"I thought he was a dick yesterday"

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 30, 2011 6:07 PM GMT
    MSNBC has suspended political analyst and Time magazine writer Mark Halperin indefinitely over a remark he made about President Obama Thursday morning.

    "Mark Halperin's comments this morning were completely inappropriate and unacceptable," said MSNBC spokesman Jeremy Gaines in a statement. "We apologize to the President, the White House and all of our viewers. We strive for a high level of discourse and comments like these have no place on our air."

    Appearing on "Morning Joe" this morning, Halperin, senior political analyst at Time and MSNBC and co-author of the 2008 election opus "Game Change," sought to characterize the president's demeanor at a press briefing the previous day. You can watch the video below--though the term Halperin uses to characterize the president is vulgar, as the partial transcript after the jump will also show:

    Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy



    "Are we on the seven-second delay?" Halperin asked.

    "We have it. We can use it. Go for it. Let's see what happens," co-anchor Joe Scarborough replied.

    "I thought he was a dick yesterday," Halperin replied, sending the hosts into a brief moment of panic.

    Halperin apologized later on in the show and issued his own mea culpa hours later via MSNBC.

    "I completely agree with everything in MSNBC's statement about my remark," he said. "I believe that the step they are taking in response is totally appropriate. Again, I want to offer a heartfelt and profound apology to the President, to my MSNBC colleagues, and to the viewers. My remark was unacceptable, and I deeply regret it."

    Halperin is the latest in a string of MSNBC suspensions this past year. Scarborough himself was suspended last November for violating the network's campaign contribution policy, as was Keith Olbermann, who left MSNBC several months later. More recently, Ed Schultz was suspended in May for calling pundit Laura Ingraham a "slut." And former MSNBC dayside host David Schuster also got a suspension in 2008 for complaining that Hillary Clinton had "pimped out" her daughter, Chelsea, on the presidential campaign trail.

    UPDATE 12:30 pm: Time also has issued a statement reprimanding Halperin: "Mark Halperin's comments on air this morning were inappropriate and in no way reflective of TIME's views. We have issued a warning to him that such behavior is unacceptable."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 30, 2011 7:56 PM GMT
    I usually watch some of that show in the morning, but it does have a macho sophomoric aura.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 30, 2011 8:56 PM GMT
    Big deal, someone said the President was a "dick"; the truth hurts the most I suppose. Has the US suddenly come under Socialist law, were you can be executed for talking the truth.

    Our Redhead foreign Prime Minister has been a dick over carbon tax yesterday to, back tracking on her word there would be No Carbon Tax in her time, but she is a dick without balls, oh just like You Know who..........icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 30, 2011 9:06 PM GMT
    Oh come on SB, which is more 'dickish', Obama for pushing shared responsibility for the debt reduction, between lower income Americans and rich jet owners, oil companies and wall street gamblers. or Repubs. who are more concerned about lining their financiers pocket's, than they are in taking it from low income people already at the breaking point.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Jun 30, 2011 9:34 PM GMT
    Mark Halperin certainly has one on me. I have not listened to Barack Obama's words in perhaps a year. If he wants to be a dick, that is fine with me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 30, 2011 10:10 PM GMT
    I don't think that's respectful to say of a president on national television, regardless of how much I may disagree with certain Obama policies.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 30, 2011 10:28 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidI don't think that's respectful to say of a president on national television, regardless of how much I may disagree with certain Obama policies.

    I have a different opinion on this. I think the office, itself, should be respected, and that respect should normally flow down to the office holder. However, if the office holder conducts himself in a way that brings disrespect to the office, then he no longer deserves respect.

    Examples of Obama's behavior along these lines: 1) His offensive remarks about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address when they were sitting right in front of him, 2) His speech at the border mocking those who live there and are in fear of the criminal activity associated with the porous border, 3) His mocking demonization of political opponents. IMO he deserves absolutely no respect.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jun 30, 2011 11:01 PM GMT
    In the end it doesn't really matter much ....... The Joe Scarborough Show is a joke
    Seven Second Delay?
    and when they Flub it Joe calls for a meeting???? Joe You got out of College WHEN ???

