PDA

View Full Version : The Count of Monte Lefto


Whatfur
07-11-2010, 11:36 PM
Uncle Ebb feared my suggestion that a tally could be made of the heads here being something related to the fairness doctrine. Fear not...it is reality I wish to demonstrate. Now I could go back and base the tally on history...but I figured we, being all forward thinkers, would be happy to compile the tally as we went along. So lets start with 7/11 and we can pretty much go as long as we want. Of course, I won't be watching every vlog nor will I know some of the heads so I will take suggestions of corrections but may make some of my assignments based on place of employment and peers thereof. May we all be surprised.

7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

Total: 2(L) 0(C) %: 100(L) 0(C)

graz
07-11-2010, 11:46 PM
http://dummidumbwit.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/troll-1.jpg

I am not disingenuous. I am a right leaning champion of freedom and balance.
Hear me wimpfur, watch me sputter, know that logic or evidence are unessential to my theater. I am right, you all are being played masterfully by me. I'm old, I use internet explorer, my constant companion is a blow-up doll.
I have an important job, wear mucklucks and fish in an ice-hole most winters.

bjkeefe
07-11-2010, 11:54 PM
[...] Now I could go back and base the tally on history...but I figured we, being all forward thinkers, would be happy to compile the tally as we went along. So lets start with 7/11 ...

In other words, today's matchup was full of liberal bias with all of its liberally biased diavloggers showing their liberal bias. Case closed!!!1!

(Unfortunately, the past week's, the past month's, and the past year's worth of data all fail to support the hypothesis. But as we all know, remembering history accurately shows liberal bias. Just ask Amity Shlaes or Glenn Beck. Or anyone on any Breitbart site.)

Wonderment
07-12-2010, 12:01 AM
Is BHTV supposed to be "fair and balanced?"

Just watch what you like and leave the rest. I personally am so sick of Kagan, Frum, Goldberg and Kaus that I'll never watch any of them again.

The only righties I can stand listening to on here are Matt Lewis (modest with a sense of humor) and Eli Lake (very smart and inclined to reporting rather than bloviating). Pinkerton I can handle every once in a while on nice-guy-to-have-a-beer-with grounds.

Whatfur
07-12-2010, 12:19 AM
Is BHTV supposed to be "fair and balanced?"

Just watch what you like and leave the rest. I personally am so sick of Kagan, Frum, Goldberg and Kaus that I'll never watch any of them again.

The only righties I can stand listening to on here are Matt Lewis (modest with a sense of humor) and Eli Lake (very smart and inclined to reporting rather than bloviating). Pinkerton I can handle every once in a while on nice-guy-to-have-a-beer-with grounds.


No its not nor am I suggesting it should be. This is just to gather information so commenters on both sides have some actual data to go by when they choose to talk numbers here. Of course, in reality there should be some sort of weighting not only per individual but if ..say... two lefties are on together then well that should maybe be give an extra lib point. But we will start out doing it straight.

Don Zeko
07-12-2010, 02:33 AM
Bad news for your thesis, whatfur:http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/29383

bjkeefe
07-12-2010, 02:40 AM
Bad news for your thesis, whatfur:http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/29383

All together now?

NOT A REAL CONSERVATIVE!!!1!

Whatfur
07-12-2010, 08:56 AM
Bad news for your thesis, whatfur:http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/29383

Yep, Zeke its over, we can turn out the lights and go home. Or maybe I stir the pot just for fun and include Saturday. (that which would have added 4 more Ls)

I really have no thesis. My guess is about 65/35 and whatever the numbers are it will not change this from being a lefty site. Maybe you are not familiar with the little study I did on comments and commenters here a while back when similar drummings were heard from the ignorant. I will try to dig it up for you as it is really a insightful, fur classic.

Whatfur
07-12-2010, 09:03 AM
7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

I haven't watched this one (albeit his stint with Dayo a couple months ago might give me more to go on) and know little of Noah but based on reaction here I will assume he is considered conservative...just like some consider Ross that.

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

Total: 2(L) 2(C) %: 50(L) 50(C)

Whatfur
07-12-2010, 09:51 AM
Actually Zeke...start here (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=120650#post120650)...the stats (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=120784#post120784)come a bit later but there is insight of your own to be gained I think by watching the progression.

bjkeefe
07-12-2010, 01:47 PM
Maybe you are not familiar with the little study I did on comments and commenters here a while back when similar drummings were heard from the ignorant. I will try to dig it up for you as it is really a insightful, fur classic.

On that part I bolded we can agree, although probably not in a way you would be happy about.

bjkeefe
07-12-2010, 01:48 PM
7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

Did I call it or what?

All together now?

NOT A REAL CONSERVATIVE!!!1!

kezboard
07-12-2010, 07:55 PM
http://elvis-pelt.com/wambulance.jpg

There are many, many times on this board where I have felt the need to post a silly internet image macro, but I've never stooped to that level until today. I think it's appropriate. There's really nothing to do at this point but call the waaaambulance.

Whatfur
07-12-2010, 10:03 PM
http://elvis-pelt.com/wambulance.jpg

There are many, many times on this board where I have felt the need to post a silly internet image macro, but I've never stooped to that level until today. I think it's appropriate. There's really nothing to do at this point but call the waaaambulance.

Actually kez, the hope is to quell the crying on both sides about where we are at.

bjkeefe
07-12-2010, 10:30 PM
Actually kez, the hope is to quell the crying on both sides about where we are at.

http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/9709/roflba.gif

graz
07-12-2010, 10:38 PM
http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/9709/roflba.gif

It's as if he has selective amnesia and imagines that forum participants suffer from the same affliction.

Whatfur
07-12-2010, 11:02 PM
With trolls in tow.

Whatfur
07-13-2010, 12:10 AM
7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

Total: 3(L) 3(C) %: 50(L) 50(C)

bjkeefe
07-13-2010, 02:27 AM
Emph. added:



7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/228/rolleye0014.gif

Equivalent 'fur:

Here, let us do some trials and record the results to determine whether this six-sided die is fair, or whether it is biased towards landing on low numbers.

I begin by defining 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 as LowNumbers™ ...

popcorn_karate
07-13-2010, 03:31 PM
Emph. added:



http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/228/rolleye0014.gif

Equivalent 'fur:

you don't think Douthat, Salam, and Millman are conservatives? or lowery a liberal?

bjkeefe
07-13-2010, 03:34 PM
you don't think Douthat, Salam, and Millman are conservatives? or lowery a liberal?

You talkin' to me?

[Added] Oh, wait. My bad. I somehow got it into my head that 'fur's (C) meant "centrist." (I expected to see an (R) (right) as opposed to (L) (left.)

Can't imagine why I thought that, but if it turns out he meant "conservative" with his (C)s, I withdraw my previous bit of snark.

kezboard
07-13-2010, 05:54 PM
Actually kez, the hope is to quell the crying on both sides about where we are at.

Thanks, but I'm not crying about too many conservatives at bhtv. I actually like listening to the conservatives here -- I even enjoyed Jonah Goldberg's last diavlog.

I'm on the young end of the bhtv demographic, as I'm sure all of you know, but even I'm old enough to remember when conservatives called out liberals for valorizing victimization. This is a point about which I think conservatives were at least somewhat in the right -- there's no need to give more credit to some person's absurd beliefs simply because they're a reaction to some kind of marginalization, and the "Oppression Olympics" is a distraction from actual fruitful political discourse. But you've all completely given up on that point and are now competing harder than anyone on the left ever has. It's incredibly obnoxious. The politics of resentment are ugly wherever they're coming from. Quit being a douchebag.

Whatfur
07-13-2010, 06:04 PM
Thanks, but I'm not crying about too many conservatives at bhtv. I actually like listening to the conservatives here -- I even enjoyed Jonah Goldberg's last diavlog.

That's good. Similarly or Symmetrically or ???, Jonah Goldberg at times drives me nuts. Again, there was talk of all the lefty heads here while the lefty commenters started bringing up all the conservatives who exist here and I thought a little breakdown might be interesting. Even the insults show some interest.

