June 07, 2011
— Ace I've noted this before; other people have too. But Zombie puts it clearly for those who still don't get it.
The media and the left (but I repeat myself) always, always claim that the reason they cover conservative sex scandals like gangbusters -- and additionally write stories connecting the Shamed One to the party generally, something they never do with liberals', where each man's sins are his and his alone -- is that conservatives run on something called "Family Values" or "Morality."
For one thing, look, idiots: Every politician in this country, including your precious Democrats, runs on a platform of helping families. Show me the politician who doesn't. Since something like 65% of the country is part of a current family (I just made that up, shut up) it would be insane not to make promises to such a huge swathe of voters.
And if you claim otherwise, show me the Democratic politicians running expressly on an anti-family platform. Okay, that's too much; how about show me one who's running on a family-neutral platform?
This whole thing about "families" is a despicable lie. The media says "family values" to euphemize what they're really talking about: The Republican Party is, as a party, resistant to gay marriage.
Fucking period.
That's all we're talking about here. That's all that matters. The GOP is against gay marriage, in the main, and the Democratic Party is for gay marriage, in the main.
That is the only distinction. Whoops: And abortion. Forgot that one.
So tell me how any straight politician's chasing heterosexual ass is implicated by his stance on gay marriage?
And tell me-- how is Anthony Weiner, who, as far as I know, did not insist on some kind of special exemption to the usual litany of promises made in a marriage ceremony, not a hypocrite?
Did Anthony Weiner ever announce, publicly, "I believe marriage is primarily a tax-minimization arrangement, and the other elements of it are generally optional"?
No, he didn't.
The liberal media's go-to excuse for partisanship-driven sex-scandalmongering is that, apparently, liberal politicians typically sell themselves to voters as sexual libertines.
They do? Who? I can only think of one guy who did something remotely similar to that, and he was Republican -- Schwarzenegger.
Who else? Show me which married Democrats do not feature their wives and children prominently in campaign commercials and campaign literature.
You think that's just... an accident? That they're broadcasting their normalness and wholesomeness to a public that responds favorably to such things?
But whenever Republicans do it, it is, as the left has it, "using children as a prop" and of course inviting scrutiny on the marital-fidelity front.
Where are, exactly, these Democrats who don't hold up a stable family headed by loving, faithful parents as the ideal? Where are these Democrats who publicly announce "I don't think marital fidelity is a particularly important value"?
Show them to me. Show me where they've signed a petition making such a statement.
No, this is simply about naked partisanship -- get those conservatives! protect those liberals -- with a meagerest fig-leaf of distinction made to justify their partisan agenda.
And as has been pointed out before -- Mary Katharine Ham just name-checked the idea on Bill O'Reilly last night -- if you're going to use "hypocrisy" as a justification for Full Spectrum coverage of conservative sex problems, then do note the major, major hypocrisy of a dirty son-of-a-bitch like Charles Rangel who runs on a platform of Big Government and the Sanctity of High Taxation Rates who then turns around and "forgets" to report big ticket items in his income.
Or a son-of-a-bitch like Charles Schumer, Hero of the Common Working Man, taking in more money from Big Banking than almost anyone in history.
Hypocrisy there?
Or how about Obama, running on a platform of "people-powered politics," fired up, ready to go on the grassroots, anti-corporation level, who decides he needs to do curry favor with his well-heeled corporate donor buddies a little more and Bejazzles his administration with corporate bigs from key cash-money-donation industries?
Hypocrisy?
No, you know which party gets the most media coverage on this kind of scandal? Also Republicans.
I'd be completely willing to stipulate, for the record, that conservatives say they love families and morality, and therefore should get especially harsh treatment when they err in such matters.
If I secured a reciprocal agreement that Democrats love the government and "the people" more and therefore should get especially harsh treatment when they steal from their beloved government by not paying taxes or sell out their beloved "people" by sucking up to corporate interests.
But of course I won't get that.
The media will just keep insisting, at the time of scandal, that Democrats are sexually libertine and therefore are not hypocrites on these issues.
But at voting time? In campaign season? On election day?
Oddly enough, I never hear the media announce "And also running is Anthony Weiner, who, as you might know, does not particularly support families and also doesn't subscribe to conventional moral beliefs."
Funny, the media never tells me that when I'm getting ready to vote, but all of a sudden when a Democrat gets his prank caught in someone else's in-box, then I'm told "Well of course he was never a big believer in your Victorian bourgeois sexual rigidity, you know."
No, I didn't know. No one ever mentioned that. Funny, I think some voters might have been interested to hear that before the actual day of the election.
You Know... This is entirely in the media's power to prove or disprove.
They could just ask their beloved Democrats, on the record, if they consider themselves to be uninterested in conventional sexual morality.
And then, if a candidate says "Yeah, I'm sort of a sexual libertine, I don't truck much with these artificial constraints on our expressions of ourselves as sexual beings," I'd say, "Okay, well, that guy right there? He can't really be a hypocrite on these issues."
But, of course, they don't ask this. Because they just want the public to assume that the Democrat in question "shares their values" -- including on notions about sexuality -- at election time.
The "he never represented himself as anything except a pooter-hound" defense only gets trotted out when necessary.
If you want the benefits of electing yourself to a special category, you must do so in advance. You must declare yourself as being beyond such bourgeois thinking.
You cannot play-act as someone who "shares the values" of normal family-oriented Americans and then one day say you take it back.
And the media can't do this on behalf of Democrats.
Speaking of the Hypocrisy Defense: A comedian, who I never thought was funny, "joked" that he would kill Palin, should she be elected president.
The media will not cover this outrageous statement, of course.
I can only assume that's because of some other weird claim make up to justify disparate treatment, like "Oh, Sarah Palin? Yeah, she never really said she was interested in living so we don't bother covering her announced would-be assassins."
Posted by: Ace at
02:01 PM
| Comments (285)
Post contains 1207 words, total size 8 kb.
That's the problem in a nutshell, really.
(Actually, no I'm not. You obviously get paid by the word.)
Posted by: Meiczyslaw at June 07, 2011 02:04 PM (bjRNS)
Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at June 07, 2011 02:05 PM (+lsX1)
Fucking period.
Not true wingnut, we don't like the opposition to abortion either. What kind of anti-science moralist would demand they we can't just get rid of the human weeds?!?
Posted by: The State Media at June 07, 2011 02:05 PM (7BU4a)
Posted by: Barbara Mikulski at June 07, 2011 02:05 PM (VXBR1)
Posted by: WalrusRex at June 07, 2011 02:06 PM (Hx5uv)
Using children as a prop? That's hot.
Posted by: Safe Schools Czar Jennings at June 07, 2011 02:06 PM (7BU4a)
Posted by: Anthony Weiner at June 07, 2011 02:07 PM (AZGON)
Posted by: George Orwell at June 07, 2011 02:09 PM (AZGON)
You're finally touching on things I've been thinking for ywears now...
BUT, you haven't acknowledged yet the depth of this shit, it goes into the universities, into the political hiring in large bureaucracies...
It's not just the media, the media is the shit that gets on tv, the USSR-ization of the US continues, and of course, it comes from the left.
Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz at June 07, 2011 02:10 PM (s5aNX)
Now if ace could convince our dumbass politicians and our ever dumberass pundits that get on TV to put that in the medias face then maybe we could change it.
I am not seeing it happening but I would love to.
Posted by: robtr at June 07, 2011 02:11 PM (MtwBb)
Posted by: George Orwell at June 07, 2011 02:13 PM (AZGON)
Posted by: winger bob at June 07, 2011 02:14 PM (uZJOg)
Posted by: robtr at June 07, 2011 02:15 PM (MtwBb)
Don't discount Congressman Weiner. He can put the toothpaste back in the tube with ease and convince the dunderhead rubes that all is well.
Posted by: Chuck Schumer, D-Asshole at June 07, 2011 02:15 PM (cwFVA)
Posted by: Timothy Geithner at June 07, 2011 02:16 PM (FcR7P)
He's a hypocrite because he's sponsored some sort of legislation against female sexual harrassment.
The main point is that he actually is a hypocrite.
Posted by: looking closely at June 07, 2011 02:17 PM (KNy97)
They have all of those things. They just have to make them up as they go along. Having rejected tradition and authority, they come up with new vices and new virtues.
A dicpic is a venial sin at best. An SUV is a mortal sin.
Posted by: kdny at June 07, 2011 02:18 PM (qUxxQ)
He can put the toothpaste back in the tube with ease
And as it happens, he's got with him at all times just the implement to push the toothpaste back into the tube.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 02:18 PM (ap/w5)
Your mistake is pretending that the "hypocrisy" defense/offense is real, not that you've insufficiently rationalized along with the profferers of it.
