim that your host and their audience are "smarter".

And speaking of lack of reading comprehension, for all your flapping, you have YET to address the actual subject of this thread, namely the reported demise of Debbie Wasserman/"Blabbermouth" Shultz. All this deflective clucking of yours started, simply because I mentioned that I heard this story first on Glenn Beck's show.

If you have some evidence to the contrary, that Schultz isn't about to get the heave-ho, let's see it.

[MCWAY]

we can expand that further.

people who own their own business can watch TV all day.  they're more likely to be conservatives.

people who work at the mall or flipping burgers cannot.

if it just about who is more popular, we'd be prepping palin to take over after a brilliant mccain presidency.

and anyone who claims the programming on fox is superior.... lol... well, anyone who says fox & friends is brilliant programming has a 90 IQ, and the rest of us know it

Dead wrong again, 240. You made the usual liberal talking point that the sole/primary reason Fox crushes MSNBC and CNN is because old(er) people watch it.

If your claims were remotely accurate, both those stations would lead Fox in that demographic. But, it ain't even close.

Once again, check the numbers and you will find the actual stats, that Fox annihilates those two stations in the money (25-54) demographic, by a margin or nearly two to one.

[blacken700]

Dead wrong again, 240. You made the usual liberal talking point that the sole/primary reason Fox crushes MSNBC and CNN is because old(er) people watch it.

If your claims were remotely accurate, both those stations would lead Fox in that demographic. But, it ain't even close.

Once again, check the numbers and you will find the actual stats, that Fox annihilates those two stations in the money (25-54) demographic, by a margin or nearly two to one.

my show beats your show na na na na na       who the fuck cares

[240 is Back]

have you guys watched all 3?

seriously, FOX is applesauce being fed to trailer folk and old people - they freakin' splice in reagan footage all the time to elicit a boner from the elderly.

CNN?  Entertainment news is more like it.  Cause we need a 17th interview with a jackson family member about the reaction to the verdict on the doc that killed him.

And MSNBC?  Surely the sun setting every night is proof that God, like everyone else not called MSNBC, is a total racist.


I'd say they're all 3 tied for last place.

[240 is Back]

seriously, I want to ninja kick a football into the face of a baby seal every time I see anyone try to assign any worth to any of the news networks.

rubbish all the way, the whole lot of them.

[Straw Man]

Nary a fact has come from your pathetic posts. His discussions are hardly polite as are his jokes. That's what I've said at least TWICE. So, the reading comprehension (or lack thereof) falls on YOU.

As usual, to excuse his relatively low ratings (along with those of Maddow), in typical liberal fashion, you claim that your host and their audience are "smarter".

And speaking of lack of reading comprehension, for all your flapping, you have YET to address the actual subject of this thread, namely the reported demise of Debbie Wasserman/"Blabbermouth" Shultz. All this deflective clucking of yours started, simply because I mentioned that I heard this story first on Glenn Beck's show.

If you have some evidence to the contrary, that Schultz isn't about to get the heave-ho, let's see it.

you think Mahers discussion with opposing voices are not polite and I say they are.
They may get spirited at times but they are civil and the larger point is that they actually take place

Doesn't change the fact that Beck/Rush etc... never let a dissenting opinion or contrarian voice on their airwaves and the reason I haven't addressed the subject of your thread is that I have no interest in any opinion of Beck

He's an certified idiot and anyone who listens to him is exactly the same

and if you're not clear yet, that is solely my opinion

[MCWAY]

my show beats your show na na na na na       who the fuck cares

Says the guy, who posts gibberish from the aforementioned red-headed stepchild of cable news.

Of course, you're free to actually talk about Debbie Wasserman Shultz and whether or not she's on the way out. But, neither you nor Straw seems to be able to do that.

[blacken700]

Dead wrong again, 240. You made the usual liberal talking point that the sole/primary reason Fox crushes MSNBC and CNN is because old(er) people watch it.

If your claims were remotely accurate, both those stations would lead Fox in that demographic. But, it ain't even close.

Once again, check the numbers and you will find the actual stats, that Fox annihilates those two stations in the money (25-54) demographic, by a margin or nearly two to one.

i guess i missed where you talk about  Debbie Wasserman Shultz 

[MCWAY]

Double down drop: Is Wasserman Schultz on her way out of the House and the DNC?





On Friday, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz told CNN’s Soledad O’Brien that “Republicans in Congress and Mitt Romney continue to demonstrate that they are rooting for failure.”

One look at Schultz’s Elections Meter popularity rating and one might get the impression she’s doing the same with her own political career.

