Feb
22
22
Shorter Tom Maguire
Above: Conclusive proof that Maguire is a communist sympathizer
- Although I am enraged that the New York Times would print second-hand rumors about John McCain having an affair, I think this paper-thin Politico article conclusively proves that Barack Obama is a terrorist sympathizer.
‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard.
UPDATE: Just to be clear, I think there is a lot to criticize in how the Times reported the charges of infidelity against McCain. If you’d like to read some smart criticism of the Times that doesn’t include the bizarre “Obama-is-a-stealth-candidate-for-terrorists” moon-bayings of Tom Maguire, I recommend checking out Greg Sargent.
El Cid said,
February 22, 2008 at 19:52
If Barack Hussein Osama X is President and he goes through with his promise to surrender to all the Mooozlim terrists and make us do the homo-Sharia-na-na-na law, then a movement will arise among Great American Patriot Conservatives to defy illegitimate authority until the last Chinese product is sold at the last Wal-Mart.
stringonastick said,
February 22, 2008 at 19:58
If Barack Hussein Osama X is President and he goes through with his promise to surrender to all the Mooozlim terrists and make us do the homo-Sharia-na-na-na law, then a movement will arise among Great American Patio Conservatives to defy illegitimate authority until the last Chinese product is sold at the last Wal-Mart.
Fixed
t4toby said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:09
When Glass Hous Boys was here the other day ranting about Ayers, I can’t believe that I didn’t assert:
Eric Rudolph is the face of the modern conservative movement.
t4toby said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:10
rinse, lather, repeat
It does wonders for washing trolls out.
Snorghagen said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:13
Bill Ayers has reappeared! I can feel the limitless evil of terminal narcissism emanating from his reptilian leer.
(See the last half of this big, fat thread for all the terrifying details.)
Dan Someone said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:24
Not for nothin’, but who exactly the fuck is Tom Maguire?
And his commenters are sure special:
I’m not even sure what that means, even in context. Asians won’t vote for Obama? Jews will because they’re all idiots? (I wonder if the commenter knows who the driving personalities are behind the neocon movement.)
Andrew A. Gill, SLS said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:26
Oh, goodness.
Obama met with Bill Moyers?
His campaign’s over.
I mean, how dare he tag along with a state senator who was meeting some of the constituents that she may have supported?
And I mean, Bill Moyers. If it’s not political suicide to meet with him, it’s–
Oh, wait. Bill Ayers? Nevermind. I actually have more respect for Obama now.
P.S. I’m glad to see you saying something about that idiotic McCain article.
D.N. Nation said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:26
Shorter entire right wing, from Maguire to Jay Ambrose to Matt Drudge:
Jamey said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:27
Yeah, you COULD read Greg Sargent, or you could take a peek at the smoking gun that vindicates the Times decision to print:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/114505
Times is punching back. Using the media to do it. Bravo.
cleter said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:33
Shorter McCain:
I wasn’t BANGING her. It was just ordinary political graft. Nothing to see. Disperse!
Brad said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:33
Jamey- there is a story to be written about McCain’s ties to lobbyists. He clearly has tons of ‘em and he’s obviously not the straight-talkin’ maverick that he and his media pals portray him as.
But the Times chose specifically to LEAD with rumors about an affair that were given by anonymous sources who only said they SUSPECTED it was going on. That’s a major no-no, and it detracts from the actual information about what McCain did or did not do for lobbyists.
WaPo’s story did much, much better by ignoring the affair aspects and focus solely on McCain’s advisors’ concerns about being too cozy with lobbyists.
Andrew A. Gill, SLS said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:39
What Brad said.
If there’s some actual meat to the story, it might be worth running, but right now all I see is “OMFG! This guy, like totally told me that McCain and some lobbyist like, you know…Oh, and I can’t tell you who it is and no one else backs up my story.”
Maybe it’s true. Maybe it isn’t. But that’s why we don’t expect that in the New York Times, while we would expect it in the New York Post.
the knack said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:39
Ho-mo-mo-Ma Sharia.
Jay B. said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:41
But the Times chose specifically to LEAD with rumors about an affair that were given by anonymous sources who only said they SUSPECTED it was going on.
Brad, that’s because the New York Times sucks. I thought Bob Somerby raised you better than that.
Anyway both the WaPo follow story and this new Newsweek story take the lobbying angle the Times buried and put it front and center. That Newsweek story has St. Maverick contradicting himself in a sworn affidavit.
Which means this story will only build from here. Soon, who knows, the media might even notice that he has lobbyists running his campaign and that one of his right-hand men, Rick Renzi has just been indicted on a staggering array of charges.
cleter said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:44
The real meat is this tidbit from Newsweek:
“A sworn deposition that Sen. John McCain gave in a lawsuit more than five years ago appears to contradict one part of a sweeping denial that his campaign issued this week to rebut a New York Times story about his ties to a Washington lobbyist.”
He’s lying now, or he lied under oath.
Righteous Bubba said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:51
John McCain’s boner is fair game if he’s running for the boner-restraint party.
Righteous Bubba said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:51
…not that the Times article was brilliant…
mikey said,
February 22, 2008 at 20:53
Look, the real problem is that NOBODY in America or anywhere else wants to think about John McCain naked and sweaty.
Hey, we all like a bit of the porn, and attractive people knockin knees can be a nice little thought in the back room of the cortex, but John McCain? Having Sex? With a HUMAN?
Just. Yuck…
mikey
fardels bear said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:03
“knockin knees” mikey? Um…. I might be doing this wrong….
Kathleen said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:05
the outrage from all of these people at the use of ANONYMOUS SOURCES!!! is so disgusting. I can’t believe I am disgusted by it. I should’ve known.
Righteous Bubba said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:06
“knockin knees” mikey? Um…. I might be doing this wrong….
Now you understand what athletes are putting on the line.
Sarcastro said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:08
Wait a second, I didn’t think the issue was the exact nature of his relationship with a telecom lobbyist while telecom legislation was before his committee but, rather, that there was ANY sort of close relationship with a telecom lobbyist while pertinent legislation was before his committee.
The story reads that they had a relationship so close that even his closest aides didn’t know if it was romantic or not. Hell, the dude can fuck sheep for all I care… as long as there’s not sheep legislation before him in committee.
pedestrian said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:09
John McCain? Having Sex? With a HUMAN?
Yeah, somehow the human bit actually makes it worse. If it were a goat or an ostrich or something it would still be disgusting, but it wouldn’t feel like the universe is coming unglued.
*dry heave*
the knack said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:11
Don’t come a-rockin when our knees are a-knockin’
(that was a b-side)
the front desk said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:12
Senator McCain, you have a call from Dolly on line two…
Kathleen said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:15
With a HUMAN?
as opposed to with CindyBot2000.
