NBC Hypes ‘Damage’ to GOP in Shutdown, Ignores Obama Approval at 37 Percent

I can well understand and appreciate the delight over Obama’s popularity numbers but there’s still a major problem. You need to realize and understand that Obama won’t be running again. Come Jan 2017, he’s done.

Gallup tells us Cruz dropped 16 points, Mike Lee 20, McConnell 12, and Boehner 14. Several sources make good arguments how the GOP could lose control of the House. Americans are turning on republicans in a fast and scary way.

Obama’s not runnig. He’ll be laying back collecting that guvmint pension and free guvmint security that follows him around to make his $250K speeches. Obama doesn’t need voters anymore. But these so-called conservative lunatics that are intentionally sabotaging our country do. And Americans have had enough.

No failed in the government and litter in the media. Tramps, whores and thieves, how simple does it get

Polls can be purposely misleading and the general populace won’t know the difference.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/10/10/about-that-nbcwsj-poll-that-killed-republicans-on-the-shutdown/

@Greg: The Repubs. resemble a circular firing squad. Today Peter King R.NY a moderate and accused RINO called Cruz a RINO, saying Cruz was not a real Repub.and was badly hurting the Party with his intransigence.The Party is cracking. The American people are blaming them for the shut down.They can read the polls.

Cruz wants to stand and fight, Bring down Obama Care. Moderate Repbs want to cut a deal to re-open the Gov. and raise the debt ceiling. This will not end well for The Grand Old Party—24% approval today. Lock and Load.

@Greg:
It appears you are misled. The statement is fair and the poll over-sampled Democrats which skews the results as well.

Mully
yes it could change if OBAMA’S GUY IS CALLING HIM,
and say : RAMUNSIN, WHAT THE FACK ARE YOU DOING TO ME?

@Mully:

Polls can be purposely misleading and the general populace won’t know the difference.

polls and publicity about the polls are media events which are under the domain of Dimocrats. They make up and publish whatever they are directed to by their handlers. Anyone that believes in media polls has probably already bought up all the oceanfront property in Arizona. So when asked a question such as “Obama is up to 51% in the ‘who is the best dictator in the world’ poll”, how do you account for that? All you have to say is, ‘it’s a made for consumption media event’ . Just ask yourself this simple question, if you are a Dimocrat and you want to make Obama look good for the news consumption, what is one way to do that.? Uhhhh, I might say, “wow, Rasmussen, who loves Republicans has Obama up to 51%, how do you explain that”? Gee, I don’t know, maybe it’s a created event, or something.

SO, there is nothing to be disapointed about some of those polls,
it’s not written in concrete, the most people don’t even know who is the HOUSE AND WHO ARE THE TENANT OF THAT HOUSE,

@Richard Wheeler: RW, I’ve been putting together a comment on that, I’ll publish it after you tell us who the person was that McCarthy accused that was not actually guilty. No one else seems to be able to find the name, but I’m sure you have it on the tip of your tongue.

@Richard Wheeler:

He left the Senate in shame and died a drunk

That description fits many. I guess you’re a Weiner fan.

P erson? What is that a joke? He accused hundreds indiscriminately

And you can’t find even one that was proven to be not involved. Just one. wow. So you admit that hundreds were.

RW, where do you find that Sen McCarthy died a drunk(assume you mean died as a result of drinking). I find where he was a heavy drinker but that he died from hepatitis, most likely not linked to drinking. Medical evidence is that all heavy drinkers do not die from hepatitis or even get hepatitis. If heavy drinking ’causes’ hepatitis then all alcoholics would get hepatitis. On the other hand, illness’s such as Weiner’s seem to be willful.

RW, you said:

voted to censure him for his many false accusations.

The official record indicates:

Date: December 2, 1954
Member: Joseph R. McCarthy (R-WI)

Charge: Abuse and non-cooperation with the Subcommittee on Privileges and Elections during a 1952 investigation of his conduct; for abuse of the Select Committee to Study Censure.