    YOU'RE a grown up now Scarborough

    and Mark Halperin you're the dick .... cause you feel for the back slapping they were giving you
    Enjoy the indefinite suspension
    But I BET YOU that phone call came from FOX right after .....Huh..huh???

    icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 30, 2011 11:57 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    mocktwinkie saidI don't think that's respectful to say of a president on national television, regardless of how much I may disagree with certain Obama policies.

    I have a different opinion on this. I think the office, itself, should be respected, and that respect should normally flow down to the office holder. However, if the office holder conducts himself in a way that brings disrespect to the office, then he no longer deserves respect.

    Examples of Obama's behavior along these lines: 1) His offensive remarks about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address when they were sitting right in front of him, 2) His speech at the border mocking those who live there and are in fear of the criminal activity associated with the porous border, 3) His mocking demonization of political opponents. IMO he deserves absolutely no respect.


    "Offensive remarks" during the state of the union? He called them out on their unconstitutional and dangerous decision, which is already damaging our country. And he did so in a respectful manner (e.g. did not call Scalia a "delusional asshat").

    The other two rationalizations you've developed show just how much of a partisan ideologue you are. Particularly, as you've repeatedly defended obvious racial slurs against our first black president, have yourself referred to him as a socialist, and, well, I could go on...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 30, 2011 11:58 PM GMT
    BTW, Mark Halperin should be canned, not because he called Obama a "dick." I'm sure BO laughed at that but because he's a terrible political analyst who has been wrong about nearly everything.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 12:01 AM GMT
    THIS is being a dick:
    http://animalsbeingdicks.com/page/13
    abd-37.gif
  • rioriz

    Posts: 1056

    Jul 01, 2011 12:12 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidI don't think that's respectful to say of a president on national television, regardless of how much I may disagree with certain Obama policies.


    You obviously have not watched much cable news or turned on a television during the Bush years
  • rioriz

    Posts: 1056

    Jul 01, 2011 12:15 AM GMT
    realifedad said Oh come on SB, which is more 'dickish', Obama for pushing shared responsibility for the debt reduction, between lower income Americans and rich jet owners, oil companies and wall street gamblers. or Repubs. who are more concerned about lining their financiers pocket's, than they are in taking it from low income people already at the breaking point.


    Just to be fair the subsidies for the Jet owners were a product of his Stimulus program...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 12:18 AM GMT
    rioriz said
    realifedad said Oh come on SB, which is more 'dickish', Obama for pushing shared responsibility for the debt reduction, between lower income Americans and rich jet owners, oil companies and wall street gamblers. or Repubs. who are more concerned about lining their financiers pocket's, than they are in taking it from low income people already at the breaking point.


    Just to be fair the subsidies for the Jet owners were a product of his Stimulus program...


    Myth:
    Matthew YglesiasThe truth is that, much as you would expect, the White House negotiating team isn’t nearly that stupid. The source of the confusion is that congress passed a “bonus depreciation” law in 2008 as an economic stimulus measure, and ARRA continued it. This depreciation is a broad (albeit temporary) provision that includes to a wide range of capital goods including both commercial and corporate aircraft. By contrast, the tax break at issue in the negotiations is a 1987 provision of the tax code that allows corporate jets to be depreciated over a five-year period rather than the seven-year period required for commercial aviation. This is not something Barack Obama created, not something Barack Obama has ever supported, and not anything that has anything to do with the stimulus bill. It is, instead, a small but real subsidy that distorts the economy at the margin by encouraging large firms to invest in corporate jets rather than paying for commercial airfare.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jul 01, 2011 12:28 AM GMT
    I don't know why it's common practice among politicians and commentators to never say anything the slightest bit derogatory about someone else.

    For instance, Michelle Bachmann is an habitual liar.
    Why aren't all politicians and commentators standing up and calling her a liar ? They dance all around the issue. And, the most they'll ever say is that she doesn't have her facts straight or she misspoke or she was mistaken. SHE'S A LIAR. SAY IT.

    And, if somebody thinks the President (or anybody else) is a dick, SAY IT. I won't agree with you, but I'll defend your right to say it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 12:35 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidI just watched the clip.

    Halperin was assured by the hosts that they were on a 7 second delay and they actually encouraged him to speak his mind.

    Seems like Halperin is not 100% at fault here.


    I watched it live. Yes, he was assured that they were on delay, but he also seemed to enjoy making that statement. It was entirely purposeful and not an "excited utterance" (a la "YOU LIE!"), so I actually find it worse.