Jay B. said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:15
From Joe Coanson in Salon today:
Eight years ago, when McCain’s connection with Iseman alarmed his staffers, the most lucrative lobbying contracts won by Alcalde & Fay were with the cruise ship industry. In 2001 alone, Iseman’s firm received well over a million dollars from passenger ship companies and interest groups, which include local port authorities in Florida as well as companies such as Carnival Cruises. That year, the International Council of Cruise Lines paid Alcalde & Fay a fee of $990,600, by far the largest amount from a single interest that the firm has earned during the past decade. Iseman herself is a longtime registered lobbyist for Carnival.
It may be just a coincidence that around the same time, McCain became a dedicated sponsor of bills to deregulate the cruise and passenger ship industries, which have been hobbled for decades by protectionism and national security laws. Year after year, he promoted legislation that would have permitted greater freedom for foreign-flag cruise ships to operate in U.S. coastal waters, even while he occasionally scolded the cruise operators for persistent safety problems on their boats. During those years, he became known as the best friend of the port authorities, cruise lines and others seeking to rewrite laws dating back to 1886 that protect American ships from foreign competition.
I’m sure it was something that long offended the old Navy man.
There might not be something “illegal” with this, but it ain’t reform, you know?
t4toby said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:17
BREAKING!
Anonymous sources have identified the aforementioned Sheep Lobbyist !
Susan of Texas said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:22
There is no accusation that the candidate did in fact have an affair with the sheep, merely that the sheep lobbied him to ease rules regulating the sheep sex industry.
Mr Garrison said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:25
Oh please, that sheep was a total slut. Raise your hand if you did not have sex with that sheep.
Oh you can all go to hell!
the front desk said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:29
Mr Garrison, Newsweek on line three…
Me said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:39
Apart from everything else, just what do these people have against Sharia Law anyway? Isn’t it basically everything they want in America?
pedestrian said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:43
Apart from everything else, just what do these people have against Sharia Law anyway? Isn’t it basically everything they want in America?
I think it’s one of these Judean People’s Front vs. People’s Front of Judea situations.
Susan of Texas said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:48
Basically, all these people hate free will. They’re still pissed Adam and Eve ate the apple, because otherwise they could live in Paradise, be taken care of, and never have to have a conscious thought. Like crawling back into the womb.
Which, considering how anti-womb they are, is another of life’s little ironies.
pedestrian said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:51
RedState is ready to compromise on the war now. They are willing to abandon Iraq to the certain doom and destruction and genocide that they have predicted, but only if the Democrats promise to fuck up America just as badly. No, seriously.
Athenawise said,
February 22, 2008 at 21:58
I’m late to this picnic, but Brad @ Feb 22 @ 20:33 got it right. McCain’s ties to lobbyists are the worrisome issue, not the innuendo of an affair.
Since the Times had weeks to do the story, you’d think they could have written a powerful, clear account instead of the convoluted mess they published. Others are doing what the Times should have done.
White Male, Jew of Liberal Fascism said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:04
This nation urgently needs to know: did John McCain receive oral sex from Vicki Iseman?
The Democrats need to put aside all other business and start a congressional inquiry IMMEDIATELY.
First order of business: call Mr. McCain and Ms. Iseman to testify.
Tom Maguire said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:09
I think this paper-thin Politico article conclusively proves that Barack Obama is a terrorist sympathizer.
Shorter Brad - I can’t actually read, but my acolytes can’t actually clink links, either, so it’s all good.
Not-Much-Longer Tom Maguire: Geez, a negative story on Obama! Is this a sign of the media backlash I have been forlornly predicting for almost two months, and dare we hope for more?
To Be Fair - an irregular reader might not easily or immediately pick up on my actual point. And Brad clearly has the problems associated with irregularity.
OneMan said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:11
knockin’ knees…You know…bumpin’ uglies, layin’ some pipe, laying wood, playing hide the salami, makin’ bacon, waxing the giraffe, gettin’ busy, the ol’ in-out in-out, clam slammin’, diving off the half-meter headboard, gettin’ jiggy, climbing Mt. Baldy, pickle tickle, the horizontal Mambo.
Boff, boink bonk, hump, screw, nail, shag…
Susan of Texas said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:13
Shorter Tom: Ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, poopy joke.
Susan of Texas said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:18
By the way, the poopy joke seems to be extremely popular among conservatives. Your Jonah Goldbergs and your sad little trolls use it all the time, as if they see the world as continuous cycle of consumption and evacuation.
Righteous Bubba said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:19
McCain’s ties to lobbyists are the worrisome issue
Well sure, worrisome to me and other people who can think properly. Worrisome to the sex-ninny party is what that smell is on McCain’s weenie.
Brad's Acolytes said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:20
Hey, what is this thing next to the keyboard?
Do I need it?
My desk would be SO MUCH neater if I could just put it in a drawer…
Brad said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:27
Tom- oh come now! You cannot argue that this was your point:
Geez, a negative story on Obama! Is this a sign of the media backlash I have been forlornly predicting for almost two months, and dare we hope for more?
When what you actually wrote was this:
Here is another ripple beneath the surface of the Obama campaign - Ben Smith of The Politico reports that Obama is unrepentant about his association with unrepentant Weatherman Bill Ayers. [...]
Just another Friend of Barack.
Nowhere in your post did you throw in any qualifications about how the article was absurdly thin- this graf is the actual “meat” of the story:
“I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers’ house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress,” said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. “[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor.”
Obama and Palmer “were both there,” he said.
Obama’s connections to Ayers and Dorhn have been noted in some fleeting news coverage in the past. But the visit by Obama to their home — part of a campaign courtship — reflects more extensive interaction than has been previously reported.
So: you’ve got Obama visiting the guy’s home at the behest of a local politico who ID’d Obama as her successor. That’s it. That’s the most “extensive interaction” from what has been reported previously. And from this, you consider this guy “a friend of Barrack?” Come ON.
D.N. Nation said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:27
Off topic, but Muir really brought out the stoopid again in today’s Day By Day. It’s more Michelle Obama-bashing by our cherry-haired gal…this time, Mrs. Obama is elitest! And looks down on the poor! This leads me to two thoughts:
1) Uh, what? Where the hell is this coming from? You doofi gonna offer any specifics?
2) I’m sure that Muir and pals spoke out against Babs Bush’s treatment of the poor as members of some subhuman species post-Katrina, and if I were to trudge through the archives of Muir’s hideous website I’d find multiple strips dealing with this. I’m positive of this. Absolutely.
Since when did randroid social darwinists care so much about the poor? Keep grasping, guys.
