Ann Coulter Mike Huckabee: Coulter's Finest Moment with Mike Huckabee

Ann Coulter had one of her finest moments on Huckabee this weekend. She was apparently invited on to discuss one thing, and was then hit with her past comment saying Huckabee was a "liberal Christian." Whatever the 'one thing' Ann was prepared to discuss, Huck said they would get back to it, but Ann's time ran out and instead they 'got' to an interview with Ariana Huffington.

NOTICE

Welcome Stacy McCain readers. It may be more pleasant to read this story at my new blog, WHICH YOU WILL FIND AT Maggie's Notebook or http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/2010/10/ann-coulter-mike-huckabee-coulters-finest-moment-with-mike-huckabee/  Thank you for visiting, I think you will like my new blog format.

Ann Coulter

Coulter was not prepared to defend herself, but nevertheless did with so with pithy gusto. Huckabee didn't like being called a "liberal," and Ann continually pointed out that she actually called him a "Christian liberal. He still didn't like it.

I have a sometimes-paraphrased, sometimes-exactly-quoted, kinda-sorta transcript below the video. There are parts of the video I did not include. If the video disappears, I'll still have some this very interesting conversation on record. And for the 'record,' I agree with Ann. I believe that Huckabee is mostly fiscally conservative, but far too socially liberal and it bleeds into his fiscal conservatism. And I still haven't forgiven him and McCain for their joint venture to knock Mitt Romney out of the 2008 presidential race. Having said all that, I like Huckabee, but I am hoping he will not run for president in 2012.

Mike Huckabee and Ann Coulter: Liberal Christians

To get things started, he read her quote from September 1, 2010:

All liberals are atheists. Only the ones who have to stand for election even bother pretending to believe in God...There's only one true Christian liberal in the country and that's Mike Huckabee.

COULTER: this was not meant as an insult. I was thinking of all the alleged Christian advisers in the Obama administration - the Jim Wallace-types. The liberal view of charity is 'raise taxes' and give it to the poor. This is the Pharisees out of the Bible. Charity is not giving their own money.

(there is some discussion of abortion tucked in here also)

COULTER: So I began thinking what if you were a genuine Christian but had some crazy liberal views with things that are not directly Christian - what would that look like, and I thought of you.

HUCKABEE: What were my "crazy views?"

COULTER responds that he was very soft on illegal immigration.

HUCKABEE immediately says he does not believe in amnesty, and says 'you don't punish the children the children of illegals.'

COULTER: "this is exactly what I mean." Pointing to Huckabee: "This is a liberal Christian." I'm sure that is what liberals said to us 30 years ago in saying we have to start subsidizing illegitimacy.

HUCKABEE: My economic heart tells me that if I had a kid who was a valedictorian whose parents were illegal, it will be better if he gets his education. Wouldn't you rather he become a doctor and pay taxes, rather than picking tomatoes?

COULTER: One million Mexicans across the border in Mexico think, 'if I can just get to America and get my kid educated, we will be legal.'

There's more but you have to watch the video for the full show.

Redeemable Coupon Courtesy Michele Bachmann

The Michele Bachmann campaign doing its part for America, brings us this offer:

Linked by Larwyn's Linx

About Obama on The View

My time on the computer has been short the last few days. If I had written about "Obama on The View," this is what I would have wanted to write, but could not have, because Reaganite Republican has a unique way with words. Read the quintessential "Obama on the View" at The Reaganite Republican.

Michele Bachmann Dylan Ratigan: Someone Named Dylan Ratigan Doesn't Like Michele Bachmann or Her Tea Party Caucus

Someone named Dylan Ratigan doesn't like Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-Minn-6th), or her Tea Party Caucus or her talk of "fiscal responsibility."  I'm searching for info on Mr. Ratigan as I "word process." Oh, here it is...oh my, he's a TV host on MSNBC and has a little show titled the Dylan Ratigan Show. Let me see... he averaged 330,000 viewers a day in May 2010! No wonder he's such a snark. See the video below.

