Mark Belling guest host Fischer on Obama: "[T]he most dangerous candidate ever to run for the White House"
SUMMARY: Kevin Fischer, guest-hosting for Milwaukee radio host Mark Belling, called Sen. Barack Obama "the most dangerous candidate ever to run for the White House." Fischer falsely asserted that Obama is "a man who has absolutely no regard for the lives of babies born that have survived abortions" and falsely claimed that "Barack Obama, if elected president, will attempt to tax and spend the hell out of you."
On the August 22 broadcast of The Mark Belling Late Afternoon Show, guest host Kevin Fischer claimed that Sen. Barack Obama "is the most dangerous candidate ever to run for the White House." Fischer added: "Here's a man who has absolutely no regard for the lives of babies born that have survived abortions." Fischer was presumably referring to Obama's opposition, as an Illinois state senator, to certain bills seeking to amend the Illinois Abortion Law of 1975. As Media Matters has repeatedly noted, Obama opposed those bills because he and other opponents of the bills said such bills would pose a threat to abortion rights and were unnecessary because Illinois law already prohibited the conduct supposedly addressed by the bills.
Earlier in the segment, Fischer falsely claimed, "Barack Obama, if elected president, will attempt to tax and spend the hell out of you." In fact, as Media Matters has repeatedly noted, Obama has proposed lowering taxes for low- and moderate-income families.
Fischer also said that "no matter who Barack Hussein Obama picks as his running mate, that doesn't change the fact that he is the most liberal member of the United States Senate, numero uno." (Obama had yet to announce his choice of Sen. Joe Biden as his running mate at the time.) Many conservatives and media figures have repeated the National Journal's ranking of Obama as the "most liberal senator" for 2007 without noting the ranking's subjectivity. As Media Matters for America has repeatedly noted, the National Journal based its rankings not on all votes cast by senators in 2007, but on "99 key Senate votes, selected by NJ reporters and editors, to place every senator on a liberal-to-conservative scale." In contrast, a study by political science professors Keith Poole and Jeff Lewis, using every non-unanimous vote cast in the Senate in 2007 to determine relative ideology, placed Obama in a tie with Biden for the ranking of 10th most liberal senator.
Fischer was filling in for Mark Belling, who is the "afternoon drive time host on News/Talk 1130 WISN-AM" in Milwaukee, owned by Clear Channel Communications.
From the August 22 broadcast of News/Talk 1130 WISN-AM's The Mark Belling Late Afternoon Show:
FISCHER: Couple of things that I'm not interested in, so we won't talk about them much on this late Friday afternoon. I'm interested to a certain degree -- of course, because I'm a political observer and I work in politics -- I am somewhat interested in who Barack Obama's going to choose as his running mate. But I'm not on the edge of my seat, I'm sorry. I'm really not. Keep in mind, folks, that no matter who Barack Hussein Obama picks as his running mate, that doesn't change the fact that he is the most liberal member of the United States Senate, numero uno. Hillary Clinton, the 16th most liberal member of the United States Senate.
So can you imagine how bad Barack Obama is if he's number one? Barack Obama's running mate doesn't change the fact that Barack Obama, if elected president, will attempt to tax and spend the hell out of you. His running mate doesn't change the fact that he is the most dangerous candidate to ever to run for the White House. Here's a man who has absolutely no regard for the lives of babies born that have survived abortions. How utterly despicable and disgusting can you be? So no matter what his choice is, it doesn't change his stripes -- that this is a very, very, very liberal politician. He is not -- he is not good for our economy; and he is very, very dangerous.
Obama can run, but he cannot hide from his voting record.
(Same is true for McCain)
Pete,
Then the failure to vote for the BAIPA and his 100% rating by Planned Parenthood is fair game.
Let's see, you state the name Planned Parenthood, like it's some demonic organization, but let's look into what they really do shall we?:
"Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) is many things to many people. We are a trusted health care provider, an informed educator, a passionate advocate, and a global partner helping similar organizations around the world. Planned Parenthood delivers vital health care services, sex education, and sexual health information to millions of women, men, and young people.
For more than 90 years, Planned Parenthood has promoted a commonsense approach to women’s health and well-being, based on respect for each individual’s right to make informed, independent decisions about sex, health, and family planning."