Righteous Bubba said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:32
Megan’s taking a beating.
http://crookedtimber.org/2008/02/22/mcmuddled/
She has some comically inept stuff in the comments.
Girl from UNCLE said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:33
He’s lying now, or he lied under oath.
But Bill Clinton did too!
There’s your wingnut rebuttal right there.
fardels bear said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:38
I would think that if Tom wanted us to know that this was the start of the media backlash he predicted, the post would contain some indication of that. Maybe a sentence like, “This is the start of the media backlash against Obama that I’ve been predicting.”
That way, his own readers wouldn’t think that he was offering a clearer picture of Obama as a terrorist sympathizer. Like his first commentator who notes that, “And a clearer picture of Obama emerges.” Of course Tom was quick to point out that HE didn’t believe the story and it of course meant nothing except a commentary on the media. Hence his use of the word “Obamanations.”
If Brad weren’t such a dumb liberal that would all be clear.
Malfunctioning Glenn Reynolds Robot said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:46
Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Heh! Indeed! Hehhhhhhhhhh! Indeeeeeeeeeee! Heeeeeeeehhhhhhhhhhiiiiiindeeeeee! hehhindooooooooo
billy pilgrim said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:47
All due respect, the Cindybot DOES seem like quite an advance over the current LauraBot. Doesn’t have that issue with the pinky finger, for one thing. The smile still needs work though.
t4toby said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:48
How old is Tom Maguire?
He must be an old fart, because the issue of irregularity never even occurs to me.
He, Old Man Tom! Project much?
I heard they made something called Metamucil for old guys. I know its true, ’cause John “GET OFF MY LAWN!’ McCain told me so.
the front desk said,
February 22, 2008 at 22:58
…I’m sorry, but Tom is tied up in the men’s restroom at the moment, can I connect you to his voice mail?
Lakeesha Shaidle said,
February 22, 2008 at 23:01
the front desk,
How’s he doing with that Larry Craig interview?
Tom Maguire said,
February 22, 2008 at 23:05
Hee hee! Poop!
Snort said,
February 22, 2008 at 23:05
It goes like this: Tap Tap Tap Tap Tap
billy pilgrim said,
February 22, 2008 at 23:16
But Bill Clinton did too!
and, umm, got impeached for it. Maybe we should start pre-emptive impeachment proceedings against McCain!!
the front desk said,
February 22, 2008 at 23:17
let’s seeeeee…that interview is showing on his schedule… Oh! He’s meeting with him right now. Can I have him call you when he’s free?
eldridgecleaverwasarepublican said,
February 22, 2008 at 23:35
MCCAIN CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN INDICTED ON CORRUPTION CHARGES!!!
There, doesn’t that read better than the rather dull NY Times headline, “Arizona Congressman Is Indicted”?
g said,
February 22, 2008 at 23:39
Oh, ahah! I see from the Politico article that
While Ayers and Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious — and unrepentant — figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement.
So, let’s see what the story is here. 12 years ago, Obama met with a pair of local Chicago activists, who, 15 years prior to THAT did something bad in the name of radical politics, but not bad enough to get charged or convicted with a crime.
They have lived a crime-free life ever since. And when they did that Bad Thing, Obama was 11 years old, and living in Indonesia and Hawaii.
So, clearly, he’s an unrepentant DFH sixties radical…..
Gosh, I’m waiting for David Horowitz to jump in on this one.
Tim (the Other One) said,
February 22, 2008 at 23:44
I have now synthesized all these comments into the following new crime fighting cadre:
The Great American Boner Patrol.
Thank me later
palmbeachmaven said,
February 22, 2008 at 23:45
All due respect, the Cindybot DOES seem like quite an advance over the current LauraBot.
Uh, Cindy McCain is brain-damaged. As First Lady, she would probably have to be briefed daily as to her husband’s name and her address.
From a 9/07 interview:
“In conversation, she will occasionally have trouble remembering certain facts, especially from the recent past, and if you look closely you realize she cannot make her right hand into a complete fist, which has affected her handwriting, if not her ability to grasp a gearshift knob. “It’s not bad,” she says, describing the damage to her hand. “I can function. I have short-term memory loss. I can remember all the major details of my life, but I sometimes can’t remember what happened last week.”
Righteous Bubba said,
February 22, 2008 at 23:45
but not bad enough to get charged or convicted with a crime.
Wikipedia: Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn raised two children, Zayd and Malik, underground before turning themselves in in 1981, when most charges were dropped because prosecutorial misconduct during the long search for the fugitives.[1]
Anne Laurie said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:01
Shorter McCain: I wasn’t BANGING her. It was just ordinary political graft. Nothing to see. Disperse!
No, Sarcastro’s right; what McCain and his defenders are actually offering is “I was ONLY banging her! It had nothing to do with political graft — didn’t you read my campaign literature explaining that I am the Most Ethical Man in the Senate(c)? Nothing to see here — disperse!”
The NYT botched its presentation, because botching has become the default setting at the NYT, but McCain’s oft-proclaimed Ethical-ness is a genuine story. And there’s a certain poetic justice to the way he’s mousetrapped himself with Iseman: either he’s spending too much time snogging a cute blond, which appals the Huckaboobies, or he’s spending too much time snogging a lobbyist, which appals the JM-Is-The-Most-Electable back-room politicos. Of course, the simplest explanation is that Iseman is a floor wax and a dessert topping… she got some excellent legislative favors for her high-dollar clients, and whether getting those favors involved rides on anything more individualized than those clients’ corporate jets is important only to her, her gynecologist, and the Talibangelical wing of the modern RNC.
Tim (the Other One) said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:07
heh..heh…heh heh…Anne Laurie said “rides on” heh..ummm.heh heh…..
billy pilgrim said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:13
Uh, Cindy McCain is brain-damaged. As First Lady, she would probably have to be briefed daily as to her husband’s name and her address.
dammit, now I feel guilty.
Makes you wonder, though, why McCain is putting her through this?
SamFromUtah said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:14
just what do these people have against Sharia Law anyway? Isn’t it basically everything they want in America?
Same shit, different God.
Makes a difference to the god-botherers, but not to me.
billy pilgrim said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:16
Anne Laurie, I think it’s more than that. NOBODY should be forced to contemplate the possibility of John McCain’s ‘O’ face.
It’s like those old creepy Bob Dole Viagra ads.
[looking for brain bleach now]
Anne Laurie said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:16
Uh, Cindy McCain is brain-damaged…
Yeah, as the result of long-term drug abuse. Of course, those were “prescription painkillers” which she was alternately stealing from her personal Third World Charity Boutique and forging her employees’ names to obtain, so it’s not like she was some kind of lowlife JUNKIE or anything. The Rush Limpbaugh Defense: It’s illegitimate to pick on a rich unfortunate with “addiction issues”, unless of course the rich unfortunate is a Kennedy, because nothing’s as entertaining as making fun of a Kennedy. Oh, and both Michael Moore and Al Gore are FAT.
palmbeachmaven said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:24
Makes you wonder, though, why McCain is putting her through this?