Democrats want to be ruled—and want you to be ruled—by rapists, killers, thieves, degenerates, etc. Don't even try to argue that they don't. The list that proves it is as almost as long as the list of all Democrats.
They seldom admit this about themselves, or to themselves, of course, because they're pussies, and they know it's wrong. And Republicans don't call it out, and also seldom admit it to themselves, because Republicans are afraid of Democrats—because Ds are the rape/kill/destroy/etc. party.
"Yeah all those queers and single moms and teachers are really scary, man."
Must be. You're fucking terrified of them.
Posted by: oblig. at June 07, 2011 02:18 PM (xvZW9)
The MFM blew all of their credibility in the 2008 election. They were so in the tank for Obama from the get-go that even Democrats remarked on it. Nobody trusts them now. Used car salesman and lawyers have a better rep than reporters.
Posted by: Vic at June 07, 2011 02:19 PM (M9Ie6)
...is that conservatives run on something called "Family Values" or "Morality."
Yeah, so what they're saying by extension is liberals are supposed to be scumbags and everyone knows that.
And we all know the media doesn't cover how many airplanes landed safely today or any other news that really isn't news.
Ergo the media doesn't cover liberal sex scandals.
It's all quite elementary my dear Watson.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 07, 2011 02:19 PM (sbV1u)
Posted by: Guy Wishing The Other Guy Who Shouts 'En Fuego' Still Had His Job at June 07, 2011 02:20 PM (2PTT7)
They don't only lie to save their sick selves from full exposure, but they lie because they like it.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at June 07, 2011 06:17 PM (G/MYk)
In doctor talk, that's called sociopathy.
Weiner is an unrepentant pervert living a life of debauchery.
Posted by: Nurse Mildred Ratched at June 07, 2011 02:20 PM (cwFVA)
Um.
Forgive me for being a reactionary bible-thumper, but I think engaging in explicit sexual talk while masturbating with individuals other than your spouse is "near adultery".
More important, the story came out today that Weiner was talking about meeting one of the women he "chatted" with (a blackjack dealer in Las Vegas) in person, presumably for sex.
So, that's "intent to commit adultery", I think.
Posted by: looking closely at June 07, 2011 02:20 PM (KNy97)
The easy solution is to assume that Democrats are likely to be amoral pieces of shit.
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at June 07, 2011 02:20 PM (1rHeD)
Hear, hear, Ace, and as an addendum, would anyone else agree that they're sick to death of hearing (for example, from Jeff Javitz on CNN this last weekend) that "in Europe, something like this would be no big deal."
Really? Tell that to Berlusconi. Or head north and west and take a look at the majority of political scandals in Britain over the last fifty years. Or cross the Channel and see if there's anything about M. Strauss-Kahn in the French media.
Some of the media elite seem to view "Europe" the way chroniclers of the Middle Ages viewed the world outside their border, as a place of wonders where normal reality is inverted and the impossible is a daily occurrence.
Posted by: A. Pendragon at June 07, 2011 02:21 PM (XDdB5)
Posted by: Truman North at June 07, 2011 02:21 PM (K2wpv)
And the day of erection even!
Posted by: kdny at June 07, 2011 02:21 PM (qUxxQ)
Umm.. .
He tried that by stonewalling questions and hiding behind lawyers.
Oddly, It didn't work out to well for him.
Posted by: looking closely at June 07, 2011 02:22 PM (KNy97)
you give good h**d?
i've been told really good...I love doing it
wow a jewish girl who sucks c***! this thing is ready to do damage
and swallows every drop.
god damn how do I get you here to f*** me?
<= thinking about gagging your hot mouth with my c***
to get us in the mood. first we watch back to back episodes of the daily show and colbert reportÂ…then, to really spice things up we go deface all of my neighbor's sharon angle yard signsÂ…then when we are really hot we go to the bookstore and cover all of the glen beck books with copies of "the audacity of hope!"Â…i do this about once a week (you can tell i am a very exciting girl!)Â…or if this i not your thing, we can just get drunk and have mad, passionate
sex!
why choose? with me behind you can't we both watch daily show?
Hhaha! seeÂ…you are always thinking! you are so rightÂ…aahhh the perfect liberal evening!
i hear liberal girls are very, uh, accommodating of others
of course! it is all about taking care of the little guy!
little?! ouch. you'd be surprised how big'
see radar
Posted by: interested at June 07, 2011 02:22 PM (Vxlzu)
Posted by: The Man Between The Cans at June 07, 2011 02:23 PM (7YKsD)
The opposite of hypocrisy is advocacy. Do we really want practitioners of whatever vice to go about declaring their failings as virtues?
Posted by: kdny at June 07, 2011 02:23 PM (qUxxQ)
When reporters first asked him about the expose reports, he should have said “Butt out.”
Well, if you're Anthony Weiner "butt out" isn't a warning to leave him alone.
It's a command.
Let's ask Meagan Broussard.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 07, 2011 02:24 PM (sbV1u)
"I support the destruction of traditional marriage, destruction of traditional families, and the sexualization of children.. Also, I deeply oppose the moral values as set forth in religious texts and I find Christianity to be particularly offensive. If you vote me, I can promise you decadence...government funded decadence...on a scale not seen since the fall of the Roman empire."
I'm thinking that would only play well in San Francisco. So, any democrat with aspirations of national office would have to lie.
Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at June 07, 2011 02:24 PM (J4Pnx)
On the hypocrisy thing... so if I am telling the children that they should not shoot up heroin, while I am shooting heroin. I am worse than the guy who is shooting heroin but not telling others it is bad. I am worse than the guy shooting it and is nuetral on if kids should also shoot up.
I just dont get the arguement.
Posted by: AndrewsDad at June 07, 2011 02:24 PM (C2//T)
It is the reason the poeple on the Left choose to be on the Left. They are attempting to get away from having to take responsibility for thier actions.
Soros is a big advocate on what he refers to as an "Open Society." This is a foundatonal stone in the Progressive Movement...it's all about creating chaos in the culture to reshape it and then control it with the idea that only the "State" or the culture as a whole can decide what is Right or Wrong and where there is no such thing as a "Fact." He has written extensively about it.
It's all about redirecting faith and religion from traditional sources to the State.
This plays out currently with the Left attempting to destroy all Christian Symbolism, and pretending that all behavior is instinctive and natural, and therefore should not be punished.
Posted by: Jimi at June 07, 2011 02:24 PM (JMsOK)
Posted by: George Orwell at June 07, 2011 02:24 PM (AZGON)
The opposite of hypocrisy is advocacy. Do we really want practitioners of whatever vice to go about declaring their failings as virtues?
===
Its an interesting point.
I think the answer is that we want people who don't exhibit these sorts of vices. That way they don't have to endorse the vices, nor conceal them.
Posted by: looking closely at June 07, 2011 02:25 PM (KNy97)
Hear, hear, Ace, and as an addendum, would anyone else agree that they're sick to death of hearing (for example, from Jeff Javitz on CNN this last weekend) that "in Europe, something like this would be no big deal."
Kinda like deodorant.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 02:25 PM (ap/w5)
Posted by: Dr Spank at June 07, 2011 02:26 PM (k0TKJ)
Posted by: Gay black Jewish abortionist from San Fran, and LIFELONG REPUBLICAN at June 07, 2011 02:28 PM (lap0q)
@47
"I love these kind of posts where ace, and others, speculate as to why dems get treated like children while we get treated like adults. The media coddles democrats;"
Yeah...but you never answered why? There is an agenda in place, been around for a long time, that transcends just Partisan Politics. Soros has not been afraid to explain it.
Posted by: Jimi at June 07, 2011 02:28 PM (JMsOK)
Posted by: BIG BABY GUY LIKES BIG LETTERS TOO at June 07, 2011 02:28 PM (2PTT7)
Democrats: It is easy to never be a hypocrite when you have the moral equivalence of a dog in heat.
Posted by: KLH at June 07, 2011 02:29 PM (4+tm0)
Can't wait for the Dems to rollout the new "Married with Kids Sucks" campaigns.
Will they run on the on the "Single with Buttsex & Drugs" platform ?
Posted by: Huckleberry at June 07, 2011 02:29 PM (s2bW4)
There is an agenda in place, been around for a long time, that transcends just Partisan Politics.
Since 1848, in fact.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 02:29 PM (ap/w5)
Posted by: George Orwell at June 07, 2011 02:29 PM (AZGON)
Hypocrisy projection is the defense method of the Statist since the Statist's whole existence is dependent upon hypocritical behavior.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at June 07, 2011 02:30 PM (1yViP)
Posted by: IE Con at June 07, 2011 02:30 PM (/COcn)
Posted by: davidt at June 07, 2011 02:31 PM (GfhFm)
Posted by: CAC at June 07, 2011 02:31 PM (lap0q)
Posted by: George Orwell at June 07, 2011 02:31 PM (AZGON)
It's not "hypocrisy"... it's having standards and failing to meet them.
