3rdnlng Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/12/12/dnc_chair_denies_unemployment_has_gone_up_under_obama.html Hmmmm http://www.bls.gov/cps/prev_yrs.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 She appears to be saying that since unemployment has not gone up every single day that Obama has been in office, that, well.....uh....ummm......not really sure where she's trying to go with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Wasserman-Shultz is a younger version of Nancy Pelosi...saying things that make absolutely, positively no sense whatsoever, and yet saying it with such conviction that it somehow must actually be true to the handful of idiots who don't know them. It's right up there with Harry Reid's comments yesterday on the Senate floor that "millionaire job creators are like unicorns: they’re impossible to find and don’t exist.” How we collective managed to put these people in charge is more embarrassing than I can take sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 13, 2011 Author Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) Wasserman-Shultz is a younger version of Nancy Pelosi...saying things that make absolutely, positively no sense whatsoever, and yet saying it with such conviction that it somehow must actually be true to the handful of idiots who don't know them. It's right up there with Harry Reid's comments yesterday on the Senate floor that "millionaire job creators are like unicorns: theyre impossible to find and dont exist. How we collective managed to put these people in charge is more embarrassing than I can take sometimes. Edited December 13, 2011 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Wasserman-Shultz is a younger version of Nancy Pelosi...saying things that make absolutely, positively no sense whatsoever, and yet saying it with such conviction that it somehow must actually be true to the handful of idiots who don't know them. It's right up there with Harry Reid's comments yesterday on the Senate floor that "millionaire job creators are like unicorns: they're impossible to find and don't exist." How we collective managed to put these people in charge is more embarrassing than I can take sometimes. Why? Becuase for every person who has at least a baseline level of knowledge of the truth, there are 1,000 who dont. And they get a vote just like those who do know whats up. So you have statements like this. She knows they are BS. But she also knows there are a ton of voters who will believe it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Wasserman-Shultz is a younger version of Nancy Pelosi...saying things that make absolutely, positively no sense whatsoever, and yet saying it with such conviction that it somehow must actually be true to the handful tens of millions of idiots who don't know them. Fixed. It's stunning how otherwise intelligent people are so stupid when it comes to listening to people like Pelosi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 You're all forgetting the "But he inherited it from Bush!" caveat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 This all goes back to the lesson that was learned from George Stephanopolous brazenly looking Mike Wallace in the eye and declaring "Gov. Clinton has no character problem. Bill Clinton has passed his character test throughout his life and this campaign"...and the fact that too many Democrats think they can pull that off. The objective is to say such an obvious lie, but so passionately, that the truth becomes anathema. I watched that live, and I remember it like it was yesterday. It was a brazen lie. I knew it, and so did Wallace. But, it was delivered with such eloquence, and, with what appeared to be sincerity. I felt willing to let it slide, as Stephanopolus wanted to believe it so much, that he transposed the sincerity of his belief onto the lie. He did such a good job with it, that there was little Wallace could do to save the interview, and, little I could do to retain my objectivity. Democrats, and a few Republicans, have been trying to reproduce that effect ever since. However, it requires 3 things: 1. Stehanopolous-level of ability 2. Sincerity of wishing to believe 3. The object the lie is intended to help must be worthy of its' effect. These are why Wasserman-Shultz FAILs here. She is fooling herself if she thinks she is able to do this. MANY Democrats have made the same mistake recently. They simply aren't very good at their jobs: as though we need more examples to convince us. She may have the sincerity of her wishes. But the real killer is: Obama is not worth it. The lack of 1 and 3 kills it dead. When Stephanopolous was done with that interview, the Clinton character issues were done until Lewinsky. How many of you think unemployment, regardless of where it is a year from now, is not permanently stuck on Obama now? Nobody wants to believe positive lies about Obama, because truth be told, we may like the guy, but we know he's no leader. He's the officer that we find a reason to send home, without embarrassing him or ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Wasserman-Schultz, Reid, Pelosi all just follow the leader when it comes to looking into the camera and telling a falsehood. Take for example, Pres. Obama on 60 minutes....................he truly must think that we have no memory of the past 3 years. Obama’s strange, revisionist history on ‘60 Minutes’ President Barack Obama, last night on “60 Minutes”: I didn’t overpromise. And I didn’t underestimate how tough this was gonna be. I always believed that this was a long-term project; this wasn’t a short-term project. Actually, Obama did overpromise—and underdeliver—on dealing with the U.S. economy. Back in August 2009, the Obama White House put out its updated economic forecast. Now, this was after the $800 billion stimulus had passed and, technically, after the Great Recession had ended See the article for the numbers he DID overpromise. 2011 is nothing like the White House projected in their own release ! but hey, he SOUNDS sincere.......................lol . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Wasserman-Schultz, Reid, Pelosi all just follow the leader when it comes to looking into the camera and telling a falsehood. Take for example, Pres. Obama on 60 minutes....................he truly must think that we have no memory of the past 3 years. Obama's strange, revisionist history on '60 Minutes' See the article for the numbers he DID overpromise. 2011 is nothing like the White House projected in their own release ! but hey, he SOUNDS sincere.......................lol . I'm sure 60 Minutes will give him a few more informercials to get the message right before November. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 She has the dentition of a Muskelunge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 She has the dentition of a Muskelunge. Well, in that picture, she stopped putting the mayo in her hair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 but hey, he SOUNDS sincere.......................lol No, he really doesn't. And, neither do his supporters. They don't "believe" the way Clinton's did. They simply look like liars. Perhaps it's just me, but, you can go see for yourself. Google The War Room. If you don't know who the sucker is in 15 minutes, you are the sucker. The only thing that can be worse is if you delude yourself into believing somebody else is the sucker. That's what I see when I watch this lady. She clearly subscribes to the Charlie Sheen definition of "winning". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Why? Becuase for every person who has at least a baseline level of knowledge of the truth, there are 1,000 who dont. And they get a vote just like those who do know whats up. So you have statements like this. She knows they are BS. But she also knows there are a ton of voters who will believe it. Says the guy supporting Gingrich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Says the guy supporting Gingrich. LOL. Yeah, thats a relevant comment. Who are you supporting again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts