Sep
25

Foto Funnies Pt. 1 1/2




Posted at 23:15 by Gavin M.

You know — and we don’t often say such things — following this Code Pink dealo has been like going down the freaking rabbit hole.

It’s important to note somewhere that right-wing rhetoric has gotten more snarly and bloodthirsty over the past few weeks, especially about the rapturous prospect of a really stupid and destructive attack on Iran, and about the need to repress the treasonous, murdering saboteurs (i.e. people like us) who are sapping America’s strength with their vile and cowardly lies, and so forth. This might be as good a place as any to make that observation in plain words — rather than contextually, as with the earlier posts down the page.

Still, it’s surprising even now how shoddy their crap is, but how tenacious even the flimsiest bit of misinformation can be when people want very badly to believe it. Here’s snooper, the same guy from the Gathering of Eagles comments, using the Code Pink Photoshop on his own site:

The Death Of Our Nation

And, so, true Patriots, the ones that have performed their duties to dig out the truth of these pathetic excuses of “troop supporters”, will expose and confront them all and, we shall overcome.

Are these “patriots” and do they really “support the troops”? I think not. They are the enemies within.

codepinkandmurderedtroops.jpg

These Code Pink Skanks do NOT support the troops. They support our enemies that are doing just what the banner depicts.

Where is the outrage on Capital Hill over this banner? No, by choice, others are superior over others and others are inferior. Plain and simple. The women in the photo above are inferior to all that is decent by American Standards regardless of the attempts of such cretins trying to redefine those same standards.

Muahaha, and thus we will crush and expose the traitors who are inferior to us, for we are American Standards, bwaha.

When somebody pointed out that the picture wasn’t real, snooper replied:

snooper Says:
September 24th, 2007 at 1:35 pm

Dear ass hole…I was there in DC with the Gathering of Eagles and Vets For Freedom. I saw the damn thing myself.

Try again ass hole.

And:

snooper Says:
September 24th, 2007 at 1:59 pm

Prove it wasn’t moron.

I was there and hundreds of us saw it.

No matter how your kind try to spin it, you have showed your true colors…YELLOW.

Have a nice day. Your above post is the last.

Have fun in your slippery slope into the Abyss of Obscurity.

Welp, okay. Here’s a statement (also from yesterday) from the guy at the Two Malcontents blog who Photoshopped the banner, although he also seems to have something of a problem in remembering things that don’t exist:

I created the graphic and those exact words are from Code Pink’s website. That is Medea Benjamin and other Code Pinko’s in the graphic. Under the graphic I did have a disclaimer saying that though the words are from Code Pink, I altered their original banner. I also provided a link to those exact words. However, that was over a year ago so my mistake to not continually add the disclaimer. Sorry for any confusion.

So much for the hundreds of people in the Gathering of Eagles who saw the banner with their own eyes. But did Code Pink actually say “We support the murder of the American troops?” Naturally, this seems a bit unlikely, and a look at the original post shows that, nope, he never attributed those words to Code Pink at all, and he never linked to their website, and in fact it all seems like a giant fib, because here’s all it says:

behindfluff.png

(The watermarks on the pic were apparently added later.) If you’re having trouble following this, it gets weirder. Beth* of the big right-wing blog BlueStarChronicles came wandering through again, and somehow managed to interpret the whole thing like this:

Fake But Accurate Depiction Of Code Pink

There’s a debate going on at a sad little leftist blog about the difference between Dan Rather’s ‘fake but accurate’ news and the ‘fake but accurate’ photoshop below. Talk about parsing words, they are downright Clintonesque …. it depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.

Well, we can see how it might be confusing. Let us rephrase: The picture “is” Photoshopped.

Beth then takes the opportunity to repeat a particularly vicious lie about Code Pink:

After all, [Code Pink] gave $650,000 to the terrorists fighting our soldiers thereby providing material aid and comfort to our enemies …. so yes, they do support those who are killing our Soldiers. They are probably wishing they had thought to write that on the banner themselves.

Now where did that come from? Good cripes, we’re back to the Two Malcontents guys again:

The Real Code Pink

code_pink_support0.jpg

During the last week of December 2004, Benjamin announced in Amman, Jordan that Global Exchange, Code Pink, and Families for Peace would be donating a combined $600,000 in medical supplies and cash to the terrorist insurgents who were fighting American troops in Fallujah, Iraq. This news was reported by Agence France Press but was picked up by only two small news outlets. In an article dated January 1, 2005, the leftist online publication Peace and Resistance reported that Rep. Henry Waxman (D – California) had written a letter addressed to the American ambassador in Amman, Jordan to help facilitate the transport of this aid through Customs. Fernando Suarez Del Solar – an antiwar activist whose son, a 20-year-old Marine, was killed in Iraq on March 27, 2003 – carried Waxman’s letter.

He was accompanied on the trip by other family members of soldiers who had been killed in Iraq, as well as relatives of victims who had been killed in the 9/11 attacks. Said Benjamin, “I don’t know of any other case in history in which the parents of fallen soldiers collected medicine . . . for the families of the ‘other side.’ It is a reflection of a growing movement in the United States . . . opposed to the unjust nature of this war. This is the positive face of the American people which we would like to show . . . so that we are not looked at with animosity but with love. Our hearts go out to the people of Fallujah and to all the Iraqi people.”

This text isn’t labeled well, but it comes from David Horowitz’s hilariously paranoid DiscoverTheNetwork(s) site (more about Horowitz in Part II). Unmentioned and carefully avoided are the facts that the donation was to aid civilian refugees of Fallujah and that other sponsors included Disney, Warner Brothers, Target, Ernst & Young, and Honeywell.

In other words, the claim that Code Pink donated $600,000 to terrorists “is” a lie.

More to come after this word from our sponsor!


* The right-bloggers Darleen, Beth, and LindaSog came over at about the same time, and I got them mixed up. We’re talking about Beth here.

211 Comments »

  1. J. Smith said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:23

    I smells me a libel suit . . .

  2. mdhatter said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:24

    May those that love us, love us.
    And those that don’t love us,
    May God turn their hearts.
    And if He doesn’t turn their hearts,
    May He turn their ankles
    So we will know them by their limping.

  3. Legalize said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:29

    For once, I think I agree as to the applicability of a potential defamation suit. This one is clearly malicious and done with full knowledge of its falsity.

    But what disturbs me is the psychosis of these people. “PROVE that the sign is fake!” They want so desperately to believe the voices in their heads, and must be suffering from some mass, violent delusion. I don’t know what this psychological phenomenon is, but it seems to manifest itself identically across a somewhat sizeable segment of the population. Anyone have any thoughts as to how this is occuring?

  4. Snowwy said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:35

    I wonder how long it’ll be before some right-wingers form a band called “Genocidal Tendencies”, then wonder what the problem is.

  5. Candy said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:37

    I get the very bad feeling they’re only about a millimeter away from serious violence. All it would take would be for one of them to pick up a gun . . .

    I don’t think they have the stones for street fighting, (unless the victim is old and frail), but sniping would be right up their alley.

  6. JK47 said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:41

    Try again ass hole.

    It’s spelled “asshole,” asshole.

  7. Ripley said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:42

    I’m just a simple unfrozen caveman lawyer, but even I can tell the banner’s been altered, no matter what size the picture. Seriously, come on…

    It doesn’t occur to ‘snooper’ that there would be pictures of the alleged banner from multiple angles if it were actually used in a march? That clown is too stupid for pants. And evidently, quite the little liar.

  8. caliph garrett said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:43

    The women in the photo above are inferior to all that is decent by American Standards

    These American Standards?

  9. Coach Kupchek said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:44

    Stuff like this belongs on a blog called “Sadly, Sad!”

    This weird little saga seems like it should be satire . . . someone playing the role of the crazed wingnut . . . except it’s for real.

  10. MzNicky said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:44

    Legalize: Teh real BDS? They’ve been trying to defend The Chimpinator so long their brains have turned to dogshit?

    It seems more like the mass hysteria that afflicted young Puritan maidens and caused them to all faint and writhe on the floor at once and accuse the old lady next door of being a witch. I mean, these neo-psychopaths are so slobbering at the bit for some mass burnings and executions you can smell it. Ewwwww.

  11. Gary Ruppert said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:45

    The fact is … the Islamofascists … the LIEBERALS … uh … the president …

    I got nothing.

    Kevin?

  12. Ripley said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:48

    Ah, maybe I was too hard on the little guy. How bout this?

    confabulate

    Function: intransitive verb
    Inflected Form(s): -lat·ed; -lat·ing
    Etymology: Latin confabulatus, past participle of confabulari, from com- + fabulari to talk, from fabula story — more at FABLE
    1: to talk informally : CHAT
    2: to hold a discussion : CONFER
    3: to fill in gaps in memory by fabrication

  13. tigrismus said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:50

    There was a debate about Dan Rather? LindaSoG said something dopey, someone intimated she was filled to the uttermost with beans, after which she crowed victory. Maybe it’s just more Clintonesque parsing on my part, but that’s not what I would call a “debate.”

  14. BiggerBill said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:54

    But, but, see, the kerning, its…the fact that there is no kerning means it got to be real, because reality is whatever the wingnuts say it is. Right, Snoopy?

  15. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:57

    There was a debate about Dan Rather?

    There totally was and I wept at the damage done to my fellow communist.

  16. FlipYrWhig said,

    September 25, 2007 at 23:58

    It seems more like the mass hysteria that afflicted young Puritan maidens

    I’ve heard a few times that that might have been caused by ergotism, a reaction to a parasite called ergot that grows on grain crops and has psychoactive effects when eaten. Maybe the wingnuts have been sharing some tainted bread, or, more likely, Cheetohs.

  17. J— said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:10

    Darleen of the big right-wing blog BlueStarChronicles came wandering through again, and somehow managed to interpret the whole thing like this:

    That was Beth. Darleen blogs at her own site and at the Protein Wisdom Pub.

  18. Candy said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:22

    Protein Wisdom Pub – every time I hear that I picture wingnuts sitting around in candlelit dimness at tables for two sipping from 10cc shot glasses filled with milky viscous fluid.

    Sorry.

  19. Gavin M. said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:24

    That was Beth.

    Fixed — thanks!

  20. celticgirl said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:25

    So Darleen hangs out over at bugfuckcrazy Godlstein’s place? Well color me surprised!

    And Candy? EWWWWWWWWWW

  21. Snorghagen said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:28

    Legalize wrote:

    They want so desperately to believe the voices in their heads, and must be suffering from some mass, violent delusion. I don’t know what this psychological phenomenon is, but it seems to manifest itself identically across a somewhat sizeable segment of the population. Anyone have any thoughts as to how this is occuring?

    It’s not easy understanding how these guys’ minds work. My guess is that after years of believing that wingnuttery was going to be the wave of the future, they’re dimly beginning to realize that they’re becoming hopelessly politically marginalized. The old saying ‘where there is no real left, there you will find the ultra-left’ applies to the right as well – as the far-right movement collapses into a disorganized collection of embittered crackpots, it decouples from any link to reality and retreats deeper into ultra-extremism and delusion.

    As to whether their frustration and anger will lead to political violence… well, I guess we’ll see.

  22. pch1013 said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:31

    That Snoopy character “is” completely insane.

  23. zellaby said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:33

    Sue them. . .

  24. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:37

    Yep. As we get closer to November ’08, and the in spite of the unwillingness of the elected Dems to assert any real power, the desperation and anger of the wingnuts as they watch the very last, sad, tattered little trappings of power fall in shreds around the not just naked, but weak emperor are going to get ugly.

    I don’t see any way for them to get organized, but some political violence in scattered locations is very likely. It’ll take a couple of major events (martial law, postponed elections, incarceration of political opponents) to truly unleash chaos, but a hightened situational awareness, ready access to defensive weapons, regular communications schedule (we gotta take care of each other) and reasonable contingency planning would not be a waste of time….

    mikey

  25. Snowwy said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:39

    Snorghagen-

    I’m not betting they’ll go quietly. Oklahoma City was only the beginning, and we didn’t get more and worse because the national political establish busied itself destroying Clinton and then stealing an election for the GOP.

    Almost as if it was all to satisfy the nutbags and stave off a wave of domestic terrorism.

    Not that I believe this. Correlation is not causation and all that…

  26. isaac said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:42

    psychadelic cheetoes?

  27. zellaby said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:42

    Change your administration… Please. . .

  28. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:43

    Where is the outrage on Capital Hill over this banner? No, by choice, others are superior over others and others are inferior. Plain and simple. The women in the photo above are inferior to all that is decent by American Standards regardless of the attempts of such cretins trying to redefine those same standards.

    Whu??? Who wrote this, Kaye Grogan?

  29. zellaby said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:45

    Weird the difference in political temperature now we have Gordon Brown (ish). . .

  30. zellaby said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:46

    in the UK.. your puppy etc. . . . 105th State etc……..

  31. Miller said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:48

    Where are all the rightwingy typeface experts when they’re needed?

    Seems easy to see that the banner has folds and bends, but the text does not.

    As a side note, leaving the reality-based community appears to lead to a bottomless pit of confabulous fantasy.

  32. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:51

    And um, not to pick nits here, but if you are a combat infantryman who is part of an occupying force, and you are killed, by what stretch of the legal definition is that murder? You’re a combat casualty. KIA. Hors de combat.

    And if you catch a round of 7.65 from a nearsighted iraq eleven bravo, that would be a friendly fire casualty.

    About the only way you could be murdered would be if one of your fellow soldiers or marines decided to grease your ass ’cause you were an asshole or he owed you a bunch of money from the pinochle game.

    Attention, Gathering of Dimwits. Just because you are an American, your death in combat is not granted special status. You start wars, you take casualties. If you can’t live with it, here’s a suggestion: Keep your goddam army in your pocket.

    Sheesh, next these assclowns will be claiming Iran doesn’t have any right to defend her interests on the other side of the border.

    Huh? Oh. Figures…

    mikey

  33. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:57

    Eiether Snoop’s page has been pulled or my connection is the shits. It’s not loading for me anyway.

    Where is the outrage on Capital Hill over this banner?
    (That his people dreamed up in Photoshop.) I too am curious and encourage Snoop to distribute his “scoop” to politicians and press people, preferably from a traceable address. We might get outrage and we’d certainly get laughs.

    Do you think any of these wingnuts passed grade 8? No, by choice, others are superior over others and others are inferior. Plain and simple. That’s plain and simple alright.

  34. M. Bouffant said,

    September 26, 2007 at 0:59

    Snooper wants to “Take Our Country Back,” yet the first petition to sign on his website involves “Move America Forward.” Cognitive dissonance. And he identifies himself as as a DAV (Disabled American Veteran). More likely to be psychological, or just half of his brain missing, than a trick knee or whatever. And what a mess that site is. More effing junk than Pammy Atlas’ mess. And hours to load.

  35. Luke said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:04

    I think you missed the classic part on Snooper’s site where Snooper said:

    ____________________________
    I saw the shredding of it.

    UPDATE: I have been informed that the picture in question was not the one we saw shredded in DC.

    My bad.

    The banner was displayed in CA at a separate rally.

    Edited By Siteowner
    Snooper | Homepage | 09.24.07 – 5:41 pm | #
    ______________________________________

  36. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:07

    Just because you are an American, your death in combat is not granted special status. You start wars, you take casualties.

    This is what I’ve stopped trying to figure out. See, in the mind of Wingnuts, two simultaneous trains of narrative thoughts exist:

    1) Our volunteer army knows what they’ve taken on and they are brave, courageous, noble, and we can accept their sacrifice and any bill proposed by the Democrats to bring them home or set a limit for the time they serve is doing them an injustice. Also, our troops are doing wonderful things bringing democracy to the grateful people of Iraq, who love us for it. And it’s all being done in the name of the innocent American civilians who were slaughtered on 9/11.

    2) All death and injury to American troops is bloody murder, even when it’s being done by troops on the side we are fighting. Those who supply weapons to our opponents are murderers – except in the case where its the same guy who supplies weapons to us. Those who dare criticize the troops’ commander are de-facto murdering the troops, and make them cry. And the people of Iraq are uncivilized, ungrateful, treacherous dogs who don’t accept their responsiblity AND they should all be killed as a first resort since they’re untrustworth. And all the innocent Iraqi civilians who died as a result of the war are simply collateral damage in the Global War on Terror, and their deaths are Worth It.

    One has to be psychotic to have both of those narratives existing in one’s head, and I no longer try to understand or empathize with a person like that.

  37. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:12

    Linda Soggybottom will have heart failure when she sees this.

    US Coast Guard comes to aid of Iranian fisherman in Persian Gulf

    The US Coast Guard came to the aid of an unconscious Iranian fisherman in the sensitive waters around Iraq’s oil terminals, the guard announced Friday.

    An Iranian fishing vessel approached a US coast guard ship charged with guarding Iraq’s two oil terminals in the northern waters of the Persian Gulf on Aug. 24 and asked for assistance.

    The US ship’s medic gave first aid to an unconscious crew member, pumping oxygen into his lungs before instructing the Iranian ship’s captain to return to port to receive additional medical help for the crew member.

  38. nilsey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:12

    yeah, the wingnuts are going insane lately. you oughta read the whinefest the marble douchebag put up recently in re patriotism. i can only imagine his face getting redder than his silly beard as he types the little rant.

  39. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:12

    drat. tag.

  40. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:20

    I particularly like Snoop’s methodology of proof -

    1) Assert something is real

    2) In the face of criticism of its veracity, continue to assert its truth, claiming to have eye-witnessed it AND to possession of additional photos.

    3) Never submit claimed evidence.

    4) challenge questioners to submit evidence that has not been cited (“can you submit the original photo?”)

    5) Admit to a change in the venue of the supposed occurence.

    6) Continue not to submit the claimed evidence.

    Now, what does this remind me of…….???

    1) Write a personal memoir of one’s experience in wartime

    2) in the face of criticism of its veracity, allow your editors to investigate your story.

    3) Admit to a change in the venue of one of the incidents

    4) Submit to a second investigation, where the conclusion is a negative, as in “No one else could confirmed these things happened.”

    5) Obey orders not to speak further about it.

    You know, it seems to me that Scott Thomas Beauchamp’s story holds up with a lot more credibility than ole Snoopy’s does.

  41. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:21

    Not a bad summary g, but I’d suggest this edit:

    And all the innocent Iraqis who died as a result of the war are simply Terrorists, and they deserved It.

  42. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:29

    g and thunder, don’t forget the part of the narrative where they say “if they’d just let our guys take the gloves off, this thing’d be over. These silly rules only hamstring our courageous fighters”….

    mikey

  43. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:40

    I’ve got the perfect example of that, mikey:

    We ought to double Gitmo.

    The Mittster can pander with the best of ‘em.

  44. White, Suburban, God-Fearing said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:43

    I can’t help but laugh at you guys, with all this, “the picture was not real, the facts-the shmacts, etc. etc. .

    We established back in 2004 (NYT, Oct. 17, 2004) that: “You belong to what we call the reality-based community, which is defined as people who believe in judicious study of discernible reality. … That’s not the way the world really works anymore, when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

    Who cares if the banner was real or not, in our gut we believe in its divine truthiness…

  45. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:45

    These silly rules only hamstring our courageous fighters

    They also hamstring our courageous toilet sexxors.

  46. a different brad said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:46

    Man, why do you have to be on the other coast, mikey? I don’t know anyone sane with an arms cache over here.

    Also, for Legalize and others trying to make sense of this, read John Dean’s Conservatives Without Conscience. I’m doing so now, and damn if it doesn’t explain a whole hell of a lot.
    (Yes, I know it’s an oldish book in political terms, and he has a new one out, but I have limited non-academic reading time.)

  47. Gary Ruppert said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:49

    We should make sure we finish the prison camps in the heartland so we can imprison the liberal and faggot traiters for there perfity.

  48. Larry said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:49

    Hey, did I ever tell you guys the one about the others who went up to the others and were all like, “others, where are the others?”. And the others were like, “the others?”. And the others are like, “NO, others, the OTHERS.”

    Tell me if I never told you guys, because it’s like HYSTERICAL. (Prove it’s not, more ons.)

  49. Gary Ruppert said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:51

    P:rove that you are patriots, you leftist scum. Oh. You cannot. qwel surpriseh. You know nothing of history and lie to twist the facts to brainwash the weak.

  50. Larry said,

    September 26, 2007 at 1:55

    Prove that we’re not, jer kuh.

    Hey, I think I’ve got a future in rightwing blogging! (Gets all rosy cheeked, eats Cheetoh.)

  51. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:06

    I particularly like Snoop’s methodology of proof -

    I’m surprised he didn’t photoshop himself standing near the banner waving his fist. After all, he was there, he saw it.

  52. TR said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:07

    I love the “fake but accurate” sneer about Rather’s memo thing. Do those people still circle-jerk over that one? Is that the last good moment they’ve had? 2004?

    There were rewards of $10,000 offered for anyone who could provide any proof that George W. Bush was at that Alabama Air Nat’l Guard post. A photo, a news story, a ceremony program, anything showing George W. Bush was actually there. And no one came forward to accept. No one on that base remembers him, and plenty of people have said he was never there. Sounds like an accurate allegation to me.

    Of course, I’m not a drooling moron. (Sorry, “Republican.” Same difference.)

  53. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:07

    is there a pic of snoop? maybe we can give him a hand with his reality project.

  54. Otto Man said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:12

    You know nothing of history and lie to twist the facts to brainwash the weak.

    But I thought all the professional historians at the snooty universities were liberals? Which is it?

    Seriously, Gary, name us five credentialed historians who support the conservative world view. Five.

    Heck, I’ll spot you Victor Davis Oedipus Rex Hanson. That leaves you four more.

    You claim to be so knowledgeable about history, so please enlighten us as to your favorite historians over there on Bizarro World.

  55. Vince Aut Morire » Blog Archive » Paranoid Freak Lunatic Comment Of The Day said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:12

    [...] like hanging out at Sadly, Blow! They’re [...]

  56. RandomObserver said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:13

    “[Code Pink] gave $650,000 to the terrorists fighting our soldiers thereby providing material aid and comfort to our enemies.”

    That must be why Code Pink is in severe legal trouble right now and its leaders are in jail on charges of treason…

  57. Colleen said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:23

    One of the numbnuts or numbnutlessnuts said this, “There’s a debate going on at a sad little leftist blog …”. Well they may have the leftist part right but in between the utter horror of reading about these idiots, I’m laughing my ass off. Thanks for that and to mdhatter, I have that little Irish saying right above my toilet. If there were a god about 20 some percent of this country would be hobbling around with their twisted ankles. Assholes. Delusional assholes.

  58. RubDMC said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:24

    I think there’s some serious misogyny among teh wingnuts, including among wingnut women (wingnettes?) like Darleen, Beth, et al.

    I mean, how can somebody look at a picture of such overtly feminine women (bright smiles, floppy hats, parasols – Code Pink, fer cryin’ out loud) and ascribe murderous intent and treachery to them?

    But I guess to the wingnut ‘mind’ (and I use the term loosely), they aren’t a bunch of overtly feminine women. They’re some kind of subhuman creature to be feared and loathed.

    As my old therapist used to say, “Somebody’s got some issues now, don’t they?”

  59. a different brad said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:28

    mikey, please do us all the favor of responding to Vince’s linked post above. He actually questions your patriotism. I gave him a little heads up, but can’t bring the smackdown like you can.

  60. C. elegans said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:40

    teh Snoopster writes:

    Have fun in your slippery slope into the Abyss of Obscurity.

    Yeah, yeah. I rode this at Six Flags over Texas–it’s the one right next to the Shock Wave. Totally not worth the 2.5 hours I waited in line.

  61. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:41

    I think we need a portrait of Vinnie. Can we photoshop in the corncob hat?

  62. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 2:54

    But I guess to the wingnut ‘mind’ (and I use the term loosely), they aren’t a bunch of overtly feminine women. They’re some kind of subhuman creature to be feared and loathed.