 Michele Bachmann

Putting "Fiscal Responsibility" in the face of a liberal is like holding up a cross in the face of a vampire. "Fiscal Responsibility" is death to a Liberal. Without mad spending you can't create voters.

More on Ratigan's embarrassing ratings below. In the video, the obviously frustrated Ratigan and friends say Bachmann is "full of crap...soooo full of crap, she might be the Queen of Crap," the talking heads opine. Ratigan quotes Congresswoman Bachmann saying the Tea Party Caucus will be "dedicated to promoting Tea Party ideals like "fiscal responsibility and limited government...

"...then again, says Ratigan, Republicans were nowhere in the mass extraction on Wall Street."

For starters, Ratigan obviously views a House Caucus as 'big government,' even though the Caucus members are dedicated to the ideals of small government. This Caucus will not create government programs. If anything, they will be working to repeal, rework and trash existing legislation.

Ratigan doesn't touch Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Democrat criminal "mass extractions" that will never be paid back to taxpayers - orchestrated by Democrat legislators, Senator Chris Dodd (D-, and Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mich) and Maxine Waters (D-CA) . Fannie and Freddie were nowhere in the Democrat financial reform bill.

A Yale economics professor, Robert J. Shiller, says taxpayers who do not even own a home are forced to support others struggling to stay in their homes. Astonishingly, Shiller thinks that Fannie and Freddie should be severely cut back:

"so that they're not helping middle-class homeowners, [but] they're helping poor people get into the housing market."

That's a fine example of academia ignoring everything known about economics. How about making Fannie and Freddie successful and then helping the less fortunate?

Shiller tells the truth, though, about the woes of the evil Democrat twins, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and why the government took them over:

...to avert possible massive losses for banks, money-market funds and, perhaps, most importantly, foreign institutions that purchased billions of Fannie and Freddie debt because of its implied government guarantee.

Remember this when you plan to walk away from your home, and perhaps file bankruptcy. Don't blame Wall Street. Fannie and Freddie are what all the housing bankruptcies are about.
That's why some of your neighbors had to turn their homes over to the bank. The bank had to sell them for peanuts, and that's why your house is undervalued today. That's why you owe more on your mortgage than the house is worth in today's market.

Democrats are solely...solely to blame for the housing crisis. They bought votes and favorability with risky home loans, are still trying to buy votes today...and what they have done should be criminal. 

Before winding this up, Ratigan's show airs at 4 p.m. EDT. If 330,000 viewers are not embarassing enough, he averaged only 325,000 viewers in the preceding 6 months, and only 83,000 in the golden  demographic of 25-54 years old. The 83,000 most desirable demographic was down from 107,000 a year earlier. Check this out for a comparison of television success rates.

For the time slot, Ratigan comes in third behind first place Your World with Neil Cavuto. The headline for these statistics: Dylan Ratigan's Ratings Show a Loss for MSNBC.

So here's the thing about Dylan Ratigan and his cronies: he/they are terrified at the words "fiscal responsibility," and they are disturbed that Michele Bachmann insists on pounding home the importance of it.

Bachmann and the House Tea Party Caucus can promote fiscal responsibility while Ratigan tries to live-down his failures at MSNBC. Watch as Ratigan and his idiots, without a single fact about Michele Bachmann, stoop to kindergarten name calling. (Yes, I called Ratigan an "idiot," did some name calling myself, but I've offered-up the facts.)












Dylan Ratigan on Michele Bachmann (video)

Lawrence O'Donnell Mark Thiessen: Scarborough Dumps O'Donnell

In the video below, Joe Scarborough, host of Morning Joe, had Lawrence O'Donnell and Mark Thiessen as guests to debate trying terrorists in military courtrooms or civilian federal trials. Mark Thiessen, a former speech writer for George W. Bush went first. Scarborough called O'Donnell into the conversation and from that point on, O'Donnell didn't give Thiessen a chance to be heard. O'Donnell spit-out every angry word. His rage was palpable. Scarborough finally dumped him after a break.

Eventually, when Scarborough cannot get O'Donnell to shut-up, he goes to break and says he will be back to interview Thiessen by himself. The transcript below the video does not include the last half with just Scarborough and Thiessen.

