Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Life, the Universe and Everything (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=15)
-   -   Tales of Your New Republican Majority! (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=6303)

bjkeefe 11-18-2010 03:03 PM

Re: Usually, slimming down is seen as an indication of a looming electoral run
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by operative (Post 188912)
The comments section of Wonkette does not equate to the statements made by Republican officials and conservative media figures, in intent, seriousness, scope, or significance. If you can't accept that, I am not interested in trying to help you further, given what I have perceived of you since you've joined this board, but I do hope someone does at some point. Or that you grow up on your own.

Interesting that this came out appearing to be your own words. Freudian slip?

Quote:

You haven't proven your case and you haven't made a real attempt at proving your case.
Correct. There are some things that are so obviously true, about which you are so pigheaded, that it's not worth the bother.

operative 11-18-2010 07:34 PM

Re: Usually, slimming down is seen as an indication of a looming electoral run
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 188937)
Interesting that this came out appearing to be your own words. Freudian slip?

A slip but not a Freudian one.


Quote:

Correct. There are some things that are so obviously true, about which you are so pigheaded, that it's not worth the bother.
Unfortunately "It's obviously true" doesn't quite cut it.

bjkeefe 11-18-2010 07:42 PM

Re: Usually, slimming down is seen as an indication of a looming electoral run
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by operative (Post 188965)
Unfortunately "It's obviously true" doesn't quite cut it.

I'm sure it doesn't for you. By the same token, if you were a Flat Earther, you would respond similarly to my dismissal, and I would be just as interested in continuing to try to persuade you otherwise.

bjkeefe 11-18-2010 07:45 PM

Tales of Your New Republican Majority! (A wholly-owned subsidiary of FoxNews.)
 
Nailed it:

Quote:

It's perfectly defensible to have a principled opposition to federal funding for journalism. But this is absurd:

Quote:

House Republicans announced today that they will force a floor vote to eliminate taxpayer-funded support for NPR in response to the firing of Juan Williams. A proposal to defund NPR was the winner in the GOP’s weekly “YouCut” contest, in which the public votes online for various spending cuts — GOP leaders have pledged to force votes on the winning items (so far nearly every such vote has failed to pass the Democratic-controlled House).
They're making a decision about whether to end federal subsidies to a decades old news organization because of Juan Williams? More to the point, the GOP rank-and-file could force a vote on a federal spending cut, and they picked NPR? I have a sinking feeling that this is what the GOP intends to do for two years: ride populist base fads into trivial nicks in spending, while never facing up to fiscal reality.
It'll be interesting, in the Chinese curse sense, to see how well two years of governing through resentment pans out.

[Added] The absurdity continues.

operative 11-18-2010 07:51 PM

Re: Usually, slimming down is seen as an indication of a looming electoral run
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 188969)
I'm sure it doesn't for you. By the same token, if you were a Flat Earther, you would respond similarly to my dismissal, and I would be just as interested in continuing to try to persuade you otherwise.

I'll keep that in mind for if I ever decide to argue that the Earth is flat.

bjkeefe 11-18-2010 08:13 PM

Re: Usually, slimming down is seen as an indication of a looming electoral run
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by operative (Post 188973)
I'll keep that in mind for if I ever decide to argue that the Earth is flat.

And if you ever get to Piaget's Stage 4.

operative 11-18-2010 08:24 PM

Re: Usually, slimming down is seen as an indication of a looming electoral run
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 188978)
And if you ever get to Piaget's Stage 4.

I think you mean bjkeefe's Stage 4 (knee-jerk hatred of all things left of Alan Grayson).

bjkeefe 11-18-2010 08:56 PM

Re: Usually, slimming down is seen as an indication of a looming electoral run
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by operative (Post 188980)
I think you mean bjkeefe's Stage 4 (knee-jerk hatred of all things left of Alan Grayson).

Typing without thinking again, I see.

bjkeefe 11-18-2010 08:59 PM

Just to keep it in perspective
 
Quote:

Did Something Happen on 11/2/10?

Only 46% of Americans know that Republicans won control of the House in this year's elections, so maybe it never happened?
-- Jim Newell

operative 11-18-2010 09:25 PM

Re: Usually, slimming down is seen as an indication of a looming electoral run
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 188984)
typing without thinking again, i see.

