My best to your relatives and everyone affected.

The good thing about tsunamis is that people have forewarning and can get out of the way (at least in the Pacific, where they have an alert system). The Indian Ocean tsunami in Dec. 2005 killed so many because there was no warning system in place – have they since put one in place?

In any case, I hope your folks’ homes are not affected – good to know they are evacuating and won’t be risking life and limb.

Which island, D?

Oahu, for the relatives. Have some friends all over, Maui, Kauai and the Big Island …

All my best to your family and friends, and all the people in Hawaii.

This has been one fuck of a lousy year so far.

Let’s all hope the early warning system works where it’s most needed throughout the Pacific.

True dat.

I have people on the Big Island, but they live at 500 feet so their biggest worry is that the KTA will run out of toilet paper. Civil Defense currently says Hilo should expect a 2.5 meter wave.

been hooked to CNN morning. My prayers to your loved ones and all being affected.

Just had a very small wave (in height) hit our Chatham Islands, and mass of water still coming in 45mins later. 20-30cm high so far.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10629036

Civil Defense currently says Hilo should expect a 2.5 meter wave.

So what does this mean, for those of us not used to living on coasts?

I’m just trying to get some kind of feeling for what might happen.

D.A. – Fingers crossed for your relatives & freinds.

No offense, but what I’m worried about is damage – it’s good people are being warned, but what’s this going to do to coastal areas that rely on tourism & fishing for income? I’m not trying to be insensitive – just worried about what the worst-case scenario we’re looking at is, particularly in light of a shitty economy (at least in the U.S.) to begin with.

“The Indian Ocean tsunami in Dec. 2005 killed so many because there was no warning system in place – have they since put one in place?”

Jennifer: The 05 tsunami resulted from an underwater earthquake and geologists in Hawaii figured out, if I remember correctly, what was about to happen only about a half hour or maybe less before it hit. Indonesia and Thailand had lousy early warning systems and couldn’t get the word out to the right people in time.

Hope there is enough time this time. Does anyone know when it may hit Hawaii?

It seems the NOAA system is accurate thus far. It even has the wave estimated at 8 feet high with under an hour before landfall.

To be more clear, massive earthquake happens in middle of ocean, siesmologists in Hawaii figure out what is about to happen in 20 minutes. What are they supposed to do. Yell “Get me the President of Indonesia on the phone. They have 15 minutes to evacuate the beaches in the largest archipelico in the world!” They had no sytem in place.

Man up, people. Air strike on Chile.

gocart – Yep, this is why I asked. I googled it and it looks like they now have something like 25 monitoring buoys in place in the Indian Ocean; these relay data to the tsunami centers in Hawaii and Japan. But local, on-the-ground warning systems are still up to the countries that border the Indian Ocean.

BTW, new post summarizing Thursday’s health care summit over at my place.

Well, here’s hoping for the best for your people and friends.

Does anyone know if there is pending gay rights legislation in Chile? Just asking.

There was also a 7.3 earthquake off the southern coast of Japan yesterday.

There was also a 7.3 earthquake off the southern coast of Japan yesterday.

Different plates, so it’s an unfortunate coincidence.

the Chili earthquake

The only rumbles associated with chili are intestinal…

Hope the relatives are safe.

Here’s a good overview of tsunamis– the destructive power of a tsunami is caused by its incredibly long wavelength, the mass of water just keeps on coming.

Good luck to all Pacific Islanders.

On the lighter side, The Onion must have regected this for being to silly so now the U.N. has to deal with her. Poor bastards.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/27290072/ORLY-TAITZ-APPEALS-TO-UN-FOR-PROTECTION-FROM-PERSECUTION-IN-U-S-27277636-Immediate-Release-February-22-2010

the mass of water just keeps on coming.

Which is why areas struck by tsunamis are typically stained white.

Why should wingnuts believe these warnings about a supposed “giant wave from the ocean” when they are coming from the exact same NOAA pointy-headed liberal scientists who are just scaring America with their scary scare stories about “climate change” in order to get filthy rich off lucrative government grant money?!