Whatfur
07-13-2010, 09:34 PM
Total: 5(L) 3(C) %: 62.5(L) 37.5(C)

7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

nikkibong
07-14-2010, 11:08 PM
7/14--Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)



not sure i agree with what you've done here, given that a) it was not an explicitly political diavlog, and b) even if you were to give it a political valence, wouldn't it be a "conservative" one? after all, they were arguing the anti-jezebel, aka, the anti-liberal feminist case.

graz
07-14-2010, 11:11 PM
Total: 7(L) 3(C) %: 70(L) 30(C)

7/14--Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

Are you about to remove your shoes to address (count) the next dv?

Whatfur
07-14-2010, 11:37 PM
Are you about to remove your shoes to address (count) the next dv?

"People love a hilarious hooker!"

Whatfur
07-14-2010, 11:44 PM
Total: 7(L) 3(C) %: 70(L) 30(C)

7/14--Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

Whatfur
07-14-2010, 11:55 PM
not sure i agree with what you've done here, given that a) it was not an explicitly political diavlog, and b) even if you were to give it a political valence, wouldn't it be a "conservative" one? after all, they were arguing the anti-jezebel, aka, the anti-liberal feminist case.

The same thing, of course, hit me and then after listening to tidbits, a few other things struck me. First, the one works for the Daily show so I figure when BHtv has the creator of "Red Eye" on things will even out. Second, assuming both voted...who do you think they voted for? Third, EVERYONE gets a label...if you have an argument for a different one or have evidence of such, I will be happy to hear it out.

Don Zeko
07-15-2010, 02:54 AM
But presumably you suspect that there will be many more liberals than conservatives on, and presumably you find this objectionable because you think that it will produce a final product that doesn't fairly represent Conservative points of view. But for DV's that aren't discussing issues with any obvious valence to contemporary political debates, or if you have Liberals in the position of arguing a heartfelt conservative position, then that's not actually evidence that bhtv is over-representing Liberals PoV's.

Whatfur
07-15-2010, 09:04 AM
...presumably you suspect.... ...presumably you find ....

Not really. I have been watching vlogs here for a couple years Zeke so my opinion has already been set by true osmosis. As already alluded the numbers are for those people who do not seem to be able to get their minds around the reality of the fact that this IS a liberal-leaning blog. BTW, ok that it is!! I would have not continued my presence here if I did not feel it beneficial. Maybe a good question is whether YOU would frequent a similar place where the numbers were reversed...both in heads and commenters.

As to the other point, liberalism is not all politics and its presence is not all about the politico. It comes out in many ways ( see Walter Cronkite, ask Dave Weigel) Come Saturday "presumably", John and George will get "L"s too.

I thought I was on your ignore list?

In any case, this is not the first time this little Dryden piece has come to mind here.

"All, all, of a piece throughout;
Thy chase had a beast in view;
Thy wars brought nothing about;
Thy lovers were all untrue.
'Tis well an old age is out,
And time to begin a new."

bjkeefe
07-15-2010, 10:09 AM
Are you about to remove your shoes to address (count) the next dv?

Only if they have shit on them!

kezboard
07-15-2010, 11:12 AM
First, the one works for the Daily show so I figure when BHtv has the creator of "Red Eye" on things will even out.

Does anyone actually watch that show? I'm asking that in all seriousness. I've seen it before while flipping channels and I'm always like "What the hell is this?"

Whatfur
07-15-2010, 12:03 PM
Total: 8(L) 4(C) %: 66.7(L) 33.3(C)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(C)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

Whatfur
07-16-2010, 12:48 AM
Total: 8(L) 6(C) %: 57(L) 43(C)

7/15--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(C)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

bjkeefe
07-16-2010, 07:35 AM
[...]

Suggestion: since you appear to be interested in keeping at this, maybe you should (also) store your data collection in a Google Docs spreadsheet (http://www.google.com/google-d-s/spreadsheets/). At the very least, it'll be a cleaner table, and you might also find it handy to be able to add some columns later on (affiliations, perhaps?), or to re-sort the data by name, or any of a bunch of things.

Whatfur
07-16-2010, 07:55 PM
Total: 9(L) 7(C) %: 56(L) 44(C)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(C)

7/15--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(C)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

chiwhisoxx
07-16-2010, 09:54 PM
Somewhat interesting that no one has decided to try and refute his premise about ideological imbalance. Someone did ask if that's the point of BHTV. I don't really know if it's the point. But it's something I'm pretty sure Bob strives for, and I think you can make an argument that getting closer to an equilibrium would be nice for a lot of reasons.

bjkeefe
07-16-2010, 10:40 PM
... and I think you can make an argument that getting closer to an equilibrium would be nice for a lot of reasons.

Evidently you, however, cannot.

Balance for the sake of Balance™ is for the ... what's that term your darlings love to use? Ah, yes, Lamestream Media.

Go watch PJTV if you're not getting enough wingnuttery. And save your ref-working for someone who hasn't been hearing it from your angry old furry friend for the last two years. Cheeses H. Rice, the two of you act like there's no place else to go on the Internet.

Whatfur
07-16-2010, 11:17 PM
Evidently you, however, cannot.

Balance for the sake of Balance™ is for the ... what's that term your darlings love to use? Ah, yes, Lamestream Media.

Go watch PJTV if you're not getting enough wingnuttery. And save your ref-working for someone who hasn't been hearing it from your angry old furry friend for the last two years. Cheeses H. Rice, the two of you act like there's no place else to go on the Internet.

Wow...and I just commented about you not linking to "Balloon Spit" much anymore ...being nice and not providing a link. That can be remedied.

graz
07-16-2010, 11:20 PM
Wow...and I just commented about you not linking to "Balloon Spit" much anymore ...being nice and not providing a link. That can be remedied.

...and the horse you rode in on... countfur.

Whatfur
07-16-2010, 11:42 PM
...and the horse you rode in on... countfur.

I know, I know, graz... still feeling bad because your long stroking him over his own blog's post about BHtv... swelled his... head. It was unfortunate that you gave him the confidence to post over at what once was an alter to him. Such a sad, belittling situation you put him in. Nice work. Let me guess, you are a professional agent. Even after I posted what I did above I still wasn't going to bother with linking back there again...and still won't. But just so you know you failed him again by your troll intrusion, how about just the final 2 comments which kind of sum things up perfectly anyway?

Oh and my horse thanks you, he hadn't had sex in quite some time.

140

graz
07-17-2010, 12:10 AM
Oh and my horse thanks you, he hadn't had sex in quite some time.



No problemo... and here's some lovin' betwix you and your canine companion:
You come across as less romantic in the forum. (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3692514&id=301204760764)

You're partial to the furry kind, yes? (http://www.youtube.com/user/whatfur)

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 12:13 AM
Actually, not me, but nice dog.

141

graz
07-17-2010, 12:17 AM
Actually, not me, but nice dog.

The likeness is uncanine (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3692514&id=301204760764#!/photo.php?pid=3690393&id=301204760764&fbid=301231310764)

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 12:34 AM
The likeness is uncanine (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3692514&id=301204760764#!/photo.php?pid=3690393&id=301204760764&fbid=301231310764)

Sorry...those pictures hold two different people. Who are you graz? Besides the lowest kind of scrub this medium holds. Out me, Mr. Courage. How about yourself, troll boy.

141

graz
07-17-2010, 12:38 AM
...Out me...

Nobody cares who you are and everyone knows what you are.

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 12:40 AM
Nobody cares who you are and everyone knows what you are.

Nobody cares. Then why are you stalking me here and around the internet you creepy thing.

141

graz
07-17-2010, 12:41 AM
Nobody cares. Then why are you stalking me here and around the internet you creepy thing.

Have you ever heard of the google?

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 12:45 AM
Have you ever heard of the google?

Sure have, great tool for creepy things like you to stalk people with.

141

graz
07-17-2010, 12:48 AM
Sure have, great tool for creepy things like you to stalk people with.

141

Reminder: You're posting on a public forum. You have a public youtube channel doofus... what's your beef?

chiwhisoxx
07-17-2010, 12:53 AM
Evidently you, however, cannot.

Balance for the sake of Balance™ is for the ... what's that term your darlings love to use? Ah, yes, Lamestream Media.

Go watch PJTV if you're not getting enough wingnuttery. And save your ref-working for someone who hasn't been hearing it from your angry old furry friend for the last two years. Cheeses H. Rice, the two of you act like there's no place else to go on the Internet.

