Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Aneristic Illusions => Topic started by: Cain on June 26, 2008, 05:22:20 PM

Title: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on June 26, 2008, 05:22:20 PM
This is the thread where we can document and laugh at all the current wingnuttery and tin foil hattery over the 2008 elections.

For example:

http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/9745.html

Over at Free Republic, they're investigating the Barack Obama Birth Certificate Scandal.

What scandal? They don't seem to know yet, but confidence is fairly high that something will turn up. Here's one essai:

QuoteI belive the reason [Barack Obama] won't release [his birth certificate] is because it lists his full name including the firstname of Barry, not Barack, and lists him as caucasian, not african.

He's worked awfully hard (changing his name to something african sounding and calling himself black, instead of white or mixed) to further his career. He's not about to have that all blown up by the truth that he's just as much white as black.

Um, yeah. Or maybe the doctor's signature trails off and reads "Aieee!" and the document is spattered with human blood. Also, be warned that we mean 'kerners' in the literal sense. A scanned copy of the document was released earlier this month (on Daily Kos and at least one other liberal site), and here's where that's been going:

QuoteThe typeface on [a sample birth certificate from Hawaii, the 'Decosta image,'] is much darker and thicker, and has less kerning (spacing between the letters), than the Obama image. Moreover, the color of the green paper comes through almost all of the letters regardless of magnification or image compression.

By comparison, you will not see the grey and white pixels found between the letters on the Obama image.

When you enlarge the letters in the Decosta image, they all tend to remain solid, especially letters like "I, L, B, E, H," that continue to look the same no matter how large you make them. Conversely, when you enlarge the letters in the Obama image, they start to fall apart — that is, they start losing pixels. This is exactly what happens to bitmapped text created by a graphics program.

OK, now let's compare the borders of both images.

In the Obama image — or, should I say, "images," because the edges of the vertical borders in the Kos image overlap the horizontal ones, whereas the...

People have asked why I'm so fascinated by the right wing in America. I believe this goes some way toward answering the question.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Dysnomia on June 26, 2008, 05:29:46 PM
I was going to shop something saying he's secretly white...but I found this instead.

(http://phatcow.com/Barack-Obama-Rapper.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on June 26, 2008, 05:30:41 PM
Oh its fascinating, until you have to live and work and play with those fuckers. I actually had to explain to half my D&D group that neither Obama nor Hillary are Communists nor Fascists.  *d4 to the forebrain*
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on June 26, 2008, 05:35:17 PM
What's really funny is that this is a carbon copy of the smears the Ron Paul crowd tried on McCain - saying that being born in Panama meant he wasn't a naturalized citizen so he couldn't run for President. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on June 26, 2008, 05:45:26 PM
It's probably a good thing that they are preoccupied with Obama's birth certificate.  They are wasting time trying to find fnords instead of doing something productive like actually campaigning for McCain.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on June 26, 2008, 05:50:52 PM
Its kind of like throwing everything and seeing what sticks - only carried out by retards.

Also, Sadly No! is an incredible source of far-right wingnuts having the piss taken out of them, and now on my daily reading list.  They have even more snark than these forums can contain.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Dysnomia on June 26, 2008, 05:52:19 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 26, 2008, 05:30:41 PM
Oh its fascinating, until you have to live and work and play with those fuckers. I actually had to explain to half my D&D group that neither Obama nor Hillary are Communists nor Fascists.  *d4 to the forebrain*

ugh I know what you mean.  Last year I worked for a christian preschool...   :x :x :x
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on June 26, 2008, 06:39:14 PM
The big problem is that there are always morons out there to spread the shit.

Case in point: A friend of mine is slowly turning into a republican conservative.  When I go and visit him, he actually uses Hannity and Limbaugh as citations and references.

He actually tried to say that if Obama became president, he would put Hillary on the Supreme Court.  And no, he wasn't joking.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Dysnomia on June 26, 2008, 07:44:46 PM
Quote from: LMNO on June 26, 2008, 06:39:14 PM
The big problem is that there are always morons out there to spread the shit.

Case in point: A friend of mine is slowly turning into a republican conservative.  When I go and visit him, he actually uses Hannity and Limbaugh as citations and references.

He actually tried to say that if Obama became president, he would put Hillary on the Supreme Court.  And no, he wasn't joking.

your friend isn't my father by any chance is he?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on June 26, 2008, 07:49:44 PM
ok, i'm not that old.   :lol:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on June 27, 2008, 10:27:27 AM
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks the people who STILL support Hillary Clinton are batshit insane:

http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/9754.html


The bell has tolled: The American Prospect has a hard-edged piece today on Larry Johnson's rise and fall as a liberal hero. Alas, Johnson.

There's a bit more to say, though. The problem wasn't just that Larry went so hard for Hillary Clinton that he began crediting nasty right-wing smears against other candidates: A lot of other liberal bloggers fell into the same trap, to some extent or another, and indeed some of them did us the courtesy of swinging by and going apeshit in comments, where it at least jazzed up our otherwise creaky and threadbare act. The problem seems more in the fact that Johnson is the sort of guy who experiences argument as affront — one of those forceful but brittle people we've all encountered who, if you tell them they're doing something that drives you crazy, will feel compelled to double down and do it even harder, just to prove (perhaps to themselves) that you can't tell them what to say or do.

The Prospect piece covers Larry's mongering of the Michelle Obama 'whitey' rumor, but even that isn't such a big deal in itself. A lot of wack narratives and mudclot rumors were slung around during the Democratic primary this season, and as we've seen with Corrente, Talk Left, and most of the other heavy-hitting Clinton sites, folks have tended to forget their differences pretty quickly since June 3rd, when no doubt remained as to who would be the Democratic nominee. What's become a bigger deal is that as the complaints and protests mounted against the bogus 'whitey' thing and other such anti-Obama rumoroids and memelets, Johnson upped the rancor. He kept it up even after Clinton suspended her campaign, and even now shows no sign of stopping. His advocacy is, in short, an activity no longer coupled to cause-and-effect, to a rational sense of outcome. It has become the obsessive work of a Clinton cargo cultist, a bitter-ender, a retailer of spite.

Johnson's latest idée fixe has been an as-yet-unspecified scandal believed to be encoded in a JPEG scan of a copy of Obama's birth certificate — a field of inquiry in which his efforts have exactly paralleled those of the far-right Freeper crazies. In fact you can read the former piece, a stupendously ding-whoop, yar-yar investigative cowflop emitted by Johnson's co-blogger TexasDarlin, either at Johnson's No Quarter site, or at Free Republic. A comparison of the comments at the two sites is guaranteed to make you wonder who's on which side, and why. Try it and see if you don't come away lightheaded yet crushingly sober. Who are these people?

An irony that often attends upon characters like Larry Johnson (i.e. spooks and related personality types) is that they can be genuinely stunned and hurt when opinion turns against them. The irony dwells in the fact that their professional-issue, otherwise adaptive touch of narcissism can lead them to engage in provocative, chaos-seeking behavior, firstly without realizing that they're doing it, and secondly without realizing that they're doing it specifically to make people react. Sometimes this leads to gems and riches, as when Johnson hilariously left cranky notes in David Brooks's mailbox. Sometimes, though, it just makes you want to crawl under the bed until the yeek goes away. Note to Johnson: It's dusty under here; please just stop.

Also, if anyone's in the mood to stare into the heart of the sun, there's a movement building in the Clinton-or-else cargo cult that leaves behind even Lambert of Corrente, one of the most grudging of hatchet-buryers:

   
QuoteThe prog-bloggers kept shouting: Go! Go! Leave us, Clintonistas! This is OUR party now. Get out out OUT!

    So out we went.

    And we ain't coming back soon.

    [...] We will not forgive those who bigot-baited us simply because we refuse to doublethink our way around the Lightbringer's nonstop lies.

    We have only one way to cleanse the party of Moulitsas, Stassinopoulos, Aravosis, Marshall, Obama, Axelrod, Plouffe, Dean, Brazile and all those other pieces of subhuman sewage. We must make sure that Obama fails — either in August (very unlikely) or in November (more likely) or, if need be, in his presidency.

    After that, and only after that, comes unity. On our terms.

There's a larger (and I think more interesting) story here, but what's striking at the moment is how quickly, in this Internet age, dunces can organize into confederacies.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kurt Christ on June 27, 2008, 05:53:49 PM
So the Democrats are getting reaady for a good, old-fashioned, party purge?
Ready the gulags!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on June 27, 2008, 07:05:48 PM
Cain's House of Wingnuttery: guaranteed to bring you the best in internet insanity.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: nostalgicBadger on June 27, 2008, 09:56:02 PM
I've actually taken to getting my election information from Fox News. Their bias, at least, is blatant and reliable, so I can just read between the lines. With CNN, I don't really know what they're trying to do sometimes.

And bloggers don't know anything.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Fredfredly ⊂(◉‿◉)つ on June 27, 2008, 10:08:32 PM
except cain. he knows everything.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Dysnomia on June 28, 2008, 02:17:24 AM
Quote from: LMNO on June 26, 2008, 07:49:44 PM
ok, i'm not that old.   :lol:

:lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on June 29, 2008, 02:24:27 AM
FINALLY, SOME NEW ANTI-MCCAIN WINGNUTTERY!

Not really.  Well, not yet.  But just wait.  I've been hearing about McCain went crazy in Vietnam is the modern day Manchurian Candidate (from the nuts at the National Review and ronpaul4president.com mostly) and now he has the backing of his former jailor at the Hanoi Hilton.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25418965/

QuoteHAIPHONG, Vietnam - John McCain has an unusual endorsement — from the Vietnamese jailer who says he held him captive for about five years as a POW and now considers him a friend.

"If I were an American voter, I would vote for Mr. John McCain," Tran Trong Duyet said Friday, sitting in his living room in the northern city of Haiphong, surrounded by black-and-white photos of a much younger version of himself and former Vietnam War prisoners.

The wingnuts are going to have a field day with this.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on June 29, 2008, 07:05:56 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 26, 2008, 05:30:41 PM
Oh its fascinating, until you have to live and work and play with those fuckers. I actually had to explain to half my D&D group that neither Obama nor Hillary are Communists nor Fascists.  *d4 to the forebrain*

I've been telling MY D&D group that they ARE.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on June 29, 2008, 07:06:55 PM
Quote from: LMNO on June 26, 2008, 06:39:14 PM
The big problem is that there are always morons out there to spread the shit.

Case in point: A friend of mine is slowly turning into a republican conservative.  When I go and visit him, he actually uses Hannity and Limbaugh as citations and references.

He actually tried to say that if Obama became president, he would put Hillary on the Supreme Court.  And no, he wasn't joking.

Sounds like it's time for an intervention.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on June 29, 2008, 07:07:17 PM
Quote from: LMNO on June 26, 2008, 07:49:44 PM
ok, i'm not that old.   :lol:

I am.  :(
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on June 30, 2008, 02:23:26 PM
Quote from: nostalgicBadger on June 27, 2008, 09:56:02 PM
I've actually taken to getting my election information from Fox News. Their bias, at least, is blatant and reliable, so I can just read between the lines. With CNN, I don't really know what they're trying to do sometimes.

And bloggers don't know anything.

Plus; it's not literature.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on June 30, 2008, 02:27:18 PM
BREAKING: IF OBAMA IS ELECTED PRESIDENT, GANGS OF AIDS INFECTED GAY NEGROES WILL RAPE YOUR CHILDREN.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/KevinMcCullough/2008/06/29/why_obamas_condoms_dont_work

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on June 30, 2008, 04:29:59 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 30, 2008, 02:27:18 PM
BREAKING: IF OBAMA IS ELECTED PRESIDENT, GANGS OF AIDS INFECTED GAY NEGROES WILL RAPE YOUR CHILDREN.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/KevinMcCullough/2008/06/29/why_obamas_condoms_dont_work



QuoteFor the last seven years Congressman Waxman has annually held up funding for abstinence - claiming it didn't work. Of course logical people everywhere are still scratching their heads at that one, because it is 100% scientifically provable that abstinence - when practiced is always 100% reliable.


People actually get away with writing shit like this?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on June 30, 2008, 04:37:34 PM
Townhall.com is SERIOUS JOURNALISM AND COMMENTARY!

:argh!:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on June 30, 2008, 04:51:40 PM
But is it literature?  And does it know all internet conventions?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on June 30, 2008, 05:20:26 PM
Quote from: LMNO on June 30, 2008, 04:29:59 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 30, 2008, 02:27:18 PM
BREAKING: IF OBAMA IS ELECTED PRESIDENT, GANGS OF AIDS INFECTED GAY NEGROES WILL RAPE YOUR CHILDREN.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/KevinMcCullough/2008/06/29/why_obamas_condoms_dont_work



QuoteFor the last seven years Congressman Waxman has annually held up funding for abstinence - claiming it didn't work. Of course logical people everywhere are still scratching their heads at that one, because it is 100% scientifically provable that abstinence - when practiced is always 100% reliable.


People actually get away with writing shit like this?

Technically the sentence is correct, BUT the emphasis needs to be on the words when practiced.  The problem is that almost no one practices it (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-12-19-premarital-sex_x.htm).  And it has also been proven that keeping kids in the dark about sex is worse than telling them about their options.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on June 30, 2008, 05:26:44 PM
No, the sentence conflates "funding for abstinence programs" with "the act of abstaining".

These two statements are both true:

"Programs telling a teen not to have sex are not effective."

"100% Abstinence prevents teen pregnancy."


The rightwingasshat made up the strawman sentence "100% abstinence is not effective" out of the two above statements.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mangrove on June 30, 2008, 08:58:00 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 29, 2008, 02:24:27 AM
FINALLY, SOME NEW ANTI-MCCAIN WINGNUTTERY!

Not really.  Well, not yet.  But just wait.  I've been hearing about McCain went crazy in Vietnam is the modern day Manchurian Candidate (from the nuts at the National Review and ronpaul4president.com mostly) and now he has the backing of his former jailor at the Hanoi Hilton.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25418965/

QuoteHAIPHONG, Vietnam - John McCain has an unusual endorsement — from the Vietnamese jailer who says he held him captive for about five years as a POW and now considers him a friend.

"If I were an American voter, I would vote for Mr. John McCain," Tran Trong Duyet said Friday, sitting in his living room in the northern city of Haiphong, surrounded by black-and-white photos of a much younger version of himself and former Vietnam War prisoners.

The wingnuts are going to have a field day with this.

The 'Have a buddy in the VC' didn't help Kerry. During the whole 'swiftboat' episode, a former VC said pretty much the same thing.

"Even though we were mortal enemies and were firing at each other all day....I'd still vote for him!"
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: nostalgicBadger on July 01, 2008, 03:41:51 AM
Quote from: LMNO on June 30, 2008, 02:23:26 PM
Quote from: nostalgicBadger on June 27, 2008, 09:56:02 PM
I've actually taken to getting my election information from Fox News. Their bias, at least, is blatant and reliable, so I can just read between the lines. With CNN, I don't really know what they're trying to do sometimes.

And bloggers don't know anything.

Plus; it's not literature.

stfuj
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sweeper137 on July 01, 2008, 05:44:42 AM
Quote from: Dysnomia on June 26, 2008, 05:29:46 PM
I was going to shop something saying he's secretly white...but I found this instead.

(http://phatcow.com/Barack-Obama-Rapper.jpg)
u forgot to add the gats and a cadillac with 24s in the background but its close
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on July 01, 2008, 01:24:53 PM
Quote from: nostalgicBadger on July 01, 2008, 03:41:51 AM
Quote from: LMNO on June 30, 2008, 02:23:26 PM
Quote from: nostalgicBadger on June 27, 2008, 09:56:02 PM
I've actually taken to getting my election information from Fox News. Their bias, at least, is blatant and reliable, so I can just read between the lines. With CNN, I don't really know what they're trying to do sometimes.

And bloggers don't know anything.

Plus; it's not literature.

stfuj

What;s the "J" for, spag?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 01, 2008, 03:51:43 PM
Quote from: LMNO on July 01, 2008, 01:24:53 PM
Quote from: nostalgicBadger on July 01, 2008, 03:41:51 AM
Quote from: LMNO on June 30, 2008, 02:23:26 PM
Quote from: nostalgicBadger on June 27, 2008, 09:56:02 PM
I've actually taken to getting my election information from Fox News. Their bias, at least, is blatant and reliable, so I can just read between the lines. With CNN, I don't really know what they're trying to do sometimes.

And bloggers don't know anything.

Plus; it's not literature.

stfuj

What;s the "J" for, spag?

Probably "Jew" going by one of his earlier statements.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on July 01, 2008, 06:54:52 PM
fanTASTIC!


Also; shalom, motherfucker.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on July 01, 2008, 07:03:03 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 30, 2008, 02:27:18 PM
BREAKING: IF OBAMA IS ELECTED PRESIDENT, GANGS OF AIDS INFECTED GAY NEGROES WILL RAPE YOUR CHILDREN.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/KevinMcCullough/2008/06/29/why_obamas_condoms_dont_work




I read this, laughed, then nearly threw up lunch from laughing so hard.  :x
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 01, 2008, 07:25:57 PM
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kovach/080626

Lolz, Obama has a funny name.  So lets run a fucking gag into the ground by making as many unfunny names which echo Obama as possible.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: nostalgicBadger on July 01, 2008, 08:39:53 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 01, 2008, 03:51:43 PM
Quote from: LMNO on July 01, 2008, 01:24:53 PM
Quote from: nostalgicBadger on July 01, 2008, 03:41:51 AM
Quote from: LMNO on June 30, 2008, 02:23:26 PM
Quote from: nostalgicBadger on June 27, 2008, 09:56:02 PM
I've actually taken to getting my election information from Fox News. Their bias, at least, is blatant and reliable, so I can just read between the lines. With CNN, I don't really know what they're trying to do sometimes.

And bloggers don't know anything.

Plus; it's not literature.

stfuj

What;s the "J" for, spag?

Probably "Jew" going by one of his earlier statements.

Cain's right, LMNO. I called you a Jew.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on July 01, 2008, 08:51:35 PM
How incredibly witty of you, goyim.


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Dysnomia on July 01, 2008, 09:01:40 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 30, 2008, 02:27:18 PM
BREAKING: IF OBAMA IS ELECTED PRESIDENT, GANGS OF AIDS INFECTED GAY NEGROES WILL RAPE YOUR CHILDREN.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/KevinMcCullough/2008/06/29/why_obamas_condoms_dont_work



ALL YOU PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HELL BECAUSE YOU'VE HAD SEX OUT OF WEDLOCK!  I OF COURSE, HAVE NEVER HAD SEX EVER, AND AM A VIRGIN.  THEREFORE I GET TO GO TO HEAVEN!
Title: The Obama Deathlist
Post by: Cain on July 27, 2008, 11:24:57 PM
The Obama Deathlist.

Oh yes, not content with the Clinton deathlist, we now have a brand new one for PRESIDENT HUSSEIN X.

QuoteThe Obama Death List

The following is a partial list of deaths of persons connected to Barack HUSSEIN Obama during his time inside the United States. Read the list and judge for yourself...

SARAH BERKLEY - Author of "The Jihad at the Ballot Box" - a book examining Obama's relationship with radical Islam. Died in a mysterious car crash in 2003.

RUSSELL MCDOUGAL - Former FBI operative, January 23rd, 2007. McDougal was known to hold sensitive information about meetings Barack Obama had with arms smugglers. His wife was murdered March 2006 after he went public with his initial reports. His father died July 8, 2006 four hours after McDougal presented his findings on the Savage Nation. Suffered administrative retaliation after reporting discussions by jihadist groups concerning Obama to his superiors.

RODRIGO VILLALOPEZ, a television news camera man who shot the footage of Obama describing small town voters as "bitter" and "clinging to their guns during the primary season.

BRIAN GORING - A defense attorney for Obama patron Antoin Rezko during his trial for extortion and bribery. Died of apparent "natural causes."

MERCEDES HUGLEY, one of Obama's many white, female conquests while at Harvard. Filed sexual assault charges against Obama for date rape in 1990. Because "date rape" was not considered a crime like it is today, she ended up dropping the charges. Two years later, she was found dead of an apparent cocaine overdose.

According to Sadly, No!:

QuoteFun game: Try to determine how many of these people even exist. We're coming up cold blank on several so far, including the 'Sarah Berkley' who wrote the apparently nonexistent book, The Jihad at the Ballot Box — which is, you know, supposed to have tied Obama to radical Islam at some point during his career as an Illinois state senator.
Title: Re: The Obama Deathlist
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on July 28, 2008, 07:41:40 AM
Quote from: Cain on July 27, 2008, 11:24:57 PM
The Obama Deathlist.

Oh yes, not content with the Clinton deathlist, we now have a brand new one for PRESIDENT HUSSEIN X.

QuoteThe Obama Death List

The following is a partial list of deaths of persons connected to Barack HUSSEIN Obama during his time inside the United States. Read the list and judge for yourself...

SARAH BERKLEY - Author of "The Jihad at the Ballot Box" - a book examining Obama's relationship with radical Islam. Died in a mysterious car crash in 2003.

RUSSELL MCDOUGAL - Former FBI operative, January 23rd, 2007. McDougal was known to hold sensitive information about meetings Barack Obama had with arms smugglers. His wife was murdered March 2006 after he went public with his initial reports. His father died July 8, 2006 four hours after McDougal presented his findings on the Savage Nation. Suffered administrative retaliation after reporting discussions by jihadist groups concerning Obama to his superiors.

RODRIGO VILLALOPEZ, a television news camera man who shot the footage of Obama describing small town voters as "bitter" and "clinging to their guns during the primary season.

BRIAN GORING - A defense attorney for Obama patron Antoin Rezko during his trial for extortion and bribery. Died of apparent "natural causes."

MERCEDES HUGLEY, one of Obama's many white, female conquests while at Harvard. Filed sexual assault charges against Obama for date rape in 1990. Because "date rape" was not considered a crime like it is today, she ended up dropping the charges. Two years later, she was found dead of an apparent cocaine overdose.

According to Sadly, No!:

QuoteFun game: Try to determine how many of these people even exist. We're coming up cold blank on several so far, including the 'Sarah Berkley' who wrote the apparently nonexistent book, The Jihad at the Ballot Box — which is, you know, supposed to have tied Obama to radical Islam at some point during his career as an Illinois state senator.

I like how it claims that anyone gave a shit about Obama in 2003, and that date rape was not a crime in 1990. I almost wonder if it was written as a joke.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:16:15 AM
I dunno, the sort of people who listen to Savage Nation are precisely the sort of people I expect to be paranoid about black people in government at any time, and probably still think date rape isn't a crime.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on July 28, 2008, 02:48:54 PM
"It's not?"
  \
(http://imagesforum.doctissimo.fr/mesimages/4078552/Steve-Urkel.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on July 28, 2008, 06:16:54 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:16:15 AM
I dunno, the sort of people who listen to Savage Nation are precisely the sort of people I expect to be paranoid about black people in government at any time, and probably still think date rape isn't a crime.
I don't know.  I'd say that roughly half of his audience listens just so they can laugh at the old crotchety racist retard and feel better about themselves.  He's like the Jerry Springer of radio.

I still say that he's a fake though.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on July 28, 2008, 06:19:13 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on July 28, 2008, 06:16:54 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:16:15 AM
I dunno, the sort of people who listen to Savage Nation are precisely the sort of people I expect to be paranoid about black people in government at any time, and probably still think date rape isn't a crime.
I don't know.  I'd say that roughly half of his audience listens just so they can laugh at the old crotchety racist retard and feel better about themselves.  He's like the Jerry Springer of radio.

I still say that he's a fake though.

Fake or really plays it up.  In fact, I have to wonder about a lot of these Conservative talk show hosts.  How much is actual belief and ideology and how much is just playing to the audience. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on July 28, 2008, 06:25:10 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 28, 2008, 06:19:13 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on July 28, 2008, 06:16:54 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:16:15 AM
I dunno, the sort of people who listen to Savage Nation are precisely the sort of people I expect to be paranoid about black people in government at any time, and probably still think date rape isn't a crime.
I don't know.  I'd say that roughly half of his audience listens just so they can laugh at the old crotchety racist retard and feel better about themselves.  He's like the Jerry Springer of radio.

I still say that he's a fake though.

Fake or really plays it up.  In fact, I have to wonder about a lot of these Conservative talk show hosts.  How much is actual belief and ideology and how much is just playing to the audience. 
After Rush's reaction following the 2006 elections I'd say that he definitely says whatever the Republicans tell him to do. He's the main voice for any and all Republican talking points. 

O'RLY is an idiot and has been drinking his own jenkem for a long time.

Coulter is the best performance artist since Andy Kaufman.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on July 28, 2008, 06:42:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on July 28, 2008, 06:16:54 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:16:15 AM
I dunno, the sort of people who listen to Savage Nation are precisely the sort of people I expect to be paranoid about black people in government at any time, and probably still think date rape isn't a crime.
I don't know.  I'd say that roughly half of his audience listens just so they can laugh at the old crotchety racist retard and feel better about themselves.  He's like the Jerry Springer of radio.

I still say that he's a fake though.

I have not heard savage say anything racist against blacks his #1 replacement host for a while was a black man . crotchety old opinionated and purposefully controversial are all true,  laugh worthy entertainment also true. his best schtick is the fact that he bashes on bush and neocons as much as liberals (unlike the shills orealy and Sean ) . his worst is  some  most of his rabid views on everything..
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 28, 2008, 06:59:21 PM
He bashes on Bush the same way Goebbels bashed on Von Papen.

Also, Weiner (his real name, srsly) follows the well-travelled path of people who went too far to the left early in the life, and so instead of coming round to the centre, decided to pop round to the extremists on the other side.

And while he may not be racist, I have no doubt much of his audience is.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on July 28, 2008, 07:24:09 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 06:59:21 PM
He bashes on Bush the same way Goebbels bashed on Von Papen.

Also, Weiner (his real name, srsly) follows the well-travelled path of people who went too far to the left early in the life, and so instead of coming round to the centre, decided to pop round to the extremists on the other side.

And while he may not be racist, I have no doubt much of his audience is.

Weiner (savage well chosen stage name) is undoubtedly an over the top extremist and one sided, his complaints about bush are rational if unfortunately diluted by his support of all things far right. I cant speak for the makeup of his audience but on the rare occasions i listen to him i do so for entertainment and exposure to a variety of views 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on July 28, 2008, 07:28:12 PM
also his shows format is carefully crafted i lean towards the "i think a lot of it is showmanship done to create buzz" view
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on July 28, 2008, 09:41:20 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on July 28, 2008, 06:42:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on July 28, 2008, 06:16:54 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:16:15 AM
I dunno, the sort of people who listen to Savage Nation are precisely the sort of people I expect to be paranoid about black people in government at any time, and probably still think date rape isn't a crime.
I don't know.  I'd say that roughly half of his audience listens just so they can laugh at the old crotchety racist retard and feel better about themselves.  He's like the Jerry Springer of radio.

I still say that he's a fake though.

I have not heard savage say anything racist against blacks his #1 replacement host for a while was a black man . crotchety old opinionated and purposefully controversial are all true,  laugh worthy entertainment also true. his best schtick is the fact that he bashes on bush and neocons as much as liberals (unlike the shills orealy and Sean ) . his worst is  some  most of his rabid views on everything..
I was talking more about his view on Arabs and Hispanics than black people. Although, according to him racism doesn't exist anymore. And yes, him occasionally going after Bush is priceless.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on July 28, 2008, 10:36:41 PM
I was commenting on the use of the word black in the quoted post . I doubt he is racist against Arabs or Hispanics either since there are left wing web sites that record and pore over the transcripts of every word he says and would call him on it in a second (this is also part of his showman ship ) he loves being missquoted or quoted out of context and called a racist then using it to create a big  fuss (controversy=ratings ). most of the stuff people belive about him i suspect fall into the (controversy=ratings ) category.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:02:09 PM
He's called Arabs "non-humans" before.  Sounds pretty racist to me.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on July 28, 2008, 11:14:00 PM
i could very well have missed it i don't follow that closely, based on the racist comments i have heard him called on he usually has said something like "any Arab fundamentalist fanatic" "Arab suicide bomber" etc he is pretty careful in how he words his inflammatory statements . as i mentioned creating a stink is his bread and butter (controversy = ratings) . he knows there are people who live to take him on and has made being misquoted a part of his show.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:25:21 PM
ITT we argue about political shock jocks.         :roll:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:26:23 PM
QuoteRight now, even people sitting on the fence would like George Bush to drop a nuclear weapon on an Arab country. They don't even care which one it would be. I can guarantee you -- I don't need to go to Mr. Schmuck [pollster John] Zogby and ask him his opinion. I don't need anyone's opinion. I'll give you my opinion, because I got a better stethoscope than those fools. It's one man's opinion based upon my own analysis. The most -- I tell you right now -- the largest percentage of Americans would like to see a nuclear weapon dropped on a major Arab capital. They don't even care which one. They'd like an indiscriminate use of a nuclear weapon. They want this over with. One thing people cannot live with, which is an undefined, limitless conflict, which is what we have now. They can't take it. They want this war over with, and they want it ended like the war against Japan. They'd like Big Boy dropped on one of the little cities over there. They don't care where. They don't care any more. The American people have had it up to here with this garbage.

   In fact, Christianity has been one of the great salvations on planet Earth. It's what's necessary in the Middle East. Others have written about it, I think these people need to be forcibly converted to Christianity but I'll get here a little later, I'll move up to that. It's the only thing that can probably turn them into human beings.

   I'm going to give you one further example from my background as an anthropologist just so that you -- I'm trying to put context on this because you can go crazy if you don't have the context on this, because I'm going to lead up to something of what we must do to these primitives. Because these primitives can only be treated in one way, and I don't think smallpox and a blanket is good enough incidentally. Just before -- I'm going to give you a little precursor to where I'm going. Smallpox in a blanket, which the U.S. Army gave to the Cherokee Indians on their long march to the West, was nothing compared to what I'd like to see done to these people, just so you understand that I'm not going to be too intellectual about my analysis here in terms of what I would recommend, what Doc Savage recommends as an antidote to this kind of poison coming out of the Middle East from these non-humans.

No caveats there.  Its about Arabs, full stop.

QuotePresident Bush should declare: Middle Eastern immigrants can no longer leave America without a thorough examination by the FBI. You come in nice and easy, and we didn't say a word. But you're not getting out. That's all. You want to leave? Go to the FBI. We'll let you out in a few years.

QuoteMaybe you think I'm paranoid when I say we must not allow immigrants to come here and impose their cultural-trappings on us, rather than respect the American culture. Fine. You're entitled to be wrong. The next time you're in your backyard grilling hot dogs, don't be surprised if your Korean neighbor is actually grilling his dog. That's the way things are done in Korea

QuoteWe need racist stereotypes right now of our enemy in order to encourage our warriors to kill the enemy

QuoteYou open the door to them, and the next thing you know, they [immigrants] are defecating on your country and breeding out of control

QuoteWith the [Latino] population that has emerged, since they breed like rabbits, in many cases the whites will become a minority in their own nation... The white people don't breed as often for whatever reason. I guess many homosexuals are involved. That is also part of the grand plan, to push homosexuality to cut down on the white race

Quote from: Media MattersDiscussing student volunteers distributing food to the homeless in San Francisco, Savage declared that "the girls from Branson [school] can go in and maybe get raped... because they seem to like the excitement of it. There's always the thrill and possibility they'll be raped in a dumpster while giving out a turkey sandwich"

Quote from: The Financial TimesMichael Savage stands out because he makes so little attempt to hide his bigoted views on blacks, Jews, Puerto Ricans or anybody else he doesn't like.

He has described the Chinese as "little devils" who should be nuked by the US. He once said Chinese-Americans who refuse to sign loyalty oaths should be sent to internment camps.

[...]

"Go back to Brooklyn!" he shouts in a nasally twang as he reads out a news story about a lawyer with a Jewish name, June Stein, who prosecuted an Alaskan man for dousing peace protesters with water while his son was fighting in Iraq.


And that was just on a quick search
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:27:36 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:25:21 PM
ITT we argue about political shock jocks.         :roll:

Hey, he's only got the third biggest radio show in America, and an audience who seems are not too nuanced in their worldview.  What could go wrong?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:30:09 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:27:36 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:25:21 PM
ITT we argue about political shock jocks.         :roll:

Hey, he's only got the third biggest radio show in America, and an audience who seems are not too nuanced in their worldview.  What could go wrong?

ROFL, I know... I don't know which is worse... that intelligent people take him seriously, or the jabbering masses take him seriously. When I was in school for Broadcasting, we had a short study on the 'new' political shock jock as a show style. Our instructor thought that they would peter out, because it was so obvious. Boy, was he wrong.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on July 28, 2008, 11:38:41 PM
based on those quotes he is far less careful than i would have expected from what i have heard him say ...
political shock jock is a good description of what he does ..
i wonder what percentage of the audience take him seriously ?

what could go wrong  ?



Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:41:05 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:30:09 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:27:36 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:25:21 PM
ITT we argue about political shock jocks.         :roll:

Hey, he's only got the third biggest radio show in America, and an audience who seems are not too nuanced in their worldview.  What could go wrong?

ROFL, I know... I don't know which is worse... that intelligent people take him seriously, or the jabbering masses take him seriously. When I was in school for Broadcasting, we had a short study on the 'new' political shock jock as a show style. Our instructor thought that they would peter out, because it was so obvious. Boy, was he wrong.

Well thats the problem.

A well educated, economically secure population would laugh off Savage as a crank and a lunatic, and he'd have to go back to writing books about healthy balanced diets or whatever it was he used to do.  It was something like that.

But when you're job is being outsourced to China, and you're being told every day that its all your fault for not trying hard enough, and then some blowhard comes on the radio and lies about how illegal immigrants are being welcomed with money and free homes, all while shitting over the country and bringing in diseases, or how the Middle East is filled with American-hating lunatics who want to convert America to a Caliphate and you don't know any better, since your teacher was more interested in making the case for the Bible being the foundational document of civilization than teaching actual history, and how the liberals at home are saying we shouldn't all lock them up....

in that sort of climate, people like Savage do thrive.  Its the same deal with Rush Limbaugh.  They take very extreme views, strip them of their most obvious wingnuttery, and introduce them into the mainstream.  And people don't bother to debunk them because "they're cranks who no-one really believes", or, even better, they claim people like this balance out people like Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore (not that I especially like either, but thats like saying Adolf Hitler balances out Ramsey MacDonald).  And so the right moves to a gradually more radical position, and thats how nutters like the Freepers or ex-Constitution Party nativists can drive policy decisions.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:43:33 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:41:05 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:30:09 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:27:36 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:25:21 PM
ITT we argue about political shock jocks.         :roll:

Hey, he's only got the third biggest radio show in America, and an audience who seems are not too nuanced in their worldview.  What could go wrong?

ROFL, I know... I don't know which is worse... that intelligent people take him seriously, or the jabbering masses take him seriously. When I was in school for Broadcasting, we had a short study on the 'new' political shock jock as a show style. Our instructor thought that they would peter out, because it was so obvious. Boy, was he wrong.

Well thats the problem.

A well educated, economically secure population would laugh off Savage as a crank and a lunatic, and he'd have to go back to writing books about healthy balanced diets or whatever it was he used to do.  It was something like that.

But when you're job is being outsourced to China, and you're being told every day that its all your fault for not trying hard enough, and then some blowhard comes on the radio and lies about how illegal immigrants are being welcomed with money and free homes, all while shitting over the country and bringing in diseases, or how the Middle East is filled with American-hating lunatics who want to convert America to a Caliphate and you don't know any better, since your teacher was more interested in making the case for the Bible being the foundational document of civilization than teaching actual history, and how the liberals at home are saying we shouldn't all lock them up....

in that sort of climate, people like Savage do thrive.  Its the same deal with Rush Limbaugh.  They take very extreme views, strip them of their most obvious wingnuttery, and introduce them into the mainstream.  And people don't bother to debunk them because "they're cranks who no-one really believes", or, even better, they claim people like this balance out people like Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore (not that I especially like either, but thats like saying Adolf Hitler balances out Ramsey MacDonald).  And so the right moves to a gradually more radical position, and thats how nutters like the Freepers or ex-Constitution Party nativists can drive policy decisions.

Yep, of course, the radio political shock jock is quickly being replaced by the Bloggers... the downside is that while Savage and Limbaugh KNOW that they're jerking off for ratings... the Bloggers actually seem to believe their own shit... and create internet feedback loops to reinforce it. LGF, pajamasmedia etc
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:48:02 PM
Yeah, the bloggers are even worse, not least because they can edit their own material.  Like certain bloggers who give out home addresses of "treasonous" reporters or protestors, then retroactively edit the entry before Google cache's it.

They're also not bound by advertisers, with so many free services, and like you say, they tend to cluster around other blogs and readerships with similar interests (oddly enough, I've clustered with a group of bloggers who go out of our way to look at views we disagree with.  They usually debate, and then I follow up with mockery).

I believe Michelle Malkin has already had a poster who was arrested for making death threats or plotting to bomb someone or something.  I'll have to look it up, but with many of the larger blogs, such as LGF (where 1000+ comments is not unheard of), may have similar audiences.
Title: The McCain - Obama Deathlist
Post by: Cain on July 30, 2008, 07:56:49 PM
Start up those chain email engines people!  This is a list of people connected to Obama and McCain who have died under mysterious circumstances, that we must spread far and wide across the innernets.

QuoteSOJOURNER 'FATIMAH' SHABAZZ – Bangladeshi mother of Arab baby "adopted" by Cyndi McCain from 1984-2003. Grew to regret Muslim indoctrination, converting to Christianity and attempted to reclaim illegitimate black baby from McCains in years approx. 1972 timeframe. Executed 1999 in Darfur under orders of Hova tribesmen related by blood and marriage to Obama, head transported to Bohemian Grove in Northern California as trophy. It was rumored he was going to bring evidence of Wright's complicity in his father's death.

ANTONIN BLAIR – Former Chicago city comptroller killed in 1997 cocaine bludgeoning overdose choking stab plunge gunshot from tall building beheaded shotgun blast. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house. Just weeks earlier had served multiple subpoenas on illegitimate nephews of Obama, including John McCain.

DESHAUN 'BLACK JUJU' HAYNESWORTH – Small-time Washington D.C. drug dealer found murdered in 2008 with sharpened crack cocaine outside Arlington, Va. home of McCain and Obama.

ST. JOHN REINHOLD - Austro-Cornish adventurer and mountaineer known for scaling 17 of world's 19 40,000+-foot peaks without breathing oxygen. Buried in 2002 avalanche of mousepads at computer distribution warehouse owned by Obama high school associate Dennis O'Halloran. Had been investigating Sherpa MySpace suicide pact allegedly engineered by former McCain technology advisor Phil McCracken, who himself disappeared in 2006 only to reappear hours later. Strongly implied that the 'baby daddy' was Barack 'John McCain' Obama.

PANCHO CORDOZA - Died from a gunshot wound. Mexican telemundo actor who portrayed stunt double for popular Sr. Bee character on Channel 12. Still living and employed as former Chicago city comptroller.

OLDSMOBILE JOHNSON – Transvestite homosexual prepared to testify about Obama connection to Hormel meat processing scandal. Confided to friends before 1893 death that McCain did it. Found shot and stabbed in fall from tall building, death ruled 'murder'. It was rumored he was going to bring evidence of Wright's complicity in his father's death.

JOHN-JOHN 'THE TOTAL FAG' DIETZ – Author of tell-all book on McCain, 'One Of These Days, Cyndi, One Of These Days', also one of Michelle Obama's many white, female conquests while at Harvard. Filed murder complaint against Michelle Obama with federal Patent and Trademark Office in 2003. Died from a gunshot wound. Because 'trademarks' were not considered a crime like it is today, she ended up dropping the charges. Fifteen years later, found murdered to death by Obama, Michelle Obama and John McCain of an apparent murder.

HARACK OUSSEIN BOBAMA – Still-born white Christian heterosexual twin brother of Obama. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house. Injured 1961 while still in womb when McCain punched white mother of Obama in stomach. Obama finished job on potential presidential rival by sawing off twin's head with makeshift ritual Muslim scimitar constructed from placenta, partially digested former Chicago city comptroller.

PETER NOONE – Popular lead singer of Herman's Hermits. Found dead of apparent suicide in 1979 following 'row' with Obama, McCain in latter's bathtub. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house.

QUINTLOCK P. MUNROE – After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house. Former Chicago city comptroller with licensing contract to McCain, Obama, killed by way of death in recent years.

MILES BANDERCOOT & JAKE LARUE – Clones of Obama and McCain respectively. Developed self-awareness in 1987 chemical vat incident before being gunned down by onlookers.

SPORT GOODMAN – Beloved Utica, N.Y.-based newscaster and former Chicago city comptroller rolled up into little ball and made to go 'POOF' in a cloud of smoke as if he had never existed.

DABNEY 'GAB' SADDLEMAN – Former Chicago city comptroller stomped to death in riot of former city comptrollers instigated by McCain crony Obama at behest of Obama crony McCain. Died from a gunshot wound.

PAUL ROTHCHILD - Democrat National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in Washington DC in 2003. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house. It was rumored he was going to bring evidence of Wright's complicity in his father's death. A 'friend and trusted advisor' to senatorial candidate Barack Obama. Dead of an apparent suicide. Was found dead of an apparent heroin overdose May 18, 1997. Former Chicago city comptroller died from a gunshot wound. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house. It was rumored he was going to bring evidence of Wright's complicity in his father's death. Died from a gunshot wound. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on July 30, 2008, 07:58:09 PM
Oh, fuck yeah. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 30, 2008, 08:10:35 PM
More deaths to add to the list


DELIA JEFFERSON - First time he shot her, shot her in the side. Hard to watch her suffer, but with the second shot she died.

FRANK "FILES" REMOVED - student, majoring in comptrolling; found dead in his home of an apparent gunshot stabbing, later the body mysteriously disappeared.

JIMMINY FLIBBERTYGIBBET - aide to the ObaCain campaign; discovered in his home with a gunshot wound to the head, a gun in his right hand, with a suicide note in his lap. Ruled a murder by overdose.

HAREGRAVE SMITHSON - Dairy Queen drive-thru employee of the month; told his friends and family that he was collecting a dossier on the shady dealings of the McCabama triad, died in a brutal fryer "accident." Ironically, his files were still in his home, but they consisted only of his pay stubs and DKP records for his WoW guild.

MISTER LEONARD PIERCE - humorist; was known to poke fun at Barack "John" McCain, later dropped off the side of the earth. Last known words were "I'm going to go say hi to Jillian, need anything from the bodega?"

BARUCH McMACCABEE — Judean revolutionary and former Chicago city comptroller found mysteriously dead of apparent martyrdom days after demonstration of super-efficient carburetor (allowing eightfold decrease in oil consumption). Files were mysteriously removed from his house.

ZAN AND JAYNA MCCAIN — Illigetimate Luo aliens from Exor adopted by John McCain. Last seen alive making suspicious terror-related gang fist-bump gesture, later found by Chicago city comptroller Richard "Gleek" Bucketmonkey as a dead giant sloth impaled on an ice-stalagmite (or possibly a fallen ice stalactite). It was rumored they were going to bring evidence of Wright's complicity in a scheme to melt all the world's gold.

IGNATZ RASPUTIN — younger brother of famed healing evangelist, known radical who advocated freeing the credit card debt serfs, survived being poisoned, shot, bludgeoned, and drowned. So it's very mysterious that he died after enjoying his favorite lead coated toy & tomato sandwich.

KICKING BEAR - Oglala Sioux medicine man, al Qaeda operative, Navy Seal, and former Chicago city comptroller. Obama's liaison to the shadowy High Plains meth lab syndicate. Captured by Apaches hired by McCain, staked down to the ground, and licked to death by homosexual prairie dogs, who were some of Bill Clinton's many small mammal conquests.

VLAD WARTZ - Double triple agent for the KGB, the CIA, the ISI, and the Apaches. Obama's liaison to shadowy East European hunchback Neo-Nazi Islamic biker gangs. Wartz reportedly survived 23 assassination attempts, including one that involved a squad of dwarves with flamethrowers and chain saws. In 2004, he was abducted by Ernst Stavro Blofeld on Michelle Obama's orders and dropped into a vat of sharks.

DRANO ALKASELTZER - Indonesian classmate of Obama's, cousin of Darsano Rahardjo, distant relative of Ferdinand Marcos and of Robert E. Lee. Obama's liaison to the shadowy southeast Asian born-again Christian porn mafia, he later branched out into heroin smuggling, kidnapping, extortion, rioting, and creating disturbances in residential neighborhoods late at night. In 2006, he was overcome by four of McCain's sumo wrestler flatulence assassins.

IRONY - abstract concept killed from overwork while comptrolling (or as GWB would have it, comptrollerizating) the city of Chicago. Last gasp was heard when John SIDNEY "Whiplash" McCain promised to run a respectful campaign. Ironically, the files were removed from its house before its death.