This is not the first time that O'Donnell has had a meltdown on television. He appeared with Joe Scarborough in 2004 with John O'Neill, the co-author of Unfit for Command. The viewpoint of the book, and 264 Swiftboaters who served with John Kerry, was that he was unfit for the Presidency. In that interview, O'Donnell called O'Neill a "liar." In fact in 16 lines, he used the word "liar," or a derivative of it 37 time, including "creepy liar," once. Read that unhinged rant here.

Scarborough, O'Donnell and Thiessen (video)


Begin Transcript:

SCARBOROUGH: So let me ask you, Marc, you heard Jane Mayer say yesterday that, 'My gosh, there's no difference between reading somebody their Miranda rights and what the military did as far as performance goes,' so why was Jane Mayer wrong yesterday, in your opinion?"

THIESSEN: You gotta think back to the period after 9/11. We didn't even know who hit us. We didn't know that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the mastermind of 9/11 or the operational commander of Al-Qaeda. And then we started rounding up these terrorists. We caught Abu Zubaydah. We caught Ramzi Binalshibh and KSM. And these guys provided us information, under questioning by the CIA, that stopped a number of terrorist attacks. They were planning to blow up the US Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. They were planning to blow up our Marine camp in Djibouti. They were well on their way to recruiting a cell of terrorists who were going to fly an airplane into Heathrow Airport and buildings in downtown London, and they were going to -- And KSM had recruited a cell of Southeast Asian terrorists called the "Guraba" cell, because he knew we'd be on the lookout for Arab men, to fly an airplane into the Library Tower in Los Angeles, the tallest building on the West Coast. This program [interrogation without Miranda rights] is why we did not have another 9/11 after the attack.

O'DONNELL: You as a former, uh, speechwriter in the White House, you took an oath of office when you took that job that you might or might not remember. (screaming) You actually publish a BOOK that says that the president of the United States -- on its title! The president is inviting the next attack. Isn't...it...true that the -- 

THIESSEN: Lawrence? Lawrence, it's the morning.

O'DONNELL: -- president you work for invited the first attack the --

THIESSEN: Lawrence, that's ridiculous.

O'DONNELL: -- by having no idea what was going on with Al-Qaeda? 

THIESSEN: That is ridiculous. O'DONNELL: You just admitted that the --

THIESSEN: All right. Please. SCARBOROUGH: Lawrence, let him answer. O'DONNELL: -- when you were hit on 9/11, you just said, we didn't know who hit us. THIESSEN: Here's the record, Lawrence. O'DONNELL: (screaming) You said, we didn't know who hit us! THIESSEN: Lawrence? SCARBOROUGH: Let him answer.

 O'DONNELL: You were told who was going to hit you --

THIESSEN: Lawrence? Lawwwwwwwrence?

O'DONNELL: -- before we were hit on 9/11 --

SCARBOROUGH: Let him answer.

THIESSEN: Do conservatives get to talk on this show, at all?

O'DONNELL: -- AND YOUR ADMINISTRATION --

THIESSEN: Lawrence? Lawwwwwwwrence?

O'DONNELL: -- INVITED THE FIRST ATTACK --

SCARBOROUGH: Lawrence, let him answer.

O'DONNELL: -- FOR WHICH YOU SHOULD LIVE IN SHAME! 
 
THIESSEN: Listen, here's the record. When the Obama administration's approach -- the law enforcement first approach was working -- the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the bombing of the USS Cole, the bombing of --

O'DONNELL: (screaming) TALK ABOUT THE BUSH PRESIDENCY FROM THE DAY --

THIESSEN: -- the bombing of our embassies in Karachi and the 9/11 attacks --

O'DONNELL: -- HE WAS SWORN IN UNTIL 9/11 --

SCARBOROUGH: Hold on a minute.

THIESSEN: Can I get a word in?

O'DONNELL: -- WHAT DID THE BUSH-CHENEY --

SCARBOROUGH: Wait, wait.

THIESSEN: After the CIA too over --

O'DONNELL: (screaming)

SCARBOROUGH: Let's stop.

THIESSEN: -- no attacks.

