It is a very sad state in this country that Super Bowl Sunday is treated like a national holiday. And people don’t see how much they are a pawns and lemmings that are exploited by Madison Ave. But as someone once said, fools and their money are soon parted.
“for abortion clinics in the heavily edited, undercover clip” kate, based on this statement alone how do you not do even the minimal level of research to assure that these follow-on accusations, given the previous ones were shown to be fraudulent. To not perform this minimum degree of research and then present this type of crap brings you very close to being an accessory after the fact. In that you are knowing promoting something as fact which you have enough knowledge to understand is as fraudulent as the previous allegations and assertions. But hey you got plenty of clicks on your post.
[-1] February 8, 2016 at 3:34pm
carly i seriously feel sorry for you that you actually waste time choosing and presenting a post this way for the sole purpose of getting people to click on it and thus get you click number up. How proud you must not be.
 February 8, 2016 at 3:30pm
Not surprising to see kelly display a “the world revolves around me” view of the world since she recently adorned the high school bloned with roots slutty girl look. I can only assume she is dealing with some crisis over getting older and loosing viewers during the past few months. No chance it is your show Megyn??? As you can see from her milking the trump feud for all its worth she is about rating over even the most minimal level of journalistic integrity. And clearly she is on a promotional tour.
 February 8, 2016 at 3:26pm
Actually for better context, kelly’s show has benefited from its time slot and for her now to dump on o’reilly and hannity is a rather cheap, bitchy way to address her consistent drop in the ratings.
I will not watch her again after what she did at the debates including the latest one without Trump. Did you see the tapes she ran about the candidates changing their minds about subjects. Can you even imagine what she had prepared for Trump if he showed?
[-2] February 8, 2016 at 3:22pm
“I mean, it was bizarre. … I think it’s anti-Semitism,” Beck said. “[I]t’s just another attack on Jews.”
It really becomes tedious performing the minimum research someone should do before making such an idiotic statement or repeating it in a post. 90% of adult american men are circumcised. And of course only less than 2% of the adult males in the US are jewish.
The fact is the percentage of babies being circumcised in the US has been dropping for some time and today only 33% of newborn boys are circumcised. And part of the reason may be that most health insurance companies do not pay for the procedure.
Right. Since Jews were not specifically targeted (or even mentioned) and since almost all males in America are circumcised, it’s quite a reach for Beck to say this protest was anti-semetic. Unfortunately, I’m not surprised by Beck’s twisted “logic”.
Most of these activists want to ban circumcision. While plenty of non-Jews get circumcised, Jews would be impacted more heavily by a ban.
Actually, Jewish law requires it.
It is a strongly Christian tradition in North America.
In Central American countries (including Mexico) it is less common, as well as eastern nations.
Most insurance companies do consider it elective, but it is not an expensive procedure.
And yes, there are risks associated with being uncircumcised.
To ban it takes away a choice for non-jewish parents. That may or may not be a valid position to have. Personally, unless you can point to real harm likely to occur to the child (which there's no data for), it should remain a choice of the parents. Believe me, I don't mind being circumcised, and I'm glad it happened at a time I can't remember.
But for Jews, it's a religious right. They are commanded by their religion to do it. Outlawing circumcision outlaws being Jewish.
So it's either a bunch of know-nothing busy-bodies trying to force their will on everyone else for no reason or they are anti-Semites wanting the Jews to leave their territory. Either way, they can bugger off.
[-3] February 8, 2016 at 3:16pm
“COUNTRY is being destroyed” But of course you wouldn’t include the worst economic failure since the great depression as the number one factor that has weakened our country. And let’s be clear most of the stuff cruz has said in the past puts him at the drivers seat of the clown car at the circus. But your right let’s go beyond cutesy comparisons and address why nearly 100% of the individuals on both sides of the isle don’t trust or respect him. And spare me the he is the only true anti-washington politician in DC because that his nothing more than another perception he has created. It is difficult to find any member of congress who doesn’t have some colleague, even a similarly deranged one, that would say they trust and respect them. Cruz is nothing more than a fake and phone politician who would say anything to any group to get himself elected. And in those instances where he can’t he cowardly ignores the question, says he never said it, or claims it was done for another reason.
O my...Why don't you tell us how you really feel?
Ted Cruz has spent a lifetime fighting to defend the Constitution — our nation’s founding document and the supreme law of the land — which was crafted by our founding fathers to act as chains to bind the mischief of government and to protect the liberties endowed to us by our Creator.
Defended Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties against Obamacare’s contraception mandate.