BILL "WILLIAM" "BEHOLD A PALE HORSE" COOPER - Repeatedly tried to inform the American people of what was going on through clearly and patiently crafted impulsive and undocumented purposeless rants on shortwave radio, particularly about the UFOs which were going to make Revelation finally happen in some way involving the New World Order. However, Cooper didn't count on Barack Hussein Obama X coming to power in completely unrelated local politics in Chicago — and soon after, Cooper died of so-called "natural causes" after a shoot-out with local sheriff's deputies trying to serve him a warrant. Later the files were removed from his house. They were then returned, so that they could be removed more mysteriously, which they were.

ROBERT STACY MCCAIN - Award-winning columnist, reporter, editor, author, bon vivant and raconteur, bastard Indonesian half-brother of John McCain and former gay lover of Barack Hussein Obama, died of "natural" causes while yelling "nigger, nigger, nigger" and "gimme some iced tea, motherfucker" in a crowded Harlem restaurant in 2007, and was later found strangled, burned, shot and poisoned behind the Automat on 52nd st. while performing fellatio on an unnamed Republican Senator from Alabama.

CORKY SCHLOCKWURSTER - Leather fetishist, sadist, sociopath, stamp collector. McCain's liaison to the shadowy world of underground Beach Boy cover band Bolshevik cells. Compiled a dossier on Obama's and Bill Ayres' plot to spray the southern Idaho potato crop with hallucinogens. Assassinated by Obama operative Hugh Beaumont.

OLGA GREX - Dominatrix librarian. Commanded Fred Thompson's special ops unit in its bloody seven-hour shoot-out with Mike Huckabee's Gamma Force, near Guntersville, Alabama on February 15, 2008. Successfully infiltrated McCain's headquarters with counter-brainwashed spittle-flinging Ron Paul supporters. Shortly after making overtures to Obama's Legion of Death military arm, Grex was abducted by pro-McCain space mummies and beamed onto the surface of Neptune.

HENRY DENT- High-flying public prosecuter in Chicago, devoted father of four. Killed in 1997 in a mysterious car accident just years after questioning whether Obama had the right to attend his exclusive golf club. No evidence of Obama's involvement has ever been dismissed.

JEFF "PASTY" GLODSTEIN - Basement dwelling pseudo intellectual "humorist" killed in mysterious auto-erotic asphyxiation stabbing after threatening to slap Obama with John McCain's comptroller's cock. Died when humor-powered bicycle broke down in front of an onrushing freight train which was, incidentally, transporting several thousand tons of missing files.

MUSTAFA AL-IBN VON SCHTUPPMEISTER - file clerk; worked for the Clinton/Brownback campaign, found dead of "death." The files were recovered, but were then mysteriously unrecovered.

TUPAC SHAKUR - rapper; Obama's cousin's hairdresser's son's penpal's uncle's best friend's dog-groomer's mother-in-law's rabbi's poker-buddy's favorite 7-11 clerk's brother was Biggie Smalls' bodyguard. The files were recovered; they became 2Pac's posthumous albums after McCain scrubbed out the references to Obama's extraterrestrial contacts.

COSMOPOLIS COLLEANDER - gypsy wench; gave Obama a tarot reading about McCain that he didn't like, ten days later she was found hung by her left leg from a tree. The cards mysteriously vanished from her nomad's tent.

BLACKY "MUSLIM" BLACK - Black black black blackity muslim black Obama black white woman blackity Islamo black baby black black blackblackblackmuslim. The files were never recovered.

LADY LYNN FORESTER de ROTHSCHILD BANANA FO-FANA LOUISA FRANCESCA BANANA FANNA BO BESCA the THIRD - Aristocrat and philanthropist with a heart of gold (actually made of 24 karat gold - replaced the fleshy meat organ she was born with). Accused Obama of being out-of-touch with common man. Found buried under a heap of money, caviar, fabergé eggs and Stradvarius violins, bludgeoned to death with a bottle of 1787 Château Lafite. After discovery of her mysterious shooting with a silver plated 1824 Beretta .54 caliber percussion pistol (signed by Bartelomeo) the files were removed from the estate. It was rumored that she was Obama's secret lover and baby mama. Stabbed to death with a jeweled Damascus steel sword forged by Domingo Montoya. After her death, the mysterious was filed away in the vaults, which then mysteriously disappeared.

BARACK OBAMA - killed by himself in a bizarre Muslim initiation ceremony involved two geese and a vat of liquid water. Death ruled a suicide. Files mysteriously disappeared in mysterious circumstances after being found then lost then transfered to laser disc. It is rumoured that Barack put himself through law school by comptrolling part time.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on July 30, 2008, 08:16:39 PM
Can we add that to whatever lollercause/horrormirth pamphlet we're putting together?


That was fucking brilliant, sir.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 30, 2008, 08:17:39 PM
I was not responsible.  The first is the writing of D. Aristophanes, the latter the commentators of Sadly, No!

However, I think we should steal them anyway.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on July 30, 2008, 09:06:17 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 30, 2008, 08:17:39 PM
I was not responsible.  The first is the writing of D. Aristophanes, the latter the commentators of Sadly, No!

However, I think we should steal them anyway.
I will definitely be yoinking them if I get one of the many annoying anti-Obama forwards.  And judging from my mom's e-mail list, I will be getting at least one in the next couple of months.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 30, 2008, 09:19:36 PM
Well you can certainly use this one

THE FILES - paper like white objects with writing on. After a successful career as Chicago comptroller, they became the pivotal element of the McBamba campaign, detailing the candidate's links to the Neo-Nazi atheist, Leprechaun Morris-dancing, Hindu, Anglo-Saxon Australian mutant underground. They died in mysterious circumstances, while being removed from a house.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 30, 2008, 09:47:49 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:43:33 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:41:05 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:30:09 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 28, 2008, 11:27:36 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 28, 2008, 11:25:21 PM
ITT we argue about political shock jocks.         :roll:

Hey, he's only got the third biggest radio show in America, and an audience who seems are not too nuanced in their worldview.  What could go wrong?

ROFL, I know... I don't know which is worse... that intelligent people take him seriously, or the jabbering masses take him seriously. When I was in school for Broadcasting, we had a short study on the 'new' political shock jock as a show style. Our instructor thought that they would peter out, because it was so obvious. Boy, was he wrong.

Well thats the problem.

A well educated, economically secure population would laugh off Savage as a crank and a lunatic, and he'd have to go back to writing books about healthy balanced diets or whatever it was he used to do.  It was something like that.

But when you're job is being outsourced to China, and you're being told every day that its all your fault for not trying hard enough, and then some blowhard comes on the radio and lies about how illegal immigrants are being welcomed with money and free homes, all while shitting over the country and bringing in diseases, or how the Middle East is filled with American-hating lunatics who want to convert America to a Caliphate and you don't know any better, since your teacher was more interested in making the case for the Bible being the foundational document of civilization than teaching actual history, and how the liberals at home are saying we shouldn't all lock them up....

in that sort of climate, people like Savage do thrive.  Its the same deal with Rush Limbaugh.  They take very extreme views, strip them of their most obvious wingnuttery, and introduce them into the mainstream.  And people don't bother to debunk them because "they're cranks who no-one really believes", or, even better, they claim people like this balance out people like Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore (not that I especially like either, but thats like saying Adolf Hitler balances out Ramsey MacDonald).  And so the right moves to a gradually more radical position, and thats how nutters like the Freepers or ex-Constitution Party nativists can drive policy decisions.

Yep, of course, the radio political shock jock is quickly being replaced by the Bloggers... the downside is that while Savage and Limbaugh KNOW that they're jerking off for ratings... the Bloggers actually seem to believe their own shit... and create internet feedback loops to reinforce it. LGF, pajamasmedia etc

Coming back to this point:

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/93126/did_right-wing_shock_jocks_motivate_knoxville_killer/


When police searched the car of the gunman who opened fire in a Unitarian Church in Tennessee, they found a 4-page letter expressing his hatred of the "liberal movement." A regular consumer of Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage and Sean Hannity, Jim David Adkisson was only following the arguments they make day in and day out to their logical conclusions.

From the Knoxville News Sentinel:

    Police found right-wing political books, brass knuckles, empty shotgun shell boxes and a handgun in the Powell home of a man who said he attacked a church in order to kill liberals "who are ruining the country," court records show.

    Knoxville police Sunday evening searched the Levy Drive home of Jim David Adkisson after he allegedly entered the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church and killed two people and wounded six others during the presentation of a children's musical.

    Adkisson targeted the church ... "because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country, and that he felt that the Democrats had tied his country's hands in the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the aid of media outlets."

    Adkisson [said] that "he could not get to the leaders of the liberal movement that he would then target those that had voted them in to office."

    Inside the house, officers found "Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder" by radio talk show host Michael Savage, "Let Freedom Ring" by talk show host Sean Hannity, and "The O'Reilly Factor," by television talk show host Bill O'Reilly.

    The shotgun-wielding suspect in Sunday's mass shooting at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church was motivated by a hatred of "the liberal movement," and he planned to shoot until police shot him, Knoxville Police Chief Sterling P. Owen IV said this morning.

    Adkisson, 58, of Powell wrote a four-page letter in which he stated his "hatred of the liberal movement," Owen said. "Liberals in general, as well as gays."

    Adkisson said he also was frustrated about not being able to obtain a job, Owen said.

    Owen said Adkisson specifically targeted the church for its beliefs, rather than a particular member of the congregation.

    "It appears that church had received some publicity regarding its liberal stance," the chief said. The church has a "gays welcome" sign and regularly runs announcements in the News Sentinel about meetings of the Parents, Friends and Family of Lesbians and Gays meetings at the church.

    Owen said Adkisson's stated hatred of the liberal movement was not necessarily connected to any hostility toward Christianity or religion per say, but rather the political advocacy of the church.

    The church's Web site states that it has worked for "desegregation, racial harmony, fair wages, women's rights and gay rights" since the 1950s. Current ministries involve emergency aid for the needy, school tutoring and support for the homeless, as well as a cafe that provides a gathering place for gay and lesbian high-schoolers.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: That One Guy on July 31, 2008, 05:11:14 PM
This whole UU church shooting thing has me bothered a bit more than many of these types of things have in the past. Not because it's an "alleged" right-winger (IMO he's just a crazy that happens to have imprinted on right-wing talking points - had he imprinted on something else he'd have taken a shotgun somewhere else), but because that kind of church is where I grew up, and spent damn near every Sunday until I went to college this whole incident made a bit more of an impression.

I've participated in and been in the audience for the kid's performance things. I've organized youth services, presided and performed in them. I've dealt first-hand with some of the crazies that the church does outreach with, and ever since the UU minister in New Paltz, NY started (illegally) marrying homosexuals in the late 90s I've always thought something like this was increasingly possible, especially because the UU church tends to make it a point of being open and public about supporting the "liberal agenda" type stuff.

And now some crazy with a shotgun decided to point it there and pull the trigger. I'm not one for rampant paranoia, but it's been really hard not to picture him walking into my old church in Albany during one of our Youth services, and opening up. If it happened once, who's to say some other crazy won't have the same idea - and next time it COULD be people I know, or a church that I've been to. All I can hope for, really, is that I'll be able to be one of the people that was in the audience that took him down quickly, before he could do more than the 3 shots he managed.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on July 31, 2008, 05:22:05 PM
There is a piece by a UU member on David Niewert's site about the shooting http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2008/07/of-madmen-and-martyrs.html

Niewert's own series on Eliminationism, referenced in the article, is worth reading as well.

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/12/eliminationism-in-america-i.html
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/12/eliminationism-in-america-ii.html
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/12/eliminationism-in-america-iii.html
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/12/eliminationism-in-america-iv.html
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/12/eliminationism-in-america-v.html
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/12/eliminationism-in-america-vi.html
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/01/eliminationism-in-america-vii.html
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/01/eliminationism-in-america-viii.html
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/02/eliminationism-in-america-ix.html
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/02/eliminationism-in-america-x.html
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/03/eliminationism-in-america-appendix.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: That One Guy on July 31, 2008, 06:35:49 PM
Thanks Cain for that link - it said what I've been thinking since seeing this go down rather nicely. Most appreciated.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 05, 2008, 06:15:32 PM
Mister Leonard Pierce of Alternet has a guide to the best smears going against Barack Obama this election season

http://www.alternet.org/election08/93617/a_guide_to_the_sleaziest_(and_most_contradictory)_smears_on_the_dem_nominee/

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

The Charge: Barack Obama is black.

The Specifics: Blacks, as every Michael Savage fan knows, are violent, irresponsible maniacs who commit crimes, take drugs and listen to violent rap music. Left to their own devices, they will say ungrateful things about white people.

The Evidence: The American Conservative makes the case with the sort of genteel care that we've come to not expect from some quarters of the blogosphere: Calling him an updated version of the "tragic mulatto" and lamenting how he fell under the spell of "leftist black nationalist preacher" Jeremiah Wright, it claims that even his Christian faith is "an affirmation of African-American emotional separatism" and calls him a "disturbing test of the best-case scenario" of post-racist America, seething with "a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity." Author Steve Sailer seems baffled that this uppity fellow has made no moves to "forgive whites and ask forgiveness for his own racial antagonism as he accepts Jesus."

The Problem: Some people haven't gotten the message. Everyone from David Horowitz's Front Page magazine to bearded gadfly Warner Todd Huston (who claims that Barry "eschews the thug, rapper lifestyle") claims that rather than being too black, Obama is not black enough, and even Bill O'Reilly, a keen observer of African-American culture, says he doesn't "want to go on a lynching party" against Michelle Obama unless more evidence arises that she's actually black. Come on, Bill! At the height of her husband's senate campaign, she made a tape where she ranted against Whitey, maybe! What more "proof" do you need?

The Solution: Hammer the scary-Negro angle for all it's worth. There's still plenty of N.W.A. videos and Willie Horton footage around just waiting to be used. Most of all, don't forget to follow the lead of humorless culture vulture Brent Bozell, who demands that Obama denounce all rappers. America hates rap, and the more you complain about it, the more with-it you will appear! Warning: As terrible as it is to contemplate, this may actually require you to listen to rap music, lest, like Human Events' Evan Gahr, you accidentally claim as misogynist a Jay-Z lyric that is in fact about men.


The Charge: Barack Obama is a crypto-Muslim.

The Specifics: Although it is not, technically, illegal for a Muslim to become president, being terrified at the very suggestion of the existence of Islam is the favorite pastime of the Scaredy-American community.

The Evidence: Exhibit A in the argument that, if elected, Barack Obama will pull off a rubber face mask and reveal himself to be Ayman al-Zawahiri, is his middle name. Of course, "Hussein" is actually an Arabic name, and the majority of the world's Muslims are not Arabs (and there are Arabs who aren't Muslims), but those are the sort of piddling details that keep people like Michelle Malkin from being all that they can be by calling him "Barack HUSSEIN Obama" at every possible opportunity. The dark mistress of this black art is unhinged Michigan D-list pundit Debbie Schlussel, who seems to be of the belief that the president of the United States wields powers somewhere between those of an emperor and a demigod, and that if Obama is elected, America will wake up the next morning to find itself subject to the strictest iteration of Sharia law. Schlussel doesn't let herself get hung up on technicalities: "Even if he identifies strongly as a Christian ... is a man who Muslims think is a Muslim a man we want as president when we are fighting the war of our lives against Islam? Where will his loyalties be?"

The Problem: The greatest gift of the Obama presidential campaign to right-wingers so far has been some carefully selected snippets from the sermons of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's former pastor, who, as far as they are concerned, is the second coming of Huey Newton. Unfortunately, Wright is not only no longer affiliated with Obama, but he is not a Muslim. He is, in fact, a Christian, and even though he's not the, ahem, "good" kind of Christian, if you know what I mean, he is an evangelical Protestant, a group that, historically, the Right has been somewhat reluctant to piss off.

The Solution: Drop the Jeremiah Wright angle. He's no longer Obama's pastor, he doesn't have much to do with the day-to-day running of his church, and even some of the right-wing crazies are urging their readers to forget about him and move on to much more pressing issues of national policy, such as whether or not Obama's wife hates America. Besides, there's a much juicier Chicago-based religious figure they're desperately trying to link him to ...



The Charge: Barack Obama is an elitist snob.

The Specifics: Curiously, although they themselves have a tendency to run multimillionaires for office, promote policies favorable to huge multinational corporations, and favor tax structures that reward the rich and punish the middle class -- hell, they even eat more stinky French cheese than their opponents across the aisle -- the GOP promotes the notion that Democrats are unsuitable for office because they are a bunch of rich toffs.

The Evidence: Despite promoting tax policy changes beneficial to the middle class and supporting innumerable aid programs for working Americans, Barack Obama seems determined to keep doing things that, in the eyes of multimillionaire Republicans, make him an out-of-touch elitist aristo whose ability to relate to the common man is constantly hampered by his tripping over his platinum walking stick or getting his diamond-studded monocle stuck in his eye. From his failure to adequately enjoy sport shooting to his inability to bowl a 300 game to his infuriating capacity to talk to farmers about farming, there seems to be no end to what this man will do to establish that he's better than the Republican conception of the working man and/or woman. (The fact that this conception is itself an egregious stereotype doesn't seem to bother the GOP.) What's more, Republicans have tarred Obama's wife, Michelle, as a stuck-up, snooty, Princeton-educated lawyer who looks down on ordinary people, unlike down-to-earth, USC-educated booze heiress Cindy McCain. Obama even thinks that it would be useful to have American citizens learn to speak foreign languages (the gall! The unmitigated gall!), unlike conservatives, who know that if English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for them).

The Problem: Some GOP operatives have become so confused by the seeming contradiction between Charge #1 (Barack Obama is a scary ghetto Negro) and Charge #3 (Barack Obama is a latte-sipping elitist liberal snob) that they have gone off-message, and in some cases, completely off the reservation. If you spend too much time, as conservatives often do, fretting that the Democrats are going to tax your capital gains and inheritance money to pay veterans' benefits to a bunch of lazy ne'er-do-well wounded soldiers, you can lose sight of the liberals-are-snooty-Mr.-Howell-types narrative and remind voters of who you really are.

The Solution: The "latte libel," as Thomas Frank calls it, never stops working. And the reason it never stops working is that it doesn't really have anything to do with economics; it has everything to do with culture. As long as the GOP sticks to the plan and distracts people from Obama's actual pro-working-class economic policies by reminding them that he's a sissy who wears his clothes funny, went to a fancy college, has a snooty wife and enjoys weirdo TV shows that no one has ever heard of (bonus: and that star scary black gangstas!), they can never go wrong. It's the slander that keeps on giving!



So now we know which charges, entirely bogus though they may be, work the best against the man who has the sheer brass to suggest that there may yet be hope for our country after eight years of George W. Bush's to-hell-with-it party. We know how to keep them straight, how to deploy them well, and how to keep from getting our Barack-HUSSEIN-Obama-is-a-covert-Muslim chocolate in our Barack-HUSSEIN-Obama-is-a-radical-black-nationalist peanut butter.

But where do we go from here? Looking back at the golden age of the 1990s, when the Republican Party essentially ground the entire government to a halt in its efforts to crush Bill Clinton for the sheer life-hating joy of it, it seems like -- with an intensely uninspiring candidate in John McCain, a sitting president with approval numbers in the low nothings, and Americans actually seeming like they're excited about politics for the first time in ages -- the GOP is barely even trying. Young Barack Obama, by his own admission, took cocaine when he could afford it; where are the Clintonesque stories of him abusing his power to fund a massive drug-smuggling ring? Where are the claims that he deliberately faked an injury to get out of fighting in the first Gulf War? And not once has any official or unofficial organ of the Republican Party accused Barack Obama of murdering anyone (oh, sorry, I spoke too soon).

We can only hope, for the sake of the clown parade that is contemporary Republican electioneering, that silly season gets a whole lot sillier.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 05, 2008, 06:20:40 PM
I've honestly never understood that "elitist" meme.  Why would anyone want a mediocre president?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on August 05, 2008, 06:25:42 PM
Because, they want someone who is smarter than them to run the country, BUT, they don't want said person to remind them of how much smarter he/she is than they are. 

This is why they watch O'Reilly, because he constantly reminds his audience, that he's just a loud-mouthed ignoramous like they are. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 05, 2008, 06:31:19 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 05, 2008, 06:20:40 PM
I've honestly never understood that "elitist" meme.  Why would anyone want a mediocre president?

I believe I got into a flame war with some twat over this very question.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on August 05, 2008, 07:01:48 PM
Cain, you should really be writing for newspapers or magazines.

:mittens:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 05, 2008, 07:16:24 PM
There seems to be a difference between elitist (thinks they are better than others based on relatively meaningless measurements "knows the right people, has money etc") and being elite (showing above the norm talent at a skill that is of value). Voting for "the elite" makes sense (if there talent is useful in the leading/running of a country), voting for the elitists seems to be the only option in modern politics... There are going to be some overlaps and differences of opinion as to what qualifies as elite vs elitist for example "knowing the right people", if it is the ability to cultivate connections it would have some value but it can also be seen as being  out of touch with the common people and there views "born into connections". The same point can be made for having money.




edit 4 more making cents
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 07, 2008, 11:59:50 AM
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on August 05, 2008, 07:01:48 PM
Cain, you should really be writing for newspapers or magazines.

:mittens:

Sadly, it is not my writing, but that of a certain Mister Leonard Pierce.  However, I really should, I agree.

More on Obama via Dave Johnson.  Johnson has collected these lovely sets of lies for our perusal.  http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2008/08/a_new_rightwing.htm


1.- He will come as a man of Peace (Obama promises peace in Iraq, defeat for the US)
2.- He will come mounted on a white Female horse(Obama mother is white who had 6 African husbands)
3.- He will come to deceive( Obama says he's a Christian but in fact he was born a Muslim, practices the Islamic religion, prays Friday's facing Mecca)
4.- He will make himself the most powerful man on earth, if elected
5.- He will try to destroy the Jewish People and Israel( Obama has said he loves the Arabs specially the Palestinians, hates Israel and Jews. Admires Hitler, Osama etc)
6.- He will present himself as good and righteous but in fact he's Satan himself. Violence is in his heart
7.- Obama will help Al Qaida in its evil projects.
8.- Barack Hussein Obama is the "King of the South" predicted in the Bible.(Daniel .11, Kenya is south of Jerusalem)
9.- Obama comes to implant muslim Sharia Law upon America.
Obama is the Anti-Christ, beware of him.
Watch him and don't let you be deceived by Him.
Supporters of Obama: 1.5 billion Muslims, Oprah, Louis Farrakanh, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and all American Muslims.
OBAMA'S GAME IS DECEPTION AND VIOLENCE
A VOTE FOR OBAMA IS A VOTE FOR OSAMA AND KILLER ISLAM!!


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 07, 2008, 12:11:18 PM
Also, the elitism thing is about playing off naturally populist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism) sentiment among the working class.  Historically, populism was usually left wing, since the right was linked strongly to social and traditional conservatism and thus the maintenance of the status quo.

However, with the discrediting of conservatism in America from the 1930s to 50s, the foundations of a more just economic system and social progress only being debated in terms of how fast it should happen, social liberalism came to be seen as part of the elite ideology.  Thus, at great cost and with a massive rebranding project, the right tried to portray itself as the party of the people - appealing to those whose own natural social conservatism clashed with more liberal ideals, but who economically were better off voting for left-wing groups.

Thats part of how the GOP continues to get people to vote against their economic interests.  The elitism thing really is laughable, coming from a party of what is essentially the mega-rich, with financial backing from the world's richest and largest companies, and whose current ruling ideology holds that people are too stupid to decide things for themselves, and need Philosopher Kings to make the real decisions.

But the marketing is more powerful than the fact, and because the Dems tie their own hands by trying to be reasonable and rational, they get owned repeatedly on this point.  Its not that the Dems are any less part of the American elite society than the Republicans, but economically at least some of them have interests that do not run counter to those of the working classes.  There is actually a level of debate in the Democratic party that goes beyond "how many no-bid contracts can we give away to our cronies while undermining labour laws" which by definition makes them better than the GOP.

But because people have been told that these people are effete, latte drinking intellectuals and elitists, their natural populism comes into play, and they vote Republican out of spite and class hatred.  Thats part of the reason why I like Howard Dean, he's recognized this bullshit for what it is and wants to work against it.  But so long as policy wonks, "centrists" and political dynasties try to dominate the party, its probably not going to happen, and the branding will stick.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 09, 2008, 08:17:55 AM
Obama is the antichrist - in detail.

http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2008/08/unsubtle.html

This ad from John McCain's campaign is a disgrace. Brian Rogers, a spokesman for the McCain campaign, claims that the spot was conceived as "a light-hearted ad that pokes fun at [Obama]." Brian Rogers knows that's not true.

The point of the ad -- the entire and only point of the ad -- is to suggest that Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate for president, may be the Antichrist warned against in the pages of Left Behind. Take that message away and you're left with nonsense. Without the Barack Obama = Nicolae Carpathia subtext, the ad would consist only of something like "he's a famous leader ... but is he ready to lead?" Hunh?

That steaming pile of spin from Brian Rogers is quoted in a Wall Street Journal article that also includes commentary from Tim LaHaye himself:
Quote
    The End Times, a New Testament reference to the period surrounding the return of Christ, were popularized in recent years by the "Left Behind" series of books that sold more than 63 million copies. The Rev. Tim LaHaye, co-author of the series, said in an interview that he recognized allusions to his work in the ad but comparisons between Sen. Obama and the Antichrist are incorrect.

    "The Antichrist isn't going to be an American, so it can't possibly be Obama. The Bible makes it clear he will be from an obscure place, like Romania," the 82-year-old author said.

Let me repeat the key part of that:

Quote"LaHaye ... recognized allusions to his work in the ad."

LaHaye recognized those allusions in the ad because those allusions are in the ad. They were put in the ad.

They were put in the ad by the very same campaign people now insisting that the ad doesn't contain such allusions, or that they were coincidental, or unintentional, or intended only as jokes. Or maybe all of the above -- maybe those non-existent, unintentional allusions were intended as jokes.

And there are a lot of those allusions. The whole look of the ad is taken from the cover art of the Left Behind series. Eric Sapp of The Eleison Group has documented many more of these visual cues and allusions to Left Behind in a memo excerpted by Steve Waldman on BeliefNet. Sapp notes that:

Quote... Numerous parts of this ad that make no sense in a high-budget presidential ad unless they are understood for what they really are: attempts to scare people with contextually bankrupt scriptural and Obama quotes and imagery tied together to send messages of fear that Obama is somehow the Antichrist.

Here's how that memo concludes:
Quote
    If the McCain camp was trying to spoof Obama as Messiah, they missed a number of more obvious images and did a very poor job with this ad. If they were trying to draw parallels to Obama as Antichrist, they nailed it.

Yep. And note again that both Tim LaHaye and I agree with Sapp's take here. I think it's safe to say that we're both fairly familiar with the text and subtexts of the Left Behind series, and that it might count for something when we both say we see those texts and subtexts inserted into this ad.

But then you might also argue that Tim LaHaye and I are a bit too familiar with the motifs of Left Behind, and that maybe both of us are just obsessively reading too much into this and seeing things that aren't really there. So what do other viewers think?

At Crooked Timber, Henry Farrell says that the ad is "so staggeringly bad at achieving its purported aims that it doesn't make sense except as a dogwhistle* video" and links to Scott McLemee's take. McLemee says the dogwhistle for the Armageddon faction is unmistakable, but slightly off-key. McCain's people speak Crazyfundie, but they don't speak it fluently:

QuoteThe people who created the ad know that most of the public won't pick up on any of this.

    But as someone who grew up in the 1970s listening to a rock opera called It's Getting Late for the Great Planet Earth! (not reissued on CD, alas) I have no doubt the message will be received loud and clear by the audience it's aimed at, which otherwise might not feel that enthusiastic about McCain himself as a candidate.

    On second thought, this might not help the campaign very much. If you are waiting for the Rapture, it's not like preventing the rise of the beast with seven horns and ten crowns etc. is a huge priority. (You sort of want to get it all over with, ASAP.)

    The RNC panders to these folks, but it doesn't actually consist of them. The ad's makers know their audience but not quite well enough to grasp how it really thinks.

He in turn also links to Maud Newton, who says the ad:

Quote... is designed to galvanize a very specific group: Evangelical Christians of the End Times, Rapture-Ready variety. It is designed, more to the point, to scare the shit out of these people by insinuating that Barack Obama is the Antichrist.

    This is a particularly nefarious and crafty argument to make because it is the one context in which all the candidate's strengths — his smarts, his articulateness, his contagious smile and way with people — can become evidence against him. All these traits are associated in the Bible with the charismatic, popular, well-spoken man who is supposed to become the leader of the world and bring about the Tribulation.

Newton is right about the way this accusation turns Obama's assets into supposed grounds for suspicion, but it's not quite true that "the Bible" describes an Antichrist with Obama-like characteristics. Folks like Tim LaHaye have long insisted that the Antichrist will be "charismatic, popular, well-spoken," but the association of those traits with the Antichrist isn't easily found "in the Bible." That association arises, rather, from Antichrist Check Lists.** The current extra-canonical canon of such Check Lists is the formulation concocted by Hal Lindsay back in the '70s. Lindsay, it turns out, has also weighed in on Barack Obama as a candidate for Antichrist, deciding he's not the Beast itself, just its opening act.

Lindsay's pop-heresies were, of course, re-popularized 20 years later by LaHaye and Jenkins. Like Lindsay, L&J praise Obama with faint damnation in their official statement declaring that Barack Obama Is Not The Antichrist:

QuoteAuthors Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins don't think Obama is the Antichrist. ...

    LaHaye and Jenkins take a literal interpretation of prophecies found in the Book of Revelation.*** They believe the Antichrist will surface on the world stage at some point, but neither see Obama in that role. "I've gotten a lot of questions the last few weeks asking if Obama is the Antichrist," says novelist Jenkins. "I tell everyone that I don't think the Antichrist will come out of politics, especially American politics."

    "I can see by the language he uses why people think he could be the Antichrist," adds LaHaye, "but from my reading of scripture, he doesn't meet the criteria. There is no indication in the Bible that the Antichrist will be an American."

The reference there to "the language [Obama] uses" reinforces what Maud Newton said about Obama's assets being used against him. LaHaye is talking about what we have repeatedly seen as a recurring, emphatic theme in Left Behind and throughout the entire premillennial dispensationalist sect: Those who seek peace and pursue it might be the Antichrist; those who speak of love, peace, unity and brotherhood might be the Antichrist.

So beware the peacemakers, recoil in horror from Middle East peace talks, fear the United Nations, wet the bed over nightmares of a One World Government and keep a terrified, watchful eye on anyone who suggests that international relations might consist of anything other than hot and cold war.

That's the message of Left Behind, and that's the message of John McCain's Left Behind ad.

And that message is getting through. The dogs hear the dog whistle. Here is a letter to the editor, published in yesterday's paper:

QuoteThose who ignored the many warning signs and are still swooning over Barack Obama should read John Bolton's excellent column of July 31 dissecting Obama's Berlin speech.

    Despite his opportunistic shift to secure swing votes, Obama emanates from the Democrats' left wing. His core beliefs are forced redistribution of wealth and formation of a world government, to which the United States will be subordinate. His "one world" platitude is typical of idealistic dreamers who made up the party before him. His willingness to dismiss inherent evil is reminiscent of the left's acceptance of coexistence with the murderous communists of the 20th century. ...

OWGOMG!

The point of the ad was to rally the fringe and at least one fringe-dweller was rallied enough to write that letter to his local paper. The problem for the McCain campaign, of course, is that he may not stick around to vote in November, having instead headed for the hills with the rest of his local Tribulation Force militia and their stockpile of canned goods, ammunition and krugerrands.

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

* It's a very clumsy kind of dogwhistle, though. When torture-apologist Michael Gerson inserted evangelicalisms into President Bush's speeches he did so seamlessly. The intended evangelical audience understood the dogwhistle message, but it was embedded within a coherent message addressed to the larger audience. McCain's ad works as a dogwhistle, but there's no larger message for the larger audience. The Left Behind readers will understand his coded message, but the larger audience will just see him standing there, growing red-faced from blowing into a whistle that appears not to work.

** Those Antichrist Check Lists are culled from the Bible, but not in any kind of systematic, logical or repeatable way. It's worth pointing out again here that the word "Antichrist" appears in only one book of the Bible, in plural form, and that book is not Revelation. "The Antichrist" is an extrabiblical character who can be read back into the text, but you won't find him there unless you're careful to bring him with you.

*** No, no, a thousand times no. There is nothing literal about their reading of the Book of Revelation. They interpret that book through a convoluted and contradictory allegorical scheme that treats it as a secret, coded mystery understandable only to the initiated. For decades, Tim LaHaye has insisted both A) the Book of Revelation must be read "literally," and B) the Book of Revelation is impossible to understand correctly without the help of experts like himself. Getting away with that is a neat trick.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 09, 2008, 09:06:46 AM
When and where is that ad airing?  I haven't seen it, but I've watched almost no tv this week.  I'm sure that it's getting heavy rotation in the South though.

Also, how the hell do you even start to read Revelation with a literal interpretation?  It takes about fucking dragons and guys with swords coming out of their mouth!  Or as Jefferson put it, it's "merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 09, 2008, 09:51:49 AM
I suspect so, though I don't know.

If you want to see the ad, it is available here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mopkn0lPzM8
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 10, 2008, 05:15:13 PM
Those dogwhistles sure are working well:

http://www.wcnc.com/news/politics/stories/wcnc-080808-krg-obama.2ab4bc09.html

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- An Indian Trail accountant is in jail, charged with threatening to kill senator and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

According to court documents, Jerry Blanchard called Sen. Obama the anti-Christ and said, "If he gets elected, we have a problem."

Then according to the federal affidavit, Blanchard, a father of two teenage daughters, spells out his plan -- all while sitting in the Pineville-Matthews Road Waffle House.

Secret Service agents say Blanchard told two others eating at the restaurant on July 15 he planned to buy a handgun from Hyatt's Gunshop on Wilkinson Boulevard. He also planned to buy a rifle and a laser scope, saying "I'm worth $50 million. Obama and his wife are never going to make it to the White House. He needs to be taken out... that man will never know what hit him... I just may do that, I've got the money and the clout."


Hmm, now I wonder where he got the idea that Obama was the Anti-Christ from...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 11, 2008, 07:36:10 AM
Focus on the Family is calling for people to pray for rain during Obama's acceptance speech:

http://www.citizenlink.org/Stoplight/A000007910.cfm
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on August 11, 2008, 02:52:21 PM
 :lulz: oh that's rich

I THINK I'M GONNA DO IT
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 12, 2008, 09:57:20 AM
Apparently the fact that Obama is going on vacation in the state he grew up in makes him an elitist snob:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/08/10/cokie-roberts-attacks-obama-for-going-to-hawaii-instead-of-myrtle-beach/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 12, 2008, 02:59:02 PM
Yeah I heard that too.  Clinton also got chewed out for holidaying in California early on in his presidency IIRC despite it, you know, being a pretty big part of teh USA.

I'm starting to think elitism = enjoying yourself, publically.  Hence "Hollywood elite" etc.  Its because its all drugs, parties and beaches.  The only time I could imagine Cheney having fun, for example, is while ripping the wings off a fly, or hearing that John Yoo once again dodged a question on torture from the Congressional hearings.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on August 12, 2008, 04:32:45 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 12, 2008, 09:57:20 AM
Apparently the fact that Obama is going on vacation in the state he grew up in makes him an elitist snob:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/08/10/cokie-roberts-attacks-obama-for-going-to-hawaii-instead-of-myrtle-beach/

That made me laugh so hard I snorted.  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Shibboleet The Annihilator on August 15, 2008, 04:36:33 PM
Foreign and exotic...

:lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: BADGE OF HONOR on August 16, 2008, 08:04:10 PM
AHAHAAH I just saw a McCain ad where he said he was going to "battle big oil"


I laughed so hard I choked.  Now my throat hurts.  I should sue that fucker for my pain and suffering.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 17, 2008, 09:37:48 AM
Maybe he meant "battle for big oil"?

Also, Obama is an "uppity black man", according to the Florida gated-community residing, poor man's Goebbels, Richard Littlejohn.

http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=1358

Not really worth noting, except to point out our own racists, trying to be clever, and failing.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 20, 2008, 12:42:01 AM
Because its too good not to mention again

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/

Just all of it.  Every link, every article, every stupid banner....all of it.  Its the epitome of wingnuttery from the "sensible" left.  No conspiracy theory is too lunatic, nor GOP talking point too vile, for these cultists to repeat.  Why?  God only knows.  Hillary has conceded the nomination, so the only explanation is that they want to derail the Obama campaign out of spite or insanity.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 20, 2008, 03:13:39 PM
Alternet is bringing the thunder again

http://www.alternet.org/story/95649/the_right%27s_five_most_hilariously_boneheaded_anti-obama_smears/

SMEAR #1: OBAMA IS A COMMIE NAZI!

Origins: While accusing Democrats of being commies has been a time-honored American tradition dating back the McCarthy era, the Right has breathed ingenious new life into this old standard by tracing Obama's commie origins back to his pre-fetus years. For as the National Review's Lisa Schiffren deftly notes, Obama's father is black and his mother is white. Why is this important, you ask? Because "for a white woman to marry a black man in 1958 ... there was almost inevitably a connection to explicit Communist politics." Wowsers! So even Obama's very conception was forged out of a mutual hatred for capitalism!

[...]

The flip side of this vast commie conspiracy, of course, is the idea that Obama is actually simultaneously positioning himself to be the next Adolf Hitler. While it may seem counterintuitive to think of a black guy as the newest incarnation of an ideology that hated black people, consider that Obama gave a speech in Germany and printed campaign fliers that were written ... IN GERMAN!!!! To make matters worse, noted blogger Dr. Melissa Clouthier, Obama and Hitler have used campaign literature that looks sort of similar, if you ignore the fact that it doesn't look anything alike at all.

[...]

The notion that Obama is a fascist is not wholly accepted by everyone on the right, however. John Ray of the Stop the ACLU blog, for example, thinks that calling Obama a fascist does fascism a great disservice, since at least "fascists were patriotic and Obama is the sort of America-hater that is now typical of the Left." Well, you can't please everyone, I guess.

SMEAR #2: BERNIE MAC/LUDACRIS/SOME OTHER BLACK ENTERTAINER WILL BRING DOWN OBAMA'S CAMPAIGN!

Origins: When Bill Clinton first denounced Sister Soulja in 1992, the goal was to help the public understand that obscure black entertainers do not, in fact, reflect the views of Democratic presidential candidates. Unfortunately, this dynamic has not played out as Clinton envisioned it, as John Kerry was repeatedly called upon to reject the views of Whoopi Goldberg and Barack Obama has been forced to renounce just about every black entertainer who has supported his candidacy. One of the more recent examples is comedian Bernie Mac, who made a rather tasteless and sexist joke during an Obama campaign event. While Obama immediately chastised Mac for his crude humor, many on the Right saw it as a great opportunity to ratfuck his campaign by driving a wedge between Obama and supporters of Hillary Clinton.

[...]

One wonders why the Obama campaign hasn't yet released a blanket statement saying, "We categorically denounce, renounce and reject any and all controversial remarks made by any black celebrity ever at any point in time on this or other planets." It would honestly save them a lot of time.

[...]

SMEAR #3: OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE PROVES ?

Origins: While the Internet is full of crazy rumors, some crazy rumors are indeed crazier than other crazy rumors. A good rule of thumb for any rumormonger should be that when Charles Johnson of Rathergate fame won't even take the time to analyze some document's kerning on your behalf, then your rumor is beyond crazy and should be dropped faster than Harriet Miers' career as a Supreme Court justice.

Nevertheless, a lack of support from "mainstream" conservative media outlets and blogs didn't deter some of the Right's very dimmest of bulbs from trying to prove that Barack Obama forged his birth certificate in order to cover up. ... Well, we still aren't really sure. The National Review's Jim Geraghty, who was skeptical of the birth certificate rumors, summarized the key rumors as such: Obama was born in Kenya and thus not eligible to become president; Obama's real middle name is actually Mohammed; and finally, that Obama's real first name is "Barry" and not "Barack." Additionally, blogger Suitably Flip speculated that the "full-length document might indicate Obama's parents were avowedly unmarried at the time of his birth." Or as one of my friends put it, "Maybe they're hoping to learn that Obama's real first name is Damien and that his mother was a jackal."

[...]

SMEAR #4: OBAMA EXERCISES TOO MUCH AND DOESN'T GORGE HIS FACE WITH FATTY, UNHEALTHY GOO!

Origins: On Aug. 1, Wall Street Journal readers were treated to a report by Amy Chozick that asked the vitally important question of whether Barack Obama was in too good shape to identify with most Americans. "In a nation in which 66% of the voting-age population is overweight and 32% is obese, could Sen. Obama's skinniness be a liability?" she wondered to no one in particular. "Despite his visits to waffle houses, ice cream parlors and greasy-spoon diners around the country, his slim physique just might have some Americans wondering whether he is truly like them."

[...]

You really have to hand it to the right-wing attack machine: They've successfully transformed exercising and eating healthy food from admirable habits into crippling character flaws. It seems that in modern America, being fat, drunk and stupid is a good way to go through life.

[...]

SMEAR #5: OBAMA WANTS YOUR CHILD TO LEARN SPANISH!

Origin: It all started out innocently enough: During a campaign event, Barack Obama said that while immigrants coming to live in the United States should learn English, parents should also make sure that their children learn Spanish. Now, you would think that Republicans would support such a sentiment. After all, if the free trade pacts that they've advocated have really made global economic interaction more important, it might be a good thing for Americans to learn the language that is spoken by the majority of countries in South and Central America. You know, because those countries comprise some of our biggest trading partners in the Western hemisphere.

But alas! In modern American conservatism's constant internal struggle of greed vs. stupidity, stupidity scored a resounding victory. As soon as Obama's pro-Spanish speech hit the YouTube circuit, right-wing blogs and Web sites erupted into a hysteria not seen since Ken Starr was writing pornographic tracts about Bill Clinton's genitalia. "Our education system is crazy enough with all these liberal, feel-good programs," said Bobby Eberle of GOPUSA. "Now, despite the fact that the rest of the world is learning English, he says that American kids should learn Spanish? What? Learn Spanish?"

[...]

Of course, the absolute dimmest comment about Spanishgate came from the National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez, who used Obama's pro-Spanish comments to deliver a stinging critique of his big speech in Germany by confidently proclaiming that "if Obama could go to Germany and give a speech in English and be not only understood but well received, why does he say we all need to learn another language?" Zing! Similarly, why do we teach our kids math nowadays when they have calculators to do it for them? Game, set, match, liberal elitists! That'll learn you to teach our children no foreign language a-spoken by foreigners!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 20, 2008, 05:13:00 PM
The "He exercises too much" smear doesn't make any sense considering how often Bush has been photographed exercising. Maybe Obama needs to fall down a couple times.  Then he'll be more electable.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 20, 2008, 05:22:46 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 20, 2008, 05:13:00 PM
The "He exercises too much" smear doesn't make any sense considering how often Bush has been photographed exercising. Maybe Obama needs to fall down a couple times.  Then he'll be more electable.

Thats because when Bush does it, he is showing his physical fitness and how he is manly enough to lead, in accordance with the values of the Heartland.

When Obama does it, its because he's a jeering elitist who wants to make fun of bovine America, many of whom reside in the Heartland.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 21, 2008, 05:20:44 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2595688/Barack-Obama-is-my-inspiration-says-lost-brother.html

obama's brother lives in a shack
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 22, 2008, 02:47:24 AM
Quote from: Cain on August 20, 2008, 05:22:46 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 20, 2008, 05:13:00 PM
The "He exercises too much" smear doesn't make any sense considering how often Bush has been photographed exercising. Maybe Obama needs to fall down a couple times.  Then he'll be more electable.

Thats because when Bush does it, he is showing his physical fitness and how he is manly enough to lead, in accordance with the values of the Heartland.

When Obama does it, its because he's a jeering elitist who wants to make fun of bovine America, many of whom reside in the Heartland.

Good god you have your fingers on the pulse!  Well said.  And sadly enough, very true.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 22, 2008, 08:57:47 AM
Quote from: Jenne on August 22, 2008, 02:47:24 AM
Quote from: Cain on August 20, 2008, 05:22:46 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 20, 2008, 05:13:00 PM
The "He exercises too much" smear doesn't make any sense considering how often Bush has been photographed exercising. Maybe Obama needs to fall down a couple times.  Then he'll be more electable.

Thats because when Bush does it, he is showing his physical fitness and how he is manly enough to lead, in accordance with the values of the Heartland.

When Obama does it, its because he's a jeering elitist who wants to make fun of bovine America, many of whom reside in the Heartland.

Good god you have your fingers on the pulse!  Well said.  And sadly enough, very true.

Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.  And when you gaze long enough into the Heartland, the Heartland gaze back into you.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 22, 2008, 10:31:25 AM
WINGNUTOSPHERE ALERT LEVEL: CHEETOS

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/21/politics/main4372096.shtml

(CBS/ AP) A threatening letter containing an unidentified white powder was received at John McCain's campaign offices in Denver, Colorado, CBS News has learned.

