February 16, 2013
— Open Blogger Barack Hussein Obama has mastered very few things in his life. His vaunted oratorical prowess is a sham; just listen to him speak extemporaneously and you will cringe. His grasp of geopolitics is laughable, as is his knowledge of economics and finance.
But he has mastered one thing all too well: He manipulates the Republican party extremely effectively. His public persona for the LIV is one of a statesman who is exasperated by the intransigence of the Republicans, but his private, and real persona is that of a tyrant who demands obedience and subservience. His handlers and flacks in the media have worked hard to smooth that instant transition from private dictator to public statesman, and Obama has taken full advantage.
I am saying nothing that isn't glaringly obvious to all thinking beings, but apparently that category does not include the Republican leadership, who expect Obama to behave the way their country club buddies act when there is an argument over where to drop after an unhittable lie. When he doesn't, which is always, they are left flabbergasted. He is particularly good at the outrageous, brazen falsehood that he dares the polite Republican leadership to challenge...and they never do! And when someone has the temerity to criticize Obama, he is chastised by his betters in the Republican hierarchy.
What fools.
Playing nice got us nothing except another term for Obama. Railing against the MBM as a bunch of partisan hacks got us exactly nothing in four years. We either take off the gloves and embrace Alinsky, -- because after all, WE are the radicals now -- or resign ourselves to our and our children's fate; living in the socialist/statist utopia that Obama has dreamed of for his entire life.
We have been counting on the innate intelligence of the American voter, who tossed Carter out on his ear, laughed at Dukakis, and even rejected the inventor of the internet. But the voters are more ignorant than ever, and they are being manipulated more effectively than ever. We can no longer rely on American exceptionalism to carry the day -- we must fight with the most effective tools at hand, and that means a much more underhanded and manipulative approach to political discourse. The Left already has its instruction manuals; there is no reason why the Republican party can't embrace the tactics of success , tailored for the fact-based world, and perhaps claw back some of the control that we have ceded to them.
I don't know about you folks, but I am tired of losing to these ignorant, race-baiting, anti-Semitic, anti-freedom bastards. If we have to take off the gloves, hit below the belt, play dirty pool, or whatever metaphor you prefer for playing dirty...and winning....then I am all for it.
America is was the greatest country in history, and I would prefer to see it return to its former glory before I die.
Update: My use of "socialist utopia" was meant seriously, and not as sarcasm. The 19th century philosophers who built the intellectual (hah!) bulwark for Marx were often referred to as "Utopian Socialists."
Posted by: Open Blogger at
06:53 AM
| Comments (450)
Post contains 522 words, total size 3 kb.
Posted by: weirdflunky at February 16, 2013 06:58 AM (tlhtD)
Posted by: holygoat at February 16, 2013 07:00 AM (XnwWl)
I always thought that Bush got up at 5:30, exercised and then went to work. When he made a decision, everyone knew that he had taken consul and then made the hard choice. This guy looks everyone in the eye and then votes present. the jets off the play golf or vacation or deliver another vacuous speech.
Posted by: Sharon at February 16, 2013 07:01 AM (DtEq4)
But he has mastered one thing all too well:
He manipulates the Republican party extremely effectively.==============
That's like mastering taking candy from a baby. Not his strength but their weakness.
Posted by: Tami[/i] at February 16, 2013 07:03 AM (X6akg)
Me too. Let's tear into them. Let us cut out their living guts, and use them to grease the wheels on our campaign buses.
Also, NBC Sports Network is covering curling LIVE.
Dammit, man PEOPLE ARE CURLING
Posted by: Jones in CO at February 16, 2013 07:04 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: Comrade Trainer on his Iphone at February 16, 2013 07:04 AM (L8M3D)
The MSM won't protect them like they do their boyfriend and their fellow traveler socialist Dems
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 07:05 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: Eaton Cox at February 16, 2013 07:05 AM (+wxCD)
Posted by: Cicero, Semiautomatic Assault Commenter at February 16, 2013 07:06 AM (07Etk)
They won't be able to do it. They'll call you an extremist for even insinuating that a thoroughly unsustainable level of spending or control is something that should be debated.
Posted by: Regular Moron [/i] at February 16, 2013 07:06 AM (feFL6)
"Then we're stupid and we'll die."
[free platinum upgrade to your AOSHQ membership for the first one to identify the quotation]
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 16, 2013 07:07 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 16, 2013 07:07 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: t-bird at February 16, 2013 07:07 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Sharon at February 16, 2013 11:01 AM
TFG's modis operandi has always been "lead from behind". Every step of the way on his career path starting with this "editor of the Harvard Law Review" has been to let others do all the hard work, then step in when it's done to grab the credit for all of it.
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 07:08 AM (mCvL4)
Excellent post sir. We all have to work on overcoming the bias in the media on a daily basis it seems, the way the MSM fawns over every lefty but especially Obama is sickening.... every conversation I have with a lefty is filled on their end with strawmen and DNC talking points that are constantly spread as "truth" by the MSM. You can point out where they are wrong, you can point out the history of death and misery by big governments throughout the world and yet, that night/week etc, on the news, you'll hear lefty after lefty pushing big government "solutions" to every problem under the sun. The media is the enemys propaganda attack dog and we have to defeat them somehow someway.
Frustrating at times, beyond measure.
Posted by: Some Guy in Wisconsin at February 16, 2013 07:08 AM (Mya24)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at February 16, 2013 07:08 AM (GEICT)
Posted by: BK at February 16, 2013 07:08 AM (R7H3g)
Dammit, man PEOPLE ARE CURLING
Posted by: Jones in CO at February 16, 2013 11:04 AM (8sCoq)
Bless you! (I'm serious!)
Posted by: I lurk, therefore I am (Hard! Hurry hard!) at February 16, 2013 07:08 AM (X11b6)
Do we have to dress ironically and stop bathing?
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 07:09 AM (UOM48)
------------
Everyone knows that one of the more subtle effects of Global
Posted by: Assault Citizen Anachronda at February 16, 2013 07:10 AM (1c58W)
Blade Runner
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at February 16, 2013 11:08 AM (GEICT)
Tell the man what he's won, CBD!!!
Posted by: Tami[/i] at February 16, 2013 07:11 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 11:05 AM
Actually we don't need the whole SMOD, just a SMOD Jr like the Russian meteor. A few seconds later on that explosion and a whole city is nuked.
One of those blowing up over DC would sure do some good without sending the whole world back to the Stone Age
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 07:11 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 16, 2013 07:13 AM (GVxQo)
You might also need to know is that if he runs, he'll win. He makes the ladies all wet.
(I know, not the ones here. Not those...eight.)
Posted by: oblig. at February 16, 2013 07:13 AM (cePv8)
The MSM won't protect them like they do their boyfriend and their fellow traveler socialist Dems"
Yes they will. They will fight even harder for them because they provide the veneer of credibility to their liberal activism.
Posted by: holygoat at February 16, 2013 07:14 AM (XnwWl)
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn at February 16, 2013 07:14 AM (n8LUb)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at February 16, 2013 11:08 AM (GEICT)
Nicely done (no googling I hope).
1. An all-expenses paid tour of the underground bunker (his mom's basement) where Ace keeps his most prized pelts.
2. A foot massage from Sean Bannion
3. A free upgrade to the Platinum membership, which includes (if supported by your AOL account) 10 free ampersands/month.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 16, 2013 07:14 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at February 16, 2013 07:15 AM (GEICT)
Frustrating at times, beyond measure. Posted by: Some Guy in Wisconsin at February 16, 2013 11:08 AM
It's futile, trust me. All you'll get from them is a dismissive; "that's just Faux News propaganda paid for by the Koch Brothers". You can't debate the obtuse
It would be easier to train Chris Christie to win the New York Marathon than reason with a lefty drone
Some people just have to learn the hard way, and even then more than half of them will reach the wrong conclusion
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 07:16 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at February 16, 2013 07:16 AM (GEICT)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 07:17 AM (knb7L)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 07:17 AM (7h5MH)
&&&&&&&&&&&
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at February 16, 2013 11:16 AM (GEICT
Stop showing off.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 07:17 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 16, 2013 07:18 AM (GVxQo)
You might also need to know is that if he runs, he'll win. He makes the ladies all wet.
(I know, not the ones here. Not those...eight.) Posted by: oblig. at February 16, 2013 11:13 AM
What's interesting is Rahmbo vs Cankles. Each know where the other has the bodies buried
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 07:18 AM (mCvL4)
Do we have to dress ironically and stop bathing?
Heh, soon we won't be able to afford clothes or water, so it's possible.
We could, however, dust off some old bumper stickers like "Question Authority" and "If you aren't outraged, you're not paying attention."
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 16, 2013 07:18 AM (+z4pE)
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn at February 16, 2013 07:19 AM (n8LUb)
they're winning
You wanna be a radical conservative? You wanna beat those leftist cocksuckers?
Steal their playbook. And escalate.
We have all at one time or another bandied about the quote, 'they bring a knife, we bring a gun. They put one of ours in the hospital, we put one of theirs in the morgue.' Well, this is how we will win. Not by being mushy moderates, but by being firebrands. First we shock our enemy by fighting back in the press, then we split him open from throat to crotch by attacking everything they believe in, relentlessly. Name names. State fact. Challenge them to prove us wrong, then declare they have failed. Shame them. Insult them. Demagogue THEM.
The other side is playing dirty and playing for keeps. This is what it takes to win in American politics. Always has. But the current GOP leaders are by and large a bunch of pussies. All this shit about 'the comity of the Senate' and 'my distinguished colleague this' and 'my distinguished colleague' that has to go. We need to be shivving our opponents in the ribs, from behind, without warning, at every available opportunity.
It takes discipline. The other side has discipline. Always on message, always attacking, always protecting their own. IT WORKS.
Steal their playbook. Play not only to win, but to crush. We want heads on pikes, as a warning to the others.
Because we're getting our asses handed to us right now.
Posted by: Jones in CO at February 16, 2013 07:20 AM (8sCoq)
http://tinyurl.com/bpp57vj
The guy looks like he's more suited to a hipster slap fight, and he'd lose.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 07:20 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: Laquisha (vote 15 x for Barrack Obama) Johnson at February 16, 2013 07:21 AM (1zsKV)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 07:22 AM (7h5MH)
Posted by: nip at February 16, 2013 07:22 AM (11Tdq)
When writing a serious and well-crafted post, as above, tell it like it is. We all know it won't be a utopia, it will be a nationwide hellhole. Sarcasm works in comments, but not in posts that should be read throughout the blogosphere.
Another point is that the Republican Party seems adrift because it doesn't have a standard bearer. Barry's Dem Party and their MSM hatchet persons have perfected the politics of personal destruction. The recent attack against Sarah Palin by a WP journalist (now "blogger") using a satire website as a "source" is a good example of the lengths they will go in order to prevent a coalescence around an political leader.
Posted by: mrp at February 16, 2013 07:23 AM (HjPtV)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 07:23 AM (ZhoXI)
Posted by: Karl Rove at February 16, 2013 07:23 AM (07Etk)
Posted by: AmishDude at February 16, 2013 07:26 AM (xSegX)
Posted by: t-bird at February 16, 2013 07:26 AM (FcR7P)
I was just thinking about this in the shower.
How else did you think it was going to turn out?
How else did you think the Left would react? The idealogical Left lives inside the host body of the Democratic Party.
After Reagan, after the end of the Cold War, after the Republicans surprised the Democrats in 1994 and took the House and Senate? Did you think they would lay down and quit?
People recently quoted Milton Friedman (paraphrasing): We don't need to elect better people, we need to make the system work so that even bad people are compelled to do the right thing.
Think about this and reflect that it is actually working in reverse, where we can elect people we think are good Americans, and the system makes them do the wrong thing. And of course the Media controls the narrative.
These guys (the Democrats and the Left inside) are playing for keeps and staying after it 24/7/365. That's what we are up against. They control most of the Media, entertainment, the academy, education, the permament bureaucracy in the Federal government and most State governments (and I don't care if you live in Texas or any other "red" state - the Democrats are all over the permanent bureaucracy).
Their preferred candidate for the Republicans in 2016 is Chris Christie. They will pimp for him the next few years, and deprecate any other candidate. It remains to be seen how the Republican primaries will shake out, but that's the way the Democrats and the Media have ALREADY gamed it out. They may even let Christie WIN, and let the "Republicans" govern for four years, just to make it look "fair" and keep fooling us that we have a real chance at changing anything.