Led the way on several cases including a U.S. Supreme Court case that preserved the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Successfully defended the words “under God” in the Texas Pledge of Allegiance and Texas schools’ moment of silence law in federal district court.
Galvanized national support for Houston pastors who had been subpoenaed by the City of Houston to provide the content of their sermons forcing the City to back down.
Supported the right of students to display banners containing religious content at school sporting events.
Successfully defended the constitutionality of the Texas Ten Commandments monument, winning a 5-4 landmark decision before the U.S. Supreme Court, setting an important national precedent for the right to display similar monuments.
Fought to help the Boy Scouts of America to reverse a district court ruling barring them from leasing a public park.
Played a crucial role in preventing federal legislation to restrict the Second Amendment rights of Americans.
Authored legislation to
Authored legislation to strengthen the Second Amendment rights of Americans by allowing interstate firearms sales.
Led 31 states in District of Columbia v. Heller where the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a ban on firearms in a 5-4 landmark decision.Honored by the National Rifle Association with a 2008 resolution for his leadership in the Heller case, which noted that his “efforts made this victory for the American people possible.”
Awarded the NRA’s 2010 Carter-Knight Freedom Fund, which “rewards exemplary activities in the support and protection of the right to Keep and Bear Arms” for his work in the Heller and McDonald cases.
Argued against unreasonable and burdensome gun restrictions before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Recognized by NRA executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre who observed, “Ted Cruz is one of our nation’s leading defenders of the Second Amendment. For over a decade, Ted has fought tirelessly to defend our constitutional right to keep and bear arms, and his leadership was absolutely critical to our major victories before the U.S. Supreme Court.”
Fought and won a landmark ruling for U.S. sovereignty in Medellin v. Texas at the U.S. Supreme Court against 90 foreign nations and the President to ensure the supremacy of U.S. legal system against encroachment by international treaties and rulings of the “World Court.”
Cosponsored a resolution urging the president not to sign the UN Arms Treaty, which would hav
Cosponsored a resolution urging the president not to sign the UN Arms Treaty, which would have subordinated the Second Amendments rights of American citizens to global interests.
Now tell us again what Donald Trump has done? Or Hillary? Or Rubio? Or whomever you are trolling for?
[-10] February 8, 2016 at 3:09pm
Cruz, “But don’t you worry because I voted against the measure that would bar individuals on the terrorist no fly list from being able to purchase a gun legally”. Because even thought they are regarded as a dangerous enough person to qualify for the no fly list, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t make it easy for them to get a gun. And don’t think for a minute I would support baring domestic violence individuals from being able to get guns legally either. So at the end of the day you can be sure I will continue to shoot my mouth off first to say things the angry mob wants to hear rather than pause and think anything through.
There is no due process when being placed on the no fly list.You don't have to be a dangerous person. You could end up on the list as easily as a case of mistaken identity (or heck, even stolen). You could be placed on the list without any chance to defend yourself, and then what?
Hey dead Teddy Kennedy is on the list and should never be allowed a firearm in his grave. I just want to see the celebs walk the walk. Don't just talk the talk. If you believe that guns should be controlled, give your armed details up as a symbol of unity. Wear a T-shirt that says I am a Pacifist and am unarmed in Times Square. It's all about power.
It's more important for the civil society that good American's have a gun that the possible terrorists to have some 'access' to a gun. Terrorists don't get firearms in legal places. They can even steal their firearms. Shocking, right?
JRook, your ignorance is you not understanding how the no fly lists are constructed. There are no standards. Weekly Standard Senior Writer and Fox News Contributor Steve Hayes was placed on that list... as were many others on a list that has grown to 700,000.
Completely dishonest BS is coming out of your mouth bud....
IF....IF...the person is an American Citizen..by Birth or Naturalized...they have a RIGHT enshrined in the Constitution to "Keep and Bear arms" (2nd Amendment) which means that the government at ANY LEVEL...CAN NOT prevent them from buying a weapon without DUE PROCESS( 4th - 6th Amendments) and PROVING that they ARE an Imminent Threat to the SAFETY of their fellow Citizens or have already committed a Federal Felony or been convicted of Treason and thus forfeiting their US Citizenship.
The government can't just "put their name on a No-Fly list" and strip them of their Constitutional Rights. ARE YOU JUST STUPID or that IGNORANT of the LAW?? I don't CARE about your FEELINGS on the subject, I bet that if I made a few calls to the right people I could get you put on that list or ANYONE I wanted, if I knew the right people to bribe, cut deals with, or "Lobby".