A second letter sent to a McCain campaign office in New Hampshire initially was reported to contain a white substance. Authorities said that was a false alarm and there was no powder in that envelope.

At least 19 people were examined at hospitals or were quarantined outside the Colorado office while authorities tried to determine whether the powder was hazardous.

Andy Lyon of Parker South Metro Fire Rescue Authority said the return address on the envelope listed the Arapahoe Detention Center and the name of an inmate. He didn't release the name.

Lyon said the first line of the letter used threatening language, but he refused to give any details.

McCain's campaign had said the letter sent to the Manchester, N.H., office also contained a threatening language and white powder.

But Malcolm Wiley, a Secret Service spokesman in Colorado, said there was no powder in the New Hampshire envelope. He said he did not know about the content of the letter.

Wiley said the letter had a Denver return address, which alarmed staffers in Manchester because they had heard about the Colorado incident.

Jim Barnett, McCain's New England campaign manager, said it's unusual for the New Hampshire office to get a letter from Denver.

"That was really the only suspicious thing about the letter, and our national headquarters advised, out of an abundance of caution for our staff and volunteers, that we have the authorities check it out," he said. "We did and it was deemed safe."

A government official familiar with the investigation said the New Hampshire letter was a false alarm. The official said authorities believe the Denver letter was a hoax because it appeared to have been sent from a jail.

Both the New Hampshire and Colorado offices were evacuated.

Lyon said about 40 people were evacuated from the Colorado building, but it contains several offices and businesses, and he did not know how many people had been in the McCain office.

Seven people drove themselves to Sky Ridge Medical Center, but none showed any symptoms of exposure to a toxic substance, hospital spokeswoman Linda Watson said.

Twelve people were quarantined outside the Colorado office, including three police officers, two firefighters and seven civilians, Lyon said.

He said Park South Metro firefighters found very little powder when they arrived.

"There were maybe a couple of grains of something inside an envelope and they had to kind of work to get a sample," he said.

Bruce Williamson of the Arapahoe County Sheriff's Department said a hazmat team was searching the building. He said authorities believe the substance was confined within the structure.

Williamson said authorities took the incident "very seriously" because the Democratic National Convention begins Monday in Denver and McCain is the presumed GOP candidate.

Postal Inspector Jo Jan Henderson said agents from her office were at the scene. FBI officials did not immediately return calls.

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

Whoever did this is a fucking moron.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: singer on August 22, 2008, 12:04:41 PM
there is already some speculation it was done by a McCain supporter to pull the spotlight back on the Republican campaign... in which case.... still a moron... with really premature timing
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 22, 2008, 01:38:26 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 22, 2008, 08:57:47 AM
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.  And when you gaze long enough into the Heartland, the Heartland gaze back into you.


:potd:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 22, 2008, 05:09:15 PM
Quote from: singer on August 22, 2008, 12:04:41 PM
there is already some speculation it was done by a McCain supporter to pull the spotlight back on the Republican campaign... in which case.... still a moron... with really premature timing

Holy shit people are stupid.  Feh.

I'd much rather it was a hate-crime than this fucked up shit.  Neither is good, but dammit, faking a poisoning so people vote for McCain? 

Fuck the issues, eh? 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 22, 2008, 05:09:47 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 22, 2008, 01:38:26 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 22, 2008, 08:57:47 AM
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.  And when you gaze long enough into the Heartland, the Heartland gaze back into you.


:potd:

That was an awesome post.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 22, 2008, 07:29:47 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 22, 2008, 08:57:47 AM
Quote from: Jenne on August 22, 2008, 02:47:24 AM
Quote from: Cain on August 20, 2008, 05:22:46 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 20, 2008, 05:13:00 PM
The "He exercises too much" smear doesn't make any sense considering how often Bush has been photographed exercising. Maybe Obama needs to fall down a couple times.  Then he'll be more electable.

Thats because when Bush does it, he is showing his physical fitness and how he is manly enough to lead, in accordance with the values of the Heartland.

When Obama does it, its because he's a jeering elitist who wants to make fun of bovine America, many of whom reside in the Heartland.

Good god you have your fingers on the pulse!  Well said.  And sadly enough, very true.

Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.  And when you gaze long enough into the Heartland, the Heartland gaze back into you.

Shiiiiit, yes.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 23, 2008, 04:34:19 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2601914/Frank-Marshall-Davis-alleged-Communist-was-early-influence-on-Barack-Obama.html
more guilt by association
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 24, 2008, 12:44:47 PM
Yeah, heard that one before too. 

Interesting articles about the GOP's main anti-Obama man, Jerome Corsi, in Alternet and The Nation recently.  Here is Alternet's:

http://www.alternet.org/election08/95820/jerome_corsi%3A_how_a_racist%2C_conspiratorial_crank_became_a_top_gop_anti-obama_point_man/

These are good times for Jerome Corsi. Already notorious for his factually challenged book-length takedown of 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, Unfit For Command, the 61-year-old Corsi has another hit on his hands. His new book, Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality has made Corsi a hot commodity again on the right-wing radio circuit, the bane of the Obama campaign and catapulted to the top slot on the New York Times bestseller list. With his newfound notoriety, Corsi has brought his pathographic anti-Obama narrative to hundreds of thousands of readers -- and millions on radio and TV -- just as he did with Kerry. Corsi has become the court bard of the conservative movement. "The goal is to defeat Obama," Corsi told the New York Times. "I don't want Obama to be in office."

[...]

Corsi had dabbled off-and-on the fringes of conservative backlash politics for nearly three decades. In his spare time, which he appeared to have lots of, Corsi busied himself at his computer, firing off opinions on the far-right website Free Republic, marked by their sexual and racial obsessions.

In a comment typical of the dozens he posted under the handle "jrlc," Corsi wrote, "Anybody ask why HELLary couldn't keep BJ Bill satisfied? Not lesbo or anything, is she?" In another, he ranted, "Isn't the Democratic Party the official SODOMIZER PROTECTION ASSOCIATION of AMERICA -- oh, I forgot, it was just an accident that Clintoon's [sic] first act in office was to promote 'gays in the military.' RAGHEADS are Boy-Bumpers as clearly as they are Women-Haters -- it all goes together."

Then he composed Unfit For Command, suddenly vaulting into best-sellerdom. Surrounded by the media buzz of talk radio and Fox News, Corsi no longer plied the seamy troll-zones of the right-wing blogosphere. Overnight, he had become a conservative folk hero. But as Bush's popularity waned during his second term, Corsi's star dimmed. He tried to reignite it by co-authoring a book with "prophecy expert" Michael Evans, Showdown with Nuclear Iran, calling on the United States and Israel to attack Iran "before it's too late," and another, Black Gold Stranglehold, claiming to expose the Big Lie that will "enslave" Americans: "the belief that oil is a fossil fuel and a finite resource." Corsi's conspiracy theories consolidated his cult status, but he did not revive the brightness of his Swiftboating campaign. As another presidential election approached, however, Corsi followed his well-trod path back to renown.

In early 2007, Corsi huddled with an old friend, Howard Phillips, a veteran conservative operative who had attempted to organize the anti-government militia movement into a cohesive political bloc during the 1990s. Corsi emerged from their discussion convinced of his destiny. He would declare his campaign for the presidential nomination of the ultra-right Constitution Party, enthusiastically embrace the party's call for a complete halt on immigration, banning abortion even in cases of rape and incest, and upholding its official platform that the "U.S. Constitution established a Republic under God, rather than a democracy." With this momentous announcement, Corsi hoped to cast himself as the last, best hope to save America from the godless, globalist duocracy conspiring to merge the United States, Mexico and Canada into a "North American Union." (His latest flop, published in 2007, was a screed entitled, The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada.)

[...]

Backed by Corsi, Baldwin seized the Constitution Party's nomination this May. Then he unfurled a bold new agenda, calling for "an independent investigative committee to analyze" whether the attacks of 9/11 were an inside government job.

Corsi, for his part, shared Baldwin's skepticism. "The government's explanation of the jet fuel fire is not a sufficient explanation," Corsi said in January on the radio show hosted by Alex Jones, a fellow Baldwin supporter who promotes himself as "the grandfather of what has come to be known as the 9/11 Truth Movement."

"With people like you starting to question 9/11 with the science," Jones marveled, "boy that's really gonna ... "

"That's what rattles the cage," said Corsi in a self-satisfied tone.

In late 2007, with Obama in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, Corsi gleaned a new opportunity to "rattle the cage." He punched out a proposal for an anti-Obama attack book, Obama Nation, and floated it to right-wing publishers. Mary Matalin, the longtime Republican consultant and former senior adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, was hunting for titles for her two-year-old publishing imprint, Threshold, a conservative division of Simon and Schuster. When Corsi's proposal landed on her desk, she was thrilled.

Matalin promptly signed Corsi to a lucrative deal, positioning Obama Nation as Threshold's premier release of the summer season. In anticipation of heavy sales, Matalin ordered the printing of 475,000 copies. When the book was released in early August, conservative foundations and think tanks ensured its early success with a massive bulk buy, propelling it to number one on the New York Times bestseller list.

Like Unfit For Command, which wrongly claimed that Kerry had falsified combat reports in order to earn medals in Vietnam, Obama Nation was larded with crackpot smears cobbled together from assorted right-wing blog posts. Corsi asserted, for example, that Obama had "extensive connections to Islam," that he may have snorted cocaine in the Senate, and that he has staffed his campaign with card-carrying communists (including the former youth politics reporter at The Nation, Sam Graham-Felsen, an official Obama blogger and self-described progressive Democrat).

[...]

Thrown on the defensive by the revelation of Corsi's myriad factual errors, Matalin rushed to her author's defense. Obama Nation, she told the New York Times, "was not designed to be, and does not set out to be a political book. Instead, it is "a piece of scholarship, and a good one at that." Following Matalin's lead, the conservative movement rallied to Corsi's side. Rush Limbaugh hailed Obama Nation as a "pretty damn good" book; Fox News host Sean Hannity hosted Corsi twice on his top-rated Hannity and Colmes, asking him during his second appearance whether Obama was ever a drug dealer. Meanwhile, the National Review's Mark Levin assailed the media for "wanting to know about anything [Corsi] has ever said or written and his associations." Even John McCain refused to condemn Corsi's work. When asked by a reporter about Obama Nation, McCain responded simply, "Gotta keep your sense of humor."

Though the conservative movement's most influential media personalities are clamoring for interviews, Corsi still found time to visit the fringe figures that had promoted his conspiratorial tracts during his lean years between campaigns. On August 4, Corsi reunited with Alex Jones, the 9/11 "Truther," to claim that Obama "really" was a Muslim. "We should not have anybody as president who -- both their parents aren't Americans," Jones barked. "Bottom line, that's always been the way it is." Two weeks later, Corsi scheduled a spot on something called "James Edwards' Political Cesspool," a show he had already appeared on in July.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on August 24, 2008, 04:39:22 PM
sweet merciful shit.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 24, 2008, 07:16:39 PM
Quoteand another, Black Gold Stranglehold, claiming to expose the Big Lie that will "enslave" Americans: "the belief that oil is a fossil fuel and a finite resource."

LOLWUT???
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 24, 2008, 07:25:41 PM
QuoteCorsi, for his part, shared Baldwin's skepticism. "The government's explanation of the jet fuel fire is not a sufficient explanation," Corsi said in January on the radio show hosted by Alex Jones, a fellow Baldwin supporter who promotes himself as "the grandfather of what has come to be known as the 9/11 Truth Movement."

Holy shit!  Alex Jones actually endorses the Constitution Party?  I knew he was crazy, but not THAT crazy.

QuoteMatalin promptly signed Corsi to a lucrative deal, positioning Obama Nation as Threshold's premier release of the summer season. In anticipation of heavy sales, Matalin ordered the printing of 475,000 copies. When the book was released in early August, conservative foundations and think tanks ensured its early success with a massive bulk buy, propelling it to number one on the New York Times bestseller list.

Yeah, I was getting ready to point that out.  The fact that he is on the NYT Bestseller list doesn't mean that all of those books are getting read.  The Right Wing media machine did the exact same thing with Coulter's last 2 books. It's a good tactic to make it look like you have the majority on your side even if your ideas are batshit insane.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 24, 2008, 08:40:09 PM
Its hardly surprising though.  They have so much in common!  Both:

love militias
are fond of conspiracy theories
hate immigrants
love Christianity
are near universally derided
make a living from scapegoating and irrational fear
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 25, 2008, 05:50:16 PM
Glenn Greenwald makes a good point today about hypocrisy from the Right Wing Noise Machine: Jerry Kerry is a gigolo for marrying a rich heiress but John McCain is a Man of the People despite cheating on his first wife with and eventually marrying an even richer heiress.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/22/gigolo/index.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 25, 2008, 05:51:29 PM
Greenwald always makes good points.

However, I bet he did not mention than McCain was a POW, did he?  Did you know McCain was a POW?  POW POW POW.

Obama was never a POW.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 25, 2008, 05:53:44 PM
"Getting shot down is not a qualification for presidency."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 25, 2008, 05:54:41 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 25, 2008, 05:53:44 PM
"Getting shot down is not a qualification for presidency."

POWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOW














































POW.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on August 25, 2008, 06:10:06 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 25, 2008, 05:53:44 PM
"Getting shot down is not a qualification for presidency."

I love this quote. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 25, 2008, 06:11:26 PM
I would add a follow-up...


"Gaming the Chicago political system to rise to the top in only a few years is, or should be, a qualification for presidency."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on August 25, 2008, 06:14:27 PM
Nader?
Barr?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 25, 2008, 06:18:43 PM
Ummm... Obama.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 25, 2008, 06:19:59 PM
Keyword:  Chicago
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on August 25, 2008, 06:28:04 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 25, 2008, 06:18:43 PM
Ummm... Obama.

No, no.  I was asking for you to come up with quotes for Nader and Barr. 

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 25, 2008, 06:28:46 PM
:lol:  I missed that one too.  And ugh Nader.  ...and Bob Barr?  Srsly?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 25, 2008, 06:33:33 PM
Wait, when did Rosanne declare her candidacy?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 25, 2008, 06:45:49 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 25, 2008, 06:14:27 PM
Nader?
Barr?

Wasted votes are still wasted?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on August 25, 2008, 06:49:12 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 25, 2008, 06:45:49 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 25, 2008, 06:14:27 PM
Nader?
Barr?

Wasted votes are still wasted?

W1nnar!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 25, 2008, 06:55:50 PM
McKinney!!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 25, 2008, 08:15:00 PM
Former SNL castmate Victoria Jackson thinks that Obama is the anti-Christ/fake Christian/Communist and that he hates Whitey.

http://www.victoriajackson.com/

QuoteI don't want a political label,  but Obama bears traits that resemble the anti- Christ and I'm scared to death that un- educated people will ignorantly vote him into office.  My mom likes him because his children are well dressed!

You see, what bothers me most, besides being a Communist, and a racist (Obama writes in his book, From Dreams of My Father, "I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and and animosity against my (white) mother's race.") ...  He pretends to be a Christian and he incriminates himself everytime he speaks about Christianity.  To lie about being a believer in Christ is very dangerous.  Lightning could strike him at any minute!  But seriously, he doesn't have a clue what the Bible says and yet he pretends to be a church- going Christian to win votes.  That is sooooo evil.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 25, 2008, 08:19:57 PM
I wondered if she might be joking (because that article reads like satire) but apparently she is quite a devout Christian, so apparently not.

BTW, fake quote

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/517/

One quote stands out as totally false.

"I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race."

We read the book, and thought this line sounded out of place. To be doubly sure, we purchased an electronic edition of the book via ebooks.com, and searched for the words solace, grievance or animosity. We were not able to find the sentence, or anything close to the sentence, in Obama's book.

The quote is actually lifted from an article in the American Conservative. Author Steve Sailer wrote a detailed analysis of Dreams from My Father, describing the narrator as "a humor-impaired Holden Caulfield whose preppie angst is fueled by racial regret" but also praising it as "an impressive book" with an "elegant, carefully wrought prose style."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 25, 2008, 08:23:27 PM
Wow.

Thanks, Cain.



Hey kids, you can learn a lot from message boards populated by misanthropic, cynical bastards!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Triple Zero on August 25, 2008, 10:49:45 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 25, 2008, 05:54:41 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 25, 2008, 05:53:44 PM
"Getting shot down is not a qualification for presidency."

POWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOWPOW














































POW.

ZAPPA?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 25, 2008, 10:56:34 PM
(http://helium.lunarpages.com/~funky4/pictures/batman.JPG)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 12:13:45 AM
Ok. So i'm gonna out myself and paint a Ron Paul bumper sticker on my ass for you guys to kick.  Doing a quick search for his name on this board seems to indicate that he doesn't get a lotta respec.  (at least, the only things i saw were denouncements of his admittedly rabid and, to a certain extent, kooky following)
On a Discordian website, i didn't expect this.... i figured he would appeal more?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 26, 2008, 12:16:12 AM
:lulz:





























:lulz:










So...why?  What's so worthy of "respec" from RON PAUL?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 26, 2008, 12:45:26 AM
1.  His supporters.  I hate to use the word cult, but many of them did act like cultists.

2.  His voting record, a good portion of which can be read here http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-record-in-congress.html

3.  His ideological and personal links to the proto-fascist militia movement, the conspiratorial far-right and Christian Reconstructionists.  Again, Neiwert has an excellent overview http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/06/ron-paul-vs-new-world-order.html

4.  Paleocon/far-right politicians who try and forge links with the anti-war left always make me suspicious.  I'm a young guy, but I know the stories about LaRouche's brownshirters trying to take over the 1991 anti-Gulf War protests for example.  I always distrust entryist politics, because I've done enough of it myself to know in most cases, it is not done out of a deep and abiding respect for those one is trying to co-opt.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 26, 2008, 12:49:48 AM
Oh, he's a wolf in sheep's clothing alright.  He preaches freedom and then alligns himself with the religious right as soon as he has a chance, because they are his FRIENDS:

http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2008/08/20/strange-bedfellows-to-say-the-least/

He's not the answer to freedom.  He's a wingnut of a different hue.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 26, 2008, 12:51:24 AM
I'd also like to point out that originally there was a level of respect for Ron Paul that was not exactly found for other Republican candidates on this board.  However, the tactics of his supporters, in addition to the information about his connections and the context of his political beliefs raised a lot of doubts.  The people behind him were...well, the Constitution Party regulars, and the Clinton is the AntiChrist/the UN is going to take over the USA/blacks and Jews are subhuman devils/Theocratic nutcase crowd who used to hang out in compounds in the 90s, waiting for the Apocalypse.

Paul was only really worth supporting in the context that it enraged the Neocon faction of the GOP, who have a long-running feud with the Paleocons.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 03:10:30 AM
Fair enough.
It seems that the largest sticking point is his rowdy band of supporters.  This is the primary reason i figured he would be popular in the Discordian circles.  They are diverse in their backgrounds and only loosely held together by a common interest in the reduction of the size and scope of centralized federal power.  This, of course, attracts 'strange bedfellows' and i view that as a wonderful trip.  I've never met such a fantastic crowd of the beautiful fringe held together with zealousness born from pent up frustration at the seemingly unstoppable descent into bureaucratic demise.

Of the voting record, i can't seem to find anything that should ring sour here.  The page you linked to misrepresents the aim of his legislation in my view.  I believe this is due to a complete denial of the ability for things of any import to be delegated to the several states rather than decided and handed down from the top.  In that context, all his 'no's seem to be pretty strange, but why shouldn't these things be left to the states? And why would our ilk support their inflexibly being determined at the federal level?  The flag burning thing does seem stupid, though..... Oh, and i disagree with him on the use of the death penalty at the federal level (we just need to administer it wisely)

Regarding his links..... What is 'proto-fascist'? and which militias of that sort is he linked to?  Please define 'far-right'.  It seems currently used as a euphemism for 'uber-hawkish', which is certainly not in keeping with RP's philosophy.  The Orcanus link you gave seems to give an explanation that his support was a conspiracy of conspiracy theorists, or some such nonsense, and tries to pin him with racism... that's a pretty good stretch there.

on your fourth point, i'm not quite sure what your angle is.  If one shares a view with someone else regarding a specific issue, are you saying that you should not cooperate to its' end unless you agree with all else they hold to?  Or are you saying that his conviction against foreign interventionism is a clever ruse carried out for decades?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 26, 2008, 04:19:56 AM
http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=98343&catid=188

Denver Hilarity Week begins.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 26, 2008, 04:50:27 AM
Quote from: vexati0n on August 26, 2008, 04:19:56 AM
http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=98343&catid=188

Denver Hilarity Week begins.
I wish that I could say I was surprised.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 26, 2008, 12:49:02 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 03:10:30 AM
Of the voting record, i can't seem to find anything that should ring sour here.  The page you linked to misrepresents the aim of his legislation in my view.  I believe this is due to a complete denial of the ability for things of any import to be delegated to the several states rather than decided and handed down from the top.  In that context, all his 'no's seem to be pretty strange, but why shouldn't these things be left to the states? And why would our ilk support their inflexibly being determined at the federal level?  The flag burning thing does seem stupid, though..... Oh, and i disagree with him on the use of the death penalty at the federal level (we just need to administer it wisely)

On issue 2:

Nothing wrong with pro-life Bills?  I don't see what is especially free about banning abortion and funding for it.  How about this:

"We the People Act - Prohibits the Supreme Court and each federal court from adjudicating any claim or relying on judicial decisions involving: (1) state or local laws, regulations, or policies concerning the free exercise or establishment of religion; (2) the right of privacy, including issues of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or (3) the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation where based upon equal protection of the laws."

He essentially wants to remove the right to take discrimination to the courts, of any sort.  Presumably the magical free market fairy will solve all their problems, but while it makes a lovely story, reality doesn't work like that.

Religious Freedom Restoration Act aims to put churches above the law and undermine the divide between the state and religion.

He wants to undermine labour unions.

He doesn't believe in a Federally mandated minimum wage...because as we know, without regulation, America's top corporations are so giving and friendly towards their workers.

Backs the electoral college to the hilt, despite how first-past-the-post systems automatically make the votes of about half the population worthless.

Wants to make registering for voting harder, by repealing the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.

Repealing the anti-trust laws and trusting the free market sounds like a recipe for disaster.  So naturally Paul is for it.

Hates Iranians and wants to deny Iranian students (and them alone) certain funds.

Obviously has no love for the 14th Ammendment.

Wants to gut Environmental protections worse than Bush.

Promotes the pointless offshore drilling, which would do nothing to reduce the cost of oil in the USA.

Wants to block membership of UNESCO

Wants to withdraw from the ABM treaty, making both China and Russia highly suspicious.

Wants to take over the Panama Canal again.  Sounds like a war in the making.

Like the text says, he wants to reduce the tax burdens of the mega-rich, who already have it far too easy.

Wants parents to have the right to be informed if their child has a venereal disease or abortion.

and

Forbid Federal funding to organizations who do not think homosexuality is evil.


QuoteRearding his links..... What is 'proto-fascist'? and which militias of that sort is he linked to?  Please define 'far-right'.  It seems currently used as a euphemism for 'uber-hawkish', which is certainly not in keeping with RP's philosophy.  The Orcanus link you gave seems to give an explanation that his support was a conspiracy of conspiracy theorists, or some such nonsense, and tries to pin him with racism... that's a pretty good stretch there.

Proto-fascist is a term for rightwing revolutionary populist organizations whose nationalistic, racist, sectarian and social agendas are reminiscient of fascism in terms of organization and aims.  The Patriot Movement in the 90s, who the militias sprung from were a political movement based in populist ultranationalism and focused on an a core mythic ideal of phoenix-like societal rebirth, attained through a return to "traditional values", and have links going back to more overtly fascist movements such as the KKK or Posse Comitatus.  However, it is not quite fascist, because it lacks the centralizing figure of a Fuhrer or Il Duce, despite the best attempts of Howard Phillips.

Ron Paul has given many talks on the militia and Patriot scene.  One such example would be this one (http://www.publiceye.org/huntred/Hunt_For_Red_Menace-11.html) detailed by Chip Berlet.  He has giving talks at the Taft Club (http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2007/10/08/extremist-group-announces-speech-by-congressman/), a racist organization whose members are part of the same network who feed bullshit racial theories from groups like Aryan Nations to the wider public, attended a Patriot Network (http://www.patriotnetwork.info/Leaders.htm) banquet in his honour and the Ron Paul Survival Report was frequently read among militia and survivalist groups.

I define far-right as socially authoritarian, often religiously or racially rooted political viewpoints, which often include anti-Semitism, racial segregation, the quashing of the civil rights of minorities, anti-immigration, homophobia and sexism.  Usually hatred of the Federal government is often included in that in the American context, but only in the sense that they view the Federal government as a cultural hegemon of liberal-social values (excuse me while I try not to laugh) and want to devolve power down to more authoritarian and crazy local representatives, making it qualitatively different from the view that the Federal government is overly dangerous and powerful per se.  Its a power-coveting thing, not a principled anti-authoritarian stance.

Hawkishness is not per se an element of the far-right.  It certainly manifests itself there in some ways, but usually a far-right groundswell of opinion takes place during and after a lost war, and thus the hawkishness is linked to nationalist ambitions.  The USA did not lose the Cold War, yet in the wake of it there was a far-right resurgence, which had been building throughout the 80s, so the lack of external hawkishness may be explained in that way.  Furthermore, they often do see themselves waging wars - internally.  Against the gays, Jews, Muslims, blacks and "liberal" or "socialist" elements of American society.  In the 90s, this manifested itself in the worst cases in lone wolf terrorism and vigilantism.  In the 2000s, it has often been linked to attacks on anti-war protestors (not for being against the war, but for being Dirty Fucking Hippies), as well as cases of fake terrorism scares designed to operate like the Italian "Strategy of Tension".

Less violently, but far more mainstream, you have the "culture warriors".  Some, such as Rush Limbaugh, Coulter etc, are chameleons, against the wars in the 90s, and for them now.  But then you have the likes of Pat Buchanan and the Paleocons, who are against the war, are in fact pro-isolation, but also think gays should be thrown in prison, that anyone to the left of Jesse Hems is the next Lenin and that God's law is the only sensible and moral way to rule a country.  Both sides tend to unite on social policy, and their increasing shrill and violent rhetoric does create a discourse which excuses the above actions, knowingly or not.

To make my point about hawkishness more clearly, there are liberal interventionists as well, the classic liberal hawks like the Clintons, Brezinkski and co, who often root their interventionism in international crisis' where America has a strategic interest.  Their social policies are often quite centre of the road (possibly right leaning in some economic cases, thanks to neoliberalism and the fucking DLC) and not overtly authoritarian, racist, sexist etc at least not compared to the current guys.  But they were the ones saying "we have the world's greatest military force, lets use it".

David Neiwert, who runs Orcinus, is a journalist who cut his teeth reporting on the far right - not just their activities, but their beliefs, the context in which they arise, their networks and affliations, how they appeal to the mainstream etc.  On one hand, this may create a "law of fives" effect where he sees fascism where it is not, but on the other hand, he has rarely, if ever, been shown to be very wrong.  It is worth noting who supports Ron Paul, as well as who he chooses to associate with.  The former is simple enough, "who benefits" should be the starting principle of any investigation, and the latter deserves scrutiny as well, since it deals with his self-image, who he feels comfortable relating his views to, and so on and so forth. 

And one key element of the far-right is its conspiracy theorism, and how that impacts on their policies.  Often there are good arguments to be made for certain policies the far right likes - such as the abolishment of the Federal Reserve due to a lack of unaccountability and oversight, or withdrawing from the UN because it doesn't have enough teeth to deal with international issues (though reform is also another option).  However, in the context of far-right politics, both the UN and Federal Reserve are owned by internationalist bankers and socialists (ie TEH JOOS!, at least fairly often) who aim at creating a single global state and forcing Satanic Communism on the USA.  And Ron Paul not only derives support from such crowds (believe me, I am well connected in online conspiracy circles, though my critical thinking abilities have made me numerous enemies, and there are plenty of Paul supporters among the far-right conspiracy fringe who dont give a shit for freedom, except as a slogan to distract from their desire to remake the USA in their image) but he also chooses to associate with such people.  He plays a coy game where he doesn't come out and say what he is thinking, but instead uses policies and his presence in those circles to signal to such people he is one of theirs.  It is kind of secret society-esque, dog whistle politics, but then again I've seen that from Bush as well (Cheney calling anti-war protestors traitors helped spark off some of the far-right violence directed at them) and I think the evidence is sufficient to support such a hypothesis.



Quoteon your fourth point, i'm not quite sure what your angle is.  If one shares a view with someone else regarding a specific issue, are you saying that you should not cooperate to its' end unless you agree with all else they hold to?  Or are you saying that his conviction against foreign interventionism is a clever ruse carried out for decades?

Well the thing is they only hold a similar view on the most superficial level.  Much of the antiwar right opposes the war because they see it as some sort of favour to foreigners - and US taxpayers money should not be spent on filthy brown people.  Not because its immoral to kill people for no reason, its just immoral to do it with taxpayer's money.  I don't doubt their position is genuine, its just not the same position as mine.

Furthermore, they are rarely ever interested in an equal working partnership.  If they were, I might be able to stand them more.  As soon as they try and hook up, you get a number of things happening.

Firstly, a lot of their people will try and take leadership positions, or establish vetos over actions.  Secondly, they will start spouting their nonsense conspiracy theories.  Thirdly, they will start expelling or sidelining their enemies.  They almost always effectively end up neutering any organization they get a foothold in, either by petty internal bickering or through ruining their credibility in the mainstream press.  Like the Truthers for example, another organization with lots of LaRouchites in leading positions, who have tried repeatedly to hijack antiwar protests, expel those who speak out against their particular brand of insanity and allowed the media to portray everyone against the war as nutcases.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 26, 2008, 01:03:15 PM
I roll with a +4 attack bonus against the far-right.

Anyway, Denver looks fun.  "Oh, he only had white supremacist connections and was travelling around Denver WITH A SMALL ASSASSINATION KIT in the back of his car.  What is there to worry about?"

Mark Ames has an article up too:  http://exiledonline.com/rachel-maddows-post-idiotic-commentary/

QuoteI just flew back to the U.S., just in time to watch the Democratic Convention's opening night. I'm amazed by how Soviet my country has become, or always was. We love these hokey big ceremonies just as much as any totalitarian country. I flipped the channel away from the Convention coverage and wound up on the opening day of the US Open, and there it was again—more ceremony, with all the hokey Soviet nostalgia that comes with it. Jesus, even the US Open has succumbed, trotting out stars from our Soviet past: Chris Evert, Billie Jean King, Ilie Nastase—I could only hold out long enough to hear John Newcombe's depressing name called out, before immediately flipping the channel, which put me right back on the other, bigger Soviet ceremony, the one in Denver. I always assumed the Russians were the world's worst ceremony-monkeys, because all you saw on their shitty state-controlled TV were endless hokey ceremonies, and tributes to crusty old pigs. I guess we're just as hokey as they are, only with marginally slicker production values, although the slickness-gap is narrowing fast.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 01:13:21 PM
Fuck, Cain.  I was gonna offer a line or two about gutting the Department of Education, but you apparently have the ability, like Alice in Resident Evil: Extinction, to set the motherfucking sky on fire.




"RON PAUL?!"
  \
(http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/953/residentevil3image3jn5.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 26, 2008, 01:19:15 PM
:thanks:

That was a good hour of writing there, however.  I practically put off breakfast until lunch to complete it.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 01:34:23 PM
Ah.  I see clearly now.   :D
Thank you for sacrificing your breakfast.  I should at least let you know that i read it thoroughly.
I can't believe that i didn't see all this stuff from my vantage point!   :wink:
I'll try to have more faith in the machine, since that's how it operates in the real world.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 01:36:57 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 01:34:23 PM

I'll try to have more faith in the machine, since that's how it operates in the real world.



Hold on, there!

There's a big difference between knowing what the Machine™ will do, and having faith in it.

To understand that The Free Market only works in a universe without Greed or Duplicity isn't the same as having "faith" in Greed and Duplicity.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 26, 2008, 01:46:10 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 01:34:23 PM
Ah.  I see clearly now.   :D
Thank you for sacrificing your breakfast.  I should at least let you know that i read it thoroughly.
I can't believe that i didn't see all this stuff from my vantage point!   :wink:
I'll try to have more faith in the machine, since that's how it operates in the real world.

How is what I am saying advocating faith in "the machine"?

Or is this a case of "you don't like my candidate, therefore you must be against freedom" a la...well, pretty much every American candidate?  If you're going to engage in childish ad hominem attacks against me instead of debate my points, then I simply wont bother with doing detailed and researched articles, and instead will just cut straight to the slanging match.

Oh, and for the record, I've also criticized Obama (DLC "centrist" like Clinton), Clinton ("Bush but for abortions"), Edwards (voted for the wrong war, probably did something else wrong), Guiliani (annointed son of the Neocon foreign policy), McCain (unstable shameless whore), Huckabee (religious nutcase), Tancredo (hates Mexicans with a passion), Romney (bad taste in fiction) etc etc ad nauseum.  But never mind that, eh?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 02:50:23 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 01:36:57 PM
Hold on, there!
There's a big difference between knowing what the Machine™ will do, and having faith in it.
To understand that The Free Market only works in a universe without Greed or Duplicity isn't the same as having "faith" in Greed and Duplicity.

The Free Market does work, and although Greed and Duplicity seek to undermine it, that does not mean we should seek an inflexible centralized planning that will also be subject to the same, no?
I didn't say anything about having faith in Greed and Duplicity.

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2008, 01:46:10 PM
How is what I am saying advocating faith in "the machine"?
Or is this a case of "you don't like my candidate, therefore you must be against freedom" a la...well, pretty much every American candidate?  If you're going to engage in childish ad hominem attacks against me instead of debate my points, then I simply wont bother with doing detailed and researched articles, and instead will just cut straight to the slanging match.
Oh, and for the record, I've also criticized Obama (DLC "centrist" like Clinton), Clinton ("Bush but for abortions"), Edwards (voted for the wrong war, probably did something else wrong), Guiliani (annointed son of the Neocon foreign policy), McCain (unstable shameless whore), Huckabee (religious nutcase), Tancredo (hates Mexicans with a passion), Romney (bad taste in fiction) etc etc ad nauseum.  But never mind that, eh?

Ok, ok i apologize, i was rather dismissive and didn't mean to hurt feelings.  I certainly didn't mean to ad hominize you.  The articles that you linked to were rather inflammatory, though, and i feel made poorly substantiated claims. 
I'll shut up about it and just enjoin you in the bashing of the other puppets now....  :D
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 02:56:30 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 02:50:23 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 01:36:57 PM
Hold on, there!
There's a big difference between knowing what the Machine™ will do, and having faith in it.
To understand that The Free Market only works in a universe without Greed or Duplicity isn't the same as having "faith" in Greed and Duplicity.

The Free Market does work,

In what sense?  Please to provide citations.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 26, 2008, 03:12:56 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 02:50:23 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 01:36:57 PM
Hold on, there!
There's a big difference between knowing what the Machine™ will do, and having faith in it.
To understand that The Free Market only works in a universe without Greed or Duplicity isn't the same as having "faith" in Greed and Duplicity.

The Free Market does work, and although Greed and Duplicity seek to undermine it, that does not mean we should seek an inflexible centralized planning that will also be subject to the same, no?
I didn't say anything about having faith in Greed and Duplicity.

Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2008, 01:46:10 PM
How is what I am saying advocating faith in "the machine"?
Or is this a case of "you don't like my candidate, therefore you must be against freedom" a la...well, pretty much every American candidate?  If you're going to engage in childish ad hominem attacks against me instead of debate my points, then I simply wont bother with doing detailed and researched articles, and instead will just cut straight to the slanging match.
Oh, and for the record, I've also criticized Obama (DLC "centrist" like Clinton), Clinton ("Bush but for abortions"), Edwards (voted for the wrong war, probably did something else wrong), Guiliani (annointed son of the Neocon foreign policy), McCain (unstable shameless whore), Huckabee (religious nutcase), Tancredo (hates Mexicans with a passion), Romney (bad taste in fiction) etc etc ad nauseum.  But never mind that, eh?

Ok, ok i apologize, i was rather dismissive and didn't mean to hurt feelings.  I certainly didn't mean to ad hominize you.  The articles that you linked to were rather inflammatory, though, and i feel made poorly substantiated claims. 
I'll shut up about it and just enjoin you in the bashing of the other puppets now....  :D

OK, but I'm going to have to dispute that Free Market claim.

For the operation of a free market as described by most free market theorists, certain conditions have to be in place, most of which do not occur naturally, and when they do is often only in a limited way.

See the 2001 Nobel Prize for Economics, for "analyses of markets with asymmetric information" by Stiglitz, Akerlof and Spence.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 26, 2008, 03:23:55 PM
To quote my friends from Sadly, No:

Ho-hum, we condemn the alleged plot to assassinate Barack. . .OH MY GOD, SOMEBODY YELLED AT MICHELLE MALKIN!

http://www.memeorandum.com/080826/p20#a080826p20
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 26, 2008, 03:32:56 PM
QuoteThe Free Market does work, and although Greed and Duplicity seek to undermine it, that does not mean we should seek an inflexible centralized planning that will also be subject to the same, no?
I didn't say anything about having faith in Greed and Duplicity.

I don't know what Paul believes but i don't think libertarians believe in the (anarchist) completely unrestricted free market. I think they would suggest that in a real world situation that demanded 25 well written, carefully crafted, functional regulations we would be better of with 10 (well written carefully crafted functional regulations) than having 3783 poorly written,dysfunctional regulations, and that we should take our time and get the remaining 15 necessary regulations right. If i get the philosophy the point is limited government, let the free market do what it can, limit the government to doing only what it must do (and doing it well).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 03:37:15 PM
The reason we have 3783 laws is that clever, greedy assholes always find a loophole, which then takes an additional law to plug it up.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 26, 2008, 03:50:55 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 03:37:15 PM
The reason we have 3783 laws is that clever, greedy assholes always find a loophole, which then takes an additional law to plug it up.

hence the importance of carefully crafted well written functional laws, creating badly written laws and finding the loop holes in them is a industry supported by politicians and there lawyer Buddy's, there's gold in them thar regulations.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 03:54:37 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on August 26, 2008, 03:50:55 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 03:37:15 PM
The reason we have 3783 laws is that clever, greedy assholes always find a loophole, which then takes an additional law to plug it up.

hence the importance of carefully crafted well written functional laws, creating badly written laws and finding the loop holes in them is a industry supported by politicians and there lawyer Buddy's, there's gold in them thar regulations.


Can you think of any regulation that was written so well that no one ever found a way around it?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 26, 2008, 04:12:53 PM
nope and there may never be one, the law must be fluid, interpreted and reinterpreted written and re written in order to work, this doesn't mean the principals of limiting regulation or eliminating unnecessary regulations in favor of fewer  better regulations is wrong.   
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 26, 2008, 04:14:16 PM
Its also a brilliant cover for undermining workers rights.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 04:46:03 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 03:37:15 PM
The reason we have 3783 laws is that clever, greedy assholes always find a loophole, which then takes an additional law to plug it up.

Law is a formal system and thus suseptible to Godel's Incompleteness theorem.  You -can't- plug the holes. you can only move them around.  so you simply accept the inherent incompleteness or inconsitency, are rely on human intellect to deal with their abuse on a case by case basis.  Trying to 'fix' the system will simply cause it to grow unbounded.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 26, 2008, 04:53:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2008, 04:14:16 PM
Its also a brilliant cover for undermining workers rights.
or corruption happens any where the corrupt happen to be.
  no philosophy/ideology is immune from this

edit or political party is immune from this
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 05:03:06 PM
Carreer lawmakers know there is no permanent fix.  They also know that the corrupt exist in every population.


So small, plug-the-hole laws work as a better overall solution than large, fluid guidelines to be manipulated by the corrupt.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 26, 2008, 05:13:18 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 05:03:06 PM
Carreer lawmakers know there is no permanent fix.  They also know that the corrupt exist in every population.


So small, plug-the-hole laws work as a better overall solution than large, fluid guidelines to be manipulated by the corrupt.

law maker/politician plugs hole in law - gets credit/popularity from the people for being tough on X -  politician/law maker gets big donation from company doing X - company "gets" new loop hole in law - politician has money/popularity wins election - politician plugs hole in law.....

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 05:17:01 PM
Or, your way:

Companies buy politicians, Laws/industries get de-regulated, companies decide not to be moral, companies fuck the citizenry, repeatedly, without lube, and no reacharound.



Incidentally, you still haven't cited a decent law that fits your ideals that has ever been passed.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 05:23:07 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 05:03:06 PM
Carreer lawmakers know there is no permanent fix.  They also know that the corrupt exist in every population.


So small, plug-the-hole laws work as a better overall solution than large, fluid guidelines to be manipulated by the corrupt.

We are sinking in evidence that they do not work though.  In the end you wind up with a morass of laws that are not able to be followed as nobody knows/understands them all.  the chances of inconsistency rise.  The 'need' for further lawyers/politicians/bureaucrats increases.  Elegance in law should be a higher virtue than expedience.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 05:28:44 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 05:23:07 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 05:03:06 PM
Carreer lawmakers know there is no permanent fix.  They also know that the corrupt exist in every population.


So small, plug-the-hole laws work as a better overall solution than large, fluid guidelines to be manipulated by the corrupt.

We are sinking in evidence that they do not work though.  In the end you wind up with a morass of laws that are not able to be followed as nobody knows/understands them all.  the chances of inconsistency rise.  The 'need' for further lawyers/politicians/bureaucrats increases.  Elegance in law should be a higher virtue than expedience.

You may be new enough here that you haven't met the barstool yet.

:barstool:





In other words, it would be extremely nice if congress could get together in bipartisan unity and write a law that would be broad enough to limit all corruption, yet not infinge on an individual's personality, flexible enough to cover all future possibilities, and integrate seamlessly with Big Industry's commitment to responsible growth, equitable pay for all its workers, and fair play within the market.


Do you believe in the tooth fairy, too?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 26, 2008, 05:44:38 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 05:17:01 PM
Or, your way:

Companies buy politicians, Laws/industries get de-regulated, companies decide not to be moral, companies fuck the citizenry, repeatedly, without lube, and no reacharound.



Incidentally, you still haven't cited a decent law that fits your ideals that has ever been passed.

not what i am proposing at all

politicians represent the people laws/regulations are simplified/clarified in a way that keeps the corrupt companies from fucking us w/o lube and still let the companies do business (reach around). when the laws fail (they will ) they get fixed corrected w/o the excessive regulation complexity that leads to the corruption we have now.

again i don't have a example of this kind of law, i started out talking about libertarian philosophy which is seldom practiced ( the constitution which is fairly simple and fairly libertarian is probably the best example i can give and it is interpreted and re interpreted as i said all laws will be)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 26, 2008, 05:57:14 PM
the complexity of an economy as enormous as in the US or Europe require a certain amount of ambiguity in laws and regulations. guidelines that protect workers in one sector of the economy could very well harm them in another sector. for that reason, it is necessary to have fairly openly interpretable laws so that the courts are free to decide and enforce the proper outcomes of different situations on a case-by-case basis.

the government's job, in my opinion, is not to describe specific processes for business to follow but to foster an open environment where both businesses and individuals can thrive. a massive "simplification" of laws and regulations could easily choke the life out of the economy by restricting business practices too much.

i think the best way to deal with corporate and political corruption is to expand the judicial system, put regulations in place to protect it from corruption, have heavy oversight of the judiciary, and make the services offered by the courts much more widely accessible. companies tend to fear loss of revenue much more than they fear enforcement of existing laws, and having a judicial system willing and able to impose punitive fines and other measures in retaliation for unethical behavior is a much better and more efficient solution than just legislating the crap out of what companies are "allowed to do" in the first place.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 06:00:37 PM
Quotei started out talking about libertarian philosophy which is seldom practiced ( the constitution which is fairly simple and fairly libertarian is probably the best example i can give and it is interpreted and re interpreted as i said all laws will be)

The reason it isn't practiced is because it forgets to take into account HUMANS.

Quotepoliticians represent the people

:cn:

Quotelaws/regulations are simplified/clarified in a way that keeps the corrupt companies from fucking us w/o lube and still let the companies do business (reach around).

:cn:

Quotewhen the laws fail (they will ) they get fixed corrected w/o the excessive regulation complexity that leads to the corruption we have now.

:cn:





Look, I get the idealistic view.  But as soon as you introduce stupid fucking primates, they're gonna do their level best to fuck things up.

My question to you is:  How does your idealistic views compensate for stupid fucking monkeys on every level of the process, from the citizenry to the politicians to the companies?