不。你打字那,我打字这。

bjkeefe 11-19-2010 11:50 AM

As Ye Sow, So Shall Ye Reap
 
Hey America, want to see what you brought upon yourself by putting the Republicans in charge of the House? Stephen Colbert presents Joe Barton (R-Texas) and John Shimkus (R-Illinois), who will be big players in deciding energy and environmental policy for at least the next two years.

Did you know that wind energy would be bad, because turbines slow down the wind that cools the planet? But that we don't have to worry about global warming because God promised Noah "never again?"

(h/t: Ocean)

Ocean 11-19-2010 05:04 PM

Re: As Ye Sow, So Shall Ye Reap
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189045)
Hey America, want to see what you brought upon yourself by putting the Republicans in charge of the House? Stephen Colbert presents Joe Barton (R-Texas) and John Shimkus (R-Illinois), who will be big players in deciding energy and environmental policy for at least the next two years.

Did you know that wind energy would be bad, because turbines slow down the wind that cools the planet? But that we don't have to worry about global warming because God promised Noah "never again?"

(h/t: Ocean)

I am Ocean and I approve this message. ;)

Don Zeko 11-19-2010 05:35 PM

Re: As Ye Sow, So Shall Ye Reap
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ocean (Post 189083)
I am Ocean and I approve this message. ;)

Nor are you the only one that does so. There's this ocean, after all, or this one, or this one.

Ocean 11-19-2010 05:42 PM

Re: As Ye Sow, So Shall Ye Reap
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zeko (Post 189093)
Nor are you the only one that does so. There's this ocean, after all, or this one, or this one.

LOL!

There are a couple more even. And I can assure you they are all equally interested in getting the story about climate change right. They'd really love to keep some balance in the planet.

bjkeefe 11-20-2010 12:59 AM

Re: Tales of Your New Republican Majority! (A wholly-owned subsidiary of FoxNews.)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 188970)
Nailed it:

Quote:

It's perfectly defensible to have a principled opposition to federal funding for journalism. But this is absurd:

Quote:

House Republicans announced today that they will force a floor vote to eliminate taxpayer-funded support for NPR in response to the firing of Juan Williams. A proposal to defund NPR was the winner in the GOP’s weekly “YouCut” contest, in which the public votes online for various spending cuts — GOP leaders have pledged to force votes on the winning items (so far nearly every such vote has failed to pass the Democratic-controlled House).
They're making a decision about whether to end federal subsidies to a decades old news organization because of Juan Williams? More to the point, the GOP rank-and-file could force a vote on a federal spending cut, and they picked NPR? I have a sinking feeling that this is what the GOP intends to do for two years: ride populist base fads into trivial nicks in spending, while never facing up to fiscal reality.
It'll be interesting, in the Chinese curse sense, to see how well two years of governing through resentment pans out.

[Added] The absurdity continues.

So, how'd that all turn out?

As you might have expected: the vote failed, Roger Ailes non-apologized, and Eric "Smartest Guy Except for Paul Ryan" Cantor (R-VA) doubled down on the stupid.

bjkeefe 11-20-2010 01:56 AM

Re: Tales of Your New Republican Majority!
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 188468)
... I recommend an article by Brian Friel, a staff writer at Congressional Quarterly, appearing in today's NYT. Here's how it starts:

Quote:

Where Will the G.O.P. Go Digging?

[...]

Looks like they're going "open-ended" on the New Black Panthers (because what more grave threat to America's freedoms is there?). Not to mention already steamrolling over the Democrats they're supposed to be working with on the commission. B'head Adam Serwer reports.

And we now set the timer to see how long it takes chiwhi and the operative to start sputtering about things getting "rammed down their throats" during HCR.

(h/t: Pareene)

chiwhisoxx 11-20-2010 03:35 AM

Re: Tales of Your New Republican Majority!
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189152)
Looks like they're going "open-ended" on the New Black Panthers (because what more grave threat to America's freedoms is there?). Not to mention already steamrolling over the Democrats they're supposed to be working with on the commission. B'head Adam Serwer reports.

