With all the lamentation among the commentariat over whether the Romney campaign’s surrogate spokesmen are effective or not, here’s a thought: Make Rep. Peter King an unofficial spokesman. He doesn’t spare mediots like Soledad O’Brien any quarter.
O’Brien goes to bat for President Obama, only to have King set the record straight.
“Never once in that speech, as you know…I have the speech right here…he never once used the word ‘apology,’” O’Brien said, referring to Obama’s 2009 address in Cairo. “He never once said, ‘I’m sorry.’”
“He didn’t have to,” King shot back. “Any logical reading of that speech, or the speech he gave in France, where he basically said that the United States can be too aggressive.”
O’Brien interrupted, offering the date of that speech—“April 3, 2009”—and adding, “but that’s not apology.”
“He was overseas, criticizing American officials and the CIA and others,” said King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. “When he says that we lost our ideals—these are the people who kept us safe for eight, nine years against Islamic terrorists.”
The CNN host, brandishing copies of Obama’s speeches, said, “I’m trying to find the words, ‘I’m sorry,’ ‘I apologize,’ in any of those speeches.”
She added that the website Factcheck.org has debunked the notion that the president went on an “apology tour.”
“I don’t care what Factcheck says,” King said.
Factcheck will come along any second to announce that King is lying when he says he doesn’t care what Factcheck says.
– Señora de la Soledad O’Brien.
At the end, King also said: “[In] any common sense interpretation of those speeches, the President’s apologizing for the American position.”
Precisely.
If the Jester in Chief is such fabulous communicator, why do we all think he was apologizing if in fact he was not? Should he not be able to communicate with us slack-jawed-extra-chromosome-radical-right-wing-baby-seal-clubbers as well as he does with the Completely and Irrefutably Objective Media Elite?
There you go again…..
Soledad O’Brien is a watercarrying flak for the radical extremists and divisive charlatans of this administration.
She doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to understand the issues or articulate them. Her reports distort the truth intentionally and slander non-leftists repeatedly.
Never once in the above statement did I use the words imbecile, idiot, liar, or propagandist.
Puh-lease!
Obammer’s apology tour was being called an apology tour all the way back in 2009! They didn’t seem at the time to be bothered about such a characterization, probably because they too looked at it as an apology tour and felt the US owed just such an apology to the world for “________”!
(fill in the blank with their pet peeve of the day, usually something involving a cowboy named Bush)
Only reason they now feel the need to push back against the “Apology Tour” accusation now is because his entire foreign policy agenda is blowing up in his face like a stick of dynamite in a Wile E. Coyote cartoon.
SoMad O’Brien just shows how much she’s in the tank swimming in KoolAid every time she opens her mouth.
OK. Just how did an airheaded talking-points parrot like Soledad O’Brien get her own gig on CNN?
Is there a “personal services for the line producer” clause in her contract?
I like how she was saying “but it’s Fact Check” as if that was an airtight argument that they are trustworthy.
Factcheck.org has ruined their own reputation. Only liberal rags, blogs, and leftist TV reporters use them anymore.
Factcheck.org may have been a reliable fact checking organization in the past, but in recent years, it has drifted very much to the liberal left side. Whenever anyone tries to use factcheck.org as a reliable source of information, I simply tell them that I do not recognize them as non-partisan data source anymore.
Anyone care to find any fact checkers who agree with King?
I’m sorry you’re such a fucking idiot.
There, I didn’t use the word apologize. So fact check that.
“Fact checkers” are for those who need to be told what to think, or are too lazy to do honest research. It’s a head fake appeal to authority, like the “consensus on global warming” when the actual facts are NOT on the side making the claim. This is why empty heads like Soledad O’Brian rely on them to support their weak and imbecilic arguments.
Rep. King doesn’t need a fact checker, he’s got the facts.
Only an insane person would conclude by invading the WRONG COUNTRY and killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens after 9/11, wasn’t misguided, over doing it, a mistake.
King has blood on his hands.
Better chalk it up to Iraqis being insane then, Marko. I mean, what rational person doesn’t still dream of Saddam Hussein and his boys thumbing his nose at 16 U.N. resolutions, playing despot and beloved by all of their countrymen?
If we had left the 2008 Presidential vote to the Iraqi people, you’d be saying President McCain right now, Marko.
You and this Soledad scumbag are rank propagandists and apologists for the theocracies that kill thousands of their own each day under the banner of Sharia.
Real accessories to murder. Want to talk about blood on your own hands, including Americans?
The morality of the left always leaves me puzzled.
Going into Libya was the right thing to do and going into the Yugo war under Clinton was the right thing to do – because of humanitarian reasons.
Going into a country where Hussein’s kids (that’s Saddam Hussein, not Barack Hussein) are setting up rape rooms, committing genocide against the Kurds, taking pot shots at US aircraft, invading neighboring countries and slaughtering the residents, etc., was somehow evil????!!!!????
Setting aside, of course, the fact there WAS a justification provided by the UN resolutions being ignored by a signatory to the UN charter….)
Great self-parody! Let me translate for Marko: “He didn’t apologize and he was right when he apologized.” And factcheck.org agrees. LOL. Perfect example of progressive (misnomer) thinking.
Scott, it’s simply explained. The left judges right and wrong based on thoughts rather than actions, that’s why results don’t matter, which is also why the thoughts don’t make sense. They don’t have to, they just have to have ‘the right motives’.
Sad but true….
Ms. O’Brien, if I tell you that I can’t stand the sight of you and that every word out of your mouth makes me violently ill, does it matter that i did not once use the term “dislike?”
I don’t understand why anyone is listening to Peter King.I am in the U.K and he was and is an apologist for the I.R.A and it’s brutal campaign.
As long as they were not killing Americans he was fine about it ,what a great ally, you all must be so proud.