Tucker: John Edwards Can't Be President, His House Is Too Big
By Logan Murphy Thursday Dec 20, 2007 9:00pm
Download | play 
Download | play
MSNBC claims to have a great political line up, yet they continue to allow feckless Tucker Carlson to darken their network. To show just how low the bar can be lowered, Tucker decides that John Edwards' large house makes for good political discussion. Never mind the fact that both John and Elizabeth came from modest means and built their wealth, they're hypocrites because they're liberals -- you just can't own a huge house and still care about people who are less fortunate -- therefore, he's not fit to be president.
What's even more frustrating is to see Bob Franken and Slate's Melinda Henneberger play along with this foolishness. Henneberger says that while Elizabeth Edwards is a wonderful person that everybody loves, she's the one who wanted the huge house and boy, that really runs counter to the message that she and her husband are trying to put out on the campaign trail. Since Edwards' campaign speeches have been about how we need to find ways to balance the great disparities between the very rich and those less fortunate and make sure that those who are less well off have the same opportunities to succeed as the wealthy, I'm missing where that goes off message.
It's reported that Rachel Maddow is taping a pilot for a new show for MSNBC and we can only hope that she succeeds and replaces Tucker Carlson. Write to MSNBC and tell them what you think of Tucker and Rachel Maddow...
John Amato: I guess it's just dandy that Bush owns a big ranch in Texas and made millions of dollars off of the sale of the Texas Rangers, but John Edwards couldn't possibly want to help people because he has a big house. Arggg.
Login or Register to post comments.
Tucker is a dufus.
So is his wife.
Why doesn't this country put up better persons to run for president?
Tucker's Brain Is Too Small.
Tucker, Tucker, listen to you. You sound so envious of Edwards. He has a 28,000ft house that his wife is happy with. That would be reason enough for most married men to see that he knows how to please the Mrs. You on the other hand..........oh never mind, you would not understand anyway.
This coming from a guy who's not fit to be on TV........................well......
How can this guy show his face in public after Jon Stewart humiliated him so thoroughly on crossfire?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE
Actually...um, 28,000 square feet? Please. That IS a pretty fair piece of conspicuous consumption, is it not? Tucker is a dolt, but in this case he has a point. How can Edwards talk about global warming and such, much less pass laws regarding it, when he is so utterly open to criticism on this point? He will inevitably be called a hypocrite, and much as I love the guy, I have to say it looks like the label will fit.
Dump this *sshole, already and put on Doctor Maddow, already.
More "shiny keys...look over there" than I can handle from this fruitcake.
What's Pucker's daddy doing now Scooter is free and doesn't need anymore money to defend himself...or does he??
Of course it is okay that Bush owns a large ranch in Texas. He isn't a hypocrite because he doesn't care about poor people at all. See that makes him a good President.
I guess that FDR wasn't a good President for the poor either, because he was filthy rich when he became President and those stupid poor people elected him to office 4 times. I guess they didn't know what a hypocrite he was, developing jobs and programs to get people back to work.
It's really about class, isn't it. John Edwards had to work for his fortune, and Bush and FDR were born to theirs. Where Bush has never done one damned thing for people less fortunate than himself, FDR with all of his riches, steered this country out of the great depression that another republican depression got us into.
Tucker Carlson should learn a thing or two. His stupidity is embarrassing.
Tucker is just trying to convince people bigger ISN'T better (if-you-know-what-I-mean-and-I-think-you-do).
Johnny Boy scares the crap outta losers like Tucker. I think it's the faint whiff of substance JE exudes that turns their collective stomach. That and his hair, oddly.
AND...
So this guy goes from dirt poor to a huge friggin house? Sounds like the American dream worked out there to me...
to agree with the previous 'anonymous' quote, a 28,000 square foot home is not merely 'big' as much as unnecessarily extravagant. The legitimate question is not his wealth, but what that ostentatiousness suggests about his values.