Yes, it does. Cindy McCain hinted in a 2005 Larry King interview that he was kind of put off about her stroke:
KING: Has the senator been very sympathetic?
MCCAIN: Yes. And I — please don’t — let me explain that. He was very confused in the beginning. He didn’t — like everyone in the family, how could it happen to my wife? I’m 18 years older than she is. It doesn’t happen to someone that’s younger than you are. So on his behalf, I think he’s trying to understand all this. It’s a lot for him to take in.
I suspect that Cindy McCain’s health is worse than has been disclosed. In October of last year, she fell in a Phoenix grocery store and hobbled around on crutches for awhile.
Is McCain putting his ambition before his wife’s well-being?
t4toby said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:29
David Letterman said McCain reminds him of a Wal-Mart greeter.
That pretty much sums it up.
Where did old Constipation Boy go?
His bio on the HuffPo says he a ‘former Wall Streeter’.
Clears up quite a bit, actually.
g said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:36
Cindy McCain hinted in a 2005 Larry King interview that he was kind of put off about her stroke
One of the articles I posted yesterday in another thread, she said she went away to San Diego or someplace by herself for 4 months to do her rehab, and that he wasn’t happy with that.
Someone pointed out somewhere else - she was a young rich girl and he was an old poor guy. Doesn’t it usually work the other way around - the young poor one marries the old rich one for their money? What’s up with that?
Susan of Texas said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:39
A former employee whose name she was using to steal illegal drugs said, “During my short tenure at AVMT I have been surrounded by what on the surface appears to be the ultimate all-American family. In reality, I am working for a very sad, lonely woman whose marriage of convenience to a U.S. Senator has driven her to: distance herself from friends; cover feelings of despair with drugs; and replace lonely moments with self-indulgences.”
This woman shouldn’t have to handle the pressure of being first lady.
Lakeesha Shaidle said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:39
The clown car racing team over at Red State has jumped on this, too. Gasbag Paul Cella is doing the honors.
Lakeesha Shaidle said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:42
What makes anybody think he’d hang on to Cindy if he got elected? He’s probably planning on only one term anyway, so he wouldn’t have to give a shit what anybody thought of him. I can see him pulling a real classy Newt-Gingrichy move.
Righteous Bubba said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:50
I can see him pulling a real classy Newt-Gingrichy move.
Maybe she could go on a long good-will mission to Afghanistan.
OneMan said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:51
Not to go all honorable on y’all but I hated it when the press and the wingers jumped on Hillary; I hate it that Michelle is getting the same treatment and I think there’s something to be said for leaving the potential First Lady out of it.
McCain has given us plenty of rope to hang his slimy ass with, don’t drag her into it too.
Of course, that’s just OneMan’s opinion.
SamFromUtah said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:53
Of course, that’s just OneMan’s opinion.
Make that two.
Grand Moff Texan said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:56
Chris Bowers has asked for help with googlebombing
I hear and obey.
.
White Male, Jew of Liberal Fascism said,
February 23, 2008 at 0:57
Three.
Duros62 said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:03
I’m late to this picnic, but Brad @ Feb 22 @ 20:33 got it right. McCain’s ties to lobbyists are the worrisome issue, not the innuendo of an affair.
True. But the lurid got our attention, didn’t it? And wasn’t that the point?
Duros62 said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:05
Since when did randroid social darwinists…
I read that as social arsonists.
Susan of Texas said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:07
Practically speaking, it doesn’t matter one way or another. We’re not going to change anything with our comments. But Cindy McCain shouldn’t be First Lady and that needs to be said. Imagine for one second if a Democratic candidate’s wife had that kind of history–drug abuse, theft, lying and covering it up, exposing innocent employees to criminal prosecution, and then her husband’s people trying to retaliate against one whistleblower by having him thrown in jail. My god, it’d be a Limbaughpalooza of hate and invective.
billy pilgrim said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:10
Shit, I was just trying to make a joke about the LauraBot…..
I SAID I felt guilty. Make that two of us for the asshole brigade, mikey….
mikey said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:11
We should form a 12 step program.
We are powerless behind our assholism…
mikey
Righteous Bubba said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:16
But Cindy McCain shouldn’t be First Lady and that needs to be said.
I’ll accept any nitwit as first whatever.
Duros62 said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:16
All due respect, the Cindybot DOES seem like quite an advance over the current LauraBot.
The eyes are still dead inside.
Susan of Texas said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:19
I’ll accept any nitwit as first whatever.
I’ve had to vote against Bush four times. I’m tired of nitwits. I want someone who can do the darn job. THe First Lady doesn’t matter, but I’d rather she didn’t come attached to McCain.
Hypocritical Left said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:24
Obama is unlikely to actually be a terrorist sympathizer; instead, like most liberals, he gets an atavistic thrill from the leftists who actually take their authoritarian philosophy seriously and put it into action.
Bill Ayers is, as I argued on a previous thread, unrepentant criminal filth. His grotesque existence is an embarrassment for the Left but one you can’t exactly run from; after all, his actions were completely in line with the coercive and totalitarian beliefs of the American Left.
What I always wonder about with these quiescent radicals is how much they might appreciate some new leftist radicals upsetting the tranquility in which they currently live. If it was OK for Bill Ayers to plant bombs and praise Charles Manson, why wouldn’t it be OK (by his reasoning) for some leftist radicals today to plant a bomb, for example, in his office? You see it’s only fun until someone gets hurt.
Since once of you brough it up, conservatives like me, who actually believe in the rule of law, applaud the arrest and conviction of Eric Rudolph. We don’t get a secret thrill from criminal violence, but that’s because we don’t believe in an all-encompassing totalitarian state forcing all of us to be “good”. That’s what Ayers presumably wanted, but now that violent filth is a tenured University professor, the archetype of the hypocritical left.
gbear said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:24
Mikey and Billy, just remember that when you get to the step where they ask you to surrender to a higher power, it’s not the phone company…
Righteous Bubba said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:25
Oh right. Obviously no McCain means no Cindy. But she’s not an issue as such to me. She might be to the god-botherers in her husband’s party.
Righteous Bubba said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:26
If it was OK for Bill Ayers to plant bombs and praise Charles Manson
And the person who said that was…
the front desk said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:28
Hello, city police? There’s some kind of crazy man screaming nonsense in front of our building and bothering everyone. Could you please send a car by to chase him away? Thank you so much. Bye.