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 06:01:54 PM
Also, because it got left behind on the last page:

Quote from: vexati0n on August 26, 2008, 05:57:14 PM
the complexity of an economy as enormous as in the US or Europe require a certain amount of ambiguity in laws and regulations. guidelines that protect workers in one sector of the economy could very well harm them in another sector. for that reason, it is necessary to have fairly openly interpretable laws so that the courts are free to decide and enforce the proper outcomes of different situations on a case-by-case basis.

the government's job, in my opinion, is not to describe specific processes for business to follow but to foster an open environment where both businesses and individuals can thrive. a massive "simplification" of laws and regulations could easily choke the life out of the economy by restricting business practices too much.

i think the best way to deal with corporate and political corruption is to expand the judicial system, put regulations in place to protect it from corruption, have heavy oversight of the judiciary, and make the services offered by the courts much more widely accessible. companies tend to fear loss of revenue much more than they fear enforcement of existing laws, and having a judicial system willing and able to impose punitive fines and other measures in retaliation for unethical behavior is a much better and more efficient solution than just legislating the crap out of what companies are "allowed to do" in the first place.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 26, 2008, 06:05:14 PM
stupid monkeys and the fact that they're trying to legislate things that they largely don't understand. add to that the fact that so many politicians these days are more concerned with looking like they're trying to fix problems than with actually fixing them, and it's surprising that we've managed to build and maintain what we have, to say nothing of "improving" it.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 26, 2008, 06:15:47 PM
I've looked at the liberal, conservative and libertarian platforms and I've played in all three. What I've found, is that none of the three philosophies even attempt to take into account reality, or human nature. Conservatives and Libertarians think that somehow, magically, with no government interference, markets will be regulated by the will of consumers, rather than the scheming of manipulative corporations that spin the hell out of consumers. For their plans to work we would need corporations that felt their best interests were served by an informed and intelligent population and we would need consumers to actually pay attention to what's going on around them. I have become convinced over the years that neither of these things are gonna happen, therefore Free Markets are doomed to fail, mostly because humans are greedy, lazy and stupid... in general.

The Liberals, however, have an equally idiotic condition to their philosophy. They actually think that we can solve problems by increasing the size, scope and powers of the government... perhaps believing that Our government has the interests of the People at heart, or that our government is unlikely to be corrupted. Yet, we've had presidents on the payroll of corporations since President Harding and probably before.

Government can't solve people's problems and people are too stupid or lazy to solve their own problems.

Thus, my political decision making focuses not on 'markets' and economy, but rather on the side items, particularly social freedoms and civic issues. I feel that currently the Democrats are slightly ahead of the Republicans on this one... not much, but a little.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 26, 2008, 06:20:58 PM
it helps to have a coherent idea of what it is exactly that you want to gain, or at least what you don't want to lose. that draws borders in the behavior of corporations. i tend to think that the conservatives are idiots for thinking the government can't help, and liberals are idiots for thinking help will come from the wrong part of the government. the legislative and executive branches are easily corruptible and basically powerless to effect behavior anyway. the judicial branch, which for some reason is the redheaded stepchild of government, is what needs to bear the weight of ensuring ethical behavior (which, as it happens, is what it was designed for).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 06:21:25 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 05:28:44 PM
You may be new enough here that you haven't met the barstool yet.
:barstool:

In other words, it would be extremely nice if congress could get together in bipartisan unity and write a law that would be broad enough to limit all corruption, yet not infinge on an individual's personality, flexible enough to cover all future possibilities, and integrate seamlessly with Big Industry's commitment to responsible growth, equitable pay for all its workers, and fair play within the market.

Do you believe in the tooth fairy, too?

Ah.  That is a problem.  You can protect the innocent (from overreaching .gov) at the cost of some bad being gotten away with, or you can  make sure that no bad goes unpunished at the cost of fvcking some innocents along the way.  It's a continuum that you draw a line in with the law.  I think your a little further to the latter end than i am.

Maybe the reason i think the barstool really ISN'T there is because people try to sit on it and they fall to the floor because they have a size 7 poopshoot from an overreaching .gov
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 06:24:25 PM
In case you were wondering, this country isn't in the tank from too much government interference in corporate affairs.


Yes, the gvt has had much to do with sticking the US in a pile of shit.  But it wasn't because they were restricting the free market.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 26, 2008, 06:26:17 PM
i think america suffers from a chronic and advanced case of addiction to quick fixes.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 07:13:09 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 06:24:25 PM
In case you were wondering, this country isn't in the tank from too much government interference in corporate affairs.


Yes, the gvt has had much to do with sticking the US in a pile of shit.  But it wasn't because they were restricting the free market.

I assume by 'restricting' you mean an even handed strangle of the market?  Of course not.  it is meddling in various points and places at the behest of lobbyists and interest groups... 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 07:18:24 PM
Nope.


Well, yes, they're doing that, too.   But regulation (what the libertarian ideologists complain about) didn't tank the economy.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 26, 2008, 07:28:08 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on August 26, 2008, 04:53:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2008, 04:14:16 PM
Its also a brilliant cover for undermining workers rights.
or corruption happens any where the corrupt happen to be.
  no philosophy/ideology is immune from this

edit or political party is immune from this


I'm a little to old for the kind of starry eyed idealism you accuse me of see above . nothing works right,  doesn't mean simpler is not better
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 06:00:37 PM
Quotei started out talking about libertarian philosophy which is seldom practiced ( the constitution which is fairly simple and fairly libertarian is probably the best example i can give and it is interpreted and re interpreted as i said all laws will be)

The reason it isn't practiced is because it forgets to take into account HUMANS.

the ideal of the representative gov relies on a  intelligent ethical well educated population (of monkeys/humans) and we are lost on all three counts
-more government more regulation wont fix any of them 

if each amendment to the constitution had 3873 lines of virtually incomprehensible legalesse and a gov agency with 1000s of lawyers to interpret it do you think you would have more freedom ? i am just trying to make a obvious point obvious - simple is often better  and always simpler.




Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 07:30:18 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 07:18:24 PM
Nope.


Well, yes, they're doing that, too.   But regulation (what the libertarian ideologists complain about) didn't tank the economy.
The economy is barely beginning to tank.
and I'm in the 'shirking monetary policy responsibility off onto private banking screwed us' camp.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 07:40:45 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on August 26, 2008, 07:28:08 PM

the ideal of the representative gov relies on a  intelligent ethical well educated population (of monkeys/humans) and we are lost on all three counts
-more government more regulation wont fix any of them 

I didn't say it would.  It would, however, make it temporarily harder for the bastards.  Or, you gotta choose the bastards you can live with. I prefer the beurocratic bastards to the capitalistic bastards.

Quoteif each amendment to the constitution had 3873 lines of virtually incomprehensible legalesse and a gov agency with 1000s of lawyers to interpret it do you think you would have more freedom ?

We do.  All laws are built on, or vetted by, the constitution.

Quotei am just trying to make a obvious point obvious - simple is often better  and always simpler.

Better for whom?

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 07:42:56 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 07:30:18 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 07:18:24 PM
Nope.


Well, yes, they're doing that, too.   But regulation (what the libertarian ideologists complain about) didn't tank the economy.
The economy is barely beginning to tank.
and I'm in the 'shirking monetary policy responsibility off onto private banking screwed us' camp.

Wait, what?  The bankers didn't cut taxes of the to 1%, raise deficit spending, and start a war.  Not even the Jewish ones.

The banker clamored for deregulation of the housing system, then developed the Sub Prime mortgage.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 08:22:23 PM
Quote from: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 07:42:56 PM
Wait, what?  The bankers didn't cut taxes of the to 1%, raise deficit spending, and start a war.  Not even the Jewish ones.

The banker clamored for deregulation of the housing system, then developed the Sub Prime mortgage.

The congress delegating monetary policy to the FED is what allows them to have deficit spending and all the crap that ensues.....
...I don't understand the Jewish reference...
Deregulation of the housing was just fine.  Stupid lenders, stupid borrowers, .gov sponsored creditors; let the sleep in it.  But no, .gov has to come meddle in it again...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 08:34:02 PM
heh.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 26, 2008, 08:51:00 PM
 
QuoteOr, you gotta choose the bastards you can live with. I prefer the bureaucratic bastards to the capitalistic bastards.


I think there the same bastards,  one big circle jerk bureaucrats pulling it for the capitalists capitalists pulling it for the bureaucrats.

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 26, 2008, 08:52:25 PM
Ok, now I'm convinced you two are engaged in some sort of wry satire.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 26, 2008, 08:52:52 PM
No, they sound like typical libertarians.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 26, 2008, 09:02:53 PM
I agree that there appears only a little difference between the Capitalist bastards and the Bureaucratic bastards. The Capitalist bastards may be willing to throw the worker and the worker's rights under the wheel to grease the path of "progress". The Bureaucrat may be willing to throw the citizen and the citizen's rights under the wheel to grease the path of "progress". The similarity is that both seem to think they KNOW what progress looks like; the difference is what they call the large fleshy bags of lubrication.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 09:34:33 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2008, 08:52:52 PM
No, they sound like typical libertarians.

Meh.....
I'll readily admit that what I advocate wouldn't 'work' in the way that anybody wants.
I guess i'm actually just a malcontent, i guess.  I want to be an island.
a luxury island. 
Honestly, i don't think any 'system' will work well at this point so advocating anything is more of a stylistic choice rather than a pragmatic one.  We live in interesting asymptotic times.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 26, 2008, 09:53:25 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 09:34:33 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2008, 08:52:52 PM
No, they sound like typical libertarians.

Meh.....
I'll readily admit that what I advocate wouldn't 'work' in the way that anybody wants.
I guess i'm actually just a malcontent, i guess.  I want to be an island.
a luxury island. 
Honestly, i don't think any 'system' will work well at this point so advocating anything is more of a stylistic choice rather than a pragmatic one.  We live in interesting asymptotic times.

Be careful of reactionaryism in the guise of jaded malcontent.  It is where many of the weak and defenseless are trampled, and where we take it for granted we are on the "up" side of that wheel and may yet at some point in time be on the lowest end.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 26, 2008, 10:13:13 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 26, 2008, 09:53:25 PM
Be careful of reactionaryism in the guise of jaded malcontent.  It is where many of the weak and defenseless are trampled, and where we take it for granted we are on the "up" side of that wheel and may yet at some point in time be on the lowest end.

I certainly don't thin we are on the 'up' side.  We've got a long way down yet.  Hell we're probably only half way down, which is why it seems things are getting worse at the rate that they are!
Also, i'm full of hogwash because i see that i am personally in a very comfortable position, with relatively little to complain about. 
I mostly like disagreeing, and with libertarian views, it seems i get to disagree with most everybody.  :D
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 27, 2008, 04:55:32 PM
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5845

Obama islama - what religion do Muslims think Obama is?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 27, 2008, 06:15:33 PM
Glen Beck says that we should all go out and waste as much energy as possible in order to make up for all of the carbon offsets that the DNC is responsible for. 

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/14354/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 28, 2008, 05:24:53 PM
http://www.politicswest.com/28818/republicans_set_war_room_near_downtown

QuoteIn an alley behind a non-descript row of brick buildings on North Speer Boulevard, and on the other side of a large metal gate with armed guards standing in front, Republicans have set up a "war room" in Denver.

In this west side location that is not far from the Pepsi Center yet out of sight from Democratic delegates and protesters walking downtown, Republicans will be crafting anti-Barack Obama messages nearly round the clock this week.

Republican National Committee Chairman Mike Duncan said the team of nearly two dozen staffers at the opposition headquarters will be "fact-checking" statements made by the Obama campaign and by speakers during the convention.

"Just consider this the Ministry of Truth," quipped Dick Wadhams, chairman of the Colorado Republican Party.

:facepalm:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 28, 2008, 05:34:18 PM
Holy carp!
you think he didn't realize what he was saying, or just thumbing his nose?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 28, 2008, 06:41:01 PM
welcome to the illiterate America
:mullet:
"they is jus tellin it like it is "
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: NWC on August 29, 2008, 03:24:36 AM
"10% chance of change"
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 29, 2008, 07:46:44 AM
Powerful new message from Barack Obama:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65I0HNvTDH4
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 29, 2008, 01:44:51 PM
I watched part of his speech on BBC america. It was cool, they had a creeper that updated itself as he spoke.

At one point it read:  "Obama: John McCain doesn't get it."

Damn, that guy can speak.  He's still the Smiler (courtesy of TGRR/Spider Jerusalem), but it's refreshing to have an actual orator on stage.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 29, 2008, 01:47:39 PM
BBC Parliament is so fucking dead with the summer holidays happening, they've been showing the full speeches from the convention.  The Senator from PA seemed to go down well.  He seemed to get something of a chant going in the crowd with his speech, which was one of the more direct attacks on McCain, IIRC.

I haven't watched too much, to be honest, but I am looking forward to the Republican convention.  I'm going to take a shot every time someone mentions an actual policy position.  I expect to be stone cold sober all week.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 29, 2008, 01:49:22 PM
You need a different game.

You should take a shot any time you want to say, "Citation Needed."


You'll be in Hospital by 9:00.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 29, 2008, 01:54:49 PM
I'll be in hospital from before the convention.

"And up next, the Republican National Convention on BBC Parliament!"

O rly? According to who?  Do you know that for certain?  Are you physically there as they prepare the broadcast?  Do you have the necessary technical skills to know that the transmission feeds are working as they should?  Do you know if the RNC leadership has not infact ordered a bunch of 18 year old rent boys and coke and will not be able to make any speeches until tomorrow?  Huh, HUH!?!?!!?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 01:56:54 PM
no no no...9/11!  Or pulling out of Iraq = certain D00M!  (mostly for those poor, unfortunate Iraqis!)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on August 29, 2008, 02:03:10 PM
I watched most of the speech on MSNBC.  I fell asleep so I missed a few minutes of it.  I didn't fall asleep because it was boring, I just haven't had much sleep lately.

Anyhoo, it was a good speech.  It's hard from my perspective.  I mean, I understand exactly why John McCain shouldn't be in office.  As good a speaker as he is, I don't need him to tell me why he is a better option.  I also know that the staunch anti-Obama folks aren't going to be swayed either.  (As is evident by the Conservotard posts I've seen on PoliticalCrossfire.com)  I wonder how it will play to those who haven't made up their mind. 

I also wonder how it will affect them when John McCain announces Mitt Romney as his VP.

Based on what I've seen so far, I think if the Obama that gave that speech is the Obama that shows up to the debates with McCain, he will win.  It won't be a blowout, but it will be convincing enough.  If it's the wimp Obama we've seen since the end of the primaries.  McCain will eek out the win. 

Also, I'm looking forward to the smackdown between Biden and Romney. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 02:19:43 PM
Yeah, I don't see anything coming from the debates but possibly more of the same from Obama vis a vis "attacks" on McCain...that includes what little harshness he handed down last night.  He's too gentle by half.

I do like the fact the montage vid and the beginning of his message focused on his roots--people needed to hear that.  And see that he could've gone the way of many a frat boy but instead chose to work amongst the poor in Chicago. 

I thought the whole thing too long...but then I tend to think that about MOST political speeches.

RWHN, you hit the nail on the head re: Romney and Biden.  Biden's going to have a field day, and it'll be the first decent set of fireworks we've yet to see on the campaign trail.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on August 29, 2008, 02:21:44 PM
I like Biden, he's nutty.  Anyone catch the brief speech he gave yesterday?  At the beginning and at the end of his speech he was giving "shout-outs" to Harry Reid, but only Harry Reid.  It was odd. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 02:22:24 PM
:lol:  He's a total nut, but right now, I think the Dems need to show some nuttiness.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 29, 2008, 02:33:33 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 02:19:43 PM
Yeah, I don't see anything coming from the debates but possibly more of the same from Obama vis a vis "attacks" on McCain...that includes what little harshness he handed down last night.  He's too gentle by half.


I dunno, I like his attack style.

"I'm not saying that McCain doesn't care about the country... He's just ignorant as to what's actually going on."

It sets McCain up as a well-intentioned idiot.  Better than if he tried to say that McCain actually wants to hurt the US.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 03:14:25 PM
Well, calling him the same as Bush should have the desired effect, but for some reason, it just DOESN'T. 

Though, I'm not sure if the detractors from Hillary's camp and McCain's more rabid, white-power followers would be bowled over if he got more vicious.  I just sometimes wonder:  where's the oomph?  Where's the "YEAH!  FUCK YEAH!" that presidential hopefuls can bring to the table...?  I listened to Bill Clinton and thought--now THERE'S a dude that would STILL get a handjob from America if he could.

Obama's speech was good--he used a strident voice often...but he needs to not make the same mistake as Gore and Kerry--softballing this election into oblivion.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 29, 2008, 03:16:05 PM
With Biden on board?  Not a fucking chance.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 03:17:10 PM
I hope they don't figure on muzzling him.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on August 29, 2008, 03:23:38 PM
I hope not.  Cheney had it way to easy in his debates going against fuckin Lieberman and Edwards.  I wanna see someone get chewed up and spat out. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 03:32:36 PM
Many have proposed that is exactly WHY they picked Biden...though Huckabee called him "the vanilla choice, the easy choice" on the Colbert Report...I think he just has sour grapes.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on August 29, 2008, 03:33:56 PM
Fox News seems to think Gov. Palin from Alaska is going to be McCain's VP pick.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/29/mccain-to-name-running-mate-on-friday/ (http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/29/mccain-to-name-running-mate-on-friday/)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 29, 2008, 04:34:49 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 29, 2008, 03:33:56 PM
Fox News seems to think Gov. Palin from Alaska is going to be McCain's VP pick.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/29/mccain-to-name-running-mate-on-friday/ (http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/29/mccain-to-name-running-mate-on-friday/)
Yep, it's been confirmed now.  Seems like a very odd pick since she doesn't have much name recognition.  She's kinda hot though, in a Tina Fey kinda way.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on August 29, 2008, 04:41:35 PM
If this were a poker match, McCain is going all-in on the women's vote. 

How else does Palin, from Alaska and little experience win over Romney, former Governor of Mass?
It's not like Alaska was in danger of going blue, and if it did it's only 3 or 4 electoral votes.  I have to think that's they play he is making, is for the women.  I think the tell will be how often he brings up the issue of Supreme Court justices.  If he really is going for women, you'll hear next to nothing from his campaign on that issue. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 29, 2008, 04:46:30 PM
Because Romney's a Douchebag Mormon who fucked Massachusetts royally when he was govenor?



But I thought of the woman-pandering, too.  "Hey!  My Vice President has a vagina!  Vote for me!"
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 04:49:40 PM
Ugh.  Well this bodes ill.

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 29, 2008, 05:29:59 PM
Wrong, this will be hilarious.  Inexperienced, Christian evangelical who wants to teach creationism instead of evolution.  MCain just blew his maverick credentials big time, and opened up a gaping hole for attack.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 05:33:50 PM
I hope they can spread that about her far and wide--Obama's camp is notoriously BAD at letting that kind of shit fly...but PERHAPS Biden is the ace in the hole there...if he can finesse it and not look either 1) lascivious or 2) patronizing.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 29, 2008, 05:48:14 PM
She's also up to her neck in a corruption charge involving her brother in law and general cronyism.

And since these rats aren't gonna fuck themselves, I have no problem with donning my RNC disguise(s) and making noises about an inexperienced WOMAN having run of things (because McCain is gonna die sooner rather than later).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 29, 2008, 05:50:13 PM
(http://www.sadlyno.com/wordpress/uploads/2008/08/vpilf.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 29, 2008, 05:55:23 PM
Found a den of PUMAs praising McCain's pick:

http://www.haloscan.com/comments/egalia/3406449702235321411/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 29, 2008, 05:57:12 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 29, 2008, 05:50:13 PM
(http://www.sadlyno.com/wordpress/uploads/2008/08/vpilf.jpg)
:fap:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 29, 2008, 06:34:53 PM
Anyone think that a debate between Palin and Biden might actually be uncomfortable for Dems?

Also, Tina Fey has to go back to SNL.  She's a dead ringer for Palin.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 06:37:34 PM
Yes, that is what I was saying, Alphadude...I think Biden  will have to watch his step with her more than if she was yet another white older dude like him.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 29, 2008, 07:12:28 PM
Man, you'd think he would have learned from Mondale. Putting a chick on the ticket is not a sure thing.

However, Obama's biggest Ace on this was the evangelicals taking their votes and going home. This Veep pick will likely bring them out of the woodwork, they can play 'progressive' and vote for a woman, while playing 'conservative' and swiping anouther SC Justice or two in the process.

Biden, on the other hand seems unlikely to bring any major group over to Obama...

And this is why the Democrats suck.   :argh!:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 29, 2008, 07:13:14 PM
Ahem...blue collar dudes...(on the Biden question)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on August 29, 2008, 07:23:47 PM
wow she might be hotter then Dennis' wife, but can she actually talk?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on August 29, 2008, 07:26:49 PM
Not hotter than Dennis' wife.


(http://roissy.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/preview.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 29, 2008, 08:42:39 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 29, 2008, 07:12:28 PM
Man, you'd think he would have learned from Mondale. Putting a chick on the ticket is not a sure thing.

However, Obama's biggest Ace on this was the evangelicals taking their votes and going home. This Veep pick will likely bring them out of the woodwork, they can play 'progressive' and vote for a woman, while playing 'conservative' and swiping anouther SC Justice or two in the process.

Exactly!  Rapture Ready is already having a circle jerk over McCain picking her. Maybe it wasn't such an odd pick.

QuoteBiden, on the other hand seems unlikely to bring any major group over to Obama...

And this is why the Democrats suck.   :argh!:
They have to have their token old white dude on the ticket. Duh!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 29, 2008, 10:56:53 PM
From a purely theatrical point of view, the Republicans have actually made a politically brilliant move appointing Palin to run for the VP slot. It's eclipsing the epic speech given last night by Obama, for one thing, and it's got the potential to steal millions of half-retarded Clinton voters for McCain.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 29, 2008, 11:43:51 PM
anyone noticed that they've already registered:
http://www.vpilf.com/
?
i wonder if that help or hurts their campaign? I'm sure it will go around emails.....
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on August 29, 2008, 11:48:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 29, 2008, 05:48:14 PM
She's also up to her neck in a corruption charge involving her brother in law and general cronyism.

you got any links on that? I'd love to spread that around, since she's being touted as being tough on corruption and a model of integrity.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 30, 2008, 12:35:34 AM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on August 29, 2008, 11:48:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 29, 2008, 05:48:14 PM
She's also up to her neck in a corruption charge involving her brother in law and general cronyism.

you got any links on that? I'd love to spread that around, since she's being touted as being tough on corruption and a model of integrity.
Here's an article about it:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gWi6yTVfPyJeiTBsQ33SSUiobt8wD92I9NIO0

QuoteGov. Sarah Palin, a rising young GOP star mentioned as a possible running mate for John McCain, could see her clean-hands reputation damaged by a growing furor over whether she tried to get her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper.

A legislative panel has launched a $100,000 investigation to determine if Palin dismissed Alaska's public safety commissioner because he would not fire the trooper, Mike Wooten. Wooten went through a messy divorce from Palin's sister.

Palin has denied the commissioner's dismissal had anything to do with her former brother-in-law. And she denied orchestrating the dozens of telephone calls made by her husband and members of her administration to Wooten's bosses.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 30, 2008, 01:55:01 AM
And for added irony, she is both very pro-life and very pro-capital punishment.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25970882/page/2/

QuoteDuring one debate before the primary, Palin said she was in favor of capital punishment in especially heinous cases such as the murder of a child. "My goodness, hang 'em up, yeah," she said. Palin opposes abortion rights.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 30, 2008, 05:27:10 PM
vpilf.com was registered in Arizona about a month ago.

Interesting, no?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 30, 2008, 05:31:25 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 30, 2008, 05:27:10 PM
vpilf.com was registered in Arizona about a month ago.

Interesting, no?

Indeed.  however, perhaps they simply figured that they could always use the 'f' for flagellate, albeit with leffer effect....
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on August 30, 2008, 05:46:02 PM
Those dirty old Men In Their political Machines.

They Go Up, Tiddly, Up, Up.

They Go Down, Tiddly, Down, Down.

They nominate The Ladies And Steal All The Scenes

With their Up, Tiddly, Up, Up

And They're Down, Diddy, Down, Down.

Up! Down! Flying for sheepel.

Looping The Loop And Defying The people
They're All, Rightfully, Kings!

Those dirty old men In Their political Machines.

They Can lie Upside Down With Their Feet In The Air.

They Don't Think Of Danger. They Really Don't Care.

the founders Would Think they Had Made A Mistake.

To See Those old Men And The Chances They Take.

Those dirty old Men In Their political Machines.

They Go Up, Tiddly, Up, Up.

They Go Down, Tiddly, Down, Down.

They nominate The Ladies And Steal All The Scenes

With their Up, Tiddly, Up, Up

And Their Down, Tiddly, Down, Down.

Up! Down! Flying for sheepel.

Looping The Loop And Defying The people.

They're All, Rightfully, Kings!

Those dirty old Men In Their political Machines.

Those dirty old Men In Their political Machines.

They Go Up, Tiddly, Up, Up.

They Go Down, Tiddly, Down, Down.

They nominate The Ladies And Steal All The Scenes

With their Up, Tiddly, Up, Up

And They're Down, Diddy, Down, Down.

Up! Down!  Flying for sheepel.

Looping The Loop And Defying The people.

They're All, Rightfully, Kings!

Those dirty old Those dirty old Men,

Those dirty old Men In Their...po...litical...

Ma-chines....
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 30, 2008, 05:49:10 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on August 30, 2008, 05:31:25 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 30, 2008, 05:27:10 PM
vpilf.com was registered in Arizona about a month ago.

Interesting, no?

Indeed.  however, perhaps they simply figured that they could always use the 'f' for flagellate, albeit with leffer effect....

I wonder if it was originally registered for the purpose of being an anti-Hillary attack site, since there was a lot of talk about her being Obama's VP around that time.  But maybe not.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 30, 2008, 05:50:41 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 30, 2008, 05:49:10 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on August 30, 2008, 05:31:25 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 30, 2008, 05:27:10 PM
vpilf.com was registered in Arizona about a month ago.

Interesting, no?

Indeed.  however, perhaps they simply figured that they could always use the 'f' for flagellate, albeit with leffer effect....

I wonder if it was originally registered for the purpose of being an anti-Hillary attack site, since there was a lot of talk about her being Obama's VP around that time.  But maybe not.

I shudder to think of the intention of 'f' in that case.....
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on August 30, 2008, 09:20:08 PM
I love how they picked somebody younger than Obama and with NO national politics experience (let alone foreign policy experience) when that's supposedly why we're not supposed to vote for him.  :roll:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 30, 2008, 09:22:54 PM
But, but...her state borders a foreign nation!  And she's the CinC of the (Alaskan) National Guard!

(no seriously, I have seen these arguments already).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 30, 2008, 10:19:04 PM
Oh, the Republitards are WETTING themselves in excitement.  The men are letting their dicks swing high and the women are high-fiving each other in the name if equality.

Rather sad, when they pooh-pooh anything negative about her as a "Democrat talking point" and play up the fact that she seems "fair" as a governor in Alaska...nevermind that she's anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, and pro-Creationism in the schools...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 30, 2008, 10:40:04 PM
what other definition of "fair" is there? "fair" is when you don't have to compromise with subhuman scum like liberals.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on August 31, 2008, 06:57:55 AM
McCain scares Democrats into wild conjecture: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/30/121350/137
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on August 31, 2008, 01:09:52 PM
Most of the commentators seem sensible enough to recognize that focusing on Palin simply isn't worth the effort.  Which is good.  That's the trap.  Attack teh pretty woman, get blasted for it, take the focus away from McCain.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 31, 2008, 05:52:23 PM
I'm watching Stephanopoulos grill these politicos (Cindy McCain and Sen Graham) on the choice of Palin "for change," and the answers being given are sooo weak.  Fucking weak.  They are left pygmied by the 1) lack of Palin's national security experience, something they have been hammering Obama on for months and months (sorry, Alaska's proximity to Russia means jack shit), 2) the youth and inexperience of Palin doesn't "count" because she "fixed" Alaska?  LAWL  Right...methinks it's time to take a deeper look into what exactly IS the state of the state of Alaska.  If Palin "fixed" the broken in Alaska, I want to see WHERE, and with WHOSE help...? "Resume of taking on tough issues"?  Yeah, let's see.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on August 31, 2008, 07:36:37 PM
http://sendables.jibjab.com/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on September 01, 2008, 05:27:31 AM
She's pretty far-right for McCain, isn't she?

With that said, I didn't think he was that desperate either.  :|
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 01, 2008, 11:48:12 AM
Quote from: Suu on September 01, 2008, 05:27:31 AM
She's pretty far-right for McCain, isn't she?

With that said, I didn't think he was that desperate either.  :|

He is.  He's been pandering to the far-right in the GOP since about...December, I think.  Usual McCain deal, he's realized the crazies are in charge of the GOP and people only pay lip service to centrism in the party, so he's being his whorish self and trying to get into their good graces.  The problem is, he lacks both nativist and evangelical credentials, two major bases for the GOP.  I'm not sure how he's going about courting the former (probably relying on smears about Obama being a foreigner and a Marxist), but with the latter, he is pandering to every crazy religious freak in the country in the desperate hope they will forget he is about as religious as Henry VIII.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 01, 2008, 12:04:49 PM
Oh, now this is interesting.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Sarah_Palin_Kuwait_14.jpg

Apparently Palin doesn't know how to hold an M-16 properly, despite being an "avid hunter".  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 01, 2008, 04:55:45 PM
McCain's really going for the Battlestar Galactica vote

(http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/6639/biopicroslinak7.jpg)
President Laura Roslin



(http://newsminerextra.com/2006/election/images/candidates/full/mug_spalin.jpg)
Sarah Palin
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 01, 2008, 04:57:07 PM
Are you sure its not the Mean Girls vote?  She has been compared to Tina Fey more than a few times.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 01, 2008, 04:58:36 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 01, 2008, 12:04:49 PM
Oh, now this is interesting.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Sarah_Palin_Kuwait_14.jpg

Apparently Palin doesn't know how to hold an M-16 properly, despite being an "avid hunter".  :lulz:
are you referring to the fact that her finger isn't indexed?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 01, 2008, 05:14:45 PM
gun safety? finger on trigger? :?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 02, 2008, 12:07:37 AM
So...no talk of her daughter's teenaged pregnancy?  And how, miraculously, the 17 year old will be marrying her h.s. boyfriend...(who wants to lay bets this was a shotgun wedding scenario...)

It could go either way for her, really:  1) the red states can admit that teenage pregnancy happens in more than just minority families (this sad commentary on America's prejudice is evident here:  http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2008/09/a_story_palin_should_tell.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 ), 2) the Republitards can chant "Jesus saves!" as we watch the Palins embrace life (again) in all forms of the un-ideal or 3) people can see that this choice was made on the fly and with very little thought to this woman's true credentials and background...surface and "looks" of the package--not what is inside--is actually what mattered most.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on September 02, 2008, 12:21:54 AM
my money is on 2.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 02, 2008, 12:56:23 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 01, 2008, 04:58:36 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 01, 2008, 12:04:49 PM
Oh, now this is interesting.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Sarah_Palin_Kuwait_14.jpg

Apparently Palin doesn't know how to hold an M-16 properly, despite being an "avid hunter".  :lulz:
are you referring to the fact that her finger isn't indexed?

No, I'm not sure what it is, but it doesn't look right.  I've never fired anything as powerful as an M-16, so I may be wrong, but plenty of my friends live way out in the countryside, so I'm no stranger to using shotguns or rifles.  I can't put my finger on it, maybe you or Roger or even ECH would know better, it just...doesn't come across right, for some reason.

Anyway, jacking this thread back to its original content, ie; talking about the wingnuts and things they say, we have a deliciously racist posting from from Larry Johnson's No Quarter blog.  Yes it is the return of Agent Flowbee of the CIA, or more accurately, his moronic minion, Susan UnPC:

QuoteIs Barack Obama compensating for his despair over the latest CNN Poll — that shows Obama in a dead heat with McCain, and with ZERO convention bounce — by taking other peoples' food? Seems that presidential nominee Barack Obama helped himself to a pile of chicken wings he didn't buy and he didn't order.

The image — from a press pool report yesterday in Hamilton, Indiana — shows a desperately hungry Obama voraciously tearing into other people's chicken wings. [...]

We've all wondered why Obama looks so skinny. I guess we know why now: He's reduced to stealing food in order to eat!

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/09/01/the-sad-state-of-the-democratic-partys-presidential-ticket/

Goddamn those black people, always stealing our fried chicken because they're too lazy and cheap to get their own
\
:argh!:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 02, 2008, 03:56:15 AM
Oh, rude.
Having not heard of that site before, i'm curious as to whether it is thought by some to be a provocateur site? Or is it just an idiot? Does it get much traffic?

Not to jack off the thread to the gun pic again, but i would say it perhaps looks funny to you because she appears to be simply looking at the rifle rather than holding it up as if aiming with it.  I would also point out that the 5.56 round that it fires should hardly be considered a 'high-power' rifle round as the media is so quick to do.  It is a small caliber, high velocity round used in what was originally dubbed by the troops using it the 'mouse gun' in Vietnam because it was considered to be underpowered compared to the M-14 used before it.  Here in TX, we have comparatively small white tailed deer, and it is common that hunters will use this round for them, however up north, they have significantly larger deer, as well as the various other larger game that would make a 5.56 rifle a less suitable firearm to carry.  I'm sure it's not her rifle of choice as the 'avid hunter' that she claims to be. (and that you and i have no reason to doubt...) [/gun-nuttery knowitallism]
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 02, 2008, 05:34:23 AM
gun nutter tread jack 2 things  i see "wrong" finger on trigger (breaking gun safety rule) and shoulder is too far back (need to lean in a bit to absorb recall) of the two the first is bad, gun supporters should know their safety rules...the second probably doesn't matter (posing not shooting)

please return to your original thread direction



edit for sprlchek
Title: President Lulz suspends Brazil spy chiefs
Post by: the last yatto on September 02, 2008, 10:58:48 AM
lesson one: dont get caught with your hand in the cookie jar
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7593265.stm


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 02, 2008, 12:59:11 PM
Maybe...though I think she did some actual shooting too.  Probably using her unborn baby to absorb the shock of the recoil etc /cheap blow.

As for No Quarter USA, Agent Flowbee was a CIA agent who got pissed at Bush for outing Plame and, once he quit the Agency, jumped ship to the hawkish Democrats.  He supported Hillary for President, and went a little insane about January time, when it looked like Obama might provide a serious challenge to her leadership bid.  He then went somewhat more insane, inviting the worst sort of Hillary supporters and spreading conspiracy theories about Obama that even the Freepers wouldn't believe.

So, in short, yeah its an attack site, but one with an odd past.  Like many of the ex-Democrat, Clinton supporting PUMA crowd, there were actually people there with liberal credentials, who suddenly started spouting racist nonsense in response to percieved sexism within the grassroots of the party (and there was some nastiness, but it was massively hyped), and have now gone way over to the mainstream GOP position.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 03, 2008, 06:45:37 AM
has any one else noticed in all the  MSM  coverage of the democratic convention every shot was filled with people, now in the republican convention every shot is of empty chairs?
i suspect wingnuttery is in play
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 03, 2008, 11:47:48 AM
Despite the polls, enthusiasm for McCain is pretty low...lots of people, especially the nativist wing/anti-immigration crowd, don't like McCain much.  Palin seems to have awakened the Religious Right from their torpor somewhat, but the choice of her has ruined his credentials with centrists and the undecided, who are generally opposed to religious nutters with too much power.  So he may have gained from it, but he also lost a fair bit.  Only the most facile and butthurt of the vocally loud but numerically tiny PUMA group are going to vote for him, and they've been supporting him since May, at least openly, so there is no real impact at the polls there.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on September 03, 2008, 01:32:36 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 03, 2008, 06:45:37 AM
has any one else noticed in all the  MSM  coverage of the democratic convention every shot was filled with people, now in the republican convention every shot is of empty chairs?
i suspect wingnuttery is in play



the best part is how unenthusiastic they all are.  Granted they're all so old and fat I imagine if they start jumping up and down or something there's a good chance they'd fall and bust a hip.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on September 03, 2008, 09:50:02 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 03, 2008, 06:45:37 AM
now in the republican convention every shot is of empty chairs?
i suspect wingnuttery is in play

you might be right considering daily shows's angle was compairing the empty convention center with an emergency evacuation center for the hurricane. Asking people if they were upset the president isnt with them in their time of grief. adding comments like "if we knew the american people actually like new orleans we wouldnt have screwed up so bad last time."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 03, 2008, 09:56:20 PM
Oh dear.  Oh dear oh dear oh dear.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/212920.php

Partial transcript, via Daily Kos:


Murphy: Um, you know, because, I come out of the blue swing state governor world. Engler, Whitman, Tommy Thompson, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, I mean, and these guys, this is all like how you win a Texas Race race, just run it up, and it's not gonna work.

Noonan: It's Over.

Murphy: Still, McCain can give a version of the Lieberman speech and do himself some good.

Todd: Its insulting to Kay Baily Hutchinson ??

Noonan: Saw kay this morning

Todd: She's(?) never looked comfortable up there..

Murphy: all bummed out.

Todd: I mean, is she really the most qualified woman they can obtain?

Noonan: The most qualified? No. I think they went for this, excuse me, political bullshit about narratives...

Todd: Yeah, but what's the narrative

Murphy: I totally agree.

Noonan: Every time Republicans do that, because that's not where they live and it's not what they're good at, they blow it.

Murphy: You know what's the worst thing about it, the greatest of McCain is no cynicism, and..

???: This is cynical.

??: And as you called it, gimmicky.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Tempest Virago on September 03, 2008, 10:11:43 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 03, 2008, 09:56:20 PM
Oh dear.  Oh dear oh dear oh dear.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/212920.php

Partial transcript, via Daily Kos:


Murphy: Um, you know, because, I come out of the blue swing state governor world. Engler, Whitman, Tommy Thompson, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, I mean, and these guys, this is all like how you win a Texas Race race, just run it up, and it's not gonna work.

Noonan: It's Over.

Murphy: Still, McCain can give a version of the Lieberman speech and do himself some good.

Todd: Its insulting to Kay Baily Hutchinson ??

Noonan: Saw kay this morning

Todd: She's(?) never looked comfortable up there..

Murphy: all bummed out.

Todd: I mean, is she really the most qualified woman they can obtain?

Noonan: The most qualified? No. I think they went for this, excuse me, political bullshit about narratives...

Todd: Yeah, but what's the narrative

Murphy: I totally agree.

Noonan: Every time Republicans do that, because that's not where they live and it's not what they're good at, they blow it.

Murphy: You know what's the worst thing about it, the greatest of McCain is no cynicism, and..

???: This is cynical.

??: And as you called it, gimmicky.

Yikes. I feel kinda sorry for them.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 03, 2008, 10:26:35 PM
Having read Peggy Noonan before, I do not.

http://www.sadlyno.com/index.php?s=Peggy+Noonan
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Tempest Virago on September 03, 2008, 10:30:23 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 03, 2008, 10:26:35 PM
Having read Peggy Noonan before, I do not.

http://www.sadlyno.com/index.php?s=Peggy+Noonan

I said "kinda". They do deserve it, but it's just so damn pathetic.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 03, 2008, 10:34:25 PM
Noonan's prose alone is reason to hate her.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 03, 2008, 10:37:06 PM
Har!  Pure gold.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Tempest Virago on September 03, 2008, 11:35:57 PM
Quote from: Mitt RomneyWe need change all right - change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington - throw out the big government liberals and elect John McCain.

I think I broke something in my brain trying to figure out what the fuck he's talking about.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 04, 2008, 12:59:36 AM
The Dominionists have spoken!!!:  Vote for the Constitution Party, but pray that the Republicans win and that McCain dies quickly.

http://johnmckay.blogspot.com/2008/09/praying-for-mccains-death.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: NWC on September 04, 2008, 04:32:26 AM
Jon Stewart just raised an interesting and very valid point while interviewing New Gingrich. He said that Bristol Palin's pregnancy was a valid issue because Sarah Palin had said it was Bristol's decision to keep the baby. She said that people should respect that, while she will not respect other peoples' decisions if in office.

I could talk about that more clearly except for the booze.

But yeah, I thought that was some very good and realistic commentary, though it will be generally ignored because it's from a comedy show.


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 04, 2008, 05:17:29 AM
NWC, I think you mistake what Jon Stewart is actually able to *accomplish* with that comedy.  See, he and Stephen Colbert get away with more and with less bullshit added because of that comedy.  And they have the ratings to prove that people are listening...learning...thinking about that schtick.  That actually turns out to be MORE than schtick.

I have to say, as a segue into American politix...the great unwashed could do WAY worse.  (like FuxNews, for example)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: NWC on September 04, 2008, 05:45:13 AM
Quote from: Jenne on September 04, 2008, 05:17:29 AM
NWC, I think you mistake what Jon Stewart is actually able to *accomplish* with that comedy.  See, he and Stephen Colbert get away with more and with less bullshit added because of that comedy.  And they have the ratings to prove that people are listening...learning...thinking about that schtick.  That actually turns out to be MORE than schtick.

I have to say, as a segue into American politix...the great unwashed could do WAY worse.  (like FuxNews, for example)

though I have had a few drinks, and spent a minute or two trying to read your stentance(s), I still think it's a valid point.

as much drama blah blah blah hypocrisy blah blah pandering to women blah nonsense is going on with Palin(not to mention her daughter), I think this is a point that is getting overshadowed by the staunch refusal by Obama(which I think was the respectful and best thing to do, hands down) to use this pregnancy in the election. While Obama and his campaign should not touch the issue, as it sincerely is classless, I think it is fair for the media to explore this aspect of the subject. It does reveal a  "flip-flop" nature of the GOP that they themselves have very often accused the dems of.


plus, there's no kitchen in the VPwhitehouse*


*not really sure where the VP lives and I'm sure they have a kitchen anyway for the slaves to cook the massa's food in
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 04, 2008, 06:00:10 AM
The VP gets a mansion on the grounds of the Naval Observatory.  I only know this because my wife made me look it up earlier today.  Welcome back, NWC, BTW.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: NWC on September 04, 2008, 06:12:36 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on September 04, 2008, 06:00:10 AM
The VP gets a mansion on the grounds of the Naval Observatory.  I only know this because my wife made me look it up earlier today.  Welcome back, NWC, BTW.

hmm, good to know.

and thanks :) I'll try to be around more, but I'm cooking 7 days a week at a local restaurant so it's alot of just work/sleep for me

but I'm reading more philosophy lately, which makes me want to come back here

so I'm here


NWC,

still has PD link on firefox toolbar
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on September 04, 2008, 01:28:08 PM
Interesting...

While the Bridge to Nowhere porject was cancelled, they kept the money anyway...

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/22/alaska.bridge.ap/


"Congress ... still sent the money to the state for any use it deemed appropriate."


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 04, 2008, 01:33:27 PM
Oh yeah, Palin loves teh pr0k.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 04, 2008, 01:54:37 PM
Well, the Republican game has become pretty clear to me.  They knew their only shot was to start a war with the media, and, at the same time they wanted to have a go at the mad-as-hell Hillary supporters.  So, they found a mad-as-hell woman, with no record, who likes to gang-tackle Moose and kill them wiff her teeth.  They knew that the media would do their job and look into this no-name.  And as soon as they even start sniffing around her personal life.  "SEXISTS!!!"  They didn't pick Palin because she thought she was capable of being a Vice President, or a President when McCain has his heart attack.  No, they picked a lightning rod with breasts. 

This election sucks big hairy Moose-balls.  The politicians clearly think we are all idiots, and unfortunately, there are far too many only too happy to add creedence to their beliefs. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on September 04, 2008, 02:01:15 PM
Unfortunately, I had to google "lightning rod with breasts", and I ended up learning more about the S&M device that gives off "erotic electric shocks" when you touch it to your partner's skin.


"Not to be used near the heart or on people with pacemakers or other implants."


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 04, 2008, 02:06:07 PM
Now, I have nothing against lighting rods with breasts, I married one.  In fact, if she were just 3 years older, she could've been Obama's Sarah Palin.  And she has way more executive experience. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on September 04, 2008, 03:05:49 PM
Ha!

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,2482434.story

"Three times in recent years, McCain's catalogs of "objectionable" spending have included earmarks for this small Alaska town, requested by its mayor at the time -- Sarah Palin."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on September 04, 2008, 03:38:08 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 04, 2008, 01:33:27 PM
Oh yeah, Palin loves teh pr0k.

Apparently, so does her daughter...  :D
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 04, 2008, 03:40:08 PM
Are you suggesting the father is a congressional earmark?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 04, 2008, 03:56:54 PM
Is there anything more American then a 3-month old baby with Down's Syndrome being used as a Political tool? 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 04, 2008, 03:59:19 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on September 04, 2008, 03:56:54 PM
Is there anything more American then a 3-month old baby with Down's Syndrome being used as a Political tool? 

Yes, a 3-month old baby with Downs Syndrome being used as a substitute American flag.  Just tattoo that skin and teach it to hold onto a fairly strong pole and you're sorted.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 04, 2008, 06:55:04 PM
posted at myconfinedspace (http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2008/09/03/fiction-becomes-reality/) yesterday.