Tucker acts like am immature teenager. I’ve been saying for years how much I hate this little twit.
I don’t know how many times I have written to MSNBC and Dan Abrams to tell them how bad Tucker is for MSNBC. It sounds like finally they have listened.
Took them long enough.
It's not terribly surprising to see someone from Slate agreeing with a conservative.
I guess Tucker was jealous cuz Jonah was getting all the attention. He wants to be GOP dipshit of the weak.
I don’t know how many times I have written to MSNBC and Dan Abrams to tell them how bad Tucker is for MSNBC. It sounds like finally they have listened. Took them long enough.
I have to say though that the huge house is not really good PR for Edwards. How bid is it anyway? 43,000 square feet (I know it’s an exaggeration but isn’t it like 12000 or more square feet?)? I really never have been able to understand how it would be comfortable to live in a HUGE house like that.
bidbigWasn't Tucker born with a silver spoon
up his ass....err...in his mouth?Dubya was born with a silver foot in his mouth - Ann Richards
Tucker is the best show on TV. He is such a pain and the ass and pisses everyone off. He often brings up very legitimate points that no one else dares too. He is also a democrat, but very hard on the democrats, and rightly so.
For the record. John Edwards is my first choice as President.
I'm leaning towards Edwards.
I'm not voting for Obama, but I will vote "present".
With Bush, that's not to mention that he's failed at everything he's ever attempted, but he was bailed out countless times. As Ann Richards said, Bush was "born on third base, thinking he hit a triple." John and Elizabeth Edwards have earned their successes.
Besides hackdom, this is typical conservative projection. Tucker can't imagine compassion for the poor, so Edwards' must be fake. In an earlier era, as Bob Somerby noted, Edwards would have been called a traitor to his class, as was FDR, another rich advocate for the poor.
As for Maddow - boy, that would be fantastic. Every time I've seen her, she's been sharp, insightful, and witty. She's got the chops and the style.
When you write your emails it might be a good idea to write a few or send them a few different times. It's Friday night a few days before Christmas. You know damn well they have a skeleton crew working. Just resend them a few times over the next couple weeks. Just to be sure somebody who knows how to read gets them. Hell the janitor is probably the only one reading the emails at this time on this weekend.
Not that there is anything wrong with janitors.
"Tucker Can't Be A Journalist- His Butt Is Too Big"
I meant to add:
Having said that I am going to vote for Edwards. I really like him and he can spend his money any way he wants.
Tucker is becoming increasingly delusional. It's embarrassing. He's been like a scared rabbit since Jon Stewart blew up Crossfire on him. Losing his show would be devastating. Yes, Tucker could always write for one of Pop's friends. But unlike TV, in print he can't drown out the naysayers by shouting.
AF
Being rich is ok if your a republican. A Democrat must be poor.
What the fuck kind of thinking is that? Look at the Kennedy's compound, and they have done right by people. FDR wasn't too shabby, either when it came to helping people.
Rich, poor, white, black, brown, cross-eyed, spotted, Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, straight, gay, whatever. This country needs NEEDS a decent person to start to right the wrongs that have been inflicted on us the past 8 years (it will be 8).
We need someone who cares CARES about this country.
I support John Edwards 100%. I could give a rats arse if he lives in a mansion or a packing crate under the Hoositanic bridge.
Tucker KNOWS he's full of shit. That's what makes him completely unsufferable.
Tucker should stop trying to analyze wealthy people who speak up for the less fortunate and analyze people who thought bringing back the Mark Twain bow tie look was going to catch on last year.
Jo @ 27:
Well Edwards has a history of fighting for the poor or disenfranchised or whatever against big corporations. That is why the MSM dismiss him. They are afraid of him. MSM are big corporations.
Of course I’m preaching to the choir here.
Huckabee pardoned a rapist who went on to rape and murder but who cares? Look at the size of Edwards house. Its huge! Hes a hypocrite! A president cant live in a huge house like that and fight poverty! Its impossible!