CBD, nice post, but one change. It is not a "socialist utopia" but a socialist dystopia that is our future. We will be poorer, less free and worse off in the future, and even letting it burn will not change any of that.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 16, 2013 07:26 AM (Md8Uo)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at February 16, 2013 07:26 AM (GEICT)
Posted by: sven10077 at February 16, 2013 07:27 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 16, 2013 07:28 AM (9Bj8R)
This is what the Left does, I meet so many people who get their political info from Lettermen, etc.
Posted by: dtih at February 16, 2013 07:29 AM (CmL+e)
Read Charles Fourier. "Socialist Utopia" is an old, old phrase.
I am not being sarcastic...I am being accurate.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 16, 2013 07:29 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Captain Hate at February 16, 2013 07:30 AM (PlG+7)
A "cut" is always a lower amount in the hike.
Obama wants 1 trillion more in "investments" but the GOP says they'll only agree to 900 billion more
That's your "100 billion dollar cut" that leftists wail will cause massive pain and suffering
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 07:30 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: teej at February 16, 2013 07:30 AM (7MSnD)
I am not being sarcastic...I am being accurate"
Sigh.
Posted by: mrp at February 16, 2013 07:31 AM (HjPtV)
Posted by: Captain Hate at February 16, 2013 11:30 AM
Rove pulled out all the stops and kicked constantly below the belt in the 2000 primaries.
Then he forgot how to do that against Democrats
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 07:31 AM (mCvL4)
The MSM won't protect them like they do their boyfriend and their fellow traveler socialist Dems
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 11:05 AM (mCvL4)
This , break the republican enablers first.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 07:31 AM (AWmfW)
Some rich sumbitch should put up three or four billboards in Chris Matthews neighborhood calling him a leftwing biased hack and listing all the democrats he worked for after college ( I believe he was on five different staffs) and how he gets a thrill up his leg everytime he hears Obama speak and how he gets all his talking points from the DNC.
Nail that f*cker good.
CHRIS "TINGLES" MATTHEWS
That would be pretty funny...... and piss tingles off big time...... which would be even funnier.
*sigh*
Why can't I win that powerball? I'm not greedy.... I only want to win it once.
Posted by: Some Guy in Wisconsin at February 16, 2013 07:32 AM (Mya24)
Posted by: rickl at February 16, 2013 07:32 AM (sdi6R)
Posted by: t-bird at February 16, 2013 07:33 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Dirty Old Man at February 16, 2013 07:34 AM (HsYW4)
Posted by: coondawg68 at February 16, 2013 07:34 AM (VhcOZ)
I was just thinking about this in the shower.
How else did you think it was going to turn out?
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 16, 2013 11:26 AM
When I'm in the shower, I'm thinking about what it would be like to have Kate Upton in there with me
But, whatever floats your boat
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 07:34 AM (mCvL4)
And that fool Rove and his ORCA BS can move along as well.
Posted by: Clemenza at February 16, 2013 07:34 AM (Fkb9l)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 07:34 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: notsothoreau at February 16, 2013 07:34 AM (Lqy/e)
Posted by: RWC at February 16, 2013 07:34 AM (sqp6o)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 07:36 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: ghostofhallelujah at February 16, 2013 07:36 AM (XvrTA)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 16, 2013 07:36 AM (GsoHv)
In the meantime, I just intend to watch it burn.
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 16, 2013 07:37 AM (Qxe/p)
Obama is not a Muslim, but like many on the Left, think they can use it to forward their own agenda.
Islam is a Third World religion that is four square against Western traditions and Western intellectual thought. It is four square against Christianity and Judaism. And that is why Leftist intellectuals and a political hack like Obama give it lip service from time to time. The Red Rider on the Green Horse of Islam. They think they can use the religious energy of Islam to bring about some kind of worldwide revolution against the hated Western influences.
More like the Green Tiger. It will devour them if given the chance.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 16, 2013 07:37 AM (Md8Uo)
Posted by: RWC at February 16, 2013 07:39 AM (sqp6o)
http://tinyurl.com/ceewfr9
Posted by: Tami[/i] at February 16, 2013 07:39 AM (X6akg)
Then he forgot how to do that against Democrats
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 11:31 AM (mCvL4)
So are you saying that the accusations are possibly correct? I don't think I've ever seen a link to substantiate them so was it a word of mouth thing?
Posted by: Captain Hate at February 16, 2013 07:39 AM (PlG+7)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 07:40 AM (ZhoXI)
Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at February 16, 2013 07:40 AM (Y5I9o)
I'm trying hard not to picture her in ski pants.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 07:42 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: RWC at February 16, 2013 07:42 AM (sqp6o)
kbda @ 73
Kate Upton is a doll, but I am also old enough to be her Dad. That just seems weird to me, but there is no doubt that she's a dish. I do some of my best thinking in the shower. I just thought it was weird that I was thinking about this and then come back here and , VOILA!, CBD has posted an essay about this very subject.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 16, 2013 07:44 AM (Md8Uo)
Posted by: holygoat at February 16, 2013 07:44 AM (XnwWl)
Posted by: Clemenza at February 16, 2013 07:45 AM (Fkb9l)
Posted by: EveR at February 16, 2013 07:45 AM (pPOhx)
Posted by: nip at February 16, 2013 07:45 AM (11Tdq)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 07:45 AM (ZhoXI)
"I don't know about you folks, but I am tired of losing to these ignorant, race-baiting, anti-Semitic, anti-freedom bastards. If we have to take off the gloves, hit below the belt, play dirty pool, or whatever metaphor you prefer for playing dirty...and winning....then I am all for it."
THIS by CBD
--------------------------------------
and THIS. Is why I come here.
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." HL Menken
Posted by: Guido at February 16, 2013 07:46 AM (XLuH2)
Yes. But how? How do the "gloves come off" and who among these congenitally impuissant Republicans will do it?
A friend and I were discussing this last night. We're close to despair at the totally perverse and untenable world of discourse and politics the Left has created and imprisoned us all in. But we agreed it is a prison of the mind. We agreed that it would take just one person -- ONE mainstream political figure or Republican -- to confront a major media figure on national TV with such a determined, relentless and revelatory line of challenge that it turned the whole interrogatory paradigm of the media on its head. It would be a simple, unemotional but unwavering line of questioning that got to the heart of the corruption and ideology of the MSM. "Unwavering" would be the key. It would have to go further than ever before, show an absolute iron refusal to be diverted from its objective. Of course the media would then go after this villainous threat, but at the same time, they'd invite him on every one of their shows to attack him. Then he would just repeat the strategy -- calm, relentless challenge and revelation. Cascade effect. The base would be exhilarated, the media would unravel in rage, a new paradigm would begin to take shape.
Posted by: rrpjr at February 16, 2013 07:46 AM (ySBrD)
Truman @ 86
That is exactly right. It is a big seduction to think we can fix everything with just one turn of the election cycle. What is wrong is rooted way down deep, and it will not turn our way again for many years, if ever.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 16, 2013 07:47 AM (Md8Uo)
No matter how frustrated they get, no matter how many forms they have to fill out, no matter how many fees they have to pay and how much time they have to spend, they'll still conclude as Matty does that Big Brother knows best
They'll never learn that even if a government program is conceived by geniuses, it'll be administered by idiots
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 07:47 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: rickl at February 16, 2013 07:47 AM (sdi6R)
<i>But the voters are more ignorant than ever, and they are being manipulated more effectively than ever.</i>
Remember the triumphalism of the New Media after Bush won in 2004? How the Old Media had been toppled bloggers in pajamas and the Liberal Death Star no longer controlled the narrative? What happened?
I remember realizing the resilient power of the mainstream media after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Bush's winning theme in 2004 was that he had kept us safe after 9/11. It seemed to me the media and democrats had a pre-packaged propaganda plan ready to go should there ever be another terrorist attack, designed to disprove the premise that the Republicans could keep us safe. When Katrina happened, this plan was opportunistically adapted to a natural disaster in order to shatter the perception of competence of the administration. After the stunning success of blaming Bush for the weather, the media smelled blood in the water and redoubled efforts to portray all of the War on Terror as a failure. By the 2006 elections, the Republican brand was destroyed, and it has never recovered. The media was then able to pin the 2008 financial crisis, caused in fact by the democrat slush fund operations at Freddie & Fannie, squarely on the Bush administration, effectively burying the Republicans for a generation.
The Death Star survived the internet, and stills reigns over the universe. Today they look stronger than ever. Any ideas?
Posted by: Beef at February 16, 2013 07:47 AM (mb1uj)
Posted by: holygoat at February 16, 2013 07:47 AM (XnwWl)
Ward, town, county, state. It's a long slog. But the alternative is... Well, doing nothing productive.
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 11:45 AM (ZhoXI)
Would like to know more. Do you have a platform on which to inform? Perhaps a guest post?
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 07:48 AM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: Hopeless at February 16, 2013 07:50 AM (+UrNT)
We need to start focusing on the lies that Dims promote as the truth. The low hanging fruit is everywhere, just waiting to be picked and thrown at the nearest leftard. How about asking why we should settle for a negative GDP when we were experiencing good growth as recently as ten years ago? Why are millions of Americans out of work who were working just five years ago?
We have the figures and the truth on our side, we just need to start speaking up.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 16, 2013 07:51 AM (+z4pE)
Posted by: Tami at February 16, 2013 11:39 AM (X6akg)
Tami, I really liked one of his opening lines in that discussion.
Where he states He wants to get the populace educated , because they cannot make decisions without being such. (not his exact wording) and stated without doing so we would end up like all fallen nations in history.
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 07:52 AM (nqBYe)
Then Kate Upton would appear in my shower. Desirable but not very likely
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 07:53 AM (mCvL4)
We have the figures and the truth on our side, we just need to start speaking up.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 16, 2013 11:51 AM (+z4pE)
If I may....
Still Bush's fault
Posted by: Red Shirt at February 16, 2013 07:53 AM (FIDMq)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 07:53 AM (l86i3)
http://preview.tinyurl.com/c83d3nt (The American Interest)
Excerpt: (Key Democrats Turn on Obamacare)
Powerful Democrats who helped write and pass Obamacare subjected the new law’s chief administrator to withering criticism at a Senate hearing yesterday. Gary Cohen, the director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, testified before the Senate Finance Committee, and the Democrats on the committee—from its Chairman Max Baucus to Senators Ron Wyden, Bill Nelson, and Maria Cantwell—tore into him.
Posted by: mrp at February 16, 2013 07:54 AM (HjPtV)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 07:54 AM (ItWCD)
racist
ignroant hillbilly
hateful and uncaring .
(and see he shows why not arguing against the statist push is actually defeatist to staying a country of strength and original purpose , freedom, opportunity, etc)
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 07:55 AM (nqBYe)
Mathematics, arithmetic, accounting and your "truth" are all artificial constructs of the white Patriarchy.
The revolutionary truth of Obama is all that matters, and we will say "nyah! nyah!" and stick our tongues out at you in public.
Which is pretty much what is said on MSNBC every night. CNN is not much different. And if you think CNN here is bad, you should travel to Europe and watch CNN there. These are the tools of the propaganda machine. Was it a fluke that Candy Crowley said what she did to Romney in the debate last fall?
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 16, 2013 07:55 AM (Md8Uo)
Faux News propaganda! You're just a stupid sheep brainwashed by Limbaugh and Beck!
Oh, and you're a homophobic racist making war on women!
Posted by: Lefty "Thinking Person" Douche at February 16, 2013 07:56 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 16, 2013 11:51 AM (+z4pE)
***
yes. we can and do do it face to face with libtards at work et. al. but will out old crony reps do it?
Posted by: Guido at February 16, 2013 07:56 AM (XLuH2)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 07:56 AM (ItWCD)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 11:45 AM (ZhoXI)
That reminds me Truman, according to AllenG, you and I need to talk.
Posted by: tsrblke at February 16, 2013 07:57 AM (GaqMa)
With all due respect Mr Dildo, fuck you* for suggesting I listen to TFG on a Saturday, on my own time.
*That's not a fuck you - fuck you.
Posted by: sTevo at February 16, 2013 07:57 AM (VMcEw)
Posted by: Sharon at February 16, 2013 11:47 AM (DtEq4)
Put your phone down! Show a little respect.
