Friday, October 12, 2007

Friday Free for All

Go for it

Posted by The Game at 10:54 AM

Labels:

28 comments:

PCD said...

http://patterico.com/2007/10/12/
the-new-republic-is-headed-for-a-
great-fall/

I'd like the lefties to admit they have to rely on lies to make their points, and when caught, the go into a Nixonian Stonewall as the New Republic has with their Phoney Hero, Scott Thomas Beauchamp, who is a self admitted liar.

October 12, 2007 12:50 PM
Jim said...

From Paul Krugman of the NYT:

"All in all, the Graeme Frost case is a perfect illustration of the modern right-wing political machine at work, and in particular its routine reliance on character assassination in place of honest debate [emphasis added]. If service members oppose a Republican war, they're "phony soldiers"; if Michael J. Fox opposes Bush policy on stem cells, he's faking his Parkinson's symptoms; if an injured 12-year-old child makes the case for a government health insurance program, he's a fraud. Meanwhile, leading conservative politicians, far from trying to distance themselves from these smears, rush to embrace them. And some people in the news media are still willing to be used as patsies."

October 12, 2007 9:34 PM
Jim said...

Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, former commander of US forces in Iraq. From Stars & Stripes ...

“There is no question that America is living a nightmare with no end in sight,” retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez told a convention of military journalists on Friday...

“The administration, Congress and the entire inter-agency, especially the State Department, must shoulder the responsibility for this catastrophic failure and the American people must hold them accountable.”

October 12, 2007 10:18 PM
jhbowden said...

Suggestions for the benighted:

Right Wing thought of the 1900s

Leftist Thinkers of the 1900s

October 13, 2007 12:19 AM
Marshal Art said...

Here's mine.

Proving the utter lack of worth in the award, the pointlessness of it all, the Nobel Prize was bestowed upon the lunatic AlGore for his tireless work creating fear amongst grade school children. You'd think accuracy and facts would play a role in the awarding of such a "prestigious" award. Of course it lost all prestige once awarded to the likes of Jimma Carter and Kofi Annan, but the point remains. I guess they'll give it to anyone. Of course there'll be no living with the pudge now. This gives him validation more than the Oscar. I thought those Oslo guys were supposed to be smart.

October 13, 2007 12:52 AM
Jim said...

Thank you, Marshall, for the fine quote.

We know where you stand. And more than that, it proves Paul Krugman's point.

And again, your continuous, irrational bashing of the winner of the popular vote in 2000 adds to the evidence that deep down inside, you know he should have been president and you're simply trying make yourself feel better by demonizing him.

October 13, 2007 10:19 AM
Marshal Art said...

Your welcome Jim. Any time.

Your point would be stronger if Krugman wasn't so off base. I don't think, from what I've read thus far, that anyone is assassinating the character of any 12 yr old. They are however pointing out how the wacky left exploits such people to advance their agenda, and then how their use of such unfortunates is inaccurate for the point they are trying to make. Krugman is a poor example to rely upon since he is equally guilty of using only those aspects of a story which support the lie he's trying to assert.

Your irrational clinging to a stat that has no relevance in the American electoral process supports the notion that your candidate was a LOSER and continues to be so. I didn't make up the electoral rules so deep down inside I'm cool with the results. If Gore had won by the rules of the game, I'd only be uncool with it because an idiot is president, not because of any crap about how my guy got jobbed, unless it was proven he did. Frankly, I don't even think about Gore unless he forces himself in the news with his ignorant comments. I'd prefer he'd just fade away like a good loser should. Then I wouldn't have to bash him.

October 13, 2007 5:59 PM
hashfanatic said...

"Your point would be stronger if Krugman wasn't so off base."

Paul Krugman is actually one of the few journalists in America who actually tells the truth.

I don't believe you've actually ever written anything he's ever written, unless someone else posted a link to it for you.


"I don't think, from what I've read thus far, that anyone is assassinating the character of any 12 yr old."