And we now set the timer to see how long it takes chiwhi and the operative to start sputtering about things getting "rammed down their throats" during HCR.

(h/t: Pareene)

I implore you to find my using that phrase here, ever. Inb4 "I have better things to do with my time!!!!!" despite copious evidence to the contrary.

bjkeefe 11-20-2010 05:41 AM

Speaking of ethics investigations ...
 
... you didn't really think anything was going to happen to John Ensign, did you?

Of course not. Endless investigations are for Republicans to direct at Democrats, not the other way around.

And after all, he's already moved out of C Street! And it's possible there are as many as fourteen other members of Congress as corrupt as he is! LEAVE JOHN ENSIGN ALOOOOOOONE!!!1!

What? You forgot?

Quote:

Ensign, TPM readers will remember, admitted in 2009 to having an affair with Hampton. Hampton's husband, Doug, was also a senior staffer and close friend of Ensign. After the affair, the couple left Ensign's employ and Ensign allegedly helped Doug Hampton get a lobbying job and clients -- a potential violation of the one-year Senate lobbying ban. Ensign's parents also gave a total of $96,000 to the Hampton family.

Find many, many more details of the affair here.
Eh, maybe he'll get primaried by Sharron Angle in 2012. About all we can hope for at this point.

operative 11-20-2010 09:39 AM

Re: Tales of Your New Republican Majority! (A wholly-owned subsidiary of FoxNews.)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189145)
So, how'd that all turn out?

As you might have expected: the vote failed, Roger Ailes non-apologized, and Eric "Smartest Guy Except for Paul Ryan" Cantor (R-VA) doubled down on the stupid.

Well of course you'd think that letting a let-wing ideologically driven media empire support itself is a bad idea. They'll succeed in the next term though. Time to cut NPR loose.

bjkeefe 11-20-2010 06:04 PM

Playing the Expectations Game
 
One of the boys over at the comically-misnamed Reason magazine rolls up his sleeves, dons his victim's cloak, and explains why even though Ayn Rand Paul is the Messiah of the Teabaggers, everyone will think he's full of fail.

operative 11-20-2010 06:41 PM

Re: Playing the Expectations Game
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189243)
One of the boys over at the comically-misnamed Reason magazine rolls up his sleeves, dons his victim's cloak, and explains why even though Ayn Rand Paul is the Messiah of the Teabaggers, everyone will think he's full of fail.

I've never heard a Tea Partier extol Ayn Rand. I'm sure that many TPers aren't very familiar with objectivism, but if explained to them, they would find it objectionable, probably along the same lines as the National Review condemned it.

bjkeefe 11-22-2010 03:14 PM

Re: Playing the Expectations Game
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by operative (Post 189246)
I've never heard a Tea Partier extol Ayn Rand.

I'm not sure whether I find that hard to believe, or in your case specifically, increasingly easy to believe, but trust me, they're out there in droves. Here is one way to illustrate that.

Quote:

I'm sure that many TPers aren't very familiar with objectivism, but if explained to them, they would find it objectionable, probably along the same lines as the National Review condemned it.
Eh. Maybe you're right that, as with any glibertarian, they'd be disinclined to embrace all logical consequences of objectivism, much less live up to them, but I'd say that to the extent that TPers, and in particular, teabaggers, claim Ayn Rand's work to be their bible, they're just as inclined to cherry-pick the parts that appeal and ignore the parts that don't as anyone else claiming to base his or her thinking on one book does.

In any case, I was more riffing on the first name of Ron Paul's boy than anything else, not to mention laughing at how he already appears so likely to disappoint his more dogmatic fans that Reason already feels compelled to make excuses for him, so I'm not sure your response has much bearing.

operative 11-22-2010 04:14 PM

Re: Playing the Expectations Game
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189436)
I'm not sure whether I find that hard to believe, or in your case specifically, increasingly easy to believe, but trust me, they're out there in droves. Here is one way to illustrate that.



Eh. Maybe you're right that, as with any glibertarian, they'd be disinclined to embrace all logical consequences of objectivism, much less live up to them, but I'd say that to the extent that TPers, and in particular, teabaggers, claim Ayn Rand's work to be their bible, they're just as inclined to cherry-pick the parts that appeal and ignore the parts that don't as anyone else claiming to base his or her thinking on one book does.