Wait....what?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 16, 2013 07:58 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: nip at February 16, 2013 07:58 AM (11Tdq)
My apologies. I should have added a warning.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 16, 2013 07:59 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Guido at February 16, 2013 11:56 AM (XLuH2)
few have the desire it seems for whatever reasons. They like their positions, they are intimidated, they really don't give a shit as long as they have some Pie?
newt , walker, cruz, perry. stands up and does well most of the time. but they really are marginalized as What's wrong with the party by media.
sigh
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 07:59 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Jmel at February 16, 2013 08:00 AM (9tSXa)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 08:00 AM (ItWCD)
Posted by: Infidel at February 16, 2013 08:01 AM (vTi1t)
If we don't fight back effectively, look at Detroit and see our future.
Posted by: Boots at February 16, 2013 11:53 AM
If you look at the situation in Argentina right now, you're seeing our future.
Cristina Kirchner has run a well off country into a hyperinflationary banana republic. But no matter how badly her heavy handed tactics drive Argentina into bankruptcy, she'll probably be handily re-elected this Autumn
It's not for nothing that I call her "Obama with Tits"
Posted by: Lefty at February 16, 2013 08:01 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: AnnaS at February 16, 2013 08:01 AM (wPzc5)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 12:00 PM (ItWCD)
You're far too good at what you do is the problem
.
And I'm thinking of doing something stupid and he thought you might be just the person to talk me deeper into it
.
Posted by: tsrblke at February 16, 2013 08:02 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: nip at February 16, 2013 08:02 AM (11Tdq)
Until we have some way to physically check individual votes against the electronic database (i.e. some type of vote "receipt" system), then we can never trust the integrity of our voting system...
Remember, in a communist system, its not who votes that's important, its who COUNTS the votes that matters...
Posted by: Josh at February 16, 2013 08:02 AM (/kaf3)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 08:03 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: soothsayer at February 16, 2013 08:04 AM (0w+w3)
HA! It is good to be General Secretary.
Posted by: Uncle Joe at February 16, 2013 08:04 AM (HjPtV)
Posted by: Hopeless at February 16, 2013 08:04 AM (D90Db)
Posted by: Clemenza at February 16, 2013 08:04 AM (Fkb9l)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 08:04 AM (ItWCD)
If I may....
Still Bush's fault
This would be a good place to start. There are several prominent financial people and organizations who are stepping forward to say that Bush didn't cause the housing crash, the CRA did. If this idea were to gain a bit of traction (which shouldn't be hard to do because it's the truth), then a lot more people would come forward with their experiences.
Faux News propaganda! You're just a stupid sheep brainwashed by Limbaugh and Beck!
Oh, and you're a homophobic racist making war on women!
And the reply to that should be pointing and laughing.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 16, 2013 08:04 AM (+z4pE)
Posted by: bern at February 16, 2013 08:04 AM (CFiSM)
You can't be serious!? The one common theme I hear in a deep blue western county and from the "educated" left is that there should less religion in politics and governance. Not only that, but by advocating for more religious-based morality in legislation and governance, you are handing the left the tools that they have successfully beat us over the head with since as long as I can remember.
I might be able to agree with you on some policy points, but its a bad idea to go about it from the lead from the bible perspective.
Fiscal conservatism, national defense, and individual liberty. That's it, as far as the scope of national governance. We need rebranding as the party of liberty through such Alinsky-esque tools as mockery of the lefts' fascination with controlling every mundane detail of our lives.
This appears to be a good piece that shows how everyone can be an unwitting criminal ("Ham Sandwich Nation: Due Process When Everything is a Crime"). I don't recall if I got it here, first.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2203713
The point is that this is a message that can win. The busybodies in DC and elsewhere (R and D, both) are continually moving toward legislating every aspect of our lives, and the abuses abound. Enough! Let's be the party of "leave me the hell alone!" Arguing from the bible is only going to get us more of the same, IMO.
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 08:05 AM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: Sharon at February 16, 2013 08:06 AM (DtEq4)
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 16, 2013 08:06 AM (C8mVl)
Posted by: soothsayer at February 16, 2013 08:06 AM (uff2W)
As Orwell said, whoever is winning at the moment looks invincible. The media is not invincible. They're so fat and arrogant and exposed and ready for a fall it isn't funny. But it just takes one courageous and incisive national figure who sees the sham of their power and is willing to challenge and define the Narrative itself, i.e., the inner-workings of the process of forming Narratives, to their faces. The conversation then becomes about the Narrative, which they're forced to deny as this person presses, using specifics -- always keeping it specific and inquisitional, ALWAYS putting them on the defensive.
Occasionally those like Gingrich and Palin indulge brief riffs and put-downs, sometimes effective and funny, but really, has anybody ever confronted the media to its face in their bailiwick over the essential nature and workings of their corruption?
Posted by: rrpjr at February 16, 2013 08:06 AM (ySBrD)
Posted by: nip at February 16, 2013 12:02 PM (11Tdq)
Yep...no more party invites for him at the good ol boys club....which I hope has a brazil like fire one of these days.
I do not denounce myself.
Posted by: Red Shirt at February 16, 2013 08:07 AM (FIDMq)
Thats why state by state voter ID is critical.
Agreed. But what to do about illegals getting drivers licenses? This is a huge problem and now we aren't deporting anyone and TFG wants amnesty.
Posted by: Infidel at February 16, 2013 08:07 AM (vTi1t)
Until we have some way to physically check individual votes against the electronic database (i.e. some type of vote "receipt" system), then we can never trust the integrity of our voting system...
Remember, in a communist system, its not who votes that's important, its who COUNTS the votes that matters...
Posted by: Josh at February 16, 2013 12:02 PM (/kaf3)
Stolen from the voters , in agreement with GOP.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 08:07 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 12:05 PM (Kkt/i)
this
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 08:08 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 08:08 AM (ItWCD)
The 19th century philosophers who built the intellectual (hah!) bulwark for Marx were often referred to as "Utopian Socialists."
Actually himself from the "Utopian Socialists," whom he viewed as hopeless dreamers (!), and characterized his proposals as "scientific socialism." This because science was in its first full blossom in the 19th century, and he wanted to associate his proposals with something on the ascendant.
I guess a latter-day Marx would call his rubbish "Facebook socialism," although "Facebook Fascism" would be more accurate, and alliterative to boot.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 08:08 AM (IDSI7)
few have the desire it seems for whatever reasons. They like their positions, they are intimidated, they really don't give a shit as long as they have some Pie? newt , walker, cruz, perry. stands up and does well most of the time. but they really are marginalized as What's wrong with the party by media.
sigh
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 11:59 AM (nqBYe)
******
Whats wrong with a good schoolyard scrap? I had plenty when I was a kid and even the ones I lost i built some cred and respect and even maybe made a friendship from it. AND I daresay I've been knoecked around pretty good here at times ( i fondly remember being called a shitweasle. lol. and Mrs. Guido is fond of it too) and when it's over I've learned something even from you assholes.
AND we should always stand up to fucking BULLIES which we are facing now. I don't GET it!
Posted by: Guido at February 16, 2013 08:09 AM (XLuH2)
Posted by: Dr Spank at February 16, 2013 08:09 AM (w+Dvf)
Still Bush's fault
Brings to mind a quote from Fight Club...
'A generation of men raised by women. IÂ’m wondering if another woman is the answer we really need.'
In current society I'd change it to -- a generation of voters willing to continually blame Bush. I'm pretty certain another Bush is not the answer we really need.
Posted by: Regular Moron [/i] at February 16, 2013 08:10 AM (feFL6)
From Obama I saw constant ads on every cable tv show, every regular broadcast, and all over the internet
From Romney? Direct mail flyers and robocalls
I read constant complaints about that here last summer, yet we died inside on 11/6/12 because we still had hope.
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 08:10 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: soothsayer at February 16, 2013 08:11 AM (0w+w3)
Posted by: RWC at February 16, 2013 08:11 AM (sqp6o)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo
---
Accepted, now I have apologize for being a douche, which come natural for me.
Thanks for putting up a thread. If TFG is the topic, I get to swear at him.
May the golf coach worsen the JEF's swing. Golf is something he will never master. Damn, he should be better than Tiger, for all he plays.
Posted by: sTevo at February 16, 2013 08:11 AM (VMcEw)
Posted by: troyriser at February 16, 2013 08:12 AM (ptcFO)
however we are always playing defense against the political wonks in the media and on the left.
They set the discussion. Newts way of answering a question work.
don't let them choose the discussion and us have to fight by terms they made .
Free BC agree or hate women- (we want self responsibility leanrned and encouraged)
keep everyone on welfare (our concern is then people are not given encouragment to break away and be free or their bonds
anywway the discussions never work out
so don't let them set the terms
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 08:12 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Tami at February 16, 2013 11:39 AM (X6akg)
Tami, I really liked one of his opening lines in that discussion.Where he states He wants to get the populace educated , because they cannot make decisions without being such. (not his exact wording) and stated without doing so we would end up like all fallen nations in history.
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 11:52 AM (nqBYe)
Education is long game stuff, and we need to focus there. The points in the OP re:messaging and tactics can happen now (and can be useful re:education) and can have near term effects.
Demonize, divide, and conquer. A local example is a school superintendent of a local mid-size municipality makes about $300K, while the State AG makes about $140K. What would happen if a bunch of people protested at the home of the superintendent jackass that he is making $300K while students suffer <insert any number of faux or real concerns>? Media picks it up (maybe), and people are informed about the big lie over needing more money, for the children. I would guess that eliminating this one jackass could save 3+ teacher jobs and some money to boot, and the children would not suffer as a result.
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 08:12 AM (Kkt/i)
"I expect something bad to happen to Cruz. He is fighting back. I expect the National GOP to turn on him."
If his last name was spelled "Cruise", they already would have.
Posted by: Beef at February 16, 2013 08:12 AM (mb1uj)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 08:13 AM (ItWCD)
May the golf coach worsen the JEF's swing. Golf is something he will never master. Damn, he should be better than Tiger, for all he plays.
Posted by: sTevo at February 16, 2013 12:11 PM (VMcEw)
I hate golf, does this make me ineligible to run for any political office? (apparently it hurt my med school application.)
Posted by: tsrblke at February 16, 2013 08:13 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: soothsayer at February 16, 2013 08:13 AM (vuIm8)
Posted by: sTevo at February 16, 2013 12:11 PM (VMcEw)
Um....this is AOSHQ, and I posted this with the name "CharlieBrown'sDildo."
Explain why you have to apologize?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 16, 2013 08:13 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Sticky Wicket at February 16, 2013 08:13 AM (KESFj)
>>From Romney? Direct mail flyers and robocalls
Whoever Romney paid to run his campaign did a terrible job. I also saw Obama ads everywhere including during a lot of sports programs, nothing from Romney.
Posted by: Dr Spank at February 16, 2013 08:14 AM (w+Dvf)
That is why Blanco didn't request help even though Bush was begging her to.
You are right and it is something that people need to think about right now. Whoever is the nominee, they will have a game plan to destroy that person. We had better be prepared to fight fire with fire.
Posted by: Miss Marple at February 16, 2013 08:14 AM (GoIUi)
Posted by: EROWMER at February 16, 2013 08:14 AM (kxlCQ)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 75% more Assault & mtcmtmail= at February 16, 2013 08:14 AM (FsUAO)
Posted by: RWC at February 16, 2013 08:14 AM (sqp6o)
From Obama I saw constant ads on every cable tv show, every regular broadcast, and all over the internet
From Romney? Direct mail flyers and robocalls
I read constant complaints about that here last summer, yet we died inside on 11/6/12 because we still had hope.
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 12:10 PM (mCvL4)
It's hard to believe that Romney could fail so bad, he's been running for president since his dad lost. It's like GOP made a deal with Obama behind his back.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 08:15 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 12:13 PM (ItWCD)
I'll give you 5 minutes to finish screwing before I email
Posted by: tsrblke at February 16, 2013 08:15 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 75% more Assault & mtcmtmail= at February 16, 2013 08:15 AM (FsUAO)
Posted by: Hopeless at February 16, 2013 08:15 AM (g2ruq)
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at February 16, 2013 08:16 AM (xjpRj)
Posted by: RWC at February 16, 2013 12:14 PM (sqp6o)
Can I cash in "fixed other people's barrel" for a get out of the barrel free card?
Posted by: tsrblke at February 16, 2013 08:16 AM (GaqMa)
And the Republican Party has been claiming a lot of moral victories the last five years.
The one and only thing that gets their attention is when their reelection is threatened.
Third party will do that very well.
They either start sucking up to us or they don't have a job.
The alternative of "well, then the Democrats will always win" isn't any worse than what we are getting now.
Posted by: RoyalOil at February 16, 2013 08:17 AM (VjL9S)
"I expect something bad to happen to Cruz. He is fighting back. I expect the National GOP to turn on him."
If his last name was spelled "Cruise", they already would have.