Sure, waking up in the morning, pulling up the blind to see a deranged shirt laundress poking around in the shrubbery and your father's financial records hacked into is how all American children should expect to start their days, with psychotics like you and your mouthpieces running around loose.


"They are however pointing out how the wacky left exploits such people to advance their agenda, and then how their use of such unfortunates is inaccurate for the point they are trying to make."

Yeah, I seem to remember a skinny little Cuban toddler, crying in terror in the arms of his guardian, as a paramilitary mutt held an automatic weapon to his head...

And that's just the shit you've pulled in AMERICA...Michael Yon and his imaginary baby in a casserole, anyone?


"Your irrational clinging to a stat that has no relevance in the American electoral process supports the notion that your candidate was a LOSER and continues to be so."

Well, no, that would be a lie, but anyone with an ounce of sense already understands your whole POINT is to undermine the American electoral system and re-anoint your "unitary executive", and this has fortunately all been journalized in other sovereign lands as well...

More evidence will be revealed as political and economic conditions become favorable.

"I didn't make up the electoral rules so deep down inside I'm cool with the results."

Of course, when you were there cheering on their violation!

Regrettably for you, that's
treachery...

"If Gore had won by the rules of the game, I'd only be uncool with it because an idiot is president,"

What about Goy George?

An idiot, a drunk, and a war criminal IS president, and this is not "uncool" (Jesus Christ, no fool like an old fool) to you? Is this not definitive proof that your loyalty is to party, not country?




"Frankly, I don't even think about Gore unless he forces himself in the news with his ignorant comments."

You posted a lazily-written, barely coherent rant on the man on your own blog, so either you pay rapt attention to the evil "MSM" a bit more than you care to admit to, perhaps you've taken to receiving telepathic "help" messages from Kevin McCullough's transmitter from the funny farm, or your other self-loathing issues are beginning to manifest themselves (much like Kevin McCullough!)

Not that there would be any thing wrong with that...


"I'd prefer he'd just fade away like a good loser should."

If you KNOW your own place in the universe, why not follow your own light?

"Then I wouldn't have to bash him."

Sure, then you can go back to the pallies and the queers.

October 13, 2007 7:05 PM
Marshal Art said...

I'm sorry Hash, did you say something?

October 13, 2007 10:03 PM
hashfanatic said...

Atta boy! :)

October 13, 2007 10:08 PM
hashfanatic said...

Almost four thousand of their military personnel, and over one million innocent Iraqi citizens certainly would have been.

And the 9/11 occurrences could never have happened under Gore, that much I will say.

October 13, 2007 11:00 PM
Jim said...

Spew nonsense? Wrong-o, moosebreath!

You continue this canard that Gore lost under every scenario. It's false. And furthermore, it's untrue.

Read about it.

And I'm much less sore about the election itself than I am about the last 7 years and the fiasco that the Bush presidency is.

October 14, 2007 1:00 AM
blamin said...

No, Jim,

Gore lost under every scenario, until he found one in which “you people” thought he won, at which point you quit looking.

Reminds me of my ex-wife. She would continue to ask the same question of everyone she met, until she
“got” the answer she wanted, at which point she would cease asking the question.

He lost, you lost, American and the world won. Deal with it!

October 14, 2007 4:29 AM
hashfanatic said...

Gore was elected.

The shrub was selected.

BIG difference.

October 14, 2007 7:05 AM
hashfanatic said...

Russ Feingold is amazing, isn't he?

How come you guys don't like to complain about him, or is it like the whole Coulter "hush-hush" thing?

Do any of you guys drink Miller beer?

October 14, 2007 7:39 AM
blamin said...

"Gore was elected.

The shrub was selected."

I guess you were stoned throughout your basic civics class in high school.

Ooops! Sorry! You'll get to that subject matter around the 9th grade.

Be patient, it won't be long. Remember, don't be absent more than the allowed days, and agree with everything your teachers tell you (I know you've had lots of practice) and you'll get there eventually.

October 14, 2007 10:51 AM
Jim said...

Gore lost under every scenario, until he found one in which “you people” thought he won, at which point you quit looking.