    Actually, Rub, wingnuts reserve a special visciousness for women opponents. Recall if you will the truly nasty rejoicing and yuk-yuks at the death of Rachel Corrie and even Marla Ruzika – I can’t figure out why they hated her, but they surprisingly did – the vile accusations at Jill Carroll in captivity, and the absolute ugliness of their talk about Cindy Sheehan.

    It’s another side of the same coin where they attempt to emasculate their male opponents, but with women it’s far more viscious, because the women are already not-men, so they try to make them not-human, I guess, there’s no place else for them to push it.

  63. Notorious P.A.T. said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:00

    leaving the reality-based community appears to lead to a bottomless pit of confabulous fantasy

    Boy, that’s for sure. Lately I’ve been trying to figure out how to coax back to reality people who have willingly abandoned it. How do you use pieces of reality to convince a person who rejects reality? Right now I’m thinking we may just have to build a humongous simulacrum and put all the wingnuts in it, complete with holographic “leftists” sneaking around, trying to kill American troops so that al-Qaeda can come to America and institute Sharia law (death to gays, no rights for women, down with science, etc) which dovetails so well with Leftist ideology.

    We’d feed them, of course, and give them everything they need to stay alive, just mentally quarantine them while the rest of us run the country.

  64. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:03

    mikey, please do us all the favor of responding to Vince’s linked post above. He actually questions your patriotism.

    Vinnie’s site has no commenters. He’s tracking back for the attention. Ignoring the twit might be more effective.

  65. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:11

    I don’t know how to respond to these drooling thugs, db.

    Patriotism. Psshhh. What is it? Is it believing America can do no wrong? Is it looking away when crimes are committed, when everything we stood against in Nuremburg becomes the stated policy of the leadership? Should we prosecute someone who burns a flag, or a war profiteer? Does the American leadership believe in democracy? If so, what’s the deal with Hamas? Or with signing statements?

    I didn’t go over there to kill a bunch of people who I’d actually like if I’d been allowed to meet them instead of shoot at them. I didn’t go over there to defend your fucking freedom, or the constitution, primarily because neither of them was threatened, and secondarily because I really didn’t give a fuck. I went over there ’cause I was too chicken to go to canada. It was just easier to go along to get along.

    And once I got there, I only fought to survive, and to keep my friends alive, and maybe to help these damn kids get through the first 90 days so they could get their head out of their ass and maybe make it home too.

    I don’t know the deal with Vinnie. I think he was a squid, so I’m not sure if he’s ever seen combat. Not that that’s a bad thing for him. But why he has so much hatred and takes such joy in warfare, I can’t even begin to understand. He’s like an alien being to me – whatever humanity he has, we don’t seem to have a shared experience.

    Ultimately, the weird, and sort of scary part, is a teenage surfer from California got put in a place of madness and horror, and thrived. I’ve spent decades trying to understand what that means. What was it in me that allowed me to do the things I did and come home, not unscathed, but generally in one piece?

    I know there are combat veterans who are supportive of more wars. I can’t get my tiny mind around that, but there it is. Look. It comes down to this. Humans have conflicts. I’m not anti-violence, and I’ll never lay down for anyone. But acceptable violence is between people with grievances, not nations who send millions of kids who don’t have a stake in the fight to learn to kill without thought, and to die without honor.

    Anyone who actively works to end war is not your enemy, vinnie. They are working for the good of mankind. Anybody who thinks will understand that wars are not good, and peace is very good. To attack those who would end war is to act against the best interests of all of humankind. You don’t have to hate muslims, or iraqis, or iranians, or mexicans, or chinese. You can simply try to live a good life in peace with your fellow human beings.

    It doesn’t make you weak, it makes you strong. You don’t have to lay down your weapons, but you don’t have to use them on innocents. And you DO have a responsibility to be able to tell the difference…

    mikey

  66. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:27

    Vinnie’s a knob who hasn’t actually made any arguments here as far as I can tell. A big so what.

  67. lobbey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:28

    qwel surpriseh

    I’m calling fake Gary, the real one at last had a spell checker, if no idea about grammar.

  68. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:35

    Wonderful words mikey.

    I think Lesley’s right, Vinnie’s trolling for attention, and rewarding him would be more than he deserves.

    mikey I know you’re in California, not sure exactly where, what you said above about “I only fought to survive, and to keep my friends alive, and maybe to help these damn kids get through the first 90 days so they could get their head out of their ass and maybe make it home too.” – there’s an incredible piece of theatre being performed now in Los Angeles over the next 2 weeks or so, and after that it goes to NYC, to Brooklyn, and it’s about young men just like that in Iraq, only not American men, but instead young men from the UK.

    Black Watch, Los Angeles

    Black Watch, Brooklyn

    For any of you who live close enough, have enough disposable income, or have an interest in live theatre, you will not regret seeing this play. It is an amazing performance.

  69. M. Bouffant said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:49

    mikey: it’s just fear of the other. 19 people (backed by, what 100 or so others, at most) make an attack on us for religio-political reasons, and to Vinnie & his kind, every last person on earth of that religion, or who agrees w/ even some of the political reasoning behind the attack is, instantly & forever, the sworn enemy of All That Is Good (us). Yet there was no sudden backlash against lapsed Catholic ex-Army guys when McVeigh blew up the OKC Federal bldg.

    I knew a guy in high school who hated all black people ’cause he’d been relieved of his wallet by black kids a couple of times. But he could have been mugged twice a day for a month by white kids, and because he was white, he never would’ve hated all white people.

    This fearof/agression towards the other may have been useful or even necessary for survival earlier in human history (tribalism @ its finest, when there was nothing but tribes) but to continue it in this modern, nation-filled ( a nation, especially the U. S., is not a tribe) globalised world becomes counter-productive very quickly. As we see in current events.

    We can only hope that those “hard-wired” for fear of the other eventually get bred out of the gene pool, before they destroy us all w/ their unreasoned stone age reactions.

    (How’s that for a pile of sissified, liberal, gawd-hating evolutionary wingnuttery? Pretty good, huh?)

  70. Insuffrable Grammarian said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:50

    I’m sorry, but at this point, may I interject and plead with those of you who insist upon ending your comments with the wan and inappropriate ellipsis ( … ), rather than the forceful and correct period (.), to PLEASE stop it. It makes your comment look like it’s wandering down the slippery slope toward the abyss, or whatever. Seriously, it’s passive-aggressive punctuation. Have the courage of your statements, commenters! No need to trail off indecisively, as if your comment is questionable and you’ve decided to go lie down somewhere and think about it!

    Use a PERIOD, dammit!

    Sorry, I’m through now. Carry on.

  71. D. Sidhe said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:53

    I deeply regret, at moments like this, that I did not take a photo of the thousand pink origami cranes I mailed to Code Pink. They were used, I note, in a peace rally in San Francisco.

    Top that, you other liberal fifth columnists!

  72. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:54

    There’s some serious comma abuse up there…

  73. The Abyss said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:57

    The ellipses wander down, they find they can’t climb back up the slippery slope, and then I eats them! More ellipses, please…

  74. M. Bouffant said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:57

    g: What mikey said is the absolute truth about war. When the shit hits the fan, no one is fighting for Mom, apple pie, Chevrolet or anything but their lives & the lives of their squad, maybe platoon, possibly company. No one goes over the top to get the machine gun nest ’cause he gives a shit about democracy, or communism, or saving his sister’s virginity from the alien hordes, it’s just so he & his bros. right there then don’t get killed.

  75. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 3:59

    No disputing it M Bouffant.

    Now, you’re in LA, right? Get on over to UCLALive and see “Black Watch”!

  76. M. Bouffant said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:07

    Grammarian, sometimes when I trail off it’s ’cause if I were speaking, I would indeed be trailing off, often to avoid restating the obvious, which most of those here get, & needn’t be reminded of. (Ooops, dangling participle…)
    It’s a perfectly legit use of punctuation. Should you indeed find specific instances where the ellipse is not proper, do let us know. Remember, blogging is semi-conversational (which is no excuse for bad grammar or spelling errors) but as such it requires a slightly different punctuational palette then those dry academic papers you’re used to cranking out.

  77. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:08

    Man, why do you have to be on the other coast, mikey? I don’t know anyone sane with an arms cache over here.

    This has been niggling about in my lizard brain. Bugging me like an itch you can’t scratch in public. Here’s what I think.

    Toss all the baggage, all the waste, all the propaganda from all sides over the side of the boat and what do you have? Firearms are a mechanical device. They have a number of purposes, and can be misused.

    You have a drill, right? If you went around drilling holes in your neighbors plumbing, in their cars, in their children, this would constitute a mis-use of the drill.

    Firearms are a tool. You should not use them for wrong purposes. You should, however, recognize that when you actually DO need that specific tool, you need it now and you better know how it works.

    Anything can be misused. McVeigh misused fucking fertilizer fer crissakes. But everything has tremendous value when used appropriately. Are there crazy people with guns? Yep. But we’ll also sell a 400 horsepower automobile to a drunk with rage issues without a thought.

    Sure, this country needs an honest dialog about guns and their place in our cities. But in the cold light of honest analytics, I’m going to predict that honest dialog is at least a few decades out. In the meantime, it does NOT make you, or you, or even you over there, a murdering thug to own a weapon and learn how to deploy it in extremis. It’s a classic case of the baby being all mixed up with the bathwater. Neither’s going to be thrown out anytime soon. So it’s probably time to think about what it all means, how it might affect you, and think about a road trip to a gun-friendly state.

    It’s at least worth as much thought as anything else. The world, well, she seems a tad precarious right about now….

    mikey

  78. Kathleen said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:08

    hmmm, I wonder why no one has appeared yet in this thread to defy us sad little leftists. COuld they finally have realized Gavin’s complete pwnage of them?

    ha ha

  79. John O said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:09

    So seldom have so few given to so few.

    Winston Dubya Churchill.

    I love the 30%ers. They’re so deeply “imbedded” in their own words and thoughts they make asses of themselves daily.

    Obvious shit, a.k.a., truth, or even “probability” means nothing to them.

    It’s like I always say: The GOP would be a big zero without their homophobic, xenophobic, racist, uneducated, uninformed base.

    It’s sort of spectacular, in a fascist kind of way.

  80. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:11

    Gramarian.

    Nope.

    I grew up with Herb Caen.

    Let me give you three words. And one elipsis.

    Three. Dot. Journalism.

    It’s where I come from, and part of who I am.

    Sorry….

    mikey

  81. M. Bouffant said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:15

    g, I know you weren’t disputing it, but I wasn’t quite sure if you got that it wasn’t just mikey’s own personal story/conclusion. I’m in fabulous WeHo, but I’m depressed, agoraphobic, anhedonic & w/o income, let alone the disposable type. I’ve read a bit about Black Watch, but at this stage I don’t need anything else bumming me out.

    BTW, was Bert’s in Madison Park still an IGA when you were there?

  82. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:19

    If anyone needs a break from the rightwing ugliness, I highly recommend NTodd’s dogblog. Two dogz, three catz, two of ‘em punkz, and they all cuddle on the same couch.

    And a dog sliding down a slippery slope repeatedly. Must be a liberal.

  83. M. Bouffant said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:19

    Herb Caen. Yeah. Grew up w/ him too. Practically the original blogger. Had other three dot journalists in other places, but none compared. Of course few places compared well to San Francisco in those days.

  84. Some Guy said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:20

    First: mikey, guns are a tool with one goal in mind: kill things. Be it people, deer, fluffy little harmless squirelles with innocent wittle eyes as they munch on the last Ritz cracker of the Fall, guns kill things.
    Target shooting? Is practice for killing things. Weither that skill is utilized or not, it’s what it is.
    Drills, knives, baseball bats, 16 tonne weights, they have other uses. Guns really don’t.

    Now then. Since S,N! see fit to further destroy my mind and soul.
    How shit-faced drunk do you have to be to think that the group who wants to pay the troops more, treat the troops better, ensure the livelihood of them and their families, allow them the rest and down time they need, and, most impotently, take them out of the downward spiral hell hole that has ruined, warped, or simpled ended the lives of tens of thousand of troops, not to mention wasted a trillion dollars, is IN FAVOR of the troops suffering?