Which is human.
It's also not necessarily something to look down upon. If someone fails and keeps trying, we should applaud them. Or at least be neutral about it.
Failing and not trying again... that's what should be frowned upon.
Posted by: Truman North at June 07, 2011 02:31 PM (K2wpv)
===
Even stipulating that European politics is some sort of "gold standard" we should aspire to, I don't think this is true, at all.
Sex scandals definitely do occur in Europe and bring down European politicians. We see that all the time.
Posted by: looking closely at June 07, 2011 02:31 PM (KNy97)
Well, to be fair, there's Barney Frank.
Posted by: Michael at June 07, 2011 02:31 PM (jVzcR)
The problem is that they are not talking to, or representing us. Their people are the people of the lie that is the Left, and until they go down in flames or go to jail, our way of life and the freedom s that enrich it will be at risk.
This was just a little reminder that the opposition that we're dealing with isn't just a different point of view, it is a darkly dangerous and malignant life form that is alien to the free minded people on the Right.
Posted by: ontherocks at June 07, 2011 02:32 PM (HBqDo)
Democrats: It is easy to never be a hypocrite when you have the moral equivalence of a dog in heat.
As a dog lover, I was going to say "alley cat," but the principle is the same.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 02:32 PM (ap/w5)
Posted by: George Orwell at June 07, 2011 02:32 PM (AZGON)
What happened to NO BLOOD FOR OIL that was continually chanted during Bush's administration? Where are they?
Obama escalated the war in Afghanistan. There are still 50,000 troops in Iraq. Obama decided to freeze assets from Ghadaffi and then decided, without Congressional approval, to drop bombs on Libya. He has since decided to freeze assets from Assad in Syria (first step before invasion, like Libya). Obama said "yes" to assassinating Bin Laden. Then there's Guantanamo Bay. And the Patriot Act extention he signed. Where are the anti-war folks? Where is the anti-war media? Where are the protests? Where are the anti-CIAers? Where are the op-eds? Where is the anti-Big Brother outrage from the left? Where did it all go?
Whether you are for or against the actions above the opposite treatments of Bush vs. Obama on war in the Middle East by the left is truly amazing.
Posted by: timmy at June 07, 2011 02:32 PM (Lg3rH)
Posted by: Anthony Weiner, The UnHumungous at June 07, 2011 02:33 PM (2PTT7)
Posted by: ricky retardo at June 07, 2011 02:34 PM (mLAWK)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 07, 2011 02:34 PM (UlUS4)
OT:
Yale University last week killed the Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism -- the only program of its kind in the country, an academically stellar one-stop anti-Semitism research shop. Worse, it almost certainly did so because YIISA refused to ignore the most virulent, genocidal and common form of Jew-hatred today: Muslim anti-Semitism.
Posted by: Truman North at June 07, 2011 02:37 PM (K2wpv)
Barney likes to use the line that the pro-life movement's concern for children ends at birth. The truth of it is, Rep Frank doesn't give a tinker's fart about children, has never done anything in his life on the behalf of a child. His version of 'caring' is absorbing as much of the economy as possible into the bookkeeping rabbit-hole of government.
Posted by: fluffy at June 07, 2011 02:37 PM (SwkdU)
Sex scandals definitely do occur in Europe and bring down European politicians. We see that all the time.
Wasn't there some European dude recently who pretty much shit the bed with his "career limiting move" of raping hotel maids? Professional and political career up in smoke? It seems so familiar....
I wonder if he sent Wiener a thank you note?
Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at June 07, 2011 02:37 PM (J4Pnx)
Which party is it that likes to refer to women as whores and sluts whenever they don't like them? Well, that would be the Democratic party, the party that supposedly respects women.
And, which prominent politician got his girlfriend pregnant (okay, aside from Arnold)? Why, that would be John Edwards, from the party that preaches about sexual responsibility and birth control.
Posted by: sydney jane at June 07, 2011 02:39 PM (+zLTj)
Yes? No? Maybe? Fuck it: Andy, release the rest of the evidence and remove the impetus on the Left to call you a vindictive piece of shit.
In the interests of Truth and Justice.
Posted by: Fritz at June 07, 2011 02:40 PM (p2IBw)
Yes. It started as the French Revolution. That is the sort of insanity that affects the Western left, these days. They are, and see themselves as, the heirs to Robespierre.
Exactly. Robespierre is the key. That cocksucker first promulgated the "noble savage" bullshit that was the impetus for so much leftist claptrap, i.e., "return to nature Luddism and the notion that all evils arise from society, not from man's intrinsic nature. Change society --> change man (New Socialist Man would do nicely) --> eliminate evil.
What childish crap.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 02:40 PM (ap/w5)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at June 07, 2011 02:40 PM (LH6ir)
The media treat dems differently because they are them.When Weiner got into trouble, the MSM covered for him because they believed what he said unconditionally, he said it was a hack and presto it was a hack, and they also wanted to protect one of their own, someone who's values they share, someone who is for the little people whether the little people like it or not.
Posted by: Dr Spank at June 07, 2011 02:41 PM (k0TKJ)
===
Yeah, but was he a hypocrite about it?
No. He never said rape was wrong, and he's been sexually harassing women for years. So its perfectly OK.
Posted by: looking closely at June 07, 2011 02:41 PM (KNy97)
Own it, fucktards.
Posted by: holygoat at June 07, 2011 02:41 PM (2ptZ1)
No question it's a power play. Statism is the essence of control, and to be accused of hijacking it (control) -- which really is to be discovered for doing it -- is the biggest threat to retaining power. So the Statist goes proactive as a defense mechanism: "I want to keep ordering you to do stuff that, of course, I won't follow; so, my state of hypocrisy must continue... but I'll charge you with hypocrisy as often as possible first because, to me, it's such a damaging charge. Surely it's just as damaging a charge to you."
At least that's my running hypothesis so far.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at June 07, 2011 02:46 PM (1yViP)
Eat it, MFM. Eat every last morsel, you stupid fucks.
Posted by: Waterhouse at June 07, 2011 02:46 PM (l0gRS)
No. He never said rape was wrong, and he's been sexually harassing women for years. So its perfectly OK.
My comment was in response to the "in Europe it wouldn't be a big deal", not necessarily the hypocrisy angle.
Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at June 07, 2011 02:47 PM (J4Pnx)
OT, but media-related.
Why is asshole David Gergen considered an astute political observer and sage?
This guy is fucking wrong more often than Charles Johnson for pete's sake.
And he's a squishy follower of conventional wisdom. Boring. Stupid. Ugly.
Only on CNN.
Posted by: Dave at June 07, 2011 02:47 PM (HPcQF)
Every time I read this, it gets worse. Richard Cohen, you are a Total POS
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, not totally there yet at June 07, 2011 02:47 PM (UqKQV)
Posted by: EC at June 07, 2011 02:48 PM (f4TZ2)
Only on CNN.
You know what I think of CNN? It's the reason I have to hit the channel button twice to get from A&E to ESPN.
Posted by: FireHorse at June 07, 2011 02:50 PM (Rq1/g)
Posted by: Kaptain Amerika at June 07, 2011 02:50 PM (2JxNK)
Yes. It started as the French Revolution. That is the sort of insanity that affects the Western left, these days. They are, and see themselves as, the heirs to Robespierre.
Exactly. Robespierre is the key. That cocksucker first promulgated the "noble savage" bullshit that was the impetus for so much leftist claptrap, i.e., "return to nature Luddism and the notion that all evils arise from society, not from man's intrinsic nature. Change society --> change man (New Socialist Man would do nicely) --> eliminate evil.
What childish crap.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 06:40 PM (ap/w5)
OT: A pretty good book for the "young adult" female crowd is Revolution by Jennifer Donnelly. It is filled with a bunch of contemporary teenage angst plus a parallel story of a teenage girl in revolutionary France as told in her journal found by the primary teenager while researching a French composer. There is a bit of a Twilight Zone / X Files ending. It would be a good book if you are trying to find something for your teenage daughter to read this summer. Robespierre and the revolution generally are portrayed as less than the stellar example of human dignity and rights that the French would like to believe that it was.
Posted by: WalrusRex at June 07, 2011 02:50 PM (Hx5uv)
Not sure. What's you Twitter handle?
Posted by: fluffy at June 07, 2011 02:50 PM (SwkdU)
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at June 07, 2011 02:51 PM (J74Py)
It irks me whenever "Europe" is held up as a paragon of civilized behavior.
