• silverwhisper said on Oct 10, 2009....

  michael steele is a moron.
  
  ed

• SeanRenaud said on Oct 10, 2009....

  The point is that he's not some nobody though.  While the Republicans clearly love Rush and Beck they can disown them at a moments notice if it's convienent.  The same way the Left is with Micheal Moore.  If they don't like him when they wake up they push him aside and claim he's a movie maker and not someone worthy of atttention.

  The same cannot be said of Micheal Steele.  He is a someone, an important someone I might add.  It would be like the Democrats pretending that Nancy Pelosi didn't speak for them. 

• silverwhisper said on Oct 10, 2009....

  but remember that steele's fighting a (losing) battle against beck or limbaugh for the "i speak for republicans" crown. so apparently he's tried to change tacks by being an even bigger ignoramus than either.
  
  ed

• SeanRenaud said on Oct 10, 2009....

  I suppose.  Your logic is sound but I have a hard time lettting Republicans preetend hs isn't part of the club.

• bloc said on Oct 10, 2009....

  The republicans jumped off the deep end a while ago. Hell, they have a senator claiming that Obama is setting up reeducation camps with fema trailers where our children will be sent to be indoctrinated. She also claimed asked the media to investigate members of congress for being anti-american.
  
  The important question is whether decent conservatives will stand up to this like they demand that moderate muslims stand up to terrorists. So far I haven't seen any of the conservatives on this site take a stand against this nonsense.
  

• MsStar39 said on Oct 11, 2009....

  Michael Steel is a nobody.

• silverwhisper said on Oct 11, 2009....

  bloc: nor will you, b/c AFAICT, the conservatives on SC are much too busy insisting that the peace prize is clearly the result of some devious machinations by none other than obama himself.
  
  having said that: i really wish that obama declined. that would have been the absolute best possible response.
  
  ed

• dyingman said on Oct 11, 2009....

  Declining might have been a good idea, but that may cause more damage to the Nobel than picking some newly minted president yet to prove himself.
  
  Maybe there just shouldn't have been a prize this year?
  
  Obama should not be blamed for poor decisions that weren't his. 
  

• ALIENated said on Oct 11, 2009....

  This whole deal of Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize is so stupid, I think most people really do not know what to say or think about it. It is just so irritating that Obama is fooling the whole world, it is dumbfounding. Steel is like the rest of us. This NPP news is like someone spraying the top of your head with freon. It freezes your brain and there is no telling what is going to pop out of your mouth. Try to imagine if they had given the NPP to Bush, and how disorienting it would have made you feel. Obama will never deserve the NPP let alone now, when he has done virtually nothing even before he became president of the United States. For you guys to act like you feel any differently about it makes me wonder about your powers of reason. No one is blaming Obama for getting the prize. If I got it, I would keep it, too. Everyone s pointing out that for him to get it is like some beauty queen being crowned simply because she agrees with homo marriage. The NPP is now a joke. In the future, when someone gets the NPP, we will not know whether they really deserve it or it is just a crock of shit, as is this one. Of course, the fact that Obama is taken seriously in any way is a mind numbing experience, and further demonstrates that Bush could have been the best president ever because Democrats / Socialists and the liberal media would not know a good president if he ran up their butts.

• mobil said on Oct 11, 2009....

  I have to agree with dyingman, "Obama should not be blamed for poor decisions that were not his"
   
  Obama hasn't made a good decision to date, cept maybe getting the girls a dog, let us not hold this one against him.

• ALIENated said on Oct 11, 2009....

  This is not a matter of blaming Obama for anything. This is a matter of the stupidity related to Obama is spreading across the world.

• silverwhisper said on Oct 12, 2009....

  dyingman quoth:
  declining might have been a good idea, but that may cause more damage to the nobel than picking some newly minted president yet to prove himself.

  
  quite frankly, i don't much care about the integrity of nobel peace prize, considering they've awarded it to freaking yasser arafat.
  
  

  mobil quoth:
  obama hasn't made a good decision to date.

  
  such as continuing some of his predecessor's policies, as in iraq, afghanistan or gitmo? c'mon, mobil, a little consistency, please.
  
  ed

• ALIENated said on Oct 12, 2009....

  Sooooo .... you are saying continuing in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gitmo are good ideas? Hmmmm. I thought those were bad ideas. Now I am confused.