You statements are the HEIGHT of IDIOTIC Progressive "feelings into Law" mentality that have driven this country and the WORLD to the brink of World War again and another worldwide economic collapse. Even our Founders, much better Legal Minds than anyone on here, knew that it was much better to let a 1000 guilty men go free than unjustly sentence 1 innocent man.
I will take my chances that 1 innocent man with a gun will step up and stand against the 10 or even 1000 JUSTLY on the No Fly List instead of being a B ITCH and trying to DISARM us all.
Do you know why he voted no on the no fly list? Obviously not! No wonder this country is in this mess! Because it gives this creep the authority to just put anyone they want on that list!!!!mThere already is people that shouldn't be on it cause some buffoon got the names mixed up or just did it!!! That's why!!! For Gods sake get informed before you open your bucket mouth!!!
 February 8, 2016 at 3:04pm
With all do respect you might want to do just a bit of research with regard how it actually works and who is regarded as a visitor as opposed to individuals who meet regularly with the President in defined meetings. And by the way it says they visited the White House not necessarily the President. Clearly he meets with members of his Cabinet on a regular basis and they wouldn’t be required to sign in on a “Visitor Log”. This is why people like rush and GB are dangerous…; because they misrepresent things and put ideas in peoples like you heads, which gets communicated as nonsensical conspiracies or “scary”.
Duh, please check if he visited Bush during his tenure. And let’s pretend you actually do some research for any of your posts….did you check on potential aliases.
[-2] February 8, 2016 at 2:56pm
Perhaps, but you will note that his lawyer does not specifically say he did not know her, but that he wasn’t in Philly at the time of the alleged assault. So perhaps they would rather not provoke a wider inquiry.
JROOK, good point. If it gets settled out of court that would be a clue.
 February 8, 2016 at 2:54pm
Bingo, could not agree with that observation more. And the penalty for a false report, particularly for the sole intent of holding the accused up for money or for revenge, should be equal to that of the falsified claims. So same as rape if rape is alleged or sexual assault, if that is what is alleged. Note some BS misdemeanor filled out a false police report nonsense.
I agree with that, assuming the charge is proven to be intentionally fraudulent. I would say the same for fraudulent charges of any crime, but it's harder to make, for instance, a fraudulent murder charge given that typically someone would need to be dead first.
JROOK and BALTHAZOR, fully agree but would like to add another ingredient: Mike Nifong. Any DA that knowingly prosecutes a crime that is fraudulent needs to be sentenced to life imprisonment.
That stripper that clearly lied through her teeth about the lacrosse players never paid for her lies either.
 February 8, 2016 at 2:51pm
Also interesting to note how the lawyer responded. Because as we know with pseudo celebrities and their lawyers its more what isn’t said than what is said. And you will note he doesn’t say that his client doesn’t know this porn star or has never met her, he merely says he wasn’t in Philly at the time she alleges she was assaulted. So what isn’t being said?
Exactly. There's a lot that could have happened. It's also possible that this actually happened to her, and she just thought the guy that did it to her was Josh Duggar. It's not like men have never pretended to be somebody famous before in order to get sex.
So some guy that kinda looks like Josh Duggar could have pretended that's who he was, and beat up the woman. Or she could have made the whole thing up and figured she could ride the gravy train of his downfall.
I always find it suspicious when people file money-based lawsuits against celebrities, rather than criminal ones. If a guy beats you up, or rapes you, or something like that, a normal person would seek criminal prosecution against the guy. If she claims that he assaulted her, why wouldn't you press charges against him? Why sue him?
Follow the money.
Why do you care.
What matters is what is said in the courtroom. Well, it matters to a jury of his peers. I can speak from personal experience that neither party is interested in the truth but is interested in what can be presented in court and what can be removed from court as evidence. I had a case where I went to court with the state and the state used evidence against me and was considered admissible at the time, although contested, because the evidence used could not be cross-examined by any valid testimony. My medical documents were inadmissible because there was no medical doctor present and therefore could not be cross-examined. I was pulling my hair out as I was ‘convicted’ of a crime but we won on the appeals process and the state didn’t appeal the overturn. There’s a word for our criminal justice system and it is not a fair one. You have to argue with some of the dumbest people for the dumbest reasons and if you don’t, you lose.
HJ you are sadly correct.
Having a good attorney is one of the best financial decisions a person can make.
 February 3, 2016 at 5:22pm
Perhaps you didn’t hear,Cruz is not respected by any member of Congress, including his fellow republicans, so I doubt any of the candidates dropping out will pass their support to him.
