Arianna Huffington was just on Jay Leno's show & said she thinks Obama shouldn't have gone to Copen-

[jenmito]

hagan because the economy is so terrible and meanwhile he went to Copenhagan and "got his clock cleaned by Rio." :eyes:

[Clio the Leo]

1. Ok, now lets hear her thoughts on getting Iran to open up their Uranium plants for inspection. NT

[jenmito]

7. She's probably against it. n/t

[Clio the Leo]

14. She's against uranium? Or she's against Iranians?

Or both? lol

[jenmito]

17. I think she's against

saying what she thinks is expected of her.

[PBS Poll-435]

59. !!

:rofl:

[Why Syzygy]

19. Huh?

They've agreed.

http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=8&theme=&usrsess=1&id=270263

They are in compliance. Please don't believe the war drums.

[jenmito]

22. I think Clio is saying that Obama got them to agree to inspections, and asked what

Arianna will say about THAT.

[Clio the Leo]

24. And Clio is ALSO saying.....

.... that Barack Obama knows more about what he's doing than Arianna could ever hope to, so Arianna should go sit down somewhere and be quiet.

[jenmito]

25. Well then...

I agree with you on THAT, too. :hi:

[Cha]

28. Arianna is in the dime a dozen club..

wall to wall yappers who are convinced they know what the president should do, how he should act and what he should say.

Now we know Arianna and Stephen Baldwin think alike. Arianna couldn't come up with any better take on the Obamas going to Copenhagen to make the case for having the Olympics in Chicago in 2016 than this.

[Why Syzygy]

34. Doesn't this feel like a replay to anyone?

(...)
What has Iran said?

President Ahmadinejad said: "We have no secrecy." He said the facility was open for inspection by the IAEA and was 18 months away from completion. Iran acknowledged the plant in a letter to the IAEA four days before Mr Obama's announcement. It told the IAEA that the project was a pilot and would enrich uranium only to low levels. It later said there were no other plants.

Did Iran violate IAEA rules in not declaring this plant earlier?

President Ahmadinejad said it was being built in conformity with IAEA rules and that Iran had given much more notice of it than required.

However, there is a dispute between Iran and the IAEA over the notice that has to be given before a nuclear facility is made operational. Iran says that, under its safeguards agreement with the IAEA, it need only declare a facility 180 days before nuclear material is inserted into it and that in this case it had given about a year's notice.

However, the IAEA says that in 2003, after the main enrichment plant at Natanz was discovered, Iran agreed on what's called a Subsidiary Arrangement to its safeguards agreement, under which it would inform the IAEA of any new facility at the preliminary design stage. Iran later repudiated this arrangement, saying that it had not been ratified by its parliament but the IAEA says that no such unilateral repudiation is allowed.

So Western governments argue that Iran did violate the rules. The IAEA agrees. (...)

Why is Iran refusing to obey the Security Council resolutions?

Under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), a signatory state has the right to enrich uranium to be used as fuel for civil nuclear power. Such states have to remain under inspection from the IAEA. Iran is under such inspection. However, only those signatory states with nuclear weapons at the time of the treaty in 1968 are allowed to enrich to the much higher level needed for a nuclear weapon.

Iran says it is simply doing what it is allowed to do under the treaty and intends only to enrich to the level needed for nuclear power station fuel. It blames the Security Council resolutions on political pressure from the US and its allies. It argues that it needs nuclear power and wants to control the whole process itself.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly stressed that Iran will not yield to international pressure: "The Iranian nation will not succumb to bullying, invasion and the violation of its rights," he has said.

What does Iran say about developing nuclear weapons?

It says it will not break its obligations under the NPT and will not use the technology to make a nuclear bomb.

On 18 September 2009, President Ahmadinejad told NBC News: "We don't need nuclear weapons... it's not a part of our programmes and plans."

He said that nuclear-armed states should themselves give up their nuclear weapons.

Shortly afterwards Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who is reported to have issued a fatwa some time ago against nuclear weapons said: "We fundamentally reject nuclear weapons."(...)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4031603.stm

[BeyondGeography]

2. Devastating, absolutely devastating

:sarcasm:

[jenmito]

5. I never said it was devastating.

I just gave it an :eyes:.

[BeyondGeography]

18. I'm giving her shit, not you

:hi:

[jenmito]

20. Oops...

I misunderstood. Sorry. :hi:

[Thrill]

3. Shes been an asshole for a while now

Save the criticism in front of large audiences for the real bad guys. Instead shes up their repeating the RW talking points. Shes beginning to show her true colors.