Susan of Texas said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:28
I dont’ know why the idea of her becoming first lady bugs me. Maybe it’s because of all the junk Sen. Clinton had to put up with. To say a first lady is off limits only seems to work for Republicans.
Righteous Bubba said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:34
As with McCain’s boner Cindy’s a non-issue to me, but she might be an issue to McCain’s constituents. I think she’s news if a paper wants to print it, I wouldn’t.
There’s a funny karma involved in hugging slimeballs.
billy pilgrim said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:35
“Hi. My name is billy pilgrim.”
“Hi, asshole!”
Lakeesha Shaidle said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:36
Hypocritical Left,
Let me guess…..this is central to your point? I think I smell a pantload.
billy pilgrim said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:38
Bubba, I just want to GET away from talking about mcCain’s boners, O face, jism, squirts, spasms, and rectal urges.
I don’t have that much bleach….
atheist said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:39
It is a strange thing to see someone fight against their own imaginary enemy.
Susan of Texas said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:39
“If there were more Erich Rudolphs, Timothy McVeighs, Benjamin Smiths and Buford Furrows in America, we’d have a much nicer place to live. ”
“Hail Erich Rudolph. I’m just sad that he didn’t have a larger support network that could’ve kept him off the streets. We need to form communities so that we can protect each other like they do in Palestine, Northern Ireland, Afghanistan, Iraq and Chechnya. We will soon be under seige ourselves.
As Chester Doles, David Duke, Matthew Hale, Christine Greenwood, and many others have demonstrated, you do not have to be violent to have your life destroyed by the Jewish occupation forces and the pigs who are “just doing their job” in destroying our country and freedom.
You guys who think that revolutionaries make us look bad should go join the Republican party. I’m over you.”
Right-wing News, quoting Stormfront
“My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.”
- Ann Coulter
Smiling Mortician said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:44
I’m not so interested in Cindy McCain’s fitness for office, since she isn’t running for one. I am, however, interested in her husband’s attempts to cover up her criminal acts and retaliate against the whistleblower who brought them to the attention of the DEA. I hear he’s running for office. The husband, not the whistleblower.
Oh, and GlassHausBoi seems now to be playing a game of I know I am but what am I, are you? or something.
Gary Ruppert said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:45
The fact is, you liberals
We Liberals said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:46
Hmmm?
Smiling Mortician said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:49
Jeez, Bubba, those huggy pics have kind of a dom-sub vibe. I really, really wish I hadn’t looked.
Kathleen said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:51
I didn’t know any of that about Cindy either. Now I feel bad too.
Righteous Bubba said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:52
I am, however, interested in her husband’s attempts to cover up her criminal acts and retaliate against the whistleblower who brought them to the attention of the DEA. I hear he’s running for office. The husband, not the whistleblower.
I’d give a pass to the defending the wife thing - I imagine that years hence if my daughter winds up burning down my house in a bong-addled stupor I’ll go to the wall for her. The whistleblower stuff sounds like actual juicy scandal.
HTML Mencken said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:54
Post-storm repairs are complete: I have teh internets again.
Kathleen said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:55
yay! we’ve been worried about you.
Kathleen said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:56
now make us laugh.
t4toby said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:56
Hypocritical Left is officially Glass Houseboy.
Please refer to him by his official S, N! name .
Hey, Glass Houseboy!
Eric Rudolph gives you a boner, doesn’t he? He is what all of you Rightards secretly want to be, isn’t he?
You cannot deny that Eric Rudolph is the face of the modern conservative movement.
See how easy that is?
gbear said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:58
Jeez, Bubba, those huggy pics have kind of a dom-sub vibe.
I agree, Smiling Mort. Bush always looks like an abuser no matter who he’s hugging. He never looks like he’s connecting with the huggee or even in the same dimension as the huggee, he’s just plowing his way forward in time and space, and fuck everyone and everything else. It’s always creepy.
t4toby said,
February 23, 2008 at 1:58
That’s right, Glassy.
ERIC MOTHERFUCKIN’ RUDOLPH!
mikey said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:01
A toast to the return of our friend Mencken!
Now write something, slacker…
mikey
Hypocritical Left said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:04
I’m fairly certain that my earlier statement praising Rudolph’s arrest and conviction is enough answer to your pathetic response.
None of you can bring yourselves to condemn Ayers, for the simple reason that you are all hypocrites, savoring Ayer’s criminal activity and violently puerile actions while acting shocked - just shocked - that some criminals are not leftist.
The modern conservative movement is about limiting governmental power - including and especially the power to tax and thus control behavior. I am disgusted by the current administration, which bears no resemblence to conservatism, but we conservatives can say this and try to re-align our party to our ideals. Rudolph, etc never represented conservatism, but Bill Ayers, Ward Churchill, the Duke 88 etc really are the mainstream Left. It’s an incredibly bitter pill for you to swallow, but its evident you aren’t even trying to distance yourself from these people.
And that’s the fact you are all running from. I see your chins trembling as you try to snark your way out of it, but you can’t. Try again, hypocrites.
dadanarchist said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:04
You know, with all this talk of Communist parents in the 1950’s, I was wondering something:
does that mean that David Horowitz is half-black?
Susan of Texas said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:07
I’m fairly certain that my earlier statement praising Rudolph’s arrest and conviction is enough answer to your pathetic response.
Good. Now denounce Ann Coulter, or you’re a violence-loving hypocrite.
g said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:09
So, HL, how badly did that grade in Professor Ayers’ class deep-six your GPA?
g said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:13
Bill Ayers, Ward Churchill, the Duke 88 etc really are the mainstream Left.
why of course they are! That’s why they appear on cable TV all the time as spokesmen, and get those HUGE fees for all the speaking engagements we hire them for. And those best-selling books of theirs - we offer huge discounts on their books on our websites!
Who is “the Duke 88?” I have no idea who you’re talking about.
dadanarchist said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:14
“None of you can bring yourselves to condemn Ayers”
Ayers was, and still seems to be, an egotistical, unrepentant douchebag. He was an idealistic if highly delusional wannabe revolutionary in the 1960’s, and now makes money off his delirium today.
There, are you fucking happy?
Besides, if you knew anything about WU you would know that most people considered Dohrn the real brains of the operation.
Wiser, better leftists than myself have condemned Ayers plenty, starting with his former Weathermen compatriots Mark Rudd and Brian Flanagan. Others leftists who have criticized WU are too numerous to list, but range from tepid left-liberal Todd Gitlin to Marxist geographer and urban critic Mike Davis.
Hypocritical Lecter said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:15
Bill Ayers is helping your career isn’t he? Apparently he likes you and you like him too.