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are-4648.htm
I'm sure what you see in them is nothing more than some sort of murdering abortion provider, and yes, they do provide abortions, but they also provide a heck of a lot more than that, and are probably the most important player in women's health issues around this country, and are proponents and people who speak out for women's health issues. But I'm sure that you don't see that at all.
Also, once again, I take you to be a "christian". Meaning that you honestly believe that God is going to judge us all either at the time of our deaths, or if you believe in the rapture, ye' shall be judged then. If that's the case, and if abortion is the wrong thing for you, move on. Guess what? You don't have to have one, or propose one for your wife/girlfriend/friend, or whoever. Let God do the judging, and let women decide what to do with their bodies, and their own well being.
I forgot.
Thing is, people who think like AA chap my arse. Why? Because, we're not saying think like us, we're saying do what's right for you. And hence, everyone should be pro-choice. For instance. I think that abortions should be legal and safe. I would not have that as an option for myself, or my wife, but I would want that option to be there for someone else should they need it.
They just don't get it. And as I said before, if God is truly going to judge us all in the end, he should have nothing to worry about right?
Mags,
Thanks for the visual.
To see whether one should simply live and let die, lets take a look at your logic. Do you think the war in Iraq is wrong? (I believe you do, but I may be wrong.)
If you are against the war but are not fighting in it, why do you object? Let those who enlist and want to fight do so. You can pick any other issue that you "object". The same logic holds.
ps. I believe that abortions are the killing of an innocent human being.
Actually, where I'm from, the director of Planned Parenthood goes by the title, Reverend.
I guess that means he really has "it" coming to him, doesn't he?
So you agree with what Magnolia posted above?
McCain has to show up and vote to have a voting record.
And???
What are you saying... liberal is somehow 'bad'? Elaborate.
I didn't say it was bad.
Since Nixon, Americans like their President's to be slightly conservative or middle-of-the-road. Liberals have a hard time getting elected.
Hey, this might be the year? Good luck.
And not coincidently at all it was the Nixon campaign that began the charge of equating liberal with "evil scum who want to destroy this country."
Four years ago you repeated the meme that Kerry was the most liberal in the senate, and he's still in the senate.
Several months ago when Hillary looked like she was gonna get the nod, you repeated the meme that she was the most liberal in the senate, and she's still in the senate.
Now you're saying Barack is the most liberal in the senate. So pray tell, how does that happen?
"So pray tell, how does that happen?"
By being a dumbass wingnut who gets his 'edyookashun' from Rush Limbaugh.
Rabbit,
Projection is never a great rebuttal. ;-)
Rabbit, he doesn't even know what he's trying to say. AA's a sick troll, I just checked out a thread from yesterday where he did the drop-in day-late insult directed at me, one of his indignant condescending little non-reality based whines.
The guys a plagiarizing delusional pussy who gets coddled like a special cousin by some of the more patient posters here. That's generous of them, unfortunately, it's caused AA to get the impression that he's more than a wingnut clown, that he's taken seriously, or here for any reason but laughs that he's not in on.
He's entertaining, but I wouldn't recommend trying to communicate with him as you would a normal human.
Way to go Colonel.
I agree.
I read yesterday that AA was accusing someone of speaking for all of a certain constituency. He's taken on that role himself many times.
As much fun as I've had discussing things with him these last few years, I'm not responding directly to him anymore. With him there is no more give and take.
Anymore, He's become one of the most strident apologists we have.
He demands respect, yet gives none.
He demands respect, yet gives none.
He claims intellect, yet shows none.
Col.
Contrary to your oft-repeated theme. I simply said I was mistaken that I thought you were ready to carry on a discussion like an adult.
It was about all about me. :-)
ps. I suggest you simply ignore my posts like I do yours.
Actually, I'll share some of the blame with you, Barney. I thought you actually might recognize an adult conversation. Mea Culpa.
I ignore most of your posts, but some are just too silly to pass by.I have a weakness for low-hanging fruit.
I've been biting my virtual tongue to resist picking that low hanging fruit.
I'm only going to respond to those who have a history of seeing things from different perspectives.
I will toss out the occasional insult though if it's called for.
Snoop,
Please show me where I said Hillary was the most liberal Senator.