Well that'd make them like any other devotees of pretty much any other philosopher ;)

bjkeefe 11-23-2010 03:30 PM

Just how far will they in pursuit of the White House in 2012?
 
Steve Benen is not known for being hysterical. That makes this even more thought-provoking:*

Quote:

NONE DARE CALL IT SABOTAGE.... Consider a thought experiment. Imagine you actively disliked the United States, and wanted to deliberately undermine its economy. What kind of positions would you take to do the most damage?

You might start with rejecting the advice of economists and oppose any kind of stimulus investments. You'd also want to cut spending and take money out of the economy, while blocking funds to states and municipalities, forcing them to lay off more workers. You'd no doubt want to cut off stimulative unemployment benefits, and identify the single most effective jobs program of the last two years (the TANF Emergency Fund) so you could kill it.

You might then take steps to stop the Federal Reserve from trying to lower the unemployment rate. You'd also no doubt want to create massive economic uncertainty by vowing to gut the national health care system, promising to re-write the rules overseeing the financial industry, vowing re-write business regulations in general, considering a government shutdown, and even weighing the possibly of sending the United States into default.

You might want to cover your tracks a bit, and say you have an economic plan that would help -- a tax policy that's already been tried -- but you'd do so knowing that such a plan has already proven not to work.

Does any of this sound familiar?

Matt Yglesias had an item the other day that went largely unnoticed, but which I found pretty important.

Quote:

...I know that tangible improvements in the economy are key to Obama's re-election chances. And Douglas Hibbs knows that it's key. And senior administration officials know that its key. So is it so unreasonable to think that Mitch McConnell and John Boehner may also know that it's key? That rank and file Republicans know that it's key? McConnell has clarified that his key goal in the Senate is to cause Barack Obama to lose in 2012 which if McConnell understands the situation correctly means doing everything in his power to reduce economic growth. Boehner has distanced himself from this theory, but many members of his caucus may agree with McConnell.

Which is just to say that specifically the White House needs to be prepared not just for rough political tactics from the opposition (what else is new?) but for a true worst case scenario of deliberate economic sabotage.
Budget expert Stan Collender has predicted that Republicans perceive "economic hardship as the path to election glory." Paul Krugman noted in his column yesterday that Republicans "want the economy to stay weak as long as there's a Democrat in the White House."

As best as I can tell, none of this analysis -- all from prominent observers -- generated significant pushback. The notion of GOP officials deliberately damaging the economy didn't, for example, spark widespread outrage or calls for apologies from Matt or anyone else.

And that, in and of itself, strikes me as remarkable. We're talking about a major political party, which will control much of Congress next year, possibly undermining the strength of the country -- on purpose, in public, without apology or shame -- for no other reason than to give themselves a campaign advantage in 2012.

Maybe now would be a good time to pause and ask a straightforward question: are Americans O.K. with this?

For months in 2009, conservatives debated amongst themselves about whether it's acceptable to actively root against President Obama as he dealt with a variety of pressing emergencies. Led by Rush Limbaugh and others, the right generally seemed to agree that there was nothing wrong with rooting against our leaders' success, even in a time of crisis.

But we're talking about a significantly different dynamic now. This general approach has shifted from hoping conditions don't improve to taking steps to ensure conditions don't improve. We've gone from Republicans rooting for failure to Republicans trying to guarantee failure.
There's more. Hat tip to Kevin Drum (via Ken Layne), who observes in part:

Quote:

Strong statements! But here's what's really remarkable: virtually no one in any position of authority has picked up on this since Collender first suggested it. On the Republican side, practically everyone from the party leaders on down is thoroughly convinced that Barack Obama is one or more of: a socialist, an appeaser, a Chicago thug, a racist, a would-be killer of grandmas, and a president who wants to undermine everything that makes America great because he's ashamed of his country. This is just standard rhetoric from Fox News pundits, radio show hosts, rank-and-file members of Congress, and party poobahs. It's hardly even noteworthy anymore.