(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/bin/f9lhy0.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 04, 2008, 07:52:18 PM
Official 2008 Debate Drinking Rules

If any of these phrases come up in the Presidential debates, take the amount of shots you are required according to the list.

POW/Prisoner of War - 1 shot
"Experience" - 1 shot
9/11 - 1 shot
Any story about eating a moose - 1 shot
Hockey mom - 1 shot
Change we can believe in, any recognizably derivative phrase - 1 shot
Liberal elite - 1 shot
Liberal media - 1 shot
Imply your opponent is a Muslim - 1 shot
Washington Elite - 1 shot

Commander in Chief of Alaska - 1 shot
Bridge to Nowhere - 2 shots
Bill Ayers - 2 shots
Community organizer - 2 shots
Manchurian Candidate - 2 shots
How many houses - 2 shots

Downs Syndrome Baby - 3 shots
The Keating Five - 3 shots
Ambien - 3 shots

Edit: if you want to share, use this link http://episkoposcain.wordpress.com/2008/09/04/official-2008-debate-drinking-rules/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on September 04, 2008, 08:06:54 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 04, 2008, 07:52:18 PM
Official 2008 Debate Drinking Rules

If any of these phrases come up in the Presidential debates, take the amount of shots you are required according to the list.

POW/Prisoner of War - 1 shot
"Experience" - 1 shot
9/11 - 1 shot
Any story about eating a moose - 1 shot
Hockey mom - 1 shot
Change we can believe in, any recognizably derivative phrase - 1 shot
Liberal elite - 1 shot
Liberal media - 1 shot
Imply your opponent is a Muslim - 1 shot
Washington Elite - 1 shot

Commander in Chief of Alaska - 1 shot
Bridge to Nowhere - 2 shots
Bill Ayers - 2 shots
Community organizer - 2 shots
Manchurian Candidate - 2 shots
How many houses - 2 shots

Downs Syndrome Baby - 3 shots
The Keating Five - 3 shots
Ambien - 3 shots

Edit: if you want to share, use this link http://episkoposcain.wordpress.com/2008/09/04/official-2008-debate-drinking-rules/

Yes We Can! - 1 shot for each full chant
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 04, 2008, 08:08:16 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on September 04, 2008, 08:06:54 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 04, 2008, 07:52:18 PM
Official 2008 Debate Drinking Rules

If any of these phrases come up in the Presidential debates, take the amount of shots you are required according to the list.

POW/Prisoner of War - 1 shot
"Experience" - 1 shot
9/11 - 1 shot
Any story about eating a moose - 1 shot
Hockey mom - 1 shot
Change we can believe in, any recognizably derivative phrase - 1 shot
Liberal elite - 1 shot
Liberal media - 1 shot
Imply your opponent is a Muslim - 1 shot
Washington Elite - 1 shot

Commander in Chief of Alaska - 1 shot
Bridge to Nowhere - 2 shots
Bill Ayers - 2 shots
Community organizer - 2 shots
Manchurian Candidate - 2 shots
How many houses - 2 shots

Downs Syndrome Baby - 3 shots
The Keating Five - 3 shots
Ambien - 3 shots

Edit: if you want to share, use this link http://episkoposcain.wordpress.com/2008/09/04/official-2008-debate-drinking-rules/

Yes We Can! - 1 shot for each full chant

Fuck yeah, forgot that one, we better add it to The List
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 04, 2008, 10:40:01 PM
:mittens: yoinked, sent.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Shibboleet The Annihilator on September 05, 2008, 12:01:30 AM
ITT: Cain causes people to attain +5 alcohol poisoning.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 05, 2008, 05:35:03 AM
I think this letter "speaks" volumes about Madame Palin:

QuoteDear friends,

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the
last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .

Basically, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have only 2 things in
common: their gender and their good looks.

You have my permission to forward this to your friends/email contacts
with my name and email address attached, but please do not post it on
any websites, as there are too many kooks out there . . .

Thanks,
Anne


ABOUT SARAH PALIN

I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992.
Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a
first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her
father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a
first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more
City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the
residents of the city.

She is enormously popular; in every way she's like the most popular
girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and
won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because
she is a "babe".

It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She
kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents
for seven months.

She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby.
There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.

She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.

She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just "puts things out
there" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit.

Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a
champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin's kind of job is highly
sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his
work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or
so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their
major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything
like that of native Alaskans.

Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.

She's smart.

Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000
(at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about
670,000 residents.

During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running
this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been
pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had
gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had
given rise to a recall campaign.

Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a "fiscal conservative". During her 6
years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over
33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the
City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation
(1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a
regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she
promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they
benefited residents.

The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration
weren't enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed
money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it
with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage
the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said
she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a
new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a
multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece
of property that the City didn't even have clear title to, that was
still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers
involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the
community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it
would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that
could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.

While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office
redecorated more than once.

These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.

As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus
in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will
make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she
proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state.

In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she
recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while
she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's
surplus, borrow for needs.

She's not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas
or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren't generated by
her or her staff. Ideas weren't evaluated on their merits, but on the
basis of who proposed them.

While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected
City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from
the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents
rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's
attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew
her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the
Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.

Sarah complained about the "old boy's club" when she first ran for
Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys". Palin
fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as
Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people,
creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally
grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power
to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the
case of pressuring the State's top cop (see below).

As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla's Police Chief because he "intimidated"
her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top
cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure
and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that
an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't
fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation
for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen
contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she
later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to
replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded
for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew
her support.

She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in
help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town
introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council
became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She
abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn't
like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.

Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything
publicly about her.

When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got
the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one
of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no
background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great
job which paid $122,400/yr, she was complaining in the press about the
high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the
structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this
Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party)
engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some
undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all
her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and
garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a
gutsy fighter against the "old boys' club" when she dramatically quit,
exposing this man's ethics violations (for which he was fined).

As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from
Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel
politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the "bridge to
nowhere" after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.

As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget
guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing
projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative
action restored most of these projects--which had been vetoed simply
because she was not aware of their importance--but with the unobservant
she had gained a reputation as "anti-pork".

She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party
leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated
them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a
fiscal conservative.

Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah.
They call her "Sarah Barracuda" because of her unbridled ambition and
predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly
stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made
point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah's
mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and
experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.

As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package
of legislation known as "AGIA" that forced the oil companies to march
to the beat of her drum.

Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to
global warming. She campaigned "as a private citizen" against a state
initiaitive that would have either a) protected salmon streams from
pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the
state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State's
lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior's decision to list polar
bears as threatened species.

McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a
heartbeat away from being President.

There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more
knowledgeable and experienced than she.

However, there's a lot of people who have underestimated her and are
regretting it.


CLAIM VS FACT
•"Hockey mom": true for a few years
•"PTA mom": true years ago when her first-born was in elementary
school, not since
•"NRA supporter": absolutely true
•social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill
that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships
(said she did this because it was unconsitutional).
•pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to
promote it.
•"Pro-life": mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby
BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life
legislation
•"Experienced": Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has
residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska.
No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on
supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city
administrator to run town of about 5,000.
•political maverick: not at all
•gutsy: absolutely!
•open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at
explaining actions.
•has a developed philosophy of public policy: no
•"a Greenie": no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores
and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.
•fiscal conservative: not by my definition!
•pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city
without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built
streets to early 20th century standards.
•pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on
residents
•pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city
government in Wasilla's history.
•pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union
doesn't make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim
that she is pro-labor/pro-union.

WHY AM I WRITING THIS?

First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed
voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting
programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne Kilkenny +
Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local
government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.

Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that "Bad things happen
when good people stay silent". Few people know as much as I do because
few have gone to as many City Council meetings.

Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out
of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no
fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will
cost me somehow in the future: that's life.

Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100
or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's
attempt at censorship.

Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to
say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.

CAVEATS
I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in
spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor)
from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of
Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust
for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible
for a private person to get any info out of City Hall--they are
swamped. So I can't verify my numbers.

You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the
population of Wasilla, ranging from my "about 5,000", up to 9,000. The
day Palin's selection was announced a city official told me that the
current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was
5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to
2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90's.

Anne Kilkenny
annekilkenny@hotmail.com
August 31, 2008

From here:  http://www.washingtonindependent.com/3671/the-reform-candidate (in the comments section)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 05, 2008, 08:18:54 AM
Interesting, if true. But first of all:

QuoteBasically, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have only 2 things in
common: their gender and their good looks.

Hilary has good looks now???    :eek:

QuoteWhile Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected
City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from
the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents
rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's
attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew
her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the
Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.

Ok, now I'm dying to know what books she was wanting to ban.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 05, 2008, 10:31:02 AM
I'm glad I'm not the only one who questioned the good looks thing.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 05, 2008, 10:53:46 AM
Now, back to some actual wingnuttery:


http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/no_questions_please_were.html

According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. According to Wallace — in an appearance I did with her this morning on Joe Scarborough's show — the American people will learn all they need to know (and all they deserve to know) from Palin's scripted speeches and choreographed appearances on the campaign trail and in campaign ads. Here's the exchange:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhgUvX_8Joo

SadlyNaught commentary:

Do watch that clip, because Carney is not exaggerating. Wallace just made the case that the only way people in this country should get to know Sarah Palin is through propaganda. We're talking about someone who could become the single most powerful person in the world, and we can only learn about her through the lens of the GOP's public relations department.

This is very, very, very dangerous. What Wallace is doing isn't merely criticizing the behavior of the media — which everyone justifiably does — but rather attacks the idea that the media should exist at all. She wants to run a campaign where the American public only sees propaganda and never gets the contrary view. Ye gods, this is a dangerous and authoritarian mindset. If the media allow themselves to be bullied and if they stop asking questions because they fear that they'll be tarred as "liberals," then our democracy is truly dead.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 05, 2008, 11:29:38 AM
Also, am I hearing McCain's speech correctly?  Did he just slam Obama for not going to Vietnam?

:lol:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 05, 2008, 02:22:24 PM
First the 3-month old with Down's Syndrome is a political prop.
Last night, it was the victims of 9/11 used in a propaganda film to rally voters.
The Republicans are so fucking classy. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Richter on September 05, 2008, 02:24:34 PM
http://www.frostfirezoo.com/inappropriate-campaign-photo
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 05, 2008, 02:34:11 PM
 :eek:

Oh dear. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on September 05, 2008, 02:34:32 PM
Davedim beat you to it. In the Political Cartoons thread.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Richter on September 05, 2008, 03:29:39 PM
Is worth dual posting.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on September 05, 2008, 03:30:38 PM
I suppose it is.

Disturbing as it is, EVERYONE should see it.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on September 05, 2008, 03:53:49 PM
Listening to NPR podcast.  Interviews Phyllis Schlafly:

"The difference between Palin and a democrat, is that a democrat would have had an abortion."



Sweet merciful fuck.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 05, 2008, 04:00:55 PM
Ah, you stay classy, Phyllis.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 05, 2008, 04:09:16 PM
Jesus fuck what is going on with the Republicans? 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: That One Guy on September 05, 2008, 04:45:47 PM
Desperation.

Their worst nightmare is potentially coming true, in that the Dems' 2 main candidates were a Black guy (oh noes! minority!) and Hillary freaking Clinton (teh Debil!). Add in the fact that the GOP is on the ropes trying to distance itself from the last 8 years of Bush problems, and the desperation move of adding an almost completely unvetted white-trash fantasy girl as the GOP VP candidate (one that directly goes against everything McCain based his primary platform on - experience, eliminating earmarks, etc.), and it's almost comical.

The GOP wins elections when they can hammer on "values", only the problem is that the economy (both global and domestic) is the FAR bigger issue for people this cycle. Historically, Dems tend to win on the economy platform (since they actually offer "fixes" that aren't just comical even if they might not be effective). The GOP, seeing this trend, has pulled out all the stops, from 9/11, to abortion and "family values" shock tactics, to try to scare voters into ignoring the economy in favor of the historical GOP strengths of "morality and values".

I'm curious to see where things stand in the polls in a couple weeks, after the Palin madness has died down a little, the VP debates have happened, and the surprise factor of the GOP hate machine gets some distance from the RNC poll bump. We've still got 2 more months of this insanity to go, and where things stand in a few weeks will be far more telling than the current situation.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on September 05, 2008, 05:02:25 PM
From the same NPR bit, with a different bullshit artist:

"I have no doubt that a John McCain presidency will restore the civil liberties the caller is concerned about, once we win the war on terror." (emphasis mine.)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 05, 2008, 05:10:44 PM
And that would be President McCain's "definition of "is" is" moment.

How would he define "winning the war on terror".  My guess is that it would be a rather open-ended definition. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 05, 2008, 05:29:45 PM
I have been amazed at how well the neocon appologists that i have talked to either ignore or deflect the question of what constitutes 'winning'.  That question is invisible to them.  They often actually get angry at that question if you demand that they define it before continuing conversation, i have found.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 05, 2008, 06:00:53 PM
Best Daily Show Clip EVER!!

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184086
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Chairman Risus on September 05, 2008, 06:14:02 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on September 05, 2008, 06:00:53 PM
Best Daily Show Clip EVER!!

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184086
:mittens:  :lulz: :mittens:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 05, 2008, 06:14:58 PM
Quote from: Risus on September 05, 2008, 06:14:02 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on September 05, 2008, 06:00:53 PM
Best Daily Show Clip EVER!!

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184086
:mittens:  :lulz: :mittens:
Ya know what, I think that deserves its own thread.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 05, 2008, 07:08:00 PM
Jon Stewart has been on a quest to motherfucking OWN those GOPfucks at the RNC.  It's been a delight to watch.  The last 3 epis running have been classics, and all the bullshit has been revealed.  Naked emperor is, indeed, very naked.

The suck part is, the talking bobbleheads of the main media only act INDIGNANT (cf: Today Show, CNN) when the RNC talking pointfucks spin it as "descrimation" (same bastards who called down Hillary Clinton on her sexism charge 6 mos ago) against a fine, upstanding working woman who's now a get this--FOLK HERO(????wtf???).

I'm really enjoying watching Jon Stewart rip them new ones every evening.  Tonight promises to be extra-special as well.  Can't wait.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on September 05, 2008, 09:20:16 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on September 05, 2008, 04:09:16 PM
Jesus fuck what is going on with the Republicans? 

i think this comment sums it up

"They’ve gone so far out the right, they’ve gone all the way around to the left."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 06, 2008, 06:07:02 AM
Apparently Rep. Westmoreland thought it was a good idea to use the word "uppity" in reference to Barack and Michele Obama:

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/westmoreland-calls-obama-uppity-2008-09-04.html

QuoteGeorgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland used the racially-tinged term "uppity" to describe Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama Thursday.

Westmoreland was discussing vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin's speech with reporters outside the House chamber and was asked to compare her with Michelle Obama.

"Just from what little I've seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity," Westmoreland said.

Asked to clarify that he used the word "uppity," Westmoreland said, "Uppity, yeah."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 06, 2008, 06:09:11 AM
They have no shame.  Why should they care if they give the tr00f to the stereotype?  They're "right," so why should they try to be anything different?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 06, 2008, 06:18:22 AM
Westmoreland is just a backwoods retard anyways.  He is the same one who wanted the Ten Commandments to be posted in Congress and then couldn't name them for Steven Colbert.

http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/videos.jhtml?videoId=70730
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 06, 2008, 06:26:23 AM
THAT guy.  He is the posterboi for why fucktard Congresspeople shouldn't EVAR interview with the Colbert Report OR The Daily Show.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 06, 2008, 06:55:01 AM
I'd also like to point out that the sentence "they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity" is grammatically incorrect in at least 3 different ways.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 06, 2008, 07:04:16 AM
...yes, but that might look, you know...elitist and uppity.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 06, 2008, 07:06:44 AM
With apologies to TGRR:

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e189/EtainOcean/elitist_shirt_preview.gif)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 06, 2008, 12:43:56 PM
http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/09/05/alaskans-speak-in-a-frightened-whisper-palin-is-%E2%80%9Cracist-sexist-vindictive-and-mean%E2%80%9D/

Alleged quote from Sarah Palin:

"So Sambo beat the bitch!"
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 06, 2008, 07:10:54 PM
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2008/09/cindy-mccains-300000-outfit.html

Obama wanting to raises taxes on people that make more than $250,000: uppity elitist

Cindy McCain wearing $280,000 earrings to the RNC: not uppity elitist
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 06, 2008, 09:18:30 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 06, 2008, 12:43:56 PM
http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/09/05/alaskans-speak-in-a-frightened-whisper-palin-is-%E2%80%9Cracist-sexist-vindictive-and-mean%E2%80%9D/

Alleged quote from Sarah Palin:

“So Sambo beat the bitch!”

"Palin may well be Dick Cheney's incarnate."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Tempest Virago on September 06, 2008, 10:50:19 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 06, 2008, 12:43:56 PM
http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/09/05/alaskans-speak-in-a-frightened-whisper-palin-is-%E2%80%9Cracist-sexist-vindictive-and-mean%E2%80%9D/

Alleged quote from Sarah Palin:

"So Sambo beat the bitch!"

Fuck, that's awful. She gets creepier and creepier the more I learn about her.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 07, 2008, 09:23:09 AM
Its only alleged at the moment, and while no doubt an interesting insight into her mindset if its true (Alaska is run by the GOP through and through, after all, and she didn't get the nickname Barracuda for nothing) I don't see it being too useful.  All the potential Republican voters turned off by racism have long left the McCain/Palin tent.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 07, 2008, 07:52:26 PM
No, but the "women for women" vote might not like her characterization of Hillary.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Eve on September 07, 2008, 10:57:58 PM
Quote from: Jenne on September 07, 2008, 07:52:26 PM
No, but the "women for women" vote might not like her characterization of Hillary.

Or her abortion and sex education views.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 08, 2008, 02:08:25 AM
Quote from: Eve on September 07, 2008, 10:57:58 PM
Quote from: Jenne on September 07, 2008, 07:52:26 PM
No, but the "women for women" vote might not like her characterization of Hillary.

Or her abortion and sex education views.

If they bother to get over themselves long enough to see that.  Although, the two VERY EDUCATED women I had over for dinner last night (with kids and husbands, too, of course) are outraged at anything and everything this woman has to say.  I'm hoping it's potential-Hillary supporters like them who will carry the torch further and not give it up.

They were disgusted by my regale of the VPILF phenomenon (they are in their 40's and rarely spend time online, so they just "didn't get it" memewise--which made me lawl all the harder, but that's another story), and they are in FEAR of this ticket winning in any shape or form.

I hinted it was that fear that should galvanize them further into supporting Obama and Biden, and be very very vocal about it.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 08, 2008, 07:09:09 AM
(http://frostfirezoo.com/files/u1/obamaby2.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: NWC on September 08, 2008, 07:10:55 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on September 08, 2008, 07:09:09 AM
(http://frostfirezoo.com/files/u1/obamaby2.jpg)

:facepalm:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2008, 11:26:29 AM
Apart from a very vocal online minority, no-one in the Hillary camp is supporting McCain or is fooled by Palin.  They remember why they voted for Hillary, and they know whose politics are closer to their own.

The online minority are unappeasable nutjobs with a bad case of butthurt and tons of Republican money and trolls behind them.  They look more impressive than they are, precisely to mislead as to how influential they are.  The hope is to sway the Democratic ticket into doing things which yield no useful results, such as trying to coax members already voting for them back into the fold.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2008, 01:28:19 PM
The fact is, heartland. Far, hard left liberal bias versus truth, freedom USA power.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 08, 2008, 02:01:38 PM
I can't find it now, but over the weekend I read the results of a poll on Palin that was on MSNBC.  Basically, the opinion of Palin was based most closely on party.  So Republicans liked her Democrats did not.  By Gender, it actually went the opposite way of what they are probably intending.  Men were more likely to have a favorable opinion of Palin than women.  Then there's the new Gallup poll that has McCain up by 4 not over Obama.  Not too surprising I suppose and a lot of the electoral map projections I've seen have Obama in a pretty comfortable position. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on September 08, 2008, 02:13:30 PM
Shit!


I missed Obama appearing on Bill O'Reily!


Can I has Transkriptz?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2008, 02:19:05 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,417563,00.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2008, 02:24:13 PM
Incidentally, massive leap of reasoning HERE:

QuoteLook, if Iran gets a nuclear weapon, OK, to me, they're going to give it to Hezbollah if they can develop the technology. Why not? And they'll say, "Well, we didn't have anything to do with it."

Well you dipshit, Iran already has massive chemical and biological weapons stocks.  Why haven't they given them to Hezbollah?  Could it be that they trust them to be a thorn in the Israeli's side, strategic partner in projecting Iranian influence into the Mediterranian and a useful bargaining chip in any future negotiations?  Could it be that Iran does not in fact directly control Hezbollah, but only helps train and arm its members, and any powerful weapon would be the perfect blackmail material against the Iranian state?  Could it be that Israel's continued existence is in fact vital for both Iranian and Hezbollah's domestic aims, which require the existence of an external enemy to consolidate various power bases?

Or are you just a nitwit with all the geopolitical sophistication and political awareness of a brain-dead louse?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 08, 2008, 02:27:03 PM
Remember, before this he was a host for "Inside Edition".  It's kind of embarrassing that people in our country hold him in such high regard when it comes to having political knowledge.  He knows how to be loud, that is essentially his only "gift". 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 08, 2008, 03:13:37 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on September 08, 2008, 02:01:38 PM
I can't find it now, but over the weekend I read the results of a poll on Palin that was on MSNBC.  Basically, the opinion of Palin was based most closely on party.  So Republicans liked her Democrats did not.  By Gender, it actually went the opposite way of what they are probably intending.  Men were more likely to have a favorable opinion of Palin than women.  Then there's the new Gallup poll that has McCain up by 4 not over Obama.  Not too surprising I suppose and a lot of the electoral map projections I've seen have Obama in a pretty comfortable position. 

Well, I think the "new, pretty face" phenomenon will wear thin, and the screeching, annoying, nails-on-a-board tone of her voice will eventually hit the base of those same men's skulls eventually.  She's on the attack often and loudly, and with little balls and spine to back it up.  Let's see this wench on the morning talk shows like her oppostion.  SANS talking points.  Let's see her REAL rep on the line, not the spoonfed version the rednecks down in Alaska are touting.

But that ain't going to happen.  She's now considered the folk hero, ace in the hole for the Republitards, and they are not going to spoil that with any touch of reality whatsofuckingever.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 08, 2008, 03:21:23 PM
I can understand why they are all riled up about Palin.  I mean, let's face it, McCain is a bore.  He's not quite the bore that Kerry, Gore, and Dole were, but he's pretty damned close. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2008, 03:23:37 PM
The only reason something hasn't gone horrifically wrong with Palin so far is because the Repubs are stage-managing every event she is at, down to the finest details.  Get her in an uncontrolled environment, and she is toast.  The Republican strategists know it, and so do the Democrats.  She doesn't have long term appeal, she is turning moderates and even Republicans off from voting and she has only bought in the few of the crazy Christian contingent and the Paleocons - and not in impressive numbers.

Its a fuckup and everyone knows it.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 08, 2008, 03:25:46 PM
I just hope the media keeps doing its job.  They got bitchslapped at the RNC, and some of them enjoyed it WAY too fucking much--Andrea what'syourass at NBC, I'm looking AT YUO.

But yeah, everything is way scripted, wherever Sarah Barracuda-No-Balls goes.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 08, 2008, 03:27:59 PM
In other news, MSNBC is pulling Olberman and Matthews from Election Coverage:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/business/media/08msnbc.html?_r=3&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/business/media/08msnbc.html?_r=3&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin)

I think this is retaliation for Olberman stating, on air, that MSNBC shouldn't have aired that 9/11 "tribute" video from the RNC.  It seems there is some bad blood brewing between the MSNBC personalities and the NBC (in other words Brokaw and Brian Williams) crew.  Obviously Matthews and Olberman are biased, and Olberman can get a little excited sometimes, but I still think they did a good job when it came to the nuts and bolts of the election.  Ah well.  So it goes.  
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 08, 2008, 03:30:42 PM
The commentary was fine, but the squabbling WAS a bit much.  Jon Stewart did an excellent montage of it.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on September 08, 2008, 08:53:19 PM
Mike Malloy was just on CNN talking about taxing all churches :lulz: (i think he ment it as those who wish to partake in politics but still)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 08, 2008, 09:26:51 PM
Quote from: YattoDobbs on September 08, 2008, 08:53:19 PM
Mike Malloy was just on CNN talking about taxing all churches :lulz: (i think he ment it as those who wish to partake in politics but still)
Well, yes.  If a preacher explicitly endorses a political candidate from the pulpit (which Palin's pastor came extremely close to doing) then they have forfeited their rights as a non-profit organization.  James Dobson is trying very very hard to get a test case on this sometime later this month.  Fun times!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2008, 10:06:04 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on September 08, 2008, 03:27:59 PM
In other news, MSNBC is pulling Olberman and Matthews from Election Coverage:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/business/media/08msnbc.html?_r=3&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/business/media/08msnbc.html?_r=3&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin)

I think this is retaliation for Olberman stating, on air, that MSNBC shouldn't have aired that 9/11 "tribute" video from the RNC.  It seems there is some bad blood brewing between the MSNBC personalities and the NBC (in other words Brokaw and Brian Williams) crew.  Obviously Matthews and Olberman are biased, and Olberman can get a little excited sometimes, but I still think they did a good job when it came to the nuts and bolts of the election.  Ah well.  So it goes.  

I found amusement with this.

Someone is trying (poorly) to troll me in the comments, presumably because they believe Republican pressure had NOTHING to do with this

http://episkoposcain.wordpress.com/2008/09/08/fuck-tha-media/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on September 08, 2008, 10:15:59 PM
re: Olberman
I thought it was cause Jones gave him the fist bump while he was trolling the other media at RNC


man i should get this flyer out
(http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/9528/taxchurchrb4.th.gif) (http://img178.imageshack.us/my.php?image=taxchurchrb4.gif)

if i owned property i might have more to work with but my compound is rented

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on September 08, 2008, 10:55:42 PM
I actually like what you're saying there.

I think it needs to be re-tooled to come off looking more "SRS BSNS" or it risks preaching to the choir, but general premise is good.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 09, 2008, 04:48:41 AM
What's the difference between Sara Palin and a Muslim Fundamentalist?  Lipstick.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/09/09/palin_fundamentalist/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 09, 2008, 04:54:42 AM
has anybody been able to confirm the book banning thing? I'd love to toss that one around, but i don't want to be forced to say that it's unsubstantiated when i am (understandably) pressed to give citation.....
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 09, 2008, 05:26:34 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 09, 2008, 04:54:42 AM
has anybody been able to confirm the book banning thing? I'd love to toss that one around, but i don't want to be forced to say that it's unsubstantiated when i am (understandably) pressed to give citation.....

According to Time, she asked the librarian about how to ban books.  The librarian said no chance in hell.  Palin later tried to fire the librarian for not giving her full support.  I don't think that there was ever a list of specific books she wanted to ban, but I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 09, 2008, 11:10:37 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on September 09, 2008, 05:26:34 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 09, 2008, 04:54:42 AM
has anybody been able to confirm the book banning thing? I'd love to toss that one around, but i don't want to be forced to say that it's unsubstantiated when i am (understandably) pressed to give citation.....

According to Time, she asked the librarian about how to ban books.  The librarian said no chance in hell.  Palin later tried to fire the librarian for not giving her full support.  I don't think that there was ever a list of specific books she wanted to ban, but I could be wrong.

Some books have been named.  They were the usual Harry Potter, Catcher in the Rye, Catch 22, Dan Brown etc etc
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Honey on September 09, 2008, 12:36:15 PM
Sarah Palin compared to Margaret Thatcher here:

http://www.dailymail.com/Opinion/DonSurber/200809040147

Like that is a good thing?  What will they think up next?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 09, 2008, 12:47:20 PM
Hah yes, I've seen that comparison more than a few times.  Our political right have fallen in love with Palin, mainly because most of them couldn't get laid in a morgue.

Jon Gaunt had an especially sockfucking-esque article which I made fun of here http://episkoposcain.wordpress.com/2008/09/07/i-wonder-if-gaunt-had-to-get-some-tissue-paper-after-writing-this-article/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 09, 2008, 01:19:29 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on September 09, 2008, 05:26:34 AM
According to Time, she asked the librarian about how to ban books.  The librarian said no chance in hell.  Palin later tried to fire the librarian for not giving her full support.  I don't think that there was ever a list of specific books she wanted to ban, but I could be wrong.

Yeah, but all the wire articles specifically point out that the librarian is 'wouldn't comment' or is 'not available for comment'.  The librarian may be telling the absolute truth, but other places where ive seen this argument going on, the pro palin side asks for some kind of evidence (a procedural form, more corroborating witnesses, etc.) and the argument gets derailed.

Quote from: Cain on September 09, 2008, 11:10:37 AM
Some books have been named.  They were the usual Harry Potter, Catcher in the Rye, Catch 22, Dan Brown etc etc
Link, please?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 09, 2008, 01:25:56 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 09, 2008, 01:19:29 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on September 09, 2008, 05:26:34 AM
According to Time, she asked the librarian about how to ban books.  The librarian said no chance in hell.  Palin later tried to fire the librarian for not giving her full support.  I don't think that there was ever a list of specific books she wanted to ban, but I could be wrong.

Yeah, but all the wire articles specifically point out that the librarian is 'wouldn't comment' or is 'not available for comment'.  The librarian may be telling the absolute truth, but other places where ive seen this argument going on, the pro palin side asks for some kind of evidence (a procedural form, more corroborating witnesses, etc.) and the argument gets derailed.

Quote from: Cain on September 09, 2008, 11:10:37 AM
Some books have been named.  They were the usual Harry Potter, Catcher in the Rye, Catch 22, Dan Brown etc etc
Link, please?

Snopes apparently disagrees with me

http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bannedbooks.asp

Whoops. I should check my sources more carefully.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 09, 2008, 02:25:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 09, 2008, 11:10:37 AM
Some books have been named.  They were the usual Harry Potter, Catcher in the Rye, Catch 22, Dan Brown etc etc

these would get my vote, though.

though i must admit i haven't actually read any of them
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on September 09, 2008, 02:53:52 PM
I wouldn't ban the books. I might ban Dan Brown readers though. And Dan Brown himself, of course.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 09, 2008, 02:59:26 PM
Quote from: Dr. Payne on September 09, 2008, 02:53:52 PM
I wouldn't ban the books. I might ban Dan Brown readers though. And Dan Brown himself, of course.

good point.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 10, 2008, 03:32:15 PM
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/09/you-botched-the-joke-barry-o/

Michelle Malkin is having a meltdown because Obama supposedly said "You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig." in reference to Sarah Palin.

In fact, here is the context of what he said:

Obama poked fun of McCain and Palin's new "change" mantra.

"You can put lipstick on a pig," he said as the crowd cheered. "It's still a pig."

"You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink."

"We've had enough of the same old thing."

Politico has more http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Obama_Lipstick_on_a_pig.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on September 10, 2008, 03:38:41 PM
Considering that McCain said the exact same thing in reference to Hillary, AND CONSIDERING IT'S AN EXTREMELY OLD AND FAMILIAR ANALOGY, I don't see how they're getting traction on this.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 10, 2008, 03:40:05 PM
Quote from: LMNO on September 10, 2008, 03:38:41 PM
Considering that McCain said the exact same thing in reference to Hillary, AND CONSIDERING IT'S AN EXTREMELY OLD AND FAMILIAR ANALOGY, I don't see how they're getting traction on this.

Because he called her a pig, d00d!  Weren't you paying attention?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on September 10, 2008, 03:56:55 PM
On the subject of McCain gaining ground in the polls, maybe that's because pollsters have been polling more Republicans than Democrats (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/poll-madness-mccain-takes_n_125158.html) lately.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Darth Cupcake on September 10, 2008, 03:57:21 PM
(http://i276.photobucket.com/albums/kk34/feministing/palintoon.jpg)

And how!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 10, 2008, 04:16:42 PM
Quote from: vexati0n on September 10, 2008, 03:56:55 PM
On the subject of McCain gaining ground in the polls, maybe that's because pollsters have been polling more Republicans than Democrats (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/poll-madness-mccain-takes_n_125158.html) lately.

Closer races make more money.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 10, 2008, 04:17:17 PM
OMG!!  Obama said "my Muslim faith"!  That obviously means that he is a crypto-Muslim fascist!!!

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=74783
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Damned Dino on September 10, 2008, 05:05:52 PM
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/lowcarbscoop/2008lipstick.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 10, 2008, 05:35:03 PM
Yeah, I saw when George Stephanopolous had to correct him about "my Muslim faith," and I got Obama's meaning right away, but then I thought, Shit, this is going to be taken out of context REAL soon...

It's the electoral college votes I give a shit about, not the polls.  I'm sure it'll swing the other way, however, as these things always do.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 10, 2008, 08:25:29 PM
http://www.ontheissues.org/

probably old news,
but I have found this site most useful in comparing how politicians stand / have voted on zillions of issues. Like for one, I didn't know that Barack snorted coke in college.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on September 11, 2008, 04:05:07 AM
that makes you about the only person in America who didn't know that.

personally, if I were waffling on who to vote for, that'd be the deal-breaker.

no way in HELL I would vote for a candidate who hasn't blown a few lines back in the day.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 11, 2008, 04:22:58 AM
more Obama is a commie
Quotethe role of the community organiser was developed by an extreme left intellectual called Saul Alinsky. He was a radical Chicago activist who, by the time he died in 1972, had had a profound influence on the highest levels of the Democratic party. Alinsky was a 'transformational Marxist' in the mould of Antonio Gramsci, who promoted the strategy of a 'long march through the institutions' by capturing the culture and turning it inside out as the most effective means of overturning western society.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/2073071/revolution-you-can-believe-in.thtml
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 11, 2008, 04:47:19 AM
Well, if spending time with Communists makes you a Communist then John McCain should explain the 5 and a half years he spent hang around in Hanoi.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 11, 2008, 04:53:28 AM
not professing belief in any Manchurian candidate theory, just providing examples of good wingnuttery as the thread name suggests
i like this ones detail on the work of  Saul Alinsky and Antonio Gramsci, i believe i have heard Hillary is a big fan of his as well..
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 11, 2008, 07:50:23 AM
The biggest proponent of Gramsci is a right wing American radio host.

I'd tell you his name, but then I'd be commenting on American politics, which is verboten.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 11, 2008, 03:58:39 PM
fuck them, comment all you want, screw with them (politics) all you want.   the book by Saul alinsky on communist infiltration sounds like a worthy read especially if a lot of democrats are using it as a tactical manual.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 11, 2008, 04:05:06 PM
He wasn't a Communist, he was a Chicago community organizer and radical liberal.

His basic rules can be read here:  http://www.vcn.bc.ca/citizens-handbook/rules.html

However, it is worth noting that ex-Marxist Leninist and GOP cheerleader David Horowitz is the most noted public proponent of Alinsky, and used parts of his thinking in the writing of his Art of Political War, extracts of which were distributed at the 2000 RNC.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 11, 2008, 04:22:43 PM
the rules are a good read, i would like to read the whole book. The article called him a 'transformational Marxist not Communist (my bad) not sure of its veracity

who is the right wing host?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 11, 2008, 04:34:30 PM
Oh, sorry.

It was Rush Limbaugh.  Alot of the authoritarian right are obsessed with Gramsci, they think he is proof of a far-left conspiracy in the media and among academics.  His contribution to Marxist theory is pretty important though, his idea of a cultural hegemon which is held by the rulin class and transmitted via propaganda to the lower classes in order to perpetuate class warfare.

His theories went on to be important to the Frankfurt School and Critical Theory, which partially aligned themselves with cultural Marxism (though their influence is overrated, and the best known of their number, Jurgen Habermas, is a Kantian liberal).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 11, 2008, 05:08:25 PM
a quick look at gramaci on wikipedia and i see where the authoritarian right would get that idea from. funny thing (according to wikipedia?) the right is using the same tactics.
QuoteCultural hegemony continues to be a widely applied model in political analysis. For example, an analysis of US political power from 1932-2006 speaks to the dynamics of both class struggle and cultural hegemony. In this view, the surge in trade union membership in the 1930s helped create a massive political base for the Democratic Party, one which declined but persisted largely until 1980. In this exemplary analysis, Robert Brenner argues that the key turn in US politics was the ability of the Republican Party to exploit politics of race and religion:

    ...the problem that had bedeviled the American right since Goldwater: how to win electoral support for a domestic programme that was transparently against the economic interest of the great mass of the population, and a foreign policy that appeared both reckless and redundant? ¶ The answer, as we have seen, was to look to the South, both as model and as electoral base, to construct an anti-statist individualist ideology founded on white supremacy, [on] defence of the patriarchal family and [on] Protestant fundamentalism. It was the Republican right's success in constructing this ideological formula, and in identifying the liberal state as a central threat to the racial status quo and 'traditional family values', that provided it with the wherewithal to contend for power on a brazenly pro-business programme.[2]

The preceding analysis shows both material forces in play (such as class and capital), but also a cultural politics, in which ruling interests seek to find emotional issues with which shift worker loyalties from social programs to those which benefit the largest corporations. Many scholars have used these ideas to explain the rise of Margaret Thatcher in the UK and Ronald Reagan in the US. The pattern of playing to issues of race, fear, and individualism in the US is sometimes represented by the notion of the "Southern strategy." More recently, many scholars have argued that the complex events of September 11, 2001 were instantly and deliberately conflated with "The War on Terror," a tool with which George W. Bush exploited nationalism, racism, Christianity, and fear so as to pursue corporate profiteering in the energy sector, pharmaceuticals, armaments, telecommunications, and other key sectors.[3]   [/qoute]
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 11, 2008, 05:20:21 PM
Yeah, that is one of the ironies.  The Southern Strategy is an excellent example of this, making people vote on race or gender or abortion, and not where their economic interests lie.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 11, 2008, 06:08:52 PM
Alan Keyes:  McCain didn't mention Jesus enough in his acceptance speech!!!

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=74684
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on September 11, 2008, 06:13:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 11, 2008, 05:20:21 PM
Yeah, that is one of the ironies.  The Southern Strategy is an excellent example of this, making people vote on race or gender or abortion, and not where their economic interests lie.

Isn't that what the book What Happened to Kansas is about?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 11, 2008, 06:19:29 PM
What's the Matter with Kansas? by Thomas Frank:
??
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 11, 2008, 06:20:17 PM
While I'm at it:

Tom Hoefling:  Sarah Palin didn't talk about God and abortion enough!!!  And McCain is being funded by George Soros.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=74636

QuoteBut what of the substance? In keeping with the normal culinary proclivities of John McCain and the George Soros-funded liberals who run his political operations, there was not a single mention of the central moral question of our day: the fact that – even though the protection of the God-given, unalienable right to life is the foundation upon which American liberty rests – every day in this country thousands of unborn children continue to be brutally killed in their mother's wombs. Not a single word.

Ed Brayton had a good write-up on both articles:

http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/09/worldnutdaily_declares_mccain.php#more
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 11, 2008, 06:22:16 PM
Quote from: LMNO on September 11, 2008, 06:13:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 11, 2008, 05:20:21 PM
Yeah, that is one of the ironies.  The Southern Strategy is an excellent example of this, making people vote on race or gender or abortion, and not where their economic interests lie.

Isn't that what the book What's the Matter with Kansas? is about?
I kept meaning to read that...  But yes, using religious issues as a political distraction is a great way to win votes.  The Republicans have been doing it for pretty much my entire lifetime.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 12, 2008, 02:49:35 PM
Better class insanity

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/11/ground-zero-etiquette-a-tale-of-two-roses/

MM and her cult painstakingly analyze the way the two presidential candidates placed their roses at the NYC memorial on 9/11 and the commenters almost unanimously agree that it all demonstrates how McCain is the noblest of heroes but Obama is soulless, devoid of integrity, and indifferent to anything but his mad plan to destroy all that is or ever was Holy and Good in the history of western society.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 12, 2008, 02:57:49 PM
Well, she was the dipshit who decided Rachel Ray was supporting terrorists because of a stupid fucking scarf. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on September 12, 2008, 02:58:52 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 12, 2008, 02:49:35 PM
Better class insanity

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/11/ground-zero-etiquette-a-tale-of-two-roses/

MM and her cult painstakingly analyze the way the two presidential candidates placed their roses at the NYC memorial on 9/11 and the commenters almost unanimously agree that it all demonstrates how McCain is the noblest of heroes but Obama is soulless, devoid of integrity, and indifferent to anything but his mad plan to destroy all that is or ever was Holy and Good in the history of western society.

:lulz:

What isn't there to love about that page?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on September 12, 2008, 03:08:56 PM
Mrs LMNO had an interesting theory last night.  I'll do my best to sum up, but the details might be sketchy because I was on my 3rd finger of Rye at the time.

Basically, the "undecided" voters aren't really undecided; they pretty much know who they're voting for.  But that's not what they care about.  They want the DRAMA.

They see the Presidential race as just another reality show, so they expect and look forward to the petty bickering and slap-fights.  They would prefer to talk about pitbulls, pigs, and lipstick; they want to see Michelle Obama snap her fingers above her head and say, "Oh, no you DID-INT."  They're just in it for the controversy and the conjecture. 

Basically, they want this to be the most drawn-out episode of "The Hills" ever.


I think that was the gist of her point.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on September 12, 2008, 04:00:26 PM
the very real possibility that she might be right makes me want to puke a little.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 12, 2008, 04:13:40 PM
Not so sure.

If she said the media, then I would agree 169%.  Voters, maybe not. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 12, 2008, 04:34:29 PM
People at the RNC explain "small town values" to the Daily Show's Best Fucking News Team Ever:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184114

The guy in the cowboy hat: horrormirth.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on September 13, 2008, 01:16:19 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on September 12, 2008, 04:34:29 PM
People at the RNC explain "small town values" to the Daily Show's Best Fucking News Team Ever:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184114


:roflcake:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 13, 2008, 03:03:38 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on September 12, 2008, 04:34:29 PM
People at the RNC explain "small town values" to the Daily Show's Best Fucking News Team Ever:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184114

The guy in the cowboy hat: horrormirth.
I totally saw that guy at the TX state convention!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 13, 2008, 02:37:12 PM
Weakest fucking attack ad ever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQobIUE1zTU

Don't get me wrong - I think if you need a helicoptor when you go out hunting, you're a pretty piss-poor hunter in the first place, and should probably just stick to shooting your neighbour's cats with a BB gun, like the fucked up little sociopath that you probably are.

But this just plays into the "dirty fucking hippies want to take away your guns and do not share the values of the heartland" memes.

If you wanna slam Palin, mention things like making rape victims pay for their own rape test kits.  This shit is weak.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 14, 2008, 04:29:06 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/sarahpalin/2827217/Neoconservatives-plan-Project-Sarah-Palin-to-shape-future-American-foreign-policy.html

Comments by the governor of Alaska in her first television interview, in which she said Nato may have to go to war with Russia and took a tough line on Iran's nuclear programme, were the result of two weeks of briefings by neoconservatives.

Sources in the McCain camp, the Republican Party and Washington think tanks say Mrs Palin was identified as a potential future leader of the neoconservative cause in June 2007. That was when the annual summer cruise organised by the right-of-centre Weekly Standard magazine docked in Juneau, the Alaskan state capital, and the pundits on board took tea with Governor Palin.

Her case as John McCain's running mate was later advanced vociferously by William Kristol, the magazine's editor, who is widely seen as one of the founding fathers of American neoconservative thought - including the robust approach to foreign policy which spurred American intervention in Iraq.

In 1988, Mr Kristol became a leading adviser of another inexperienced Republican vice presidential pick, Dan Quayle, tutoring him in foreign affairs. Last week he praised Mrs Palin as "a spectre of a young, attractive, unapologetic conservatism" that "is haunting the liberal elites".

Now many believe that the "neocons", whose standard bearer in government, Vice President Dick Cheney, lost out in Washington power struggles to the more moderate defence secretary Robert Gates and secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, last year are seeking to mould Mrs Palin to renew their influence.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 15, 2008, 02:27:24 PM
Mr. Kristol is a hole. 

I'm pretty sure as a lad he whacked off to pictures of William F. Buckley Jr. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 15, 2008, 05:03:34 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on September 12, 2008, 04:34:29 PM
People at the RNC explain "small town values" to the Daily Show's Best Fucking News Team Ever:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184114

The guy in the cowboy hat: horrormirth.

laughing.
my.
  ass.
   off.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 16, 2008, 08:23:14 PM
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2008/09/how-big-shitpile-will-be-good-for.html

The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County, Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP's effort to challenge some voters on Election Day.

"We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren't voting from those addresses," party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week. He said the local party wanted to make sure that proper electoral procedures were followed.

State election rules allow parties to assign "election challengers" to polls to monitor the election. In addition to observing the poll workers, these volunteers can challenge the eligibility of any voter provided they "have a good reason to believe" that the person is not eligible to vote. One allowable reason is that the person is not a "true resident of the city or township."