It is a simple matter that Obama was not a Senator four years ago and since becoming a Senator has eclipsed Kerry as most liberal.
(Same is true for McCain)
Gramps McCain doesn't have much of a recent voting record to run from, AA - HE'S NEVER THERE!!!!!
AA,
I have posted this repeatedly, but you never seem to answer it, is it fair, if we use McCain's reasoning that he would rather win a campaign than a war based on his voting record? You have excused McCain's no-shows in 10/14 Iraq votes in 2007 by saying he was campaigning, yet, none of the other Congressional Presidential candidates missed one vote. Is he more interested in winning the election or the Iraq war?
Also, with McCain, do you believe his votes or his rhetoric on tax cuts, immigration, campaign finance, wiretapping, torture, the GI Bill (http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16022.html), raising cigarette taxes, offshore drilling, Liebermann/Warner (global warming), the DREAM act, lobbying reform, etc.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops
Fried,
I don't recall the first question directed at me, however I am happy to give you my two cents.
I have said all along it is fair game to go after McCain on his voting record. I think the criticism is warranted and if anyone wants to attack him on his voting record, it is fine by me.
I personally am not a McCain fan. I am of the opinion that he is the lesser of weevils. :-)AA,
You have said that Obama doesn't want to win the war and only wants to win the campaign. Would you agree that McCain wants to win the campaign more than the war as reflecting by his voting attendance?
OMG. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Do any of these dumb**** right-wing professional liars bother to investigate anything for themselves?
Yeah, dangerous for your side, moron. No wonder you bastages wanted Hillary to get the nomination... you're scared of Obama cuz you know you just might lose this time around. Hillary would have been easy for you... even with Mr. POW.
Oh, 'tax and spend the hell out of you'? I seriously wonder how many of this moron's dimwitted listeners actually earn $250,000 and up? I always thought that it would be a bit difficult doing so from Momma and Poppa basement...
Unfortunately, the times did a disservice to Obama by using the top 20% mark for this chart, Obama specifically said $250,000 and up, not $117,000 and up. But I think everyone will get the picture...
Why do you have to call people names? Does it make your argument valid?
Here's just one example of Obama's tax plan that will cost people more that you probably have not considered:
A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research shows that under Social Security's current rules, young college graduates will contribute about 5 percent of their lifetime earnings. Under Obama's proposal, that number would rise to almost 9 percent, taking these individuals' overall lifetime tax rate from 45 percent to 49 percent. By voting for Obama, a 22-year-old young college graduate earning $40,000 per year today would be opting to surrender an additional 4 percent of his lifetime earnings to the Social Security administration — and may get no benefits in return. ...
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9218
Oh, now you're playing dumb, I see. Or perhaps not.
You must be jaded from all that rightwing talk radio drivel if you're asking that question.
rabbit,
My mistake, I thought you were referring to me. I gave up juvenile name calling a long time ago.
You are correct. There are some on the right who do engage in this type of sophomoric behavior.
Is your argument that others do it, so you will too?
The proverbial maternal warning starting with 'if your friend jumps off a bridge" comes to mind.
Oh, now you're playing dumb, I see.
AA is not playing dumb - he realli IS dumb.
Once again AA is citing an opinion piece and presenting it as fact. Better still, that editorial first was printed in National Review Online. Even better is this:
"A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research shows that under Social Security's current rules, young college graduates will contribute about 5 percent of their lifetime earnings. "
That part is true. Though it takes a lot of digging through the NBER site to find that data. However the paragraph then continues:
"Under Obama's proposal, that number would rise to...."
Strangely enough no NBER papers seem to include the calculations that follow. A search for Obama on NBER's site yields 4 results, 2 of them published after the article AA quotes and none of them directly addressing his social Security reform ideas. That would make the conclusions about Obama's plan that make up the rest of paragraph the opinions of the author, not of the organization cited in the first sentence.
No AA, you may not directly call us names, but you call us stupid through implication every time you try presenting the opinions of others as indisputable fact.
How many left-leaning radio talkers were monitored by the Secret Service after 9/11 to prevent them from attacking pResident Bush on the air?
I wonder if these same right-wingers, that are more or less accusing Obama of being in the al-Qaeda, will get the same treatment when President Obama takes office.