But the mirror image of that — Democrats saying that Republicans are deliberately sabotaging economic recovery — is virtually invisible. Krugman finally said it yesterday, but that's it among high-profile liberal leaders. For the most part they're just not willing to go there. This, in a nutshell, is the difference between the conservative noise machine and the liberal noise machine. One is noisy, the other is....restrained. We'll see if that changes now that Krugman has brought his cannons to bear.
* Ed. note: In the blockquote from Benen, I added the links back to the embedded Yglesias blockquote as they appear in Matt's original post.

bjkeefe 11-23-2010 04:32 PM

Re: As Ye Sow, So Shall Ye Reap
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189045)
Hey America, want to see what you brought upon yourself by putting the Republicans in charge of the House? Stephen Colbert presents Joe Barton (R-Texas) and John Shimkus (R-Illinois), who will be big players in deciding energy and environmental policy for at least the next two years.

Did you know that wind energy would be bad, because turbines slow down the wind that cools the planet? But that we don't have to worry about global warming because God promised Noah "never again?"

(h/t: Ocean)

And speaking of Joe Barton:

Quote:

Mashey's analysis concludes that 35 of the report's 91 pages "are mostly plagiarized text, but often injected with errors, bias and changes of meaning."
What report was this? Oh, nothing special. Just the report commissioned ...

Quote:

... in 2005 by Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, then the head of the House energy committee. Barton cited the report in an October letter to The Washington Post when he wrote that Penn State climate scientist Michael Mann's work was "rooted in fundamental errors of methodology that had been cemented in place as 'consensus' by a closed network of friends."
And:

Quote:

"The report was integral to congressional hearings about climate scientists," says Aaron Huertas of the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington, D.C. "And it preceded a lot of conspiratorial thinking polluting the public debate today about climate scientists."
Right-wing noise machine? What right-wing noise machine?

(h/t: Pareene)

[Added] You'll note references to DeepClimate.org if you read the above. Here's the latest post from that site on this scandal. It offers detailed analysis and links back to previous coverage, including the first reports made of the plagiarism accusations.

[Added2] You may want to start with this overview of the DeepClimate.org analysis, from Stoat (William M. Connolly), over at ScienceBlogs.

[Added3] Kate Sheppard has a good post on a different aspect: "... and it appears that Barton's office may have been feeding Wegman's team the information to include in the report."

operative 11-23-2010 09:54 PM

Re: Just how far will they in pursuit of the White House in 2012?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189552)
Steve Benen is not known for being hysterical. That makes this even more thought-provoking:*



There's more. Hat tip to Kevin Drum (via Ken Layne), who observes in part:



* Ed. note: In the blockquote from Benen, I added the links back to the embedded Yglesias blockquote as they appear in Matt's original post.

How dare they dissent!

bjkeefe 11-24-2010 07:19 PM

The Hammer Comes Down
 
Houston Chronicle reports on a GOP hero:

Quote:

AUSTIN – A Travis County jury today found former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay guilty of political money laundering charges relating to a corporate money swap in the 2002 elections.

The verdict came down five years after DeLay was forced to step down as the second most powerful Republican in the U.S. House. The charges also led DeLay to resign from his Sugar Land congressional seat in 2006.

DeLay was accused of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering. On the conspiracy charge, DeLay faces a sentence of two to 20 years in prison and five to 99 years or life in prison on the money laundering count.

In preparation for the 2002 elections, DeLay cloned his Americans for a Republican Majority political committee as Texans for a Republican Majority. TRMPAC was designed to help Republicans win a state House majority in preparation for a mid-decade congressional redistricting in 2003.

That redistricting helped the Republicans take a 17-15 majority from the Democrats and win a 21-11 GOP majority in the 2004 elections.

At the center of the case against DeLay was an exchange of $190,000 in corporate donations to TRMPAC for an equal amount of money donated by individuals to the Republican National Committee. The RNC money was given to seven Texas candidates specified by TRMPAC.

Corporate money cannot be used in candidate campaigns in Texas.
Wonder if that last sentence still holds, in light of Citizens United.

operative 11-24-2010 07:20 PM

Re: The Hammer Comes Down
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189784)
Houston Chronicle reports on a GOP hero:



Wonder if that last sentence still holds, in light of Citizens United.