Posted by: Beef at February 16, 2013 12:12 PM (mb1uj)
*****
And yes...THIS is what pisses me off to no end. You get someone who is willing roll up his sleeves and bloody soem noses and he gets hit in the back of the head with a baseball bat by his own fucking party. Pathetic.
Posted by: Guido at February 16, 2013 08:17 AM (XLuH2)
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 16, 2013 08:17 AM (Md8Uo)
How many of us back down in a Facebook argument to "save a friendship" but let the lefty friend skate and dictate the terms of continued friendship?
Last week I reached my point and told my lefty brother in law whom I've always liked and can agree on lots of things other than politics that if what I was saying pissed him off that much, he's welcome to click on the unfriend button
He didn't and I'm glad he didn't, but I'm tired of punting just to keep the peace. I've had enough
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 08:17 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 75% more Assault & mtcmtmail= at February 16, 2013 08:17 AM (FsUAO)
Posted by: Tami[/i] at February 16, 2013 08:17 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 08:18 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: RWC at February 16, 2013 08:19 AM (sqp6o)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 75% more Assault & at February 16, 2013 08:19 AM (FsUAO)
It's hard to believe that Romney could fail so bad, he's been running for president since his dad lost. It's like GOP made a deal with Obama behind his back.
In hindsight, I think it was worse than that. I think Romney may have been in on it. He sure didn't show any fight at all. His campaign made no sense at all.
I still think Dick Morris is a traitor.
/tinfoil hat off
Posted by: Infidel at February 16, 2013 08:20 AM (vTi1t)
If his last name was spelled "Cruise", they already would have.Posted by: Beef at February 16, 2013 12:12 PM (mb1uj)*****And yes...THIS is what pisses me off to no end. You get someone who is willing roll up his sleeves and bloody soem noses and he gets hit in the back of the head with a baseball bat by his own fucking party. Pathetic.
Posted by: Guido at February 16, 2013 12:17 PM (XLuH2)
and he gets hit in the back of the head with a baseball bat by his own fucking party. Pathetic
someone said something like' keeping the status quo going.'
That's probably the easiest and simple truth.
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 08:21 AM (nqBYe)
Can I cash in "fixed other people's barrel" for a get out of the barrel free card? Posted by: tsrblke at February 16, 2013 12:16 PM
Nope, you know the rules. Anyone using eye-talics will close their eye-talics. Anyone caught not closin' their eye-talics will spend the night in The Barrel
You got any questions, you come to me. I'm Carr the Threadwalker
Posted by: Carr the Threadwalker at February 16, 2013 08:21 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 12:17 PM (mCvL4)
Bingo!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 16, 2013 08:22 AM (GsoHv)
Atheists suck. They undermine the Constitution, and the Unites States of America.
Posted by: nip at February 16, 2013 11:58 AM (11Tdq)
Bite me.
Posted by: Thomas Paine at February 16, 2013 08:23 AM (4pNjZ)
Posted by: Guido at February 16, 2013 08:23 AM (XLuH2)
Posted by: RWC at February 16, 2013 08:23 AM (sqp6o)
you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to
the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a
precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to
fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to
live as slaves. - Winston Churchill
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 16, 2013 12:17 PM (Md8Uo)
Barbaric!
Posted by: John Boehner at February 16, 2013 08:23 AM (AWmfW)
---
I'm not convinced Rombley and the like didn't vote for TFG.
Posted by: sTevo at February 16, 2013 08:24 AM (VMcEw)
Which means, in all truthfulness, we need to get better at stealing votes than they are.
The only way by will be interesting in taking the margin of fraud out of the system is if we're beating the shit out of them at vote stealing.
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 12:08 PM (ItWCD
yes it was. i'm more than 90% sure. we screwed with elections in Australia in the 70s because of our facility at Pine Gap and certan politicians being against it, they're our ALLY for fucksake . Our capabilities have not decreased, what makes anyone believe these scumy Chicago cocksuckers that have access to 80 years of Allied work in humint why wouldnt they use that along with the ground work done by Gramscian disciples in Academia and the media?
Posted by: Reticent Rodent (Secret Squirrel's brother) at February 16, 2013 08:24 AM (hauZ0)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 16, 2013 08:24 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 11:42 AM (UOM4
******
It's okay Jane. Someone's got it covered.
http://tinyurl.com/cmxl9p2
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 16, 2013 08:24 AM (qqZuQ)
Posted by: sTevo at February 16, 2013 08:25 AM (VMcEw)
Here is one directed to college students:
The federal government and the universities are conspiring to sentence you to a lifetime of debt and poor employment or NO employment in order to puff up professor's and administrator's life styles.
An add with graphics, good actors, great camera work could easily protray both the feds and the universities as fat cat enemies of the poor college kids.
An added benefit is that they would look askance at those lefty hypocrite professors.
Posted by: Miss Marple at February 16, 2013 08:25 AM (GoIUi)
Bullshit, to you and your reference. Whether rights come from a God is a moot point. Rights are respected as a pact between men (and women) and the government they allow to govern. In the end, that's all that matters.
Call it leftist or whatever you will. But governments are instituted among men, not through divine intervention. Adding more god to the equation will only strengthen the left's grasp on the reigns.
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 08:25 AM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: Hopeless at February 16, 2013 08:26 AM (ieU06)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 16, 2013 08:26 AM (DvVVN)
If we were winning in the war of ideas, we'd be winning the presidency and moving the Democrats to the right.
Guess what. We aren't.
We aren't winning the war of ideas because nobody in the GOP is even addressing them.
Who, among the most recent crop of candidates, asked the question, "Why shouldn't every American have a good job, a stable future, and money in their pocket?"
Show some "before" and "after" pics of California's Central Valley and ask, "Is this a government that's working for you?" Show a big group of recently unemployed coal workers and ask the same question.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 16, 2013 08:26 AM (+z4pE)
There are only a couple people I'll discuss politics with on Facebook; believe it or not one of them is one of the few lefties with integrity I know. Actually I'm kind of embarrassed to be on FB at all since Suckerberg has the ethics and humanity of the Stasi.
Posted by: Captain Hate at February 16, 2013 08:26 AM (PlG+7)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 16, 2013 08:26 AM (9Bj8R)
i guess this is what we do continually
tea party helped even if they had lost a round or two, and it was imperfect
the desire is there, we need more
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 08:27 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Guido at February 16, 2013 12:17 PM (XLuH2)
The kept prostitutes dont want anyone to fight back.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 08:28 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 75% more Assault & at February 16, 2013 08:28 AM (FsUAO)
If you can do it better than Obama? Yes.
Posted by: Fritz at February 16, 2013 08:28 AM (UzPAd)
Posted by: nip at February 16, 2013 08:28 AM (11Tdq)
"...but I'm tired of punting just to keep the peace. I've had enough."
I've lost very good friends over the years over politics. People that I shared many interests with - music, sports, literature, drinking - couldn't handle the fact that I might not buy into everything that was being sold. I am perfectly able be in a relationship where people express different, sincere beliefs and not insist that they agree with me. But leftism demands conformity. Liberalism is a disease.
Posted by: Beef at February 16, 2013 08:29 AM (mb1uj)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 08:30 AM (l86i3)
The only cure involves pain. We will not convince anyone by talking and campaigning. Especially with a complicit media.
Burnage and pain, media destroyed, GOP destroyed, then rebuild when people realize what happened and what things are supposed to be like in this country.
Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at February 16, 2013 08:30 AM (MmH0Z)
Posted by: troyriser at February 16, 2013 08:30 AM (ptcFO)
Posted by: Hopeless at February 16, 2013 08:31 AM (lhNul)
If you can do it better than Obama? Yes.
Posted by: Fritz at February 16, 2013 12:28 PM (UzPAd)
hell i might wear one and ask the govt to stay OUT of my womb and personal decisions !
like back in the day
now it has become, govt hands in my womb, my child's life and I am nothing with out sugar daddy "keeping me'
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 08:31 AM (nqBYe)
"...but I'm tired of punting just to keep the peace. I've had enough."
Closely related to this phenomenon is the tendency of fellow travelers to insert their politics into inappropriate situations as though they're certain all present will necessarily agree with them.
This really pisses me off no end. For example, I had some liberal bitch come to pick up our son to play with hers, and right in my house went off on a rant about Bush.
The same thing just happened at a neighbor's get-together. Some asshole told, out of the blue, a story about a woman who parked in a red zone before rushing into the post office. He chided her about it, and she went off on him. Turns out she had a Romney sticker, and he had a Jugears one, from which he drew a conclusion about Romney supporters. I thought, "She parked in the red; you voted for the Red," but being better bred than said asshole, kept my mouth shut. I did point out that his wife gives great head, though. /kidding!
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 08:32 AM (IDSI7)
Punch a hippy in the face.
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 12:30 PM (l86i3)
laughing.
watch that swing though ok? i still wear hippy flower skirts, potato sack shirts and Birkenstocks on days i'm just hanging out!
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 08:32 AM (nqBYe)
It was harassment and an invasion of privacy.
Posted by: sTevo at February 16, 2013 08:33 AM (VMcEw)
toyrisr: " One cannot expect a Massachusetts Republican to run as a Texas Republican and win, at least not in Massachusetts."
That's agood point. In a nation of 300 million with a two party system, you need to get a representative sample of 150 million people on your side to win. For any one person to expect that they get their very own perfect candidate is infantile. You have to make some compromises when trying to agree with 149,999,999other people.
Posted by: Beef at February 16, 2013 08:35 AM (mb1uj)
Posted by: RWC at February 16, 2013 08:35 AM (sqp6o)
Posted by: Hopeless at February 16, 2013 08:36 AM (lhNul)
like back in the daynow it has become, govt hands in my womb, my child's life and I am nothing with out sugar daddy "keeping me'
The dumb asses who want the government to pay for everything apparently have failed to figure out that he who pays, controls.
You don't want others to interfere with your life and your decisions? Pay your own way. Otherwise, whoever is paying has bought a say in what you do, whether you realize it now or not.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 08:36 AM (IDSI7)
Here is one directed to college students:
The federal government and the universities are conspiring to sentence you to a lifetime of debt and poor employment or NO employment in order to puff up professor's and administrator's life styles.
An add with graphics, good actors, great camera work could easily protray both the feds and the universities as fat cat enemies of the poor college kids.
An added benefit is that they would look askance at those lefty hypocrite professors.
Posted by: Miss Marple at February 16, 2013 12:25 PM (GoIUi)
Easy one , but above GOPs pay grade..
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 08:37 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: Miss Marple at February 16, 2013 12:25 PM
Obama is proposing a program of student loan forgiveness with the taxpayer picking up the tab
Guess who the students will think is looking out for them
Posted by: Carr the Threadwalker at February 16, 2013 08:37 AM (mCvL4)
It took over 225 years of diligent work to circumvent them.
After a sincere "well played gentlemen", they would be the first to root SMOD on.
Posted by: Clutch Cargo at February 16, 2013 08:38 AM (Qxdfp)
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 16, 2013 08:38 AM (C8mVl)
Posted by: deepred at February 16, 2013 08:39 AM (rUiSC)
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 08:39 AM (mCvL4)
Adios!
Posted by: Clutch Cargo at February 16, 2013 08:39 AM (Qxdfp)
215-The kept prostitutes dont want anyone to fight back.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 12:28 PM (AWmfW)
You're right. just corrupt, robbing, dirty rotten stinking fucking whores. and there are some great posts here today but have no rational thought. I am so enraged. I am going to drop out, sit in bed and dry fire my 38 until I get some perspective. later all.
Posted by: Guido at February 16, 2013 08:40 AM (XLuH2)
Thanks for the advice pal, I might have been able to use it if you'd told me 200 fucking years ago
Posted by: Alexander Hamilton at February 16, 2013 08:40 AM (mCvL4)
"The great irony is how conservative many pot smoking hippies actually are."
Reality is conservative. The hardest core liberals live in gated communities far from the consequences of their beliefs.
Posted by: Beef at February 16, 2013 08:40 AM (mb1uj)
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 12:36 PM (IDSI7)
yes. They now own you. and threaten to have those things you are beholden to away if you don't vote their way.
dependency =owned!
it's hateful
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 08:41 AM (nqBYe)
You don't want others to interfere with your life and your decisions? Pay your own way. Otherwise, whoever is paying has bought a say in what you do, whether you realize it now or not.<<<
Wait a minute. Are we allowed in their vagina or not?
I guess it never hurts to ask again. Is three times considered harrassment?