Meg,
Was that rhetorical? How many?
They've been saying it since before we invaded Iraq. Anything said against Bush was made akin to being for the terrorists, and hating on the United States. I can't remember how many times I heard the right wing talking heads expressing this over and over again on the radio. So and so criticized the President? How dare they say anything against Bush during this time of "war".
I put "war" in quotes, because we're technically not in a "war". One was not declared. Anyway, of course the hypocrites in Congress, and elsewhere you were critical of Clinton during his military intervention in Kosovo weren't called anti-American when they were talking bad about him. No sir. They were loyal Americans standing up the executive branch.
"he is the most dangerous candidate to ever to run for the White House"
3 words for you, wingnut:
George Effing Wallace
3 words for you, wingnut:
George Effing Wallace
I get the feeling that this Kevin Fischer clown would have no problem with the racist/segregationalist garbage that those Southern Conservatives spewed back in the '50s and '60s.
(Notice that I referred to George Wallace as a "conservative" - that's because he was. Many Southern Conservatives (including Strom Thurmond) left the Democratic Party for the GOP after the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act were signed into law by LBJ. Modern-day conservatives constantly point out that Wallace and the other Southern governors who blocked the schoolhouse doors to fight desegregation orders were Democrats, but they were racist conservatives first and foremost. Back then, both major parties had liberal and conservatives wings - since them, there has been a shift, with the GOP moving right and the Democrats moving left. And speaking as a life-long Democrat, I know we moved in the correct direction.
OFF TOPIC. Hey if Snoop can do it, so can I ;-)
Wonder If MMFA will highlight the following [bet they would if a Republican had said it] It's all over talk radio...I'm listening to Howie Carr [WRKO 680 Boston] Apparently Rush reported it earlier.
JIM LEHRER: And do you think that -- if it happens that he is elected, or even just being nominated, is -- will send positive ripple effects throughout the country on the race issue?
JIMMY CARTER: Around the world. Around the world. And I think it already has sent a wave of approbation and admiration in many countries around the world, just knowing that this black boy who grew up with just a loving mother and grandparents -- and that was about all he had to start with -- does now have a chance to become the nominee of the Democratic Party for president.
From:President Carter Mulls Historical Significance of Barack Obama
President Jimmy Carter sits down with Jim Lehrer, Mark Shields and David Brooks to reflect on the race for the White House, Sen. Barack Obama's candidacy, and the historical significance of the moment.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec08/sbcarter_08-25.html
Snoop,
Now I'm certain Carter didn't mean to belittle Obama by referring to him as a "Black Boy", but you gotta admit the Left would be having a fit if a Republican just as innocently had done the same.
Hey Snoop I figure you & I can be the Town Criers. Bringing all the news to the posters here that MMFA doesn't always cover ;-)
I like that - town criers!
Now to be fair though, yes it was innocent enough, and I think if a republican said it he'd likely get a pass depending on the context. Limbaugh will muddy that water though because his spin will automatically be "liberals say it, why can't I?" when he full well knows there's a huge difference between an honest mistake or - man, can't think of a better word, but trying to say something about reference - and engaging in racial stereotyping. Stereotypes are negative by definition which is why Limbaugh will cry foul.
So what's the problem? Obama was a 'boy' at one time and he is 'black'. Yeah??? And???
Sorry, you and Rush are reaching. And very ironic for Rush to be going there given his history. Perhaps we should cue up 'Barack The Magic Negro' for starters.
Yeah right Rabbit.
If a Republican had uttered "Black Boy" you'd pitch a fit.
Gawd you're one disingenuous dude.
Depends on the context. In this case... it's a non-issue.
And no, not because Carter is a lib. Beat ya to it...
Bullsh#t. But nice try.
If a Republican said it, even innocently, you & every Lib would be screaming about it.
Please, I've seen it before. You guys sometimes have very interesting double standards.
Wow Jeder2 - that's some pathetic stuff.
Carter is a racists just like Limbaugh is anorexic.
But a Republican would be a racist if he/she said it...right?
I know how you minds work.