[jenmito]

9. And she CHOSE to talk about it. She had a choice of topics to choose from

for this "roundtable discussion." The RW Baldwin brother was there too, and ALSO said it was a mistake, saying Obama failed to get the Olympics and he's going to fail AGAIN (I guess regarding HCR). :eyes:

[jbnow]

26. Exactly, that bugged me the most. She had 1st choice and chose THAT

so she could criticize him...on a day he got such nasty slams already. When she chose it I thought she'd say something supportive about the effort he made or object to republicans celebrating it.
Heck I hoped the question would get to McCain. She'd probably have been more reasonable that Huffington.

Really irritated me. Don't care what she thinks really but she didn't have to do that.

[jenmito]

27. Yeah...

but when she chose it, I had a feeling she WOULD say something negative, at least I was afraid she might. And she did. Why couldn't she have just picked something else rather than slamming him when he was down?!

I agree that Meghan McCain would've probably said something positive about it.

[firedupdem]

4. she can STFU n/t

[xchrom]

6. i LOVE the responses here so far!

:rofl:

[ruggerson]

30. I'd swear it was satire if I didn't know better

[babylonsister]

8. Arianna, a tool? Say it isn't so!

Jeebus, she needs to catch up! Even ballon-juice got it right, with a r/wer and politico!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8682417&mesg_id=8682417

[buff2]

10. Sometimes I wonder who's side she's really on

plus I have a hard time understanding her when she talks. :shrug:

[Exilednight]

42. She's never claimed to be on any side since dumping her far right positions, she's moved .......

to the political center, maybe slightly right of center.

[sandnsea]

11. cynical chic

A certain group of liberal elites who are afraid of being ridiculed by their friends if they say anything positive about any politician except the flavor of the day. They're just as big of fools as the Limbaughs and Becks.

[Jennicut]

40. You nailed it. She makes me want to puke and so do her hysterical headlines on her website.

[mopinko]

66. +1

[gateley]

12. I disagree, but we all have our own opinion. nt

[Cha]

13. That's too bad Arianna doesn't have a clue what this

is about and put herself in the same bin with stephen baldwin.

[jenmito]

15. I agree. I was surprised...

but she's friends with Bill Maher. Maybe they both decided to "go rogue."

[Cha]

21. They should be embarrassed to get up there and act

so freakin' clueless. It's really a dumbell rw bottom of the barrel sleaze point and has nothing to do with reality.

[Jennicut]

41. I am highly skeptical of that little crew

Maher and Coulter and Huffington.

[PopSixSquish]

16. What Arianna and other Pundits Don't Realize is the Olympics Were Always a Long Shot for Chicago

The United States has hosted 4 Olympic Games in the past 30 years - Lake Placid, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Salt Lake City.

The White House knew this and that's why Obama ultimately went. Not because it "was in the bag" as the media had you believe. He went because it wasn't and more than likely Chicago was #4 on the list before this last round of meetings.

Rio was always the front-runner. No country in the Southern hemisphere with the exception of Australia had hosted them and Australia hosted them twice - Melbourne and Sydney.

If the Olympics truly belong to the world, then they need to take place in different parts of it. I wouldn't be surprised to see the 2020 games also take place in the Southern Hemisphere and possibly in Africa...

[Cha]

23. I know ..they really should get their collective

head out of their collective ass.

Arianna, shame on you..huffpost.

[EmilyAnne]

29. That's four hours that President Obama will NEVER get back! NEVER! nt

[uberblonde]

31. Arianna is a flake.

Let's not go there.

[ProSense]

32. She had a difficult choice to make.

tough call

:rofl:

[question everything]

33. So??

Why should her opinion matter?

[jenmito]

43. Why SHOULDN'T it? You're free not to care.

:shrug:

[Rincewind]

35. Interesting,

now explain why I, or anyone else should give a fuck about what she thinks.

[jenmito]

44. She is a commentator who many people pay attention to. You don't have to be one of

them.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

36. I just love how dems can't stick together for shit, even on a simple thing like this.

[iceman66]

37. ALL OF THE OTHER HEADS OF STATE WENT!

If Obama had been the only one, this would be a valid criticism.

With all the others going, if Obama had not gone he SURELY would have been blamed for the loss!

[jenmito]

45. Exactly. And he went overnight, coming back by the next afternoon.

He even met with Gen. McChrystal along the way. I can't stand people who criticize him for doing what he would've been criticized for NOT doing.

[malletgirl02]

60. IOC

I also heard that some of the IOC got mad at him because he stayed such a short time.

[Marsala]

49. But the U.S. is more special! OUR President should only go if the fix is in!

Or so everyone seems to think.

[ErinBerin84]

38. good grief

I think this is a dumb thing to criticize him on Obama was there was what, 24 hours at the most? It took up a week's worth of news cycle? The US has spent time and effort on dumber stuff, and Obama was going for the Chicago economic angle here (not that there is uniform agreement on a positive effect that olympics have on the economy, but still).This "he went and LOSTTTT!" is the wimpiest shit I've ever heard. Criticize his economic policies if you want, but I think it's just weak to go at it from this angle.