DA–

Live feed here (via Huff Po) of local Hawaii tv coverage. They’re waiting for the wave, which they expect within the half hour:

http://tinyurl.com/yjqnt29

From Kos but link is to Reuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61Q1A720100227

A powerful 8.8 magnitude earthquake struck offshore of Chile this morning. Pacific coasts including all Hawaiian Islands are under emergency Tsunami warning. That means get the hell off the beach in those areas or any place near it. Experts indicate there is time for residents near vulnerable shores to proceed quickly but safely and calmly to higher ground:

“Urgent action should be taken to protect lives and property,” the Warning Center said in a bulletin. “All shores are at risk … The center has issued a Pacific-wide tsunami warning that included Hawaii and stretched across the ocean from South America to the Pacific Rim.

Geophysicist Victor Sardina said the Hawaii-based center was urging all countries included in the warning to take the threat very seriously. “Everybody is under a warning because the wave, we know, is on its way. Everybody is at risk now,” he said in a telephone interview.

The center estimates the first tsunami, which is a series of several waves in succession, will hit Hawaii at 11:19 a.m. Hawaii time (4:19 p.m. EST) in the town of Hilo on the Big Island of Hawaii, with waves in Honolulu at 11:52 a.m.

Why should wingnuts believe these warnings about a supposed “giant wave from the ocean” when they are coming from the exact same NOAA pointy-headed liberal scientists who are just scaring America with their scary scare stories about “climate change” in order to get filthy rich off lucrative government grant money?!

Wait for the wingnuttery that will come from this… “why should we be expected to pay for people who live on shores when they know tsunamis might hit, HARRUMPH HARRUMPH blurp blurp *rustle*” and the kind of “aren’t I so politically incorrect tee hee” bullshit they foisted on us after Katrina.

No big tsunami surge yet. Crossing fingers.

Wait for the wingnuttery that will come from this…

I think the main theme will be “the casualties in Haiti were much higher because ***blackity-black-black Bell Curve voodoo***”

Bookmark it!

Holy shit. If you aren’t watching Mr. Wonderful’s link, go there NOW.

Visual Aids:

Preliminary energy model.

Travel times.

Wait, didn’t Obama grow up in Hawaii? Is this God’s punishment for not being a natural born citizen and but a natural born muslim to boot?

Wingnuts will oppose federal government aid to Hawaii because it is a foreign country and practices voodoo . . . I mean Hula dancing which like voodoo is prohibited by Levicticus or so I read on the internet. I do know for a fact that they eat a lot of shellfish over there so they have that thing going against them at least.

First sentence grammar fail.

Today in headlines that should be fun, but turn out to be boring. On the front page of CNN.com:

Ticker: Obama taps WH event planner

If you click, the real title is much less interesting.

Also, a classic disappointingly non-literal headline:

In first visit to China, Obama walks tightrope

Holy shit. If you aren’t watching Mr. Wonderful’s link, go there NOW.

Summary for those of use presently denied streaming media?

Just had a very small wave (in height) hit our Chatham Islands, and mass of water still coming in 45mins later. 20-30cm high so far.

Everyone in NZ had plenty of warning so we’re all down at the beaches now watching to see how high the surges will become.

Get real close there, Smut. Wouldn’t want to miss anything.

Dear God,

Next time you make a planet, make sure all the pieces fit together properly you dumbfuck.

Sincerely,

Kelly Monteith.

Now if someone can clasp a Playtex-gloved hand firmly around Pat Robertson’s mouth, the world will be spared his hideous brain farts.

Visual Aids:
Preliminary energy model.

That’s way cool.

More live streaming coverage
http://www.ustream.tv/hitsunami
(mostly silly, trivial commentary though, as there’s nothing to see)

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-10461062-36.html

Hang ten, Smut!

Or, if you have polydactyly, hang twelve!

WP spellcheck doesn’t like “polydactyly”, or “spellcheck”, for that matter.