Love that Jon Stewart clip
His Values? Maybe it says he hopes all his little birdies come back home to roost, maybe he plans to turn it into a museum or perhaps turn it into a school. Maybe he wants a place to be alone and safe, since those that are vocal and active about standing up to TPTB sometimes run into trouble. Maybe Elizabeth likes to pretend shes a princess... Really, who gives a crap? Tucker sure as hell doesn't. Ostentatious displays of wealth are probably the only form of love he recieves.
No, what chaps Tuckers face shaped ass is that John Edwards doesn't just read the Bible to get snappy one liners those religious nuts lap up, he actually believes that crap. It is legitimate and shit, and damn but Guliani isn't selling he's even SEEN a bible and Mike Huckabee is a fucking lunatic.... Romney can't open his mouth without lying out of one side of it. Who the hell knows if Thompon's going to feel like getting out of bed on any given morning... John Edwards is the kind of guy that a hardcore gasbag godbag could feel good about voting for, and Tucker is laying the HYPOCRITE groundwork. Tucker is pretty sure that word was in the Bible.
I am not a huge Edwards supporter, but since hearing Obama would even consider hiring Arnold, I have to question his judgement. Or Sanity. Or whatever.
Did I mention that I hate Tucker Carlson. Iwant to make that perfectly clear.
I hate the asshole.
abarts @ 18:
I heard Glen Beck was born with a silver coat hanger in his ear.
By any chance, has Tucker seen the house at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.? It's not too shabby.
Captain Kangaroo @ 29:
We may be the choir, but at least we can sing on key. And, btw, I used to watch you on tv when I was a kid. How's Mr. Green Jeans doing?
Seriously, MSM are afraid of anyone who can't be bought.
Tucker's wife and kids should be in all our prayers this Christmas.
Maybe if we all concentrated together, we could make Tucker's head explode.
Tucker Carlson ...? Is he still on the air ?
Tucker is a tool.
Please get Tucker and Joe off the air waves. With Keith Oberman and Dan Abrams NBC is starting to shine. I hope NBC brass is watching.
You see this is the kind of shit they are going to pull throughout the campaign. It will get worse as they pick up even more of the media then they already own, operate and control.
We have got to somehow get these idiots in Congress to see that this six man media ownership is going to finish this country off.
These people are not for the betterment of this country at all. They are the catalyst of destruction, just as George W Bush is.
It is simply not fair to allow these people to continue to dictate and control what people want to see and here .
It is wrong, wrong wrong and I plan to continue blasting these bastards until they get the hell off the air waves and I hope that millions and millions of American people finely get so sick and tired of these ass holes that we take to the streets and go after their asses in numbers so huge, it will scare the living hell out of them and their families, as they are doing to us.
This is a democratic country and we are featuring all these red neck, right wing ass holes, that contradict any and everything, anybody says or does to try to make some kind of difference for the betterment of this country.
Senator Edwards and his wife are good decent people, who want to show the world a different side of what they have seen in the last seven years of this Bush dictatorship and these ass holes don't like it.
Well, this is to tell all of them that they may as well get ready for more and more and more of it, because people like Senator Edwards and his wife are the faces of America that we want the world to stop, look and listen too.
Stop the bull shit.
as a solid democrat, i gotta say i don't mind Tucker Carlson -- he usually has interesting guests and isn't horribly infuriatingly unfair in his discourse -- even if most of his ideas tend to make me ill.
Maddow has a speech pattern that includes the overuse of "I mean" that drives me up a wall. It's not as bad as my nephew's "like" but it's quite noticeable. I hope she can cure it, because she's otherwise pretty literate.
So what is really going on here on this cozy little Tucker stage? Hmmmmm?
Tucker spouting off about rich liberals and not getting it and tweedledum and tweedledummer chiming in about the hypocrisy of it all, someone who is rich trying to be an advocate for the poor?