    I was thinking a few days back. This is, verbatim, exactly as if believe that anyone who says, “Michal Vick is a douche bag” hates dogs and wants dogs to suffer. That’s what they’re arguing. You hate what Vick did? Why do you hate dogs? Why do you want dogs to die?

    You can’t fight that level of stupid.

  85. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:22

    I don’t know that Black Watch would bum you out – I always find an evening like that very cathartic and thus very invigorating. Plus I am so full of admiration for the performers and creators of the piece.

    Because its Scottish and not American, the sentiment is a bit different. I spoke with one person with the show; he says this sort of knee-jerk “Support the Troops” sentiment we Americans profess, in reaction to myth/reality from Vietnam, just isn’t there in Britain. No hostility, of course, but not this sort of Sacred-Cow sentimentalizing.

    Also the piece has a lot of depth about them being the famous Black Watch regiment, which doesn’t really resonate here in the US.

    Still – it’s an amazing piece of theatre.

    Yeah, Berts was an IGA when I first was there, but turned into a Red Apple later.

    Just like Rogers over on MLK and 23rd was a Thriftway or something before it became a Red Apple, too.

  86. John O said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:22

    Right on, Mikey. I’m not a gun owner, though the sniper-rifle thing has a lot of appeal to me, but I’m a fucking Constitutionalist, and you take the good with the bad.

    I think our gun laws, with a few exceptions like really thorough background checks regardless of purchasing circumstances, are OK.

    I also feel no pain whatsoever for the adults of kids who shoot other kids. The herd has a way of thinning itself out.

    On a related note, I don’t really understand child restraint LAWS when it comes to motor vehicles. Seems to me the punishment of watching your kid fly through the windshield and get splattered all over the pavement is beautifully self-contained.

    Why pile on?

    And I’m not suggesting people shouldn’t buckle kids up. I’m suggesting if they don’t, there isn’t any big social impact.

  87. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:29

    Uh, John….

    {nope, not going to get drawn into it. It’s almost time for dinner.}

  88. John O said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:31

    Michael Vick is a thug loser.

    I’m not truly familiar with the point you’re trying to make, Some Guy, but the man is a weird sort of sadist, regardless of “culture.”

    And since I eat meat, I get the philosophical argument. There’s just something about watching suffering for suffering’s sake I find repulsive.

    So, M. Vick can get back to his thug roots, take what money he has left, and risk it all on his sadism. Don’t care. Lots of animals die in horrible circumstances.

    I watch the Discovery Channel.

  89. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:34

    Pork chops in a Dijon mustard white wine sauce with cornichons; buttered noodles and baby greens salad with forme d’aubert and walnuts.

    A nice Alsatian pinot blanc.

  90. Insuffrable Grammarian said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:35

    Okay, fine. Misuse ellipses all you want and look like a bunch of indecisive illiterate pussies. See if I care.

  91. John O said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:35

    g, it’s OK.

    If I bought a sniper rifle, I can assure you at a very, very high probability I wouldn’t kill anyone with it.

    I was a good thrower of the frisbee, a good shooter of the basketball, a good striker of the golf ball, etc. I like the concept of being able to hit targets from far away. Doesn’t mean I want to hurt anyone doing so.

    Repeating now: I do not own a gun, never have, and just for emphasis, Mom wouldn’t even let me have a BB gun, which subjected me to much humiliation in the rural environment in which I was raised.

    And I would never shoot or even hurt any animal that wasn’t attacking me. Except for insects. They can all die as long as it is done individually, as far as I’m concerned. :-)

  92. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:37

    John, I kill rats even though they’re not hurting me. But they are hurting my house and car, so maybe that’s justification.

    I also use a humane method. I electrocute them. Snap traps don’t work (they outsmart them) and poison just makes them rot in your walls or lets your dog eat them and get sick.

    Never, ever, ever, ever use a glue trap to kill rodents. That is the sickest, most horrific torture you could ever imagine.

    Electrocute ‘em. It works.

  93. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:40

    g! Man, we’re on the same track tonight. I’m doing a breaded, stuffed top loin pork chop, garlic and herb shells, fresh sweet corn (I’m totally out of control on the fresh corn right now – think I might need an intervention), cole slaw and corn bread.

    Food is way more fun than guns, or wingnuts, or beth.

    Just sayin…

    mikey

  94. M. Bouffant said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:42

    Oh, guns can be a fun way to destroy property w/o hurting anyone. Safer than dynamiting all those old tee vee sets & clock-radios.
    John O., there can be a big social impact. Not everyone who is shot, or goes through a windshield, dies quickly & cleanly. As often as not, they live, but horribly, often paralyzed, deformed or disfigured for life. How ’bout the adults of the children who are shot? Or the children who aren’t old enough to put themselves in the safety seat? Don’t you libertarian types believe in “personal responsibility?” Parents should take responsibility for their children, and I don’t think parents should be allowed not to be responsible for those in their custody.

    I left Seattle before there was an MLK Blvd., g. And though I’ve been back a few times, I don’t remember seeing it or riding on it.

  95. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:44

    And hiding under the end of the “Bonds era” is the likely end of the “Vizquel era” and I would like to say, as man crushes go, he is the shit….

    mikey

  96. RubDMC said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:51

    “Pork chops in a Dijon mustard white wine sauce…”

    I find pork chops to be real hard to cook well. The only thing that works for me is some quick browning followed by a long, slow braise in the ol’ cast iron Dutch oven.

    Otherwise, I just dry the shit out of them, no matter what.

    I do brine mostly all of my pork (and chicken), so that usually helps for outdoor cooking. But on the stove in the house? I just can’t get the hang of it, and I’d really like a nice thick succulent pork chop, yes I would.

    (and yeah, those wingnuts sure do hate them some wimmen – must be skeered or sumptin’…)

  97. John O said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:51

    Yep, that’s absolutely true, M.B.

    I absolutely believe in personal responsibility. If you don’t strap your kids in, tough crap. You abdicated your responsibility.

    (I should point out that most everyone I know, of a certain age, was not strapped in. The vast majority of us made it.)

    Didn’t lock your gun cabinet? Too bad, even if someone else got shot. May turn those other parents, likely gun owners themselves, into activisits.

    Life is full of risk. Getting in the shower with no one home carries risk. What next, mandatory slippery preventers? And you still won’t get down to “zero” risk.

    There’s a federal law outlawing lawn jarts. I played with them a lot as a kid, just like I played baseball and football and other dangerous games.

    It’s a scary world out there. What say we outlaw baseball bats and, say, chainsaws? After all, the latter has been used for massacres.

  98. John O said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:55

    Oh, and g, I probably wouldn’t even hurt the rat, even though I have never had to deal with them damaging my property. Though rats are darned near insects on my “kill them personally” list.

    I’d get cats. Or even dogs like terriers.

    The rats will find a better place to frolic.

  99. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:56

    M Bouffant, MLK is what we used to know as Empire Way.

  100. John O said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:56

    And there is NOT a big social impact. There is a big INDIVIDUAL impact.

    Sorry to say, the government has no interest in any private individual’s life. Just makes no difference whatsoever in any real policy terms whether I’m here or not.

  101. John O said,

    September 26, 2007 at 4:59

    How white trash am I?

    I think Shake ‘N Bake is an excellent pork chop-in-the-kitchen food.

    Otherwise, pork is indeed hard to get just so.

  102. Matt T. said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:00

    You know what this reminds me of? The crop circle guys. Two guys in England in the ’70s go tromping around the countryside, fucking up farmers’ fields and screwing with the head of the usual assortment of koo-koo whackadoodles. After twenty years of this – and other smart-asses joining in – one of ‘em fesses up and spoils the fun for all the UFOlogists (and the “cereologists”, them that study the phenomenon *snicker*).

    Except them that believe there’s something to crop circles beyond two liquored up limeys with plywood strapped to their feet STILL claim it’s evidence of goddamn space aliens. And they’re gonna keep believing it, damn your “evidence” and “facts” and their lack thereof.

    That’s the sort of mindset I’m seeing from the vast majority of the right. Not just your wingnut loonies like this Snooper character, but in every yay-hoo who smirks that the “jury’s still out on evolution/global climate change/stem cell research/what have you”, mainly because it would be to embarassing to admit that they’ve been bamboozled. Or they’re crazy one, I don’t know for sure anymore.

  103. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:02

    John, I think you came to this blog after most of my dog posts were over. I live in the country and have fruit trees and had 2 big elderly dogs – now only one. The rats are fat and sassy here, and the dogs don’t phase them, and cats don’t do to well here because the hawks and coyotes tend to prey on them.

    So the Rat Zapper is my tool of choice.

    THICK pork chops, not thin. Brining is good, but I didn’t have time. Sear them in a hot pan on both sides, take them out, pour off most of the fat; wilt some chopped onion & garlic and then deglaze the pan with white wine & broth; then turn the heat low & put the chops back in, covered. Swirl in the mustard and some cornichons at the end.

  104. Ganesh Bengal Cat said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:07

    Misuse ellipses all you want and look like a bunch of indecisive illiterate pussies.

    Hey, now…

    What?

  105. a different brad said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:08

    Hmm…
    there’s a very specific reason I don’t own a gun, mikey, but I can’t really get into it here.
    Since you are trustworthy I’ll send you a quick facebook message.

  106. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:09

    THICK pork chops, not thin. Brining is good, but I didn’t have time. Sear them in a hot pan on both sides, take them out, pour off most of the fat; wilt some chopped onion & garlic and then deglaze the pan with white wine & broth; then turn the heat low & put the chops back in, covered. Swirl in the mustard and some cornichons at the end.

    Oh, babe, you betcha. With Iggy Pop on the stereo and the giants/bonds farewell tour on the box under mute. If I could put a fire in the ‘place it would be perfect…

    mikey

  107. dgbellak said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:13

    Are these “patriots” and do they really “support the troops”? I think not.

    This can’t be right. Dennis Prager was just telling me that conservatives don’t question the patriotism of liberals.

  108. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:13

    I couldn’t find walnuts for the salad – thought I had them in the pantry but I don’t know where – so instead I used pistachios. So it’s baby greens, forme d’aubert, pistachios, and dried cherries. With apple cider vinaigrette.

    Ganesh, sorry for what I said about the cats out here.

  109. Kip W said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:15

    There is some apparent confusion here, punctuation-wise. I believe what these posters are using is not the ellipsis, but the Three Dots Of Irony. They are used as a signal to indicate tone of voice and a raised eyebrow. They are often thought to be a typographical nod to Cartoonist Ernie “Nancy” Bushmiller’s “Three Rocks.” The proper place for the Three Dots is at the very end of a comment. Using them within the body of a comment is too often indicative of a gasping tone, and not at all ironic, droll, or waggish.

    Even when properly used, they are often overused. As with exclamation points, in which by emphasizing everything, nothing ends up being emphasized, the overuse of the Three Dots tends to make everything “ironic,” and thus nothing truly stands out as being genuinely ironic. This is, of course, somewhat ironic in itself, but only in a meta-ironic sort of way.

  110. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:21

    You’ll get my irony when you pry it out of my cold, dead hands…

  111. The Abyss said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:25

    Dots! Exclamation points! Asterisks placed around a word to indicate emphasis! I eats them all…!…!…!

  112. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:28

    Asterisks placed around a word to indicate emphasis!

    I hate asterisks place around a word to indicate emphasis.

  113. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:29

    Just smiling, with that warm sense that I’m home, just talkin shit with smart funny people. There are reasons to think life is worth living…

    mikey

  114. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:30

    too true.

  115. *Sob* My Blog Has No Comments | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:48

    [...] just wanted to post a link to this comment at Sadly, Blow! to prove a [...]

  116. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:48

    So the geriatric Rottweiler got some tasy pork chop leftovers, and now he’s curled up back on his doggie bed. Spouse is watching Stephen Colbert on the 42″ flat screen TV that was a 53rd birthday present.

    The moon – I think it’s full tonight – is rising in the east, and the amazing thing about living in a canyon is that when the moon or the sun rises, it illuminates the entire hillside on the opposite side of the canyon – and moonlight illumination is pretty awesome. In various little cuts and hollows of the topography you can see the lights of houses. There’s a pack of coyotes over by Old Canyon – you can hear them yipping and setting each other off. Sometimes you can see bats fluttering in the twilight, but by the time it’s really dark, you can’t see them anymore.