FYWP!

The fact is, the danger has passed in Hawaii as the waves from this were on the small side.

gokart Mozart,

Thanks for the Taitz link. She is a sad case and is descending into paranoid fantasies before our very eyes. Did you notice she and her attorney spelled Obama’s first name wrong in the filing? Can’t imagine what type of supersized asshole gene one would need to complain about inappropriate identification documentation of others when you can’t even figure out how to spell the name of your chief antagonist.You would think the spelling of a name she has been fixated on for more than a year now would be right at the tip of her paranoid little fingers.

that’s because ‘spellcheck’ is an easter european family name, like ‘havlicek’. ‘spellchecker’ is the nickname for pavel spellcheck, a top scoring point guard orginally from the czech republic

man made global climate change may be disputed, but man made global stupid is already killing us

Next time you make a planet, make sure all the pieces fit together properly you dumbfuck.

You want a planet with no moving parts, live on Uranus Mars.

i’ve run into many people who’ve suggested things to me that sounded very similar to “go live on uranus”

Here in Japan, the warning on the tv says they are expecting 2 metre waves along most of the coast.

Wait, my Japanese isn’t so good. One stretch of coast up north is expecting 2 metres. Most of the rest of the coast is expecting about 50cm (20 inches). I apologize for any confusion I may have caused. I will study harder in my Nihongo class so that this doesn’t happen again. Gomen nasai.

Where I grew up in Oregon had a pair of signs from the mid-last century waaay above head height and ten miles up river saying ‘1964’ and another sign next to it for a rain caused swell.

When I was a teen in Washington, we had a 2 meter tsunami, though that wasn’t enough to really look like more than a big wave, it’s just out of nowhere. We had hours of warning, though, but little information on the height.

I think it’s awesome we can now (sometimes) predict the height of these. Beaches here locally in California – San Mateo, Santa Cruz – were closed until late this afternoon because of it, though we live high in the hills now.

At any rate, these things happen infrequently, but places like Hawaii and Japan see them very often because of their positions facing active rift zones. The areas where I grew up have evidence of 2005-sized tsunamis every 150-300 years, so the Pacific coast is not immune.

I thought “hanging twelve” was Strine for surfing (male) naked.

In case you missed it, sammiches, with a side of waterfall and Tom Selleck.

I’m glad that Hawaii and the west coast were spared but I’m still very worried about my friends in Japan. The world is just too goddam small.

Chances are that if one has lived any length of time or achieved a modest success of character, humility, or enterprise, then he is at least unconsciously aware of the concept of noblesse oblige. The term of French origins is defined as “the inferred obligation of people of high rank or social position to behave nobly or kindly toward others.”

While the concept itself likely conjures images of royalty or aristocratic obligations to help the poor during the knighted era, the idea is in fact ancient and stands as a pillar of Western civilization.

When the Israelites left the bondage of Egypt, they were immediately commanded in Exodus 23:9 “to not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.” Suddenly, at this epoch in civilization and for perhaps the first time, freedom came not with license to oppress or exploit others, but with grave responsibility and obligations to God and man. No limousine liberal hypocrisy or ivory-towered hubris in the wilderness — the Hebrews were freed slaves.

Later, in the New Testament, Jesus, in Luke 12:48, gave perhaps the greatest forerunner to the modern notion of noblesse oblige when he stated, “For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.” Wealth, success, intelligence, ability, and blessings were now revealed as synonymous with the talents, goods, or money entrusted by a master to a steward. And lest man, as is the natural “default,” become too intoxicated with blessing or success, the Apostle Paul later charged the early Christian church to first ask the question, “For who maketh thee to differ from another? And what hast thou that thou didst not receive?”