They stink for the most part; I will take America's fascination with hygiene, thank you very much.
They have no moral background since they lost any connection to religion.
They tend not to like people like me (I am Jewish).
They tend to be afraid of and submissive to people who enjoy raping and killing in the name of religion.
On the other hand, they are really good cooks and their old buildings are pretty.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at June 07, 2011 02:52 PM (LH6ir)
Posted by: sTevo at June 07, 2011 02:53 PM (VMcEw)
Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves) at June 07, 2011 02:53 PM (y/+eD)
Maybe modern Europe has a use, after all:
World's largest theme park!
Posted by: fluffy at June 07, 2011 02:54 PM (SwkdU)
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 02:54 PM (ap/w5)
also that women were to be treated with respect and not boy toys.
also that women wanted gvt out of their uterus and hands off their bodies.cough
also they hat fat cats while making their chosen fat cats billions of bucks
they hate business unless it is their chosen one
they hate suvs and gas guzzlers unless they are using them to get to their meetings
they want everyone to cut back on electric, gas, but not themselves.cut back on water , but they love their golf courses
etc, etc everyone can add to the list of Dem hypocrisy
of course they do embellish truth.
they don't seem to be for much of anything but taking power/money away from swaths of people for themselves.
Posted by: willow at June 07, 2011 02:55 PM (h+qn8)
The modern Left wants to get rid of any source of authority for anyone they see as a rival
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, not totally there yet at June 07, 2011 02:55 PM (UqKQV)
I think it was Joy Behar interviewing Rosie O'Donnell discussing the Arnold where they agreed that despite his relation by marraige, this adultery disqualified him from being a Kennedy. And of course they were right. Arnold didn't leave a trail of dead girls.
Posted by: WalrusRex at June 07, 2011 02:56 PM (Hx5uv)
Crap indeed, but I think that was Rousseau, non?
Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 07, 2011 02:56 PM (qaU+h)
Posted by: TrueProLifeMom at June 07, 2011 02:56 PM (ywMlo)
I've had people tell me I'm a hypocrite for prohibiting my kids from doing stupid and possibly illegal things that teenagers do sometimes that I may have done in my younger days.
My reply is basically, "Yeah, so the fuck what?"
Posted by: Dave at June 07, 2011 02:57 PM (HPcQF)
Posted by: MayBee at June 07, 2011 02:57 PM (PLixr)
Maybe modern Europe has a use, after all:
World's largest theme park!
I lived in Europe for many years, and used to say exactly that.
And as for beautiful old buildings, sure; but their non-touristy areas are every bit as grimy and depressing as ours.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 02:57 PM (ap/w5)
I've always liked Neal Stephenson's take on hypocrisy: (Sorry long, but good)
"
You know, when I was a young man, hypocrisy was deemed the worst of vices,” Finkle-McGraw said. “It was all because of moral relativism. You see, in that sort of a climate, you are not allowed to criticise others-after all, if there is no absolute right and wrong, then what grounds is there for criticism? … Now, this led to a good deal of general frustration, for people are naturally censorious and love nothing better than to criticise others’ shortcomings. And so it was that they seized on hypocrisy and elevated it from a ubiquitous peccadillo into the monarch of all vices. For, you see, even if there is no right and wrong, you can find grounds to criticise another person by contrasting what he has espoused with what he has actually done. In this case, you are not making any judgment whatsoever as to the correctness of his views or the morality of his behaviour-you are merely pointing out that he has said one thing and done another. Virtually all political discourse in the days of my youth was devoted to the ferreting out of hypocrisy.
Â…
We take a somewhat different view of hypocrisy,” Finkle-McGraw continued. “In the late-twentieth-century Weltanschauung, a hypocrite was someone who espoused high moral views as part of a planned campaign of deception-he never held these beliefs sincerely and routinely violated them in privacy. Of course, most hypocrites are not like that. Most of the time it’s a spirit-is-willing, flesh-is-weak sort of thing.”
“That we occasionally violate our own stated moral code,” Major Napier said, working it through, “does not imply that we are insincere in espousing that code.”
“Of course not,” Finkle-McGraw said. “It’s perfectly obvious, really. No one ever said that it was easy to hew to a strict code of conduct. Really, the difficulties involved-the missteps we make along the way-are what make it interesting. The internal, and eternal, struggle, between our base impulses and the rigorous demands of our own moral system is quintessentially human. It is how we conduct ourselves in that struggle that determines how we may in time be judged by a higher power.”
-The Diamond Age
Posted by: Lauren at June 07, 2011 02:57 PM (MOKB9)
Posted by: Mr. Pink at June 07, 2011 02:58 PM (VidfH)
Posted by: really not sayin' who I am at June 07, 2011 02:59 PM (2y90e)
- destruction of the family
- destruction of society
- destruction of capitalism (for conservatives)
- destruction of our economy
Posted by: PeePeePundit at June 07, 2011 02:59 PM (+sBB4)
Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves) at June 07, 2011 02:59 PM (y/+eD)
@110 Crap indeed, but I think that was Rousseau, non?
Yes, of course. I meant Rousseau, not Robespierre. Thank you.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 02:59 PM (ap/w5)
I recall Ted Kennedy being seen as a faithful (if not exactly "devout) Catholic. I was pretty young when he dumped Joan (his seriously alcoholic wife), and then petitioned the Pope for an annulment. It was all very exotic Henry VIII kind of stuff to a whitebread Presbyterian kid from Connecticut.
I guess Ted made up for his failings by being an outstanding father. In fact, I know for a fact that he took his nephews on spring break until they were well into their 20s.
Posted by: Wodeshed at June 07, 2011 02:59 PM (LEcV+)
Posted by: sTevo at June 07, 2011 03:01 PM (VMcEw)
trueprolifemom
so you are saying those that have abortions would likely be unfit parents.
interesting.
still coat hangers? heck
Posted by: willow at June 07, 2011 03:01 PM (h+qn8)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at June 07, 2011 06:52 PM (LH6ir)
Aside from the nukes, which I don't want the Muslims to get, I'm pretty fine with Europe crashing and burning. Once the Euro collapses, I still expect to see either an ethnic cleansing of Islam throughout the EU or battles in the streets as welfare dries up and the battles to take over happen.
Either way, no help for them. Hopefully a few will turn into men and survive the battles. I'm sick of the entire socialist, welfare state crap. Let it burn.
Posted by: Stateless Infidel at June 07, 2011 03:02 PM (GKQDR)
It's not "hypocrisy"... it's having standards and failing to meet them.
Which is human.
It's also not necessarily something to look down upon. If someone fails and keeps trying, we should applaud them. Or at least be neutral about it.
Failing and not trying again... that's what should be frowned upon.
You're so right! I've got to get back on the horse that bucked me or I'll never be able to look in the mirror the same way - and I looooove doing that. This time, I'm going to keep all my extramarital cyber, phone, and real sex completely secret!
Posted by: Tony Weiner at June 07, 2011 03:03 PM (D+phB)
Playing Devil's Advocate here:
(1) Europe may make the best pop music in the world. It's certainly better than ours.
(2) ...
No, just (1). That's it.
Posted by: FireHorse at June 07, 2011 03:03 PM (Rq1/g)
For the love of a child, you would deny it the chance to ever take a breath? You are devoid of logic and compassion.
You idolize "choice", yet the person most effected by this decision has no say. You are lacking as a human being.
Posted by: fluffy at June 07, 2011 03:03 PM (SwkdU)
Whew! I am so relieved... Nobel prize. They donÂ’t just give those away you know.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at June 07, 2011 03:03 PM (jx2j9)
Posted by: delmar at June 07, 2011 03:03 PM (d9sox)
You know the one question during Breitbart's Weiner press conference that is illustrative of this is the one from the douche "Is this payback for Chris Lee?"
Now, why would he think of that angle, why would he have the notion in his mind?
Is he thinking that, of course, we destroyed Chris Lee, just like we destroy all the other Republicans, and Breitbart is using HIS media to counter-attack.
This ideology is all over the media. They are incompetent jagoffs.
Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz at June 07, 2011 03:04 PM (s5aNX)
That has got to be the most mind numbingly gay as fuck retarded pile of liquid shit I have ever read in my life. In other words, Average Joe, is that you? I know that's you, you sly, deceitful bastard.
Posted by: The Man Between The Cans at June 07, 2011 03:04 PM (7YKsD)
Posted by: willow at June 07, 2011 03:04 PM (h+qn8)
with a coat hanger between her legs
Now do you stupid fuckers get it? I said NO WIRE HANGERS!!!!
Posted by: Joan "Mommy Dearest" Crawford at June 07, 2011 03:04 PM (LEcV+)
Gets the popcorn out.
Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at June 07, 2011 07:00 PM (J4Pnx)
I'm going with sock.
We'll find out is he/she/it argues back.
Posted by: ErikW at June 07, 2011 03:05 PM (C07mQ)
"It’s again and again running on a promise to “help the children,” yet forcing more unwanted children to come into the world to be abused and starved by their unfit parents."
Welp, here is a person who defends the practices of Kermit Gosnell.
I'm glad you just came out and did that, I suspect you aren't alone, at all.
Demented bastards.
Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz at June 07, 2011 03:05 PM (s5aNX)
That's because liberals equate "values" with "religion," and they see religious people as Elmer Gantry clones.
There was a clip from The Big Lebowski on YouTube and a commenter, in a fit of spittle-flecked rage, talked about how the Liam character was so sleezy and "probably attended a Southern Baptist church." All of this about a peripheral character who never so much as speaks in the movie, much less offers a religious viewpoint.
Posted by: MuppetFart at June 07, 2011 03:06 PM (5vS4v)
Posted by: TrueProLifeMom's Gaping Mangina at June 07, 2011 03:06 PM (ywMlo)
I'm going with sock.
We'll find out is he/she/it argues back.
Quick google shows that hash posted on a Palin thread back in January.
Other than that, I didn't see any regular postings for the hash.
Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at June 07, 2011 03:06 PM (J4Pnx)
That was hardly the option here, shit-for-brains.
STRAWMAN FAIL. Please proceed to Fuckwit Jail. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.
Posted by: Waterhouse at June 07, 2011 03:06 PM (l0gRS)
My reply is basically, "Yeah, so the fuck what?"
Posted by: Dave at June 07, 2011 06:57 PM (HPcQF)
I hear that shit from one of our brats. My answer is always, "Do as I say, not as I do."
Then she says, "that's not fair!" And then I use your line.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at June 07, 2011 03:07 PM (LH6ir)
Posted by: TrueProLifeMom at June 07, 2011 07:06 PM (ywMlo)
heh, alright.
You know my spouse drives me to distraction and i would love to have a brighter future. maybe i should wack em eh?
Posted by: willow at June 07, 2011 03:08 PM (h+qn8)
Take out their legs. Destroy their revenue stream. Burn down the foundations of their business model. Destroy their livelihood. They have to face real consequences otherwise they won't change their behavior. Reward your friends, punish your enemies.
And some real world anti-left discrimination works, too.
So much info is public these days. It's easy to find out if somebody is a left-wing asshole or if they donated money to Obama. It's easy then to not do business with them, to not hire them, to not promote them.
The left does this -- and it works. My left-wing friends are much more public on Facebook with their politics. They aren't worried a future employer will hold their left-wing views against them. My right-wing friends are worried, for example, that publicly opposing gay marriage can come back to haunt them -- and are much less vocal as a result.
People respond to incentives.
Posted by: Clubber Lang at June 07, 2011 03:09 PM (QcFbt)
Other than that, I didn't see any regular postings for the hash.
Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at June 07, 2011 07:06 PM (J4Pnx)
Dayum! Your Google-fu is strong!
Posted by: ErikW at June 07, 2011 03:09 PM (C07mQ)
Also, if it is Average Joe, you suck.
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:09 PM (2dbd9)
Other than that, I didn't see any regular postings for the hash.
Posted by: mpurinTexas
With a Pro-Palin comment so...
The Shimano reel goes whizzzzzzzzzzzzzz-snag!
Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 07, 2011 03:10 PM (qaU+h)
Stay out of my bedroom you stupid hypocritical regthuglicans !!!
Posted by: Mary Flogginmine -- Proud Resident of Bratsonburros, VT at June 07, 2011 03:10 PM (j/Wpi)
#146
Yep, I've also used the "do as I say, not as I do" line many times and when they tell me life isn't fair I say "Yes I know and the sooner you get used to that fact the better off you'll be."
Posted by: Dave at June 07, 2011 03:10 PM (HPcQF)
Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves) at June 07, 2011 03:11 PM (y/+eD)
I know my life would sure be a lot better if I murdered my asshole boss and a few others who shit on my life if I could do so legally.
So I guess that's ok too?
Really, you HAVE to be a sock puppet, because otherwise you would seriously have to be the biggest dingleberry, yeast infested vayjayjay to ever grace the halls of AoS. Just, WOW.
Posted by: The Man Between The Cans at June 07, 2011 03:11 PM (7YKsD)
So, how desperate are you? Do you have a twitter account?
Posted by: Typical hard-up moron at June 07, 2011 03:11 PM (LH6ir)
We know how they are for all these things and since they dont we dont see them doing this stuff, then they are hypocrites.
Posted by: KOW at June 07, 2011 03:11 PM (TbM8N)
I noticed that. I think it's a drive-by troll.
By the way, I always check. I have been burned too many times by you fuckers and your finely tuned socks.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at June 07, 2011 03:13 PM (LH6ir)
Gosnell? Is that you? You sound like an amoral-enough sack of shit for it to be.
Posted by: Waterhouse at June 07, 2011 03:13 PM (l0gRS)
The biggest pile and most dangerous form of hypocrisy has been the democrats' cries of "We support the troops, not their mission."
Fuck those pricks.
Posted by: Dave at June 07, 2011 03:13 PM (HPcQF)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 03:14 PM (+01MZ)
Stay out of my bedroom you stupid hypocritical regthuglicans !!!
Posted by: Mary Flogginmine -- Proud Resident of Bratsonburros, VT at June 07, 2011 07:10 PM (j/Wpi)
uh hmm, I'm sure Hillary was glad for lewinsky and Huma thrilled that some other woman wanted to be in her partners bed.
i know there were consenting adults involved yet, also there was another that had been given a promise ..
of course unless all three partners were in agreement about open relationships, then it's all good.
Posted by: willow at June 07, 2011 03:15 PM (h+qn8)
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:15 PM (2dbd9)
Grading on a curve?
Reminds me of the Sarah getting her history right being "wrong" or "not right enough" or "didn't express it clearly" etc etc.
Wish Ace would put a thread up about that.
Posted by: Andrew Breitbart at June 07, 2011 03:16 PM (HPcQF)
And keep your hands off that case of Cheetos under my bed !
Posted by: Mary Flogginmine -- Proud Resident of Bratsonburros, VT at June 07, 2011 03:16 PM (j/Wpi)
Ace, this has to be in the running for your all time best line. I literally read it to everyone around me.
Posted by: curious at June 07, 2011 03:17 PM (k1rwm)
I think it's time to move past Weinergate and on to Hillary/Huma. There has to be a reason that Weiner was Tweeting 7's when he was a newlywed to a 10.
Posted by: geoff at June 07, 2011 03:18 PM (kfRzh)
None of your business why I had 3-phase 240 volt power lines run from garage to my bedroom rethugs !
Posted by: Mary Flogginmine -- Proud Resident of Bratsonburros, VT at June 07, 2011 03:19 PM (j/Wpi)
I mean, apart from repeatedly exposing them in our small circles as what they are, which is cathartic but doesn't seem to change much.
I don't have the answer, but we seem to be asking the wrong questions. We know what the problem is, we don't yet know the solution.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 03:19 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 03:20 PM (+01MZ)
A 10??? what???? geoff when was the last time you visited your eye care professional?
Posted by: curious at June 07, 2011 03:20 PM (k1rwm)
Posted by: TrueProLifeMom at June 07, 2011 03:20 PM (ywMlo)
i only blame that on him because He seems really involved with stroking his own ego.
Posted by: willow at June 07, 2011 03:20 PM (h+qn8)
Posted by: willow at June 07, 2011 03:21 PM (h+qn8)
We got it with Weiner. Now, let's get it for everyone else. Politicians should no longer be able to hide under the media's skirts.
Posted by: soulpile is... expendable at June 07, 2011 03:21 PM (afWhQ)
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 03:21 PM (u8cj+)
I am revising my previous strong opinions against random drug testing.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 03:23 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 03:23 PM (+01MZ)
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, not totally there yet at June 07, 2011 03:24 PM (UqKQV)
Posted by: curious at June 07, 2011 03:24 PM (k1rwm)
A 10??? what???? geoff when was the last time you visited your eye care professional?
I'm sorry, I think she's a hottie.
geoff yeah maybe he was a crappy selfish lover and she lost interest.
I think Occam's Razor comes into play once again - the 3-year old rumors about Hillary and Huma were correct.
Posted by: geoff at June 07, 2011 03:24 PM (kfRzh)
Crew on TV shows talk. This Titus asshole is infamous as a shitbird.
He is playing the Kathy Griffin game.
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:24 PM (2dbd9)
Maybe modern Europe has a use, after all:
World's largest theme park!