In fact, the plunge of her popularity rating graph-line over the past three months looks like a schematic drawing of a “double down drop” on a theme park roller coaster.

At her peak in mid-April, her popularity rating was 18.23 percent. By mid-May, it dropped to 16.96 percent. As of June 25, her popularity rating hit a depressing 14.76 percent.

In May, speculation that Shultz had worn out her welcome with President Barack Obama as chairwoman of the DNC and questions of whether or not she would even attempt reelection were already raised by Examiner.com.

But now, those queries have wheels and are starting to gain traction.

Billy House of the National Journal reported Wednesday that, regardless of whether or not Barack Obama wins reelection, rumor on Capitol Hill says Schultz “will not be asked to serve another term” as chairwoman for the Democratic National Committee.

On Sunday, Javier Manjarres of The Shark Tank wrote that his source “within the Democratic Party, who is also a close associate of Wasserman Schultz” confirmed that “the arrangements have already been made for her to leave DNC regardless” if Obama “wins re-election or not.”

A curious note in the National Journal article by House was the new speculation that Schultz “reportedly now has her eye on a House leadership post—perhaps even the highest.”

    If Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California decides to relinquish House Democrats’ top spot after November—a possibility oft-discussed in the cloakroom, hallways, and Capitol subway—the similarly polarizing Wasserman Schultz may make a play for her post.

First: No matter how “oft-discussed” the “possibility,” in cloakrooms, hallways and the Capitol subway -- outside of Pelosi’s company -- can anyone really imagine her voluntarily surrendering power?

Second: Since losing her position as speaker of the House, although “similarly polarizing,” Pelosi has pretty much fallen off the political radar and has become little more than a bad memory. But she still strikes fear into the hearts of her fellow Democrats.

Conversely, Since ascending to the position of DNC chair she has been nothing more than a source of embarrassment.since ascending to the position of DNC chair, Schultz has become the punch-line to a bad political joke.

From her hire of Dani Gilbert -- and the ensuing “Jewbags” debacle -- to the cancellation of her speech at Miami's Temple Israel, Shultz’s presence has caused Obama to spend less time advancing his reelection effort and more time running damage control.

In April, Shark Tank's inside source told Manjarres that Obama addressed Shultz personally on her destructive activities, telling her: “Don’t forget, you work for me.”

In early June, Mediaite reported that even former Democratic National Committee chair and Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell Gov. spanked Schultz for her over-the-top criticisms of Mitt Romney’s credentials to be president.

All things considered, Schultz has few -- if any -- political allies. Moreover, where it may be true that she “has her eye on a House leadership post” as she rides her political roller coaster -- it doesn’t mean her cart will take her there.

According to Arthur Levine -- in his post on About.com -- a “double down drop” is a roller coaster term describing “a drop that is immediately followed by a second drop.”

The thing is, where coaster passengers can usually see the first drop coming, they “generally aren't able to anticipate the second drop.”
Democratic National Committee Chair and Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz may have "her eye on a House leadership post" but that doesn't mean she can see her way there.
Democratic National Committee Chair and Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz may have "her eye on a House leadership post" but that doesn't mean she can see her way there.


http://www.examiner.com/article/double-down-drop-is-wasserman-schultz-on-her-way-out-of-the-house-and-the-dnc

i guess i missed where you talk about  Debbie Wasserman Shultz 

It's the topic of the thread, O myopic one. I've only posted two stories about it (well, three, counting this one).

[Fury]

Maddow - Stanford graduate, Rhodes Scholar, Phd from Oxford Doctor of Philosophy in Politics (DPhil)

Mahr - B.A. in English and history from Cornell University in 1978

Neither one is a drug addict, religious kook nor attempted suicide

Haha, nothing even close to a quantitative degree among the bunch. Sorry, there's nothing impressive about that and I'd be surprised if either of them could handle simple calculus.

It always amuses me when people try to argue that talking heads are intelligent.


A Doctorate in "POLITICS". LOL.

[MCWAY]

Haha, nothing even close to a quantitative degree among the bunch. Sorry, there's nothing impressive about that and I'd be surprised if either of them could handle simple calculus.

It always amuses me when people try to argue that talking heads are intelligent.


A Doctorate in "POLITICS". LOL.

Would that be Calculus I, II, III?

Back to the topic at hand, for some reason I don't recall your party's chairman head on the chopping block, during a presidential election, is a positive sign.

I thought one of the responsibilities was to raise money for the party. If that's the case, no WONDER she could potentially get whacked.