Really? Simply because I didn't choose to make the argument there means I can't make it? That's some pretty solid logic. As it turns out, I remember an old thread where I was asking about ideological asymmetry. I don't remember all the gory details, but it ended in you accusing me of enjoying torture in a pornographic way. Not exactly your finest moment. And then in Commentators Court, Bob and Aryeh discussed it, and agreed with me! Bob said, something close to verbatim, that diavlogs are better when you have people disagreeing about things. He also pointed out your lack of manners, but I suppose that isn't the point.

I don't really know what you mean by "ref working", because my influence is pretty limited, and I'm asking for something to happen that I know is already actively pursued by BHTV. So please.

And by the way, I don't act like there's no where else to go on the internet. But I think BHTV has a pretty good thing going. I really like the concept, and I like a lot of the people who appear, and I enjoy debating, so I'd like to participate in a vibrant forum community to discuss the site. And in said vibrant community, I'd like to not log onto the forums and see that 85% of the threads on the front page are threads created by you whining about your delusions of conservatives. I watched this site for a really long time before I commented. And I swear to god, I'm not making this up, you and a few others were the main roadblock to me posting. Your snide tone and condescending dismissal of people is a pretty good disincentive to posting. You jump at everyone who you sniff out as slightly to your right, post everywhere, and essentially try to make yourself omnipotent here. And it's fucking annoying.

But I posted once anyways, just because I felt strongly about something. And you welcomed me with a nice comment in the first line...and then were snide and dismissive, doing your trademark "quote every four words and comment on them" maneuver. I shouldn't have expected anything more. It doesn't matter, it's going to continue to be this way. I've just felt the need to say this for a while, and despite the inevitable response I'll get, it feels good.

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 12:59 AM
Reminder: You're posting on a public forum. You have a public youtube channel doofus... what's your beef?

Whatever stalker boy. Who are you? Mr. Courage. Come on...give us something to google, creep.



bjkeefe. proof that flashers now come back and whine about not getting reviews of their performance. whew, there are still surprises to be had in this world.

graz
07-17-2010, 01:00 AM
... I've just felt the need to say this for a while, and despite the inevitable response I'll get, it feels good...
After you get past the thrill... keep posting... you're smart and interesting... at least so far :)

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 01:03 AM
After you get past the thrill... keep posting... you're smart and interesting... at least so far :)

Start with googling Chicago White Sox Fan.

chiwhisoxx
07-17-2010, 01:18 AM
After you get past the thrill... keep posting... you're smart and interesting... at least so far :)

I really appreciate that, and I'm glad you think so.

bjkeefe
07-17-2010, 05:12 AM
[...]

Oh and my horse thanks you, he hadn't had sex in quite some time.

140

Actually, not me, but nice dog.

141

This is just comical coming from someone who is always whimpering about being "stalked."

bjkeefe
07-17-2010, 05:20 AM
Not exactly your finest moment. And then in Commentators Court, Bob and Aryeh discussed it, and agreed with me!

That's some pretty solid logic.

Indeed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority).

... I'd like to not log onto the forums and see that 85% of the threads on the front page are threads created by you ...

Hard fact of life: it's not all about you. If you're not happy here, go elsewhere, or learn how to use the Ignore List. But whining about how things aren't exactly to your liking, especially in alliance with ol' 'furry there, is going to get you nowhere.

I watched this site for a really long time before I commented. And I swear to god, I'm not making this up, you and a few others were the main roadblock to me posting.

Based on your babbling the past couple of days, I can only say I wish I knew that back then. I would have tried harder.

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 10:51 AM
This is just comical coming from someone who is always whimpering about being "stalked."

You originally linked to the things here. So yeah, I stalked you with the links you provided. Doh!

bjkeefe
07-17-2010, 10:52 AM
You originally linked to the things here. So yeah, I stalked you with the links you provided. Doh!

If you say so.

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 10:57 AM
Ha, you and graz must have got your signal books mixed up. chiwhisoxx fan simply has your number, just like so many others have here in the past. There is no "alliance" between the Chicagoan and myself, although I certainly share with him the clarity of your being.

graz
07-17-2010, 11:01 AM
...give us something... creep.


Just fur u. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qnd-hdmgfk&feature=related)

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 11:04 AM
Just fur u. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qnd-hdmgfk&feature=related)

Of course you can't, you sniveling little laprey.

bjkeefe
07-17-2010, 11:05 AM
Ha, you and graz must have got your signal books mixed up. chiwhisoxx fan simply has your number, just like so many others have here in the past. There is no "alliance" between the Chicagoan and myself, although I certainly share with him the clarity of your being.

I do love me some 'furry sputterin' and backpedalin'!

Be interesting to see whether chi sticks with you or figures you out, though.

Question: how long until you start referring to him as "Mr. Soxx?" (cf. (http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Abloggingheads.tv&q=%22mr.+stones%22)) <-- That was just too precious!

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 11:06 AM
Total: 11(L) 7(C) %: 61(L) 39(C)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(C)

7/15--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(C)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 11:13 AM
I do love me some 'furry sputterin' and backpedalin'!

...

Practiced in the art of projection.

graz
07-17-2010, 11:16 AM
Total: 11(L) 7(C) %: 61(L) 39(C)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(C)

7/15--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(C)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

elementary. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJxKvwMIVtA)

graz
07-17-2010, 11:18 AM
Of course you can't, you sniveling little laprey.

Too funny! Me and the missus had a wager on whether you'd bite.
We all win!

bjkeefe
07-17-2010, 11:35 AM
... projection.

Y'know, as long as you're using your mad 'puter skilz to collect data, why not keep also keep track of how many times you use that word (http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Abloggingheads.tv&q=whatfur+projection)? It's gotta be close to edging out "Perez" and "Queef"* by now, being that it is your only retort besides "I win!!!1!" and "you have shit on you'r shoez!!!1!"

=========

* (And now you will blockquote just these three words, to give yourself a woody. Have fun! Or as much fun as is possible, being you!)

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 11:46 AM
Y'know, as long as you're using your mad 'puter skilz to collect data, why not keep also keep track of how many times you use that word (http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Abloggingheads.tv&q=whatfur+projection)? It's gotta be close to edging out "Perez" and "Queef"* by now, being that it is your only retort besides "I win!!!1!" and "you have shit on you'r shoez!!!1!"

=========

* (And now you will blockquote just these three words, to give yourself a woody. Have fun! Or as much fun as is possible, being you!)

Ho Hum. Bye Queef. I have been asked by the powers that be to just leave you alone to perform your little pirouettes.

bjkeefe
07-17-2010, 11:49 AM
Ho Hum. Bye Queef. I have been asked by the powers that be to just leave you alone to perform your little pirouettes.

If that's your story ... okay. I'm sure that if by some remote chance it's true, they appreciate the classy way you brought it to an end.

Consistency, thy name is 'furry.

graz
07-17-2010, 11:49 AM
...I have been asked by the powers that be...

Because once again, you high-tailed it, while crying, to the refs.

Fail... again... furry 1... too funny... pathetic...

Whatfur
07-17-2010, 01:03 PM
Because once again, you high-tailed it, while crying, to the refs.

Fail... again... furry 1... too funny... pathetic...

Ha! What a pair you are.

graz
07-17-2010, 01:12 PM
Ha! What a pair you are.

No, I'm just one man, which bests you by a longshot.

Can you help me countfur (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sL5Mm9RX-gA)

Whatfur
07-18-2010, 11:28 PM
Total: 13(L) 7(C) %: 65(L) 35(C)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(C)

7/15--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(C)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

7/11--Posner(L), Butler(L)

graz
07-18-2010, 11:48 PM
Total: 20(L) %: 100(L)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(L)

7/15--Millman(L), Douthat(L)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(L)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

Sure, I double counted Millman and Douthat, but that suits my point just fine.
Ain't I clever.

7/12--Millman(L), Douthat(L)
Lowrey(L), Salam(L)

graz
07-18-2010, 11:51 PM
Total: 13(L) 7(C) %: 65(L) 35(C)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(C)

7/15--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(C)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)

Mad skillz in evidence.

graz
07-18-2010, 11:57 PM
Ain't I clever.


Just besotted.
Total: 20(L) %: 100(L)

bhtv -- liberal -- no matter what!
The numbers can't be refudiated.

