Those who fail to learn from history will be eviscerated by Chris Matthews
Before tonight, the only Kevin James I was aware of was the one who played the fat guy on King of Queens. Watching this was both painful and deeply gratifying...
Friday, May 16, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Saw that live and it was a jaw dropper. When GOP talking points go horribly awry...
I'll admit I had no idea what Neville Chamberlain did back in 1939 (thank you Louisiana Public School system), but I sure as hell wouldn't bring something up on a national news network if I didn't at least know the basic facts. It was fun watching Matthews body slam that guy (what a fucking mouthbreather).
@laura...totally. usually the host will just let it go but matthews was having none of it.
@carl...ditto. my memory was sketchy too, but i'd be damn sure to freshen up if i were going on national tv to invoke his name to slam someone else.
Oh man, I could not love this more. James should have a great time showing his face in public for the next week or so. Christ, what an asshole.
Just goes to show you - don't phuck with Philadelphians.
James is a tool, however, Matthews baited him...
Just a clarification on appeasement.
"How horrible, fantastic it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing. I am myself a man of peace from the depths of my soul."
Sounds familiar. I think Chris got hung up on his technical definition of "appeasement". Also, James didn't make the Chamberlain reference, Bush & McCain did.
I like a good dressing down, too, and the guy deserved it just because he was so damn ADD. However, I think Matthews and the Air Radio guy, and half of the Democrats on the Hill complaining about Bush criticizing an American politician on foreign soil is a bit rich, as they have made a habit out of doing the same to him. Right or wrong, there is class and protocol and neither party shows much of either anymore.
@musicmaven...i agree that homeboy didn't exactly raise the point, but he was parroting it, and if you're gonna go down that road you'd better know your shit, and he didn't. that said, matthews no doubt led him into an ambush, but you know what, he fucking deserved it.
and goddamn, can a human being be more intolerably annoying that that fucking guy?!
Check out the interview with Kirk Watson...the man supports OBAMA but can't name one accomplishment of the man!
I love the Obama supporters attitude of "let's vote for him based on what he says he will do and not look at the fact that he has no experience to be making such bold promises"
here is an idea, make a spreadsheet of all the accomplishments and shortcomings off all the presidential candidates but do not list the names, then see who people want to vote for!
This race for the Presidency has become a three ring circus with voting not based on any pertinent information but based on color and gender.
@anon...i don't disagree that there are supporters on both sides that don't know what the fuck they're talking about. it's the nature of the beast. i often revel on when asshats of either stripe get served.
however, i disagree with your contention that much of his support is hollow symbolism and that "experience" is indicative of a successful presidency. i've said it before and i'll say it again...the bush admisnistration had lots of experience going in and look where the fuck that got us.
and by the way, i'm a republican who voted for the tard...TWICE!
the reason i like obama is because he has ideas, some new and original, some not, and not so much the fact that he articulates himself well, but it helps. you can not underestimate the power of eloquence to change a nation. most of the people who are noted as being the greatest leaders of the world's history are the ones who mastered the ability to communicate a vision.
don't sell that short and don't sell obama short by making the suggestion that he's all empty rhetoric. disagree with his vision if you want, but to suggest that he is devoid of one is a pretty baseless assertion.
Post a Comment