Well a quick look at history shows that perhaps the most successful progressive President in History, FDR was exactly that:
Excerpts:
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/New_Deal_opposition.htm
But there is much more going on here that than the usual Tucker style idiocy and Glen Greenwald has taken it up big time and his whole post at Salon is a must read.:
Media hostility toward anti-establishment candidates
Excerpts
There is no question that the media has paid far less attention to Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee than the respective successes of their campaigns merit. To that list, though, I would add a third candidacy that has received far less media attention than it merits by all objective metrics (polls, stature and money): the John Edwards campaign. In 2004, Edwards was the party's Vice Presidential nominee, came closer than anyone else to beating Kerry, and has continuously been very near the top of Iowa's polls. Yet the media has all but ignored him -- it's Clinton v. Obama in their World -- except to mock him on the pettiest of grounds, from his hair to his house.
SNIP!
Edwards, Paul and Huckabee are obviously disparate in significant ways -- ideologically, temperamentally, and otherwise. But there is a vital attribute common to those three campaigns that explains the media's scorn: they are all, in their own ways, anti-establishment candidates, meaning they are outside and critical of the system of which national journalists are a critical part, the system which employs and rewards our journalists and forms the base of their identity and outlook. Any candidate who criticizes and opposes that system -- not in piecemeal ways but fundamentally -- will be, first, ignored and, then, treated as losers by the press.
It is very striking how little Edwards' substantive critique of our political system has penetrated into the national discourse. That's because the centerpiece of his campaign is a critique that is a full frontal assault on our political establishment. His argument is not merely that the political system needs reform, but that it is corrupt at its core -- "rigged" in favor of large corporate interests and their lobbyists, who literally write our laws and control the Congress. Anyone paying even casual attention to the extraordinary bipartisan effort on behalf of telecom immunity, and so many other issues driven almost exclusively by lobbyists, cannot reasonably dispute this critique.
Yet because that argument indicts the same Beltway culture of which our political journalists are an integral part, and further attacks the system's power brokers who are the friends, sources, and peers of those journalists, they instinctively react with confusion, scorn and hostility towards Edwards' campaign. They condescendingly dismiss it as manipulative populist swill, or cynically assume that it's just a ploy to distinguish himself by "moving left." In the eyes of our Beltawy press, the idea that our political system is "rigged" or corrupt must be anything other than true or sincerely held.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/12/19/establishment_candidat...
with all love to keith, it is time to boycott all of the corporate media outlets.
it is too much you all. we have to draw a line.
even on keith's show--and i'm sorry keith i love you but it is infotainment--britney updates, that horrible michael musto and all the paeons to the so called main stream stuff.
i swear on any god you want to front--i do not know any one person enthralled by the main stream entertainment/news, whatever.
not one.
turn it off.
i salute c&l for being one of the watch dogs we so need in these times; they and other outlets like them please keep doing what you do but the rest of us--the millions of us--need to do one thing only--turn it off--leave it off and look only to this and other honest reporters for the information that concerns those that seek the news about serious issues, not those who are interested in jackie's hat style, hillary's cackle or even laura stepford bush's mechanical inner works--these propagandists/entertainters need a dose of $ or maybe -$ and these few watchdogs have taken on the loathsome task of watching it so we don't have to. they are the pros and need to keep looking and sorting, the rest of us need to stop adding our numbers to the time warner, g.e. and disney kitty.
you don't have to boycott their sponsors. if you never look, you will not see the slick 'drink my beer' or or 'use my effing shampoo ads...no problem keeping a mental list of who to not patronize. keep a much shorter list of who to patronize.
simplify, downsize and refuse to use and use and use.
Captain Kangaroo @ 33:
Just the other day I was thinking we had collectively put this idiot on ignore. but here he is, being his stupid self.
Oh, you know, having abig house is a good idea if you have to entertain a ton of people involved in your efforts to make a change in the world...