The apostle’s question is at once rhetorical and foundational. It echoes across the millennia. The answer is self-evident in all ages:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Jefferson and the American Founders made the natural connection between God and the dignity of the individual — with the resultant role of government existing only as a limited, and almost necessary, evil. Government functioned not to impose equalized outcomes, but to guarantee that man would have equal opportunity to develop God-given talents without statist obstruction. Today’s statist may reason falsely that the Framers could not have foreseen the future and all its complexities that necessitate the need for a “fluid document” and far-reaching central government serving as a safety net. In fact, the signers of the Declaration were hardly idealists of a bygone era, or devoid of discernment of the perils and complexities on the horizon. Jefferson himself had also written:

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

In the actual practice of noblesse oblige, the leaders of the early American era were the original “Greatest Generation.” Although in many cases men of station and wealth, the signers acknowledged first the sovereignty of God, and then a mutual and solemn covenant of sacrifice for the better good in closing their petition to “Nature’s God”:

And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

As the American Republic grew into the 20th century, “certain men crept in unawares,” and gradually notions of limited government and a Judeo-Christian worldview were encroached upon by secular humanism, with the state assuming the former role of God. Only by first negating the Creator in the equation of noblesse oblige could the liberal then invert the actual definition to then read:

Noblesse oblige: the inferred role of government and elites everywhere to compel others to behave nobly or kindly toward others.

With the Orwellian definition now in play, at once the great liberal issues of our day become moral imperatives — and not mere political talking points subject to honest discussion. Nationalized health care, even if unworkable or bankrupting in practical application, becomes a noble obligation for you and me to subsidize — while Congress keeps its own sweetheart plan with no thought of sacrifice by the “more equal animals.” Or global warming crusaders can jet all over the world to useless summits and live in mansions while with a straight face urging the average citizen to turn his thermostat down. “Do as I say and not as I do” becomes an acceptable premise because, after all, the beautiful people really do know what’s best for the rest of us. It is no longer God nudging the heart toward a higher plane of concern based on love and empathy, but rather the state ramming its religion down one’s throat with a cold and heartless inefficiency.

America has a true heritage of noblesse oblige currently on display amidst the destruction of Haiti, the liberated torture chambers of Iraq, and the rebuilding of Afghanistan. Americans are a giving people who have always taken care of their own as well as the “stranger.” Perhaps the greatest deeds go unnoticed. Words and definitions may occasionally fall prey to the sleight of hand, but truth and love do not.

The world is just too goddam small.

But, as Stephen Wright observed, I still wouldn’t want to have to paint it.

CONTINUE TO SPREAD THE WORD!!! said,
Well, I don’t know because I have scroll-troll protection. Continue to spread the killfile!!!

So, what’s the over/under on when we’ll hear that the earthquake/possible tsunami is a divine warning/punishment for the election of Barack Obama?

The Palestinians have nothing on liberal Democrats. Palestinians, as Abba Eban, Israel’s former ambassador to the United Nations, famously quipped, “never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” But the Democrats and the jogging canines of mainstream journalism never miss an opportunity to miss the obvious.

Allow me, then, to explain the reason — the real reason — why the aforementioned devote the enormous amounts of time, effort, ink, and pixels to attack one woman, Sarah Palin. Palin is a private citizen, who does nothing but give speeches, sell books, post Facebook messages, and is a “Fox News contributor” whose only substantive “contributions” so far, from what I can see, have been to Fox News’ bottom line and to her own bank account.

After all, we never saw the left direct this level of vitriol — no, let’s call it what it is, hatred — against the likes of Ron Paul, Steve Forbes, Ross Perot, and others whose names, for good reason, I cannot recall. And, unlike Sarah Palin, these were all declared candidates, actively-campaigning for the presidency in an election year.

What could possibly account for this borderline deranged venting of hellfire, this spewing of enough bile to float a battleship, enough gnashing of teeth to pay the college tuition — all four years — of the children of a whole battalion of cosmetic dentists? After all, it’s not like Sarah Palin could actually be elected President of the United States or anything.

Or could she?