    The house is built on a steep lot, and the land falls away from it precipitously. It’s a post and beam house, very 60′s, with square lines and big Ifloor-to-ceiling narrow windows. If I go out on the deck outside the house, and then turn around and look at the house, it looks like a big lantern or maybe the wheelhouse of a ship, sailing above the waves.

    There are lots and lots of crickets and moths here, and tree frogs in the dry ravine – I think maybe it’s not totally dry anymore, since we had rain this weekend maybe the moisture has awakened the frogs and their tadpoles.

  117. objectivelypro said,

    September 26, 2007 at 5:53

    Well I gotta tip my hat to anyone, Kip W, who brings Ernie Bushmiller into the conversation. Nancy, Fritzi Ritz, Sluggo…

    Fritzi’s boyfriend – Phil, right? I remember reading the rationale for the “three rocks”: only two would be a couple and that was too specific. It needed to be ‘some’ rocks and four rocks would also be ‘some’ but why put four when you only needed three to acheive said ‘some’. So it was three. And one tree. And Nancy mailing a letter for Aunt Fritzi.

    About the ellipsis thing: I’m no grammarian and not much of a writer but I’d like to decide for myself how best to use the period key and I don’t need no schoolin’ from some insuff[e]rable comma-freak. For instance, I noticed Mikey used a rare four-dot ellipses above. I’m sure he had a valid reason.

    Cheers, everyone. Let’s keep knockin’ down the wingnuts. I wish I had a gourmet meal to share but it was just roasted pita chips and semi-homemade baba ghannouj for me while my girlfriend visits her Mom. With a California red that found its way to Quebec. And an action movie…

  118. Qetesh the Abyssinian said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:08

    I absolutely believe in personal responsibility. If you don’t strap your kids in, tough crap. You abdicated your responsibility.

    (I should point out that most everyone I know, of a certain age, was not strapped in. The vast majority of us made it.)

    Didn’t lock your gun cabinet? Too bad, even if someone else got shot. May turn those other parents, likely gun owners themselves, into activisits.

    Whoa, whoa there, boy! You’re failing to take into account one very important fact: kids are people too. Those kids who don’t get strapped in? They deserve a chance to live. Those kids who get shot? Them too. Just because you don’t like having to obey laws, doesn’t make those laws unfair/onerous/whatever.

    Here’s my position: personal responsibility extends further than you think. If someone dies because you don’t want to lock your gun cabinet or strap a seatbelt on your kids, then you are responsible. Responsibility doesn’t just mean choosing whether or not to be cautious: it means accepting the consequences of your own actions.

    I’m also very firmly of the opinion that your rights should not interfere with my rights. I don’t mean that in the wacky wingnut way, but in a sensible way. I mean that your rights (and my rights, for that matter) should only be curtailed when there’s a chance of harm to some innocent third party. Their right to life takes precedence over your right to not lock your gun cabinet or whatever.

    I’m always a bit surprised at this vehement rejection of seat belts, to be honest. Here in Oz, we’ve had seat belt laws for decades, and they’re enforced, so it’s just a matter of course for people to belt up when they get in the car. But I’ve seen what happens when people don’t belt up, and that’s stomach-churning and horrifying and tragic, all in one go. And sure, the parents may have to bear the tragedy of losing a child, but that child has to suffer the injustice (not to mention pain) of losing life or mobility.

    As the old saying has it, “your right to swing your fist ends at the end of my nose”. Complete freedom to do what you want that harms no-one, yes. Acceptance of responsibility and consequences when you do something that harms someone is also necessary. Otherwise we’re not a society, we’re just a loose collection of gangs.

  119. UmYeah said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:21

    Why is every single right wing war supporter such a shameless liar and why oh why do they seem to be more insane every day?

  120. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:23

    I haven’t eaten a pork chop in 25 years but I recall my mom baking them in cream of mushroom soup. That’s sorta white trashy too, but mmm they were good.

  121. objectivelypro said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:29

    Here’s my position: personal responsibility extends further than you think. If someone dies because you don’t want to lock your gun cabinet or strap a seatbelt on your kids, then you are responsible.

    Is it too liberal to say that it extends further than that? If you actively oppose seatbelt and gun laws (or whatever) in the name of freedom, do you not bear some responsibility for resultant casualties?

    Or does that make me a nanny-state bureaucrofascist?

  122. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:35

    I’m always a bit surprised at this vehement rejection of seat belts, to be honest.

    The rejection is puzzling because it’s so disproportional. On the one hand, strapping a belt across your body, kind of like in an airplain. On the other hand – sure, proven death or injury in the event of a crash. This is kind of a no-brainer. OK, I get the thing of “government shouldn’t be able to tell me whether to strap myself in” – but, really, in order to prove your point are you going to risk your life?

  123. mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:43

    I always was happy to wear my seatbelts, long before there were laws. But personal choice is something worth considering.

    g. Do you live in Elvis Cole’s house? Tell Joe I said “hey”….

    mikey

  124. werver said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:46

    Actually, Rub, wingnuts reserve a special visciousness for women opponents. Recall if you will the truly nasty rejoicing and yuk-yuks at the death of Rachel Corrie and even Marla Ruzika
    “Rachel”, robert or Rocky, I know I just like it when hate-supporters die because they are dumb. Rachel “Rocky” Corrie died because she (He, it) had a sub-arctic IQ. Good. Be done with it. More of ya’ll shouldn’t be such CHICKECKPALIHAWKS and die for your cause!

  125. werver said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:47

    Oh and “Marla Ruzika” remains in obscurity because it deserved to die thus if it supported terroerists.

  126. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:52

    CHICKECKPALIHAWKS

    I gather Vinnie isn’t getting enough attention as “Vinnie”.

  127. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:53

    Heh, mikey, I don’t think Elvis Cole lives in Topanga. But I do recall that Dave Robicheaux came out here once – was it after “Electric Mist”?

    Elvis lives in the Hollywood Hills. Probably he’s got Harry Bosch in his emergency phone tree in case of wildfires or earthquakes. Maybe his house looks like this one:

    Pierre Koenig Case Study #22 Overlooking Hollywood

    They’re in the city of LA. We’re not in the city, we’re in an unincorporated part of the county. We’re between Santa Monica and Malibu. It’s a little more rough and ready here. The folks who’ve lived in Topanga are more on the lines of Woody Guthrie, Lord Buckley, and Will Geer.

    Oh, and Charles Manson, but we don’t talk about him.

  128. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 6:55

    CHICKECKPALIHAWKS

    Um. no. Pali High’s mascot is a dolphin, not a hawk.

  129. objectivelypro said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:11

    werver said…

    How come you can never find an insufferable grammarian when you need one?

  130. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:12

    My house looks a little like this:

    Neutra house

    Only not exactly. If some residential architect in the 60′s wanted to build an inexpensive homage to Richard Neutra, it would kind of look like this, only a lot cheaper.

    But, all the same, it’s actually a pretty nice house.

  131. D. Sidhe said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:13

    mikey, marry me. I know, but never mind that. Marry me.

    Also, the last book sucked.

  132. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:15

    Oh, hell, let’s form a commune. Or would that be too Dirty Fuckin’ Hippie?

  133. rz said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:21

    I say “Pamela’s up to something stupid” far too often in the comments, but this time it’s ON topic. Her most recent post has an extra helping of Pamela’s signature technological illiteracy. In response to a sober, levelheaded critique of her newest blogging adventure, she denies that she called for Islam to be banned, but leaves active the critic’s link to her post “Ban Islam? Uh ………. yeah.” Thank you Pamela, for all the laughs.

  134. beth said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:34

    hmmm, I wonder why no one has appeared yet in this thread to defy us sad little leftists. COuld they finally have realized Gavin’s complete pwnage of them?

    Ahhh, its nice to know you missed us. I came here via a link from Vinnie’s. He’s actually quite popular, comments or not. He posts a several blogs.

    Sorry I didn’t get by here today (yesterday now) – I had other things that were a tad more important to attend to. I’m going to Germany to be at my son’s wedding to his Deutsche Fraulein when he’s back from Iraq. He’s a short timer. Mikey, you should know what that means.

    I suppose the fact that he’s marrying a German will give you plenty to criticize me for. But so be it. I shake and quiver at the very thought of what you’ll deduce from that. :)

  135. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:37

    You know, Beth, we were all just enjoying the evening, and you barged in here. We didn’t miss you. In fact, we were pleased not to have to smell the sulferous scent of your hatred.

    So get the fuck out. Have a nice trip, congratulations to your son. We wish him well.

    And don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

  136. beth said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:45

    Mikey, I do find your version of events in Vietnam interesting. My husband is a Vietnam vet and has the Combat V – he was in the thick of things. He doesn’t recall Americans going around indiscriminately killing women and children.

    I know that’s a fantasy that Mr. Heinz had, during the three months he was on a swift boat there before he got his three purple hearts for self-induced gnat bites. But still, most of the men and women I know who were there – and I know quite a few – found Americans to be as Americans are – not perfect, but not cruel. With the usual exceptions of a few here and there, of course.

    Most that I know, including my husband, found the Vietnamese people very likable and loved the country. The war was hateful and horrible, but the people were kind and friendly. The North Vietnamese were fierce warriors that the men respected for their honor and skill, even as they fought them. They were certainly worthy adversaries.

    You have a very different take on things than what I’ve heard from others who were there. And I’ve heard many of the horror stories. Most I won’t repeat out of respect for those that told them to me. There was nothing pretty about it. I had good friends who died there. Even those with obvious emotional scars don’t talk about a hatred of the people there. Of course, other than ppl like Mr. Heinz who built a political career on his 3 months of service towards the rear.

  137. beth said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:47

    You know, Beth, we were all just enjoying the evening, and you barged in here. We didn’t miss you. In fact, we were pleased not to have to smell the sulferous scent of your hatred.

    So get the fuck out. Have a nice trip, congratulations to your son. We wish him well.

    And don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

    The beautiful scent of the flower children. Peace and love! Acceptance and tolerance. I feel so loved.

    Nite all.

  138. Johnny Coelacanth said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:47

    “I suppose the fact that he’s marrying a German will give you plenty to criticize me for. But so be it. I shake and quiver at the very thought of what you’ll deduce from that. :)”

    I suppose you think we give a crap. Good for your son. For all that I don’t know him, may he have a nice wedding and domestic bliss. With luck the war will end soon and his young bride won’t become a young widow. Vaya con Dios, sister.

  139. Mrs. Lovett said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:47

    MRS. LOVETT:
    Seems a downright shame…
    TODD: Shame?
    LOVETT:
    Seems an awful waste…
    Such a nice, plump frame
    Wot’s ‘is name has…
    Had…
    Has!
    Nor it can’t be traced…
    Bus’ness needs a lift,
    Debts to be erased…
    Think of it as thrift,
    As a gift,
    If you get my drift!

    No?

    Seems an awful waste…
    I mean, with the price of meat
    What it is,
    When you get it,
    If you get it…

    TODD: HAH!
    LOVETT:
    Good, you got it!

    Take, for instance, Mrs. Mooney and her pie shop!
    Bus’ness never better using only pussycats and toast!
    And a pussy’s good for maybe six or seven at the most!
    And I’m sure they can’t compare as far as taste!

    [Simultaneously]

    TODD:
    Mrs. Lovett, what a charming notion
    LOVETT:
    Well, it does seem a waste…

    TODD:
    Eminently practical
    And yet appropriate as always!
    LOVETT:
    It’s an idea…

    TODD:
    Mrs. Lovett, how I’ve lived
    Without you all these years, I’ll never know!
    How delectable!
    Also undetectable!
    LOVETT:
    Think about it!
    Lots of other gentlemen’ll
    Soon be comin’ for a shave,
    Won’t they?
    Think of
    All them
    Pies!

    TODD:
    How choice!

    How
    Rare!