[...]

"It is actually a very smart thing to do," he went on, "particularly in this climate with so many foreclosures."

For Republicans, he said, targeting the foreclosures would be a cost-effective and "probably" legal method of reducing Democratic votes.

If he were still in the election business, he said, "I'd be doing that all day long."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 18, 2008, 02:33:23 AM
Fun whether or not it's true.

http://blogs.artvoice.com/techvoice/2008/09/17/hackers-break-into-sarah-palins-inbox/

Hackers break into Sarah Palin's inbox

This is breaking news, so stay tuned for details as more are available... but it appears the infamous group of cyber-mischief makers "anonymous" are up to their old tricks, and this time they had Governor Palin in their sights.

While this has not been completely confirmed, it seems that some time over night or early this morning, somebody was able to compromise "gov.palin@yahoo.com," by apparently discovering the password to the account.  The password was posted to a public forum, 4chan.org, and a field day ensued.  Within a short time, another "anonymous" had changed the password on the account to effectively lock everybody else out, and later this morning the account had been locked completely by Yahoo.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on September 18, 2008, 03:54:13 AM
I doubt she has a yahoo address.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on September 18, 2008, 03:56:56 AM
ok... nevermind....



Sarah Palin is bat shit retarded.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 18, 2008, 06:53:16 AM
According to the latest poll, Obama could possibly win Indiana.  It would be the first time Indiana went for a Democrat since LBJ in '64 (and FDR in '36 before that).

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080917/NEWS0502/80917076
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 18, 2008, 06:55:23 AM
The polls are starting to turn around.  Palin's bumps are starting to...(what happens to bumps when they disintegrate?)...submerge in a pail of fail? 

*hoping so*
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 18, 2008, 07:07:37 AM
If Obama wins Indiana then I'm predicting a landslide for him.  It would mean that he has won over enough small town voters and that race was not as big a factor as everyone thought.

That poll also reaffirms the fact that women HATE HATE HATE Palin for the most part.  She was obviously picked to sway NeoCons and the Religious Right (who would have held their nose and voted for McCain anyways) and not the female vote.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 18, 2008, 05:14:06 PM
I found the hacking hilarious also.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 18, 2008, 05:27:59 PM
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-trailrothschild18-2008sep18,0,529074.story

"I feel like [Obama] is an elitist." - Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild

:facepalm:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 18, 2008, 05:29:28 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 18, 2008, 05:14:06 PM
I found the hacking hilarious also.
I missed most of that story.  Did Palin actually use a Yahoo account for government e-mails?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 18, 2008, 05:32:54 PM
Quote from: Jason Wabash on September 18, 2008, 05:29:28 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 18, 2008, 05:14:06 PM
I found the hacking hilarious also.
I missed most of that story.  Did Palin actually use a Yahoo account for government e-mails?

Pretty sure she did.  I think I read it on Talking Points Memos, though I'm not certain.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 18, 2008, 06:13:50 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 18, 2008, 05:32:54 PM
Quote from: Jason Wabash on September 18, 2008, 05:29:28 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 18, 2008, 05:14:06 PM
I found the hacking hilarious also.
I missed most of that story.  Did Palin actually use a Yahoo account for government e-mails?

Pretty sure she did.  I think I read it on Talking Points Memos, though I'm not certain.
So she knows more about technology than McCain, but less than Paris Hilton?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on September 18, 2008, 10:05:02 PM
actually, the email account that got hacked was totally personal emails. there is a second personal yahoo account in her name and the popular theory is that since the hacked email contained only personal stuff, the other one must be a way to do an end-run around scrutiny of official emails.

for the record, I do not buy into the popular theory (she's gotta be smarter than that, right?).

I can, however, confirm that the email account that was hacked contained only personal emails.

Unfortunately, I do not believe that it would be in my (or faust's) best interests to post screenshots here, but they could be made available to certain people who know how to get ahold of me.

and since the Fort Meade bots are probably working overtime right now (thanks Yemen!), let me just make it VERY clear that I had nothing to do with this. I am just good at finding things.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on September 19, 2008, 02:17:58 AM
nothing you just said made anything even remotely resembling sense.

please die in a fire.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on September 19, 2008, 02:20:09 AM
I have absolutely no idea what the deal is with Palins E Mail, I've not even read anything about it.

Your post makes it sound like someone opened up a mineshaft and found an epic seam of LULZ though.

EDIT: Ah, ok, I read up a bit on it. Funny stuff
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on September 19, 2008, 02:38:48 AM
truth is, anonymous tried to make it out to be WAY more lulzy than it actually is.

it's also created a significant amount of blowback. We can thank anonymous and their ham-handed methods for future additional difficulties anytime we try to do something interesting and quasi-legal.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on September 19, 2008, 02:39:56 AM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on September 19, 2008, 02:38:48 AM
truth is, anonymous tried to make it out to be WAY more lulzy than it actually is.

it's also created a significant amount of blowback. We can thank anonymous and their ham-handed methods for future additional difficulties anytime we try to do something interesting and quasi-legal.

Isn't that always the way of it?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 19, 2008, 05:33:15 PM
Thats annoying.

Also, I was going by the fact I had heard about Palin using a Yahoo account for government business, and so made the obvious (and wrong) leap.

Then again, I've hardly surfed the internet all week, so I'm not exactly up on things.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 19, 2008, 06:29:17 PM
Jonathan Rauch is full of WIN!

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/socialstudies.php
An imaginary conversation between campaign manager Steve Schmidt and John McCain:
Quote"You may have heard of the law of the excluded middle. No? It's from philosophy. Logic, to be specific. It says that if X, then not not X. Wait, bear with me. If a statement is true, then the negation of that statement cannot also be true. Otherwise everything could be true at once. You'd have fuzzy logic."

"Steve --"

"We've figured out something. The law of the excluded middle is not in the Constitution. We looked. It's not in any contract our party ever signed. It wasn't even written by Republicans. It was written by left-wing academics.

"So at the convention last week, we send the former mayor of New York City to go out on prime time and ridicule Obama for being 'cosmopolitan.' We make Rudy Giuliani, Mr. Manhattan, the spokesman for small-town values. According to Democrat logic, he should be laughed off the stage. But the response goes off the charts.

"Why? Across America, people are fed up with so-called logical 'laws' that they never agreed to and that insult their values. They're ready to fight back against cosmopolitan logic. We've tapped into that!

"Look at Mitt Romney. The former governor of Massachusetts gets up there and bad-mouths the East Coast. No one bats an eye. Then he says, 'We need change, all right: change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington. We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington: Throw out the big-government liberals.' As if Ted Kennedy has been president these past eight years. The liberal bloggers said things like, 'Has Romney lost his mind?' But that's Democrat logic.

"Or Sarah. Our side says Obama is too inexperienced to be president. Karl Rove says Tim Kaine, the Democrat governor of Virginia, is too inexperienced to be vice president. So what do we do? We go find Sarah, who has less experience than either of them. Less than anybody in American politics, practically. We put her on the ticket and say she has more than enough experience to be president. Even though Obama doesn't. Maybe that's not cosmopolitan logic, but Americans get it.

"Look at the themes of your campaign. Republicans have messed up in Washington. So, what's the answer? Elect another Republican. Messing up isn't a strike against us. It's a qualification.

"Washington. You've been there 26 years. You're a fixture. So what does that make you? An outsider.

"Government. You run against big government. OK, so Republicans have made it bigger. That only shows why we need Republicans to make it smaller. And who better to bring competence to government than the guys who go around bashing it?

"You run on fiscal responsibility. Get that deficit under control. How better to do that than with big tax cuts, unpaid-for? Who turned surpluses into deficits? Republicans. That's exactly why we need the kind of sound fiscal management that Republicans bring to Washington.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Golden Applesauce on September 20, 2008, 04:23:13 AM
The NYT, while not really wingnuttia, ran an interesting headline today.

Quote from: The New York Times
Meanwhile, the Other No. 2 Keeps Punching
Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. has been butchering Senator John McCain this week. It is not clear who has noticed.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 20, 2008, 03:58:18 PM
shocking news  Obama compared to Hitler in Washington times :lulz: :lulz:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/20/idols-and-crowds/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on September 20, 2008, 06:50:58 PM
The stupid season is upon us.  I can barely  talk to anybody about politics without hating their guts.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 20, 2008, 06:53:47 PM
Quote from: Felix on September 20, 2008, 06:50:58 PM
The stupid season is upon us.  I can barely  talk to anybody about politics without hating their guts.
It's stupid season?! How much does the license for that cost?  and whats the tag limit?  :D
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on September 20, 2008, 06:56:15 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 20, 2008, 06:53:47 PM
Quote from: Felix on September 20, 2008, 06:50:58 PM
The stupid season is upon us.  I can barely  talk to anybody about politics without hating their guts.
It's stupid season?! How much does the license for that cost?  and whats the tag limit?  :D

Ah, yes.  Actually, stupid people wrote the rules on that... 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on September 21, 2008, 01:01:26 AM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 20, 2008, 03:58:18 PM
shocking news  Obama compared to Hitler in Washington times :lulz: :lulz:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/20/idols-and-crowds/

Wouldn't comparing Obama to Mugabe make a hell of a lot more sense?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on September 21, 2008, 01:02:34 AM
Wait no, that would require Americans to actually know who the hell Mugabe is.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 21, 2008, 01:10:08 AM

if the mugabe comparison works they will use it
this is the Hitler comparison

QuoteA human group transforms itself into a crowd when it suddenly responds to a suggestion rather than to reasoning, to an image rather than to an idea, to an affirmation rather than to proof, to the repetition of a phrase rather than to arguments, to prestige rather than to competence." To find anything comparable to crowds' euphoric reactions to Mr. Obama, you would have to go back to old newsreels of German crowds in the 1930s, with their adulation of their Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler. With hindsight, we can look back on those people with pity, knowing now how many of them would be led to their deaths by the man they idolized.

The exultation of the moment can exact a brutal price after that moment has passed. Nowhere is that truer than when it comes to picking the leader of a nation, which means entrusting that leader with the fate of millions today and of generations yet unborn.

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 21, 2008, 01:22:32 AM
Of course, the media sucking Bush's dick for practically the last 8 years is an entirely different matter, as that is showing Appropriate Praise of a Brave And Visionary Man.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on September 21, 2008, 01:23:10 AM
Both Kennedies didn't have the same kind of reaction from the crowds?

That's a new one on me.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on September 21, 2008, 02:46:30 AM
Quote from: Requiem on September 21, 2008, 01:01:26 AM

Wouldn't comparing Obama to Mugabe make a hell of a lot more sense?
\
:nigel:

fixed.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Golden Applesauce on September 21, 2008, 06:05:41 AM
Frankly I'm surprised McCain hasn't done this himself yet.

Remember that ad that showed Obama speaking to jubilant crowds in Germany after his foreign tour?
It was something something charismatic, famous, crowd-pleaser - and then he DIDNT CUT TO HITLER.  I mean come on, he was FUCKING IN GERMANY, AT A PODIUM.  We got Paris Hilton instead.  If you're going to attack somebody on the basis of being good at giving speeches, at least go all the way.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 21, 2008, 12:30:35 PM
National Review did it for him.

Kathryn Jean Lopez, an editor there, made several blatant Hitler analogies, as did some other fairly well known bloggers, just minutes after the Germany speech.  I think if McCain did it, that would cross a definite line, and even the mainstream media would give him major shit.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on September 21, 2008, 05:22:25 PM
Quote from: GA on September 21, 2008, 06:05:41 AM
Frankly I'm surprised McCain hasn't done this himself yet.

Remember that ad that showed Obama speaking to jubilant crowds in Germany after his foreign tour?
It was something something charismatic, famous, crowd-pleaser - and then he DIDNT CUT TO HITLER.  I mean come on, he was FUCKING IN GERMANY, AT A PODIUM.  We got Paris Hilton instead.  If you're going to attack somebody on the basis of being good at giving speeches, at least go all the way.

I look forward to the day when people do not feel the need to bring up the third Reich at the slightest contrivance.  Clearly that day is far off.  Obligatory Hitler references are, to me, the grown-up way of arguing like a six year old.  The German people today are equally if not more allergic to Nazi references than most any minority persecuted during it's time.  They're the only ones left who haven't beaten the horse until it's become meaningless in conversation.

Christ, anyways.  It seems like Obama is getting less media love if only because he's somehow not perceived as the underdog.  As though we should feel sorry for McCain going up against a smart Democrat after four years of Bush.


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on September 21, 2008, 07:51:11 PM
Quote from: Felix on September 21, 2008, 05:22:25 PM
Quote from: GA on September 21, 2008, 06:05:41 AM
Frankly I'm surprised McCain hasn't done this himself yet.

Remember that ad that showed Obama speaking to jubilant crowds in Germany after his foreign tour?
It was something something charismatic, famous, crowd-pleaser - and then he DIDNT CUT TO HITLER.  I mean come on, he was FUCKING IN GERMANY, AT A PODIUM.  We got Paris Hilton instead.  If you're going to attack somebody on the basis of being good at giving speeches, at least go all the way.

I look forward to the day when people do not feel the need to bring up the third Reich at the slightest contrivance.  Clearly that day is far off.  Obligatory Hitler references are, to me, the grown-up way of arguing like a six year old.  The German people today are equally if not more allergic to Nazi references than most any minority persecuted during it's time.  They're the only ones left who haven't beaten the horse until it's become meaningless in conversation.

Christ, anyways.  It seems like Obama is getting less media love if only because he's somehow not perceived as the underdog.  As though we should feel sorry for McCain going up against a smart Democrat after four years of Bush.




thank you.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on September 22, 2008, 11:42:45 AM
Now i want a t-shirt that says "Republicans for the Apocalypse" maybe add a '98 just to confuse the con.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Alethias on September 22, 2008, 06:27:02 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 21, 2008, 01:10:08 AM

if the mugabe comparison works they will use it
this is the Hitler comparison

QuoteA human group transforms itself into a crowd when it suddenly responds to a suggestion rather than to reasoning, to an image rather than to an idea, to an affirmation rather than to proof, to the repetition of a phrase rather than to arguments, to prestige rather than to competence." To find anything comparable to crowds' euphoric reactions to Sarah Palin, you would have to go back to old newsreels of German crowds in the 1930s, with their adulation of their Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler. With hindsight, we can look back on those people with pity, knowing now how many of them would be led to their deaths by the man they idolized.

The exultation of the moment can exact a brutal price after that moment has passed. Nowhere is that truer than when it comes to picking the leader of a nation, which means entrusting that leader with the fate of millions today and of generations yet unborn.


I made a small tweak to that quote.  I think my version is at least as true as the original was.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 25, 2008, 04:55:48 PM
Rush: Obama isn't black

http://mediamatters.org/items/200809220015
QuoteThese polls on how one-third of blue-collar white Democrats won't vote for Obama because he's black, and -- but he's not black. Do you know he has not one shred of African-American blood? He doesn't have any African -- that's why when they asked whether he was authentic, whether he's down for the struggle. He's Arab. You know, he's from Africa. He's from Arab parts of Africa. He's not -- his father was -- he's not African-American. The last thing that he is is African-American. I guess that's splitting hairs, I don't -- it's just all these little things, everything seems upside-down today in this country.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 25, 2008, 04:59:02 PM
Yeah, Rush, because hypocrites like YOUR ASS are on the radio shouting about shit YOU know NOTHING about!

I hate that pigfucking drug addict.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 25, 2008, 05:00:19 PM
And the thing of it is...he literally IS tone deaf. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on September 25, 2008, 05:11:51 PM
Kenyans are Arabs?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 25, 2008, 05:16:56 PM
He's a total ignoramus--he apparently doesn't know geography.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on September 25, 2008, 05:23:57 PM
No... his statement checks out:

(http://loki.discoflux.com/img/limbaugh_map.png)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 25, 2008, 05:25:01 PM
Psh, thats nothing.

Hands up who has heard of Joel's Army?

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2008/09/what-goes-around.html

For example, while we're at it, we should be taking stock of this new SPLC report examining the strength and numbers of the "Joel's Army" movement. While this group has been a concern of right-wing watchers for the past few years, I got my first public sighting of them last summer -- at the Northwest Washington County Fair, of all places. The military mothers' group had put together a big scrapbook showing all the county's service men and women, with a page for each one with personal histories (high school attended, parents' names, deployment dates, etc.) and photos. It was a very popular and moving exhibit. My husband and I went through it twice.

What struck me was that better than half of the troops from this rural ag county were either homeschooled or had attended Christian schools. Some families had two and three sons serving. A few photos showed them in battle dress, Bibles in hand; or in other religious contexts. Being aware of Joel's Amry, I couldn't shake the impression that some of these families had bred these kids for military service the way most middle-class families groom their kids for college. I was looking at at least a few of the faces of this new army of Christian warriors, young men (and a few women) who joined the military not just out of patriotism or job experience, but also to gain the skills they expected to need someday to take the country for Jesus -- by force.

The SPLC report expresses deep concern over the size and intensity of the Joel's Army movement:

    LAKELAND, Fla. — Todd Bentley has a long night ahead of him, resurrecting the dead, healing the blind, and exploding cancerous tumors. Since April 3, the 32-year-old, heavily tattooed, body-pierced, shaved-head Canadian preacher has been leading a continuous "supernatural healing revival" in central Florida. To contain the 10,000-plus crowds flocking from around the globe, Bentley has rented baseball stadiums, arenas and airport hangars at a cost of up to $15,000 a day. Many in attendance are church pastors themselves who believe Bentley to be a prophet and don't bat an eye when he tells them he's seen King David and spoken with the Apostle Paul in heaven. "He was looking very Jewish," Bentley notes.

    Tattooed across his sternum are military dog tags that read "Joel's Army." They're evidence of Bentley's generalship in a rapidly growing apocalyptic movement that's gone largely unnoticed by watchdogs of the theocratic right. According to Bentley and a handful of other "hyper-charismatic" preachers advancing the same agenda, Joel's Army is prophesied to become an Armageddon-ready military force of young people with a divine mandate to physically impose Christian "dominion" on non-believers.

    "An end-time army has one common purpose — to aggressively take ground for the kingdom of God under the authority of Jesus Christ, the Dread Champion," Bentley declares on the website for his ministry school in British Columbia, Canada. "The trumpet is sounding, calling on-fire, revolutionary believers to enlist in Joel's Army. ... Many are now ready to be mobilized to establish and advance God's kingdom on earth."

    Joel's Army followers, many of them teenagers and young adults who believe they're members of the final generation to come of age before the end of the world, are breaking away in droves from mainline Pentecostal churches. Numbering in the tens of thousands, they base their beliefs on an esoteric reading of the second chapter of the Old Testament Book of Joel, in which an avenging swarm of locusts attacks Israel. In their view, the locusts are a metaphor for Joel's Army.

    Despite their overt militancy, there's no evidence Joel's Army followers have committed any acts of violence. But critics warn that actual bloodletting may only be a matter of time for a movement that casts itself as God's avenging army.

    Those sounding the alarm about Joel's Army are not secular foes of the Christian Right, few of whom are even aware of the movement or how widespread it's become in the past decade. Instead, Joel's Army critics are mostly conservative Christians, either neo-Pentecostals who left the movement in disgust or evangelical Christians who fear that Joel's Army preachers are stealing their flocks, even sending spies to infiltrate their own congregations and sway their young people to heresy. And they say the movement is becoming frightening.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on September 25, 2008, 05:34:14 PM
"becoming" frightening?  Sounds terrifying as it is, ta verrra much.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 25, 2008, 05:39:55 PM
And three out of the four churches Palin has attended has links to Joel's Army.

http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/8/114332/7479
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 29, 2008, 06:24:36 AM
Obama plans to use police to silence critics
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/09/breaking-gov-matt-blunt-releases.html
http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on September 29, 2008, 06:50:00 AM
Umm.. yeah. "Sue for telling malicious lies" now equates to sending out death squads to silence the opposition.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on September 29, 2008, 07:15:39 AM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 29, 2008, 06:24:36 AM
Obama plans to use police to silence critics
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/09/breaking-gov-matt-blunt-releases.html
http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem

Requesting non-right-wing slant citation?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 29, 2008, 08:11:34 AM
Barack tells a story:

http://kools.ytmnd.com/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 29, 2008, 08:54:09 AM
Quote from: Felix on September 29, 2008, 07:15:39 AM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 29, 2008, 06:24:36 AM
Obama plans to use police to silence critics
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/09/breaking-gov-matt-blunt-releases.html
http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem

Requesting non-right-wing slant citation?

wingnuttery imbalanced really  :lulz: :lulz:
There are no left wing citations/support of this (that i can find) so the left wing either doesn't support this plan or wants it to fall off the radar until they can find an actual malicious lie they can arrest someone for. I would like to see the democrats original request that this should be done, but could not find that either.

PS most wingnuttery is one sided
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on September 29, 2008, 01:21:22 PM
I went to this rally and my dad, who's turning out to be a bit of a conserva-tard, sent me this:

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770 (http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770)



:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on September 29, 2008, 06:35:38 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 29, 2008, 08:54:09 AM
Quote from: Felix on September 29, 2008, 07:15:39 AM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 29, 2008, 06:24:36 AM
Obama plans to use police to silence critics
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/09/breaking-gov-matt-blunt-releases.html
http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem

Requesting non-right-wing slant citation?

wingnuttery imbalanced really  :lulz: :lulz:
There are no left wing citations/support of this (that i can find) so the left wing either doesn't support this plan or wants it to fall off the radar until they can find an actual malicious lie they can arrest someone for. I would like to see the democrats original request that this should be done, but could not find that either.

PS most wingnuttery is one sided


Okay, requesting proof that this is actually happening, not just the word of some anti-Democrat nut.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 29, 2008, 07:13:09 PM
i looked but couldn't find it maybe some one with better google fu could search it out, since it is being responded to by Missouri politicians there must be some basis /origin for it
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 29, 2008, 07:34:01 PM
this seems to be the original news report http://www.kmov.com/video/?nvid=285793  it interviews the prosecutors involved

edit to add - from other stuff i read while searching for this it seems the threat of prosecution may have no teeth and that the law wouldn't ever get a conviction, it may be the prosecutors and sheriff are Obama wing nuts trying a intimidation tactic to scare off free speech
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 29, 2008, 08:05:38 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 29, 2008, 07:34:01 PM
wing nuts

You keep using that word.

It does not mean what you think it means.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 29, 2008, 08:31:13 PM
a person holding the  views of the extremist side of there party most often conservative republican "right wing" (i may be wrong to use it to describe extremist liberals) there may be a more accepted word for far left nuttery but i don't know it...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Golden Applesauce on September 29, 2008, 08:35:57 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 29, 2008, 08:31:13 PM
a person holding the  views of the extremist side of there party most often conservative republican "right wing" (i may be wrong to use it to describe extremist liberals) there may be a more accepted word for far left nuttery but i don't know it...

No.  This is a "wing nut.":

(http://www.linitindia.com/images/315-large.jpg)

This is a "wingnut.":

(http://www.islamicmediacity.com/cms_files/news_images/1180036235.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 29, 2008, 08:45:12 PM
 :lulz: damn spellcheck
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on September 30, 2008, 06:07:01 AM
Quote from: trillian on September 29, 2008, 01:21:22 PM
I went to this rally and my dad, who's turning out to be a bit of a conserva-tard, sent me this:

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770 (http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770)



:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:




dude there's an add on that page for a "Koons" car dealer.
i couldn't read the article cause my eyes saw that then hit the back of my skull then i clicked out.
i dont really know why
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 30, 2008, 08:44:54 AM
And the first person to blame the recession on Obama: Jay Nordlinger from NRO's The Corner.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWE0ZGNiZDU3MzYxMDJhMmEzNDhjODc1NDdhZGQ0ZjM=
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on September 30, 2008, 08:48:45 AM
The repubs are already throwing their little bitch fits?  Game over I guess.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on September 30, 2008, 01:25:31 PM
Quote from: Squiddy on September 30, 2008, 06:07:01 AM
Quote from: trillian on September 29, 2008, 01:21:22 PM
I went to this rally and my dad, who's turning out to be a bit of a conserva-tard, sent me this:

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770 (http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770)



:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:




dude there's an add on that page for a "Koons" car dealer.
i couldn't read the article cause my eyes saw that then hit the back of my skull then i clicked out.
i dont really know why


well i mean, i do live in a town that is primarily known for the civil war battle fought here.


we still have the slave auction block on one of the street corners.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on September 30, 2008, 02:32:02 PM
Fuck 'em all.  They have no clue what they are doing.  It's good they have a couple of days off.  Maybe some of them will be hit by buses. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 30, 2008, 05:45:59 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW9b0xr06qA

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on September 30, 2008, 05:56:36 PM
Kids are such pawns.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 30, 2008, 06:57:41 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on September 29, 2008, 08:31:13 PM
a person holding the  views of the extremist side of there party most often conservative republican "right wing" (i may be wrong to use it to describe extremist liberals) there may be a more accepted word for far left nuttery but i don't know it...

There is, and its called "moonbats", and it is much rarer for a few reasons.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on September 30, 2008, 07:07:11 PM
can wingnut be applied to all extreme view holders as a general term or is it specifically reserved for the right wing? moonbat is new to me it must be pretty rare.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on September 30, 2008, 07:08:52 PM
wingnut is recognized as a shortening of "right wing nut".

Moonbat is more often used on places like Malkin's place, Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler, etc
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on September 30, 2008, 07:40:20 PM
Quote from: trillian on September 29, 2008, 01:21:22 PM
I went to this rally and my dad, who's turning out to be a bit of a conserva-tard, sent me this:

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770 (http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770)


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:



People aren't allowed to bring their own signs to rallies where the candidate will be present, regardless of the party. The reason that is cited for this is because signs can be used to hide weapons or be used as weapons.

I've heard a lot of people of many political affiliations go off on this but they all lack context. The signs that appear handmade at rallies are all made beforehand by pros and distributed to real audience members chosen by marketers inside the event.

In 99% of cases of people screeching about signs "not being allowed," it has nothing to do with the message on the sign.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on September 30, 2008, 07:43:55 PM
Quote from: Netaungrot on September 30, 2008, 07:40:20 PM
Quote from: trillian on September 29, 2008, 01:21:22 PM
I went to this rally and my dad, who's turning out to be a bit of a conserva-tard, sent me this:

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770 (http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770)


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:



People aren't allowed to bring their own signs to rallies where the candidate will be present, regardless of the party. The reason that is cited for this is because signs can be used to hide weapons or be used as weapons.

I've heard a lot of people of many political affiliations go off on this but they all lack context. The signs that appear handmade at rallies are all made beforehand by pros and distributed to real audience members chosen by marketers inside the event.

In 99% of cases of people screeching about signs "not being allowed," it has nothing to do with the message on the sign.


hence my surprise that my father, who has a phd, would be dumb enough to give that article any credit.


also,  all that free speech would have made it impossible to see anything.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on September 30, 2008, 10:53:57 PM
Quote from: Netaungrot on September 30, 2008, 07:40:20 PM
Quote from: trillian on September 29, 2008, 01:21:22 PM
I went to this rally and my dad, who's turning out to be a bit of a conserva-tard, sent me this:

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770 (http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770)


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:



People aren't allowed to bring their own signs to rallies where the candidate will be present, regardless of the party. The reason that is cited for this is because signs can be used to hide weapons or be used as weapons.

I've heard a lot of people of many political affiliations go off on this but they all lack context. The signs that appear handmade at rallies are all made beforehand by pros and distributed to real audience members chosen by marketers inside the event.

In 99% of cases of people screeching about signs "not being allowed," it has nothing to do with the message on the sign.

Please to be explaining:

(http://s.buzzfeed.com/static/imagebuzz/2008/9/5/10/4abd5be86a20ca453069fdc8f662617d.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 01, 2008, 10:28:50 AM
Quote from: Netaungrot on September 30, 2008, 07:40:20 PM
Quote from: trillian on September 29, 2008, 01:21:22 PM
I went to this rally and my dad, who's turning out to be a bit of a conserva-tard, sent me this:

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770 (http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770)


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:



People aren't allowed to bring their own signs to rallies where the candidate will be present, regardless of the party. The reason that is cited for this is because signs can be used to hide weapons or be used as weapons.

I've heard a lot of people of many political affiliations go off on this but they all lack context. The signs that appear handmade at rallies are all made beforehand by pros and distributed to real audience members chosen by marketers inside the event.

In 99% of cases of people screeching about signs "not being allowed," it has nothing to do with the message on the sign.

WHY AREN'T YOU FIGHTING THE POWER, NET???
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on October 01, 2008, 05:40:54 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkqosRiyYo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkqosRiyYo)



EXCELLENCE IN JOURNALISM.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 01, 2008, 05:52:12 PM
Quote from: trillian on October 01, 2008, 05:40:54 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkqosRiyYo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkqosRiyYo)



EXCELLENCE IN JOURNALISM.

Heh, I like how the old guy starts to raise his hand for McCain and his wife pulls his arm down, before they both raise them for Obama.

Also, the reporter is a stooge. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 01, 2008, 06:05:51 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 01, 2008, 05:52:12 PM
Heh, I like how the old guy starts to raise his hand for McCain and his wife pulls his arm down, before they both raise them for Obama.

Would not have caught that.  Awesome.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 01, 2008, 06:07:32 PM
Kate Couric: What newspapers and magazines do you read on a daily basis?

Sarah Palin: All of them!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRkWebP2Q0Y
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 01, 2008, 06:12:33 PM
A vast variety even. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 01, 2008, 06:14:12 PM
BTW, arguing with a McCain/Palin supporter about her ineptitude is pointless, as I've discovered over at PCF.  If they can't offer up anything meaningful to support her as a VP candidate, they'll just give you the "breath of fresh air" mantra.  So it's like they are perfectly content with electing Gomer Pyle as the next VP. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 01, 2008, 06:15:41 PM
She can't even name one, the dumb woman.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 01, 2008, 06:20:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 01, 2008, 06:14:12 PM
BTW, arguing with a McCain/Palin supporter about her ineptitude is pointless, as I've discovered over at PCF.  If they can't offer up anything meaningful to support her as a VP candidate, they'll just give you the "breath of fresh air" mantra.  So it's like they are perfectly content with electing Gomer Pyle as the next VP. 
There are actually people out there who are trying to defend her???  Why??  Even NRO has turned on her.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE=#more
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 01, 2008, 06:22:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 01, 2008, 06:20:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 01, 2008, 06:14:12 PM
BTW, arguing with a McCain/Palin supporter about her ineptitude is pointless, as I've discovered over at PCF.  If they can't offer up anything meaningful to support her as a VP candidate, they'll just give you the "breath of fresh air" mantra.  So it's like they are perfectly content with electing Gomer Pyle as the next VP. 
There are actually people out there who are trying to defend her???  Why??  Even NRO has turned on her.

Really?  K-Lo hasn't:

As soon as I saw it on CBS earlier (I trust most of you have better things to do with your time!), I knew the new conventional wisdom would be something like "she bans books and doesn't read." And sure enough. The e-mails are coming in. Obviously the governor of Alaska reads. And what it looked liked to me is the governor of Alaska decided she wasn't going to play along with Couric. Whatever she answered would be scrutinized for the next 24 hours for what she included and left off. So instead she let Katie badger her a little.

And now the ticket is in yet a better position to run against the media.

Who knew a McCain ticket would ever be in a position to do such a thing?

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmMzOGZiMDU3MDVjZmM4MzA2NzNmNTM4Y2ZlMTVkYjE=
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 01, 2008, 06:24:50 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 01, 2008, 06:20:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 01, 2008, 06:14:12 PM
BTW, arguing with a McCain/Palin supporter about her ineptitude is pointless, as I've discovered over at PCF.  If they can't offer up anything meaningful to support her as a VP candidate, they'll just give you the "breath of fresh air" mantra.  So it's like they are perfectly content with electing Gomer Pyle as the next VP. 
There are actually people out there who are trying to defend her???  Why??  Even NRO has turned on her.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE=#more

Yep, here are a couple of examples:

http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=112967 (http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=112967)
http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=112862 (http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=112862)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 01, 2008, 06:26:34 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 01, 2008, 06:22:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 01, 2008, 06:20:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 01, 2008, 06:14:12 PM
BTW, arguing with a McCain/Palin supporter about her ineptitude is pointless, as I've discovered over at PCF.  If they can't offer up anything meaningful to support her as a VP candidate, they'll just give you the "breath of fresh air" mantra.  So it's like they are perfectly content with electing Gomer Pyle as the next VP. 
There are actually people out there who are trying to defend her???  Why??  Even NRO has turned on her.

Really?  K-Lo hasn't:

As soon as I saw it on CBS earlier (I trust most of you have better things to do with your time!), I knew the new conventional wisdom would be something like "she bans books and doesn't read." And sure enough. The e-mails are coming in. Obviously the governor of Alaska reads. And what it looked liked to me is the governor of Alaska decided she wasn't going to play along with Couric. Whatever she answered would be scrutinized for the next 24 hours for what she included and left off. So instead she let Katie badger her a little.

And now the ticket is in yet a better position to run against the media.

Who knew a McCain ticket would ever be in a position to do such a thing?

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmMzOGZiMDU3MDVjZmM4MzA2NzNmNTM4Y2ZlMTVkYjE=
Yeah, but who listens to K-Lo anyways?

(http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/Pictures/Persons/1007581/1007581-185199-02.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 01, 2008, 06:34:24 PM
I'd like to say no-one, but she definitely wasn't made editor of NRO for her good looks or writing ability.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 01, 2008, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 01, 2008, 06:24:50 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 01, 2008, 06:20:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 01, 2008, 06:14:12 PM
BTW, arguing with a McCain/Palin supporter about her ineptitude is pointless, as I've discovered over at PCF.  If they can't offer up anything meaningful to support her as a VP candidate, they'll just give you the "breath of fresh air" mantra.  So it's like they are perfectly content with electing Gomer Pyle as the next VP. 
There are actually people out there who are trying to defend her???  Why??  Even NRO has turned on her.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE=#more

Yep, here are a couple of examples:

http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=112967 (http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=112967)
http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=112862 (http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=112862)
That looks more like deflection than defending.  I didn't read all of the second thread though.

Quote from: Cain on October 01, 2008, 06:34:24 PM
I'd like to say no-one, but she definitely wasn't made editor of NRO for her good looks or writing ability.
I don't want to imagine what kind of sexual favors she had to perform to get that job. It's giving me the heeby geebies.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 02, 2008, 09:40:17 PM
Not sure if this goes here, but my husband just sent this around.  He respects this guy's expertise vis a vis Afghanistan and Pakistan.  What he has to say about the McCain policies for that region is interesting, I think.

http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/10/01/mccain-afghanistan-pakistan-oped-cx_br_1002rubin.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on October 02, 2008, 10:58:38 PM
lol while waiting for the debate on msnbc someone actually got a McFAILin 2008 sign up for a good minute or two
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 03, 2008, 01:58:55 AM
Nice.  I wonder if they're from the internet.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on October 03, 2008, 02:00:28 AM
Quote from: Cain on October 01, 2008, 06:22:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 01, 2008, 06:20:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 01, 2008, 06:14:12 PM
BTW, arguing with a McCain/Palin supporter about her ineptitude is pointless, as I've discovered over at PCF.  If they can't offer up anything meaningful to support her as a VP candidate, they'll just give you the "breath of fresh air" mantra.  So it's like they are perfectly content with electing Gomer Pyle as the next VP. 
There are actually people out there who are trying to defend her???  Why??  Even NRO has turned on her.

Really?  K-Lo hasn't:

As soon as I saw it on CBS earlier (I trust most of you have better things to do with your time!), I knew the new conventional wisdom would be something like "she bans books and doesn't read." And sure enough. The e-mails are coming in. Obviously the governor of Alaska reads. And what it looked liked to me is the governor of Alaska decided she wasn't going to play along with Couric. Whatever she answered would be scrutinized for the next 24 hours for what she included and left off. So instead she let Katie badger her a little.

And now the ticket is in yet a better position to run against the media.

Who knew a McCain ticket would ever be in a position to do such a thing?

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmMzOGZiMDU3MDVjZmM4MzA2NzNmNTM4Y2ZlMTVkYjE=

National Review?

I don't even KNOW you anymore, man.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 03, 2008, 02:15:12 AM
NRO and LA Times are the only places I can read the hilarious writings of Jonah "Liberal Fascism" Goldberg.

(http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/6809/lolcatjonahgoldbergrw2.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on October 03, 2008, 02:55:42 AM
Quote from: Cain on October 03, 2008, 02:15:12 AM
NRO and LA Times are the only places I can read the hilarious writings of Jonah "Liberal Fascism" Goldberg.

(http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/6809/lolcatjonahgoldbergrw2.jpg)

Ah.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on October 03, 2008, 10:13:33 AM
redneck chain letter
QuoteWhen electing the next President,  "the only decision you have to make is who you want sitting in that seat in the White House when  - not if -  WHEN we get hit again and millions of America n lives are put at risk!"


This is from: "You ain't gonna like losing."
   President Bush did make a bad mistake in the war on terrorism.  But the mistake was not his decision to go to war in Iraq.  Bush's mistake came in his belief that this country is the same one his father fought for in WWII.    It is not.
  Back then, they had just come out of a vicious depression. The country was steeled by the hardship of that depression, but they still believed fervently in this country. They knew that the people had elected their leaders, so it was the  people's duty to back those leaders.


  Therefore, when the war broke out the people came together, rallied behind, and stuck with their leaders, whether they had voted for them or not or whether the war was going badly or not. And war was just as distasteful and the anguish just as great then as it is today. Often there were more casualties in one day in WWII than we have had in the entire Iraq war.  But that did not matter.  The people stuck with the President because it was their patriotic duty. Americans put aside their differences in WWII and worked together to win that war.

Everyone from every strata of society, from young to old pitched in. Small children pulled little wagons around to gather scrap metal for the war effort. Grade school students saved their pennies to buy stamps for war bonds to help   the effort.

Men who were too old or medically 4F lied about their age or condition trying their best to join the military.
Women doubled their work to keep things going at home.  Harsh rationing of everything from gasoline to soap, to butter was imposed, yet there was very  little complaining.

You never heard prominent people on the radio belittling the President.
Interestingly enough in those days there were no fat cat actors and entertainers who ran off to visit and fawn over dictators of hostile countries and complain  to them about our President. Instead, they made upbeat films and entertained our  troops to help the troops' morale.  And a bunch even enlisted.

And imagine this: Teachers in schools actually started the day off with a Pledge  of Allegiance, and with prayers for our country and our troops!

Back then, no newspaper would have dared point out certain weak spots in our cities where bombs could be set off to cause the maximum damage. No newspaper would have dared complain about what we were doing to catch spies.  A newspaper would have been laughed out of existence if it had complained that German or Japanese soldiers were being 'tortured' by being forced to wear women's underwear, or subjected to interrogation by a woman, or being scared by a dog or did not have air conditioning.

There were a lot of things different back then. We were not subjected to a constant bombardment of pornography, perversion and promiscuity in movies or on radio.  We did not have legions of crack heads, dope pushers and armed gangs roaming our streets.

No, President Bush did not make a mistake in his handling of terrorism. He made the mistake of believing that we still had the courage and fortitude of our fathers. He believed that this was still the country that our fathers fought so dearly to preserve.

It is not the same country. It is now a cross between Sodom and Gomorra and the land of Oz.  We did unite for a short while after 9/11, but our attitude changed when we found out that defending our country would require some sacrifices.

We are in great danger. The terrorists are fanatic Muslims.  They believe that it is okay, even their duty, to kill anyone who will not convert to Islam.  It has been estimated that about one third or over three hundred million Muslims are sympathetic to the terrorists cause. . . Hitler and Tojo combined did not have nearly that many potential recruits.  So... We either win it - or lose it - and you ain't gonna like losing.

America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall, or watching the movie stars.
(Remember Obama said in his book "Audacity of Hope", 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction'.....what better   place for the Muslins to control our country, than in the office of the President of USA. If you ever forwarded an e-mail, now's the time to do it!)
PLEASE PRAY FOR OUR MILITARY, AND ASK OUR GOD/LORD TO TAKE CARE OF THIS ELECTION!!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 03, 2008, 03:02:27 PM
Of course, in WWII many prominent Republicans actually conspired to stab the President in the back (the America First Committee, the German-American Bund, the Silver Shirts etc) and align themselves with Nazi Germany, so this is complete and utter rot.

Its actually really interesting, a couple of good books came out of that fun.  John Roy Carlson's Undercover: My Four Years in the Nazi Underworld of America is well worth reading.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 04, 2008, 09:52:27 PM
What I find funny is that the McCain campaign has been chiming on about how Obama doesn't have enough foreign policy experience blah blah cause "he's never even been over there" and what have you yet all their new new campaigning is trying to tie him to terrorists.

Obama... terrorists.

What? The shit just doesn't make any damn sense. Yet there are people out there dumb enough to fall for the shit.

Ug. I'm just sick of it all now.
The least they could do is try to be honest. Or at least twist the truth into your favor. But outright lying?

(unless he actually is tied to terrorists somehow, if so please tell me)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Golden Applesauce on October 05, 2008, 06:37:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on October 03, 2008, 03:02:27 PM
Of course, in WWII many prominent Republicans actually conspired to stab the President in the back (the America First Committee, the German-American Bund, the Silver Shirts etc) and align themselves with Nazi Germany, so this is complete and utter rot.

Its actually really interesting, a couple of good books came out of that fun.  John Roy Carlson's Undercover: My Four Years in the Nazi Underworld of America is well worth reading.

I'd always thought that that had more to do with America just having tons of German immigrants; didn't think it had anything to do with party.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2008, 01:34:25 PM
There was a lot of isolationist sentiment among the Republicans of the time, which gave a cover to the Fascist sympathizers, especially within the America First Committee, who after going underground planned to be the American Vichy government in the face of Nazi victory.  The AFC has a lot of apologists among the current paleoconservative set (see: Pat Buchanan for more).

Also, FDR was quite a power-sharer when it came to moderate Republicans, so many of those left out in the cold sought new audiences.  Pelley was English in origin, Father Coughlin was Canadian-Irish, as far as I know the only authentically German inspired effort was the German-American Bund and associated groups (the original American Nazi Party etc).  The most extreme anticommunists and most virulent American Nazis had a common foe in FDR and his "communistic" government, and in some cases that led to alliances of interest.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2008, 01:36:53 PM
Oh yeah!

(http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/322/2908127576f5e5cefc7evj7.jpg)

http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/scenes_from_a_blue_oasis_in_a_red_state/

QuoteSaw this in my neighborhood and had to take a picture of it.  The context of this is that my neighborhood is stuffed with the sort of people right wing radio instructs you to hate: Earnest college students, college professors, liberal yuppies with jobs in marketing and law, bohemians who own successful antique shops.  You know the like. It means that the overall tenor of the neighborhood, signage-wise, is "OBAMA! FUCK YEAH!" It's not subtle in any way.  I suspected, the second I saw this display, that the people responsible are trying to aggravate their neighbors. Considering that this house is in an area with heavy foot, car, and bicycle traffic and is right around the corner from the neighborhood hippie grocery store, I suspect mine is a good bet.

There's an equally big American flag that I didn't capture in the picture, so I apologize if this doesn't seem as fair and balanced as they perhaps intended the display to be.  When I first saw it, people were sitting on the porch, but I figured they'd get tired of sitting out there hoping to catch people walking by holding their noses, but apparently not, because when I got there later, they were still sitting out there eating meringue.  Unable to just snap and run, I decided to engage, and be friendly so as not to frighten them and lose access to the photo op.  On went the redneck switch.  "Hi, y'all!  Lovely day!  Mind if I take a picture of this display you got here?"

Permission was granted and I was asked who I was voting for.  I demurred, as people did in my childhood but don't much anymore.  I asked the old man who was doing all of the talking who he was voting for.

"Palin!" he said.  I thought I misheard him.

"Did you say McCain?"

"No!  Palin!  She's got more sense than the lot of them!"

I thanked him and hopped on my bike and rode off.

Hope this makes up for a lack of a post this morning.  We had to film some video for RH Reality Check, and I didn't have time.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on October 05, 2008, 02:10:24 PM
erm...I'm assuming that your post is a quote from another site?

or did you recently move across the pond?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2008, 02:11:01 PM
Argh, yes.

Left the quote tags off while playing with the image hosting.  Let me fix that.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on October 05, 2008, 04:55:51 PM
:lulz:

my first thought, upon reading that before having had any coffee, was "goddamn, McCain and Palin are even dumber than I thought if they've abandoned Michigan in favor of the midlands".
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2008, 05:00:50 PM
Strangely enough, they have in a way.  Palin is very popular with the "Continuity IDS" wing of the Tory party, for no particular reason I can discern.  It could be the inexperience, or the bone-headed stupidity, or the fact she's a political loser, all three traits that particular group seem to enjoy in a political candidate.