SCARBOROUGH: We're going to break right now. 

End transcript


Thanks to RushLimbaugh.com for the transcript.

Dianne Feinstein Hand Notes 1990 - Another Cheating Moment for Feinstein

Liberals reported Sarah Palin's "hand notes" as further proof of Palin's lack of intelligence - can't make a speech without notes - nevermind that the President cannot utter a word without his TOTUS (Teleprompter of the U.S). What would Liberals do without Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin, neither of whom lack for anything, as they well know.

Palin wrote three topics on the palm of her hand when addressing the National Tea Party in Nashville. Palin has a lot to say. She never lacks for words. It is easy to get wound-up, go long on one topic and end up short on another. So, she wrote a reminder on her palm.

And so did, now Senator, Dianne Feinstein, but Feinstein was in a debate; notes, including palm notes were forbidden - but she did it anyway. Watch the video of Feinstein, and notice that former Bush Press Secretary, Dana Perino, said had she done the "palm note" tease from the White House Press Secretary's podium, as did Robert Gibbs, she would have probably been fired.

Dianne Feinstein Uses Palm Notes h/t Hot Air

Linked by The Lonely Conservative - Thank you Karen!

The New Pearl Harbor: Safe Schools CZAR peddles child pornography to kids

Sixty-eight years ago today, Japan launched a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor that brought the United States into World War II. In that historic conflict we defeated Japan and its German Nazi ally four years later at a cost of over 400,000 American lives.


Since before World War II however, we have faced a much more subtle foe – one that in many ways has been more deadly. The foe is an amorphous mass, variably called: “Liberal,” "Progressive," “Leftist,” “the Left,” “the Radical Left,” the “New Left,” “Communist,” “Neo-communist,” “Socialist,” “Marxist,” “Neo-Marxist,” even “Marxofascist.”

Lest “liberals” take offense at being associated with communists, Marxists and socialists, it can only be said that Lenin referred to them as “useful idiots,” i.e. those who knowingly or unknowingly assist communists in achieving communist objectives.

For this reason communists share the same contempt for liberals that the rest of us do. We both know they are fools. The communists laugh at them because they know the liberals will be joining us in the gulags if the communists have their way. So forget liberals.

Call the foe the “radical left”. It has been the instigator of most of our foreign policy failures, including Vietnam and Korea; failures measured in millions of lives. Practically every public policy failure of the past century, from the healthcare crisis to our addled legal system, from crime-ridden ghettos to failing public schools, can be laid at the feet of the Left.

But many of us have been complicit, in that we either stood idly by, or supported the left’s policies because we saw some personal benefit (e.g. welfare payments, housing subsidies, Medicare, etc.) Many politicians have assisted the Left out of cynical calculation, going along to get along, or downright cowardice.

Some of us voted for them. Many pitched in and helped because we thought we were doing good – like Teddy Kennedy used to say, “Fighting the good fight.” As a result, today this foe occupies the corridors of power across much of the United States, and has penetrated our government at all levels, corporations, foundations and most tragically, our schools.

Read More...

Howard Dean Socialism Capitalism: Margaret Thatcher Socialism Explained

Howard Dean, do you remember him at all...found an audience to share his new-found "public" fondness for socialism. Note, in the first video below, he says our capitalist tendencies arise from our "human nature," but our desire for socialism comes from our communitarianism. What? To Democrats today, capitalism is apparently a lone endeavor. Nevermind that capitalism actually employs people and pay wages from profits. If that isn't a "community" endeavor, I don't know what is. See two videos below - don't miss Margaret Thatcher comparing socialism and capitalism in the second.

Howard Dean

 

Margaret Thatcher

Howard Dean is a former Vermont governor, a former chair of the DNC, a physician who hasn't had to keep office hours lately, and the founder of Democracy for America.

Many organizations in this country have the word "Democracy" in the title. It's time to drop that like a hot potato. "Democracy" is used as a crutch by those not understanding that we are a Republic, that there is a vast difference between the two, and we lean on the moniker "democracy" at our peril.