    TODD:
    For what’s the sound of the world out there?
    LOVETT:
    What, Mr. Todd?
    What, Mr. Todd?
    What is that sound?
    TODD:
    Those crunching noises pervading the air!
    LOVETT:
    Yes, Mr. Todd!
    Yes, Mr. Todd!
    Yes, all around!
    TODD:
    It’s man devouring man, my dear!
    BOTH:
    And [LOVETT: Then] who are we to deny it in here?

    TODD: (spoken) These are desperate times,
    Mrs. Lovett, and desperate measures are called for!
    LOVETT: Here we are, now! Hot out of the oven!
    TODD: What is that?

    LOVETT:
    It’s priest. Have a little priest.
    TODD:
    Is it really good?
    LOVETT:
    Sir, it’s too good, at least!
    Then again, they don’t commit sins of the flesh,
    So it’s pretty fresh.
    TODD:
    Awful lot of fat.
    LOVETT:
    Only where it sat.
    TODD:
    Haven’t you got poet, or something like that?
    LOVETT:
    No, y’see, the trouble with poet is
    ‘Ow do you know it’s deceased?
    Try the priest!

    TODD: (spoken) Heavenly!
    Not as hearty as bishop, perhaps,
    but then again, not as bland as curate, either!

    LOVETT:
    And good for business, too — always leaves you wantin’ more!
    Trouble is, we only get it on Sundays!

    Lawyer’s rather nice.
    TODD:
    If it’s for a price.
    LOVETT:
    Order something else, though, to follow,
    Since no one should swallow it twice!
    TODD:
    Anything that’s lean.
    LOVETT:
    Well, then, if you’re British and loyal,
    You might enjoy Royal Marine!
    Anyway, it’s clean.
    Though of course, it tastes of wherever it’s been!
    TODD:
    Is that squire,
    On the fire?
    LOVETT:
    Mercy no, sir, look closer,
    You’ll notice it’s grocer!
    TODD:
    Looks thicker,
    More like vicar!
    LOVETT:
    No, it has to be grocer –
    It’s green!

    TODD:
    The history of the world, my love –
    LOVETT:
    Save a lot of graves,
    Do a lot of relatives favors!
    TODD:
    Is those below serving those up above!
    LOVETT:
    Ev’rybody shaves,
    So there should be plenty of flavors!
    TODD:
    How gratifying for once to know
    BOTH:
    That those above will serve those down below!

    LOVETT: (spoken) Now let’s see, here… We’ve got tinker.
    TODD: Something… pinker.
    LOVETT: Tailor?
    TODD: Paler.
    LOVETT: Butler?
    TODD: Subtler.
    LOVETT: Potter?
    TODD: Hotter.
    LOVETT: Locksmith?

    Lovely bit of clerk.
    TODD:
    Maybe for a lark.
    LOVETT:
    Then again there’s sweep
    If you want it cheap
    And you like it dark!
    Try the financier,
    Peak of his career!
    TODD:
    That looks pretty rank.
    LOVETT:
    Well, he drank,
    It’s a bank
    Cashier.
    Never really sold.
    Maybe it was old.
    TODD:
    Have you any Beadle?
    LOVETT:
    Next week, so I’m told!
    Beadle isn’t bad till you smell it and
    Notice ‘ow well it’s been greased…
    Stick to priest!

    (spoken) Now then, this might be a little bit stringy,
    but then of course it’s… fiddle player!
    TODD: No, this isn’t fiddle player — it’s piccolo player!
    LOVETT: ‘Ow can you tell?
    TODD: It’s piping hot!
    LOVETT: Then blow on it first!

    TODD:
    The history of the world, my sweet –
    LOVETT:
    Oh, Mr. Todd,
    Ooh, Mr. Todd,
    What does it tell?
    TODD:
    Is who gets eaten, and who gets to eat!
    LOVETT:
    And, Mr. Todd,
    Too, Mr. Todd,
    Who gets to sell!
    TODD:
    But fortunately, it’s also clear
    BOTH:
    That [L: But] ev’rybody goes down well with beer!

    LOVETT: (spoken)
    Since marine doesn’t appeal to you, ‘ow about… rear admiral?
    TODD: Too salty. I prefer general.
    LOVETT: With, or without his privates? “With” is extra.

    TODD: What is that?
    LOVETT:
    It’s fop.
    Finest in the shop.
    And we have some shepherd’s pie peppered
    With actual shepherd on top!
    And I’ve just begun –
    Here’s the politician, so oily
    It’s served with a doily,
    Have one!
    TODD:
    Put it on a bun.
    Well, you never know if it’s going to run!
    LOVETT:
    Try the friar,
    Fried, it’s drier!
    TODD:
    No, the clergy is really
    Too coarse and too mealy!
    LOVETT:
    Then actor,
    That’s compacter!
    TODD:
    Yes, and always arrives overdone!
    I’ll come again when you have JUDGE on the menu!

    LOVETT: (spoken) Wait! True, we don’t have judge yet,
    but we’ve got something you might fancy even better.
    TODD: What’s that?
    LOVETT: Executioner!

    TODD:
    Have charity towards the world, my pet!
    LOVETT:
    Yes, yes, I know, my love!
    TODD:
    We’ll take the customers that we can get!
    LOVETT:
    High-born and low, my love!
    TODD:
    We’ll not discriminate great from small!
    No, we’ll serve anyone,
    Meaning anyone,
    BOTH:
    And to anyone
    At all!

  140. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 7:49

    I feel so loved.

    OH, bullshit, you stupid cow. You came here to be a jerk, you got what you came for.

  141. bour3 said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:02

    I hate it when I get linked to these pathetic hell holes.

  142. Vinnie said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:03

    “you stupid cow. ”

    Happy, happy tolerance from the left on display again.

    Enjoying the traffic, Gavin?

    Sorry I left this comment, I need the attention!

  143. beth said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:06

    I suppose you think we give a crap. Good for your son. For all that I don’t know him, may he have a nice wedding and domestic bliss. With luck the war will end soon and his young bride won’t become a young widow. Vaya con Dios, sister.

    I don’t think you are interested in the least. I only brought that up because you guys were accusing me of being a nazi when I wrote about Germany on my blog. That seemed to be the genesis of it. I thought I’d explain why I hadn’t come by today since someone up there mentioned I hadn’t been here.

    g – a cow? golly gee.

    Auf Wiedersehen

  144. marc page said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:07

    So, Vinnie, you want your cake and eat it too ? You expect that your malevolent, intolerant behavior will be tolerated by decent people? Don’t count on it.

  145. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:14

    Acceptance and tolerance. I feel so loved.

    Where the fuck did you get the idea that we accepted and tolerated the nastiness that you bring here – I mean specifically you, Soggy Linda, someone who comes here, on the eve of what should be a happy occasion for you – your departure for your own son’s wedding – to throw some nasty shit at people you don’t even know.

    You might as well have taken your bag of dogshit and thrown it at a bystander from the window of your car on the way to the airport. Way to celebrate the happy occasion! Your future daughter-in-law is probably wondering about the tight-lipped expression you wear in public.

    Oh, and Vinnie? You can kiss my ass, you dumb fucking cornhusker. You’re still holding a grudge because some hippie chick didn’t sleep with you back in 1977 – pathetic loser.

  146. a different brad said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:14

    Beth, you are basically a right wing Cindy Sheehan. You picked a side and now you’re cheering for it by going to occasional irrational extremes. You don’t make me mad, you make me sad. For you, and for all the people who have to deal with you.
    And Vinnie, please delete my comment. They’re right, you’re worth about as much attention as a meth addict.

  147. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:14

    I’m going to Germany to be at my son’s wedding to his Deutsche Fraulein when he’s back from Iraq.

    If I was your kid I’d marry someone half a world away from babbling you, too (for the sake of my spouse, especially).

    All the best to him. I hope he has a very nice wedding.

  148. a different brad said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:16

    Oops, except Cindy Sheehan has had an actual effect. I’m not entirely fond of her, but she’s undeniably accomplished more than you, dearie.

  149. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:18

    I only brought that up because you guys were accusing me of being a nazi when I wrote about Germany on my blog.

    Germany had nothing to do with it. You were accused of being Nazi-like for calling an entire race of people cockroaches. What Hitler was to the Jews (and other minorities), you’ve decided to be to the Iranians, you dig?

  150. Johnny Coelacanth said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:20

    “Happy, happy tolerance from the left on display again.”

    You misunderstand. Tolerance excuses many things, except intolerance. Being tolerant does not require me to suffer in silence when someone is being a jerk. But I can call that person a jerk without impugning or caring about their status as a minority, gay, or a different religion. Those don’t bother me at all. Generally, people on your side of the left/right divide do have a problem with those things, ergo you are intolerant. Of course, you don’t see a problem; you don’t recognize intolerance in yourself (or beth) because it’s the defining characteristic of your politics.

    And I know you need the attention, Vinnie. I’ve seen the moldering wasteland of your comments section.

  151. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:21

    I don’t think you are interested in the least.

    Isn’t it funny? somebody comes over here and acts like a total asshole, and then says something about her son’s wedding, and then gets all offending – “Ohmigod! It’s not like you care about my son’s wedding!!!”

    Stupid – yes – stupid cow.

  152. Johnny Coelacanth said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:27

    “I don’t think you are interested in the least.”

    That hurts a lot, beth. Now I will question the deep, human connection I thought we shared.

    “I only brought that up because you guys were accusing me of being a nazi when I wrote about Germany on my blog.”

    I didn’t comment on that post, or visit your blog. I believe that it’s bad to compare your fellow man to insects, no matter how different his beliefs. It’s dehumanizing, but you probably know that by now. Dehumanizing people allows you to treat them as objects, and then you can do anything to them without feeling the appropriate amount of horror.

  153. beth said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:43

    Food is way more fun than guns, or wingnuts, or beth.

    I was leaving – really I was and now I am – but I couldn’t pass this pearl up!! I have to tell you Mikey – I ain’t had many complaints!

    ROFL

  154. marc page said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:47

    Well, you’ve had them now, cupcake.

  155. Lesley said,

    September 26, 2007 at 8:49

    Mikey, I do find your version of events in Vietnam interesting. My husband is a Vietnam vet and has the Combat V – he was in the thick of things. He doesn’t recall Americans going around indiscriminately killing women and children. I know that’s a fantasy that Mr. Heinz had, during the three months he was on a swift boat there before he got his three purple hearts for self-induced gnat bites.

    I bet at dinner parties Chatty Cathy prattles on about her husband’s Vietnam experience as if, because they’re a couple, it’s become her experience too. Like that Thurber story where the wife finishes all of her husband’s sentences and stories until he’s driven so batshit that he decides he will only describe his dreams, but she finishes those for him too and he ends up in a mental institution.

    Beth’s got Vietnam neatly wrapped. There were the nice Vietnamese people, the heroic American soldiers who came to take care of them and a teeny bit of unpleasantness that we won’t speak about because it would only spoil the presentation.

  156. zython said,

    September 26, 2007 at 9:10

    The beautiful scent of the flower children. Peace and love! Acceptance and tolerance. I feel so loved.

    I don’t exatly feel like being lectured on “tolerance” by someone who wrote this.

  157. FlipYrWhig said,

    September 26, 2007 at 9:12

    He doesn’t recall Americans going around indiscriminately killing women and children.

    You know, I think there’s a name for that… oh yeah, “repressed memory.” Sure beats post-traumatic stress disorder.

  158. Johnny Coelacanth said,

    September 26, 2007 at 9:15

    Zython, I call fake beth in that link.

  159. marc page said,

    September 26, 2007 at 9:17

    A “fake but accurate” comment from Beth? Good enough.

  160. marc page said,

    September 26, 2007 at 9:21

    As Rick Moran would see it:

    “Then again, what does it say about beth that I saw no reason why she couldn’t have marched in and made that comment? Seemed real to me as I’m sure it did to many readers.”

  161. Johnny Coelacanth said,

    September 26, 2007 at 9:27

    Excellent, marc. Wish I had thought of that.

  162. Humor Me said,

    September 26, 2007 at 9:49

    How the hell did I miss the beth experience? If I sign up for S,N! premium, do I get text alerts when a wingnut appears in comments?