I don't usually say things like this here, blamin', but you're an idiot.

ANY reading of the history, sources to which have been provided, will tell you that Gore would have lost using the scenario HE asked for. However, FULL recounts with certain standards would have given him the greater vote total.

So your claim is utterly false.

October 14, 2007 2:13 PM
hashfanatic said...

"I guess you were stoned throughout your basic civics class in high school."

It's entirely possible, but what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

"Ooops! Sorry! You'll get to that subject matter around the 9th grade."

Well, then, the next round of drinks is on you, because, if I'm not mistaken, 9th grade was well prior to the first stolen election.....

And that would be the one in 1980.


"Be patient, it won't be long. Remember, don't be absent more than the allowed days, and agree with everything your teachers tell you (I know you've had lots of practice) and you'll get there eventually."


Excerpt from teachers' comments on one of my primary school report cards...

"Outspoken, sometimes to the point of belligerence..."

Delicious. Absolutely DEE-LISH!

;

October 14, 2007 3:36 PM
Ron said...

This is in response to:
You know what..I'm okay with this, almost.
If congress was going to get rid of the AMT and therefore CUT about 200 million dollars a year of failed liberal social programs that create a permanent underclass of government dependant losers, I would say go for it.

-------------------------------

Game this is the place where many of you burn my ass. You are SO HATEFUL of poor people. I know your knee will jerk and you will say I just don't understand what you are saying but you should look at your self again. After watching you and others here for sometime now I can no longer buy that. You would say you hate the liberals or the liberal principals that fail and cause this, right? Nope, your theory always includes them getting up off their ass or how they are lazy or cons or losers or criminals or minorities(immigration). For someone who inevitably works with them I would think you would know better. You find them a scourge not someone to be lifted. Yes, again, I know that you work with and try to help some of these people. Kudos, I do wonder if some of this comes from your personal frustration on the seeming lack of an answer to this problem.

There are things in nature that dominate over others. There are animals at the top of the chain and animals at the bottom. Some are more skilled than others and some are skilled at different things than other. These are inevitable facts of all living things. Nature, according to Darwin sorts this out with survival of the fittest. We humans are suppose to be a thinking higher order. In this lies the morality in which most liberals look at the poor people. To put a survival of the fittest mentality to the human race seems a bit less than civilized to most liberals. Social Darwinism is unacceptable. For our lives to have value we should care about others, have a sense of community and add to the stream of life. That is a liberal(ok Jason, modern day liberal) mindset. For a conservatives life to have value more is based on individual achievement being the key. There lies the crux of our differences. Yes, there are lazy people that suck off the teat of the government(us). There are also wealthy people that do the same thing.

The fact is that with differently skilled people we need to have a diverse economy. The end of the unions and industrial capability is not only a national security problem, it is a huge economic and social problem too. Many people who could do that work made a good living that was far preferable to the alternatives. It takes certain skills to do that work and it takes certain skills to be a Nasa rocket scientist. All of those people contribute to the capability and vibrantness of our nation. When we import low priced labor, bring down the wages of laborers and ship good, American Dream jobs, overseas. ..that is bad policy. It leaves the poorest among us few options toward a good life. A possible solution would be for us to take the lead in alternative energy and new technologies. Smart and mechanically skilled(all segments of the population) people would be necessary for the development and manufacture of the products.

I and, I am sure, nearly all liberals, agree that lazy people should get off their ass and go to work. As noted above a contribution to community in general is a liberal golden rule. To think one persons experience or life should match that of someone else is idiocy. We all need help in different areas of our lives. Is the way we are trying to solve the problem now the best way? Maybe not. I know some things that have happened(as noted above) will make it a harder problem to solve. We might want to start buy throwing away the shovel.
By the way, do you know what welfare programs and entitlements for the poor cost as a percentage of the budget? If you consider Social Security and Medicare/medicaid as a part then much of it. Take those two out though and it is 2%. About what we give to foreign countries in financial aid in a year. If you love our country you MUST care for the people in it because they are the country.

October 14, 2007 4:39 PM
Marshal Art said...