Posted by: Fritz at February 16, 2013 08:41 AM (UzPAd)
Our own lukewarmness in our own lives is in many ways responsible for the moral rot found in our society. How can we expect to renew America when many if us ourselves do not properly honor God?
There are certain things that can be addressed on our individual levels, and they should be.
A lot of filth comes through television. And the media companies are trying to destroy us. Maybe individuals should stop waiting for leadership to announce the "plan" and just cancel their TV subscriptions and starve the beast. Same with local newspapers. "but how will I be entertained by the flashy box?!?!". Suck it up. Our own weakness and "need" for entertainment contributed greatly to the rise of these problems.
- - -
Just saying. I see a lot of push back from people who should be solid conservatives (e.g., 2A supporters) that, whether rational or not, believe that religion in politics is destroying science, wants to keep you barefoot and pregnant, etc. More of this same morality-based push, ESPECIALLY ON A NATIONAL LEVEL, freak these people out.
Instead, the new party should be about individual liberty.
Agree, starve the beast. I am (no cable, no newspaper, etc.). Teach your own and advocate for local religious-based morality plays, if you feel compelled. As a national strategy, its going to hurt us, IMO.
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 08:41 AM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: Miss Marple at February 16, 2013 12:25 PM (GoIUi)
Excellent.
Puts me in mind of Conan Doyle's "The Speckled Band," where the villain kills his victims by sending a snake from his room into their room by way of a bell pull. Holmes whacks the snake with his stick as it descends into the victim's room, whereupon it slithers back up the bell pull to the villain's room and bites him.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 08:42 AM (IDSI7)
Posted by: truth at February 16, 2013 08:42 AM (VbTKR)
Wait a minute. Are we allowed in their vagina or not?
If you pay your own way. Try to keep up, OK? /kidding
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 08:43 AM (IDSI7)
"But leftism demands conformity"
A truism that lies at the heart of the current debate - today's "left" is a monolith in so many aspects of day to day life - not unlike the religious oversight of day to day medieval life, thus today the local "government building" is the "community center" to which the populace goes for advice, favors, promotion of interests, and more, and as that influence grows, so do the structures, thus the modern American Cathedral in so many small towns...
Posted by: Jess1 at February 16, 2013 08:45 AM (lbiWb)
Obama is proposing a program of student loan forgiveness with the taxpayer picking up the tab
Guess who the students will think is looking out for them
Posted by: Carr the Threadwalker at February 16, 2013 12:37 PM (mCvL4)
That's where GOP should say that it's the colleges that took their money and gave them a clunker education, not the banks or the taxpayers.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 08:46 AM (AWmfW)
yes. They now own you. and threaten to have those things you are beholden to away if you don't vote their way. dependency =owned! it's hateful
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 12:41 PM (nqBYe)
Yep. And it starts insidiously, with "subsidies." The Feds take tax money from states, and then dole it back (after taking their cut), but with strings attached, even though the money originally came from the state.
I first realized this during the Carter (mal)Administration, when the Feds withheld highway funds unless a state enacted that moronic 55 mph speed limit nonsense.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 08:46 AM (IDSI7)
So I'll step into this.....less than lightly
Don't wait for (as someone said on an earlier post) the "Knock at the Door"
Because my dear M+M's, it is far past late maybe to do a single DAMN thing that will may any deference. Time is now or time to plow.
Who do you swear your rifle, pistol, sword or pitchfork to? What Flag will you post to? Who will you rally to? Given the current status of the party that is "THE" MARXIST FREELOADING CORRUPT BASTARDS who wish to hang the free market with a rope made in our own factories and just for the record are lead by the cabal of the JUG EARS....are you waiting for........what.......exactly? The REPUBLICANS?
BONED we be...
Still I ask you.....what will you do?
Republicans????....Enablers....hopeless flacid white boys just trying to protect the pension......eyein the exit door 24/7....and FUCK u too...
jus sayin.........jus sayin
Posted by: Richard at February 16, 2013 08:47 AM (kRhMw)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 08:47 AM (l86i3)
This really pisses me off no end. For example, I had some liberal bitch come to pick up our son to play with hers, and right in my house went off on a rant about Bush.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 12:32 PM
That's why I prefer the company of my kittehs to most people. Teh kittehs don't bring politics into every conversation, just food
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 08:48 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 16, 2013 08:49 AM (DvVVN)
Posted by: truth at February 16, 2013 12:42 PM (VbTKR)
Word!!
Posted by: ambassador Chris Stevens at February 16, 2013 08:49 AM (AWmfW)
Republicans????....Enablers....hopeless flacid white boys just trying to protect the pension......eyein the exit door 24/7....and FUCK u too...
jus sayin.........jus sayin Posted by: Richard at February 16, 2013 12:47 PM
Hoooo-wahhhhh!
Posted by: Lt Col Frank Slade at February 16, 2013 08:50 AM (mCvL4)
It's turning cold, wet, and windy here. Down to below freezing tonight, after days of warm weather. Azaleas coming into full bloom, and the citrus trees are beginning to bloom.
*whine*
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 08:50 AM (UOM48)
it really is like staying a child under mothers roof but without the " this is what is Really good for you "
dependance without a day when you know you are free to make your own decsions and also to take responsibility for those.
the good and the bad.
anyway off to grocers.
Posted by: willow-ette at February 16, 2013 08:50 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 08:52 AM (1Aqe2)
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 12:46 PM
As much as they insist that they're "thinking" types, they don't think in hypotheticals and abstracts.
It's not the colleges calling them up and demanding payment. They go by who is responding to their tales of woe with "fuck you, pay me"
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 08:54 AM (mCvL4)
Meanwhile, on the right, there were PLENTY of people taking their cue from the NYT to bitch at Romney's "timing" of his Cairo embassy statement. And if you pointed out that we should be presenting a united front you were not only attacked and derided as a "Mittbot" but loudly scolded that we shouldn't have a nominee whom we have to defend in the first place (never mind that defending Obama is the full time job of the NYT, WaPo & the DNC).
Need a more recent example to believe me? Look at those on the right who "agreed" that Rubio's sipping water was "awkward" -- eff that shit -- Alinksy calls for us to be labeling Chris Matthews a racist for implying Rubio is a wetback, NOT "conceding" that the moment was awkward and then laying out a rational analysis that the only reason Matthews wants to focus on that is because he can't address Rubio's arguments. Ridiculing them on their focus on trivial b.s. doesn't work because they have no SHAME; laying out rational arguments in response to them doesn't work because they can't THINK; attacking them in a way in which they can't defend (such as the "racist" argument they've been using on us for the last 4-5 years) is the only way to go. But that isn't happening on the right -- instead we've got SE Cupp going to the NYT and denouncing Rush Limbaugh as "dangerous."
Now the newest victim seems to be Dr. Ben Carson -- pray God loves the man enough for him *not* to run for public office, because the moment he does is the moment people on the right start loudly complaining that he "isn't a good politician" and he "doesn't have enough experience" etc. while the left denounces him as an Uncle Tom -- and that man doesn't deserve that.
Until the clown show on the right gets itself together, it will keep getting rolled by OFA.
Posted by: angienc at February 16, 2013 08:54 AM (w3JGl)
Posted by: Preznit Urkel X at February 16, 2013 08:54 AM (jucos)
Posted by: rickl at February 16, 2013 08:55 AM (sdi6R)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at February 16, 2013 08:55 AM (jucos)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 08:55 AM (1Aqe2)
foolish Conservatives!!!!
Posted by: Clemenza at February 16, 2013 08:56 AM (Fkb9l)
Posted by: blaster at February 16, 2013 08:56 AM (/1U3u)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 16, 2013 08:56 AM (DvVVN)
Please tell me you said something.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 12:52 PM (1Aqe2)
Once again, as on the thread the other night, alas, no. Mrs. Guevara again was the stumbling block. She glared at me not to, as she was concerned that our son would lose a friend, and I kept the peace.
The irony is that the fellow traveler's kid dropped our son as a friend shortly thereafter anyway.
I'm always torn on these issues, because as in the case of the teacher with the Jugears cutout in the classroom, it's cheap for me to tee off, but my kids will pick up the tab. OTOH, I hate letting this kind of bullshit go.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 08:56 AM (IDSI7)
Posted by: archie goodwin at February 16, 2013 08:57 AM (Jsiw/)
Posted by: rickl at February 16, 2013 08:58 AM (sdi6R)
Posted by: angienc at February 16, 2013 12:54 PM (w3JGl)
Whut?! Why did she think so?
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 08:59 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: Clemenza at February 16, 2013 08:59 AM (Fkb9l)
I just imagined myself in the scenario and how those sorts of exchanges usually end in my experience with the other person either a) apologizing profusely, b) weaseling out with "I'm not really into politics", or my personal favorite c) in tears.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 16, 2013 12:56 PM (DvVVN)
Actually, left to my own devices, I'd apply Socratic method. Becoming obnoxious, always an early choice for me, doesn't do any good. But asking questions that gradually point out the inconsistencies in the fellow traveler's views, might plant the seed of doubt.
And in my defense, whenever this situation arises and I'm on my own tab, I do speak up. I just don't want to put my kids behind the eight-ball, especially with Comrade Teacher.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 08:59 AM (IDSI7)
snakes don't have ears--can't hear. Conan Doyle, he didna know that
Posted by: Lt. Col. Bat Guano at February 16, 2013 09:00 AM (Dll6b)
My lefty brother called himself a "thinking person" after reciting to me every piece of prefabricated lefty dogma that the MSM manufactures.
He's my brother and I love him, but sometimes I think Michael Corleone had the right idea
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 09:01 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: Fritz at February 16, 2013 09:01 AM (UzPAd)
It was a general denouncement -- no specific examples given and she doesn't think she need to give any. I read about it on Twitchy (link):
http://tinyurl.com/cmzqqul
Posted by: angienc at February 16, 2013 09:01 AM (w3JGl)
The Complete Sherlock Holmes is available on Kindle..for free!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 16, 2013 09:02 AM (GsoHv)
chasing after them is pointless, fruitless, and f*ckin stupid
Posted by: Lt. Col. Bat Guano at February 16, 2013 09:02 AM (Dll6b)
we've got SE Cupp going to the NYT and denouncing Rush Limbaugh as
"dangerous."
Posted by: angienc at February 16, 2013 12:54 PM (w3JGl)
Whut?! Why did she think so?
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 12:59 PM
SE Cupp works for MSNBC now as their latest "token conservative" and I can tell from her tweets that she's starting to "turn Injun". Any day now, you'll hear compliments from Mika on how SE has "grown"
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 09:04 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: Truman North at February 16, 2013 09:05 AM (ItWCD)
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 16, 2013 09:06 AM (C8mVl)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 09:07 AM (l86i3)
Maybe Meggie thinks she'd look hip with a shaved head
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 09:08 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: nip at February 16, 2013 09:09 AM (11Tdq)
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 01:04 PM (mCvL4)
I agree, but that is irrelevant to my point, which is that we don't present a united front to the public and unless and until we do the right will keep getting rolled by OFA.
Posted by: angienc at February 16, 2013 09:09 AM (w3JGl)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 09:10 AM (l86i3)
138...The Republic can only survive as a Christian nation.
Posted by: Hopeless at February 16, 2013 12:04 PM (D90Db)
But it is our 'Christian principles' that have led to the problems that we have...because they have been used against us.
"Turn the other cheek"
"Freedom of Religion"
"Free Will" has given rise to 'freedom of expression' and has been parlayed into a widespread exploration of depravity.
So, unfortunately...one could argue that this 'experiment' of basing a Republic on Christian principles, is flawed.
Because it is failing.
Posted by: wheatie at February 16, 2013 09:10 AM (DZbQ0)
The Complete Sherlock Holmes is available on Kindle..for free!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 16, 2013 01:02 PM (GsoHv)
Yep. I got it from archive.org, and re-read 'em. Great stories.
I got a Sony e-reader some time ago, and have yet to buy a book for it. Just reading or re-reading the classics, and various out of print books available for free, has kept me well-stocked in reading material.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 09:11 AM (IDSI7)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 01:10 PM (l86i3)
Brooks or Frum?
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 09:11 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: rickl at February 16, 2013 11:32 AM (sdi6R)
Curling is a sport that is open to practically anybody. You don't need to be a super athlete to play competitively, but you do have to develop skills. And since a large feature of the game is the drinking in the bar afterwards, it is Moron-friendly!