Yeah, Tom DeLay is totally a GOP hero. About as much as William Jefferson is a Democrat hero.

bjkeefe 11-24-2010 07:25 PM

Re: The Hammer Comes Down
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189784)
Houston Chronicle reports on a GOP hero:

Quote:

AUSTIN – A Travis County jury today found former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay guilty of political money laundering charges relating to a corporate money swap in the 2002 elections.

The verdict came down five years after DeLay was forced to step down as the second most powerful Republican in the U.S. House. The charges also led DeLay to resign from his Sugar Land congressional seat in 2006.

DeLay was accused of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering. On the conspiracy charge, DeLay faces a sentence of two to 20 years in prison and five to 99 years or life in prison on the money laundering count.

[...]

This is the most tragic Tom DeLay story since this.

[Added] Special for the operative: Yes. A Republican hero.

operative 11-24-2010 07:37 PM

Re: The Hammer Comes Down
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189786)
This is the most tragic Tom DeLay story since this.

[Added] Special for the operative: Yes. A Republican hero.

Wow, Bush praised him. So, I suppose all of the praise heaped on the ridiculously corrupt Jack Murtha makes him a hero to the left. And you know that if I look, I can find people praising Cold Cash Jefferson, maybe even loopy Truthy Cynthia McKinney.

bjkeefe 11-24-2010 07:57 PM

Re: The Hammer Comes Down
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by operative (Post 189788)
Wow, Bush praised him. So, I suppose all of the praise heaped on the ridiculously corrupt Jack Murtha makes him a hero to the left. And you know that if I look, I can find people praising Cold Cash Jefferson, maybe even loopy Truthy Cynthia McKinney.

No, I don't know that. I do know you have a history of making empty assertions, though.

I also know that George W. Bush, another of your Republican heroes, was twice President of the United States, and that Tom DeLay was House Majority Leader. I do not know, though, why you think two back-benchers, who so far are connected only* in what we politely call your mind, stand as equivalents to these two heroes of yours.

But then, being a good operative, you'll no doubt deny ever liking Bush, too.

Because NOT A REAL CONSERVATIVE!!!1!, amirite?

==========

* But, hey, look at that: "cold-cash Jefferson, Cynthia McKinney" right next to each other. Are we surprised to learn where you got this talking point? No, we are not surprised. That much we have long known about you.

And of course you will deny this, too.

operative 11-24-2010 08:13 PM

Re: The Hammer Comes Down
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189792)
No, I don't know that. I do know you have a history of making empty assertions, though.

I also know that George W. Bush, another of your Republican heroes,

You have a flare for baseless assertions. For the record (which doesn't seem to matter much to you), my opinion about Bush is that he is a tremendously respectable, genuinely decent, person who was faced with an incredibly difficult presidency and lacked the leadership skills to truly rise to the occasion. Sorry that that doesn't fit into your "good/bad" schema.

Quote:

was twice President of the United States, and that Tom DeLay was House Majority Leader. I do not know, though, why you think two back-benchers, who so far are connected only* in what we politely call your mind, stand as equivalents to these two heroes of yours.
Murtha was Nancy Pelosi's chance to be her number 2 and was possibly the second most powerful Dem in the House in terms of real power waged.


Quote:

But then, being a good operative, you'll no doubt deny ever liking Bush, too.

Because NOT A REAL CONSERVATIVE!!!1!, amirite?
More baseless assertions.

And considering that I seldom watch Fox News (and haven't watched it today--right now Nightly Business Report is playing on my tv, having followed the News Hour), yes I will deny your silly charge, which seems to be little more than a way to duck out of acknowledging the worst your party has had to offer. Considering the slap on the wrist Chuck Rangel got for income tax evasion etc., you really ought not talk.

bjkeefe 11-25-2010 04:08 AM

Re: The Hammer Comes Down
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by operative (Post 189796)
... my opinion about Bush is that he is a tremendously respectable, genuinely decent, person ...

Noted for the record. Maybe you'd like to unhand that shovel, though? Because what you type after that ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by operative (Post 189796)
... who was faced with an incredibly difficult presidency and lacked the leadership skills to truly rise to the occasion.