We are not governed by a majority, and so it is ironic that Dean says we've decided to settle on a little socialism and a little capitalism. Is Howard Dean the decider? Will Democrats accomplish a little socialism, and then some more, because they are the majority - and as Pelosi and Obama have said - we won? Here's an example of how this works. On Dean's Democracy for America, he has an open letter for reader's to sign advocating the will of the majority over reason or a clear representation of constitutents:

Democratic Caucus Accountability
If ANY member of the Democratic Caucus joins a Republican filibuster of healthcare reform with a public option, the Caucus must immediately strip that Senator of all Committee chairmanships.

Can you venture a guess at how a Congressman or Congresswoman might weight their choice: take a chance that voters will forget your vote, as they often do, by the time the election rolls around, or lose a coveted and powerful chairmanship. They'll choose the power of the committee room without a backward glance.

The Founding Fathers, with infinite wisdom obtained from life experience with kingdoms and parliaments, intended for as much power as possible be granted to, and retained by, each individual. There is no socialism to be found in this intent.

Howard Dean understands completely, however, and he and his cronies intend to use socialism, veiled as democracy, as a club against our republic.

Walter Williams, writing for Capitalism Magazine, reminds of us our Founder's views of democracy:

James Madison, the father of our Constitution, said that in a pure democracy, "there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnoxious individual."

John Adams said, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

And...Justice John Marshall observed, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."

From Walter Williams:

Our founders intended for us to have a limited republican form of government where rights precede government and there is rule of law. Citizens, as well as government officials, are accountable to the same laws. Government intervenes in civil society only to protect its citizens against force and fraud but does not intervene in the cases of peaceable, voluntary exchange. By contrast, in a democracy, the majority rules either directly or through its elected representatives. The law is whatever the government deems it to be. Rights may be granted or taken away.

As effortlessly as Howard Dean threw out the idea that America has decided to share capitalism with socialism, just as effortlessly are Liberals gaining momentum in stealing individual power.

From Bookworm, speaking about Germans in the 1920's, and writing for American Thinker:

They just thought that, after the utter chaos of the 1920s (especially the economic chaos), the socialists would calm the economy (which they did), and simply remove from people the painful obligation of having to make their way in the world.  It was only incrementally that the average German bought into the ever-more-extreme demands of the state - and those who didn't buy in were coerced because of the state's unfettered willingness to use its vast, brute power to subordinate individuals to its demand....

Soft socialism is better, but it certainly isn't the American ideal.  Britain springs to mind as the perfect example of soft socialism.  Britain's socialist medicine is a disaster, with practically daily stories about people being denied treatment or receiving minimal treatment.  Invariably, the denials arise because the State's needs trump the individual's:  Either the treatment is generally deemed too costly (and there are no market forces at work) or the patients are deemed unworthy of care, especially if they're old.

British socialism has other problems, aside from the dead left behind in her hospital wards.  As did Germany, Russia, and China (and as would Obama), socialist Britain took guns away (at least in London), with the evitable result that violent crime against innocent people skyrocketed. 

The British socialist bureaucracy also controls people's lives at a level currently incomprehensible to Americans, who can't appreciate a state that is constantly looking out for its own good.  In Britain, government protects thieves right's against property owner's, has it's public utilities urge children to report their parents for "green" crimes; tries to criminalize people taking pictures of their own children in public places; destroys perfectly good food that does not meet obsessive compulsive bureaucratic standards; and increasingly stifles free speech.  (Impressively, all of the preceding examples are from just the last six months in England.)

 Read more from Bookworm at Bookworm Room.

Just two years ago, this snippet from Howard Dean would have quickly followed him from Paris to a YouTube debut, but considering "socialism" as a reality, and maybe a better way forward, is a thought shared by many who really do believe that Obama has some stash to share with them.


Howard Dean Socialism and Capitalism (video)  Margaret Thatcher Compares Socialism and Capitalism

Thanks to LeftCoastRebel

Roxana Mayer is Sheila Jackson Lee Fake Doctor

Sheila Jackson Lee rudely talks on a cell phone while a cancer survivor asks a question at a Townhall meeting about the health care bill threatening our health care. Oh, and by the way, she meets and greets a fake doctor, then hugs the same physician and asks the audience to give the fake physician, a Pediatric Primary Care doctor, Roxana Mayer, a hand. Roxana Mayer is Sheila Jackson Lee's fake doctor.