Whatfur
07-19-2010, 12:05 AM
Total: 13(L) 7(C) %: 65(L) 35(C)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(C)

7/15--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(C)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

7/12--Millman(C), Douthat(C)
Lowrey(L), Salam(C)





Although I assume that others are a bit more perceptive than my personal troll... The Millman/Douthat vlog, although recorded at the same sitting, went on for almost 2 hours and BHtv decided to split it up into two segments. I pondered treating it as one, but figured if I did the usual suspects and especially my personal troll would argue that I was short counting the Conservatives. Now, I have to admit my personal troll has reached new heights in illogical thought by complaining about the opposite, but he has alot on his mind.

graz
07-19-2010, 12:10 AM
It still adds up to 18 not 20 countfur. Howz about that spreadsheet?

Not splitting hairs... just counting to twenty.

bjkeefe
07-19-2010, 12:41 AM
... refudiated.

Win.

Whatfur
07-19-2010, 09:29 AM
Once again, I will assume the most of you are more perceptive than my personal troll... The total represents the total since the start of the process and I only list the past weeks worth of pairings. I plan to go for a month and the final post will include all.

So yes the total is twenty. My personal troll has a couple problems ("what are the odds"), here. When his first attempt at castigation failed once he realized he was stupidly arguing from the wrong side (Doh!), he then is thrown by seemingly divergent numbers as being a math problem because I guess he cannot add 11+2...again be kind... he has much weighing on his mind.

I see Mr. Keefe is polishing the troll's knob too. Could this be payback for the troll pushing him on the Balloon Spit post? Be careful Troll.

What a pair they are.

I also see Mr. Keefe harrassing yet another fairly new poster. I have seen Bong Bong push back at Mr. Keefe's antics and I have seen Wonder Boy push back when it concerns him. I have seen ledocs take a pretty much vanilla poster down for being supposedly "smug", but where is he on the topic of Mr. Keefe...where are the rest of you?

bjkeefe
07-19-2010, 09:36 AM
...my personal troll...

Self-aggrandizing much?

My personal troll has a couple problems ("what are the odds"), here. When his first attempt at castigation failed once he realized he was stupidly arguing ...

Over-defensive much?

I see Mr. Keefe ... What a pair they are.

Persecution complex much?

I also see Mr. Keefe harrassing yet another fairly new poster.

Admit weakness of argument by changing the subject much?

I have seen Bong Bong push back at Mr. Keefe's antics and I have seen Wonder Boy push back when it concerns him. I have seen ledocs take a pretty much vanilla poster down for being supposedly "smug", but where is he on the topic of Mr. Keefe...where are the rest of you?

Asking Daddy to fight your battles much?

graz
07-19-2010, 09:39 AM
Once again, I will assume the most of you are more perceptive than my personal troll... The total represents the total since the start of the process and I only list the past weeks worth of pairings. I plan to go for a month and the final post will include all.

So yes the total is twenty. My personal troll has a couple problems ("what are the odds"), here. When his first attempt at castigation failed once he realized he was stupidly arguing from the wrong side (Doh!), he then is thrown by seemingly divergent numbers as being a math problem because I guess he cannot add 11+2...again be kind... he has much weighing on his mind.

I see Mr. Keefe is polishing the troll's knob too. Could this be payback for the troll pushing him on the Balloon Spit post? Be careful Troll.

What a pair they are.

I also see Mr. Keefe harrassing yet another fairly new poster. I have seen Bong Bong push back at Mr. Keefe's antics and I have seen Wonder Boy push back when it concerns him. I have seen ledocs take a pretty much vanilla poster down for being supposedly "smug", but where is he on the topic of Mr. Keefe...where are the rest of you?

Hmmm... Did ya notice that your explicating is nothing more than a conversation with yurself?

You can't even set-up a spreadsheet to keep your elementary counting legible or interesting.

Perhaps you're too busy at your Haliburton gig... or maybe just pre-occupied with mixin' the kibble and cleaning up poop. Either way, suit yurself, furry stuffed dog peddler.

graz
07-19-2010, 09:45 AM
...where are the rest of you?

They've got yur #.

But yur failure and persecution complex will only strengthen yur resolve... you betcha!

Whatfur
07-19-2010, 09:53 AM
I should have added the Mr. Keefe special "5,4,3,2..." to my post. Ha!

Whatfur
07-19-2010, 09:57 AM
Actually FurTroll, I have noticed that I actually am getting read at the very least by the desired audience. Doh!

bjkeefe
07-19-2010, 11:38 AM
... refudiated.

Win.

More refudiatin' (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/07/18/refutah-the-beautah/), from Herself.

bjkeefe
07-19-2010, 05:44 PM
More refudiatin' (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/07/18/refutah-the-beautah/), from Herself.

refudiate.com (http://refudiate.com/) is now live! The hot new hashtag is #shakespalin (http://twitter.com/search?q=%23shakespalin)! T-shirts are literally flying off the virtual shelves!

These and many other exciting developments are being reported by StrangeAppar8us at Rumproast: "Refudiator 3: The Dimpaling (http://www.rumproast.com/index.php/site/comments/refudiator_3_the_dimpaling/)."

Whatfur
07-19-2010, 06:19 PM
Total: 14(L) 8(C) %: 64(L) 36(C)

7/19--Goldberg(L), Ponnuru(C)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(C)

7/15--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(C)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)

7/13--Yglesies(L), Chotiner(L)

...

graz
07-19-2010, 06:26 PM
...

http://www.sunclipse.org/downloads/pandas/pandas-commute.jpg

graz
07-19-2010, 06:36 PM
...but I figured we, being all forward thinkers, would be happy to compile the tally as we went along... May we all be surprised.


I like the tricorne. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Da9sc6YDBo)

Whatfur
07-19-2010, 06:41 PM
And a talented troll at that.

Whatfur
07-19-2010, 06:44 PM
Is this one of those "longshot"s you were talking about.

bjkeefe
07-19-2010, 07:04 PM
http://www.sunclipse.org/downloads/pandas/pandas-commute.jpg

Furry math! I love it.

Whatfur
07-20-2010, 04:54 PM
Total: 15(L) 9(C) %: 63(L) 37(C)

7/20--Farrell(L), Drezner(C)

7/19--Goldberg(L), Ponnuru(C)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(C)

7/15--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

7/14--Schmitt(L), Spruiell(C)
Tkacik(L), Winstead(L)


...

Whatfur
07-21-2010, 05:54 PM
Total: 16(L) 10(C) %: 62(L) 38(C)

7/21--Beutler(L), Suderman(C)

7/20--Farrell(L), Drezner(C)

7/19--Goldberg(L), Ponnuru(C)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(C)

7/15--Millman(C), Douthat(C)

...

Whatfur
07-22-2010, 09:29 AM
Total: 17(L) 11(C) %: 61(L) 39(C)

7/22--Noah(L), York(C)

7/21--Beutler(L), Suderman(C)

7/20--Farrell(L), Drezner(C)

7/19--Goldberg(L), Ponnuru(C)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)

7/16--Franke-Ruta(L), Lewis(C)

...

graz
07-23-2010, 10:18 AM
...I need help...
Obviously so

... Most the issues discussed here put him in the "C" camp, but there is an alluding to him being quite another....
As a bleeding heart liberal, I demand that you stop torturing the syntax.

I will know more about Mr. George as we move forward, but this vlog was my largest association.

Just... huh?

Whatfur
07-23-2010, 11:08 AM
Total: 18(L) 12(C) %: 60(L) 40(C)

7/23--Wright(L), George(C)

7/22--Noah(L), York(C)

7/21--Beutler(L), Suderman(C)

7/20--Farrell(L), Drezner(C)

7/19--Goldberg(L), Ponnuru(C)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)


...

graz
07-23-2010, 02:19 PM
... Deleting your silly, factually incorrect and syntactically tortured posts is only your latest fail, in the bag of tricks. Ho Hum.

Whatfur
07-23-2010, 02:39 PM
... Deleting your silly, factually incorrect and syntactically tortured posts is only your latest fail, in the bag of tricks. Ho Hum.

Comprehension was never your strong suit...oh creepy one...harassment maybe.

bjkeefe
07-23-2010, 03:07 PM
[...]

Subject line fixt.

No, no. Don't thank me. I'm here to help.

nikkibong
07-23-2010, 06:57 PM
7/23

Scher (L) and Friedersdorf (NARC)

nikkibong
07-23-2010, 07:00 PM
7/23

Scher (L) and Friedersdorf (NARC)

Re: my own wit.

NARC works for Friedesdorf in more than one sense, doesn't it?