Of course, she could, or at least the people attacking her think so. That is not to say that she will be elected or even nominated, but she could and that’s clearly one reason why the left is so viciously attacking her and her alone. This has to be a sweet irony if you’re Sarah Palin: Your enemies are screaming to the rafters that you can’t be elected precisely because, in their heart of hearts and brain of brains, they know that you can. The New York Times’ editorial board doth protest too much.

But even that is only one factor that explains, the ferocity, the hateful, the sheer derangement of the left’s anti-Palin barrage and it’s not the main factor, which is this: They are powerless to stop her. And they know it.

For Democrats, it is, literally, the Fear That Dare Not Speak Its Name, the fear that Sarah Palin could indeed be elected president and that there is nothing they can do about it.

Follow my impeccable logic here: While anything can happen between now and the first Tuesday of November, 2012, as the situation exists today (absent a swift and substantial rightward shift by Obama, a dramatic drop in the unemployment rate, the emergence of the Tea Parties as a viable third party, a decision by Obama not to run, or the sudden appearance of a deus ex machina) Barack Obama is a one-term president. If present trends continue, the next president will be a Republican. Mitt Romney, Scott Brown, your Aunt Petunia.

Or Sarah Palin. Whoever the Republicans nominate in 2012 becomes president in 2013. And that’s the key word: “Republicans.” Whoever the Republicans nominate.

And that’s got to be frustrating for your average liberal Democrat: knowing that absent some surprising favorable development, the Republican Party will choose the next president. The Democrats role will be limited to simply standing there and letting it happen.

But as the late Billy Mays liked to say, “Wait! There’s more!” Because if you’re a liberal Democrat facing this prospect, you’re probably thinking: “The Messiah’s a goner, but if we’re to have a Republican president, please, God, please, anyone but Sarah Palin. Anyone but an attractive, charismatic, principled, conservative, pro-life woman.”

Now sometimes appeals to the Almighty work, but not always, or the nation would have been spared the Obama administration, and any appeals and arguments to the voters — anything the Democrats do after the GOP chooses their candidate — will be too late. The Plan A dog (to reelect Obama) won’t hunt in 2012, which leaves liberals with Plan B: dissuade the Republicans from nominating Palin in the first place. Throw everything, including the kitchen sink, at her. Blast her with every crack, every criticism, every accusation, no matter how absurd, how hysterical, how rabid and irrational, and hope something sticks. Sully her good name; taint her so badly in the public’s eyes that Republicans won’t dare nominate her.

Either that, or turn on the TV at noon, January 20, 2013 to see Barack Obama, out after one soon-to-be-forgotten term, standing on a platform in front of the White House — and the entire world puts her left hand on the Bible, raises her right, and repeating after Chief Justice Roberts (or reading from her palm) says:

I, Sarah Louise Palin, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States…

Is it any wonder the Dems are going bonkers?

I, Sarah Louise Palin, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States…

That will be pretty impressive, given that she’ll have to overcome the perception among 73% of the population that she lacks any and all qualification to be president.

You left out the part about how she would ride to the inauguration on a unicorn with a silver horn, along a path strewn with rose petals tossed by the Care Bears.

I’ll win in your home state if I’m noninated, Jennifer!

You betcha!

CONTINUE TO SPREAD THE WORD!!! said,

February 28, 2010 at 5:45

Even when you stay in the boat you still get wet… god dammit

OT: America, where mental hygiene reigns supreme.

Doodling on your notebook is the Nuremburg Rally of liberal fascism!

Recently on “The O’Reilly Factor,” Bill O’Reilly seemed very concerned about President Obama being described as a socialist by members of the right such as Rush Limbaugh. O’Reilly has often dodged calling the president a socialist, as if doing so would condemn Obama as a tyrannical dictator. It was discussed throughout the show with various guests, and O’Reilly frequently stated that yes, Obama is a far-left guy, but he didn’t want to use the actual term “socialist.” It would be too much.