Jeter,
I think sooner or later the left will toss Carter under the back of the bus for that one. :-)
Jeter,
I think a person's history needs to be examined when statements like this are evaluated. Rush, George Allen, etc. have a history of racially charged statements, Jimmy Carter, to my knowledge does not. I can only speak for myself, but I evaluate the history of those making what could be considered "offensive" utterances.
They are simply reaching. The desperation is building on their side. They cannot win on the issues and they have NOTHING to offer except the POW garbage.
The Detestable One, aka His Vileness, aka Mark Levin last night spent the first half-hour cracking on Obama and Biden over ridiculously trivial garbage that has no bearing on the issues and this election. What's he gonna do tonight - spend the entire two hours busting on Obama's mistake when he said St. Louis instead of Kansas City?
The term was used by David Ehrenstein in a LA Times opinion piece. March 19, 2007. Rush made a parody out of it.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19,0,5335087.story?coll=la-opinion-centerJeter,
It is you who are the racist because you pointed out a white Southern leftist doing something that only conservatives can be guilty of doing. ;-)
JIMMY CARTER: Around the world. Around the world. And I think it already has sent a wave of approbation and admiration in many countries around the world, just knowing that this black boy who grew up with just a loving mother and grandparents -- and that was about all he had to start with -- does now have a chance to become the nominee of the Democratic Party for president.
THIS is an example where using the term "boy" to describe an ADULT African American male is meant to be condescending and demeaning:
U.S. Rep. Geoff Davis, a Hebron Republican, compared Obama and his message for change similar to a "snake oil salesman." He said in his remarks at the GOP dinner that he also recently participated in a "highly classified, national security simulation" with Obama.
"I'm going to tell you something: That boy's finger does not need to be on the button," Davis said. "He could not make a decision in that simulation that related to a nuclear threat to this country."
More tired hysterical rhetoric from right wing - they would save time if they just chanted "Booga Booga".
Robert,
I was just joking with Jeter above, but you make a good point as a liberal who thinks uttering a racist statement is okay as long as you say a conservative said it.
It's not. You are the one guilty of the racist statement.
"You are the one guilty of the racist statement."
I think you're confused. "Booga booga" is usually referring to scare tactics, like what's in the headline of the item. I've never heard of it having anything to do with race.
Yes, that is probably what AA is thinking of. It was "Ooga booga fever".
The Urban Dictionary bears out my definition. I've been saying "BOOGA BOOGA" for years.
One of the things l have learnt as a black man here in the UK is this:
Not all right wingers are racists. But all the racists l have ever met, argued or fought with have been right wing, and that includes Africans, Afro-Caribbeans, people from the Asian sub continent and those from the Middle and Far East. It's never been where they are from, it's always been the political mindset.
My experience is the same UK. Funny thing is, your post is stating the obvious to 1/2 the people in this country, and totally off base to the other 1/2.
They're always the last to know.
Two incidents brought this home to me. One was when l was in school and one of the biggest and most dangerous West Indian kids (whose dad was a school govenor and his mum was a doctor and their family was VERY well off) was denegrating Africa and all things African much to the amusement of most of the white kids in the class (this was 1981 so common sense, tact and anti racism wasn't too near the top of the agenda then). Me being born in Africa but raised in England found it offensive. I pointed out to this idiot that as all human life started in Africa HE was African also. This didn't go down well and he menacingly told me to take it back and that he wasn't "No stinking African". I could have shut up there but, as l have a smart mouth that usually get's me in trouble l replied "oh yeah, l forgot you West Indians are the Africans we didn't want. That's why we got rid of you!" (Not my proudest moment but l was young and he did hit me very hard more than a few times before being dragged off). The second time l saw him he was playing sunday morning football (the REAL one, not your one) with a team of his friends. The opposition team were mainly kids of Nigerian descent including another kid from our school who knew his views on Africans. Needless to say the tackles flew in, late and high and everything in the end decended into a mass brawl which ended up including parents, coaches and some passers by. Both teams were banned and things were tense in school for a few weeks.
I saw him about two years ago running a stall in Croydon, Surrey. He was dressed in African garb and had the audacity to try to address me as "My Nubian bredrin (bretheren)". I could have been the bigger man and let things go but he was a dick so l reminded him in front of the others who were there all the things he used to say about Africans in school. I left him spluttering his denials to his friends while l used some well known sayings which all ended with the word "off".