... sounds disturbingly like this:

Quote:

"a man who has struggled with adversity with an inspiring humility."
But let us move away from your crush on Commander Codpiece. You have more talking points generated by Fox, et al, yes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by operative (Post 189796)
Murtha was ...

Ah. Indeed you do.

We will first note, with amusement, your backpedaling away from your earlier "Cold Cash Jefferson" and "Cynthia McKinney" talking points. Couldn't respond to my challenge to find any connections there, hmmm? Ah well, GoogleIsLibrullyBiased!!!1!, as your hero Kathryn Jean Lopez will tell you on a regular basis.

As to Murtha, not to mention your later attempt to throw Rangel into the mix now that the names you first babbled out have been shot down: I'll be the last person on this earth to blindly insist that any member of Congress is free from corruption, since I do not suffer from the same mindless tribalistic mentality as you do, but just in case you've yet to learn this, due to Fox and the rest of the right-wing sources you prefer to consume, here's a difference worth keeping in mind, especially in the context of this thread. In bullet points because we believe in placing the fodder where the cattle can reach it:

• Murtha has never been convicted of a crime.

• He has never even been indicted for a crime.

• Neither has Rangel.

• By contrast, your hero Tom DeLay has.

• Tom DeLay has been indicted.

• Tom DeLay has been convicted.

And if there is any justice left in this country, he will be doing long years behind bars.

(Yes. (*sigh*) We know what you're furiously itching to type right now. See note [1].)

And yes, Tom DeLay is your hero. Just admit it. Or else admit you are guilty of mindless tribalism.

I mean, seriously. Your Must.Fire.Rapid.Response. mania concerning this clown, not to mention the likes of George W. Bush and Sarah Palin ... really? You cannot see how vacuous that looks?

Something to think about, assuming that you will at some point turn off your teevee and give that experience a try.

Somewhere later you said this ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by operative (Post 189796)
More baseless assertions.

... to which I will say only that I'm glad to see ... a hint! A small hint, yes, but a hint! A small hint that there may be some evidence to be found that you have not yet calcified so much that you've been completely deaf to that criticism that you have earned.

I call that one seed planted, to the good.

Now let's see if you can do anything more with it than to multiply it by -1 and try to hurl it back.

Not betting, mind. But I'm always a little hopeful. Even with people like you.

==========

[1] Doubtless, you're looking to duck everything else said in this post and so the Foxy voices in your head are already howling out loud about the "indictment" of Rangel by the House Ethics Committee. They are saying, "Don't think! Just type!"

Save it. I am talking here about actual crimes as determined by actual courts of law. Which, I sadly feel compelled to add for your edification, was a distinction the operatives of the Party of Law and Order™ used to love to make. But of course, now they're just working for the Party of No.

operative 11-25-2010 06:24 PM

Re: The Hammer Comes Down
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 189852)
Noted for the record. Maybe you'd like to unhand that shovel, though? Because what you type after that ...



... sounds disturbingly like this:



But let us move away from your crush on Commander Codpiece. You have more talking points generated by Fox, et al, yes?



Ah. Indeed you do.

We will first note, with amusement, your backpedaling away from your earlier "Cold Cash Jefferson" and "Cynthia McKinney" talking points. Couldn't respond to my challenge to find any connections there, hmmm? Ah well, GoogleIsLibrullyBiased!!!1!, as your hero Kathryn Jean Lopez will tell you on a regular basis.

As to Murtha, not to mention your later attempt to throw Rangel into the mix now that the names you first babbled out have been shot down: I'll be the last person on this earth to blindly insist that any member of Congress is free from corruption, since I do not suffer from the same mindless tribalistic mentality as you do, but just in case you've yet to learn this, due to Fox and the rest of the right-wing sources you prefer to consume, here's a difference worth keeping in mind, especially in the context of this thread. In bullet points because we believe in placing the fodder where the cattle can reach it:

• Murtha has never been convicted of a crime.

• He has never even been indicted for a crime.

• Neither has Rangel.

• By contrast, your hero Tom DeLay has.

• Tom DeLay has been indicted.

• Tom DeLay has been convicted.

