In response to:

David Gregory's Slobbering Obama Interview

Seawolf Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 7:09 AM
The 0 hasn't been on a Sunday show in a long time, he needed a platform for more campaigning and gregory is a total sycophant. It's because of fools like him and mathews etal that this commie clown got re-elected...Their cheerleading while covering up 0's lies should have gotten them all hanged for treason.....when the greatest nation on earth is destroyed because of this quisling obama, what will they say then?
bruce130 Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 7:41 AM
They'll say it's all because of the evil Republicans, just like they're doing now, and all the low information voters will buy into it, just like they're doing now. Nothing will change. That's the only defense Owebama needs. Most Owebama voters don't even watch shows as deep and as complex as "Meet the press." Most of them get their information from the Comedy Channel. Really, they do.
Seawolf Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 7:55 AM
I'm afraid you're my perfect world they wouldn't be allowed to vote unless they were paying INCOME taxes as in working for a living. I have a few neighbors who voted for this clown, they never give a reason, but from just casual conversation, it is apparent that they are completely clueless...and these are not stupid people, but they are liberals. How anyone with a brain and any love for this nation could even THINK about voting for this commie is beyond me.
NBC's David Gregory interviewed President Barack Obama on "Meet the Press" Sunday, and a conversation ensued that would have been more fitting for a show called "The President Meets One of His Many Mainstream Media Enablers."

Let's take a look at just some of the exchanges and fantasize how different the nation's political and electoral climate might be if the liberal press were doing its job as watchdog instead of taking sides.

Obama said, "We're seeing signs of recovery ... in employment numbers improving."

Might Gregory have asked Obama how he can continue to put an unrealistically positive spin on such persistently dismal numbers?...