Incidentally, curling is of Scottish origin, and they brought it to Canada. But it is now enjoyed world-wide.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 16, 2013 09:12 AM (673KB)
Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 16, 2013 09:12 AM (GVxQo)
Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 16, 2013 09:12 AM (GVxQo)
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 16, 2013 09:12 AM (C8mVl)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 09:12 AM (7h5MH)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 09:13 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 09:13 AM (EpY2d)
Posted by: JustLikeDavidHasselhoff at February 16, 2013 09:13 AM (wWZWw)
So, unfortunately...one could argue that this 'experiment' of basing a Republic on Christian principles, is flawed.
Because it is failing.
Posted by: wheatie at February 16, 2013 01:10 PM (DZbQ0)
Yep. And Christianity contains more than a streak of socialist thinking, which the Reds highlight and use against us (the "help the poor" business), notwithstanding that most of the poor are so because of their own decisions.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 09:13 AM (IDSI7)
I'm trying hard not to picture her in ski pants.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 11:42 AM (UOM4
Look for a rash of Bigfoot sightings in Colorado.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 16, 2013 09:14 AM (673KB)
Posted by: Jerk Store at February 16, 2013 09:15 AM (GaMAt)
Global video gaming company that backed search for WWII fighter jets says no planes in Myanmar
http://tinyurl.com/ct7vybw
A global video gaming company that funded a search for dozens of World War II-era British fighter jets in Myanmar says none of the legendary planes are buried in the Southeast Asian country.
Aviation enthusiasts hunting for the lost planes believe as many as 140 Spitfires were hidden in crates in pristine condition in three Myanmar locations.
Masses of LIVs will "know" that Spitfires are jets because "experts" told them so
This is what we're up against
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 09:16 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 09:19 AM (EpY2d)
Posted by: Hopeless at February 16, 2013 12:04 PM (D90Db)
So the Jews are right out, then?
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 16, 2013 09:20 AM (673KB)
Ya know, this is going to sound cold and heartless, but I am sick and tired of hearing about monuments, playgrounds, $ donations for Sandy Hook victims. Blah, blah, blah.
How about condeming the damn freak that did this and doing something about the mentally ill running all over the place?
Posted by: Infidel at February 16, 2013 09:22 AM (vTi1t)
Aviation enthusiasts hunting for the lost planes believe as many as 140 Spitfires were hidden in crates in pristine condition in three Myanmar locations.
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 01:16 PM
Excuse me, could you tell me why the jets have those propeller thingies on the front?
Posted by: Thinking Reporter Asking Hard Questions at February 16, 2013 09:22 AM (mCvL4)
I do what Jay does on his own dime, I ask simple questions.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 01:13 PM (EpY2d)
One of my favorite techniques is to elicit substantive information, rather than make assertions or even asking yes/no questions.
So for example, I might ask, "How would you characterize the Obama Administrations fiscal policies - as inflationary, deflationary, or neither, and why?" Or, "What would you consider to be the beneficial, and what the deleterious consequences of inflationary policies?"
That forces them to consider the substantive issue, rather than regurgitating leftist talking points. As an aside, it's amazing how few lefties actually have ever thought about things this way.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 09:23 AM (IDSI7)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 09:23 AM (EpY2d)
Hannity asked him if he'd ever heard his "brilliant" messiah pronounce "corpsman." The guy was silent for a couple of seconds and said, "no." Hannity then played audio of TFG saying "corpseman" several times.
The libtard's reply was, "Well, plenty of people probably wouldn't know how to pronounce it."
Hannity: "He's the commander-in-chief."
Then Hannity played other clips of TFG fucking up facts, etc.
The lib really didn't have any smug comebacks. It was a thing of beauty.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 09:23 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: angienc at February 16, 2013 09:24 AM (w3JGl)
Excuse me, could you tell me why the jets have those propeller thingies on the front?
To keep the jet engines cool, silly.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 16, 2013 09:24 AM (IDSI7)
Posted by: archie goodwin at February 16, 2013 09:25 AM (Jsiw/)
Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 16, 2013 09:26 AM (GVxQo)
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 01:16 PM
I'm not an historian, but could someone tell me if the RAF even deployed Spitfires in the CBI theater of the war?
The "fighter jets" bit is beyond stupid even for an intern
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 09:27 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 09:28 AM (EpY2d)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 09:28 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: Thinking Reporter Asking Hard Questions at February 16, 2013 01:22 PM (mCvL4)
Primitive deflector dish.
Posted by: Berserker at February 16, 2013 09:29 AM (FMbng)
So, before I nach off to bed after my night shift 3of 5 16 hour days with 2 other jobs to tend to....ask yourself.....you better off than.....1985?..95?...2005?
if you say "OH HELL YA!!"...you are probably suckin the state tit for disability, welfare, or "FUNEMPLOYMENT or all of the above and drivin an MB with a distinct Eastern EURO dialict.....COMRADE??? or you may be just from DETROITKA!!....or Glendale Ca.
yeah...it's like that bitches.....and they are laughing in yo faces all the way to da races....unless they be south of...then they be all driving Escalades with the RAIDERS window wraps.........
.....WORD!
Posted by: Richard at February 16, 2013 09:30 AM (kRhMw)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 01:23 PM
That's a problem I have with HANNITY! , he uses the same old tired comebacks, he's like a pitcher who is easy to hit because he always throws that pitch in a situation and he always tips his pitches
Let's face it folks, he's just not very bright
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 09:30 AM (mCvL4)
...and invited to all the "smart" cocktail parties.
She's been sitting at a table with Toure, Krystal Ball (gah) and that other lib douche for too long.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 09:31 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 16, 2013 09:31 AM (DvVVN)
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 01:30 PM (mCvL4
Agreed. The purpose of the post was to illustrate that the lib had never heard "corpseman, 57 states, etc. etc." He was shocked into silence.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 09:33 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 09:33 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: The Marchioness of Queensbury at February 16, 2013 09:33 AM (Lxw+T)
Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 16, 2013 09:34 AM (GVxQo)
Some leftard posted a vid of the Russian meteors and said "NOW what do you think of cutting government spending on research!"
I would have countered with "no one says cut ALL government spending, just the idiotic stuff"
I didn't bother, it would have been as effective as pouring water on a bocci ball
Posted by: kbdabear at February 16, 2013 09:35 AM (mCvL4)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 09:36 AM (7h5MH)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 16, 2013 09:36 AM (PxYrx)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 16, 2013 09:37 AM (DvVVN)
I don't understand falling in love with someone who pretty much believes in the polar opposite of one's beliefs.
Kind of like someone who hates Joooos marrying a Jew.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 16, 2013 09:37 AM (UOM48)
The RAF wasn't going to lose even a 140 Auster's, it's idiotic to think they just forgot about a 140 Spitfires. The whole story is boogus. You don't misplace a 140 airplanes.
Posted by: lowandslow at February 16, 2013 09:38 AM (Fz2C7)
Never was a big Rush fan, but I've listened to him enough to know that anyone who says he's "dangerous" either hasn't listened to him or is lying, or both.
2112 is still a great record.
Posted by: garrett at February 16, 2013 09:38 AM (j6Z29)
Hannity is FoxNews' token conservative, in their evening lineup.
He's better than nothing...but, he does telegraph his punches.
And he is very repetitive in his use of phrases.
The FoxBusiness channel has more conservatives than FoxNews channel.
Varney, Dobbs, Asmin, Cavuto...those guys bring the good arguments, complete with hard facts.
Eric Bolling is a good guy, too.
He had a good show on FoxBusiness...'Follow The Money'.
Shame they cancelled it.
Posted by: wheatie at February 16, 2013 09:39 AM (DZbQ0)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 16, 2013 09:39 AM (DvVVN)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 09:39 AM (l86i3)
So no....they're good to go.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 01:23 PM (EpY2d)
Yeah, I know that, and you know that, but I wonder if Hopeless knows that? He keeps pushing that false dichotomy, that if you're not a Psalm-singing Bible-thumper, then you're a fucking commie. It's the crap like his that the Progressives cherry-pick and then use to slander all Conservatives.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 16, 2013 09:40 AM (673KB)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 09:40 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 09:40 AM (7h5MH)
Posted by: Sean Bannion
One of my favorite techniques is to elicit substantive information, rather than make assertions or even asking yes/no questions.
...
That forces them to consider the substantive issue, rather than regurgitating leftist talking points. As an aside, it's amazing how few lefties actually have ever thought about things this way.
Posted by: Jay Guevara
This x1000.
If you are engaging co-workers or family or neighbors this is the best method of having political discussion if you must have them.
Asking questions is the rhetorical equivilant of aikido; you're not directly confronting someone, turning their defenses on. You're stepping aside so the other person gets caught on their ideological hand-holds.
After listening to them bumble through an explanation of what the lefties want, follow it up with something like;
"Well, since there is often another side to debates and we aren't always able to see everything relevant to an issue, what is the conservative argument?"
Of course their natural instinct is to go full-blown insult mode and regurgitate the "Meany McHatey Rethuglikkkans!" line of nonsense. You then gently interrupt and ask them if that's what the Right really believes to be its own position. Get them to actually try to describe the Right's position in neutral as possible terms.
The Left operates in that close-minded sphere that they accuse us of operating in. They really don't *want* to understand the arguments from our side, mostly because we're right a lot of the time and those arguments leave them open and exposed.
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at February 16, 2013 09:41 AM (Ipj15)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 16, 2013 09:43 AM (PxYrx)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 16, 2013 09:43 AM (DvVVN)
335...I don't understand falling in love with someone who pretty much believes in the polar opposite of one's beliefs.
Yeah, like Mary Maitlin and James Carvell?
Talk about 'sleeping with the enemy'.
She was a high level campaign strategist, for Pappy Bush...and was sleeping with Carvell.
Posted by: wheatie at February 16, 2013 09:44 AM (DZbQ0)
Just got back from gun show. Got there before it opened and had to wait 45 minutes to get in.
Not much to be had and all way overpriced. Ammo was simple ridiculous. I guess Big Sis buying up all the shit is working. No shells for less that a buck a piece, 556, 223, etc. 5.7 $1.20 a shell.
After an hour they announced that the Fire Marshall would not let any more people in. We left about an hour later and there were over 700 people standing in 30 degree rain waiting to get in. This was at noon. When we left the parking lot there was a line of cars almost a mile long trying to get into the lot.
Amazing. Lots of guys trying to sell their AK's for ridiculous prices. There seems to be plenty of supply if you wanted to get fucked. Now they are souping up $250 10/22 with rails etc and selling them for $500.
My son and I bought a gun sleeve, hard to mark those up, and laughed our way home.
Posted by: Billy Bob, The guy who drinks in SC at February 16, 2013 09:45 AM (wR+pz)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 16, 2013 09:46 AM (PxYrx)
Posted by: lowandslow at February 16, 2013 09:46 AM (Fz2C7)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 01:36 PM (7h5MH)
One of the things the Left does is to form hundreds of interlocking organizations. Most of these have shared directorships amongst a relative small group of individuals. It gives the impression of there being a huge number of like-minded people, but it's really nothing more than the same gangs flying different flags.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 16, 2013 09:46 AM (673KB)
That said, I do think everyone who reads here should read Rules for Radicals. I know I consider my own copy money well spent. Of course new copies just aren't the same without the original dedication to Lucifer, I hear they took that out of the new reprints. It is like reading The Prince, small book packed tightly with pure Truth and pure Evil. It is possible to be both; and when somebody does it it is really unsettling.
Posted by: John Morris at February 16, 2013 09:46 AM (YhRJW)
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 16, 2013 09:47 AM (C8mVl)
Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 16, 2013 09:47 AM (GVxQo)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 09:48 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 16, 2013 09:50 AM (GVxQo)
Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at February 16, 2013 09:50 AM (Y5I9o)
My lovely wife was a lib when I met her. She claimed the usual lib positions, but since her time with me, I've turned her into a small L libertarian, soft-rightwing. She's usually apolitical but like most LIV, gets caught in libtard momentum and doesn't know any better. Now, she's asking questions about everything and isn't just blindly voting like she used to.
Posted by: EC at February 16, 2013 09:50 AM (doBIb)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 01:40 PM (7h5MH)
You would think that's a good point to focus on.
No one gives a shit that McCarthy was eventually proven right and with the MSM protecting Obama you will never break through to the LIVs on his past associations -- everyone who cares already knows.
But screaming about how racist Sen. Boxer and Chris Matthews are for being so scared of a Hispanic man in the Senate that they try to smear him by linking to an Irish guy from WI from 50 years ago -- now that's Alinsky.
The fact that you refuse to and/or can't see that makes you part of the problem on the right that I've been talking about.