Ron,

Pay attention here, because I think you've missed it. There is no hatred of the poor coming from the right. There is a frustration due to failed liberal social policies that perpetuate rather than alleviate the problems they set out to solve. The right allows for the fact that there will always be those in true need. But the right doesn't fool itself by claiming to have done a good thing by helping the poor with other people's money. The liberal social policies remove expectation from the equation of helping the needy and as a result the entitlement mentality has set in deeply. This country is still flush with jobs and opportunity and adults can educate themselves in a variety of ways to improve their situation.

But the one thing that programs of any kind can't fix is the mentality of the individual and how the individual sees the world before him. Successful people don't see themselves as victims, or without the ability to find a way to get where they want to go. But the truth is that when people are without options for handouts, they tend to find ways to get their asses out of jams. Some turn to crime, but they are travelling the same entitlement path. Most get busy doing whatever they can and whatever it takes. And they get it done. It's been that way for me in hard times. I never sought aid because I found the thought embarrassing and humiliating. And the thing is, I'm not highly educated or even ambitious. But there are lines I will not cross and that's what keeps my head above water in the worst of times.

In some cases, the individual might not be technically lazy, but still doesn't have the work ethic neccessary to succeed. Their idea of giving 100% isn't really 100%, but they are too much tainted by the victimhood mentality to understand the difference. To provide easy assistance does nothing to break this mindset.

I'm digressing here. The main point is that the right does not hate the poor, but we hate the liberal ideas that are more of the same failed policies with only the names changed. We also hate that the real aid isn't coming from those who pretend to champion the cause of the needy, but from those forced through taxation.

October 15, 2007 12:17 AM
hashfanatic said...

"...but from those forced through taxation."

AHA!

Then demonstrate your commitment to these lofty values and vote only for candidates that will abolish the income tax entirely!

Hmmm....now, if the income tax is abolished, and we cannot ask the corporations to pay their share, who will pay for wars for special-interest groups and foreign lands? Where will the funds for foreign aid, earmarked for specific foreign lands and peoples, their defense systems, armaments, and "economic development" come from?

Uhhh....guess we better forget that idea.

We can use a FLAT TAX to continue to borrow against our grandchildrens' future, and STILL appease our allies! Woo-hoo!!


HYPOCRITE.

October 15, 2007 12:42 AM
hashfanatic said...

"If you love our country you MUST care for the people in it because they are the country."

Ron?

Oh, these neocons care for people.

Unfortunately for us, none of the people they care about happen to BE Americans.

October 15, 2007 12:44 AM
Marshal Art said...

There you go lying again, you dolt.

I've never been in favor of NO taxation. Support for the system goes without saying. I'm referring to the duties of the federal government. To have to spell such things out for a such a smart guy like yourself is troubling. But then you're really just here to abuse, aren't you you sorry pathetic being.

October 15, 2007 8:29 AM
blamin said...

Excellent synopsis Marshall.

The only thing I would add is the fact that many of the more powerful leftists are fully aware of the mentality some of their policies create. And make no mistake, its purposeful, self-serving, devious, and evil.

It’s just a shame that otherwise intelligent people like Ron, allow themselves to be used by the power-hungry bastards!

October 15, 2007 8:41 AM
hashfanatic said...

"But then you're really just here to abuse, aren't you you sorry pathetic being."

Join a real church, moishe.

October 15, 2007 8:45 PM
Marshal Art said...

Blamin,

Agreed. I like Ron. He's wrong a lot, but he's not the lunatic that some who come here are. I don't want to name any names, but when you want to HASH out a point with someone, some have a poor hold on reality. But they're fun to mock. I like Jim too, but he flirts with the goofy sometimes, like when he claims we know deep down that Gore would have been a bette president. I get a good laugh, but I worry.

October 15, 2007 11:01 PM
Marshal Art said...

"Join a real church, moishe."

OOH! THAT'S tellin' me!

October 15, 2007 11:02 PM
hashfanatic said...

Yeah. We're real GOOFY...

October 16, 2007 2:44 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)