You are absolutely right! Ted Cruz is awful, the Republicans and Democrats had to band together against Ted Cruz, to pass a Trillion Dollar budget funding all of Obama’s Programs. They really don’t respect it when someone tries to single-handedly deter “business as usual”.
How Dare he try to stop the funding on big government spending, better we should continue to spiral hopelessly into massive debt.
Ted Cruz should be disrespected for trying to do exactly what he was elected to do, rather than make deals, and “play ball”. We should all become Trumpketeers and support a guy who buys and sells politicians for crony capitalism, and promises to “make deals” with Congress.
Which is why Mitch McConnell's legal rep started a Super PAC that essentially supports Cruz and attacks Trump... Trump also has taken plenty of fire from both sides and the media...
But I don’t want a president that is friends with everyone in congress or goes golfing with Supreme Court justices. A system of checks and balances can’t possibly work the way it was intended to when those doing the checking and balancing are doing so while schmoozing up to each other behind locked doors and drawn curtains.
It would be nice to see Cruz force Republicans to face conservatism again. They have slowly slid to the progressive side of the spectrum and they are uncomfortable doing what they were elected to do. Cruz would shake things up and republicans would line up to work with him because they don’t want to loose to Dems.
 February 3, 2016 at 5:20pm
Oh right but Iowa has been so successful in picking, or have you forgotten they chose Santorum once. lol New Hampshire has a much better record a picking the eventual nominee than Iowa. And let’s remember Cruz only garnered one more delegate than Trump.
Right.....Did you enjoy the terms of President Santorum and President Huckabe?
The Christian Science Monitor said "Iowa might be less about deciding the winner, and more about confirming the losers,"
Iowa Picks Corn...
New Hampshire picks Presidents
 February 3, 2016 at 5:18pm
“Oddly enough, they all said some fellow named Trump was going to win.” But we knew we had sent out the deceptive mailers and decided to extend the rumor that Carson was leaving the race, knowing we would get the majority of his evangelical voters. And voila, it worked. And of course my campaign and/or super PAC funding posts like this doesn’t hurt us either. Because, other than being paid there is no purpose for this post.
Unlike what "Duh Donald" or his followers might believe, I support a candidate because of his record, and his desire for a smaller Government. Not because I was bought and paid for, like some New York Senator, or Mayor.
CNN said that, Cruz just repeated the news.
Yes it make sense now… Cruz is in cahoots with CNN to sway the massive number of Carson voters away from him. Naturally he knew all those voters would come his way and not Trumps… yep sounds like a leftist conspiracy. You people are certifiable. The alternative is that someone saw that Carson was dropping out and retweeted it with their praises in hopes to get a few votes. Simply got caught up in the excitement of the first Caucus. Why let common sense rule your thoughts, better have a good conspiracy.
February 3, 2016 at 5:14pm
Carli, the voters have heard from you and following a slight surge based on your impassioned lie regarding the planned parenthood videos you have plummeted. But you are correct the debate should be narrowed to the top 4, with the remaining also rans left out, including you.
i think you are mistaken. she didn't lie and the videos are just common sense. abortions kill viable children. regardless, no one cares do they?
 February 3, 2016 at 5:07pm
The fact is the Carson is the only truly decent individual running on either side of the political spectrum and clearly the most intelligent. And as such you could see him becoming increasingly disillusioned the campaign churns along and politicians act like the slimey folks they are. As for GB it is one thing to endorse someone. It is another thing to be paid to promote him through your media outlets. And clearly unethical to not disclose you are being paid to promote him and as shown by this segment, provide him cover as needed.
[-4] February 3, 2016 at 4:46pm
Ok what planet are you from Cruz’s communication director, a used car salesmen if I’ve ever seen, admitted they promoted the rumor and sent our the “voting violation” mailings. And Cruz apologized for his campaign spreading the rumor. Both were done purposely by a slimey group of politicians. No doubt Cruz will distance himself and find someone to blame it all on. If his communication director is a guide, Cruz does not object to slimey political operatives.
 February 3, 2016 at 4:39pm
“Equality” be damned….NO..women should not be required to register for the draft. Then they shouldn’t be allowed to serve. Isn’t it bad enough we have ESPN showing college women basketball when only 2-3 players on either team would make a mediocre 8th. grade team. My son has a buddy who attends U. of Louisville and plays on the club baseball team. They challenged the national champion womens basketball team to a game to raise money and beat them by 60 points. Again, a men’s club baseball team. So yes in a sense I agree. They shouldn’t be allowed in the combat roles and thus should not be drafted.