Posted by: angienc at February 16, 2013 09:51 AM (w3JGl)
We own about ten. I tried to show her the difference, but it was like talking to a brick wall.
Thus does the MSM indoctrinate the womyns.
Posted by: Billy Bob, The guy who drinks in SC at February 16, 2013 09:52 AM (wR+pz)
Where was this show? Fairgrounds?
Posted by: EC at February 16, 2013 09:52 AM (doBIb)
Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at February 16, 2013 09:52 AM (Y5I9o)
Posted by: teej at February 16, 2013 09:53 AM (4Zmpq)
He had a good show on FoxBusiness...'Follow The Money'.
Shame they cancelled it.
Posted by: wheatie at February 16, 2013 01:39 PM (DZbQ0)
He's now hosting their 'Cashin' In' show.
Posted by: Tami [/i] at February 16, 2013 09:53 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 16, 2013 09:55 AM (DvVVN)
366...He's now hosting their 'Cashin' In' show.
I thought he was just filling in for David Asmin.
He subs for Cavuto a lot, too.
Posted by: wheatie at February 16, 2013 09:56 AM (DZbQ0)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 16, 2013 09:56 AM (PxYrx)
It isn't like we have cut ties with a golfing buddy or childhood friends or neighbors because of their liberalism, but we don't have to talk politics with them either. People like Ham and Cupp link their value with their ability to be "friends" with the media and beltway masses. Who the fuck starts socializing with Juan Williams and people like him in the first place?
Posted by: lowandslow at February 16, 2013 09:57 AM (Fz2C7)
Posted by: angienc at February 16, 2013 01:51 PM (w3JGl)
--- You are correct but you are wasting your breath
Posted by: Velvet Ambition at February 16, 2013 09:57 AM (R8hU8)
He subs for Cavuto a lot, too.
Posted by: wheatie at February 16, 2013 01:56 PM (DZbQ0)
I thought he was too but last week I heard his other hosts on The Five congratulating him on getting that show.
Posted by: Tami [/i] at February 16, 2013 09:57 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Prepositions Fists and Nachos at February 16, 2013 09:58 AM (sItLn)
Posted by: MidniteRambler at February 16, 2013 09:58 AM (bk97Q)
Posted by: teej at February 16, 2013 09:58 AM (yrHcy)
That certainly applies to the old fuddy duddy roll over and play possum Graham and McCain Republican "leadership".
Not every Republican is gaga over Bambi. Time has come to replace the Big Gov Republicans with the 'less is more' newcomers into party leadership. The GOP voters have been turning in the ballots to deaf national leadership since 2008: Out with the old.
Barbara Boxer and Claire McCaskill offered a biting label for Texas Senator Cruz: McCarthy. Funny, Boxer/McCaskill thus parallel themselves as communists in their own analogy.
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 16, 2013 09:58 AM (MhA4j)
I was amazed at how many rednecks were trying to sell their guns. Times are tough and momma probably told them to get rid of that shit so we can buy some food, gas, etc.
I wasn't in the market, but if you want to drop $1500 on a $800 AK, there are plenty of them. Most every gun was marked up double the real price. They wanted $120 for a $50 folding stock.
I don't think they will deal much either. This spring, it will clam down. Until then, I am not buying shit.
Posted by: Billy Bob, The guy who drinks in SC at February 16, 2013 09:58 AM (wR+pz)
I can't believe that the Left has the nerve to even bring up McCarthy...
Since *they* are the ones who are openly practicing 'McCarthyism' these days.
The way that the Left demonizes conservatives...and persecutes them...is exactly the way that McCarthy went after communists.
Posted by: wheatie at February 16, 2013 09:59 AM (DZbQ0)
Posted by: teej at February 16, 2013 01:53 PM (4Zmpq)
Its a huge uphill battle to waken a generation that has been brainwashed to march eyes wide open into slavery.
Posted by: Berserker at February 16, 2013 09:59 AM (FMbng)
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 16, 2013 09:59 AM (Vk2pI)
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 16, 2013 01:46 PM (673KB)
ABC , CBS , CNN , NBC.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 10:01 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: Velvet Ambition at February 16, 2013 01:57 PM (R8hU
Ayup. :-)
Posted by: angienc at February 16, 2013 10:02 AM (w3JGl)
372...I thought he was too but last week I heard his other hosts on The Five congratulating him on getting that show.
Ah. Thanks, Tami...I missed that.
Cool.
I'll have to watch him, I love Eric Bolling.
Posted by: wheatie at February 16, 2013 10:02 AM (DZbQ0)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 16, 2013 10:02 AM (PxYrx)
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 16, 2013 10:02 AM (Vk2pI)
It isn't like we have cut ties with a golfing buddy or childhood friends or neighbors because of their liberalism, but we don't have to talk politics with them either. People like Ham and Cupp link their value with their ability to be "friends" with the media and beltway masses. Who the fuck starts socializing with Juan Williams and people like him in the first place?
Posted by: lowandslow at February 16, 2013 01:57 PM (Fz2C7)
But Rush is dangerous.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 16, 2013 10:02 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 16, 2013 10:02 AM (C8mVl)
Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 16, 2013 10:04 AM (GVxQo)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 16, 2013 10:04 AM (PxYrx)
Posted by: nip at February 16, 2013 10:07 AM (11Tdq)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 10:07 AM (7h5MH)
Yes.
I'm reminded of the English who killed their king for a civil war only to give it up and "reset" the monarchy to rule the roost. So, what was the point of their civil war to empower Parliament more directly connected with "the people" when monarchs demanded absolute power? Oh, so long as the monarch budges on "absolutism" or authoritarianism, be grateful for Big Brother in charge.
The truly authentic genius of our Founders has been revised in the telling. But those who appreciate the value of a pearl, even if tossed into mud, won't give up the real thing for a fraud.
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 16, 2013 10:09 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 16, 2013 10:09 AM (C8mVl)
Posted by: teej at February 16, 2013 10:09 AM (wIEXv)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 16, 2013 10:10 AM (DvVVN)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 16, 2013 10:10 AM (oq9RJ)
You're ignoring the forms of governance NOT being the same.
And don't think it was the first time the British or any other monarch overtaxed his subjects to finance wars, or boarded soldiers in the homes of subjects or confiscated the homes in foreign lands on conquests, or confiscated weapons from the subjects in question, or refused to allow free market in order to monopolize on special interest vprofits.
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 16, 2013 10:13 AM (MhA4j)
Sorry, thought it would be obvious. I'm talking about CharlieBrown's Dildo. His article is peppered with tinyurl links to a PDF of Rules for Radicals. A commenter would be one thing, but someone with posting rights doing that shit just ain't going to end well. It isn't legally defensible. Somebody with access really need to fix that before a legal situation develops.
Posted by: John Morris at February 16, 2013 10:13 AM (YhRJW)
<i>"A vote for a Republican is a vote to return to those failed policies we've been working so hard to correct these past 8 years."</i>
The "Bush tax cuts for the rich caused the deficits and the financial crisis" storyline has been etched in stone in the Narrative. The Democrats will be able to run again on this Lie in 2016, And 2020. And probably 2024.
Not contesting the Narrative was the worst thing G.W. and crew ever did. The Bush administraiton is the Gift that Keeps on Giving for progressives.
Posted by: Beef at February 16, 2013 10:14 AM (mb1uj)
chasing after them is pointless, fruitless, and f*ckin stupid
I've been wondering for while if we aren't going after the wrong Hispanics. We keep thinking "Hispanic...Catholic...conservative." That might have been true 40 years ago, but not now.
Maybe, instead, we should be trying to pick up Hispanic Evangelicals, who are a significant minority. We generally do well with Evangelicals. And while I have enormous respect for the Roman Catholic church, it is, after all, a Big
(Ecclesisastical) Government church. People who left the RC for a small, independent church might be much more receptive to our way of thinking. The Dems might still carry the majority of Hispanics, we could shave a good number off their share.
Posted by: Burke at February 16, 2013 10:15 AM (CrqI6)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 10:16 AM (7h5MH)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 16, 2013 10:17 AM (PxYrx)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 02:07 PM (7h5MH)
Since you named me in your post, I'm responding out of politeness.
But seriously -- way to entirely miss the point asshat.
I'm done wasting my breath on you.
Posted by: angienc at February 16, 2013 10:17 AM (w3JGl)
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 16, 2013 10:18 AM (Vk2pI)
Posted by: rickl at February 16, 2013 10:18 AM (sdi6R)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 10:18 AM (7h5MH)
Posted by: teej at February 16, 2013 10:19 AM (m4AUe)
That's because the term revolutionary didn't mean what it does now, what we call a revolution and revolutionaries was actually based on the French Revolution of 1789. We were secessionist, not revolutionaries.
Posted by: lowandslow at February 16, 2013 10:19 AM (Fz2C7)
What Carter largely suffered from was the economic stagnation of the '70's as a decade, compared to the high growth decade of the 60's. People knew the difference.
That, and the Federal Reserve was cranking up the prime rate to fight inflation. That can't happen today because the National Debt is so high, if the interest rates went up, the Federal budget would be broken. Fun times just around the corner.
And of course, the Iranian hostage debacle.
A friend bought a new house in 1980, and people praised him because he got a fixed rate of 12% on the 30 year home loan. People in those days were talking about multigenerational 60 year loans to be able to buy houses, because the interest rates were climbing out of sight.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 16, 2013 10:19 AM (Md8Uo)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 16, 2013 10:22 AM (7h5MH)
__
Yes. And the distinction of what "we" are attempting to conserve should be clarified. We want our Constitutional Governance and rights as US citizens respected by our own constitutional governing officials.
Our Founders amalgamated the conservative and revolutionary ideals when formulating our Constitutional Government, classically and symmetrically balanced/separated powers, the government to be ruled by The People, the voting literate citizenry.
In the 18th century, the old guard was conserving the rights of absolute monarchies which effected authoritarian governance. In that, today's Marxist revolutionaries would return to the glory days of authoritarianism. And as the Jacobites wanted all the power and rights formerly attributed to the French monarchy, so the socialists today would have absolute powers over the populace seen by them to be "subjects" -- NOT citizens and certainly without any Bill of Rights.
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 16, 2013 10:22 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 16, 2013 10:23 AM (MhA4j)
"It meant revolution in the sense of the revolution of the earth around the sun in which the earth returns to its starting place. That was the meaning given to the English Revolution of 1688-89. The English felt that by toppling James II they were returning to the true order from which James had departed. The American revolutionists saw themselves in the same light. George III had departed from the true order by claiming a power over the colonies that had never been claimed before, and they were returning to the true order in which the colonies governed themselves."
Posted by: lowandslow at February 16, 2013 10:26 AM (Fz2C7)
Posted by: Reisen Udongein Inaba at February 16, 2013 10:27 AM (Vk2pI)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 16, 2013 10:28 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: teej at February 16, 2013 10:35 AM (wIEXv)
__
I didn't say you were. I noted what you were ignoring, the distinction between the British and American determination.
The British fought their civil war only to return to the old ways, and have yet to desire abandoning their tradition of maintaining a Monarch. And America wasn't the only colonial entity being abused by the British Monarch and Parliament, as Ireland was abused ferociously.
Americans got over that desire for a monarch by 1776. Our own unfortunate civil war "four score and seven years" subsequent was not to reinstate any monarchy, but regarded the US Constitution's protection of rights, namely States rights (and civil rights). The Federal taxation system at that time resembled the practices of the British leading to our secession from that Empire, as Northern industrialists got the Congressional votes to impose an unfair taxation/tariff system on the Southern agrarian states, avoiding their own equal responsibility to contribute to the federal treasury. And of course, the morality of slavery was very significant, and is not being glossed over by my main point regarding constitutional rights, whether economic or civil as both intertwine.
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 16, 2013 10:37 AM (MhA4j)
Not according to the preamble to the Constitution.
If they come from men then they can be denied by men, and we return to might makes right.
Such sloppy thinking us fucking pathetic, and the desire to be free from the moral constraints of natural law is the very rot that has so harmed the Republic.
Posted by: Hopeless at February 16, 2013 12:31 PM (lhNul)
Ugh - preamble merely states what the guys who wrote it believed at the time regarding God and religion. It is by no means a treatise on religion, the origin of man and his rights, or anything else that supports your various premises and conclusions. Fucking pathetic indeed.
You can wish there was more God in the country all you want. I have a strong sense that a primary focus on religion is one of the primary things that is killing the chances of our more viable, and more widely palatable, platforms of individual liberty, strong national defense, and fiscal conservatism.
Why do you hate gays? Why do you want to force rape victims to bear their attacker's children?