Do you think that Bill Ayers wants you sexually? True, he is much older but do you think he visualizes scenarios, exchanges, fucking you?
Gerontophilics Anonymous said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:20
Anne-Laurie said: “and whether getting those favors involved rides on anything more individualized than those clients’ corporate jets is important only to her, her gynecologist, and the Talibangelical wing of the modern RNC.”
Respectfully disagree. Any evidence (graphic, visual, or otherwise) would be of utmost importance to the public and must be disseminated urgently.
Sincerely,
Gerontophilics Anonymous
tigrismus said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:20
All due respect, the Cindybot DOES seem like quite an advance over the current LauraBot.
The eyes are still dead inside.
Can you blame them? Poor things.
Lesley said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:20
I’m secretly hoping for an expose involving McCain, an Intern, and a BJ. If he’s smoking a Cuban at the same time, that would be icing on the cake.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:22
The modern conservative movement is about extending governmental power - including and especially the power to spy on, arrest, imprison, and torture anyone they consider an enemy.
Which includes most Americans.
Fixed your typo, hypocrite.
g said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:24
I think maybe Professor Ayers refused to be on GlassHouseBoy’s thesis committee.
mikey said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:25
Ok, alright, I guess I’m curious and bored enough.
Over to wiki. Type in Aye Why Eee Are Ess.
Here he is. Weather Underground. Those guys.
So lets see, Hysterical Left is so spun up, lets check this boy’s body count.
WHAT? Three?? That’s IT? And waitaminute, they were his FRIENDS and they were killed by ACCIDENT?
And let’s see here. Hmm, this is interesting. Looks like most of the bombings and acts of violence were incited and enabled by FBI/COINTELPRO infiltrators. Sheeesh. No wonder they couldn’t prosecute.
Hey Glassboy. You serious? This is your devil incarnate?
Hell, babe, in 1970 I killed more people, blew up more shit and basically did a whole bunch more evil than this guy’s worst wet dream. This was a sex and drugs dilettante terrorist. Dood, they called in to get the buildings evac’d before the bomb went off.
Man, Glassy, you need two things. A script for some better meds and something to fucking DO…
mikey
Susan of Texas said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:25
Still waiting for the hypocritical right to denounce Ann Coulter.
g said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:26
I think GlassHouseBoy doesn’t like Ayers cuz Ayers didn’t say “I’m sorry.”
Smut Clyde said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:26
I imagine that years hence if my daughter winds up burning down my house in a bong-addled stupor I’ll go to the wall for her.
If I’ve told my daughter once I’ve told her a thousand times, turn the stove off after spotting hash!
Krassen said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:27
So a day after the McCain graft allegations, another Arizona GOP lawmaker is indicted on graft charges… What are the odds? You may think that the Republicans may be corrupt or something…
Lesley said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:27
Hey, maybe someone can answer this because I’m at a loss. Aside from the lying bastard neocons who exploit rumours and petty events to bring down democrats, do most Americans really care about the sexual peccadilloes of their heads of state?
owlbear1 said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:35
Wow, its amazing to watch someone work themselves into a frothy fear.
BOO!!
Leftests gonna get ya in yer sleep!
OneMan said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:36
Lesley,
Based on Clinton’s approval numbers, I’d guess the answer is, ‘no.’
El Cid said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:36
How on Earth did the authorities ever manage to hunt down those hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of Weather Underground terrorists?
I gather from much of the preceding discussion that it was a huge, huge movement, which destroyed vast swaths of developed infrastructure during the “turbulent ’60’s(c)” .
After all, it would have to be huge numbers, vast multitudes, because it’s physically impossible for small numbers of people to aim to blow up stuff, because otherwise how would such a movement prosper and grow for decades given how often amateur bombers blow themselves up?
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:38
Lesley, let’s see what Michael Gerson has to say. Just for laffs.
Sitting among the journalists, I experienced something like a flashback from a forgotten war. Late in the 2000 election campaign, Gov. George W. Bush — whom I worked for at the time — was forced to admit a youthful DUI conviction, which reinforced a public image of frat-boy recklessness.
Bush was 30 years old at the time of his ‘frat-boy recklessness’.
Even if the accusation of infidelity were true, this kind of past relationship is hardly disqualifying for high office anymore, given a series of more prurient precedents. An affair between adults is a far cry from President Bill Clinton’s exploitation of an intern, which involved not merely a failure of character but also an abuse of power.
Clinton did it!
(And Monica was a 22 year old former intern at the time of the alleged exploitation.)
But at this point, it is the Times and not the candidate that should be mortified. If this is all the Times has — sexual innuendo and anonymous sources — it really is a scandal.
Somebody get Judge Starr on the case, I’m sure he’ll get to the bottom of things.
Dr BLT, Recovering Troll said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:38
It is refreshing to note your intellectual honesty on the McCain non-scandal. The New York Times is looking more and more like the National Inquirer everyday. In their eyes, McCain is…
Born to be Smeared (Lookin’ for the Blue Dress)
Dr BLT and SteppinSmear (parody)
http://www.drblt.net/music/Born2BSmearDemo2.mp3
but I guess…
That’s Politics
Dr BLT copyright 2008
http://www.drblt.net/music/ThatsPolitixDemo2.mp3
As far as Obama is concerned, I must return the intellectual honesty by admitting that he’s got a lot going for him, much more than Hillary, who has two big buns and no beef (and I say that figure-atively). If it were a personality contest, I would vote for Obama. He’s one cool dude. But, he’s a little too far to the left in his views, so I’m voting for…
The Maverick
Dr BLT copyright 2008
http://www.drblt.net/music/MaverickDemo2.mp3
Urban Dictionary said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:44
If he’s smoking a Cuban at the same time, that would be icing on the cake.
Indeed.
t4toby said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:44
I hereby denounce all douchebags.
Ayers - Douchebag
Churchill - Probably a douchebag. Never bothered to see why he got the Right all lathered up
Glass Houseboy - Double D Douchebag
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:46
I see your recovery is not going well, Dr. Sammich.
I’m sorry for your loss. I do expect your patriotic support of our next president, though. Or are you planning to flip-flop on this?
El Cid said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:47
Well, at least now we know that we can rely on John McCain to keep our nation straight and steer the ship of state with a strong hand, because someone has “written” a terrible song to that effect.
Smut Clyde said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:49
steer the ship of state with a strong hand
Is that what the kids are calling it?
gbear said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:50
BLT. It’s always impressive to see you’re total immersion in and dedication to the DIY ethic. One man band, one man promotion machine, one man fan club.
MrWonderful said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:52
HL, more in sadness than in anger, refers to himself thu:
“conservatives like me, who actually believe in the rule of law…”
Then the past seven years must have been sheer hell for you. My sympathies.