Whatfur
07-23-2010, 09:57 PM
Total: 20(L) 12(C) %: 63(L) 37(C)

7/23--Wright(L), George(C),
Scher(L), Friedersdorf(L)

7/22--Noah(L), York(C)

7/21--Beutler(L), Suderman(C)

7/20--Farrell(L), Drezner(C)

7/19--Goldberg(L), Ponnuru(C)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

7/17--Wright(L), Railton(L)


...

Starwatcher162536
07-23-2010, 10:11 PM
Total: 20(L) 12(C) %: 63(L) 37(C)

7/23--Wright(L), George(C),
Scher(L), Friedersdorf(L)
...

From the diavlog alone I can see Friedersdorf(N), but Friedersdorf(L) is a stretch.

Whatfur
07-25-2010, 10:38 AM
Total: 22(L) 12(C) %: 65(L) 35(C)

7/24--Aguirre(L), Aaronson(L)

7/23--Wright(L), George(C),
Scher(L), Friedersdorf(L)

7/22--Noah(L), York(C)

7/21--Beutler(L), Suderman(C)

7/20--Farrell(L), Drezner(C)

7/19--Goldberg(L), Ponnuru(C)

7/18--McWhorter(L), Ford(L)

...

Starwatcher162536
07-25-2010, 12:19 PM
Total: 22(L) 12(C) %: 65(L) 35(C)

7/24--Aguirre(L), Aaronson(L)

...

Congrats, you have found the connection between ruminations about scientific(?) theories over such things as the origins/design of the universe and quantum computers and the transient politics of 21st century America which eluded me.

Whatfur
07-25-2010, 01:29 PM
Luckily for me, comology also talks of freedom and thus drilling down to their take on that allowed me the same.

Granted, John and George, are easier to peg, but I have said a couple of times that I am more than willing to change my designation if given overriding evidence to the contrary.

Of course, I won't be watching every vlog nor will I know some of the heads so I will take suggestions of corrections but may make some of my assignments based on place of employment and peers thereof. May we all be surprised.

Got something?

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 01:30 PM
Total: 22(L) 12(C) %: 65(L) 35(C)

7/24--Aguirre(L), Aaronson(L)

...

Congrats, you have found the connection between ruminations about scientific(?) theories over such things as the origins/design of the universe and quantum computers and the transient politics of 21st century America which eluded me.

Too funny!

I think we can see now, even more clearly, why 'fur won't just put his little data collection effort into a proper table where everyone can see all the data, in one place, without having to hunt through past posts [added: as has already been suggested (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=170067&highlight=google+docs+spreadsheet#post170067)] -- using his approach, he can keep padding the L count while letting the actual names fall off the ends of his very partial lists. And then when he pronounces the conclusion of his Very Serious Study ("Bh.tv is Librully Biased, and I have proved it, with Science!!!1!") and people say, "Meh, we're not buying every one of your calls on who's a liberal and who's a conservative", he will demand links. To posts which he'll probably delete, if his track record is anything to go by.

Breitbart would be proud of him.

nikkibong
07-25-2010, 01:39 PM
Granted, John and George, are easier to peg, but I have said a couple of times that I am more than willing to change my designation if given overriding evidence to the contrary.


Liberal until proven innocent!

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 01:39 PM
Shorter 'fur (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=171712#post171712):

You are guilty liberal until proven innocent otherwise.

Whatfur
07-25-2010, 01:41 PM
Too funny!

I think we can see now, even more clearly, why 'fur won't just put his little data collection effort into a proper table where everyone can see all the data, in one place, without having to hunt through past posts -- using his approach, he can keep padding the L count while letting the actual names fall off the ends of his very partial lists. And then when he pronounces the conclusion of his Very Serious Study ("Bh.tv is Librully Biased, and I have proved it, with Science!!!1!") and people say, "Meh, we're not buying every one of your calls on whose a liberal", he will demand links. To posts which he'll probably delete, if his track record is anything to go by.

Breitbart would be proud of him.

So glad I have peaked your imagination (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia).

As mention previously, the final post will include the entire listing and all the previous assignments are right here. There has been very little disagreement and if a few Cs or Ls become Ns the % will not be swayed much.

nikkibong
07-25-2010, 01:41 PM
Dude! Great minds! Both at 9:39 pacific time ... however, I got mine in first. ;)

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 01:46 PM
Liberal until proven innocent!

Jinx! (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=171715#post171715)

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 01:47 PM
Dude! Great minds! Both at 9:39 pacific time ... however, I got mine in first. ;)

That's because of Bh.tv's bias in favor of people who write for the Weekly Standard.

;)

Whatfur
07-25-2010, 01:49 PM
I should add the half of the disagreements were put out by yourself and graz when at different times you two were too busy wetting yourself trying to castigate me to realize that you were arguing against your own purpose.

Duh! "Great minds".

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 01:54 PM
So glad I have peaked your imagination (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia).

I am so glad you're so glad! Why not celebrate by learning how to spell (http://www.google.com/search?q=peaked+%2F+piqued)?

As mention previously, the final post will include the entire listing and all the previous assignments are right here.

We will only have your say-so to go on at that point. You should keep your running table publicly available if you want to avoid hurting your credibility.

I mean, given how much yowling you've done about transparency and data release in other contexts, I should think you'd value the opportunity to lead by example.

There has been very little disagreement and if a few Cs or Ls become Ns the % will not be swayed much.

Actually, the lack of disagreement is better explained by a lack of interest, I'm quite sure. (And before you start sputtering back something about my posts in this thread, remember I'm just here for the lulz.)

Whatfur
07-25-2010, 02:01 PM
...


We will only have your say-so to go on at that point. You should keep your running table publicly available if you want to avoid hurting your credibility.


Yes, that and timed and dated listings.

...
I mean, given how much yowling you've done about transparency and data release in other contexts, I should think you'd value the opportunity to lead by example.


While you lead with your chin? What a silly, unimpressive, illogical argument.

...
Actually, the lack of disagreement is better explained by a lack of interest, I'm quite sure. (And before you start sputtering back something about my posts in this thread, remember I'm just here for the lulz.)

No, sputtering. Everyone here already knows your remonstrations can never possibly get applied to yourself no matter how obvious.

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 02:02 PM
I should add the half of the disagreements were put out by yourself and graz ...

Links? Or is this just more wingnut huffing?

Also, too:

Duh! "Great minds".

You do realize that nikkibong and graz are in fact not the same people, don't you?

In any case, I do have to say that you're on a roll with your war on the English language today, though:

... when at different times you two were too busy wetting yourself trying to castigate me to realize that you were arguing against your own purpose.

And:

... This place is like buying books at a garage sale...

This was a great line...although the line that may best describe your post comes from a book found quite often there...

"...the wicked fleeth where no man pursueth."

And the winner of the day:

Luckily for me, comology also talks of freedom and thus drilling down to their take on that allowed me the same.

Jesus. If you're not farting out non sequiturs, you're just stone butchering spelling and tossing word salad.

(And yeah, I know those last three words just made you tumesce a little bit. I know how your mind works.)

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 02:09 PM
Yes, that and timed and dated listings.

Up to you. Of course you will not take my advice, just because of the source. But your "timed and dated listings" aren't going to mean shit. They're at best going to be links to a pointlessly large list of partial posts. Who wants to go through those, one at a time?

While you lead with your chin? What a silly, unimpressive, illogical argument.

Another non sequitur for today's collection (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=171724#post171724)! Keep 'em coming!

(Also, I do have to laugh at how if it's not homophobic slurs with you, it's physical violence metaphors. Jesus, grow up a little, old man, will ya? The rest of us left the schoolyard decades ago.)

(Although it's always nice to see when I'm getting under your skin.)

No, sputtering. Everyone here already knows your remonstrations can never possibly get applied to yourself no matter how obvious.

Bzzzt! Lambchop Alert!

Whatfur
07-25-2010, 02:21 PM
Links? Or is this just more wingnut huffing?

Also, too:



You do realize that nikkibong and graz are in fact not the same people, don't you?

In any case, I do have to say that you're on a roll with your war on the English language today, though:



And:



And the winner of the day:



Jesus. If you're not farting out non sequiturs, you're just stone butchering spelling and tossing word salad.

(And yeah, I know those last three words just made you tumesce a little bit. I know how your mind works.)