[hileeopnyn8d]

39. I have never understood her appeal.

I don't think she's a liberal or a Democrat, I think she's an opportunist.

She was a conservative writer, wife of a Republican oil millionaire congressman. She ran a website calling for Clinton to resign, she wrote scores of articles every one of them supportive of Republicans. And I'm expected to believe that in 2004 she suddenly saw the light? When the political climate started changing, what she saw was $$$$$$ and opportunity. I mean come on, she hired Andrew Breitbart to help her launch Huffington Post!

[jenmito]

47. Wow-I never knew she

hired Breitbart to help her launch HuffPo!

[hileeopnyn8d]

52. Incredible, isn't it?

Here's an old article from CNet that mentions it:

http://news.cnet.com/Breitbart.com-has-Drudge-to-thank-for-its-success---page-2/2100-1025_3-5976096-2.html

Here's a blog post from Jonathan V. Last (he writes for the Weekly Standard, which says it all if you ask me)- http://galleyslaves.blogspot.com/2005/05/huffington-post.html

Tuesday, May 10, 2005
The Huffington Post

Welcome to The Huffington Post, the new blog/news portal run by my old friends Arianna Huffington and Andrew Breitbart.

Most of the attention this new project is going to receive will be focused on its monstrous blog, but in the long run, I suspect that the Huffington Post may come to be valued as much for its function as a news aggregator. Breitbart is a genius and the Huffington Post could well become the new Drudge Report.

10:00 AM | posted by Jonathan V. Last

[jenmito]

55. Yuck...

so she's "in bed" with the RWers (maybe literally). :puke:

[WCGreen]

48. That's why I shy away from Huffington Post because she is involved

with it...

She was right there, blaming clinton for everything and anything in the 90's. She was a charter member of the Vast Right-Wing conspiracy.

[jenmito]

51. Thanks for the info.

That explains some of the stories at HuffPo. :hi:

[AspenRose]

65. I agree.

Opportunist of the highest order

[Odin2005]

46. Huffington can go suck an egg

Her online rag is a joke, too.

[Meshuga]

50. There was nothing wrong with Obama going to Chicago

Part of the problem that hurt Chicago (besides the flawless campaign from the Rio de Janeiro delegation) is one that is related to the last question asked by an IOC member during Chicago's presentation which I want to somewhat paraphrase it here (with what was implicit): how are foreigners going to be treated when coming to the US for the Olympics?

This is big because many foreigners complain about the way they are treated by US immigration at the airports and some of other negative sentiments toward certain foreigners, that Chicago may not share, but some other parts of the country are passionate about. Ask an American citizen named Mohamed if he feels comfortable at the airport or being pulled over by the police in certain parts of the country. Remember all the mistrust of foreign students with the issue of student visas during the last administration? Getting a simple tourist visa to come to the US is not easy for some nations. For some countries, people who want to visit the US have to pay a large fee for the investigation that has to be performed in order for a visa to be issued. And that does not guarantee their admission upon arrival as they could be sent right back in handcuffs if an immigration officer thinks that a person is coming here to find employment.

What we learned in Copenhagen is that Obama's clout and popularity loses out to the policies from the Bush years and from all the nuttiness of our right wingers who get a lot of airplay here in the US as if they have valid concerns.

[Cha]

54. No, it was the right thing to do..and if the corporatemedia's

rage on sterioids has any silver lining it's to remind PO, once again how fucking detrimental they are to our country.

[Metric System]

53. I wonder if Arianna is turning back into a Republican now that a Dem is President?

[bigwillq]

56. I think Obama

did the right thing by going. And I don't think it's a failure that we didn't get the Games. We didn't win. That's all. It happens. We had the Games so many times. It's not a loss that we didn't get them this time.

[BlooInBloo]

57. Harden the fuck up, Arianna.

[jenmito]

58. Maybe she IS-and that means going back to her Repub. ways.

[rmp yellow]

61. So if Obama didn't go to Copenhaghen the economy would have improved?

Arianna is not the brightest liberal.

[DuaneBidoux]

62. I never particularly thought it was a great move. But it made conservatives look pathetic again.

(not that they need any help).

[jenmito]

67. If he hadn't gone (and we hadn't gotten the Olympics) the Repubs. would've said

he's un-American, doesn't love our country, and that's why he didn't go.

[Jakes Progress]

63. I was just on DU and said Arianna shouldn't have gone on Leno. nt

[watercolors]

64. Such bull Sh--!

can't stand the woman, anoys the hell out of me!

[LittleBlue]

68. LMAO. Well, his image wasn't helped by losing the games, but really..

Chicago losing it had nothing to do with him.

[TheKentuckian]

69. I sometimes suspect Arianna of just being oppositional

She seems to end up on the opposite side of power after an initial honeymoon and if that is the case then she's not alone.