Unless you mean “believe in” the way children “believe in” Santa Claus. In which case, the last seven years, etc.
MrWonderful said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:53
…refers to himself THUS:
(My sympathies made me type too fast.)
Brittany Spears said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:57
…moms like me, who actually believe in a committment to childrearing…
Smiling Mortician said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:00
So a day after the McCain graft allegations, another Arizona GOP lawmaker is indicted on graft charges…
No, no, Krassen. It’s tastier than “another Arizona GOP lawmaker.” It’s Rick Renzi, aka McCain’s Arizona co-chair. Bad couple of days for St. John.
Fozzetti said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:00
Leslie: #
” . .do most Americans really care about the sexual peccadilloes of their heads of state?”
They SHOULD: *IF* the same rep/senator is legislating on the issues. For instance, if Bill Clinton had tried to have a law passed making oral sex illegal, (or required for all presidents) *then* his blow job would be relavant.
Dr BLT, Recovering Troll said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:08
“gbear said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:50
BLT. It’s always impressive to see you’re total immersion in and dedication to the DIY ethic. One man band, one man promotion machine, one man fan club.”
I believe it was Three Dog Night that once said in a song, “One is the Loneliest Number.” If you became a fan, it would be much less lonely.
Dr BLT, Recovering Troll said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:10
“I see your recovery is not going well, Dr. Sammich.
I’m sorry for your loss. I do expect your patriotic support of our next president, though. Or are you planning to flip-flop on this?”
You see the sandwich as half empty, I see it as half full. And, no, I am not planning on doing any flip-flopping. I will continue to be every bit as consistent in my inconsistency as I am now.
Dr BLT, Recovering Troll said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:12
“El Cid said,
February 23, 2008 at 2:47
Well, at least now we know that we can rely on John McCain to keep our nation straight and steer the ship of state with a strong hand, because someone has “written” a terrible song to that effect.”
So I guess this means you liked the other two songs? As Meatloaf once said in a song, “Two outa Three Ain’t Bad.”
Lesley said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:12
Since the neocons and tabloid journalists are hell bent on petty judgements, I encourage McCain to hire insatiable psychopath Rachel Marsden in any capacity, as long as he also calls her an Intern.
Lakeesha Shaidle said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:19
Doc Sammich, I believe that Jonah Goldberg has released a 21-st century version entitled “One is the Doughiest Number.”
gbear said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:21
Three Dog Night? How about XTC instead?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ9ieVLaLo8
No Thugs In Our House.
klyde said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:23
It’s not about the sex with McCooCoo it is his cozy relationships with and the favors he does for contributors.
Jay B. said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:24
Yeah, me, I’m a conservative. My movement is dedicated to everything that hasn’t happened since conservatives took power in the 80’s, and not at all before then either. As a lifelong conservative and a big stickler for the rule of law, I’ve long admired how every administration that ran and ruled as self-described conservatives have eviscerated the Constitution increased government AND the surveillance state while I sat on my ass and bitched about Democrats. And when I don’t espouse my ultra-awesome conservative bonafides, I live in a big house surrounded by a moat filled with cotton candy and gummy bears which I use to train my ant army.
gbear said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:26
Lakeesha, I always heard it as ‘One is the Most Basement Entrenched Number’. Thanks for the correction.
El Cid said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:31
No, the other two songs were just so sad I didn’t have the heart to even mock them. I’m just not a cruel person, and I thought I would leave them to ponder their misery on their own.
After experiencing “that’s politics” I shall now assume that any random exhalation by tired people hoping to change the subject from here on out are to be considered “songs” — which, on the plus side, fills the entire world with “songs”, just, unfortunately, the kinds of “songs” which have little (i.e., nothing) to do with the concept of “music” which many of us have also experienced.
Hypocritical Left said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:39
Susan asks me to “denounce” Ann Coulter. Susan, denouncing is something Maoists like you do in your Orwellian groupthink sessions. I am no fan of the woman, although she is savvy enough to make a lot of money winding up liberals.
G snarks about the Duke 88, then admits he has no idea who they are. Look it up, G; they are the tenured professors at Duke who libeled their own kids when a race baiting prosecutor framed them. As for the reference to speaking engagements etc, perhaps you really don’t understand what professors do. Ayers (and until recently Churchill) live off the public tit. They spew venom at ordinary Americans while living in luxury off their taxes.
Ifthethunder and Mr Wonderful, yes I am thoroughly disgusted with Bush. The Republican expansion of government shows that all power corrupts, not just power in the hands of those with whom we politically disagree. That’s why conservatives wisely seek to restrict the power of the government, and want to ensure all people with power are subject to oversight and to checks and balances. I think that anyone who disagrees with that statement is not really a conservative; this is perhaps subject to debate. In any case, conservatives don’t have to live with tenured professors advocating the bombing of Americans; liberals do. Do you think your hand waving about Bush can make anyone forget that?
Finally, Mikey, it’s not about his body count. Any regular reader of S,N! realizes that you are lethal killing machine who would gladly drop anyone to the right of Pol Pot - I see as usual you’ve taken the opportunity to remind us of that fact. Ayers is criminal filth, sneering at an American public that he (rightly) believes he’s taken advantage of his entire life. Born to privilege and wealth, Ayers coupled his intense narcissism with his sociopathic disregard for other people; his girlfriend publically mocked the victims of Charles Manson while Ayers plotted the murder of American soldiers. Because of government misconduct, Ayers never had to answer for his crimes, and now inhabits a university sinecure which assures of him of lifelong comfort and security. He says he is “guilty as hell, and free as a bird”, a sociopath who leers at us with a vicious death’s grin. Compared to Ayers, Ward Churchill is a sad figure, pathetically claiming membership in a Native American tribe that tells him, puzzledly, that he simply isn’t one of them, a man who actually lost his secure perch by his own stupidity and intellectual dishonesty. Ayers is example of the crime that pays, an American Leftist who profits from and revels in his past crimes.
Smut Clyde said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:41
The loneliest number is in fact 40585.
This has been your daily moment of gratuitous maths geekery.
Susan of Texas said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:45
“Susan, denouncing is something Maoists like you do in your Orwellian groupthink sessions.”
LOL, as the kids say. I’m going to put that on my business card. Susan the Maoist. Available for Orwellian groupthink sessions. Reasonable fees.
gbear said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:48
Ayers is example of the crime that pays
Hmmmm, Enron, Enron, rings a bell but I can’t quite remember the details….
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:49
That’s why conservatives wisely seek to restrict the power of the government, and want to ensure all people with power are subject to oversight and to checks and balances.
When’s the last time that happened?