  163. Percyprune said,

    September 26, 2007 at 10:00

    [Re: Black Watch] Because its Scottish and not American, the sentiment is a bit different. I spoke with one person with the show; he says this sort of knee-jerk “Support the Troops” sentiment we Americans profess, in reaction to myth/reality from Vietnam, just isn’t there in Britain. No hostility, of course, but not this sort of Sacred-Cow sentimentalizing.

    Historically, we British have had an enormous distrust of standing armies. (See Kipling’s ‘Tommy’ poem as an illustration of that phenomenon.) There are good historical reasons for this dislike, going back to the quartering and plundering of the Civil Wars and beyond.

    The world wars of the 20th Century rehabilitated the image of the armed forces somewhat, but at the end of the day we don’t become over-sentimental about our fighting men. Most Britons will happily express support for soldiers, airmen and ratings in war zones, while preferring the squaddies (or erks or matelots, or whatever) stay well away when they are quartered at home. That’s because we teach our warriors to be rough men, not paragons. Only the officers get to be gentlemen, and frankly that’s a thin fucking veneer.

    This goes double for Scotland, by the way, where there is currently a huge crisis in recruiting for the Scots regiments.

  164. Percyprune said,

    September 26, 2007 at 10:08

    Historically, we British have had an enormous distrust of standing armies.

    I should have qualified that. We traditionally have little truck for armies. The Navy, however, has had a much better press for longer. And the Air Force hasn’t done too badly at Public Relations since the summer of 1940. Squaddies, especially in the era before conscription, tend to get the ‘Tommy’ treatment reserved for brutes. Especially if they are Paras.

  165. Dancing in outer space said,

    September 26, 2007 at 10:21

    I’m going to Germany to be at my son’s wedding

    Welcome to Eurabia!

  166. lobbey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 10:54

    and watch our for those scaaaary moooslims…..

  167. Freshly Squeezed Cynic said,

    September 26, 2007 at 12:41

    Mikey, I do find your version of events in Vietnam interesting. My husband is a Vietnam vet and has the Combat V – he was in the thick of things. He doesn’t recall Americans going around indiscriminately killing women and children.

    Ah, but of course. There were no indiscriminate killings in Vietnam.

    What’s that? Oh, they were just bad apples, no more like them, indeed.

    Ah well, at least the government wasn’t involved in any indiscriminate killing.

    And before you say that I’m ignoring Viet Cong atrocities, well, yes. I expect communist dictatorships to carry out brutal, senseless violent acts. That’s what they do. They are not nice governments and they commit deplorable acts. I expect democratic governments not to sink to their level (which is why, dear Beth, Israel’s deplorable acts get the amount of press that they do. We don’t expect liberal democracies to do terrible things, because they’re not supposed to do those kinds of things.) “They did it too” is not a valid excuse for a child, it is not a valid excuse for a grown woman, and it is emphatically not a valid excuse for the army of a world superpower.

  168. Link Lock | BitsBlog said,

    September 26, 2007 at 12:53

    [...] If you need proof of how liberals are bereft of anything cerebral, you need to look no further than here.  [...]

  169. Snowwy said,

    September 26, 2007 at 13:06

    An insomnaic night.
    I’m just getting to feel like I can sleep.
    I’ll just go to S,N! for a sec, get a last chuckle before bed.
    And what do I spy? Vinnie still trying desperately to…what? Actually, I don’t know. He never says what his point is. I suppose he avoids that so as to keep from being pinned down. He already knows how easily he gets punked by The Sadlyites, so he dares not try to make a point for fear they’ll pwnz0r him again.

    Must be a sad and lonely existence to be a winger. Nobody likes you. Everybody hates you. You know the rest.

  170. zsa said,

    September 26, 2007 at 14:37

    Vinnie’s a drive-by wingnut … he stops by, pinches out something just studded with nuttiness, and drives off again, secure in the knowledge that if he covers his ears and goes lalalalallala, he can’t hear us …………..

    Although, I do plan to use “:chickenjihadist” whenever possible. Seriously, whenever I see that it just cracks me up …

    We aren’t chickenhawks … we’re chickenjihadists! Get it? It’s like a pun or a joke or something dotdotdot

  171. zsa said,

    September 26, 2007 at 14:41

    Sweet Jeebus, Snowwy, where the hell do you live that you’re going to bed now? I’ve been awake for hours (EST), and I’m like the laziest guy on the planet.

    Too late for you to sleep now, man, you might as well score some crank, get yourself a big bottle of malt liquor and hit the highway.

  172. rachel said,

    September 26, 2007 at 14:56

    Mikey, I do find your version of events in Vietnam interesting. My husband is a Vietnam vet and has the Combat V – he was in the thick of things. He doesn’t recall Americans going around indiscriminately killing women and children.

    It wasn’t me! It was the one-armed man!

  173. MzNicky said,

    September 26, 2007 at 15:09

    He doesn’t recall Americans going around indiscriminately killing women and children.

    And he would know, because he was always everywhere in Vietnam for the entire war. What, My Lai?

    Here’s the wingnut thing: Binaries, binaries everywhere. Black/white, good/bad. No gray, no complexities, no different levels of meaning. They were probably abused as children, bullied on the playground, ostracized by their peers during adolescence, ignored and/or ridiculed as teens and now avoided at all costs by other humans. As a result they know nothing else but us v. them. It’s a much more comfortable place to live, I imagine, but holy christ, look at the resulting toxic fumes and rancid effluence that inevitably escapes their plugged-up pores.

  174. Robert M. said,

    September 26, 2007 at 15:32

    Late to the thread, but I wanted to say a couple of things. I apologize for the length, but I’ve bottled this up for long enough.

    I find pork chops to be real hard to cook well. The only thing that works for me is some quick browning followed by a long, slow braise in the ol’ cast iron Dutch oven.

    Otherwise, I just dry the shit out of them, no matter what.

    I do brine mostly all of my pork (and chicken), so that usually helps for outdoor cooking. But on the stove in the house? I just can’t get the hang of it, and I’d really like a nice thick succulent pork chop, yes I would.

    I generally butterfly the pork chops, then fry them on a cast-iron skillet. This comes out particularly well when they’re brined first, although any kind of marination will do nicely (I prefer equal parts soy sauce and white wine vinegar). If you want your chops thick, then g’s method will do ya.

    inappropriately-capitalized Beth’s various noises

    No one cares that your son is marrying a German (except for generalized good wishes for someone who’s done me no harm). My family is from the Midwest, and six of my eight great-grandparents were German immigrants. What we care about is that you’re participating wholeheartedly in one of the hallmarks of fascism: dehumanization of a perceived enemy.

    Mahmoud Ahmedinejad is a twisted, evil little man, but he’s not Iran. The Iranian government is interfering in our interests in the region, which is troublesome, but the government is also not Iran. Iran is just an idea in the minds of the average, normal citizens who live there, and when you approvingly re-post an editorial cartoon that portrays them as cockroaches, you’re making them into something less than human. That’s what the S,N! commenters have been trying to hammer through your skull on a regular basis for days now, and it’s actually kind of impressive that you’re still missing the point so thoroughly.

    Oh, and whatever you think of his politics, John Kerry (like other often-smeared Democratic politicians, such as John Murtha and Jim Webb) is a decorated veteran, and deserves to be treated as such. Your verbal treatment of vets like Kerry and Mikey, here, says more than you can possibly imagine about your real attitude toward the troops: they’re heroic paragons of American manhood only so long as they remain useful tools. If they start thinking for themselves and disagreeing with your politics, though… well, then they’d better watch their backs.

  175. Qetesh the Abyssinian said,

    September 26, 2007 at 16:09

    g said,
    September 26, 2007 at 7:15

    Oh, hell, let’s form a commune. Or would that be too Dirty Fuckin’ Hippie?

    Hey, I’ll be there. I’d be entirely, deliriously happy if some of the fine cooks that abound here were there as well, ‘cos I am entirely shithouse in the kitchen.

    MzNicky, you’re quite right about the wingnuts: it’s all binary, and one of the more irritating aspects of that is the “the US can do no wrong” fable. It pisses me off in a major way, given that I’m well aware of some of the appalling things the US has undeniably done in the past, and continues to do in the present. But no, to these idiots, no ‘Murkin can ever possibly do anything that’s not a glowing advertisement for Mom and apple pie and flags.

    The converse of that, of course, is that they also find it ludicrously easy to believe that other humans can be mere 1-dimensional caricatures: the Evil Furr’ner With Dastardly Intent.

    Whereas the truth, which is obvious to any person with more brains than a mollusc, is that people are people wherever you go. Most folks just want to raise their kids, live their lives, and be safe and happy. If you stick people in an abominable situation, like war, they’ll most likely do abominable things. Or go crazy.

    There’s just too damn many things about wingnuts that annoy me (but then I am Miss Crankypants). I particularly detest the way they bring in non sequiteurs, like the “Oh, and you hate Israel too” thing that Beth pulls out of her arse. Also the “You must hate Germans because you called me a Nazi for calling Iranians cockroaches” thing: I have no idea where she got that little idea, but then, as many folks here have pointed out, wingnuts seem to operate in their own little unreality zone. If only they operated on their own little planet, and let the normal people get on with life.

    Ah, what’s the use. It only makes me mad.

  176. Angela said,

    September 26, 2007 at 16:32

    I honestly do not understand the entire Code Pink mentality. Can somebody come on over and please explain it to me?

  177. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 26, 2007 at 16:38

    I honestly do not understand the entire Code Pink mentality.

    Do tell.

  178. Percyprune said,

    September 26, 2007 at 16:45

    Here’s the wingnut thing: Binaries, binaries everywhere. Black/white, good/bad. No gray, no complexities, no different levels of meaning. … they know nothing else but us v. them. It’s a much more comfortable place to live, I imagine…

    It is. Many people prefer certainty. They parse uncertainty into fear and anger and reprisal.

    To be fair, you see some of this on the left, but given that the default state of liberalism is compromise the pathology is more common on the right

    MzNicky, you’re quite right about the wingnuts: it’s all binary, and one of the more irritating aspects of that is the “the US can do no wrong” fable.

    The only thing that bugs me about the myth of American uniqueness, is that Americans believe it is a unique phenomenon. This is, to be fair, a common feature (or bug) of all nationalism. We British have suffered from it at one time or other.

    The converse of that, of course, is that they also find it ludicrously easy to believe that other humans can be mere 1-dimensional caricatures: the Evil Furr’ner With Dastardly Intent.

    To be fair to them (and Beth has demonstrated this) they also believe in the ‘noble savage’ for certain foreigners. Though admittedly this is no more dimensional than the swarthy, moustache-twirling, evil foe.

    There’s just too damn many things about wingnuts that annoy me (but then I am Miss Crankypants). I particularly detest the way they bring in non sequiteurs, like the “Oh, and you hate Israel too” thing that Beth pulls out of her arse.

    It’s a common lawyer trick: deny, traverse and counterclaim. It keeps your opponent off balance.

  179. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 16:46

    Angela – see if you don’t understand someone, you should go ask them. Don’t ask another person. Go right to Code Pink’s website, and email them, ask them.

    But I have a little pointer for you – if you want to ask about “Code Pink’s mentality” you would do better if you actually described what you mean.

    Unless, of course, you just want to provoke a flame war, under a dishonest guise of asking what you pretend is a “reasonable” question.

  180. Nancy in Detroit said,

    September 26, 2007 at 17:09

    Mikey:

    Re: Keep your goddam army in your pocket.

    Everyone knows you keep your armies in your sleevies.

    Sorry.

  181. RubDMC said,

    September 26, 2007 at 17:15

    Robert M. said – Late to the thread, but I wanted to say a couple of things.

    And well said, indeed – your pork chop technique (which I will try); and your assessment of teh wingnut military fetish – but only when the object of the fetish fulfills teh wingnut need.

    I rely on Bob Altemeyer’s work on right wing authoritarianism to understand teh wingnut mind (such as it is). The binary world (most notably ‘us’ and ‘them’), along with the need to be told what to think/do, are central to the belief system.

    It would be funny and sad if it wasn’t so harmful.

  182. a different mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 17:18

    I agree with RobertW. And the rest of you fine bunch of Noistas.