Here in Britain we look at the continuing battle as to whether Obama is a socialist or not as a rather odd American quibble. In Britain we have no problem defining people as socialists, nor do people on the left have a problem calling themselves socialists. It is not that those of us on the conservative right do not believe that socialism is a bad doctrine. We do, and we see evidence of its continual destruction of the country on a day-to-day basis, but we have always had socialism living quite openly amongst us. We are therefore able to see and recognize it quite calmly as a day-to-day occurrence in politics, just as one recognizes the flu. We wish it didn’t exist, but it does, and so we get on with our lives, trying to avoid catching it in the process.

When one looks back at the prime ministers that the British Labour Party has produced in the twentieth century — James Ramsay MacDonald, Clement Attlee, Harold Wilson, James Callaghan etc. — all have defined themselves as socialists at one time or another. Even the relatively centrist Tony Blair described himself as “Coming to Socialism through Marxism” and is a member of the Christian Socialist Movement. When one considers that Blair is widely considered to sit on the “right” of the Labour party, it becomes clear how deeply the Labour Party is rooted in socialism. Moreover, from 1918 until 1994, Labour’s famous Clause IV of its Constitution defined its aim as follows:

To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry
and the most equitable distribution thereof that maybe possible upon the basis
of the common ownership of the means ofproduction, distribution, and exchange,
and the best obtainablesystem of popular administration and control of each
industry or service.

This succinct definition of socialism was seen as the defining purpose of the Labour Party
and was printed on the back of every membership card. During Labour’s so-called “shift t
o the centre” after Blair’s ascendancy to the leadership in 1994, it controversially rewrote
Clause IV to read,

The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of
our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for
each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in
which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few.

Even amidst the fury of the hard left of the party, who saw the change as a
movement away from the party’s Marxist roots, the re-envisioned “New Labour”
still defined itself as a socialist party (even if it squeezed “democratic” into the
definition to soften the blow) and still does to this day.

The current Prime Minister Gordon Brown, has also defined himself as a socialist[1]
and admitted to adhering to socialist policies, as do a great deal of his top Cabinet
ministers, including the Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling, who believes that
Labour should talk up the massive redistribution of wealth it has achieved, and the
Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, Ed Balls, who stated recently that ”
[s]ocialism, as represented by the Labour Party, the Fabian Society, the Co-operative
movement, is a tradition I can be proud of.”

In Great Britain, and across Western Europe, it will not raise any eyebrows for a leading
politician to describe himself as a socialist. Definitions of socialism range widely across
the world, whether one is a democratic socialist, a socialist democrat, a liberal socialist, a
Christian socialist, or the theatrical “Luxemburgist Trotskyist, post-Trotskyist” of Christopher
Hitchens. We in Europe know that the definitions of what a socialist is depend on the socialist.
As British scholar Robert Service has commented on the subject of left-wing organization,
“Grandiose names were chosen for organizations which were little larger than
crepuscules”[2].

There are as many exact definitions of socialism as there are socialists. Yet they do have
common characteristics. Love of big government, nationalization of industry, massive
taxation, wealth redistribution, etc. all point towards socialism. Someone like the president
would not even have to say he was a socialist in Western Europe; it would be assumed quite
normally, without any fuss or conspiracy.

I have a lot of respect for Bill O’Reilly, but to a Brit who has seen his fair share of socialists and
lives in a socialist country run by a self-described socialist party by a self-described socialist
prime minister who has taken over for another self-described socialist prime minister, it is
puzzling why self-described independents like Mr O’Reilly are doing backflips in an attempt
to avoid the obvious fact — President Obama is quite clearly a socialist.

All these verbal gymnastics that are used to avoid stating the obvious may be rather humorous for
someone watching from over the Atlantic, but for Americans, such delusion is a very serious matter.
It is important, not just for the American right, but for the American people as a whole, to realise just
exactly who it is they have elected to office. With the approval numbers dropping almost daily for
the president, it appears that it is sinking in for the generally center-right American public.

