Comments on: Mark A. Kleiman Sucks Giant Green Slimy Goat Balls; or, How To Talk To Motherfuckers Who Tolerate Indecency While Mewling About Incivility

By: Cheez It

Cheez It — Sun, 04 Apr 2010 05:47:18 +0000

Crooked Timber referenced this one, and Substance sees what I see. Poor Brad R. nailed by history.

Hi, Yosef in the past!

By: ClubPenguinCheats

ClubPenguinCheats — Sun, 04 Apr 2010 01:28:21 +0000

As for people who say the same thing about teh ghey, if they don’t understand that torture is all about victimizing others, while gay sex is welcomed by others, well, I wish for the same thing they do: that they be tortured, but not ass-fucked. How civil is that?

By: Substance McGravitas

Substance McGravitas — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 23:01:35 +0000

(Calling Jon Chait a “wanker?” C’mon, that’s silly.)

Memory
All alone in the moonlight
I can smile at the old days
I was beautiful then
I remember the time I knew what happiness was
Let the memory live again

By: Sheesh

Sheesh — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 01:07:21 +0000

Damnit, ITTDGY is already in here with the link... oh well. Still, that's high praise from Glenn: BEST POAST EVAR.

By: Naso

Naso — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 20:04:24 +0000

Although women wank, women are virtually never called wankers. There seems to be a general rule whereby insults connected with male anatomy are rarely used to describe women. For instance, at least in Britain and Ireland, women are rarely called dicks, cocks, knobs or tossers. On the rare occasions they are, it’s pretty much always by other women.

Carry on…

By: commie atheist

commie atheist — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 21:28:42 +0000

Maybe this will convince him to start posting again on a regular basis. We miss you, Mencken.

By: ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©

ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:13:05 +0000

Congrats to HTML! As HTML Mencken insightfully noted in what is one of the best blog posts ever written, our political mores demand vehement repudiation of petty acts of incivility (not all, but most) while tolerating and even approving of extremely consequential acts of indecency as long as they're advocated with superficial civility. ~

By: Kyle

Kyle — Sat, 09 Sep 2006 17:53:40 +0000

“and what the fuck does it mean to hate bushco on an outpatient basis? â€¦ iâ€™m talkin matrix-style hookup powered by a heart/lung machine of hate … iâ€™m not even from your damn country and hate them … utter mania!”

Paging Dr. Krauthammer.

By: itsbenj

itsbenj — Sat, 09 Sep 2006 17:38:10 +0000

Salleri – there is NO debate about torture. No, most people DO NOT find waterboarding Afghani farmers acceptable. What world are you living in? People who advocate torture are scum. Criminals who threaten innocent people are scum. These are simple concepts that are long, long past being up for debate. Jeeezus…

By: Carl Nyberg

Carl Nyberg — Sat, 09 Sep 2006 17:36:44 +0000

It’s bad to engage in personal attacks against Kleiman’s peers, but it’s OK for his peers to discuss and make policies that torture the hoi polloi.

It’s people like Kleiman who make the excesses of the French Revolution seem reasonable.

By: Candymarl

Candymarl — Sat, 09 Sep 2006 16:22:37 +0000

Don’t be shy. Say what you really feel.

By: Karatist Preacher

Karatist Preacher — Sat, 09 Sep 2006 15:39:44 +0000

Who knew that Wankette had an an army of ass-fucking trolls? She has her 15 minutes – why do you care what Atrios says about you?

By: owlbear1

owlbear1 — Sat, 09 Sep 2006 15:17:46 +0000

Well if you use bad language then everyone will KNOW you have an emotional investment it what is being discussed. Now that would truly be a fucking shame.

By: Harry R. Sohl

Harry R. Sohl — Sat, 09 Sep 2006 14:39:44 +0000

Don’t be a hauteur!

By: Marq

Marq — Sat, 13 May 2006 17:28:40 +0000

I got yer civility right here!!1!11!

By: bitchphd

bitchphd — Thu, 11 May 2006 02:22:58 +0000

nobody ever won a cause just by hurling invective.

Have you no sense of decency, sir?

By: liquified viscera

liquified viscera — Wed, 10 May 2006 04:22:09 +0000

“if not, then not.”

holy fuck that’s clever. (NOT.) (then NOT.)

can’t speak to its author’s intellectual caliber? au contraire. that’s what I’ve just done.

raising scarecrows instead of issues? is that good debate?

NOT.

then NOT.

eh okay? A-OK.

let’s hear it for the spineless “liberals” and their fellow Demmicans! including Mr/Ms “if not, then not.”

hoo.

ray.

(charles, probably)

By: almostinfamous

almostinfamous — Wed, 10 May 2006 02:24:51 +0000

yeah, it ought to be more fun and overall less depressing than watching the right-wing eat your future.

By: Joey

Joey — Tue, 09 May 2006 23:42:30 +0000

I love watching the left eat its own!

By: almostinfamous

almostinfamous — Tue, 09 May 2006 22:54:36 +0000

also, if ana marie cox cared or wanted to respond, i’m sure she can do it for herself. from waht i can see on the wonkette site, she still has some sort of keys to the place, if not she does have her own damn website.

what the fuck is this holy calamity that has befallen her from [gasp] atrios and [OHEMEFGEE] digby’s blogposts?

and what the fuck does it mean to hate bushco on an outpatient basis? what single goddamn thing have they done in 6 damn years that you shouldn’t hate them for on an inpatient basis… i’m talkin matrix-style hookup powered by a heart/lung machine of hate. jesus fucking christ man, they have destroyed everything that your country could have (and did, albeit wrongly, after the blowjobber-in-chief’s reign) stood for.

i’m not even from your damn country and hate them. not dislike, but actively hate, to the point of utter mania!

basically what that means is that i agree with retardo.