No, you are you and troll is troll and bong bong is who he is. As to the rest...
you are working yourself into quite a lather there...Ho Hum.

Whatfur
07-25-2010, 02:28 PM
Did I call it or what?

If you say so? Duh!

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 02:58 PM
Did I call it or what?

If you say so? Duh!

Oh, you sad old 'furry. I was wondering if you were going to reach for that as "evidence," but then I thought, nah, even 'fur wouldn't be that stupid.

I'll remind you of another post in this same thread, posted nearly two weeks ago, in which I said (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=169640#post169640):

[Added] Oh, wait. My bad. I somehow got it into my head that 'fur's (C) meant "centrist." (I expected to see an (R) (right) as opposed to (L) (left.)

Can't imagine why I thought that, but if it turns out he meant "conservative" with his (C)s, I withdraw my previous bit of snark.

Ah, the dishonesty. And the so-easily exposed dishonesty, at that. Once again, you have Breitbart on your shoes.

==========

[Added] By the way, did you think there was any sense to this?

For Queef's benefit:

Doh! Now troll, would it not have suited me more to actually double could actual "L". Duh!

I see you have since deleted this post of yours while I was composing the above, so maybe you had a moment of clarity? Nonetheless, more to actually double could actual "L". Duh! is a serving of four-star-quality word salad, and I will treasure it forever. Thanks!

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 03:12 PM
No, you are you and troll is troll and bong bong is who he is. As to the rest...
you are working yourself into quite a lather there...Ho Hum.

I recognize your new "Ho Hum" as a way of saying you got nothing, so, okay. See ya later.

I do love how you try to lay off on others what you're feeling yourself, though. Especially given how often you hurl around the term PROJECTION!!!1!

Whatfur
07-25-2010, 03:30 PM
So like you Queef, writing this rebuttal hoping that people concentrate on you calling me dishonest and don't bother to follow the bouncing ball and clicking links for that matter.

Here if they chose to follow...they would see that you got yourself so wound up in triumphant expectation that when you saw a "C" you errantly thought you had called something correctly....wasting little time to claim victory while dancing. (i.e. "wetting yourself")

Just because you later were called on your error by one of your own, retracted it with excuse and not apology, and most likely would not have if it was I who bothered to call you on it...doesn't erase the fact that you originally had been dancing in error. (i.e. "arguing against your own purpose")

Ho Hum.

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 04:03 PM
So like you Queef, writing this rebuttal hoping that people concentrate on you calling me dishonest and don't bother to follow the bouncing ball and clicking links for that matter.

Here if they chose to follow...they would see that you got yourself so wound up in triumphant expectation that when you saw a "C" you errantly thought you had called something correctly....wasting little time to claim victory while dancing. (i.e. "wetting yourself")

Just because you later were called on your error by one of your own, retracted it with excuse and not apology, and most likely would not have if it was I who bothered to call you on it...doesn't erase the fact that you originally had been dancing in error. (i.e. "arguing against your own purpose")

Ho Hum.

Wow. You just won't stop digging, will you?

No, I don't put links into my posts hoping people won't click them. That is the kind of thinking only a wingnut could come up with. As to whether anyone will share your assessment that I "got [my]self so wound up in triumphant expectation" I'll leave to them, but I know how I'm betting.

I can understand your need to make yourself feel better after getting so easily caught out in your pathetic "gotcha" attempt. However, that I thought for a short while, two weeks ago, when you first started your Science Project, that you were calling Douthat, Salam, and Millman Centrists instead of Conservatives -- in light of your well-known position on the far right of the political spectrum -- hardly seems sufficient, even by your obviously low standards. Further, your attempts to dress up this moment -- where ZOMG!!!1! I thought you meant something different by "(C)" -- with exaggeration and imagined scenarios is really nothing short of sad, even as another part of me delights in your never-ending fury that invariably ends up only in making you look worse.

And the same old homophobic slur to start? Just the cherry on top.

graz
07-25-2010, 04:22 PM
So like you Queef, writing this rebuttal hoping that people concentrate on you calling me dishonest and don't bother to follow the bouncing ball and clicking links for that matter.

It's as if he has selective amnesia and imagines that forum participants suffer from the same affliction.

http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/9709/roflba.gif

Whatfur
07-25-2010, 05:11 PM
Wow. ...


Ho Hum

bjkeefe
07-25-2010, 05:17 PM
Ho Hum

ibid. (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=171738&highlight=recognize+%22Ho%20Hum%22+got+nothing#pos t171738)

Let's see if you're smart enough to put down the shovel this time.

Whatfur
07-25-2010, 11:11 PM
Total: 23(L) 13(C) %: 64(L) 36(C)

7/25--Fernholz(L), Conn(C)

7/24--Aguirre(L), Aaronson(L)

7/23--Wright(L), George(C),
Scher(L), Friedersdorf(L)

7/22--Noah(L), York(C)

7/21--Beutler(L), Suderman(C)

7/20--Farrell(L), Drezner(C)

7/19--Goldberg(L), Ponnuru(C)

...

Whatfur
07-27-2010, 09:08 AM
Total: 23(L) 15(C) %: 61(L) 39(C)

7/26--Sanchez(C), Baker(C)

7/25--Fernholz(L), Conn(C)

7/24--Aguirre(L), Aaronson(L)

7/23--Wright(L), George(C),
Scher(L), Friedersdorf(L)

7/22--Noah(L), York(C)

7/21--Beutler(L), Suderman(C)

7/20--Farrell(L), Drezner(C)

...

Whatfur
07-27-2010, 09:24 PM
Total: 24(L) 16(C) %: 60(L) 40(C)

7/27--Wilkinson(L), Althouse(C)

7/26--Sanchez(C), Baker(C)

7/25--Fernholz(L), Carroll(C)

7/24--Aguirre(L), Aaronson(L)

7/23--Wright(L), George(C),
Scher(L), Friedersdorf(L)

7/22--Noah(L), York(C)

7/21--Beutler(L), Suderman(C)

...

bjkeefe
07-27-2010, 11:05 PM
9 of the 10 worst states for children are Southern Republican states
July 27, 5:44 PM Dallas County Political Buzz Examiner (http://www.examiner.com/x-60184-Dallas-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner) Michelle Oliver

Southern Republican states are 9 of the 10 worst states for childhood well-being, according to The Annie E. Casey Foundation (http://www.aecf.org/) recently released 2010 Kids Count Data Book (http://datacenter.kidscount.org/DataBook/2010/Default.aspx). New Hampshire received the overall best ranking, while Mississippi received the worst ranking.

Top (Best) 10 States for Child Well-Being
Rank State Party
1 New Hampshire Dem
2 Minnesota Dem
3 Vermont Dem
4 Utah GOP
5 Massassachutts Dem
6 Iowa Dem
7 New Jersey Dem
8 Connecticut Dem
9 Nebraska GOP
10 Wisconsin Dem

Bottom (Worst) 10 States for Child Well-Being
40 Kentucky GOP
41 Tennessee GOP
42 Georgia GOP
43 West Virginia GOP
44 Oklahoma GOP
45 South Carolina GOP
46 New Mexico Dem
47 Alabama GOP
48 Arkansas GOP
49 Louisiana GOP
50 Mississippi GOP

The survey was based on 10 key indicators:

* Percent low-birthweight babies
* Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births)
* Child death rate (deaths per 1000,000 children ages 1-14)
* Teen death rate (deaths per 1000,000 teens ages 15-19)
* Teen birth rate (births per 1,000 fremales ages 15-19)
* Percent of teens not in school and not high school graduates (ages 16-19)
* Percent of children living in families where no parent has a full time, year-round employment
* Percent of children living in poverty (income below $21,834 -family of 2 adults & 2 children)
* Percent of children in single-parent families

Texas ranks 34th overall in child well-being.

(source (http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-60184-Dallas-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m7d27-9-of-the-10-worst-states-for-children-are-Southern-Republican-states?cid=sharing_twitter%3A60184))

(h/t: @cam00re (http://twitter.com/cam00re/status/19694485312), RT by @sonjablair (http://twitter.com/sonjablair))

uncle ebeneezer
07-27-2010, 11:29 PM
But at least they are protected from SOCIALISM!!1!

rfrobison
07-28-2010, 05:50 AM
Of course you are aware that correlation is not causation. And until about 1965 or so nearly all of these states on the poor list were part of the Democrats' "solid South."