However, when people on the right start being “concerned” about describing Obama as what he clearly
is, in part due to the hysteria that both sides of the political spectrum exhibit when the word “socialist”
is used, then it damages the effectiveness of opposition to him. Instead of being able to define what
Obama’s aims are in his presidency, those on the left and on the right keep pushing Obama into a slightly
left-of-center, non-ideological fog. Such a political move is deceitful, and it does not allow the American
public to get a clear perception of just what they have voted into the White House.

Those of us across the pond who analyze American politics know exactly who it is you have in the White
House. Obama is not some new post-political entity. Nor is he some form of Stalinist that will set up a
USSA. He is a normal, well-spoken, charismatic socialist who in Britain would sit quite happily towards
the left of the Labour Party alongside figures such as Tony Benn, Aneurin Bevan, Harold Wilson, and Ed
Balls. To call someone a socialist is not conspiratorial, and it is not fear-mongering; it is simply the truth, and
it is time for some in the conservative media to take a deep breath and admit it — America has a socialist
leading the country. Welcome to the club: It stinks!

I’ll win in your home state if I’m noninated, Jennifer!

You betcha!

Meaning that in areas with the lowest educational attainment, where racism is alive and well, you’ll win the stupid bigot vote.

Congratulations. That’s a very high bar to clear.

CONTINUE TO SPREAD THE

how much would that be if you just cut me off about a foot and a half’s worth?

Logorrhea+Troll=Continue to spread the word

Whoever the Republicans nominate in 2012 becomes president in 2013

much worshiping lately at the shrine of the unhatched chickens

Logorrhea + Diarrhea = scuse mah finGAHS

It is no longer God nudging the heart toward a higher plane of concern based on love and empathy, but rather the state ramming its religion down one’s throat with a cold and heartless inefficiency.

Looks like the teabaggers are still getting excited about the idea of things being shoved down their throats.

Shorter Spread

Liberal guilt is giving generosity a bad name!

Sometimes I forget how cool a scrollball with acceleration is.

Well, being that Hawaii was spared and Chile was not, I guess God loves Barack Obama and hates Chile:

http://anexerciseinfutility.blogspot.com/2010/02/god-loves-barack-obama-and-hates-chile.html

Well, being that Hawaii was spared and Chile was not, I guess God loves Barack Obama and hates Chile:

I see you conveniently forgot to mention Michelle Bachelet, Chile’s agnostic president.

Pat Robertson will surely be on the case as soon as he’s informed of this.

Nom de Plume, if you read my post that I linked to, you would have seen that I made the Bachelet connection.

Follow my impeccable logic here:

Seldom has anything a troll writes given me as big a laugh as this.

Follow my impeccable logic here:

Here is how it will go down next week. First, the results from Modus Ponens and Modus Tollens will come in, and they’ll be declared for McCain. You’ll be disappointed, but “no big deal, change can’t come overnight” will be your comment. Disjunctive Syllogism will go red, and a little nervousness will creep in. The usual suspects will fall into the usual categories. As the night drags on, Tertium Non Datur, Colorado, and (much to your horror) De Morgan’s Theorem will be too close to call.

My advice at this point to you will be to go to bed. You will wake up to a McCain presidency and the Great Liberal Freakout will be on.

Continue to spread the manure: Exodus 23:9 “to not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.”
Funny, the same book tells what happened to the Canaanites. Apparently, incipient noblesse oblige was right out when it came to owning land. .

Without a motive there cannot be random cruelty. People can be cruel.
Life is neither fair or unfair. People choose to act one way or the other.
Like corporations being given the status of personhood, and the bizarre
idea that money is free speech are constructs by individuals who
distort logic and precedent to suit a corrupt agenda. Life is not evil it just
is. People choose to be evil, especially in the names of patriotism, righteousness, and feelings of superiority or hubris. Life can harm when it has no intent to do so. People do harm because some are thoughtless, callous and self-centered. Quakes happen, stars nova, planets collide and I write stupid shit on the internet with no harm intended. Life ends, for some sooner than others with no harm intended. Accidents are in another category, because they have more to do with “care” -lessness, “wreck” -lessness, and inexperience. Random natural tragic events may be many things, but cruel is not one of them.