    Its a damn shame Beth has never felt the hospitality of Iranians which is a wonder to behold. That they’ve been saddled with a generation or three of ass-hat government is terrible but they are a warm and generous people. Given our own ass-hat government we should be sympathetic, not equating them with cockroaches.

    As for chops, Diana Kennedy is right, American pork has been bred to be hard to cook; lean, dry and white. If you can get local farm raised pork or even better wild hog you’ll find it much more flavorful and interesting. If you can’t braising is an excellent solution.

    I look forward to the SadlyNo! cookout. I’ll bring the wild boar.

  183. Douche Baggins said,

    September 26, 2007 at 17:56

    a different mikey hits on it: modern American pork is just frankenmeat and a pain to get right. I find that I need to use a kitchen timer and an instant-read thermometer to get those inch-thick chops to “perfect.” The folks at Cook’s Illustrated (and their teevee show, America’s Test Kitchen, and their cookbooks, esp. the ATK Family Cookbook) have done the work so you don’t have to — but you still have to be careful.

    Speaking of another modern grammatical annoyance: what about the use of underscores in place of long dashes? It just looks wrong to see _ and I know you’ll agree with me _ those goddamned “I’m a space but I’m really not a space” underscores filling the wrong shoes.

    And finally, wrt/Iran and Iranians: The General recommends that you humanize Iranians wherever possible by the generous use of the foto-grafik technique. In udder words: pitchers! It’s easy to get your two-minute hate on over a cartoon depiction of a drain with cucarachas, it’s harder to suppress your own humanity when faced with your evil enemy. (hey, is that kid hitting on the hookah?)

  184. Douche Baggins said,

    September 26, 2007 at 17:57

    nice, I fucked up the last link. Here you is: linky

  185. Northern Observer said,

    September 26, 2007 at 18:00

    American pork has been bred to be hard to cook; lean, dry and white

    For a minute there I wasn’t sure if we were talking about what’s for dinner or the Republican base.

  186. a different mikey said,

    September 26, 2007 at 18:21

    Yeah, who’s for a little Republican base, braised aux fines herbes?

    Brined? Dry salted with a rub? Ewwwwwww.

  187. Mo's Bike Shop said,

    September 26, 2007 at 18:30

    Prove it wasn’t moron.

    I suppose the original image just won’t cut it?

  188. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 19:03

    Beautiful, Mo. I’ve been looking for that, although not very hard.

  189. Percyprune said,

    September 26, 2007 at 19:08

    Excellent, Mo. Expect much spluttering and denial from the wingers.

  190. g said,

    September 26, 2007 at 19:17

    For a minute there I wasn’t sure if we were talking about what’s for dinner or the Republican base.

    “Here’s a politician so oily
    It’s served on a doily
    Have one”

    If you’ll allow a small repeat of my “Sweeney Todd” amusement.

  191. objectivelypro said,

    September 26, 2007 at 19:18

    Expect much spluttering and denial from the wingers.

    Yup.

    They’ll play the Venezuela card for all it’s worth. These wingnuts can turn on a dime.

  192. t4toby said,

    September 26, 2007 at 19:20

    Damn! My nine to five intert00b connection is making me miss all the fun!

    Mikey- I have been having the same thought. How will we, like minded patriots that we are, communicate when the other Size 14 Steel-Toed Boot drops?

    If Al Gore turns off his series of tubes, how does the virtual community remain in contact? I have some ideas, but am too shy to stick my neck out right now. I’m still stinging from the synonym/homonym pwnage…

    And, I think the ellipsis is indicative of the ongoing nature of the comment thread. I am probably as guilty as anyone of using it, but I see it as leaving the thought open to the rest of the ongoing discussion…

  193. PeeJ said,

    September 26, 2007 at 19:48

    Oh please. Cooking a moist pork chop is so easy even a Moran could do it. http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-morans.htm

    Much easier in fact, than than searching through archive.org’s codepinkalert.com pages. He sed, “Under the graphic I did have a disclaimer saying that though the words are from Code Pink, I altered their original banner. I also provided a link to those exact words. However, that was over a year ago so my mistake to not continually add the disclaimer. ”

    Let’s see, ….aha:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20060624034251/http://www.the-two-malcontents.com/2006/03/30/leftist-scum/
    Thu 30 Mar 2006 12:10

    Alas, code-pink-murder.jpg wasn’t archived but I dinna see nae diss-claiming goin on.

    A not too exhaustive (it’s a pain – not worth the effort) search of codepinkalert.com at archive.org doesn’t turn up that phrase. Even if the phrase is there, it’s highly probable it was taken completely out of context, or at best, posted by some troll.

    He’s a liar, a deceiver, a hateful punk. Just like his glorious leader.

    Now about that chork pop: Start with a reasonably thick, say 3/4 to one inch thick center cut loin chop. There’s a lot of meat sold these days that’ “contains up to 12% of a solution.” Pheh. Stay far far away from it.

    Preheat your oven to about 250 F. Season the chop with salt and pepper, and I like to grind a little (just a little) Herbes de Provence or Finnes Herbes through my fingers and rub it into the meat. I also like to dust it with Wondra flour but it aint necessary – I like the texture it gives and how it soaks up the sauce.

    Heat an oven-safe frying pan (preferably non-stick) to medium high, toss in a good splash of extra virgin olive oil, and carefully place your chop(s) in the pan. DON’T START POKING AT IT OR TURNING IT OR MOVING IT AROUND OR NUFFIN! Just let it sear for two to three minutes. THEN flip and sear the other side for about the same amount of time. Now you’re ready to toss the pan in the upper third of your preheated oven for about eight to ten minutes.

    Douse the chops in good balsamic vinegar just before they go into the oven for a fabulous glaze.

    Or, toss in few shots of gin (best to do this off-heat to avoid flamage). Then when you retrieve the chops, plate them, put the pan back on the heat and whisk in a good dollop of butter to make a light liaison. The juniper pairs beautifully with pork.

    The saucing possibilities really are endless. Orange juice and ginger? Sounds good to me. Go wild! Experiment!

    And don’t forget to garnish, even if it’s just a sprig of parsley! Sprinkle on some scallions sliced 1/4 inch on the bias. Something, anything – food that looks better tastes better.

    bon appetit!

  194. J— said,

    September 26, 2007 at 19:51

    Hurray! Mo’s Bike Shop found it. Good work. And it’s from the 2006 World Social Forum in Caracas, which proves something nefarious, I’m sure.

  195. freejack said,

    September 26, 2007 at 20:26

    I smell an opportunity here (not for me, I mean for somebody with some talent).

    If these ‘morans’ are this desperate for material that reinforces their world view, lets give it to them. Set up web sites with phony pictures, data, stories (onion-like) but without letting on it’s satire.
    Sit back and wait for the links to roll in.
    Like Wolfowitz said, it will pay for itself.

  196. freejack said,

    September 26, 2007 at 20:34

    Re: the pork chop debate

    Brine (try it adding a little ‘chinese 5 spice powder’ to the usual 1cupKosherSalt/1gallonH2O ratio solution, yum!)

  197. CS Lewis Jr. said,

    September 27, 2007 at 7:06

    Is this whole argument exactly as retarded as it sounds, or am I missing something because my head exploded way back when the “fake but accurate, interesting if true” splatter was first deployed? I mean, if I am the sort of person who might comically be supposed to, say, display an obviously fake slogan banner or hungrily cradle an obviously exaggerated (albeit delicious) sandwich, how can I complain when someone points out that I want to see American soldiers murdered, or notes that my videogame novelizations suck?

    Wait, I lost the thread there, I think.

    Something about people with no actual sense of humor using “humor” to attack enemies who have made them into jokes… no, it’s gone.

    Are there and Gathering of Eagles guys still here? I need a ride home…

  198. beth said,

    September 27, 2007 at 7:33

    I don’t exactly feel like being lectured on “tolerance” by someone who wrote this.

    That’s a cute trick Zlyzlong – do they teach that at the school you go to or did you figure that out on your own? Surely you aren’t old enough to be a professor there. But then, professors have been known to play little sneaky internet games too.

    Unfortunately, I wouldn’t have to play pretend to link to vulgar comments left by you.

    Seriously though, how old are you?

  199. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 27, 2007 at 7:41

    But then, professors have been known to play little sneaky internet games too.

    It appalls me when they trade racist cartoons.

  200. zython said,

    September 27, 2007 at 9:08

    That’s a cute trick Zlyzlong – do they teach that at the school you go to or did you figure that out on your own? Surely you aren’t old enough to be a professor there. But then, professors have been known to play little sneaky internet games too.

    As marc put it:

    “Then again, what does it say about beth that I saw no reason why she couldn’t have marched in and made that comment? Seemed real to me as I’m sure it did to many readers.”

    Unfortunately, I wouldn’t have to play pretend to link to vulgar comments left by you.

    Unfortunately, you consider the word “dang” to be vulger.

  201. Lawnguylander said,

    September 27, 2007 at 16:06

    Imagine having Beth as your mother? Your over in a war zone and your mother is back home fanning the flames for more war. Advocating policies that will make it more likely for you to die or come home missing some important parts like say half of your face, a few limbs, maybe your genitals. Shit but that must suck and the fact that she’s a nobody with zero influence wouldn’t be comforting because her intent would be enough to make you realize that the one person in this world who you’d expect to put your well being above any other consideration is doing just the opposite.

  202. twilight said,

    September 28, 2007 at 22:14

    I have enjoyed your coverage of this story so much that I am sending a contribution. This is high comedy.
    Thank you very much for your efforts. I will keep reading.

  203. Praying For War said,

    September 28, 2007 at 22:58

    I don’t care if the pic was photoshopped or not. I see moonbats say the same thing on blogs, liberals hate the military. Even if the moonbat queen hitlary itself wins the office (highly improbable), the only thing about the war that will change is who gets awarded the contracts. Good luck condemning the people of Iraq to slaughter, just like when your allies in the VC slaughtered 165000 and displaced millions.

  204. FRODO said,

    September 28, 2007 at 23:40


    Are there and Gathering of Eagles guys still here? I need a ride home…

    Samwise, you think they will save us?

  205. Democratic Convention Party Political Local Advertising Presidential Campaigns » Blog Archive » This Week Behind the Dumbass Curtain said,

    September 29, 2007 at 12:02

    [...] Sadly, No!, conservative bloggers were up in arms over a supposed Code Pink banner that said “We support [...]

  206. Daily Kos State and the Nation » Blog Archive » This Week Behind the Dumbass Curtain said,

    October 2, 2007 at 15:51

    [...] Sadly, No!, conservative bloggers were up in arms over a supposed Code Pink banner that said “We support [...]

  207. Right Wing Rhetoric | hell's handmaiden said,

    October 27, 2007 at 15:50

    [...] Sadly, No! » Foto Funnies Pt. 1 1/2 [...]

  208. christina said,

    November 12, 2007 at 8:43

    You are all pathedic. You make women stupid. I wish I was a rich housewife with nothing better to do with my time than prance around looking for attention. How is what your doing even excusable?

  209. Righteous Bubba said,

    November 12, 2007 at 8:50

    Yeah, that Beth is some kinda nutcase.

  210. buck said,

    February 2, 2008 at 22:29

    codepink is a group of terrorists. they should be sent to the middle east and forgotten by real U.S. citizens!

  211. Jessy Coach said,

    August 31, 2009 at 7:08

    heir Ahava Champaign amounts to harassing store clerks, using women, and at best causing the company to lay off workers. They offer no solutions or resolutions, or effective measures to achieve any means. Their claim to fame of getting Kristin Davis sacked from Oxfam for being employed as an Ahava spokes person isn’t even true. Further more their ground for the Champaign that according to the Geneva convention the land source for Ahava minerals is Palestinian territory is BS. The GC has NO authority to designate boarders. Further more notice all of their protests are concerning strictly US policy toward Arab/Islamic hotspots. Check it out Gaza, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq….No Congo, Sudan, Northern Ireland, Georgia, Chechneya, Columbia, Korea, Haiti, or anywhere else where there is conflict. Conspiracy I think so…These women where spurred on by nothing wholesome… Better luck next time Osama! LOL

Leave a Comment

  • Things of Interest

  • Meta Goodness

  • Clunkers

  • httpbl_stats()