Roxana Mayer (R) - Sheila Jackson Lee (L)

The short story is that Roxana Mayer was a Texas delegate for Obama. She admitted that she is not a physician. Patterico's Pontifications has the whole story. Read the email exchange between the blog's Patrick Frey and Roxana Mayer here. Patrick asks her if she "plays a physician at townhalls?" Follow the links to all of Patterico's posts on Sheila Jacson Lee and Roxana Mayer. Here's a snipped of info about the "not a doctor" Roxana Mayer:

[UPDATE 8-14-09:] Mayer has admitted to me that she was invited to the town hall meeting via a listserv message sent by a radical Obama supporter who ran an Obama campaign office that displayed a Che Guevara poster.

Roxana Mayer - Sheila Jackson Lee (video)   Photo credit: Houston Chronicle who obviously had to explain their photo caption. Related: Sheila Jackson Lee Talks on Phone: Sheila Jackson Lee Townhall Talker(video)

Would You Believe How Obama Got Elected?

View at YouTube.com The Stats:

Zogby Poll

512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

71.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

And yet.....

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.

Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)

Wilson Research Poll

The 12 "Zogby" questions were duplicated, one on the Keating scandal was added for extra balance. The results from Obama voters were virtually IDENTICAL in both polls.

Here are the highlights:

35 % of McCain voters got 10 or more of 13 questions correct.

18% of Obama voters got 10 or more of 13 questions correct.

McCain voters knew which party controls congress by a 63-27 margin.

Obama voters got the “congressional control” question wrong by 43-41.

Those that got "congressional control" correct voted 56-43 for McCain.

Those that got "congressional control" wrong voted 65-35 for Obama.

The poll also asked voters to name all the media sources from which they got information.

Those “exposed” to Fox News got "congressional control" correct 64-25 (+39)

Those “exposed” to CNN got “congressional control” correct 48-38 (+10)

Those “exposed” to Network news got “congressional control” correct 48-39 (+9)

Those “exposed” to print media got “congressional control” correct 52-37 (+15)

Those “exposed” to MSNBC got “congressional control” correct 55-35 (+20)

Those “exposed” to talk radio got “congressional control” correct 61-29 (+32)

Voters in the "South" had the best response rate on “congressional control” (+22)

Voters in the "Northeast" had the worst response rate on “congressional control” (+9)

Those “exposed” to Fox News voted 70-29 for McCain.

Those “exposed” to CNN voted 63-37 for Obama.

Those “exposed” to MSNBC voted 73-26 for Obama.

Those “exposed” to network newscasts voted 62-37 for Obama.

Those “exposed” to national newspapers voted 64-36 for Obama.

Those “exposed” to talk radio voted 61-38 for McCain.

Those that could associate Bill Ayers' name/story with Obama voted 52-48 for McCain (We added Ayers name to the "Zogby" question and it significantly increased the rate of correct response, indicating a very superficial grasp of the overall story).

Those that knew Obama had made negative comments about “coal power plants" voted 76-24 for McCain.

Those that knew Obama had his opponents knocked off the ballot in his first campaign voted 66-34 for McCain. McCain voters did poorly (only 42% correct) on the Keating question and,in general, the voters did universally worse on questions where the negative information was about their candidate

Women under 55 did worse than they might have by guessing on four of the thirteen questions, and yet 95% of them knew that Palin was the candidate with a pregnant teenage daughter. Even 95% of those in this demographic group who didn't know “congressional control” got this question correct.

Those “exposed” to MSNBC “scored” 90% correct on the three Palin questions (including an incredible 98% on the “pregnant teenage daughter” question), while those not “exposed” to MSNBC averaged 84% correct on those three questions.

Video: The Vote Reaper

Tip to Jeremy Sarber and Friends. See five (5) more videos from Rachel and Perez at Jeremy Sarber and Friends Thanks to YouTube.com