• silverwhisper said on Oct 12, 2009....

  no, but those are clearly ideas that mobil favored since i'm pretty sure that mobil, like you, thinks that bush never did anything remotely wrong. :>
  
  c'mon, alienated, it really isn't that difficult.
  
  ed

• ALIENated said on Oct 12, 2009....

  Hmmm. I thought Bush did some things wrong. Where would you get an idea like that? Bush did few of the things he promised, and most of those were the reasons I would have voted for him. (I did not vote in 2000 and voted against Kerry in 2004.) I was just understanding about our involvement in the Middle East. Bush did not make the decision to go there alone. He just got blamed for it not being as easy as naive people thought it should be. Taking military action is never easy. Look at the JFK's / LBJ's war in Vietnam or FDR's WWII. Liberals are the ones who deal in absolutes ... Bush did nothing right, Obama does nothing wrong. There are no perfect presidents because there are no perfect human beings. However, to pretend that Obama is even in the same ballpark as Bush or Clinton, is ludicrous (he has no experience). He is not even in the same state compared to presidents like Reagan. I would almost be willing to bet that Obama will be an even worse president than Jimmy Carter, but time will tell. Things can turn on a dime. What we believe the world to be can change in a heatbeat, just as it did on 9/11/2001. Everyone was ready to go into the Middle East shortly after that. It is not Bush's fault that most did not have the backbone to finish the job once it was started. And it will take future presidents years to clean up the mess Obama is making and will continue to make during his four years in office just like it took Reagan a while to clean up Carter's mess. No, it is not difficult at all to see what is going on, but about half the country still refuses to acknowledge it ... for now.

• bloc said on Oct 12, 2009....

  Alien does this weird thing of taking his faults and accusing other people of them. This is the classic karl rove tactic. 

• ALIENated said on Oct 12, 2009....

  bloc does this weird thing of being an asshole and ignoring everything except what he wants to hear. A classic Marxist / Socialist / liberal tactic.

• silverwhisper said on Oct 12, 2009....

  wow, alienated. do you even have the faintest scintilla of intellectual honesty?
  
  ed

• SeanRenaud said on Oct 12, 2009....

  I'm not always civil.  I don't often ask you all to be but guys, lets try to at least include something on topic other than so and so is a retard.

   

• silverwhisper said on Oct 12, 2009....

  wuss. :D
  
  ed

• ALIENated said on Oct 13, 2009....

  Hey, I try, but some are not content unless they are making personal attacks. Feel free to delete any of my comments that you do not like. And some are not content to discuss Obama. They think Bush is still president. How long does Obama have to be president before he takes possession of the things that are going on on his watch. I assume the next president can blame everything on Bush as well since Obama is not doing anything about anything.

• SeanRenaud said on Oct 13, 2009....

  Obama has at least a year.  Or until Conservatives stop blaming Carter and Clinton for the current economic mess.  Whichever comes first. 

• javadewd said on Oct 15, 2009....

  I believe the awarded NPP was the cannon ball shot across the bow that Obama is a failure. It's just being orchestrated as spin by Republicans that seem to not have anything better to do.
  
  I'm really disappointed in the Republican party. Unfortunately, they, too, will be dispersed in 2010 along with all the progressives and far-left loons. They will be gone like a vapor, and then SNL will have to make fun of Obama more often. Oh, boo hoo.
  
  Good old Michael Steele isn't taken seriously, not because he's black, but because he's a well-off black moderate Republican. I can't even take this guy seriously. He spends too much time with a penny-loafer in his cake hole.
  
  I'd elect Morgan Freeman to run, but then they'd blame him for following in Reagan's footsteps... You know... Actor turned president? Besides, he was good playing one on the big screen!
  

• SeanRenaud said on Oct 15, 2009....

  A lot of people are suspecting that the NPP was more a hint from the left.  Kind of a "Hey we paid in full now git r dun".  Either way I'm kind of tired of discussing the NPP.

• ALIENated said on Oct 15, 2009....

  Tired of discussing the what?

• javadewd said on Oct 16, 2009....

  Nobel Peace Prize... Me, too. I'd rather discuss Whoopi's "rape rape" comment, but even that is getting old...

Comment on "America Surrenders!"

Currently tagged	politics Obama Peace Prize Nobel Prize Republicans adults (Click to add tags below)
Tag this post	(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)
Your comment