Result: He was “condemned.” Died in office.

Vote: 67-22

It appears that the censure was not related to his activities concerning him accusing persons of being communist but only for not co-operating with a committee on Privileges and Elections.
So, are you man enough to admit, that since you are guilty of ‘falsely accusing’ a former US Senator of being censured for something that he ‘clearly was not censured for’ that you are prepared to admit that it may likely be that McCarthy was also falsely accused?

@Richard Wheeler: wow nuff said just cuz you say so?….arrogant asshole …read some of the books on Mccarthy and how right he was …. you do know fdr’s administration was full of communists right

@Richard Wheeler: It’s slowly getting to the point where absolutely nothing you’ve said about McCarthy was true. Everyone he accused of being communists were proven to be. He was NOT censured for accusing anyone of anything. He did not die a drunk, he died from Hepatitis. You are getting one hell of a reputation for not knowing the subject you’re expounding on.

@Richard Wheeler:

BTW “Proven not to be involved”? That’s backwards RT

Let’s see if we can make it grammatically correct enough for you. Name one person that McCarthy accused of being a communist that history has exonerated. Can you interpret that ok? This is strange, hundreds accused, not one has been exonerated, not a single one. Pretty remarkable record, I’d say.

@Richard Wheeler:

Weiner is a scumbag, McCarthy a boldfaced liar.

So, which one is better? Uh, I know what Weiner did, it was in the news. Don’t know what McCarthy did, hard to get the truth out of anyone. You don’t seem to know anything other than ‘what you’ve heard’, which has been pretty much destroyed.

@Redteam: RT I’m waiting for you to give evidence that” everyone he claimed to be a Communist proved to be” An absolutely ridiculous statement even by your standards. You wanna stand behind this guy how bout the list and “the proof” Doesn’t really surprise me you’d stand behind a discredited witch hunt.
McCarthyism ” The practice of making false accusations of disloyalty subversion or treason without regard for evidence.” Your guy

@Richard Wheeler: Annie Lee Moss: hmmm, let’s just do a casual Google search:

The March ll, 1954, McCarthy hearing, in truth, was a devastating indictment of Army security procedures—and Moss herself. Moss denied she was a Red, but admitted receiving the Daily Worker, the official organ of the Communist Party, at various addresses she had inhabited over the years. She conceded, after some prodding, that the paper “might have been addressed to me” (instead of her husband). She acknowledged that Robert Hall, one of three top Washington, D.C., Communists, had visited her home and that she had lived for a time, with Hattie Griffin, an active CP member who hosted Communist meetings at her home. More damning evidence was produced. Moss, as the hearings disclosed, had been identified as a dues-paying member of the Northeast Club of the D.C. Communist Party by FBI undercover informant Mary Markward, and the committee’s majority counsel, Roy Cohn, stressed that Markward’s testimony had been “corroborated” in “a sworn statement” by another witness in executive session. The clincher came four years later, when the Subversive Activities Control Board, an agency of the federal government, held a hearing on Markward, partly to determine if she had told the truth about Moss. The SACB’s Sept. 19, 1958, verdict, based on D.C. Communist Party records, such as membership and dues rosters, was that the exhibits “corroborate Markward’s testimony in the Moss security hearing. . . .” (emphasis added). The SACB hearing also proved another crucial point: that the Annie Lee Moss named by Markward was the very same Annie Lee Moss named by McCarthy. Case closed, for most reasonable people

http://www.humanevents.com/2003/09/02/coulter-and-her-critics/

I do have to consider I may not be communicating with a ‘reasonable person’. Lots more available proof, you do know about Google search?

RW, you do remember that the object is for you to supply one name of one person falsely accused by McCarthy, don’t you?

Redteam
the citizens could use a McCARTHY NOW, HE MUST BE ROLLING IN HIS TOMB,