Speaking of that big ole ranch in Crawford, Texas, I would sure like to see an accounting of it. I understand it's state of the art in every aspect. It supposedly sustains everything needed for life right there on the site. Electricity, water supply etc. This has to have cost milions and millions. I know the "owner" is the most paranoid person walking the earth, but I want to know how much of it we paid for?
I'll be really blunt. I think the GOP just want to put up any Old White Guy against The "Bitch" or the "Black".
I know that sounds extremely crude, but I think that's their "winning" strategery. That's why MSM ignores Edwards...
I don't mean to be offensive...just trying to read the offensive small minds of tools like Tucker. Apologies.
Yet Bush 1 owns a "compound" in Maine among other crime family properties here and in countries without extradition laws. I think a ranch, a compound, and a South American hideout beats a large house any day. Forgive me though, I'd rather have John Edwards and his big house than a Bush under any circumstances.
Tucker, go away and dream of supposedly beating up gay guys who supposedly bothered you in a public bathroom and leave us sane people alone.
Like anyone would decide not to like Edwards because of the size of his house....oh plezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz tucker boy. We got rid of his bow tie, now HIM! Dear MSNBC,I will watch your cable network all the time if you would ax this pea brained fool.
we all need to live more efficently. edwards house is too big if you consider the number of occupants but i would vote for him.
Actually, "THE HOUSE" isn't 28,000 square feet.
Most of the PHYSICAL STRUCTURE on the property is "THE BARN," which includes the squash court, pool, basketball court, and offices and living quarters for guests.
The "HOUSE" is much smaller than the barn, so when they portray it as "A HOUSE" that's 28,000 square feet, they are actually LYING.
This all drives me nuts.
The point of changing environmental laws and protecting our less fortunate is not to make sure nobody has big houses. It's not to make sure everyone with money gives it all away to someone else. It's to put a better overall system in place, on the scale were it can make a difference.
Whenever someone says "Oh gee, they are right about Al Gore, doesn't he do more damage with a plane than I do with a car?" Well, yes, but he is using that plane to achieve his goal of turning these laws around. If he were to succeed, then all the jet fuel he has ever used would cancel out, because changing the emissions laws of an entire country is the only thing that will have any impact.
Guys like Gore and Edwards are allowed to have huge houses and huge jets all they want, and they are not hypocrites for having it so long as their larger goal is to share wealth with the less fortunate, or to make a cleaner earth.
it just drives me nuts when people concede on these things. John Edwards isn't doing a damn thing wrong. He isn't a hypocrite. He isn't saying "Hey rich people, give up your huge houes, and give back." He's saying, let us not lock ourselves in our huge mansions and forget about those not as fortunate as us.
Especially at Christmas time, what could be more sensible than that?
all of these creeps.
how nice is their space? do they ever pass homeless ppl? why don't they invite them home?
by their Bolshevik logic, any person with lebensraum larger than their own needs should share that space with 'the stranger without a cloak'
where should the edwards family reside? when any one person earns more money than is needed for their own shelter and sustenance, shouldn't ALL of the largess be given to the less advantaged?
christian? left wing view?
what are you saying tucker? should anyone running for public office forfeit all of his wealth so that the playing field is leveled?
tucker, you commie bastard.
Don't suppose Tucker Swanson McNear Carlson mentioned that each of his given names came with with an eight figure trust fund. Did he mention that Edwards made his money by representing people suing the corporate interests Tucker was born to inherit? Hmmm... I wonder if any of Edwards' cases were brought against Swanson.
As always, with great loving kindness I might add ... most of these people on TV are mentally ill keeping the great freakshow traditions alive. Isn't Tucker a puffy-faced, rich, silver spoon fat-ass? Or, is that some other Tucker?
Who was the genius that Ever thought that tucker had anything worthwhile to say?
Can't Wait for Rachel
Bye bowtie lil man
Fucker Carlson doesn't understand noblesse oblige.
This is Exhibit A: There IS a vast right wing conspiracy in the media. Their M.O. is to state a lie and repeat it again and again and again unchallenged and unquestioned, until finally the public believes it to be true. In this case the big lie is that Democrats abhor wealth and financial success, therefore any Democrat or Liberal who achieves it is a hypocrite. Hey you Democrat, you say you favor the poor? Well you had darned well better BE poor or at least LIVE LIKE THE POOR, else you are full of sh*t.
You know the game is lost when guests who should know better tacitly accept the meme. Allow a guest to point out the stupidity of his premise, and this preppy twit would be turned into a babbling pile of silly putty in two minutes.
How many executives did Tucker Carlson have to blow to land the job he has? Someone must have told them "That guy SUCKS" and they took it literally.
FDR had a big house - or two - and there was no better!!!
One word: Franklin Delano Roosevelt...oops, that's three words. Tucker is a punk. The news media and political commentary in this country are a joke, only not funny. Send that twirp packing, and the sooner the better.
Uh... FDR AND LBJ both had large homes...
Tucker = Wanker
Oops, I guess that leaves out Donald Trump and Bill Gates and Warren Buffet and ... oh yeah, GW Bush.
Typical old money dislike for new money. Tucker's inherited wealth is somehow innately better than Edwards' earned wealth.
I've never understood the charge of "limosine liberal." How is calling for people in your own tax bracket to actually pay more taxes hypocritical? Doesn't that also mean that you yourself would be paying more?
House too big..?
Damn! An' I was all for votin' for the guy... sheesh.
Rudy, hold the bus!
Tucker alone at home with poppa's million dollar cane collection. That man-boy has a fever from way.... back and no-one can cure it..
I would LOVE for Rachel Maddow to take over from that nitwit, Carlson. But I heard that rumors of her making a deal with MSNBC are just that - rumors.
MSNBC must get rid of the smart-alec punk, and I hope they do so soon. They got rid of Savage, so should they get rid of Carlson, get someone with a brain that functions sans republican talking points.
What kills me about a$$holes like Carlson is that so many people on the political Right in this country deny that class exists. I actually heard Bob Novak crowing on Crossfire a while back about how the United States is a "classless" society.
Yet, by talking in such terms, Carlson is confirming the existence of class. The implication is that Edwards and other "rich liberals" can't possibly be concerned with those less off, because they possess a class consciousness that makes them incapable of feeling empathy for such people. Or, in FDR's case, he was labeled a "class traitor" because he came from money yet pursued policies that worked against (some of) the interests of his class.
So....if a poor person is a liberal, he's "envious" of the ruling class. If a person is a rich liberal, he's either a phony and/or a class traitor.
Either way, class is a reality that can't be avoided.
I don't get it. Probably never will. How do the biggies decide just which talentless lames should become "pundits" and get to blather away on their shows? They certainly make some peculiar choices. Imagine Tucker Carlson coming up to you at a party and talking his endless nonsense. Wouldn't you try to get away from him as quickly as possible? So why on earth would anybody think you would want to watch him on TV?
jacob @ 11:
Do we know that this is even true, or did "boy-with-bowtie" just conjure it out of his ass? I don't know, but 28,000 square feet would be a freakishly large house, even by Hollywood standards. Can we get a fact check on this?
I'd like to hang out with Tucker.
Not because he's cool or a good guy to hang out with. I like to look smart and I'm lazy.
Hanging out with Tucker, all I have to do is wait for him to open his mouth and I'll look smart by comparison. No effort (other than enduring his presence) required.
Wealth is the ultimate IOKIYAR
When I was in school, I never took anybodies lunch money - but in that little twerp's case, I might have made an exception - just to see him cry.
I had plenty to say, but other's have already said it so well.
I don't think the big lie about the 28000 foot house is gonna hurt JE nearly as much as the fact that his message isn't getting out. Most poor folks secretly (or openly - why else would anybody give a fuck about celebrity gossip?) admire the rich - especially a bootstraps kind of guy who made it honestly - taking on the establishment. The "Breck Girl" stuff now - that hurts. Hillary is a dyke; Edwards is a fag - they can't say it openly - but they know how to make sure it is out there. Ironically, half or more of those "macho" Republicans the bobbleheads swoon over have wide stances themselves.
