Posted on 07/10/2014 10:41:24 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Morning Joe cohost Joe Scarborough agreed Thursday morning with a Wall Street Journal editorial calling the recent outbreak of impeachment talk, led by Sarah Palin, delusional, and the panel argued that it really said something when the WSJ ed board, not the most liberal cabal that ever gathered, found the GOP’s tactics too extreme.
“I must say for the Wall Street Journal editorial board to talk about extremism is a little much,” MJ regular Cokie Roberts said. “They have certainly been guilty of that themselves, to put it mildly.” (Ahem.)
“Or, maybe it’s a sign things have gotten so extreme that even they see it as extreme,” cohost Mika Brzezinski said.
This came after a poll, led in part by the Wall Street Journal, that found a majority of Americans want Palin to zip it.
Scarborough pointed out that the WSJ ed board had argued against tactics like the government shutdown. “They’ve been helpful,” he said.
Watch the clip below, via MSNBC:
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
Effing idiot. The WSJ isn’t remotely conservative outside some (but not all) of the opinion section. Joe might know this if he could bother to put down his copy of Mother Jones.
Most of these wastes of skin in the media have lived in the progressive shell their whole lives and have no idea how ludicrous their worlview is, but Joe knows. Hookers have more integrity.
Nixon was going to be impeached for covering up illegal activities by his campaign. This administration has used multiple departments of the government to go after political opponents. Which one is worse?
To what extent is the WSJ sympathetic with big government subsides and benefits towards big business? To that extent, the WSJ is sympathetic with unconstitutional socialism and accompanying abuses.
Who did the Wall Street Journal poll..Daily Kos members LOL..WOW, no wonder Mark Levin calls this “Network” MSLSD..first of all, who gives a flying sack of poo what Mika(And her anti semite daddy) and Joe(Hey Joe, at least Sarah Palin didn’t find a dead intern in her office) think
It couldn’t be that the WSJ has moved left, oh nooooooo.
When Robert Bartley died and Paul Gigot, the resident “conservative” at PBS took over the editorial page, it became all amnesty all the time.
Making an assertion - no matter how ludicrous - is the same as stating a fact when your listeners are uneducated.
If MSLSD ever fires him maybe Joe can get a job on The View as their conservative voice.
Don’t forget Al Jazeera and RT.
Have they progressed so far that they think they have outgrown a basic principle of our republic:
"GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE"
It's now government of the bureaucrats, by politicians , and for the well connected.
Max Boot destroyed the WSJ editorial page when he turned it into a strict neocon propaganda sheet. Thankfully, his era is over. But it will never be the dynamic must-read that it was in the ‘80s-’90s.
Doesn’t Rupert Murdoch own it now?
Good gravy!! If 0bama’s activities taken at face value are not sufficient enough for impeachment, just what would these talking heads think *IS* impeachable?
Now, I don’t know if impeaching 0bama would actually cause him any political harm — consider Clinton came out of it with even better ratings and is still a political rock-star among the kool-aid drinkers. But that doesn’t mean impeaching 0bama is a far-fetched idea due to lack of evidence. compared to what Nixon & Clinton were impeached for, 0bama should be a slam dunk to an *objective* media (which no longer exists).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.