Posted by: fluffy at June 07, 2011 06:54 PM (SwkdU)
I'm going EuropeLand yaaaaaaaayyyyyy!
Posted by: Lemmiwinks at June 07, 2011 03:24 PM (pdRb1)
I stand by my comment about drug testing.
Waaaaaay too much time on your hands.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 03:24 PM (bxiXv)
The Left will use any argument, any rationale, any logic, to further their aims.
They have one goal: winning.
They don't even have to believe what they say. Just win, baby.
ANY MEANS TO THAT END.
ANY. MEANS.
It's a very effective strategy.
Posted by: Jones at June 07, 2011 03:24 PM (8sCoq)
Think Obama is on-board with the infanticide thing, isn't he?
Think he voted against a Born Alive Act in the Illinois legislature.
Posted by: Dave at June 07, 2011 03:24 PM (HPcQF)
http://tinyurl.com/6akj869
I am not kidding. Bwhahahahah
h/t JammieWearingFool
Posted by: mpfs at June 07, 2011 03:25 PM (iYbLN)
The biggest pile and most dangerous form of hypocrisy has been the democrats' cries of "We support the troops, not their mission."
Cool. I support the gays, but detest their lifestyle.
Same thing.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 03:25 PM (ap/w5)
Stupid nosy rethugs...
The good heavy-duty industrial concrete vibrators don't run on 2-phase 110 Volt power.
Posted by: Mary Flogginmine -- Proud Resident of Bratsonburros, VT at June 07, 2011 03:25 PM (j/Wpi)
Posted by: toby928™ at June 07, 2011 03:25 PM (GTbGH)
Posted by: soulpile is... expendable at June 07, 2011 07:21 PM (afWhQ)
So we demand it and don't get it. Like the last thousand times. Then what?
Seriously, they're not going to cooperate. We need a plan.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 03:26 PM (bxiXv)
in person, the woman's not a 10, maybe not even a 5. but he's no looker as my mom would say so they found each other.
Posted by: curious at June 07, 2011 03:26 PM (k1rwm)
Oh no, he didn't vote against it.
He let it die on his desk so that it couldn't be voted on.
Much like how he let newborns die on shelves in hospital storage closets.
Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at June 07, 2011 03:27 PM (J4Pnx)
in person, the woman's not a 10, maybe not even a 5.
I wouldn't know - I just look at the pictures. Certainly she had more going for her than his Twitter pals.
Posted by: geoff at June 07, 2011 03:28 PM (kfRzh)
He'll be seeing those babies again in the fullness of his time. He may not believe in an afterlife, but decisions like that will come back on the people who make them.
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:29 PM (2dbd9)
Posted by: Batznratz at June 07, 2011 03:29 PM (QFAFF)
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 03:29 PM (u8cj+)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 07:23 PM (+01MZ)
Dagny makes a good point and so do you. It's evil. Period.
How else can a rational human being explain it otherwise?
It's a bit disturbing to think that a third of the American people are so sick and twisted that infanticide isn't just to be merely tolerated but also to be endorsed and celebrated.
I don't throw the word "hate" around loosely, but well, you know.
Posted by: ErikW at June 07, 2011 03:30 PM (C07mQ)
Weiner's a beard.
Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at June 07, 2011 03:30 PM (J4Pnx)
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 07:29 PM (u8cj+)
He's a conservative man pretending to be a liberal woman.... pretending to be a conservative man pretending to be a liberal woman...
Not sure where the train stops on that line...
Actually, it's pretty easy to imitate a liberal, I'd do it but it puts me off my food.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 03:31 PM (bxiXv)
All the liberals I've been forced to associate with are always miserable, sulking smacktards. With very few exceptions, all the conservative folks I know love to have a good time. Men and women both.
I was never taught that fun or lving life to the fullest was wrong. Where does that come from?
People watching Footloose too many times?
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:31 PM (2dbd9)
Weiner's a beard.
And an ugly one at that.
Did you see the wedding picture? She doesn't look all that radiant or happy about the whole thing. She looks like she wants to hang herself.
Posted by: mpfs at June 07, 2011 03:32 PM (iYbLN)
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 07:29 PM (u8cj+)
My head is impervious to average joe.......unless he's downwind.
Trolls don't hardly come here any more, because of the reception they know they'll get.
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, not totally there yet at June 07, 2011 03:33 PM (UqKQV)
Did you see the wedding picture? She doesn't look all that radiant or happy about the whole thing. She looks like she wants to hang herself.
Posted by: mpfs at June 07, 2011 07:32 PM (iYbLN)
well you saw the weiner so you know why now.
Posted by: curious at June 07, 2011 03:33 PM (k1rwm)
Anthony and Huma look like well-dressed rats who just got done eating a lemon in their wedding photo.
They both have the look of nasty-ass underground sex club types.
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:34 PM (2dbd9)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 03:35 PM (+01MZ)
Weiner's a beard.
I suspect that's true. Which means that with a bit more pushing, we can reveal both the mockery they've made of the institution of marriage, and the secret life of our Secretary of State.
Posted by: geoff at June 07, 2011 03:35 PM (kfRzh)
Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at June 07, 2011 07:30 PM (J4Pnx)
Reverse beard; very odd; creepy; disturbing. Weiner gets to sex-talk freely while Huma works behind The Scenes ( whatever and wherever that is )
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, not totally there yet at June 07, 2011 03:36 PM (UqKQV)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 03:36 PM (+01MZ)
Posted by: Clubber Lang at June 07, 2011 03:36 PM (QcFbt)
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 07:31 PM (2dbd9)
MBM reality and liberal reality are pretty much the same place - the inside of their heads, filled with bigoted preconceptions that reinforce their premature conclusions about the world.
I have had liberals angrily confront me out of nowhere over positions I don't hold - MORE THAN ONCE (the same person), because their preconceptions outrank observed reality.
Honestly, I try to interact with them as little as possible in real life because they're so relentlessly irrational.
They have to be, or they would reject their own philosophy, it's bone-shatteringly simple.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 03:37 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 03:37 PM (+01MZ)
Posted by: davidt at June 07, 2011 03:38 PM (GfhFm)
Evil, as a force, undoubtedly exists. Sure as gravity and inertia.
We crack that code, and then science will be getting somewhere.
My guess is the solution to the mystery isn't lying on a sofa talking about Mom.
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:38 PM (2dbd9)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 03:39 PM (+01MZ)
I was thinking about their hypocrisy defense this morning. It's a red herring. No one runs on "I'm an ugly pervert". Of course that argument can always be answered with "What do you think Algore's carbon footprint might be?, Hmmm?"
Conservatives are way more fun than libtards. Libtards think that indescriminate sex with strangers is the end all and be all of fun. Sorry, but being nervous about STDs is not my idea of a good time. Neither is having an Addadictomy.
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 03:39 PM (u8cj+)
When and how did we Republicans get the reputation that we hate sex and having fun?
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 07:31 PM (2dbd9)
Rhetorical, yes?
The problem is that our version of fun isn't a tolerant, cocaine-fueled BDSM orgy.
Posted by: ErikW at June 07, 2011 03:39 PM (C07mQ)
There is something here that reaches toward the core belief of American nanny statists, socialists, progressives, all Democrats, many Republicans, most women and many men of today. There is something about children and the emotions they invoke that lead even the most cynical politicians and political parties to eventually use them metaphorically or literally in campaigns over issues and elections. The quoted statements are throwaway lines as used by politicians, but worry about children is universal, and very real.
I hope someone can more accurately state what IÂ’m going to try and describe. I think IÂ’m right in this.
Children deserve protection. This postulate is accepted by all human societies. I have spent some years in Southwest Asia, and many other years working and living with Central and South Americans. In these cultures, the tribe, family, grandfather, father and oldest brother fill a traditional role as social arbiter, referee and protector of family values. State government help is not expected or desired, and would be considered unwanted interference. Family matters, including childrenÂ’s issues, are settled by families.
These cultures are seen by Americans as backwards, and in many ways they are. In many cultures decisions about employment, spouse and domicile are made by the tribe and family, directly or through unbelievable peer pressure. In America, we are all about individuals being all they can be, no matter their tribal or family background, religion or ethnicity, and I celebrate that most important distinction between America and the rest of the world.
But it seems to me that as individual rights and diversity become more important in America, family influence wanes. As traditional family influences and pressures disappear, fatherless children, homeless children, children living in poverty, child criminals, uneducated children and abused children do proportionally increase.
In these ‘backward’ societies, parents who refuse to properly care for their children will be pressured relentlessly by the family elders to step up. The family takes care of itself to avoid being socially stigmatized- shamed- the most powerful motivator in tribal cultures.