Evidence: http://conservativehome.blogs.com/

Ctrl F and "Palin" for teh Fiery Fox users.  Check back to when she first appeared on the McCain ticket as well.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 05, 2008, 08:40:35 PM
What's the deal with McCain supporters not knowing how to spell? Is spelling words properly suddenly a 'liebral socialest plot two poisen r childern's minds'???
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on October 05, 2008, 09:03:21 PM
prawbublee.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2008, 09:05:46 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 05, 2008, 08:40:35 PM
What's the deal with McCain supporters not knowing how to spell? Is spelling words properly suddenly a 'liebral socialest plot two poisen r childern's minds'???

elitist
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on October 05, 2008, 09:31:01 PM
I think you mean "aleetist".
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 06, 2008, 05:26:57 AM
Obama is going to completely and utterly destroy democracy as we know it!!!!

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/10/04/a-few-thoughts.php

Quote3. I am reading emails from readers and fellow bloggers who are worried that this might be our last free election if Obama is elected. It sounds a little extreme and over the top, but when I read their reasons for feeling that way it makes too much sense. Between the rampant voter fraud being perpetrated by liberals at ACORN and elsewhere across the country, the Democrats' refusal to even pass a law to require people show ID to vote, and the liberal media's absolute non-interest in doing much to inform the public about the situation, I am beginning to see the reason for their concern. If Dems get their way and are able to effectively shut down talk radio and other conservative outlets by reviving the Fairness Doctrine, our free speech will be stifled so the Obamagovernment will be able to do just about anything they want to control our elections and the public might not even know about it. Doubt it will happen? With Obama in the White House, the Dems controlling Cnogress and Obama's newly shaped Supreme Court seated, exactly what would there be to stop it? The leftwing media? I hate to sound like an alarmist, but there is as much evidence to point to such an outcome as there is that my SUV is going to cause the extinction of the polar bear.
I resisted the temptation to correct any of the spelling errors.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 06, 2008, 01:25:38 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on October 05, 2008, 09:31:01 PM
I think you mean "aleetist".

Stop correcting my spelling you uhleetist!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 06, 2008, 01:32:06 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 06, 2008, 05:26:57 AM
Obama is going to completely and utterly destroy democracy as we know it!!!!

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/10/04/a-few-thoughts.php

Quote3. I am reading emails from readers and fellow bloggers who are worried that this might be our last free election if Obama is elected. It sounds a little extreme and over the top, but when I read their reasons for feeling that way it makes too much sense. Between the rampant voter fraud being perpetrated by liberals at ACORN and elsewhere across the country, the Democrats' refusal to even pass a law to require people show ID to vote, and the liberal media's absolute non-interest in doing much to inform the public about the situation, I am beginning to see the reason for their concern. If Dems get their way and are able to effectively shut down talk radio and other conservative outlets by reviving the Fairness Doctrine, our free speech will be stifled so the Obamagovernment will be able to do just about anything they want to control our elections and the public might not even know about it. Doubt it will happen? With Obama in the White House, the Dems controlling Cnogress and Obama's newly shaped Supreme Court seated, exactly what would there be to stop it? The leftwing media? I hate to sound like an alarmist, but there is as much evidence to point to such an outcome as there is that my SUV is going to cause the extinction of the polar bear.
I resisted the temptation to correct any of the spelling errors.

What a bunch of whining crybabies.

This is about the reintroduction of the fairness doctrine on talk radio.

Now, you can make some arguments for or against the doctrine on various grounds, but it is constitutionally sanctioned and is meant to make sure that all sides of an issue are presented.  In other words, blowhards like Savage and Limbaugh will actually get challenged, perhaps even not just by milquetoasts like Colmes or Joe Klein.

OH TEH NOES, PEOPLE WILL CHALLENGE MY MONOLOGUES!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 06, 2008, 04:55:57 PM
Famous Person officially endorses Palin:

http://www.theagitator.com/2008/10/04/you-make-the-call/
(http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/palin%20ad.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kurt Christ on October 07, 2008, 01:26:16 AM
In an intersting example of my own reality tunnel-vision, I had to read that like 3 times before I didn't see it as "She was killed."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 07, 2008, 02:34:47 AM
Quote from: Father Kurt Christ on October 07, 2008, 01:26:16 AM
In an intersting example of my own reality tunnel-vision, I had to read that like 3 times before I didn't see it as "She was killed."

Wishful thinking.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on October 07, 2008, 10:30:37 AM
Quote from: Father Kurt Christ on October 07, 2008, 01:26:16 AM
In an intersting example of my own reality tunnel-vision, I had to read that like 3 times before I didn't see it as "She was killed."

I dunno, the debate would have been pretty awesome if she had literally murdered Biden in front of the cameras.

That's the image in my head.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on October 07, 2008, 10:33:54 AM
Quote from: Payne on October 07, 2008, 10:30:37 AM
Quote from: Father Kurt Christ on October 07, 2008, 01:26:16 AM
In an intersting example of my own reality tunnel-vision, I had to read that like 3 times before I didn't see it as "She was killed."

I dunno, the debate would have been pretty awesome if she had literally murdered Biden in front of the cameras.

That's the image in my head.


:lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on October 07, 2008, 12:19:12 PM
who is this famous person she killed?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 07, 2008, 01:39:00 PM
Well, she killed John McCain's campaign.  does that count? 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 07, 2008, 04:40:27 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 07, 2008, 01:39:00 PM
Well, she killed John McCain's campaign.  does that count? 

:lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 07, 2008, 09:29:40 PM
Breaking: Bill Ayers ghost-wrote one of Obama's books (allegedly)!

http://cashill.com/natl_general/did_bill_ayers_write_1.htm

He's a world net daily writer, by the way.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 08, 2008, 03:40:41 PM
http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2008/10/08/the_acornobama_voter_registration_thug_thizzle?page=full&comments=true

Poor black people are now taking away YOUR right to vote!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Chairman Risus on October 08, 2008, 06:35:38 PM
 :x
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on October 08, 2008, 07:35:40 PM
yeah, i couldn't make  it all the way through that.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 08, 2008, 11:05:31 PM
Someone let the cat out of the bag:

http://townhall.com/columnists/KathleenParker/2008/10/08/put_the_gloves_back_on?page=full&comments=true

Pretty obvious, but check out the hate in the comments.  Also, she cheerleaded some of this on, which is what really makes it interesting.

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 08, 2008, 11:38:02 PM
QuoteDemocrats and other critics distracted by her winks may have missed the message, but Palin's target audience heard it loud and clear. She is like the high-pitched whistle only dogs can hear. While Democrats heard non-answers, superfluous segues and cartoon words -- shout-out, I'll betcha, doggone, extra credit -- Republicans heard God, patriotism, courage, victory.

It's called code, and Republicans are fluent.

It isn't just the "maverick" word, which we now may consign to the Cliche Crematorium. Sprinkled throughout Palin's remarks were phrases that set the free associative mind in motion...

A television audience won't remember facts -- and most won't race to FactCheck.org -- but they'll remember impressions. Palin successfully conveyed to those she was targeting that she is a Ronald Reagan-ish outsider who puts God and country first. And The Other is just like that elitist, flip-flopping John Kerry.

That's a plateful of imagery and a buffet of touchstones familiar to those who distrust "elitists" and who recognize in Palin a kindred regularness.

OH SHI-  She just gave away the whole Karl Rove playbook there, didn't she?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 09, 2008, 06:29:43 PM
McCain messes up, calls everyone "My fellow prisoners":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYFm5kK4f1k
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 09, 2008, 06:30:45 PM
Maybe McCain is just a fan of the BIP?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 09, 2008, 09:43:22 PM
Uh oh....

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/10/09/alaskan-independence.html

    Vogler's greatest moment of glory was to be his 1993 appearance before the United Nations to denounce United States "tyranny" before the entire world and to demand Alaska's freedom. The Alaska secessionist had persuaded the government of Iran to sponsor his anti-American harangue.

    That's right ... Iran. The Islamic dictatorship. The taker of American hostages. The rogue nation that McCain and Palin have excoriated Obama for suggesting we diplomatically engage. That Iran.

The following year, Todd and Sarah Palin attended the AIP convention, and Todd Palin joined the party shortly thereafter.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 09, 2008, 11:07:46 PM
 :lulz:  Well, this is about to get interesting.  Think it will bump the Williams Ayers story? Or at least tone it down?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 10, 2008, 02:33:28 AM
Has this already made the Wingnut thread?

http://www.barackbook.com/

Alas, GOP, you crack me the fuck up!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 10, 2008, 05:03:08 AM
Wooow.  They've completely lost their minds.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on October 10, 2008, 05:11:06 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/09/spying.on.americans/index.html

:lulz:  :lulz:  :lulz:

SUPOART TEH TROOPZ!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 10, 2008, 05:16:19 AM
Quote from: Felix on October 10, 2008, 05:03:08 AM
Wooow.  They've completely lost their minds.
Smells like desperation.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 10, 2008, 09:05:30 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 10, 2008, 05:16:19 AM
Quote from: Felix on October 10, 2008, 05:03:08 AM
Wooow.  They've completely lost their minds.
Smells like desperation.

It's frankly amazing how many people care more about winning the election than having a good candidate get the presidency.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 10, 2008, 01:02:04 PM
Time for some credible news, at last

http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/election-08/obatma/

QuoteAt a shocking press conference this morning, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama announced that he has a half-man half-bat half-brother.

The boyish looking half brother of undetermined age had been living in a cave in the Karura Forest outside Nairobi, until he was recently discovered by Dr. Robert Ndesango of Kenyatta University.  Dr. Ndesango, who had been researching in the cave, was at first startled by the unusual boy, who quickly introduced himself as Obatma.   Soon enough, the boy was showing him his part of the cave and pictures he'd drawn on the walls.

Tests indicate that the boy mutant is indeed Barack Obama's younger half brother; the two share a father but have different mothers.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 10, 2008, 01:41:50 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 10, 2008, 05:11:06 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/09/spying.on.americans/index.html

:lulz:  :lulz:  :lulz:

SUPOART TEH TROOPZ!

"HOLY CRAP, THEY'RE COMING!!!"

"Huh, the terrorists?"

"Well no, but you gotta hear this, it's hawt!"

Of course, everyone's so worried about some idiot denture-wearing ex-radical that this is getting buried in the news. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Idem on October 10, 2008, 02:22:57 PM
http://www.cracked.com/blog/an-interview-with-mccain-and-obama-in-the-year-2012/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 10, 2008, 03:24:51 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 10, 2008, 01:02:04 PM
Time for some credible news, at last

http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/election-08/obatma/

QuoteAt a shocking press conference this morning, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama announced that he has a half-man half-bat half-brother.

The boyish looking half brother of undetermined age had been living in a cave in the Karura Forest outside Nairobi, until he was recently discovered by Dr. Robert Ndesango of Kenyatta University.  Dr. Ndesango, who had been researching in the cave, was at first startled by the unusual boy, who quickly introduced himself as Obatma.   Soon enough, the boy was showing him his part of the cave and pictures he'd drawn on the walls.

Tests indicate that the boy mutant is indeed Barack Obama's younger half brother; the two share a father but have different mothers.

FUCK YEAH WEEKLY WORLD NEWS!


Also, this just in from the Committee to elect Michael Palin mailing list:

Quote
According to the Daily Telegraph, "Republicans
have said they expect Democrat party activists to
be behind the video as part of a 'dirty tricks'
campaign."

Which is 100% accurate, if you simply replace the
words "Democrat party activists" with the words
"two middle-aged (though charmingly boyish) Monty
Python geeks from L.A. who aren't particularly
political but may just possibly have a bit too
much time on their hands."

:lulz: The GOP thinks the Michael Palin campaign is a Democratic ploy!  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 10, 2008, 03:31:18 PM
Hey, The First Dude is coming to my State to campaign for the McCain/Palin ticket.  Except he's going all the way the fuck up North so it's a bit out of my way.  A little Maine 101 for those you who might not know.  Maine is one of two states (the other being Nebraska) where our Electoral Votes are actually split.  They go by voting district.  We only have 4 votes altogether and they are split 3/1.  Overall, Maine leans Blue, but the part of the state that has the 1 electoral vote is more Purple, so it looks like they are making a strong play to pick off that 1 electoral vote.  I don't think they'll actually win it, but it looks like they're trying really hard to win whatever they can. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 10, 2008, 03:43:02 PM
Is he going hunting?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 10, 2008, 03:46:12 PM
Quote from: LMNO on October 10, 2008, 03:43:02 PM
Is he going hunting?

Heh, well there are lots of Moose up there, but I'm not sure if the season is open yet.  And the enforcement in this State for hunting out of season is pretty fierce.  Unfortunately for him, no caribou.  From what I've seen of him though, he'll probably fit right in up there.  Lots of rednecks in those parts. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 10, 2008, 03:55:09 PM
Voting FOR Obama now means that you are racist:

http://washingtonindependent.com/10456/hate-mail-in-communist-county

(http://www.groveproject.org/wp-content/uploads/clarendon.jpg)

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 10, 2008, 03:56:28 PM
Thats a beautiful piece of concern trolling, right there.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 10, 2008, 04:37:19 PM
Are you seriously telling me Obama's black?  Why wasn't I informed earlier? :x
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 11, 2008, 03:06:00 AM
McCain:  Barack Obama is a decent man (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/mccain-confront.html)

Palin:  These rats ain't gonna fuck themselves! (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h21ZbzgPbTVRftcJPT5vkHkonY5QD93NU5OO0)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 11, 2008, 03:15:43 AM
Well, in all fairness, that's what a Veep is SUPPOSED to do:  be the attack dog while the prezitator candidate takes "the high road."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 11, 2008, 11:08:53 AM
There is no high road in the McCain - Palin campaign.

Its just an ever decreasing series of lows.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 11, 2008, 04:27:21 PM
High levels of Wingnuts detected!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjxzmaXAg9E
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 11, 2008, 04:35:51 PM
Oh shit, I saw this on The Poor Man Institute.

Part 2 is just as good.  Also, bloodlines is now a meme.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 11, 2008, 04:39:35 PM
I'm waiting for the crowd to start screaming "darksided!" until they collapse.

I will not be satisfied until this happens at a Palin speech.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 11, 2008, 04:44:19 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 11, 2008, 04:35:51 PM
Oh shit, I saw this on The Poor Man Institute.

Part 2 is just as good.  Also, bloodlines is now a meme.
I just saw part 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJghQMq49dw).  Dear god, they are singing Lee Greenwood!!!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on October 11, 2008, 04:47:08 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 11, 2008, 04:44:19 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 11, 2008, 04:35:51 PM
Oh shit, I saw this on The Poor Man Institute.

Part 2 is just as good.  Also, bloodlines is now a meme.
I just saw part 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJghQMq49dw).  Dear god, they are singing Lee Greenwood!!!

FUCKING WIN!   :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 11, 2008, 07:02:30 PM
I liked this election at first.
Now I'm just disgusted.

Go ahead McCain, keep shitting your hate and calling him a terrorist.
until someone assassinates him.

won't be so funny then, will it?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 11, 2008, 07:34:38 PM
Quote from: Squiddy on October 11, 2008, 07:02:30 PM
won't be so funny then, will it?

What?  The punchline is the best part.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on October 11, 2008, 08:24:23 PM
Quote from: Squiddy on October 11, 2008, 07:02:30 PM
I liked this election at first.
Now I'm just disgusted.

Go ahead McCain, keep shitting your hate and calling him a terrorist.
until someone assassinates him.

won't be so funny then, will it?

This ain't gonna be your century.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 11, 2008, 09:48:49 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 11, 2008, 08:24:23 PM
Quote from: Squiddy on October 11, 2008, 07:02:30 PM
I liked this election at first.
Now I'm just disgusted.

Go ahead McCain, keep shitting your hate and calling him a terrorist.
until someone assassinates him.

won't be so funny then, will it?

This ain't gonna be your century.

no it isn't.
as it stands i don't even know who i work for anymore.
WachoFargovia??
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on October 11, 2008, 10:03:05 PM
Lehman Brothers.

You're fucked.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 12, 2008, 01:52:29 AM
awedamn.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 12, 2008, 10:21:05 AM
Pro-tip: work for any bank whose collapse would impact very badly on Goldman-Sachs.

Paulson is a G-Sachs man through and through, and will not let it be hurt by the current financial crisis (which is why he would not let AIG collapse, but let Lehman brothers sink without a trace).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 12, 2008, 04:20:09 PM
YES, ITS THE MOTHERFUCKING 90S ALL OVER AGAIN!

Via Sadly, No:

This rush to buy guns, whether real or not, has become a conservative shibboleth lately, stemming from the avidly held prospect that an Obama administration would outlaw gun ownership, and the even more eagerly dreaded couch-time fantasy of a socioeconomic catastrophe that calls for the stockpiling of canned and dehydrated food and ammunition, the appointment of a 'bug-out vehicle' (in the imagined form, perhaps, of a suburban minivan with a jerry-built roof turret and spikes welded to the wheel hubs), and the merciless shooting of revenooers, bushy-haired and/or dusky-hued strangers, strangers in general except for attractive young women in distress, stray dogs and other previously non-huntable wildlife, and actual or potential thieves of canned and dehydrated food and ammunition.

The ongoing stock market crash has given a keen edge to this perennial daydream, this powerful intersection of the desires of the cod-Libertarian science-fiction fan and those of the cod-populist rural crank. When Confederate Yankee drops the name "Barack" at the end of his tale, it's meant to invoke something that he, himself might not be able to explain in plain language, but that's nevertheless pretty easy to understand for anyone who's experienced the antics of the Confederate-Yankocracy since the mixed blessing of the Internet enabled them in media other than the micro-scrawled journal and the talk radio call-in line.

It signifies a return to the wingnut ethos of the Clinton years, before the conspiratorial, wackadoo right wing fell in love with George W. Bush, and thus with government power and weird neo-royalist notions of the Executive Branch. It's a return to the "jackbooted government thugs" iconography of the '90s, in which incidents such as Ruby Ridge and Waco were seen as defining a historical fault line between an illegitimate, runaway Federalism and a perpetually threatened organic America — the often agrarian, invariably pre-capitalist order imagined and extolled throughout the early 20th Century by characters from William Jennings Bryan to Father Coughlin, and later as even sillier farce by conservatives from Pat Buchanan, to G. Gordon Liddy, to Rod Dreher. Armed militias, or at least groups of yo-yos with guns, sprang up to oppose a hallucinatory, originally Birch-concocted trend toward world government and to defend the sanctity of the Constitution — whose feckless shredding they would later, as we know, cheer, as soon as a spite-lofted pseudoconservative administration again controlled the White House.

In brief and to sum up, an Obama presidency will yield us a bounty of delicious 180-degree reversals, hanging contradictions, forehead-smacking discontinuities, and flaming self-pwnages from our wingnut pals, as their entire political edifice turns heliotropically to face the warming light of the new Hated Thing. Their doings of the past eight years will seem, to them although not to ourselves, like fragments from a dream. They will charge the George W. Bush presidency with a Reaganlike aura of indistinct, dumb uplift and nonspecific moral rectitude. And they will struggle to recapture those great days of America, always so intrinsic but so sadly vanished, held always and each time just out of their grasp.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on October 12, 2008, 04:40:36 PM
Someone has been brushing with the preemptive troofpaste again.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 12, 2008, 04:43:44 PM
The next decade is going to be even more fun than the last!!!  :tgrr:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 12, 2008, 09:27:59 PM
Wait.. a Wingnut actually making sense and turning against the Republicans???  :eek:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/opinion/10brooks.html?_r=3&em&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
QuoteBut over the past few decades, the Republican Party has driven away people who live in cities, in highly educated regions and on the coasts. This expulsion has had many causes. But the big one is this: Republican political tacticians decided to mobilize their coalition with a form of social class warfare. Democrats kept nominating coastal pointy-heads like Michael Dukakis so Republicans attacked coastal pointy-heads.

Over the past 15 years, the same argument has been heard from a thousand politicians and a hundred television and talk-radio jocks. The nation is divided between the wholesome Joe Sixpacks in the heartland and the oversophisticated, overeducated, oversecularized denizens of the coasts.

What had been a disdain for liberal intellectuals slipped into a disdain for the educated class as a whole. The liberals had coastal condescension, so the conservatives developed their own anti-elitism, with mirror-image categories and mirror-image resentments, but with the same corrosive effect...

The political effects of this trend have been obvious. Republicans have alienated the highly educated regions — Silicon Valley, northern Virginia, the suburbs outside of New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and Raleigh-Durham. The West Coast and the Northeast are mostly gone.

The Republicans have alienated whole professions. Lawyers now donate to the Democratic Party over the Republican Party at 4-to-1 rates. With doctors, it's 2-to-1. With tech executives, it's 5-to-1. With investment bankers, it's 2-to-1. It took talent for Republicans to lose the banking community...

[Sarah Palin] is another step in the Republican change of personality. Once conservatives admired Churchill and Lincoln above all — men from wildly different backgrounds who prepared for leadership through constant reading, historical understanding and sophisticated thinking. Now those attributes bow down before the common touch.

And so, politically, the G.O.P. is squeezed at both ends. The party is losing the working class by sins of omission — because it has not developed policies to address economic anxiety. It has lost the educated class by sins of commission — by telling members of that class to go away. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 12, 2008, 09:38:18 PM
Nah, its just Brooks pretending to be even-handed, as he does every so often.  He'll go off the deep end again in a moment, or engage in moral equivalency or something.

Besides, what he is doing here is a modern day version of the aristocrats calling for intellectuals to defend the Ancien Regime in France, once the revolution was over.  "Write essays praising absolute monarchy, and I shall give you this lump sum of cash as a prize".
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on October 13, 2008, 01:50:55 AM
(http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/2008/10/custom_1223838327176_racistbf5.png)


:x
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 13, 2008, 02:24:08 AM
Quote from: trillian on October 13, 2008, 01:50:55 AM
(http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/2008/10/custom_1223838327176_racistbf5.png)


:x
I'm sold, Obama '08
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 13, 2008, 02:30:45 AM
This sign represents a fundamental fundamentality of this election's fundamentalness.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kurt Christ on October 13, 2008, 02:32:44 AM
Quote from: trillian on October 13, 2008, 01:50:55 AM
(http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/2008/10/custom_1223838327176_racistbf5.png)


:x
Y'know...it's mostly Sikhs that wear turbans, rarely Muslims.
Obama is now officially a crypto-Sikh.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on October 13, 2008, 03:32:13 AM
I love how "hussein" is in quotes... like it's some sort of secret muslim nickname or something
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 13, 2008, 04:26:25 AM
that's disgusting.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on October 13, 2008, 09:30:29 AM
(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/OBAMAturban.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 13, 2008, 01:28:59 PM
I don't know if it's just my area, but the Obama freaks I know are also hardcore gun-toters who are stocking up on ammo in case Obama loses.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on October 13, 2008, 01:33:33 PM
If Obama loses, it's gonna make LA '92 look like the fucking Hamptons.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 13, 2008, 01:38:37 PM
If Obama loses and the polls are like they are now, it wont be pretty.

Then again, if McCain loses, it wont be pretty either.  Probably not as bad immediately, but over a period of time...

In short, whoever wins, it wont be pretty.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 13, 2008, 02:11:49 PM
If Nader wins.... :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 13, 2008, 05:21:55 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 13, 2008, 02:11:49 PM
If Nader wins.... :lulz:

Wait, who's the Socialist candidate again? Brian Moore. 

We also have a Boston Tea Party candidate, Charles Jay. http://www.charlesjay2008.com/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 13, 2008, 11:47:23 PM
Sarah Palin is the future of the GOP:

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Election2008/Default.aspx?id=280186

QuoteDr. Charles W. Dunn, dean of the Robertson School of Government at Regent University, believes that even if Obama wins, Americans should give John McCain credit for picking Sarah Palin as his running mate.

"She is the heir apparent to conservative leadership. She is the heir apparent to having the mantle of Ronald Reagan bestowed upon her. She is the heir apparent to becoming the Margaret Thatcher of America," Dunn contends. "If she does not stub her toe along the way, she has a very bright future."

Dunn believes the first-term Alaska governor can bypass both Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee to become the future standard-bearer of the Republican Party.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 13, 2008, 11:57:59 PM
Comparing her to Maggie Thatcher? Christ.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 12:04:43 AM
Called her that over here as well.

http://episkoposcain.wordpress.com/2008/09/07/i-wonder-if-gaunt-had-to-get-some-tissue-paper-after-writing-this-article/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on October 14, 2008, 12:13:01 AM
If they're comparing her to Margaret Thatcher in 1988, there's no way.

If they're comparing her to Margaret Thatcher in 2008, they're spot on.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 12:24:20 AM
Thatcher, for all her ludicrous political ideas, was a pretty canny political operator, and sharp as hell.  I don't like her, but I can respect that she managed to fight her way to the top of a male dominated party, prevailing against the political opinion of the party at the time, and held onto power until the moment her rule became totally untenable.

Palin is a joke, by contrast.  She was purposefully plucked from obscurity and made her entire way through the party by leeching off the gratitude of those in power, and has never had to face down anyone like Thatcher's cabinet (who, despite being nicknamed "the wets", were the biggest pack of back-knifing bastards in British history).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on October 14, 2008, 03:37:58 AM
like I said...no comparison to Thatcher '88.

Thatcher '08 suffers from dementia and shouldn't be allowed outside. They're peas in a pod, her and Palin.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:53:35 AM
Fortunately, I haven't seen Thatcher recently, since unlike Palin she has shunned all media contact in the past few years.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 10:12:29 AM
Obama had an "underage affair" with a gay pedophile, apparently.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=12325

As Highclearing points out:

In the course of considering Peak Wingnut Theory, John Cole discovers Erick Erickson of Red State staying classy by booming a National Enquirer story about the possibility that, as Erickson puts it, "Barack Obama had an underage, gay affair with a pedophile." That's a pretty interesting way to describe what may have happened between the two. Obama met Frank Marshall Davis when Obama was ten years old. When people discuss (possible) sexual contact between ten-year-old boys who are not their political enemies and grown men, they usually refer to the "underage gay affairs" as sexual abuse. They also recognize that adults who have been abused may or may not wish to tell the whole world the details, and they respect it. Admittedly, most people are not members of the NAMBLA wing of the Republican Party, or, failing that, curdled into pure meanness. Maybe Erickson just holds with the more sweeping theories about the cultural construction of the age of consent. Whatever the reason, he's sure that that little vixen, ten-year-old Barry Obama, was asking for it man.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 14, 2008, 01:24:38 PM
What the fuck?


What is wrong with people?


Isn't it obvious that the 10-year-old Obama raped that guy?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 14, 2008, 02:02:32 PM
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/straw_man_arguments_and_the_right_wing_hatred_meme/

Interesting, quote/unquote, turn of events there.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 14, 2008, 02:06:15 PM
Quote from: LMNO on October 14, 2008, 01:24:38 PM
What the fuck?


What is wrong with people?


Isn't it obvious that the 10-year-old Obama raped that guy?
But he's only half black.  What's halfway raping?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 14, 2008, 04:32:36 PM
Obama's Chicago mob problems
http://hillbuzz.wordpress.com/2008/10/10/urgent-big-story-about-to-break-we-are-one-step-closer-to-rezko-giving-obama-up-to-federal-prosecutors/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Eve on October 14, 2008, 04:37:58 PM
Quote from: Vene on October 14, 2008, 02:06:15 PM
Quote from: LMNO on October 14, 2008, 01:24:38 PM
What the fuck?


What is wrong with people?


Isn't it obvious that the 10-year-old Obama raped that guy?
But he's only half black.  What's halfway raping?

non-consensual touching?

-Eve
is never sure how to feel about the word 'sensual' being within 'non-consensual'
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 04:39:13 PM
More on Obama and his gaylord butt buddy poet pal who is gay and into the homo sex.

http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/275493.php
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on October 14, 2008, 05:04:03 PM
why was this unstickied?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 05:12:56 PM
I felt it managed to keep itself at the top regardless of stickiness, and since every day brings new hilarity, it needeth not teh stick.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 06:12:11 PM
Obama is now not gay at all, but the next Bill Clinton.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1076695/Obama-hit-affair-smears-following-claims-attractive-aide-banned-wife.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mangrove on October 14, 2008, 06:29:32 PM
Cain, I think you need to stop using smear tactics and look at the real issues:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1076698/Lippygate-US-election-furore-Palin-critics-say-tattooed-lip-liner.html



(turns out that there was, and I quote a 'furore')
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 06:33:08 PM
If Arianna Huffington were a TRUE freethinker, she'd be investigating this Illuminati Org ACORN Chart instead of wasting time on such trivial issues:

(http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/8350/acorn20networpx7mediumgs8.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mangrove on October 14, 2008, 06:35:59 PM
Damnit! But what if it turns out that Palin's lippy isn't real!?

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 06:37:38 PM
Clearly it will be due to the machinations of the radical Left and their Illuminati Weatherman agents, doing it to Palin in her sleep.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 14, 2008, 06:39:14 PM
Dude, if she got a facial tattoo, doesn't that make her more appealing to the Body Modification voting bloc?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mangrove on October 14, 2008, 06:41:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 06:37:38 PM
Clearly it will be due to the machinations of the radical Left and their Illuminati Weatherman agents, doing it to Palin in her sleep.


:lmnuendo:


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 14, 2008, 06:42:16 PM
Evidently neither Obama nor Palin have ever done anything in their entire lives that is newsworthy.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 14, 2008, 06:43:31 PM
But,  honestly, what is up with Palin's ugly, ugly glasses?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 06:43:56 PM
Or Arianna Huffington is reverting to her socialite gossip roots.

Along with the rest of the media.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 14, 2008, 06:44:15 PM
She is a woman so it is funny to ironically criticize her appearance.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 14, 2008, 06:44:37 PM
Quote from: Nigel on October 14, 2008, 06:43:31 PM
But,  honestly, what is up with Palin's ugly, ugly glasses?

Indeed, it's clearly an issue that requires more speculation.  
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 06:45:35 PM
Quote from: Nigel on October 14, 2008, 06:44:15 PM
She is a woman so it is funny to ironically criticize her appearance.

I just hate her for inflicting the HuffPo on the internet.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 14, 2008, 06:46:01 PM
The Conservatives are up in arms over this ACORN group--I watched Maxine Waters pound the token Conservative fuck on Bill Maher's show over this subject on Friday night.  Interesting how they (the Conservatards) will defend their pet groups to the death, but once a Liberal PAC comes in, holy hell it's Shitstorm City.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mangrove on October 14, 2008, 06:46:41 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 06:44:37 PM
Quote from: Nigel on October 14, 2008, 06:43:31 PM
But,  honestly, what is up with Palin's ugly, ugly glasses?

Indeed, it's clearly an issue that requires more speculation.  

She's feeling ground down by all the public scrutiny.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 14, 2008, 06:47:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 06:45:35 PM
Quote from: Nigel on October 14, 2008, 06:44:15 PM
She is a woman so it is funny to ironically criticize her appearance.

I just hate her for inflicting the HuffPo on the internet.

It's not just the internet, it's the cable news media too.  MSNBC frequently has people from HuffPo on as commentators.  I mean, if they're going to put up some internet lefties couldn't they at least go for the intellectuals over at Slate.  
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 14, 2008, 06:48:14 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 06:47:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 06:45:35 PM
Quote from: Nigel on October 14, 2008, 06:44:15 PM
She is a woman so it is funny to ironically criticize her appearance.

I just hate her for inflicting the HuffPo on the internet.

It's not just the internet, it's the cable news media too.  MSNBC frequently has people from HuffPo on as commentators.  I mean, if they're going to put up some internet lefties couldn't they at least go for the intellectuals over at Slate.  

Wooord.  Although--I think the average age of the Slate-writers might be around 23.  :lol:  I think Huffington (besides her Hollywood ties) gets clout mostly because she's been around since the 90's.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 14, 2008, 07:04:56 PM
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/its-not-an-obama-flag-its-ohios-state-flag/ (http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/its-not-an-obama-flag-its-ohios-state-flag/)

*blink*

*blink*

horrormirth
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 14, 2008, 07:06:47 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on October 14, 2008, 07:04:56 PM
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/its-not-an-obama-flag-its-ohios-state-flag/ (http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/its-not-an-obama-flag-its-ohios-state-flag/)

*blink*

*blink*

horrormirth

Oh for fuck's sake! 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 14, 2008, 07:09:26 PM
:lulz:  The stupidity of the Far Reich crack me up to no end.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 07:31:56 PM
How the lost election will be spun (via Democratic Strategist):


QuoteComing after an intensely fought election campaign with a compelling — indeed mediagenic, rock- star cultural conservative like Sarah Palin on the Republican ticket, a strong Obama victory would imply:

That most Americans don't actually share cultural conservative's vision of themselves as "the real America," opposed by only a minority of educated elites.That most Americans don't share the view that Obama and Democrats are essentially un-American and unpatriotic.

That most Americans do, in fact, believe that it was eight years of Republican pro-free market policies that created the current economic crisis.

This, conservatives simply cannot accept. As a result, in the last few days, we have seen the beginnings of the new conservative narrative start to emerge from Steve Schmidt's Rovian media operation within the McCain campaign. The key elements of this new narrative are as follows:

1. That Barack Obama is not only actually a secret radical/terrorist sympathizer but that there has been a vast and concerted conspiracy by "the mainstream media filter" to hide this truth from voters.

2. That leading Dems including Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank and Harry Reed are the primary culprits in the current financial crisis

3. That primarily Black "goons and hooligans" are going to steal the election.

Each of these new tropes has been launched by one or more of the major McCain campaign ads in the last few days and each is widely repeated and reinforced by extensive viral e-mail campaigns.

When McCain finally felt obligated to speak up and disagree with these distortions last Friday he was roundly booed by his own supporters – and it will only get worse after the election. If McCain does not rigidly stick to the new conservative script that Steve Schmidt has handed him to read and he loses the election, the conservatives – including Sarah – "et tu, Brutus" - Palin - will turn on him like wild hyenas.

If you think Democrats have been mean to McCain this year, just wait until you hear the conservatives rip him apart after the election. They will call him a "weakling," "a bumbling fool" and a "senile, doddering old man who let an easy victory escape him." "After all," they will add knowingly, "he was never really a true conservative to start with." This "the loss was all McCain's fault" rationalization will actually provide the fourth and final element of the new conservative narrative.

This may seem cruel, but conservatives really have little choice except to explain the election in this way because a key part of their world view is an unrelenting insistence that politics is a simple morality play of good vs. evil — with themselves invariably in the heroes' role. In this storyline Conservatives are always basically right and always essentially pure – they do not make fundamental mistakes or display major moral and ethical failings (if an individual conservative does any of these things, it simply proves that he or she was not actually a "real" conservative to begin with).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 14, 2008, 07:35:55 PM
Fucking pack of wolves.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 14, 2008, 07:39:46 PM
relevant article
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=77636

McCain not a conservative
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 14, 2008, 07:42:25 PM
Well duh, he's only a Conservative when he's winning.

Also, Savage is a dope.  McCain won't lose his Senate seat.  However, if he does lose the Presidency, he will be irrelevant in the Senate.  Especially if the Dems get their fillibuster-proof majority.  It's a good thing he and Lieberman are so chummy. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 14, 2008, 07:50:18 PM
I don't think he has ever been considered Conservative by any one other than campaign handlers and the dopes that buy their rhetoric.

not sure if he is hated enough to loose his seat but the few Arizonians i know would vote him out if they could
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 08:06:03 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 07:06:47 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on October 14, 2008, 07:04:56 PM
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/its-not-an-obama-flag-its-ohios-state-flag/ (http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/its-not-an-obama-flag-its-ohios-state-flag/)

*blink*

*blink*

horrormirth

Oh for fuck's sake! 
:facepalm:

Also, my work computer isn't allowing me to open WingNutDaily articles.  That's probably a good thing.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 14, 2008, 08:23:15 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on October 14, 2008, 07:04:56 PM
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/its-not-an-obama-flag-its-ohios-state-flag/ (http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/its-not-an-obama-flag-its-ohios-state-flag/)

*blink*

*blink*

horrormirth
:cramstipated:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 08:27:02 PM
Whats scary is that it has taken Michelle Malkin to point this out to people.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 14, 2008, 08:30:21 PM
I have given up in my pursuit to comprehend the depths of human stupidity.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 14, 2008, 08:32:01 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 08:27:02 PM
Whats scary is that it has taken Michelle Malkin to point this out to people.

Considering it was her who got all hot and bothered over Rachel Ray's "Terrorist Scarf".  Maybe she started taking meds or something. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 14, 2008, 08:47:51 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 08:32:01 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 08:27:02 PM
Whats scary is that it has taken Michelle Malkin to point this out to people.

Considering it was her who got all hot and bothered over Rachel Ray's "Terrorist Scarf".  Maybe she started taking meds or something. 

Oh that made Pepsi come out of my nose.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:08:18 PM
Christopher Buckley turned in his resignation to the National Review:

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/books/entries/2008/10/14/a_little_scoop_on_christopher.html

The Republicans have decided to eat their own.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 14, 2008, 09:17:53 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:08:18 PM
Christopher Buckley turned in his resignation to the National Review:

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/books/entries/2008/10/14/a_little_scoop_on_christopher.html

The Republicans have decided to eat their own.

Oh even better is the blogpost he made stating why he's voting Democrat:

http://thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-10/the-conservative-case-for-obama

QuoteMy colleague, the superb and very dishy Kathleen Parker, recently wrote in National Review Online a column stating what John Cleese as Basil Fawlty would call "the bleeding obvious": namely, that Sarah Palin is an embarrassment, and a dangerous one at that. She's not exactly alone. New York Times columnist David Brooks, who began his career at NR, just called Governor Palin "a cancer on the Republican Party."

As for Kathleen, she has to date received 12,000 (quite literally) foam-at-the-mouth hate-emails. One correspondent, if that's quite the right word, suggested that Kathleen's mother should have aborted her and tossed the fetus into a Dumpster. There's Socratic dialogue for you.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 14, 2008, 09:22:25 PM
Oh look, more Nobel laureates are voting for Obama. (http://scienceblogs.com/voteforscience/2008/10/im_a_scientist_and_im_voting_f_2.php)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on October 14, 2008, 09:24:19 PM
elitists.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 14, 2008, 09:27:12 PM
http://thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-10/the-conservative-case-for-obama

good read
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 14, 2008, 09:28:03 PM
I don't have any links or anything, but Keith Olbermann was reporting last night that there are some Conservatives who have accused George F. Will of drinking the Obama kool-aid, because he was critical of the McCain/Palin ticket.  Seriously.  They'll take a shot at ANYONE if they so much as suggest McCain/Palin might lose.  
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:33:08 PM
The National Review is in the middle of a civil war.

Rats are abandoning ship with increasing regularity.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 14, 2008, 09:36:20 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 09:28:03 PM
I don't have any links or anything, but Keith Olbermann was reporting last night that there are some Conservatives who have accused George F. Will of drinking the Obama kool-aid, because he was critical of the McCain/Palin ticket.  Seriously.  They'll take a shot at ANYONE if they so much as suggest McCain/Palin might lose.  

Of course, Dogma and Belief act the same, be it about JESUS or PALIN.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:40:55 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 09:28:03 PM
I don't have any links or anything, but Keith Olbermann was reporting last night that there are some Conservatives who have accused George F. Will of drinking the Obama kool-aid, because he was critical of the McCain/Palin ticket.  Seriously.  They'll take a shot at ANYONE if they so much as suggest McCain/Palin might lose.  
:lulz: The Republican party is going to be an empty shell by this time next month.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:40:55 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 09:28:03 PM
I don't have any links or anything, but Keith Olbermann was reporting last night that there are some Conservatives who have accused George F. Will of drinking the Obama kool-aid, because he was critical of the McCain/Palin ticket.  Seriously.  They'll take a shot at ANYONE if they so much as suggest McCain/Palin might lose.  
:lulz: The Republican party is going to be an empty shell by this time next month.

It wont even need help imploding by that stage.

Which means moving onto the next stage: sinking the Good Ship Obama.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 14, 2008, 09:46:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:40:55 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 09:28:03 PM
I don't have any links or anything, but Keith Olbermann was reporting last night that there are some Conservatives who have accused George F. Will of drinking the Obama kool-aid, because he was critical of the McCain/Palin ticket.  Seriously.  They'll take a shot at ANYONE if they so much as suggest McCain/Palin might lose.  
:lulz: The Republican party is going to be an empty shell by this time next month.

It wont even need help imploding by that stage.

Which means moving onto the next stage: sinking the Good Ship Obama.

With what result in mind, destroying the party system, or undermining the US in general?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 14, 2008, 09:50:36 PM
Quote from: Felix on October 14, 2008, 09:46:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:40:55 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 09:28:03 PM
I don't have any links or anything, but Keith Olbermann was reporting last night that there are some Conservatives who have accused George F. Will of drinking the Obama kool-aid, because he was critical of the McCain/Palin ticket.  Seriously.  They'll take a shot at ANYONE if they so much as suggest McCain/Palin might lose.  
:lulz: The Republican party is going to be an empty shell by this time next month.

It wont even need help imploding by that stage.

Which means moving onto the next stage: sinking the Good Ship Obama.

With what result in mind, destroying the party system, or undermining the US in general?

LULZ?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:50:57 PM
Enthusiastic nihilism is my primary motivating factor.

Plus being on the attack is more fun.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:51:03 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:40:55 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 09:28:03 PM
I don't have any links or anything, but Keith Olbermann was reporting last night that there are some Conservatives who have accused George F. Will of drinking the Obama kool-aid, because he was critical of the McCain/Palin ticket.  Seriously.  They'll take a shot at ANYONE if they so much as suggest McCain/Palin might lose.  
:lulz: The Republican party is going to be an empty shell by this time next month.

It wont even need help imploding by that stage.

Which means moving onto the next stage: sinking the Good Ship Obama.
Most of them are already at that stage with their shitty conspiracy theories. If Obama moves to the center in his first term then he can probably coast to a second term (as long as he doesn't do something MIND-NUMBINGLY STUPID).  

I'm curious what will become of the GOP though.  If they were smart they would promptly kick out the Neo-Cons/Religious freaks and go back to their conservative roots. I wouldn't be that surprised if a new party or two was formed from the massive power struggle that's going to take place between now and 2010.  I know that Michael Bloomberg was thinking about it before this election.  He definitely has the money and clout to pull it off.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 14, 2008, 09:52:46 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:50:57 PM
Enthusiastic nihilism is my primary motivating factor.

Like so:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/nihilism.png
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 14, 2008, 09:53:20 PM
Quote from: Felix on October 14, 2008, 09:46:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:40:55 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 09:28:03 PM
I don't have any links or anything, but Keith Olbermann was reporting last night that there are some Conservatives who have accused George F. Will of drinking the Obama kool-aid, because he was critical of the McCain/Palin ticket.  Seriously.  They'll take a shot at ANYONE if they so much as suggest McCain/Palin might lose.  
:lulz: The Republican party is going to be an empty shell by this time next month.

It wont even need help imploding by that stage.

Which means moving onto the next stage: sinking the Good Ship Obama.

With what result in mind, destroying the party system, or undermining the US in general?
get rid of the party system or at least the two parties we have now.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:58:05 PM
Quote from: Felix on October 14, 2008, 09:52:46 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:50:57 PM
Enthusiastic nihilism is my primary motivating factor.

Like so:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/nihilism.png

Only I expect less squirrels and more nuts in my adventure.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:58:13 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:50:57 PM
Enthusiastic nihilism is my primary motivating factor.

Plus being on the attack is more fun.
But... but... ya gotta support the prezinator in ah time of war!
   \
:mullet:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 14, 2008, 10:02:57 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 09:28:03 PM
I don't have any links or anything, but Keith Olbermann was reporting last night that there are some Conservatives who have accused George F. Will of drinking the Obama kool-aid, because he was critical of the McCain/Palin ticket.  Seriously.  They'll take a shot at ANYONE if they so much as suggest McCain/Palin might lose.  

George Will?  Mr.Don't-let-new-voters-vote-early-because-they'll-all-vote-for-Obama George Will?  Mr.It's-not-about-quantity-but-quality-of-voters George Will?

Seriously?

Damn. 

ATTN GOP FUCKHEADS:  Quit being such desperate ninnies.  Makes your dick show through your underwear.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 14, 2008, 10:04:02 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:58:13 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:50:57 PM
Enthusiastic nihilism is my primary motivating factor.

Plus being on the attack is more fun.
But... but... ya gotta support the prezinator in ah time of war!
   \
:mullet:

You know what's sad?  That, and the dormant yet rampant racism that's been lying in wait for all these years are what might lose the election for Obama.

That and he's kinda limp-dicked in the debates, which is actually getting him some Conservafuck votes so I'm inclined to say w/e to that.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 14, 2008, 10:09:38 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:51:03 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 14, 2008, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 14, 2008, 09:40:55 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 14, 2008, 09:28:03 PM
I don't have any links or anything, but Keith Olbermann was reporting last night that there are some Conservatives who have accused George F. Will of drinking the Obama kool-aid, because he was critical of the McCain/Palin ticket.  Seriously.  They'll take a shot at ANYONE if they so much as suggest McCain/Palin might lose.  
:lulz: The Republican party is going to be an empty shell by this time next month.