The list merely shows that southern states are overwhelmingly Republican and that many of those states are poor. Hardly an earth-shattering finding.

Whatfur
07-28-2010, 09:06 AM
Of course you are aware that correlation is not causation. And until about 1965 or so nearly all of these states on the poor list were part of the Democrats' "solid South."

The list merely shows that southern states are overwhelmingly Republican and that many of those states are poor. Hardly an earth-shattering finding.

Oh come on...give them their fun.

chiwhisoxx
07-28-2010, 11:21 AM
Total: 23(L) 15(C) %: 61(L) 39(C)

7/26--Sanchez(C), Baker(C)

7/25--Fernholz(L), Conn(C)

7/24--Aguirre(L), Aaronson(L)

7/23--Wright(L), George(C),
Scher(L), Friedersdorf(L)

7/22--Noah(L), York(C)

7/21--Beutler(L), Suderman(C)

7/20--Farrell(L), Drezner(C)

...

On what planet is Julian Sanchez a conservative?

Whatfur
07-28-2010, 11:43 AM
On what planet is Julian Sanchez a conservative?

Thanks. Not mine. I am always subject to reversal. I haven't watched him much and thought him rather liberal when I did, but gave Cato the benefit of my doubt. I do remember recently where someone said of Weigel that "Hey he was further right than Julian Sanchez on some subjects". I guess that was not a big stretch.

So yeah, unless he or some liberal here wishes to argue oppositely I will change it.

Lyle
07-28-2010, 11:44 AM
Yes it does.

bjkeefe
07-29-2010, 04:30 AM
Of course you are aware that correlation is not causation.

I am aware of that, certainly. As I am aware that sometimes, people are prone to slinging slogans in the face of uncomfortable truths.

And until about 1965 or so nearly all of these states on the poor list were part of the Democrats' "solid South."

You're not seriously trying to go there, are you? What the Dems were a half century ago is not what the Dems are now. Please. Anyone with the slightest awareness of US history knows what became of those "solid South" Dems -- they rushed over to the Republican side.

You might as well try to tell me that the Republicans are the real party of racial equality, because ... Lincoln!!!1!

The list merely shows that southern states are overwhelmingly Republican and that many of those states are poor. Hardly an earth-shattering finding.

No, it is not "hardly." It is in fact a reminder of what I and many others have been wondering about for years -- why do certain groups of poor people stick with the GOP, when it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that the GOP is just cold using them, and could not possibly give a shit about their actual interests?

rfrobison
07-29-2010, 04:53 AM
I am aware of that, certainly. As I am aware that sometimes, people are prone to slinging slogans in the face of uncomfortable truths.

I'm sure some some are. I'm also pretty sure I'm not guilty of that here.

You're not seriously trying to go there, are you? What the Dems were a half century ago is not what the Dems are now. Please. Anyone with the slightest awareness of US history knows what became of those "solid South" Dems -- they rushed over to the Republican side.

They did indeed. Not my point. My point is that these states have been poor a long, long time for a whole host of complicated socioeconomic reasons that have little if anything to do with their formal political affiliation. Utah is as Red as they come. If voting Republican makes you poor and miserable, how do you explain that?

You might as well try to tell me that the Republicans are the real party of racial equality, because ... Lincoln!!!1!

Yes, I might as well. But I won't. Nor will I allow you to besmirch me or my fellow Republicans for being, well, Republicans.

No, it is not "hardly." It is in fact a reminder of what I and many others have been wondering about for years -- why do certain groups of poor people stick with the GOP, when it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that the GOP is just cold using them, and could not possibly give a shit about their actual interests?[/

This isn't your finest work, BJ. But score all the cheap partisan points you like. It doesn't prove a thing.

[ADDED: And I don't I think the whole Thomas Frank-esque "You people are so dang thick you can't even see what's good for you" shtick is likely to win over many southerners.]

Whatfur
07-29-2010, 09:24 AM
...Fear not...it is reality I wish to demonstrate. ... May we all be surprised.


I guessed early 65/35, but if 60/40 is good enough for Bobby (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/29717?in=25:09&out=25:14)then its good enough for me.

We can be done. Thanks for playing along.

graz
07-29-2010, 10:31 AM
We can be done. Thanks for playing along.

All wankfests must pass.

Whatfur
07-29-2010, 10:34 AM
All wankfests must pass.

That's right graz...you now can return to your circular one.

popcorn_karate
07-29-2010, 06:50 PM
tossing word salad.

heh. I'm thinking this phrase may become part of my lexicon.

bjkeefe
08-01-2010, 02:38 AM
I'm sure some some are. I'm also pretty sure I'm not guilty of that here.

I would not have suggested it if I didn't think it.

... If voting Republican makes you poor and miserable, how do you explain that?

And now, in addition to slinging slogans, you're also putting words that I did not say into my mouth.

Yes, I might as well. But I won't. Nor will I allow you to besmirch me or my fellow Republicans for being, well, Republicans.

ibid.

This isn't your finest work, BJ. But score all the cheap partisan points you like. It doesn't prove a thing.

Whoa, I musta touched a nerve there, huh? Pointing out facts is now "scoring cheap partisan points," is it? Wingnut, please.

[ADDED: And I don't I think the whole Thomas Frank-esque "You people are so dang thick you can't even see what's good for you" shtick is likely to win over many southerners.]

You never know until you try. Look what happened with Virginia, North Carolina, and Indiana last election. Signs of blue around the edges, at least. And even Georgia got interesting there for a while. Not saying it was all TF's book by any means, but his are part of a series of observations that may be achieving some resonance. We can only hope, and keep reminding people of the facts. (The "cheap partisan points," I mean.)

Be as sniffy about your Republican identification as you like. Doesn't change the reality that the leaders in your party don't give a crap about people like you, once they've gotten your vote, and don't even get me started about people below you on the socioeconomic ladder. And you're blind if you can't see that.

rfrobison
08-01-2010, 06:11 AM
I would not have suggested it if I didn't think it.



And now, in addition to slinging slogans, you're also putting words that I did not say into my mouth.



ibid.



Whoa, I musta touched a nerve there, huh? Pointing out facts is now "scoring cheap partisan points," is it? Wingnut, please.



You never know until you try. Look what happened with Virginia, North Carolina, and Indiana last election. Signs of blue around the edges, at least. And even Georgia got interesting there for a while. Not saying it was all TF's book by any means, but his are part of a series of observations that may be achieving some resonance. We can only hope, and keep reminding people of the facts. (The "cheap partisan points," I mean.)

Be as sniffy about your Republican identification as you like. Doesn't change the reality that the leaders in your party don't give a crap about people like you, once they've gotten your vote, and don't even get me started about people below you on the socioeconomic ladder. And you're blind if you can't see that.

Hmm, well, I don't guess we're gonna see eye to eye on this one, as you and I are fairly partisan types, on opposite sides of the aisle. Without conceding too much on your larger points--I especially take issue with your implication that Republicans (or their leaders) are heartless, but I don't really feel like having that particular argument at the moment--I would say that as people become richer they generally expect government to do more for them, and thus the welfare state will tend to be larger in richer communities.

On the other hand, your observations--or the ones you posted earlier--would have considerably more weight, in my view, if you could show a deterioration in the southern states' economic rankings relative to northern ones after, say, 1980, which was really the first election where the old Dixiecrat part of the Democratic coalition defected to the Republicans.

Failing that, you could show that while southern states have (presumably) gotten richer over the last 30 years, they've done so more slowly than northern states, and their rate of progress on various social indicators has slowed since that time.

I have no idea whether such data are out there. If you can compile that data and make that case, I'd be interested to see it. But don't waste your time on me. It'd make a great PhD thesis or a book.

But before embarking on that project you might consider other metrics--for example rates of job creation or inward and outward migration. These could also have an effect on people's welfare and, when talking of population changes and demographic shifts, reflect in some sense people's collective bets about a region's economic prospects. In these respects, I suspect the South might come off a good deal more favorably--and start looking more purple, politically.

Lies, damn lies, statistics...I dunno. Something. Lost my train of thought.

Oh, just one question: Whaddya mean "people like me"? I could be Bill Gates or Dick Cheney, slumming it here in the comments section of Bhtv, for all you know! ;)

bjkeefe
08-01-2010, 03:23 PM
Hmm, well, I don't guess we're gonna see eye to eye on this one, as you and I are fairly partisan types, on opposite sides of the aisle. Without conceding too much on your larger points--I especially take issue with your implication that Republicans (or their leaders) are heartless, but I don't really feel like having that particular argument at the moment-- ...