In a society (such as ours) where fathers and mothers donÂ’t always fill their responsibilities, a culture where shame has gradually been spun from a punishment to a type of victimhood, the relentless pressures of raising children in fatherless families have pushed Americans to view the government as a surrogate father, filling the role of provider and protector. These misguided citizens deserve what they receive.
My point is this.
Government is taking the place of tribe, family and father in the minds of the sheeple.
Those of us who wish to provide for and protect our own families (me, for example), are standing against the socialist/progressive tide. It might take a village to raise your kids, but not mine. IÂ’m still here, not as a conservative or Republican but as a free American man, and I hope your readers are, too.
Posted by: dr kill at June 07, 2011 03:40 PM (le5qc)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 03:40 PM (+01MZ)
When we said we're also responsible for the aftermath of our actions.
Posted by: nickless at June 07, 2011 03:41 PM (MMC8r)
You know what - let them claim exemption from moral issues. It's fair, since they often argue against traditional morality. However, they should be doubleplus fucked on government corruption/incompetence matters, since they preach gummint as the cure to all ills, and claim to stand for the little guy (in direct opposition to the GOP, who they say represent the corrupt fat cats).
So, a trade then: the Left gets a pass on moral issues and gets shithammered on corruption issues; the Right gets a pass on corruption issues, but gets the shithammer on moral transgressions.
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at June 07, 2011 03:41 PM (xy9wk)
Get a liberal out alone somewhere shooting or hunting or four-wheeling or drinkin beer. Eatin BBQ and bullshitting. They revert to sanity almost every time. Some even change their lifestyles.
Hippie women go nuts out in the desert with guns.
When they get back in a herd they go fuckin bananas again. It's like pheromones of emo-stupid.
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:42 PM (2dbd9)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 07:37 PM (+01MZ)
That's the 'opening scene'.............
what's that fancy word for the beginning of operas? Fandango?
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, not totally there yet at June 07, 2011 03:42 PM (UqKQV)
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 03:42 PM (u8cj+)
Trying out Occam's Razor –
Here are a collection of basic facts:
1) There are a relatively small number of big media corporations that employ the vast majority of the people you rant about. 2) Some media corporations are part of larger conglomerates such as Viacom or GE, or are the direct beneficiaries of big money interests such as George Soros. 3) Large corporations and billionaires got their money somehow, and are not generally known for their complete failure to care how the people they pay perform to get their individual paychecks. 4) GE and others pay their media hacks a hell of a lot more than they pay their janitors. (Put more simply, GE will fire janitors that donÂ’t do a good enough job of cleaning the place. Is it reasonable to believe they have no expectations for their media hacks? By now, we can tell ratings are not how their performance is being measured back in the boardroom.)
5) All large conglomerates doing business in the U.S. must be at least somewhat involved in U.S. politics to ensure their own survival -- whether they want to or not – simply because they are just too easy of a target. 6) There are some smart folks that believe in the wisdom of “keep your friends close and your enemies closer.” 7) Some politicians are for sale and can be bought. (Some say you can tell the honest ones because they <i>stay</i> bought.)
HereÂ’s one possible (not guaranteed, IÂ’m speculating) basic extrapolation from the preceding collection of facts -- Those folks that took time to pay for the politicians they own do not want to see their investment in those politicians diminished through loss of power, prestige, resignation, failure to be re-elected, etc. They are also paying substantial bucks for their media hacks, who they can fire at will. Why wouldnÂ’t they employ one of their resources (their media hacks) to protect their investment in another resource (the politicians they bought [perhaps they were purchased just with the currency of favorable media coverage])?
Here’s another application of Occam's Razor – if you want to get your media hack to favor the politician you own, hire the true believer. Useful idiots are easier to control and more convincing than whores.
Posted by: jc at June 07, 2011 03:43 PM (i8c5b)
Individualism doesn't need to entail replacing social pressure with legal strictures. Kind of the opposite, the movement to do so comes almost entirely from very, VERY non-individualistic circles.
i.e. Cloward, Piven, Alinsky, etc. etc. etc.
And of course their predecessors, but the last big wave of the 80s, centered in Chicago, continues to today.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 03:43 PM (bxiXv)
224 That's the entire premise of C.S. Lewis' "The Screwtape Letters".
Lull them into thinking evil doesn't exist.
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 03:44 PM (u8cj+)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 07:35 PM (+01MZ)
I agree totally.
I'm a Christian (not a very good one) and while I'm not particularly superstitious, one of my rules is that you DO NOT fuck with the occult.
I don't pretend to know everything religious but I know bad news when I see it.
Posted by: ErikW at June 07, 2011 03:46 PM (C07mQ)
Lull them into thinking evil doesn't exist.
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 07:44 PM (u8cj+)
in re "The Usual Suspects".
Posted by: Verbil Kint at June 07, 2011 03:46 PM (UqKQV)
I was busy picking coffee beans in Guatemala......
Posted by: SantaRosaStan at June 07, 2011 03:47 PM (UqKQV)
You create anything that needs diapers and formula tonight when you leave this house, you will be raising it from your wheelchair. - Dad
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:47 PM (2dbd9)
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 07:42 PM (2dbd9)
Some conspiracy theorists have gone so far as to conclude there is some biological, magical or other contagion that causes this. It's just herd mentality, some people will go along with the group, and the Alinsky crowd works very, VERY hard to make sure the general perception, especially in urban centers, is that THEY are "the group."
After all, they get TV news, newspapers, Academia, and most entertainment shows (because they worked very hard to crowd out other voices). In the face of that, conservatives are rebels, even revolutionaries - we just don't act like it, so only the strongest-minded join "la revolucion".
This is a problem, because the herd votes the way the herders tell them.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 03:49 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 03:50 PM (u8cj+)
Heh. Imagine that. We were the cool rebels all along.
We didn't even need hornrim glasses and vintage jackets and girl jeans.
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:51 PM (2dbd9)
Tranquilizing the herd.
Posted by: davidt at June 07, 2011 03:52 PM (GfhFm)
in re "The Usual Suspects".
Posted by: Verbil Kint at June 07, 2011 07:46 PM (UqKQV)
"The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."
-Charles Baudelaire, 1864
And that sums up liberalism.
Posted by: ErikW at June 07, 2011 03:54 PM (C07mQ)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 03:54 PM (+01MZ)
Word. Every day that I don't go on a multi-state lefty killing spree is testament to my fear of God. But they keep pushing.
Posted by: toby928™ at June 07, 2011 03:55 PM (GTbGH)
Appeal to something taboo the youth like and promise them easy access.
He probably supports skateboards, douchey tattoos, skinny jeans, Hot Topic, Affliction t-shirts, giant stupid aviator glasses, clove cigarettes, shitty music, and hand-held video games too.
I smoked a rainforest of weed back in my dope-smokin days. But the culture never got it's hooks in me. I couldn't get over the scummy people I had to associate with in order to get it.
Kids don't think that way now. The scummy people and crime are part of the thrill.
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 03:56 PM (2dbd9)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 03:56 PM (+01MZ)
It's a very effective strategy.
Posted by: Jones at June 07, 2011 07:24 PM (8sCoq)
Most strategies work against a side that doesn't defend itself.
Posted by: Oldcat at June 07, 2011 03:57 PM (z1N6a)
I could see why someone like Soros would like to expand that demographic.
They're also dependent, same same.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 03:59 PM (bxiXv)
Hippie women go nuts out in the desert with guns.
When they get back in a herd they go fuckin bananas again. It's like pheromones of emo-stupid.
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 07:42 PM (2dbd9)
Most just want to fit into the crowd they are in, by joining or by silence.
Posted by: Oldcat at June 07, 2011 03:59 PM (z1N6a)
"What is Soros interest in marijuana? I have a theory or two but I may be missing the obvious."
Easy: undermining American society, to make it easier to replace with socialist utopia.
Same reason liberals/ communists/ progressives/ socialists/ Democrats/ whatevers support drug liberalization, homosexual marriage, welfare (which destroyed the black family), identity politics (balkanize the population), global warming (hobble the economy), criminals generally (hence Dems' support for letting felons vote), hamstringing American military power and/or frittering it away on matters of no importance to America.
One theme runs through all of these policies.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 03:59 PM (ap/w5)
The family, as a unit of self-government, is an obstacle to state power. Marxism loathes the family. In the heady first few years of Bolshevik power in Russia, they toyed with the idea of assigning numbers to children rather than names.
These people are all Marxists at core, and this behavior doesn't make him a hypocrite. Saying he was pro-family to begin with is what makes him, and the press, hypocrites.
The way the culture is headed, they won't even have to hide it in twenty years.