    In any event, his douche baggery extends well beyond this incident.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 12:37 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    mocktwinkie saidI don't think that's respectful to say of a president on national television, regardless of how much I may disagree with certain Obama policies.

    I have a different opinion on this. I think the office, itself, should be respected, and that respect should normally flow down to the office holder. However, if the office holder conducts himself in a way that brings disrespect to the office, then he no longer deserves respect.

    Examples of Obama's behavior along these lines: 1) His offensive remarks about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address when they were sitting right in front of him, 2) His speech at the border mocking those who live there and are in fear of the criminal activity associated with the porous border, 3) His mocking demonization of political opponents. IMO he deserves absolutely no respect.


    "Offensive remarks" during the state of the union? He called them out on their unconstitutional and dangerous decision, which is already damaging our country. And he did so in a respectful manner (e.g. did not call Scalia a "delusional asshat").

    The other two rationalizations you've developed show just how much of a partisan ideologue you are. Particularly, as you've repeatedly defended obvious racial slurs against our first black president, have yourself referred to him as a socialist, and, well, I could go on...

    I don't recall ever saying or defending any kind of racial slurs. Because you said "repeatedly", you should easily have examples. As I recall the only time I discussed racism was pointing out that your use of the term was incorrect when you said someone was racist if they ignored racism. But back again to your statement that I repeatedly defended racial slurs.... specifics. (Because I don't think you can come up with anything and will deflect.)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 1:25 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    mocktwinkie saidI don't think that's respectful to say of a president on national television, regardless of how much I may disagree with certain Obama policies.

    I have a different opinion on this. I think the office, itself, should be respected, and that respect should normally flow down to the office holder. However, if the office holder conducts himself in a way that brings disrespect to the office, then he no longer deserves respect.

    Examples of Obama's behavior along these lines: 1) His offensive remarks about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address when they were sitting right in front of him, 2) His speech at the border mocking those who live there and are in fear of the criminal activity associated with the porous border, 3) His mocking demonization of political opponents. IMO he deserves absolutely no respect.


    "Offensive remarks" during the state of the union? He called them out on their unconstitutional and dangerous decision, which is already damaging our country. And he did so in a respectful manner (e.g. did not call Scalia a "delusional asshat").

    The other two rationalizations you've developed show just how much of a partisan ideologue you are. Particularly, as you've repeatedly defended obvious racial slurs against our first black president, have yourself referred to him as a socialist, and, well, I could go on...

    I don't recall ever saying or defending any kind of racial slurs. Because you said "repeatedly", you should easily have examples. As I recall the only time I discussed racism was pointing out that your use of the term was incorrect when you said someone was racist if they ignored racism. But back again to your statement that I repeatedly defended racial slurs.... specifics. (Because I don't think you can come up with anything and will deflect.)


    I don't play the "search my thread history game". I have an eiditic memory. You have repeatedly denied the racism of certain Tea Party elements, dismissed the documented evidence and then blamed "liberals" for planting said racist signs. You have also defended undeniably racist laws, such as those in Arizona. You defended birther positions, despite the obvious racism and xenophobia involved. Etc...

    I'll be clear and say I do not believe you are, yourself, a racist. I think you have defended those things because they were anti-Obama.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 1:36 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    realifedad said Oh come on SB, which is more 'dickish', Obama for pushing shared responsibility for the debt reduction, between lower income Americans and rich jet owners, oil companies and wall street gamblers. or Repubs. who are more concerned about lining their financiers pocket's, than they are in taking it from low income people already at the breaking point.


    I would say Obama, as his "policies" are causing the destruction of the country.





    Nice try REWRITING HISTORY, SB.
    But, the FACTS prove that BUSH destroyed the country.

    The BUSH recession hit in 2007 - long before Obama was even sworn in.

    The economy started growing rather than shrinking after Obama took office.
    The massive job losses of the final year of Bush's presidency turned into job gains after Obama took office.
    The huge stock market crash of the final months of the Bush presidency have been erased by solid and sustained market gains since Obama took office.