And if there is any justice left in this country, he will be doing long years behind bars.

(Yes. (*sigh*) We know what you're furiously itching to type right now. See note [1].)

And yes, Tom DeLay is your hero. Just admit it. Or else admit you are guilty of mindless tribalism.

I mean, seriously. Your Must.Fire.Rapid.Response. mania concerning this clown, not to mention the likes of George W. Bush and Sarah Palin ... really? You cannot see how vacuous that looks?

Something to think about, assuming that you will at some point turn off your teevee and give that experience a try.

Somewhere later you said this ...



... to which I will say only that I'm glad to see ... a hint! A small hint, yes, but a hint! A small hint that there may be some evidence to be found that you have not yet calcified so much that you've been completely deaf to that criticism that you have earned.

I call that one seed planted, to the good.

Now let's see if you can do anything more with it than to multiply it by -1 and try to hurl it back.

Not betting, mind. But I'm always a little hopeful. Even with people like you.

==========

[1] Doubtless, you're looking to duck everything else said in this post and so the Foxy voices in your head are already howling out loud about the "indictment" of Rangel by the House Ethics Committee. They are saying, "Don't think! Just type!"

Save it. I am talking here about actual crimes as determined by actual courts of law. Which, I sadly feel compelled to add for your edification, was a distinction the operatives of the Party of Law and Order™ used to love to make. But of course, now they're just working for the Party of No.

If you're not willing to concede that Murtha was corrupt then there is no point in continuing the conversation because you are not acting in good faith.

But I am in a very good mood so I will say Happy Thanksgiving all the same.

bjkeefe 11-29-2010 07:46 PM

So, what else is Michele Bachmann's favorite edumacator up to?
 
Evidently, David Barton's brainwashing sessions for incoming Republican members of Congress have not filled his schedule. Looks like he also has time to ally himself with the likes of Bryan Fischer, Tony Perkins, and a bunch of other fundies to put forth a message of the Biblical (Christian) response to the godless environmentalists!!!1!

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/8...reendragon.png


Sound familiar?

Oh, did I say "message?" Of course I should have said "product." These grifters never miss a chance to repackage the same shit appealing to the same fears and hatreds, do they?

(h/t: Jack Stuef)

bjkeefe 12-01-2010 02:31 AM

Thank goodness we've got the grown-ups back in charge
 
In order to get this Great Nation Back On Track, we're gonna need ... Priorities!

Apparently, wanking over earmarks and trying to cut the last eight cents the government gives NPR wasn't picayune enough, so the Number One and Number Two Republicans in the United States House of Representatives are now Very Concerned about?

Works of art that offend no one but wingnuts who spend their every waking hour searching for things to be offended by. Srsly.

(h/t: Roy Edroso. And don't miss his previous post on the same subject.)

Ocean 12-01-2010 08:36 AM

Re: Thank goodness we've got the grown-ups back in charge
 
The multiple faces of fascism.

operative 12-01-2010 10:29 AM

Re: Thank goodness we've got the grown-ups back in charge
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 190525)
In order to get this Great Nation Back On Track, we're gonna need ... Priorities!

Apparently, wanking over earmarks and trying to cut the last eight cents the government gives NPR wasn't picayune enough, so the Number One and Number Two Republicans in the United States House of Representatives are now Very Concerned about?

Works of art that offend no one but wingnuts who spend their every waking hour searching for things to be offended by. Srsly.

(h/t: Roy Edroso. And don't miss his previous post on the same subject.)

About time NPR stood on its own. It is an intolerant lefty spin machine. So they're free to do so, but they shouldn't be expected to be propped up by taxpayer funds.

TwinSwords 12-01-2010 01:57 PM

Re: Thank goodness we've got the grown-ups back in charge
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ocean (Post 190540)
The multiple faces of fascism.

Exactly right.

Republicans hate us for our freedom. (To borrow a phrase.)

operative 12-01-2010 05:25 PM

Re: Thank goodness we've got the grown-ups back in charge
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TwinSwords (Post 190556)
Exactly right.

Republicans hate us for our freedom. (To borrow a phrase.)

Separating media and government is actually the exact opposite of fascism. The State-media was a major component of the Nazi regime.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.