See how easy that is? Your not helping your cause, and your derailing the rest of ours.
Your morality play may be the way to go in the bible belt of deep red states. The founders intended that each state be a social experiment unto itself. You might find it surprising that people can be moral without believing in any god, or while acknowledging that the existence of God can neither be proven nor disproved.
But your insistence on moral purity regarding government's role in our lives (whether real or perceived) has a good chance of killing off any hope of saving this country from the shift away from fiscal conservatism and individual liberty.
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 10:40 AM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: sexypig at February 16, 2013 10:54 AM (dZQh7)
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 16, 2013 10:55 AM (Vk2pI)
Posted by: troyriser at February 16, 2013 10:58 AM (ptcFO)
Posted by: troyriser at February 16, 2013 11:02 AM (ptcFO)
Posted by: Burke at February 16, 2013 11:04 AM (CrqI6)
Posted by: troyriser at February 16, 2013 03:02 PM (ptcFO)
Your probably taking something out of context and then poorly alluding to something that is making me an asshole in your eyes.
Care to elaborate?
I know I can be an asshole and all, but in a thread about getting the country back on track, going Alinsky an all, the solution is to get right with God? I begged to differ.
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 11:17 AM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: The Political Hat at February 16, 2013 11:25 AM (Vk2pI)
Atherists should probably realize that often their position is borne of pride, seeing themselves as people who do not need God and perhaps also think they are smarter than the average Christian.
The problem before us right now is one of preserving a republic in which people are free to believe (or NOT believe) as they wish. In case both sides don't realize this, take a look around. Obama is currently attempting to make the Church bow to the will of the state, and his minions will not be happy until everyone (and that includes you atheists) is forced to worship Obama as the savior of the world.
I suggest coming to terms with the fact that all of us have different beliefs which should be put to use preserving our country, whether through prayer or action. I say this as a practicing Catholic.
Posted by: Miss Marple at February 16, 2013 11:27 AM (GoIUi)
I am done here. All I am saying that turning off a large number of people by appeals to "more religion please" is not helpful here in blue or purple America. Our last few elections, we had a gubernatorial and a senate candidate lose by only a few thousand votes with more than a million voting. That may play in red America, but it is a recipe for disaster elsewhere. And as a consequence of national elections, we lost what could have been the deciding vote on Obamacare.
Regardless of what the FF said or believed, I reject the notion that a refusal to acknowledge that there needs to be more religious-based morality in the US leads inexorably to a living Constitution or none at all. We can, with all logical consistency, use what the FF said and wrote at the time the Constitution was drafted ABOUT ACTUAL SUBSTANTIVE LAW (the Articles, the Amendments) to fix what the Constitution meant at the time it was adopted, while simultaneously rejecting the notion that more religion is what we need to right this country (and rejecting any appeals to the FF's writings on religion and its basis in the formation of the Constitution for support of the former).
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 11:30 AM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 11:35 AM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 16, 2013 11:44 AM (PxYrx)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 16, 2013 11:48 AM (PxYrx)
Sorry dude, that just means you haven't though it through very well. Since we lack a complete philosophical system based entirely upon pure reason all of our political systems have certain axioms at their base which are simply taken as such on faith. One of ours is the whole "... endowed by their Creator with certain Rights..." part. As an agnostic myself this does bother me a bit but as an agnostic instead of an atheist I can just say "Well we don't know enough yet to have a complete philosophy" and take a longer view.
But if you take the externality of a Creator away you do lose any brake on devolving to a rule of men, living Constitution situation. There currently isn't any purely rational replacement for "because God said so." backing up our inalienable rights. Until you sit down and think it out, and realize that Truth, are you ready to decide whether you, as an Atheist, can still buy into the whole American philosophy.
And hint: Objectivism is still incomplete enough it can't supply a basis either. (yet?)
Posted by: John Morris at February 16, 2013 11:52 AM (YhRJW)
Posted by: Joe Cor at February 16, 2013 11:55 AM (J8uFo)
Posted by: troyriser at February 16, 2013 12:50 PM (ptcFO)
Posted by: JDP at February 16, 2013 01:36 PM (8HhF2)
Posted by: JJ Stone at February 16, 2013 01:52 PM (diRA1)
Posted by: troyriser at February 16, 2013 01:57 PM (ptcFO)
Posted by: Devan at February 16, 2013 02:07 PM (w3cmD)
Posted by: troyriser at February 16, 2013 02:43 PM (ptcFO)
Posted by: JDP at February 16, 2013 03:25 PM (8HhF2)
Posted by: JDP at February 16, 2013 03:28 PM (8HhF2)
Posted by: JDP at February 16, 2013 03:30 PM (8HhF2)
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 03:37 PM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 03:49 PM (Kkt/i)
All should praise the name of Barack Obama.
Posted by: Mary Cloggenstein from Brattleboro, Vermont at February 16, 2013 04:27 PM (+PoXK)
Posted by: troyriser at February 16, 2013 05:04 PM (ptcFO)
Posted by: jbarntt at February 17, 2013 09:49 AM (UNFot)
Posted by: assault flounder at February 16, 2013 07:49 PM (Kkt/i)
You wrote to 'Hopeless', "You might find it surprising that people can be moral without believing in any god, or while acknowledging that the existence of God can neither be proven nor disproved."
I don't know of anyone of faith and possessed of a reasonable amount of intelligence who believes one must be religious in order to be moral. I won't presume to speak for 'Hopeless', but I've heard that accusation made before and find it abrasive and patronizing. Since very few religious people think that way, what you're doing is arguing a straw man, a construct pulled from the air in order to give your argument a validity it does not otherwise possess.
<- - - -
Wrong. You either do not know what a strawman is, or you failed to comprehend what was being discussed. I might recommend that you read and understand a conversation before chiming in and insinuating that someone is being a patronizing or pompous asshole.
I'll lay it out for you.
Hopeless writes "This Republic can only flourish in a Christian society, with a Christian people. All attempts to do otherwise will fail. Ace is a great example of why this is so. As a professed atheist he is unable to accept that there are moral absolutes, and so even when he advocates for conservatism, he advocates for soft-leftism. It's that very rot, even a little bit of moral relativism, that enters the field and spoils the whole crop."
Boil that down, you get that atheism = soft leftism, with Ace as an example, or that any morals that are not aligned with religiously-dictated doctrine (which are all relative to the particular denomination) is moral relativism, where one is "unable to accept that there are moral absolutes." That's the base premise that is being discussed.
Although your proposition that extends such a premise to making a moral equivalence between all atheists/agnostics and genocidal dictators comes after the fact, it illustrates perfectly that rather than being "a construct pulled from the air in order to give your argument a validity it does not otherwise possess . . . ," my purportedly patronizing strawman exactly addresses the premise at issue, without exaggeration of the premise.
Also note that when you are going to attempt to give your argument the air of legitimacy by throwing out scare-words like "strawman," you might want to avoid being so sloppy in your own argument.
You wrote: "I was an atheist once (for much of my adult life). I don't remember being a patronizing asshole who automatically assumed people of faith were complete idiots. Is it a requirement now?" You also write: "I don't know of anyone of faith and possessed of a reasonable amount of intelligence who believes one must be religious in order to be moral."
So, in the first instance, you group me with people who have automatically assumed that people of faith were idiots (shorthand - those that think you cannot be moral without God). Realize that wasn't ever said. That is your own strawman. I was addressing Hopeless and his premise. Then, to refute what is presumptively my premise (your strawman), you construct a group of people (faithful and possessed of a reasonable amount of intelligence), which could reasonably be said to include only non-idiots. And, finally, you argue from this subset of the faithful (the non-idiots) to conclude that there are only a few idiots (only a few that, in shorthand, believe one cannot be moral without God) that are faithful.
Your conclusion is a non sequitur and is based on an artificial group of non-idiots. That is, you exclude idiots from your artificial group (those having a reasonable amount of intelligence), and then you argue from that artificial group that there are very few people of faith that are idiots in the real world. Either it is very circular (a group of non-idiots has very few idiots), or the conclusion does not follow from the premise, and just asks us to rely on your anecdotal experience.
I understand that you can find such propositions made about entire populations (or generalizations) to be "abrasive and patronizing," but you fail to comprehend that your ire is misdirected. I was talking to one person about one particular thing said. Perhaps you would take your own cue and avoid making moral equivalences between non-believers and genocidal dictators.
- - - ->
Further, I wasn't arguing that you advocated genocide and other atrocities because you shared non-belief with some who did. What I was arguing is that non-belief is not the default 'reasonable' position since--at least in the 20th Century--atheists managed to kill more people than those killed by religionists of one sort or another in all other previous centuries combined.
Your last argument, "people can be moral...while acknowledging that the existence of God can neither be proven nor disproved" is another straw man since you're essentially positing another aspect of agnosticism that--insofar as I can see--was never offered up as a subject for debate. Further, use of the term 'acknowledging' implies that the premise, 'the existence of God can neither be proven or disproved' is settled, a self-evident, proven fact. Whether or not God's existence can be proven is still very much an open question, and is yet another argument.
You can break out Wittgenstein's truth tables if you like and diagram the daylights out of it. If you did, you'd find your argument doesn't hold up there, either.
<- - - -
I am not engaging you in argument. I was discussing with Hopeless, his premises and conclusions. You jumped in, and based on an unsupportable presumption (that I was painting all faithful with a broad brush) and insinuated that I was being a patronizing or pompous asshole. I asked for clarification, and because you provided that, I thank you.
However, due to the sloppiness with which you read, comprehend and/or make a point, I consider it pointless to continue.
Nice walk-back on the genocide moral equivalence. There is no argument that many of the perpetrators of genocide have been non-believers. Continued insistence on discussing this illustrates that you don't understand that this is beside the point. In addition, for one so intent on pointing out perceived strawmen, I find it disappointing how readily you employ argumentum ad Hitlerum to make a point.
I will give you the point about the premise of agnosticism (that existence cannot be proven nor disproved is accepted) being open for debate. Again, not every flaw (or perceived flaw) in argumentation is a strawman. There are many other types. However, in this instance, that statement was merely intended to describe categories of types of people (atheists and agnostics) that might be able to fall into a group of moral people (if we could ever get that far) that don't believe in a god. That it did. It was not used to misrepresent or exaggerate any of Hopeless' premises or conclusions.
I'll leave the truth tables to you, but I am not convinced that you can carefully state the point at issue, given the above.
- - - ->
Few doubt the ability of agnostics to make moral decisions and lead ethical lives. History is full of such men and women. The core argument we're having here regards the source of our rights. If our rights are not endowed by 'Our Creator'; that is, a higher Natural Law aka That Which Is Greater Than Ourselves transcending humanity, then our rights are derived from men, which means those rights can be given or taken away at the whim of men powerful enough to give them or take them away.
<- - - -
Again, nobody is arguing anything with you, because, for one, you're out of the gate with patronizing or pompous asshole. And while I endeavored to unravel for your what is being discussed, between Hopeless and I, I don't have any faith in your ability to argue cleanly and clearly without resorting using fallacies as both a sword and a shield.
Witness: "Few doubt the ability of agnostics to make moral decisions and lead ethical lives." Hopeless appeared to do just this or nearly so. You just employed argumentum ad populum to support my point. Please leave this to me.
Then you state, that the "core argument we're having here regards the source of our rights." Wrong. At best, this was subsidiary to, or used as a premise, ex post facto, to support the original supposition, to wit: any morals that are not aligned with religiously-dictated doctrine is moral relativism, where one is "unable to accept that there are moral absolutes." Otherwise it was ancillary to or inapposite to the topic being discussed.
- - - ->
The central Founders such as Jefferson, Adams and Washington were not conventionally religious men, by and large. They were Sons of the Enlightenment, for lack of a better term. They were also possessed of enough humility to recognize there exists a Power greater than they from whence our rights are derived.
<- - - -
And here is an appeal to authority (Founders had humility . . . ) to support the subsidiary proposition that rights devolve from a deity only. Aside from the fact that this is not the point of discussion, but was raised (whatever exactly for I forget now) as a remotely supporting proposition, it matters not whether the Founders believed or did not. It is beside this subsidiary point.
One can still recognize that rights are respected in a society, whatever their provenance, and can endeavor to create a document that is the foundation of a central government that is designed and limited so as to protect those rights.
Hope this helps.
- - - ->
Posted by: assault flounder at February 19, 2013 01:34 AM (Kkt/i)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2269 seconds, 578 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: weirdflunky at February 16, 2013 06:55 AM (tlhtD)