    The facts prove that things have gotten better not worse since Obama took office.
    Unfortunately, Bush left the economy in such an EPIC mess when he left, it will take a long time to get back to true prosperity.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 1:43 AM GMT
    I liked Obama's speech. Comparing members of Congress to his children was classic. The two kids can get their homework done but Congress goes on vacation all the time, or dicks around. The real dick is Boener. (pun)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 2:30 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    rickrick91 said
    Nice try REWRITING HISTORY, SB.
    But, the FACTS prove that BUSH destroyed the country.

    The BUSH recession hit in 2007 - long before Obama was even sworn in.


    Well, let's see, who took over Congress in January of 2007... oh yeah, Pelosi and Reid... So I guess we shouldn't call this the Bush recession, nor the Obama recession, but rather the Pelosi-Reid Recession.


    rickrick91 said
    The massive job losses of the final year of Bush's presidency turned into job gains after Obama took office.


    Uh... RickRick, hope you're sitting down. There are 1.9 million fewer people employed NOW than when Obama took office. Or to put it in terms that you liberals use so often, Obama killed 1.9 million jobs so far in his term.



    rickrick91 said
    The facts prove that things have gotten better not worse since Obama took office.



    Yep.

    # of People on Food Stamps: UP

    Unemployment: UP

    # of People Paying No Income Taxes: UP

    Inflation: UP

    National Debt: UP

    # of Federal Government Workers: UP

    Federal Budget: UP

    Gay Marriage Law of the Land: NO

    # of Illegal Aliens in Country: UP

    Oil Industry: Under attack

    Coal Industry: Under attack

    Insurance Industry: Under attack

    Private Jet Owners: Under attack



    This is just so silly. Macroeconomics do not operate on an election cycle. Just as the Bush tax cuts and war spending didn't tank the economy in 2 or 3 years, nothing the Pelosi or Reid did substantively changed the arc of the economy and employment/unemployment is a lagging indicator of the health of the economy.

    Remember, Bush doubled the deficit. Obama, in trying to right the Bush economy grew it by 50%.

    Our entire annual deficit (and it's contributions to the debt) are the product of three Bush policies: tax cuts for the rich, two wars on the credit card and Medicare Part D.

    Obama ended Iraq, is moving toward ending Afghanistan and tried to end the tax cuts, but was blocked by Republican douche baggery, and HCR will lower the costs of Medicare Part D.

    All things that, per the CBO, will eliminate the annual deficit over time and move us to surplus.

    If you don't like the economy, don't vote Republican.

    The rest of your post is equally or more silly and not based on fact.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 2:31 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    wrestlervic saidI liked Obama's speech. Comparing members of Congress to his children was classic. The two kids can get their homework done but Congress goes on vacation all the time, or dicks around. The real dick is Boener. (pun)


    Yeah.... but he couldn't remember that his "13 year old daughter" is actually 12 years old. icon_lol.gif



    Right because her birthday is next week. I spoke with a friend tonight and asked her how old she is and she gave me a year old than she actually is. Shit happens.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 2:40 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidI don't play the "search my thread history game". I have an eiditic memory. You have repeatedly denied the racism of certain Tea Party elements, dismissed the documented evidence and then blamed "liberals" for planting said racist signs. You have also defended undeniably racist laws, such as those in Arizona. You defended birther positions, despite the obvious racism and xenophobia involved. Etc...

    I'll be clear and say I do not believe you are, yourself, a racist. I think you have defended those things because they were anti-Obama.

    Fair enough. I think your recollection is reasonable but I disagree with your interpretation. I will comment on the specifics:

    You have repeatedly denied the racism of certain Tea Party elements, dismissed the documented evidence and then blamed "liberals" for planting said racist signs.
    I have not denied there could be racist elements within the Tea Party, as with any large group, but I denied there was rampant racism, or that racism was an underlying motivation. There were reports of liberals infiltrating tea party events with offensive signs. A specific example was found at a Sharron Angle rally. The offender was later seen at a Reid rally. My position is based on what I saw, and whether you agree, there is no supporting of racism in blaming liberals for planting signs.

    You have also defended undeniably racist laws, such as those in Arizona.
    I and many others, and I think most in the US, disagree that laws to enforce immigration are racist. The target is people here illegally. True they are hispanic, but there is no targeting of hispanics here legally. The issue is legal status, not race, but liberals always like to play up race.