The only question is - which millionaire is gonna be president?
A day might come when an ordinary (but intelligent) citizen might have a shot (as opposed to a dullard like W or a senile old actor like Rayguns) but we are nowhere close to that now.
"What’s even more frustrating is to see Bob Franken and Slate’s Melinda Henneberger play along with this foolishness. Henneberger says that while Elizabeth Edwards is a wonderful person that everybody loves, she’s the one who wanted the huge house and boy, that really runs counter to the message that she and her husband are trying to put out on the campaign trail."
Tucker knows how to play the game (read: double standards). In America, you just don't get anywhere putting someone down for their accumulation of wealth, whether it's Arbusto or Edwards. You can't. We're capitalist country. Accumulation of wealth is the name of the game and the goal of every true, red-blooded American. But he and Henneberger do have a point in identifying Edwards as a Cadillac liberal. He made his fortune as a plaintiff's attorney in huge lawsuits. It could be observed that his is a lot more honorable than having Daddy help you buy a baseball team then turn it around for a zillion times more than you paid for it. Edwards is a self-made multi-millionaire; Arbusto is a Daddy-made multi-millionaire. I always thought Arbusto's handlers (no doubt including Herr Karlheinz Roeff) put him up in a modest ranch house in Crawford to convince the TV audiences he is a man of simple means, a man of the people so to speak. After all, the next time he's down there, check out the background of the White House correspondents' broadcasts: an old beaten-up, falling down barn with some rusty plows and such. Reminds me of that SciFi movie about how NASA faked the moon landing.
RobertD @ 72:
Read comment #53. It's true.
Flush this turd already.
Tucker Carlson is one intellectually dishonest clown (remember his bow-tie?.) I bet we can find an amoeba with a higher IQ than this joker.
Him and Scarborough should be fired, or better yet, banned, and not just from MSNBC but from any mass media outlet, and not even for their right-wing beliefs --which are bad enough-- but for the sheer stupidity of their arguments and points.
Dump them. Now.
Tucker Carlson endorsed Ron Paul. And you should too. He'll get our troops out of Iraq.
Bush has a 1600 acre ranch but Tucker thinks that's fine. Double standards on the march. I'm sick of seeing Tucker and his Wonder Years haircut
UnEasyOne @ 77:
Right. That's my point.
FDR didn't live in an era of known global warming and natural habitat demise. Edwards built his house in such an age. No excuse for such gluttony and selfishness today. Kucinich's house is 1200 square feet.
do-si-do @ 49:
I'm sure you're right.
It's so true though. Being a very poor person at a major university I see it all the time. All the kids that have no money problems always have this "white people are evil and so it money" attitude, but the second you take their money away from them they change their tune.
They can afford to be whiny brats is the conclusion I have come to. How rich do you have to be to only accept "organic" food? (even though it's often inferior)
What I find even funnier is all these kids making trips to africa to help an orphan, when just the cost of their plane ticket could feed a family there for over a year.
repugs are ignorant. When did Dems take an oath of poverty.
Hillary's laugh, clothes, bustline
Obama's name, parents, religion
repugs are petty as hell.
This is how ignorant these conservatives are. A successful person can not fight against poverty because they are successful? That makes no freakin' sense.
I am at a loss for any other words. Ignorance has become rampant in our society today. It is no wonder that Bush has been able to fool us for so long.
Yeah, its ok for Mr Republican to have his 200 foot yacht but for a Democrat to have a big house, a really big house, is outrageous. Democrats are supposed to live like hobbits.
Fucker Carlson, one of the heirs to Swanson's Foods, is calling people who actually made money (unlike himself) to task. What a jerk-off and where's the bow tie?