"Heartless" is a needlessly loaded word. You're exaggerating my view with your own emotions. I am not, nor do I have to, make such vapid accusations to sustain my view that the Republicans do not work much to the benefit of the very people they depend on to get them elected, once they get into office.

Here's a perfect example, which I noted (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2008/09/farm-report.html) during the fall 2008 campaign, that says it in a nutshell:

A few days ago I talked politics with Donn Teske, the president of the Kansas Farmers Union and a former Republican. Barack Obama may come from a big city, he admits, but the Farmers Union gives him a 100% rating for his votes in Congress. John McCain gets a 0%. "If any farmer in the Plains States looked at McCain's voting record on ag issues," Mr. Teske says, "no one would vote for him."

... I would say that as people become richer they generally expect government to do more for them, and thus the welfare state will tend to be larger in richer communities.

That's a weird way of putting something I think I might agree with. I would say, following Clarke, that you can measure the degree of advancement of a society by how well it takes care of its least fortunate members. I don't think of it as Teh Government, except in the of the people, by the people, for the people sense -- there has to be a mechanism for implementing collective action, dealing with free rider problems, etc.

In any case, I think a lot of rich Republicans would vehemently deny the first half of your sentence, but I think you're on to something there.

On the other hand, your observations--or the ones you posted earlier--would have considerably more weight, in my view, if you could show a deterioration in the southern states' economic rankings relative to northern ones after, say, 1980, which was really the first election where the old Dixiecrat part of the Democratic coalition defected to the Republicans.

Failing that, you could show that while southern states have (presumably) gotten richer over the last 30 years, they've done so more slowly than northern states, and their rate of progress on various social indicators has slowed since that time.

[...]

I'd like to see such studies, too. I'm sure the data are out there; and I'd bet that more than one person has gathered them up in such a study. However, as you say, it seems like more than a little work to assemble this, and not worth it, in my view, for an Internet forum exchange with someone who. I suspect, would be unlikely to do anything except knee-jerkily dispute the results:

Lies, damn lies, statistics...I dunno. Something. Lost my train of thought.

Moving on ...

Oh, just one question: Whaddya mean "people like me"? I could be Bill Gates or Dick Cheney, slumming it here in the comments section of Bhtv, for all you know! ;)

You could be, but you'd have had to had a pretty long term plan to misrepresent yourself on this site. Anyway, what I meant by "people like you" in my previous post was merely "someone of the middle class, roughly speaking."

rfrobison
08-01-2010, 07:51 PM
BJ:

I'm going to make just a couple quick responses and give you the last word, if you'd like.

"Heartless" is a needlessly loaded word. You're exaggerating my view with your own emotions. I am not, nor do I have to, make such vapid accusations to sustain my view that the Republicans do not work much to the benefit of the very people they depend on to get them elected, once they get into office.


I'd say "heartless" is a pretty good characterization of what you've been accusing Republicans of being. In fact your initial description used a vulgarity, which I won't repeat. It seems to me that you jump to the conclusion that many liberals do, that since Republicans generally favor a smaller government and dislike a lot of social spending, the only reasonable conclusion is that they're greedy bastards. [Yes, I know, "loaded."] But there are other ways of helping the poor.

Here's a perfect example, which I noted (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2008/09/farm-report.html) during the fall 2008 campaign, that says it in a nutshell:

McCain is unpopular in the Midwest because he has consistently opposed wasteful, environmentally destructive agricultural subsidies like America's totally stupid ethanol program. He could be another bastard--or he might be a principled leader willing to take on entrenched interests. I'm pretty certain the president of any farmer's union isn't in danger of losing his iron rice bowl paid for at taxpayer expense anytime soon. Something like 80% of all agricultural subsidies in the U.S. go to the top few percent of farms in terms of scale. Robin Hood it ain't.



That's a weird way of putting something I think I might agree with. I would say, following Clarke, that you can measure the degree of advancement of a society by how well it takes care of its least fortunate members. I don't think of it as Teh Government, except in the of the people, by the people, for the people sense -- there has to be a mechanism for implementing collective action, dealing with free rider problems, etc.

This is fine as far as it goes, except that the poorest have not much of a constituency. The middle class and the wealthy get far, far more in terms of public benefits because they're the ones who make campaign donations. This does not strike me as a problem merely of one party.

I'd like to see such studies, too. I'm sure the data are out there; and I'd bet that more than one person has gathered them up in such a study. However, as you say, it seems like more than a little work to assemble this, and not worth it, in my view, for an Internet forum exchange with someone who. I suspect, would be unlikely to do anything except knee-jerkily dispute the results:


And if the data showed no such shifts in ranking or, worse, from your point of view, an improvement in the relative standing of the South, you'd be inclined to write it off as coincidence and find some other evil to blame on Republicans. Two can play at this game, BJ. It serves no constructive purpose.


You could be, but you'd have had to had a pretty long term plan to misrepresent yourself on this site. Anyway, what I meant by "people like you" in my previous post was merely "someone of the middle class, roughly speaking."

I'll accept membership in the middle class. I'd say politicians of all stripes tend to ignore voters whose votes don't seem biddable. Republicans have long felt the same way about Blacks. Look at the Democrats doing everything they can to stop school choice dead in its tracks despite surveys showing inner city parents favoring such programs and desperate to get their kids a leg up. Oh, but no. There are the teachers unions to placate. What was I saying about iron rice bowls? There's compassion for you.

What this entire exchange comes down to, BJ, it seems to me, is you think Republicans are basically bad and/or stupid people. I find that irksome. But it's only politics, after all. You're still a fun and entertaining guy. And mostly thoughtful and thought-provoking. Keep up the good work.

Over to you. I've spoken my piece.

bjkeefe
08-02-2010, 03:50 AM
It seems to me that you jump to the conclusion that many liberals do, that since Republicans generally favor a smaller government ...

Save that Kool-Aid for someone who just flew in from Neptune. There is absolutely no evidence over the course of my life to support this claim. It is, and has been for decades now, solely a bumper sticker sold to the rubes, full stop.

As to the rest, I have no interest in responding. You evidently think you can tell me what I think and argue against that. I usually think better of you, and will therefore write this exchange off as a bad few moments on your part.

Winspur
08-04-2010, 11:44 AM
I have to say I am a little incensed when two diavlogs in a row have participants (Pinkerton and Lowry) calling the "Ground Zero" mosque "offensive." How far are we going to go on this site in coddling bigotry? Would repeated appearances of "ex-gay therapists" be OK? How about some White Power spokespeople?

I know some are going to reply that this merely reflects the opinions of many Americans, civilized or not, but I wish to register my dissatisfaction.

And shouldn't we ask Reihan Salam to weigh in on the Manhattan mosque thing?

bjkeefe
08-05-2010, 12:24 AM
I have to say I am a little incensed when two diavlogs in a row have participants (Pinkerton and Lowry) calling the "Ground Zero" mosque "offensive." How far are we going to go on this site in coddling bigotry? Would repeated appearances of "ex-gay therapists" be OK? How about some White Power spokespeople?

Good point.

This is the worst part about Bh.tv -- the obsession with Appearing Balanced™ that ends up meaning platforms are given, over and over and over, to the worst sort of fringe characters from the far right.

I know some are going to reply that this merely reflects the opinions of many Americans, civilized or not, but I wish to register my dissatisfaction.

And thanks for so doing.

chiwhisoxx
08-05-2010, 01:38 AM
Good point.

This is the worst part about Bh.tv -- the obsession with Appearing Balanced™ that ends up meaning platforms are given, over and over and over, to the worst sort of fringe characters from the far right.



And thanks for so doing.

Rich Lowry is a fringe character of the far right? Uhhh that's an interesting interpretation of the American political spectrum.

bjkeefe
08-05-2010, 02:11 AM
Rich Lowry is a fringe character of the far right? Uhhh that's an interesting interpretation of the American political spectrum.

I do not think merely typing "uhhh" is going to win you many adherents to your cause, nor admirers of your intellect, let alone reasons from me to treat you as someone of worth, but for the record: yes. Starbursts Lowry is a fringe character of the far right. Or he presents as one, for money, which is worse.