Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
Funny example of liberals who dont fact check. Does anyone think hell admit it, or spin his way out of it?
2010
2002"I've never seen language like this in the American press," he said, "referring to an elected representative government, elected in a totally fair, democratic, American election -- we will have another one in November, we'll have another one for president in a couple years -- fair, free, and wonderful democracy we have in this country…. We know that word, 'regime.' It was used by George Bush, 'regime change.' You go to war with regimes. Regimes are tyrannies. They're juntas. They're military coups. The use of the word 'regime' in American political parlance is unacceptable, and someone should tell the walrus [Limbaugh] to stop using it."
Matthews didn't stop there. "I never heard the word 'regime,' before, have you?" he said to NBC's Chuck Todd. "I don't even think Joe McCarthy ever called this government a 'regime.'
Read more at the Washington Examiner: Rush Limbaugh, Chris Matthews and the 'regime' question | Washington Examiner
And if you havent been asleep for the last 8 years, youve heard people refer to the Bush Regime many times.Finally -- you knew this was coming -- on June 14, 2002, Chris Matthews himself introduced a panel discussion about a letter signed by many prominent leftists condemning the Bush administration's conduct of the war on terror. "Let's go to the Reverend Al Sharpton," Matthews said. "Reverend Sharpton, what do you make of this letter and this panoply of the left condemning the Bush regime?"
Read more at the Washington Examiner: Rush Limbaugh, Chris Matthews and the 'regime' question | Washington Examiner
"Truth is treason in the empire of lies"
--R.P.
Not even Chris Matthews watches Chris Matthews...







Mathews is a blow hard....
There's nothing wrong with using the word regime. By definition, it is a designation of the government that is currently in control.
It may have negative connotations when it's associated with totalitarian regimes...etc......and it probably is being/has been used with the intent to malign the current administration. It's just not a big deal...it's a spin word of sorts.
http://willblogforfood.typepad.com/w.../ovshinsky.jpg
The world could use more Stan Ovshinsky's
What a surprise opinion from Limbaugh....:rolleyes:
But yeah, that's my point. The negative connotation of regime is an allusion to "totalitarian regime". If one calls the current administration of our American democracy a "totalitarian regime", they are likely maligning it because they disagree with it. But they are also being intellectually dishonest.
It goes for all those who overreacted at Bush's controversial executive orders, initiation of War, wiretapping, Patriot Act, bailout of banks, etc........as well as those overreacting to Obama's controversial bailout of banks and auto companies, healthcare legislation, letting the Bush Tax cuts expire, etc.etc....
The truth is that we have a democratic republic and every single one of those actions was supposedly within the administration's power. If it is proven otherwise, it is proven otherwise, but to date, it has not.
http://willblogforfood.typepad.com/w.../ovshinsky.jpg
The world could use more Stan Ovshinsky's
Lol. It's like when people trip over shit in slapstick.
First they came for the mimes, and I did not speak out, because I was a mime.
Oh, you mean like this
Or this
Or maybe this
In all three cases unelected, un-confirmed members of the Obama administration operating without legal mandate, are making 'law' to grave consequence.
http://willblogforfood.typepad.com/w.../ovshinsky.jpg
The world could use more Stan Ovshinsky's
Bookmarks