    You defended birther positions, despite the obvious racism and xenophobia involved.
    Again, no race involved. 1) I dislike his policies and would like to see him marginalized. 2) I have had the opinion that his view of this country is tepid at best. "Sure we think we are exceptional, but so does everyone.". 3) His early years were not in the country, and having been born to a non-US citizen, questions about his own status were reasonable. 4) He has also hid his college records, raising questions as to what he is hiding.

    Racism is easy to define. Denigrating someone specifically because of their race, not for other reasons. As a good example, look at the Jon Stewart mocking Herbert Cain using Amos and Andy. That is racism.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 3:38 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidI don't play the "search my thread history game". I have an eiditic memory. You have repeatedly denied the racism of certain Tea Party elements, dismissed the documented evidence and then blamed "liberals" for planting said racist signs. You have also defended undeniably racist laws, such as those in Arizona. You defended birther positions, despite the obvious racism and xenophobia involved. Etc...

    I'll be clear and say I do not believe you are, yourself, a racist. I think you have defended those things because they were anti-Obama.

    Fair enough. I think your recollection is reasonable but I disagree with your interpretation. I will comment on the specifics:

    You have repeatedly denied the racism of certain Tea Party elements, dismissed the documented evidence and then blamed "liberals" for planting said racist signs.
    I have not denied there could be racist elements within the Tea Party, as with any large group, but I denied there was rampant racism, or that racism was an underlying motivation. There were reports of liberals infiltrating tea party events with offensive signs. A specific example was found at a Sharron Angle rally. The offender was later seen at a Reid rally. My position is based on what I saw, and whether you agree, there is no supporting of racism in blaming liberals for planting signs.

    You have also defended undeniably racist laws, such as those in Arizona.
    I and many others, and I think most in the US, disagree that laws to enforce immigration are racist. The target is people here illegally. True they are hispanic, but there is no targeting of hispanics here legally. The issue is legal status, not race, but liberals always like to play up race.

    You defended birther positions, despite the obvious racism and xenophobia involved.
    Again, no race involved. 1) I dislike his policies and would like to see him marginalized. 2) I have had the opinion that his view of this country is tepid at best. "Sure we think we are exceptional, but so does everyone.". 3) His early years were not in the country, and having been born to a non-US citizen, questions about his own status were reasonable. 4) He has also hid his college records, raising questions as to what he is hiding.

    Racism is easy to define. Denigrating someone specifically because of their race, not for other reasons. As a good example, look at the Jon Stewart mocking Herbert Cain using Amos and Andy. That is racism.


    Trying to deflect that constant racism at Tea Bagger rallies is defending it by denying it exists.

    Courts have found the Arizona law racist as have the groups representing non-illegal Hispanics. I'll take their word for it.

    "Birtherism" on its face is both racist and xenophobic. John McCain was born outside the US but no one questioned his citizenship. And Obama was born TO a U.S. citizen. Case closed. There is no disputing his maternal parent or her citizenship. And he was born in Hawaii, which the state of Hawaii attested to repeatedly. And his college record - one of excellence (Editor of the Harvard Law Review) - is no more hidden than any other politicians and irrelevant.

    Again, you, yourself, are not and do not view yourself as racist, but you have and are continuing to support racist attacks on our first black president.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2011 4:18 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidTrying to deflect that constant racism at Tea Bagger rallies is defending it by denying it exists.

    Courts have found the Arizona law racist as have the groups representing non-illegal Hispanics. I'll take their word for it.

    "Birtherism" on its face is both racist and xenophobic. John McCain was born outside the US but no one questioned his citizenship. And Obama was born TO a U.S. citizen. Case closed. There is no disputing his maternal parent or her citizenship. And he was born in Hawaii, which the state of Hawaii attested to repeatedly. And his college record - one of excellence (Editor of the Harvard Law Review) - is no more hidden than any other politicians and irrelevant.

    Again, you, yourself, are not and do not view yourself as racist, but you have and are continuing to support racist attacks on our first black president.

    I see little evidence that racism is prevalent in the Tea Parties. I do see evidence that some overtly suggest otherwise.

    Some have held the Arizona law invites racial profiling. You can call it racist, but not per the dictionary.

    McCain was born to military parents on active duty. Different situation.

    College record hidden, unlike Bush, Kerry, and Gore. Harvard Law Review is elected, not based on scholarship. But aside from that, how do you know his record was one of excellence?