Posted by: Early Cuyler at June 07, 2011 03:59 PM (mW4Hi)
We didn't even need hornrim glasses and vintage jackets and girl jeans.
Posted by: sifty at June 07, 2011 07:51 PM (2dbd9)
Our nation was founded by the rebels. Rebellion is our heritage, our mainstream, our "normal."
At least until the concerted effort to change that started. We are getting dangerously close to the point where that tradition dies except in tiny rebellious "cells."
Rebellion isn't about "stickin' it to tha man," that's just revenge. Rebellion is *ignoring* tha man.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 04:02 PM (bxiXv)
I agree with your hypocrisy point in main, but I think you are a bit off here. Besides the abortion issue, which you mentioned, there is the safe sex / abstinence issue. Democrats promote condoms and safe sex, whereas many conservatives prefer that the schools stop handing out condoms and if they have to promote anything, that abstinence be the solution. Abstain until marriage and then practice fidelity. (Practice until you get it right. Bada boomp boomp)
And, beyond the whole gay marriage issue, is the whole mainstreaming of gay (read deviant) lifestyles. Republicans as a whole would prefer the whole "We're here, we're queer, get use to it" crowd would just practice their "lifestyle" in private and leave the rest of us alone about it already.
Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at June 07, 2011 04:02 PM (k34Gz)
Posted by: toby928™ at June 07, 2011 04:02 PM (GTbGH)
So we demand it and don't get it. Like the last thousand times. Then what?
Seriously, they're not going to cooperate. We need a plan.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 07:26 PM (bxiXv)
True, but this whole kerfuffle pushed the media into reporting on it - thanks to Ace and Breitbart and whoever else kept the fire burning.
It's just the beginning - if we can keep it going, that is.
Posted by: soulpile is... expendable at June 07, 2011 04:03 PM (afWhQ)
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 04:05 PM (u8cj+)
The family, as a unit of self-government, is an obstacle to state power. Marxism loathes the family. In the heady first few years of Bolshevik power in Russia, they toyed with the idea of assigning numbers to children rather than names.
Yep. I've read that the early kibbutzes, in an attempt to build socialism, had men in one barracks, women in another, and the children in a third. The logic was that the family led to an "us/them" mentality, and thereby to competition to promote one's family, over cooperating and favoring the collective.
The strategy foundered ultimately because of women, who wanted to be with their husbands and children, and who ultimately demanded such. From there, the whole socialist experiment largely unraveled, and the kibbutzes became more like garden variety businesses.
This is per my reading, not my firsthand knowledge, which others may have re this.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at June 07, 2011 04:06 PM (ap/w5)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 04:07 PM (+01MZ)
Posted by: steevy at June 07, 2011 04:09 PM (+01MZ)
Seems like Titus has a streak of his mother in him. IIRC, his mother shot his father Thanksgiving day while they were arguing.
So, I guess the shitstain doesn't fall far from the asshole.
Posted by: Steph at June 07, 2011 04:12 PM (AkdC5)
...because as you say over and over again..she doesn't get this kind of crap any more than anyone else
Posted by: beedubya at June 07, 2011 04:12 PM (AnTyA)
True, but this whole kerfuffle pushed the media into reporting on it - thanks to Ace and Breitbart and whoever else kept the fire burning.
It's just the beginning - if we can keep it going, that is.
Posted by: soulpile is... expendable at June 07, 2011 08:03 PM (afWhQ)
Same with ACORN, Sherrod, PP - but it's like we took one small step forward and now we've stopped.
We can't just maintain pressure, we have to find another way through. Maintaining just maintains, we won't gain any more.
It's not like the MBM had any crisis of conscience or anything, we just made them address a few issues. Which you will notice they continue to lie about.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 04:14 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 08:05 PM (u8cj+)
You don't need drugs to tranquilize.
Posted by: Oldcat at June 07, 2011 04:15 PM (z1N6a)
What do you think Hillary meant by "it takes a village to raise a child"..
..you know...that old African saying that no one has ever been able to find the actual origins...or even usage...in Africa
Posted by: beedubya at June 07, 2011 04:15 PM (AnTyA)
I love the internet!
INTERNET BLOGS (The New Media): DOING THE JOBS THE MBM REFUSES TO DO
Since 1998 (or something like that)
Posted by: hughie at June 07, 2011 04:19 PM (+56Bh)
The strategy foundered ultimately because of women, who wanted to be with their husbands and children, and who ultimately demanded such. From there, the whole socialist experiment largely unraveled, and the kibbutzes became more like garden variety businesses.
My horror-story libtard harvard lawyer atheist san francisco bitch niece-in-law's mother was raised in such a kibbutz. The woman is the most neurotic twist I have ever met. She immigrated back (her mother left) to the US and then proceed to raise her own children patterened on how chimps raised theirs--separated by 5 years, behavioural discipline, etc. Hence the niece-in-law is also a neurotic freak. She's already announced that no child of hers would get antibiotics--I suggested that after 72 hours of a screaming ear infection she might change her mind. Stupid bitch. (You can guess that I'm not one of her biggest fans).
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 04:19 PM (u8cj+)
Posted by: AmishDude at June 07, 2011 04:20 PM (T0NGe)
Stupid bitch. (You can guess that I'm not one of her biggest fans).
Posted by: dagny at June 07, 2011 08:19 PM (u8cj+)
You might want to clarify that point.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 07, 2011 04:25 PM (bxiXv)
Ann Coulter said so.
Posted by: Chuckit at June 07, 2011 08:11 PM (G+sxF)
was that before or after mr. snuffleupagus owned her by showing her parts in her book where she spoke out of both sides of her mouth?
that woman,imho, is responsible for more young republicans leaving the republican party than anyone else. She should stop having dinner and lunch with them, they are so unimpressed they join the dems.
Posted by: curious at June 07, 2011 04:36 PM (k1rwm)
Posted by: Socratease at June 07, 2011 04:45 PM (vaIln)
--Never heard of him.
No, I did not forget a Charlie Gibson sock --I honestly have never heard of the guy.
Posted by: logprof at June 07, 2011 04:47 PM (BP6Z1)
Personal.
Posted by: I'm in a New York state of mind at June 07, 2011 05:38 PM (4sQwu)
Bet he's afraid of the dark also (dieing)
Posted by: Cracked at June 07, 2011 05:59 PM (1rA2i)
Posted by: steelz at June 07, 2011 06:40 PM (X/jA0)
that is disappointing.
Posted by: curious at June 07, 2011 07:05 PM (k1rwm)
Amen Ace!!!! In fact, maybe EVERY DEM who is now silent about Weiner should be asked to sign a pledge that he too believes his private life is none of the constituents fucking business. Lets see how many will run on that.
Unfortunately, I think this country is so fucked (Obama still has 50% approval) that they could still survivr signing such a statement, as long as the leeches continue to get their goodies.
Posted by: Schwalbe at June 07, 2011 07:58 PM (IxGUR)
Keeping the Internet Devoid of Sexual Predators Act of 2007 – Anthony Weiner
http://alturl.com/t54c3
Posted by: Scott at June 07, 2011 09:56 PM (TqGYF)
And by now not only is Track familiar with it, he probably also can do suppressive fire quite well.
SP's response to this is probably something along the lines of 'bring him on.'
Posted by: Xenophon at June 07, 2011 10:12 PM (gHBfR)
Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at June 07, 2011 10:15 PM (NHeC0)
Who Gives A Rat's Ass: Sen. David Vitter Implicated In DC Madam's Phone Records, Apologies For Error In His Past
Eh. The only thing that will ruin you is being caught with a dead girl or live boy.
No one is claiming the escorts are dead.
Ergo, I don't care.
(Source: the very blog you're reading now!)
And Rex, you got it right: Hookers are so much more...manly.)
Posted by: Aldorossi at June 08, 2011 06:08 AM (9I66i)
I have read a lot of comments on this issue, but I still haven't seen what is to me the most obvious explanation for it.
Huma has been Hillary's lover for 15 years, as part of the Hill-Bill quid pro quo.
Weiner is Huma's beard. Their quid pro quo is that he can chase all the tail he wants, as long as he doesn't get caught to obnoxiously.
He did get caught obnoxiously, so he's in trouble. But Huma isn't being too vocal about it in public because it will only draw attention to the beard arrangement, and maybe bring down Hillary too.
Couples who value wealth or power over all else do this all the time. Very similar to the arrangement Jon and Kate Gosselin had (until his over-enthusiasm for it blew that sky high) and of course the masters of the genre are Hill and Bill themselves.
Posted by: arminius at June 08, 2011 06:12 AM (E8rdu)
Posted by: matthew at June 08, 2011 06:33 AM (JKbPx)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.7995 seconds, 413 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 07, 2011 02:03 PM (UlUS4)