Thank god for dancing badgers.

Your enemies are screaming to the rafters that you can’t be elected precisely because, in their heart of hearts and brain of brains, they know that you can.

Say I don’t want a dog in a Mickey Kaus costume to fly my airplane; I want an actual pilot to. My hysterical screaming that dog cum Kaus is unqualified to fly the plane could only be caused by precisely one thing: in my heart of hearts and brain of brains (that’s the frenulum, right?) I actually think a dog can fly a plane.

Think about it. When else in human history has anyone ever had grounds to question the competence of another, except that they secretly believe the other is competent, and that scares them, or something. (*) “That dog is woefully unqualified to fly!”, you say.

Well, it’s time to face the facts, pal: you’re not scared of a dog blowing a goat flying a plane. You’re scared of you, dammit. You’re scared of you. Not to mention George Bush’s manly characteristic, or for that matter, Jesus’.

OK good session guys; let’s the more attractive of us finish today by hugging this one out.

(*) FUCK OH SHIT IT’S TEH LOGICAL CONSISTENCY POLICE. If this were true, all those remarks about the various ways Obama was unqualified to be president (his lack of experience, his blackitude, his non-crackerocity) would prove that deep down, conservatives believe he is qualified.

The Messiah’s a goner, but if we’re to have a Republican president, please, God, please, anyone but Sarah Palin. Anyone but an attractive, charismatic, principled, conservative, pro-life woman.

Just imagine, if only Sarah Palin were fugly or just a smidge less principled, we wouldn’t have to hate her policies so. Think of what an amazing world that would be. If Sarah Palin were just a little more homely, liberals would like her, too. AND THATS WHAT SCARES THEM. If she put on 20 pounds, all those chuckleheads in the left coast enclaves would suddenly want to sex her, or at least do her hair up real purty for her (or both, in the case of the bi’s). But would she ever do that? No. She is too committed to the sexiness to pander with frumpiness.

anyone but Sarah Palin. Anyone but an attractive, charismatic, principled, conservative, pro-life woman.

OK, sure, anyone but Palin and whoever the person that the second sentence refers to.

Mainstream politicians in Britain openly identify as socialists? Wow! Obviously the political spectrum in Britain is exactly the same as it is here! Oh sure, even the BNP supports the NHS but that’s cause they’re liberal fascists! The political spectrum is absolute! That’s why the conservatives who threw a coup against Gorbachev in 1991 are exactly the same as the Republican Party!

Sarah Palin is one of the most mendacious people to whom I’ve ever listened. It is the primary talent conservatives seek in their rulers. A person who is as disingenuous her and continue to have people support her necessarily translates to her being a superior person and conservatives are all about superiority especially if it hasn’t been earned. Her talent justifies everything from jingoism to larceny. Conservatives do not seek someone to represent them, they seek an individual to mislead them, because it is the measure of one’s ability to rule. They get a real kick out of the reaction she solicits from liberals. Rather than liberals being complicit in her dishonesty they react to it as if it is unexpected. Imagine the naivete’ of that reaction and one can understand the joy experienced by conservatives. ‘though I walk through the valley of death I shall fear no evil, for I am its partner.

So what’s the over-under on how quickly someone at ClownHall or NRO says Chile is better prepared than Haiti because Chile had Pinochet and Haiti just has black people?

WF

J– has found a Free Republic thread to that effect.
Recent reports of looting there, from WHITE PEOPLE — I don’t know how that is going to fit into the narrative.

Sarah Palin has only one principle: Give me what I want and nobody gets hurt.

Pro-life? A woman who shoots animals from a helicopter for fun?

I suggest you CONTINUE to jam your head even farther up your ass than it is now.

CONTINUE TO SPREAD THE WORD!!!!! said,
February 28, 2010 at 6:06

God rested on the Sabbath, Troofie.

Fortunately, much of Sadly, No! is atheist and ready to kick your ass 24/7!