I specifically recall a reference to modern conservatism in your post.
Edmund Burke has been dead a couple of years or so, I believe.
atheist said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:51
Damn. Houseboy really is that fucking stupid.
gbear said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:53
The loneliest number is in fact 40585.
Well cut off my legs and call me shorty! You’re right! It is the lonliest number since the number one. And look! Two CAN be as sad as one! Who’da thunk it…
gbear said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:55
Oops. imagine closed italics. It isn’t hard to do.
Patkin said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:56
puzzledly
This is not a word.
Like everything you say, it is manufactured from the diseased mind of someone who should get help.
mikey said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:56
you are lethal killing machine who would gladly drop anyone to the right of Pol Pot
Dood, try to concentrate. I’m a flatulent old man with high blood pressure and a history of addiction. Not much of a machine, sorry.
I am, however, unwilling to be intimidated by right wing assholes. Too much water under the bridge and not enough left to lose. So you keep frothing at the mouth about a washed up dillatente hippie incompetent bomber with a body count of ZERO.
In the meantime, my country, you know, the one I went to war for, will try to recover from the criminal behavior and violation of the oath of office represented by the fuckers who lied and cheated their way into office.
And when you and your ilk are marginalized and laughed at, when you count for nothing but a cautionary tale of what was and could have been again, and the people who love this nation and what it stands for take power and try to save everything that’s important, I can heave a heavy sigh of relief and go gently into the darkness of my future.
And if you guys want to tear this nation apart and spill blood in the streets, well, just make sure you’re up to what you wish for, ’cause some of us will dance with you…
mikey
Hypocritical Left said,
February 23, 2008 at 3:56
There are many problems within modern conservatism, and my political interests lie there. Major problems are caused by framing conservatism as a “family values” movement - nonsense considering the social conservativism of a great many Democratic constituencies - or as some kind of “low tax” movement in and of itself. While I believe the power of the government to tax should be severely limited, I believe that only because the level of taxation is directly proportional to the amount of power the government exerts over its citizens.
Libertarianism, in my view, is garbage. Republicans may be accused of being born on third base and thinking they hit a triple, but libertarians think the same thing, only they also wonder why everyone else can’t hit a triple too.
Snark about this all you want children, my beliefs are well thought out and internally consistent. My disgust with modern conservatism is nothing compared to my contempt and visceral hatred of criminal scum like Ayers.
dadanarchist said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:02
“Susan, denouncing is something Maoists like you do in your Orwellian groupthink sessions”
That’s rich, coming from the man who said this (”none of you can bring yourselves to condemn Ayers”) just up the thread.
g said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:03
Ayers (and until recently Churchill) live off the public tit
Umm, sadly no. Universityof Chicago is a private institution.
Fozzetti said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:04
Mikey: I love you!
hypocritical bickle said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:06
Snark about this all you want children, my beliefs are well thought out and internally consistent. Now I see this clearly. My whole life is pointed in one direction. There never has been a choice for me. My disgust with modern conservatism is nothing compared to my contempt and visceral hatred of criminal scum like Ayers.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:06
Snark about this all you want children, my beliefs are well thought out and internally consistent.
Dream on. And go away, faux patriot. You are part of the pollution.
Isn’t there some right-wing blog audience you could be lecturing to?
We Sadly,No!sians aren’t interested in shifting deck chairs on the GOP Titanic.
We just want it to go away.
Great Gazoogle said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:07
Susan, denouncing is something Maoists like you do in your Orwellian groupthink sessions
Results 1 - 10 of about 72 from instapundit.com for denounce
Results 1 - 10 of about 161 from corner.nationalreview.com for denounce.
Snorghagen said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:08
HL describing Ayers:
…a sociopath who leers at us with a vicious death’s grin…
HL describing Ayers on the previous thread:
…the hateful face of leftist violence grinning at us all… his grinning, hateful face… the hideously leering Ayers… leers his sickening serpent’s smile…
HL describing his own mental state:
…my beliefs are well thought out and internally consistent…
Hedley Lamarr from ‘Blazing Saddles’ describing his own mental state:
…My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives. …
Lesley said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:09
My whole life is pointed in one direction.
as long as it’s not straight down….
kenga said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:10
“Perhaps”?
And you don’t seek to restrict the power of corporations … why, exactly?
Um, fuck you? I guess that’s as politely as I can put it.
Hypocritical Left said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:10
G,
Ah, but does Ayers work at the University of Chicago? Sadly, No!
And if I do go away, thunder, does that make the ugly existence of Ayers go away? I don’t think so. Get used to it, hypocritical lefty, ordinary Americans can smell out criminal garbage like Ayers. (Notice how the snark recedes when the points really hit home….)
Oh, and take it easy, Flashback. No one is going to dance in the street with you. Spilling the blood of the Man is kind of a leftist fantasy, donchyaknow; I’m not comfortable in the company of the bomb throwers. Guess I’m not just not cut out to be a Leftist.
gbear said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:11
(Pssst, Leslie, that part of the ‘quote’ is lifted from Taxi Driver)
Smiling Mortician said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:12
That’s some nice research right there, Snorghagen. Every last fucking word of it is central to my point.
Krassen said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:13
Mortician,
thanks for the clarification…
I guess it has been the Season of The Indicted Campaign Chairman,
considering that Larry “Wide Stance” Craig was Romney’s campaign chairman…
dadanarchist said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:13
“Hedley Lamarr from ‘Blazing Saddles’ describing his own mental state:
…My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives. …”
Ha, awesome! My Dad, brother and I watch that movie every father’s day…
Here is Hedley Lamarr describing the modern GOP:
“I want rustlers, cutthroats, murders, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con-men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglars, horse thieves, bull-dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shitkickers, and Methodists!”
Well, not Mexican bandits…
OneMan said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:13
So GHB, help me out here.
You want us to denounce Ayers who several of the good folks here have already conceded is a king-size asshole but for some reason that’s not acceptable.
Meanwhile,
Is this your “well thought out and internally consistent” conservatism at work? Or is it, perhaps, another case of IOKIYAR?
Just askin’.
Patkin said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:15
Snorghagen:
Ditto.
dadanarchist said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:16
“None of you can bring yourselves to condemn Ayers…”
The best part is *I did* condemn Ayers, and listed other “leftists” that did as well, and he has nothing to say about it….
Gary Ruppert said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:17
The fact is, here in the Heartland
mikey said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:17
Y’know, if the Hysterical Left had an idea to offer, if he could write well in english, if he had a case to present and could present it in a coherent fashion, if he could get over his pathetic obsession with a forty year old incompetent wannabe terrorist and was willing to offer some kind of deep commitment and had some kind of personal history to back it all up, then just maybe he’d be…