It wont even need help imploding by that stage.

Which means moving onto the next stage: sinking the Good Ship Obama.
Most of them are already at that stage with their shitty conspiracy theories. If Obama moves to the center in his first term then he can probably coast to a second term (as long as he doesn't do something MIND-NUMBINGLY STUPID).  

I'm curious what will become of the GOP though.  If they were smart they would promptly kick out the Neo-Cons/Religious freaks and go back to their conservative roots. I wouldn't be that surprised if a new party or two was formed from the massive power struggle that's going to take place between now and 2010.  I know that Michael Bloomberg was thinking about it before this election.  He definitely has the money and clout to pull it off.

The GOP will sit quietly by, ready to spring on ANY perceived gaffe by Obama. Then, by either 2012 or 2016 they'll have some case for a GOP president and the idiots in America will stick one back in.

At this point, I think the leaders of the GOP realize that the only way for them to remain a viable party AT ALL, is to appeal to the extremes, the aMoral Majority and  the Neo-Con. Without them, the GOP would be too small to hold any real power. Heck, the democratic party should be the natural home of most Christians, with feeding the poor, caring for the needy etc. Libertarian and Conservative ideals are not generally altruistic and thus not generally in line with Christian belief.

It's only because of Roe v Wade that the GOP are still able to pull this along. They can appear not to be nut jobs and argue that it was a breech of States Rights... while carrying water for the nut jobs that think its an issue of LIFE. If the GOP dropped that one issue, most Christians would go blue and the GOP would be the size of the Libertarian party. Though, they'd likely be better funded.


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 14, 2008, 10:18:00 PM
I dunno, Rata...Bill Clinton got 8 years...and people really wanted him for 12 or 16, if polls meant anything.  I'm not so sure it'll be anyone but Obama if he makes it there.  He might go down just LIKE Bill, since their demographics are pretty much the same.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 15, 2008, 01:25:54 PM
Christopher Hitchens just endorsed Obama.

http://www.slate.com/id/2202163/

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 15, 2008, 01:27:30 PM
Maybe the Hitch has gotten over whatever temporary insanity gripped him in 2001.

Maybe.  It would be nice to have the old Hitchens back, but I don't hold out too much hope.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 15, 2008, 01:30:30 PM
Well, he didn't so much endorse Obama as declare McCain/Palin a complete embarassment.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 15, 2008, 01:32:27 PM
Yeah, but Hitchens would have never been keen on Obama.  Remember how much he despised Clinton?  Plus Obama is religious, and the Hitch does not think highly of religious people (see: God is Not Great for more).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 15, 2008, 01:46:34 PM
Mad Mel is like a weathervane for the nuttiness of the British right.  A reliable indicator of the sort of smears you can come to expect a few months, or years, down the line. 

So when she says:

Quotea Marxisant radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshipped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it's considered impolite to say so.

You know exactly what you are in for.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 15, 2008, 01:48:26 PM
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v711/Marburger/facepalmwall.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 15, 2008, 02:06:10 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 15, 2008, 01:46:34 PM
Mad Mel is like a weathervane for the nuttiness of the British right.  A reliable indicator of the sort of smears you can come to expect a few months, or years, down the line. 

So when she says:

Quotea Marxisant radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshipped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it’s considered impolite to say so.

You know exactly what you are in for.

SAY WHAT?

Ugh.

Well, guess it could be worse--they could claim he likes fellatio in the Oval Orifice and chunky white chicks.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 15, 2008, 02:10:40 PM
He does anyway.  He's black, duh.  He probably lists his interests on Facebook as "fucking your white, virgin daughter".

Mad Mel is probably the closest thing we have to Ann Coulter over here.  To be honest, I'm surprised the Spectator printed that.  They like to think of themselves as intellectual, elite conservatives, this is far too populist and conspiratorial for them.  But then again, Mad Mel has been circling that drain for a number of years now.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 15, 2008, 02:35:47 PM
This is the kind of rhetoric that is causing the fiscal conservative, liberal on social policy Conservatards to drop like flies.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 15, 2008, 03:26:54 PM
This year we might actually see the end of the political system's weird obsession with pleasing the Religious Right. Probably not, but it's nice to dream.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 15, 2008, 03:28:14 PM
Yeah, don't hold yer breaf on that one.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 15, 2008, 04:19:16 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 15, 2008, 01:27:30 PM
Maybe the Hitch has gotten over whatever temporary insanity gripped him in 2001.

Maybe.  It would be nice to have the old Hitchens back, but I don't hold out too much hope.
Or maybe he quit drinking for a couple of days...

Quote from: Cain on October 15, 2008, 01:32:27 PM
Yeah, but Hitchens would have never been keen on Obama.  Remember how much he despised Clinton?  Plus Obama is religious, and the Hitch does not think highly of religious people (see: God is Not Great for more).
Obama has been particular slippery when it comes down to religious beliefs.  I take that back, all politicians are slippery when it comes to religion.  Both sides have to pander to Christians to get votes.  I know Obama promised more Faith Based Initiatives, but who knows if he actually meant it.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 15, 2008, 04:19:54 PM
Quote from: vexati0n on October 15, 2008, 03:26:54 PM
This year we might actually see the end of the political system's weird obsession with pleasing the Religious Right. Probably not, but it's nice to dream.
Don't get my hopes up like that.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 15, 2008, 04:24:47 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 15, 2008, 04:19:16 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 15, 2008, 01:27:30 PM
Maybe the Hitch has gotten over whatever temporary insanity gripped him in 2001.

Maybe.  It would be nice to have the old Hitchens back, but I don't hold out too much hope.
Or maybe he quit drinking for a couple of days...

Quote from: Cain on October 15, 2008, 01:32:27 PM
Yeah, but Hitchens would have never been keen on Obama.  Remember how much he despised Clinton?  Plus Obama is religious, and the Hitch does not think highly of religious people (see: God is Not Great for more).
Obama has been particular slippery when it comes down to religious beliefs.  I take that back, all politicians are slippery when it comes to religion.  Both sides have to pander to Christians to get votes.  I know Obama promised more Faith Based Initiatives, but who knows if he actually meant it.

Huh?  Hadn't heard this before. :cn:

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 15, 2008, 04:40:05 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-07-01-obama-faith_N.htm


QuoteBarack Obama, arguing that it makes sense for the federal government to join with religious organizations to solve social problems, said Tuesday that he wants to continue President Bush's initiative to promote "faith-based" social welfare programs.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 15, 2008, 04:46:03 PM
Incidentally, what's the scoop with Obama and ACORN?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 15, 2008, 04:55:06 PM
Obama and ACORN?

He paid them to register voters some time ago.
They went out and hired a bunch of doofs who they paid(w/ Obama's money) on an incentive basis.
Those doofs made up a bunch of fake names and filled out ballots just to get the money.
Essentially, Obama got ripped off.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 15, 2008, 05:07:38 PM
Incentive based???   :x  Who the hell thought that was a good idea?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 15, 2008, 05:49:09 PM
Quote from: LMNO on October 15, 2008, 04:40:05 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-07-01-obama-faith_N.htm


QuoteBarack Obama, arguing that it makes sense for the federal government to join with religious organizations to solve social problems, said Tuesday that he wants to continue President Bush's initiative to promote "faith-based" social welfare programs.

Hm...that's not that suspicious--in fact, that's what churches have been doing since the Yurospags landed here.

Course, their outreach in the 1600-1700's was not what we see it as TODAY...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 15, 2008, 05:50:08 PM
Quote from: Squiddy on October 15, 2008, 04:55:06 PM
Obama and ACORN?

He paid them to register voters some time ago.
They went out and hired a bunch of doofs who they paid(w/ Obama's money) on an incentive basis.
Those doofs made up a bunch of fake names and filled out ballots just to get the money.
Essentially, Obama got ripped off.

TITCM.  So now the GOP assholes have a new hobby horse.  Also, I don't think ACORN is normally this retarded.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 15, 2008, 05:59:16 PM
Faith-based social welfare programs don't bother me, as long as there are secular avenues for welfare as well.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 15, 2008, 06:09:28 PM
Another day, another fun Palin rally:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4944922.ece

QuoteTheir answers were uniform because they all followed the same right-wing radio chat-show hosts and conservative bloggers. The "liberal media elite" is enemy number two here. Only Mr Obama is detested more.

"Obama and Biden will take this country far too far to the left. They'll take away the freedoms I've spent 40 years defending," said Dwayne Schnakenberg, 40, a Navy veteran.

Others considered Mr Obama to be a subversive, terrorist- sympathising, America-hating radical and covert Muslim. They cited his links to the former Weathermen militant Bill Ayers, and to Jeremiah Wright, his fiery former minister. Some claimed that he supported sharia in Kenya and consorted with Hugo Chávez of Venezuela.

"What turned me off was the way he wouldn't put his hand over his heart for the Pledge of Allegiance or wear a flag pin. I don't know how you can call yourself an American if you don't do that," Heather Zimerman, 39, a substitute teacher, said.

"He's smart, articulate and beguiling but his supporters — his inner circle— are radicals who want revolution," Billy Benton, 55, an estate agent, said. "I don't know what he was doing in Indonesia all those years — hanging around with Muslim terrorists?" Madeleine Willis, 60, a retired factory worker, asked.

Mr Taylor complained about the trip to Europe that Mr Obama took in July: "I don't think the president of the US should go around saying, 'I'm a citizen of the world'." One beefy man wore a T-shirt proclaiming: "The difference between Obama and Osama is just a little B.S."

:horrormirth:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 15, 2008, 06:17:14 PM
i'm still waiting for obama to win so i can start telling conservatards to shut up and support the president because it's their patriotic duty.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 15, 2008, 06:18:14 PM
Quote from: vexati0n on October 15, 2008, 06:17:14 PM
i'm still waiting for obama to win so i can start telling conservatards to shut up and support the president because it's their patriotic duty.

That would be SO.  MUCH.  FUN.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 15, 2008, 06:18:30 PM
Quote from: vexati0n on October 15, 2008, 06:17:14 PM
i'm still waiting for obama to win so i can start telling conservatards to shut up and support the president because it's their patriotic duty.
:lulz: I've been waiting to do that for 3 years now.  It'll be fun to use their own words against them.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 15, 2008, 06:27:48 PM
Oh it won't work--they'll just claim he's a Arab Muslim spy who infiltrated the American government through Al-Qaeda.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 15, 2008, 06:36:54 PM
These people need to be reminded that the definition of "American" is "whatever the fuck Americans decide to do."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 15, 2008, 06:37:24 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 15, 2008, 06:27:48 PM
Oh it won't work--they'll just claim he's a Arab Muslim spy who infiltrated the American government through Al-Qaeda.
WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA??? SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!!!

:amurrica:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 15, 2008, 06:51:18 PM
OODOOV economics obama's "trickle up socialism"  theory of economics
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10152008/news/politics/obama_fires_a_robin_hood_warning_shot_133685.htm
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 15, 2008, 06:53:53 PM
NPR had both campaigns' advisors on this subject yesterday afternoon--twas very lollerific to hear McCain's advisor talking about how Obama's people talk down on limiting capital gains taxes, and then Obama's advisor come back and say, "Where are your CAPITAL GAINS INVESTMENTS NOW, BITCHES?!"  Or something to that effect.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 15, 2008, 06:54:25 PM
I would encourage people to look at that with "a jaundiced eye."  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 15, 2008, 06:58:36 PM
its all connected Ayers president carter rev wright economic collapse and acorn (and of course Obama) plus a few more
http://www.spectator.org/archives/2008/10/14/anatomy-of-a-scandal
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 15, 2008, 07:14:03 PM
donation fraud in election, found in (you guessed it) Obama campaign
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/FEC_Should_Begin_Obama_Audit_Now.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 15, 2008, 07:23:41 PM
Republicans must really hate the fact that it's this late in the race, and this crap is all they have to scrape from the bottom of the barrel. If there was anything that actually means anything to throw at Obama, I'm sure we'd have heard it by now.

McCain's only hope now is that Osama bin Laden comes up with a video endorsing Obama like he did for Kerry in 2004. And even that should be easy enough to spin -- "Oh yeah, that guy would have been dead by now if the Republicans knew what they were doing."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 15, 2008, 08:16:49 PM
Quote from: LMNO on October 15, 2008, 04:46:03 PM
Incidentally, what's the scoop with Obama and ACORN?

ACORN is a central hub of the Illuminati organization in North America, and has provided terrorist training (in the form of voter registration) to thousands of militant Stalinists (read: black people).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 16, 2008, 10:20:52 AM
POST DEBATE SPECIAL


FOX NEWS (http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/15/colin-powell-fuels-speculation-possible-endorsement/) - Speculation continues to rise that Colin Powell will endorse Obama - not based on any real evidence, except the fact that Powell is a black man who does black things with other black people.

NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE/MARK STEYN (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTI2MmVlNzZkMTc0MjcwN2Y2Y2RjZTJlN2MxYWFhYWQ=) (pronounced "Stein" not "Stain") - McCain would have won the debate if only he had unleashed his inner insanity.

JOHN MCCAIN, VIA YOUTUBE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6c12Of-lH0) - My immiment pwning is all the fault of the Illuminati agents that run ACORN.

The Poor Man Institute (http://thepoorman.net/2008/10/15/let-us-now-praie-famous-death-dwarves/) - Um, there's probably someone who had a weirder debate performance.  Somewhere.  In the olden days, before not being a fucking crazy person was invented.  Probably.

TEAM SARAH PALIN (http://www.teamsarah.org/profile/Tammy37) - staying classy with a classic image of Obama as an out of work street bum washing Sarah Palin's shoes.

TOWNHALL.COM (http://townhall.com/blog/g/d60e7409-a6fe-4785-9974-c21b944cbcd9?comments=true#comments) - We are unfamiliar with the Ohio State Flag

ABC POLITICAL PUNCH (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/obama-campaign.html) - Shock breaking news, wingnuts taken in by an obvious hoax.  Next on ABC: questions raised abouting shitting habits of bears.

NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE/JOHAN "PANTY DOUGHLOAD" GOLDBERG (http://corner.nationalreview.com/) - if you strike us down, Darth Kos, the conservative movement shall become more powerfully insane than you can possibly imagine
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 16, 2008, 01:26:19 PM
Excellent distillation!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 16, 2008, 02:03:01 PM
BTW, Colin Powell has also been defending Ted Stevens and his legal troubles.  I'm not sure Obama really needs that stink in his corner. 

http://aprn.org/2008/10/10/colin-powell-testifies-in-support-of-ted-stevens/ (http://aprn.org/2008/10/10/colin-powell-testifies-in-support-of-ted-stevens/)

QuoteFormer Secretary of State Colin Powell says Alaska Senator Ted Stevens' reputation for integrity and truth is "sterling."  The four-star general testified today as a character witness in Stevens' federal trial.  Alaska's senior Senator faces seven felony counts of lying on his financial disclosure forms.  He's accused of taking more than $250,000 in gifts, mostly from oil field services company Veco.

:lulz:

Poor Colin, he's only getting nuttier with age. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 16, 2008, 02:26:34 PM
Colin Powell is hanging out with old white men! This obviously means that he's about to endorse McCain!
  \
:nigel:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 16, 2008, 03:12:14 PM
Oh, you bitch:  Palin panders to Red Sox Nation (and the Drays, too).

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/10/after-toasting.html

Quote
"New Hampshire, I gotta tell ya, I am looking forward to the debate tonight right here in Red Sox Nation," Palin said to roaring approval from the crowd, many of them decked out in Red Sox gear. "We're just 20 days out from the election and it's gonna come right down to the wire, and we're counting on you because Red Sox fans know how to turn an underdog into a victor, and that's exactly what you can help us do on November Fourth!"

While Palin's support for the Red Sox could be seen as noble support for the underdog as they stand on the brink of elimination, there's just one problem with her remarks: Palin made nearly identical comments in Florida last week in praise of the Tampa Bay Rays. At a rally in Clearwater, Florida last Monday, Palin had spoken glowingly of the Rays, who won the AL East division this year for the first time – a division title that has been in the sole possession of either the Red Sox or New York Yankees since 1997.

"It's great to be here in the home of the Tampa Bay Rays too. I know that earlier some of the experts this year were kind of tough on the Rays. I've been there," Palin said, drawing laughs from the Tampa-area crowd.

"But what a difference a season can make, and now the Rays in the playoffs for the first time ever," Palin continued. "So Florida knows a little something about turning an underdog into a victor, and together that's what we can do."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 16, 2008, 03:18:57 PM
Fuck that. It sounds like she needs a new speech writer.

GET THE FUCK OFF OF MY BASEBALL, WOMAN! GO BACK TO HOCKEY!  :argh!:

I heard she got booed when she dropped the puck at an NHL game.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 16, 2008, 03:24:58 PM
Unfortunately, geography continues to be a bitch for Palin.  At that rally in New Hampshire she referred to the region as The Great Northwest. 

ATTN Palin:  Here's a little ditty that might help you, Never Eat Shredded Wheat. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 16, 2008, 03:30:24 PM
I love how the Repubs love to circumvent Rhode Island and Massachusetts entirely. I think when McCain came to RI earlier in the year for a rally, only 1000 people showed up (which is from what I understand the entirety of the Republican Party in this state of oh...2 million people.) and a few people started throwing stuff on the stage and heckling.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 16, 2008, 03:32:02 PM
Quote from: Suu on October 16, 2008, 03:30:24 PM
I love how the Repubs love to circumvent Rhode Island and Massachusetts entirely. I think when McCain came to RI earlier in the year for a rally, only 1000 people showed up (which is from what I understand the entirety of the Republican Party in this state of oh...2 million people.) and a few people started throwing stuff on the stage and heckling.
Liberal elitists.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 16, 2008, 03:35:05 PM
Kennedy Land.

No really, we could start our own fucking amusement park.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 16, 2008, 04:14:57 PM
If we didn't have the ability to split our EVs here, the Repubs wouldn't be bothering with us either. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 16, 2008, 04:27:57 PM
McCain plays the part of Dear in the Headlights:
"What? ZERO?! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EASpPlcVbdI)"
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 16, 2008, 04:40:38 PM
McCain as we know it, is also a man of his word.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lazgf7DYlaI


Though I still think that with the way he reacted to the "KILL HIM ARAB" rally and saying that Obama was actually a good person, it makes me think that he was probably pressured into the mudslinging tactic.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 16, 2008, 04:43:57 PM
I suspect he doesn't enjoy it.

On the other hand, no-one is holding a gun to his head and making him do it.  No-one forced him to shack up with the operational descendants of Karl Rove, one of the single most chickenshit moves by McCain, given his personal history.  And as Obama has showed, overly negative campaigning is not a necessary precondition to popularity.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 16, 2008, 04:48:38 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 16, 2008, 04:14:57 PM
If we didn't have the ability to split our EVs here, the Repubs wouldn't be bothering with us either. 
Ha ha, McCain has given up here.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 16, 2008, 05:05:22 PM
Jon Stewart on the Daily Show had a great analogy for the runaway racist train that the McCain Campaign of RAGE has built:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=188327  It's in the beginning of the epi.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 16, 2008, 07:29:40 PM
Communist Hugo Chavez says "comrade bush now to the left of me" after nationalising of American banks

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE49F0K720081016?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 16, 2008, 07:36:59 PM
Chavez loves trolling Bush.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on October 16, 2008, 08:58:06 PM
Quote from: Suu on October 16, 2008, 03:30:24 PM
I love how the Repubs love to circumvent Rhode Island and Massachusetts entirely. I think when McCain came to RI earlier in the year for a rally, only 1000 people showed up (which is from what I understand the entirety of the Republican Party in this state of oh...2 million people.) and a few people started throwing stuff on the stage and heckling.

how in the hell do you fit 2 million people into 8 acres of land?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 16, 2008, 09:39:18 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 16, 2008, 07:36:59 PM
Chavez loves trolling Bush.
Can you really blame him?

Also,
(http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/images/2008/10/16/hofstra2emmanueldunandafpgetty.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 16, 2008, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Suu on October 16, 2008, 04:40:38 PM
McCain as we know it, is also a man of his word.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lazgf7DYlaI


Though I still think that with the way he reacted to the "KILL HIM ARAB" rally and saying that Obama was actually a good person, it makes me think that he was probably pressured into the mudslinging tactic.

My guess is that he didn't intend to. I bet Palin went forward with the bullshit and he decided to play along rather than stab his running mate in the back.... then it got way the fsck out of hand.

Or, maybe McCain decided that the Republicans are all nuts and ran to intentionally throw the election... I have no other explanation for Palin or some of the 'tactics' of his campaign, based on McCain's history...

or Alzheimer's?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 16, 2008, 10:42:56 PM
.
Quote

My guess is that he didn't intend to. I bet Palin went forward with the bullshit and he decided to play along rather than stab his running mate in the back.... then it got way the fsck out of hand.

Or, maybe McCain decided that the Republicans are all nuts and ran to intentionally throw the election... I have no other explanation for Palin or some of the 'tactics' of his campaign, based on McCain's history...

or Alzheimer's?

-DEM  "if we give you a Hillary win now, in 8 years we will give you a Jeb bush" - REPUB "OK you have a deal" - DEM  "o fuk Obama won the primary" REPUB " deal is still on no take backs" 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 16, 2008, 10:53:41 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on October 16, 2008, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Suu on October 16, 2008, 04:40:38 PM
McCain as we know it, is also a man of his word.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lazgf7DYlaI


Though I still think that with the way he reacted to the "KILL HIM ARAB" rally and saying that Obama was actually a good person, it makes me think that he was probably pressured into the mudslinging tactic.

My guess is that he didn't intend to. I bet Palin went forward with the bullshit and he decided to play along rather than stab his running mate in the back.... then it got way the fsck out of hand.

Or, maybe McCain decided that the Republicans are all nuts and ran to intentionally throw the election... I have no other explanation for Palin or some of the 'tactics' of his campaign, based on McCain's history...

or Alzheimer's?

this is the correct Ronald Reagan allusion.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 17, 2008, 12:36:57 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on October 16, 2008, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Suu on October 16, 2008, 04:40:38 PM
McCain as we know it, is also a man of his word.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lazgf7DYlaI


Though I still think that with the way he reacted to the "KILL HIM ARAB" rally and saying that Obama was actually a good person, it makes me think that he was probably pressured into the mudslinging tactic.

My guess is that he didn't intend to. I bet Palin went forward with the bullshit and he decided to play along rather than stab his running mate in the back.... then it got way the fsck out of hand.

Or, maybe McCain decided that the Republicans are all nuts and ran to intentionally throw the election... I have no other explanation for Palin or some of the 'tactics' of his campaign, based on McCain's history...

or Alzheimer's?
Almost all of the negatives ads have been from "the Republican National Committee" and not McCain himself.  He might not have control over the content of those ads, which would be more pathetic than if McCain had approved the ads. 

The Palin things STILL makes no sense.  I guess he was betting that the social conservatives would pull him over the top.  He ended up alienating the rest of the party instead.  He had a shot if he had picked someone more to the center like Romney or Guiliani. The history books will look back and show that picking Palin is what sunk him.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 17, 2008, 04:01:14 AM
In other news, there was a guy in Ohio or somewhere last week that Obama talked to. He said he was afraid to go into business for himself because Obama's tax policies could mean he would end up making less than he does as a simple plumber. This is "Joe the Plumber."

At the debate, McCain was harping on Joe the Plumber like a madman. He addressed half of his answers directly to Joe the Plumber, he framed half the discussion in terms of what an Obama presidency would mean for Joe the Plumber.

Anyway, some fun facts (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg/john-mccain-and-the-joe-t_b_135319.html) about Joe the Plumber:

- He isn't a licensed plumber.
- He is nowhere near wealthy enough to go into business for himself, let alone face a tax hike from Obama.
- His grandfather was Charles Keating.

Small world, huh?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 17, 2008, 12:03:10 PM
http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_S_buck16.3d67d4a.html?chitlins

Someone thought that this was a good idea.
(http://www.pe.com/imagesdaily/2008/10-16/racist16_400.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 17, 2008, 12:38:52 PM
The Obamamaniac thing is hilarious.

I mean, there are some starry eyes idealistic fools (ie; everyone commenting at HuffPo) who are supporting Obama, but thus far it is nothing like the Fuhrerprinzip which the GOP has operated on since the Reagan years.

I love the smell of hypocrisy in...*checks watch*, uh, lunchtime.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 17, 2008, 05:13:33 PM
 :news:

People are only voting for Obama because of "Negrophilia"

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78065

QuoteYes, America is a racist nation - but not in the way Democrat presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama and his cohorts Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pfleger, Otis Moss III and James Meeks would have us believe. Many of those whites who will cast votes for Obama on Nov. 4 are suffering from negrophilia, an inordinate affinity for blacks (as opposed to antipathy toward them).

The next 4/8 years of WND are going to be hilarious.  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 17, 2008, 05:52:55 PM
Speaking of which, a highly pertinent post over at Balloon-Juice:


QuoteYou might be excused if you said placing Obama's face on a $10 food stamp with a bucket of fried chicken, watermelon, ribs, and Kool-Aid was an isolated act.

When a major right-wing network calls Michelle Obama, "Obama's Baby Mama," you could dismiss it as as an overzealous producer who just thought it was funny and didn't mean it to say that black women are just baby machines for black men. You could, I suppose.

You might even get a pass if you thought a Web site that depicted Obama and the word "Waterboard Him" was just created by an obscure group that didn't represent all Republicans – although you would be wrong.

If a picture of Obama was Photoshopped to make him look a little bit like Osama Bin Laden, you could pass it off as the work of a few idiots on the right. It could be, right?

Supporters who carry racist Obama Monkey Dolls to your rallys are people who don't represent your campaign. You could argue that.

Of course, this is just a moron on the fringe, right?

What about when a high-level Republican fundraiser sends out an email that includes a joke with the punchline, if an airplane carrying Obama and his wife were blown up "it certainly wouldn't be a great loss, and it probably wouldn't be an accident either."? Sure, you could pass it off as the act of a random dumbass.

If, in response to your question, "Who is Barack Obama?" someone yelled "Terrorist!" you could say that was just one idiot in the crowd and was not indicative of the general sentiment. It's plausible.

In fact, you could cite dozens of examples of these racist, divisive, dillusiuonal attacks on Barack Obama and conclude that they are just elements of the fringe and don't represent mainstream Republicans.

Sooner or later though, you will have to acknowledge that this "fringe" is very widespread. You'll have to come to grips, eventually, with the fact that this "fringe" has become the very definition of the your party.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 17, 2008, 05:55:05 PM
did you notice that article" negrophilia' was written by a black man?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 17, 2008, 05:59:26 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on October 17, 2008, 05:55:05 PM
did you notice that article" negrophilia' was written by a black man?
"Allegedly" written by a black man.  I wouldn't put it past WND to use a ghost writer to deflect outrage.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 17, 2008, 06:01:49 PM
WND has as its South Africa correspondent an apartheid supporting white supremacist who has trained with rightwing paramilities in the country.

Or it did, at least.  Anyway, that gives you an idea of its vision of unbiased reporting.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 17, 2008, 06:28:28 PM
WND always reminds me of The New Frontiersman magazine in Watchmen.  Just a little website run out of a small office that will publish any old crank (SOY MAKES YOUR KIDS GAY (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53327)!) and takes money from any advertiser (FLOOR HUMPER FTW!).  They've got a cult following of both True Believers and Trainwreck Watchers.  It's a weird little dicotomy.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 17, 2008, 06:42:52 PM
WND is awesome, no  :cn:  :amurrica:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 19, 2008, 12:36:49 AM
The only reason left to vote for McCain: fear of a completely Democratic Washington.

http://www.acandidworld.net/2008/10/18/the-nameless-fear-a-democratic-washington/

QuoteIf Barack Obama wins - as remains likely, despite the Republican media empire's remarkable yet dishonest attempts at denialism - he will take power with, for the first time since the Democrats "lost" America by enacting sweeping civil rights legislation (a worthy trade-off), a Congress willing to reinforce his power, rather than fight against it. The media may take pains to estimate the size of the wave of anti-Republican backlash that fuels the possible creation of a united Democratic Washington, but none deny its likelihood.

While McCain and Palin have yet to catch on to the spin potential behind what is quickly becoming a political fact, the right-wing pundits are way ahead of them.  In the grand Republican tradition of whipping up fear rather than generating new ideas, web pundits across the series of tubes are starting to use the prospect of a Democratic Washington to terrify voters with terms like "liberal supermajority." Sure, you can't trust us Republicans, the narrative goes - after all, we've rampantly abused power for nearly eight years - but the Devil you know, right?

Yet there's cause to doubt this strategy's efficacy. Our Democratic Party has managed, over the past year, to pull a stunt worthy of a 1996 Tony Blair (I still love you, Tony): we've managed to reinvent our party by moderating our hard-line policies and accentuating our electoral strengths, all the while somehow preserving what makes us essentially "Democrats." Insofar as Buchanan & co. hearken back to an outdated image of the far-left Democratic Party, one dispelled by the moderate Barack Obama and even-tempered Senators like Claire McCaskill, the strategy is likely to simply reinforce the radical right's hatred of all things Democratic, and go amiss with the target demographic (swing voters). For Buchanan to try to sway swing voters by yelling to his readers at "Human Events," after all, is the pundit's equivalent of navel-gazing. Ditto for the WSJ editorial board and its, uh, vast cross-spectrum appeal to America's inner "Plumber Joe." As for the swing voters reading this blog - yes, both of you - I'm confident in my ability to "draw the sting" of Buchanan's point.

Note: above link is to a "moonbat" and not a "wingnut". ;)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 19, 2008, 05:34:01 AM
Never underestimate the power of Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
          --Barack Obama

I predict the next 3 weeks are going to be filled with all kinds of people at all points on the political spectrum generating lots and lots of noise about Barack Obama being the inevitable President-elect, which will prompt Democrats will assume they have it in the bag by such a large margin that no one will notice if they don't actually go out and vote, resulting in a McCain victory.

The next four years will be full of Democrats bitching about Republicans stealing this election, a disaster or three on Wall Street, skyrocketing unemployment, bread lines, food rationing, and maybe Martial Law in some places.  In 2012, the Democrats will nominate Hillary Clinton, who will also lose (if elections are still legal).

Also, since this America, there will be a race war.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 19, 2008, 11:35:57 AM
Comparing yourself to Tony Blair is nothing to be proud of.

No, really.  Only the scumscuckers in the DLC could see that being a complete and utter whore to...oh, the same interests that the other side are beholden to as a good thing.  Because they are inherently good people, and as such will not be tempted to act in exactly the same way as the people before them.

Also, it may just be the sort of people I read online, but none of them are very happy with the Democratic Congress "moderating" themselves.  They've become a second chorus of yes-men, unable to stand up to even a lame duck President like Bush, not even on the issue they got elected on (Iraq).  That's probably why Congress is about as popular as the second-least popular President of all time.

Pro-tip: the problem is not "partisanship".  Never was.  If you believe that, you've already bought into the framing methods of the Republicans, and everything you do from there on in will be dictated by their moves and initiative.  Republicans call the Democrats partisan left wing loonies not because they are, or to merely insult them, but to move them further to the right, policy wise, to avoid being tarred with the "socialist" brush (as if anyone within Congress with a D next to their name has even read a book by Marx).  They move the Overton window so far to the right that the Democrats start acting like Republicans to stay in the game, instead of fucking that media narrative to death and reframing events in a more realistic fashion (the country got hijacked by a bunch of second-rate wannabe Machiavellians, using religious loons and fascists as their foot soldiers, and browbeat and intimidated anyone who dared disagree).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 19, 2008, 04:46:43 PM
I'm registered Republican, so I get all kinds of amusing emails from them. Today I got one from a city commissioner saying that "Joe the Plumber speaks for all of us".  :|

Does he speak for all of us when he says he wishes the Republican party would stop speaking for him?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 20, 2008, 12:08:44 AM
Holy shit, they were right!  Colin Powell does endorse Obama.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LbLxja4UHY
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 20, 2008, 12:21:05 AM
Self fulfilling prophecy, much?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 20, 2008, 12:44:53 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 20, 2008, 12:08:44 AM
Holy shit, they were right!  Colin Powell does endorse Obama.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LbLxja4UHY

But only because he is a black man hanging around with other black people, doing black things with them.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 20, 2008, 12:52:30 AM
I think that the reasons he gave for support Obama were pretty well laid out.  The Republicans are the ones trying to divide the country by questioning the patriotism of anyone who isn't a jingoistic robot like them.

All the stuff he said about Iraq was pure bullshit though. "The president and I didn't want to go to war."  How can he say that with a straight face?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 20, 2008, 01:13:04 AM
I'd buy that Powell didn't really want a war in Iraq, but it's plainly obvious that Bush did. Powell isn't a Neoconservative, he's a "pragmatist," most of whom are of the opinion (now) that going into Iraq was a mistake. Saying now that Bush didn't want to go to war then is probably just Powell trying to save a little face with the millions of Republicans who are pissed off at him now.

As for the endorsement, it's great and all but it probably won't move any numbers. Endorsements have more effect on the news cycle than they do on actual votes, which is still good for Obama. Of course it won't have any effect on the overheated base of the GOP, who will undoubtedly see this as a "Black thing," whether they come right out and say so or not. Expect all those people who say they're not racist because they'd vote for Colin Powell if he ran to write this off as Powell losing his "Conservative Edge," whatever that is, and not following his example with their votes.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 20, 2008, 01:33:45 AM
Powell may be more pragmatic, but he's no less of an idiot.

I've seen first year undergraduate papers with a more sophisticated and critical grasp of von Clausewitz than that poor excuse for a general.

He's also a proven political coward, who tried to whitewashed the My Lai massacre, and had a role in the Iran-Contra affair (supplying missiles to the CIA that were traded to the Iranians). 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on October 20, 2008, 09:19:34 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs

this video makes my head hurt
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 20, 2008, 11:27:31 AM
Reminder:  Colin Powell was also very recently backing Ted Stevens, testifying on his behalf in his corruption trial.  I wager dollars to donuts that Sarah Palin will be bringing this up in the next couple of days. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on October 20, 2008, 11:29:58 AM
this might be her fnord moment so she may be forced not to sell out her own state. then again if it proves a point that politics is corrupt then hmm would be a nice footbullet to watch over the news tho

Quote
Rush Limbaugh reacts: "I am now researching his past endorsements to see if I can find all the inexperienced, very liberal, white candidates he has endorsed."
:lulz:

then again she did turn down that wonderful rap SNL wrote for her so
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 20, 2008, 04:03:19 PM
Quote from: YattoDobbs on October 20, 2008, 09:19:34 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs

this video makes my head hurt
:facepalm:

I fucking hate that guy.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 20, 2008, 06:00:54 PM
(http://thepmi.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/plummer.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 20, 2008, 06:23:43 PM
I'm sure that the state of Ohio would be interested in talking to those "Joe the Plummers".  Maybe they will help the original Joe the Plumber pay his back taxes:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aWDHvDjnDnTs&refer=home

And surprising no one but her running mate, Palin is in favor of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/20/palin-and-mccain-disagree-on-federal-gay-marriage-ban/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on October 20, 2008, 10:03:46 PM
QuoteChicago Sun-Times
FROM ASSOCIATED PRESS

MADISON, Wis. — The Racine school district's use of an eighth grade textbook that includes a chapter on Democrat Barack Obama but nothing on his opponent John McCain is unfair and troubling, the Wisconsin Republican Party argued Thursday.

A parent complained on an Internet blog about the textbook that includes a chapter on Obama called ''Dreams from My Father.''

The school district said in a statement that it has received no complaints about the book, which it first used last school year. Even so, the 21,000-student district said it was reviewing its policies regarding the book's use in a literature class.

The textbook, ''McDougal Littell Literature,'' is published by an arm of Houghton Mifflin Co. A spokesman for the publisher, Richard Blake, said the book was compiled in 2005 before Obama ran for president.

The latest version of the textbook, with a 2009 copyright, and all future versions will not include the Obama chapter to avoid any appearance that the publisher supports one political campaign over another, Blake said.

Wisconsin Republican Party executive director Mark Jefferson accused the Racine district of being a ''satellite campaign office'' for Obama. Deciding to use the textbook was at best very poor judgment and at worst intentional indoctrination of students in Democratic politics, he said.

''That offends a lot of people in our party and justifiably so,'' Jefferson said. ''You don't have to look very far outside of the Democratic presidential nominee to come up with other stories of inspiration as well.''

Phil Walzak, spokesman for Obama's campaign in Wisconsin, declined immediate comment.

The chapter in question includes an excerpt from Obama's 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention and a portion of his 1995 autobiography.

The book was chosen by a group of teachers because of how well it meets the state's academic standards, the Racine district said in its statement.

''The choice of this selection was to provide a contemporary and multicultural figure to explore the unit on community,'' the district said.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 20, 2008, 10:07:56 PM
I got in a copy of the Rhode Island ballot for my district in today...Please note this is my first time voting in RI.

In Florida we had actual MACHINES that I got to poke holes with and then feed into a counter and it was oodles of fun and I got a sticker and a cookie at the end...





....This one is a fucking multiple choice test that allows the citizen to manually draw an arrow to the candidates of choice or just simply do a straight ticket between Democrat or Republican even though it lists every presidential candidate from EVERY PARTY, which is something the Florida ballot never did.

I fucking KNEW the votes didn't matter here! HAR!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Eve on October 20, 2008, 10:14:02 PM
CT used to have fun voting machines, you got to flick little switches and all that. In CA I had a paper one with some weird special pen. Now CT's apparently going all out: fill in the circle next to your candidate of choice! Like the SATs! Somehow this is more secure.  :?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 20, 2008, 10:20:54 PM
Florida has touch-screens now...I can't IMAGINE the old people being able to FUCK THOSE UP.  :roll:

I think I'm just going to do a Democrat straight ticket and head home with my sticker, which is, as we all know, the best part about voting, getting and wearing the sticker for the rest of the day.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 20, 2008, 10:27:02 PM
Is that sticker so roving gangs of Freepers and other brownshirts know who to jump?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on October 20, 2008, 10:29:04 PM
When I voted in the primaries, I was literally scowled at. The Dem line stretched out the door, and I was the only person in the Republican line  :mrgreen:

The woman at the Repub table was so pleased to see a young republican - she was grinning ear to ear! Her expression changed when she saw me taking some practice coin-flips. I forget what I said exactly, but it was something like

"Which booth do I enter to participate in the tyranny of the majority?"

"Um, that one," she said.

As I left, I shouted at the room, "Good luck with your, um, what do they call it now? Good luck with your democracy."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 20, 2008, 10:29:28 PM
Quote from: Eve on October 20, 2008, 10:14:02 PM
CT used to have fun voting machines, you got to flick little switches and all that. In CA I had a paper one with some weird special pen. Now CT's apparently going all out: fill in the circle next to your candidate of choice! Like the SATs! Somehow this is more secure.  :?
Indiana has been doing scantron ballots for awhile now.  They seem secure but I can see how the system could be scammed.

Quote from: Suu on October 20, 2008, 10:20:54 PM
Florida has touch-screens now...I can't IMAGINE the old people being able to FUCK THOSE UP.  :roll:
There is no way to make an idiot-proof system.  The world keeps coming up with better idiots.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 20, 2008, 10:29:55 PM
Of COURSE not, it's a sticker to proudly proclaim the fact I voted, and if you do not have a sticker, then you should go vote so you get one. Duh.

It's a special sticker than only cool people get for voting.

They look like this:

(http://www.willisms.com/archives/ivotedsticker.gif)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 20, 2008, 11:28:58 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on October 20, 2008, 10:29:04 PM
When I voted in the primaries, I was literally scowled at. The Dem line stretched out the door, and I was the only person in the Republican line  :mrgreen:

The woman at the Repub table was so pleased to see a young republican - she was grinning ear to ear! Her expression changed when she saw me taking some practice coin-flips. I forget what I said exactly, but it was something like

"Which booth do I enter to participate in the tyranny of the majority?"

"Um, that one," she said.

As I left, I shouted at the room, "Good luck with your, um, what do they call it now? Good luck with your democracy."

This is awesome.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 20, 2008, 11:53:26 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on October 20, 2008, 10:29:04 PM
When I voted in the primaries, I was literally scowled at. The Dem line stretched out the door, and I was the only person in the Republican line  :mrgreen:

The woman at the Repub table was so pleased to see a young republican - she was grinning ear to ear! Her expression changed when she saw me taking some practice coin-flips. I forget what I said exactly, but it was something like

"Which booth do I enter to participate in the tyranny of the majority?"

"Um, that one," she said.

As I left, I shouted at the room, "Good luck with your, um, what do they call it now? Good luck with your democracy."

Wow, Cram.  Wow.  :lol:  Awesomely done.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Eve on October 21, 2008, 01:18:54 AM
Quote from: Suu on October 20, 2008, 10:29:55 PM
Of COURSE not, it's a sticker to proudly proclaim the fact I voted, and if you do not have a sticker, then you should go vote so you get one. Duh.

It's a special sticker than only cool people get for voting.

They look like this:

(http://www.willisms.com/archives/ivotedsticker.gif)

Ours are more round! But you're right.. even today, I was thinking that I need to hit up my voting place (school half a block away) early so I can wear the sticker all day and be obnoxious. :D
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 21, 2008, 03:03:24 AM
Woo!  Death threats for a sign!
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-villa_park_signoct17,0,1501910.story (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-villa_park_signoct17,0,1501910.story)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 21, 2008, 03:09:28 AM
I am THIS CLOSE to putting a bunch of fucked up Obama and No on Prop 8! signs in my yard...in fact, screw it...if I have time this weekend (and I should, we ain't doin' much), I think I will.  Just need some laminating shit because it's damned damp all of a sudden.

There are so many McCain/Palin "CUNTREE FURST!" and YES ON Prop 8! (protect marriage proposition--GAG PUKE GAG) signs everywhere, it's driving me nuts. 

Can anyone think of some clever but catchy No on Prop 8 --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008)) --and Obama signs?  I can probably think of a good one for Obama...but Prop 8 is a bit touchier.  It even sparked off a debate in my kitchen with my brothers, my husband and my mother...my husband said something like "Imagine the propoganda being said in the CHURCHES" and my mom went off...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 21, 2008, 03:26:52 AM
They want to pull back same-sex marriages already? WTF CALIFORNIA?!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 21, 2008, 03:30:34 AM
California has some fucking wing-nuttiest jack-offs in the nation, believe you me.  A lot of them in the OC and San Diego.  Fucking business asstards and military podunks.  *sigh*  They undo a lot of the shit done by San Fran.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 21, 2008, 03:48:59 AM
PROTECT MARRIAGE
From the Religious Right

VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 8
Osama Bin Laden would.

EQUALITY IS UNAMERICAN
Vote YES on Proposition 8
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 21, 2008, 03:52:58 AM
Quote from: vexati0n on October 21, 2008, 03:48:59 AM
PROTECT MARRIAGE
From the Religious Right

VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 8
Osama Bin Laden would.

EQUALITY IS UNAMERICAN
Vote YES on Proposition 8

:mittens:  I'll take #1 for 500, Alex.  (edited...think #1 is awesome--think the other 2 will have to be used, as awesome as they are, just not as signs)...stickergasm?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 21, 2008, 06:04:18 AM
Mike Lunsford, proud racist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbbcVNOMqSk
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 21, 2008, 07:25:05 AM
hey.
where are these touch screen machine doodads??

all i get is a damn bubble sheet.
AGAIN!

but i will get a new sticker  :D
so i can hang with the cool kids. and swear and smoke cigarettes n shit.

yeah.

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 21, 2008, 12:23:13 PM
This is Radio Rwanda calling.

http://www.wisn.com/politics/17754232/detail.html

In an exclusive interview with 12 News, 58 year-old Nancy Takehara of Chicago says she was going door-to-door when she came across a disgruntled homeowner.

"The next thing I know he's telling us we're not his people, we're probably with ACORN, and he started screaming and raving," Takehara said. "He grabbed me by the back of the neck. I thought he was going to rip my hair out of my head. He was pounding on my head and screaming. The man terrified me."

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

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/20/rick-davis-were-rethinkin_n_136173.html

Rev Wright is back on the cards.

John McCain's campaign manager says he is reconsidering using Barack Obama's relationship with Reverend Jeremiah Wright as a campaign issue during the election's closing weeks.

In an appearance on conservative Hugh Hewitt's radio program, Davis said that circumstances had changed since John McCain initially and unilaterally took Obama's former pastor off the table. The Arizona Republican, Davis argued, had been jilted by the remarks of Rep. John Lewis, who compared recent GOP crowds to segregationist George Wallace's rallies. And, as such, the campaign was going to "rethink" what was in and out of political bounds.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 21, 2008, 01:01:39 PM
While I'm here, I may as well transcribe a post from The Editors, detailing right wing reactions to Powell's endorsement of Obama.

QuoteNo one could have predicted, a few bad apples, etc (http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/10/19/mccains-base-in-action/):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvPJOQhXrak

(The Star of David is a nice touch.)  Wow, that's a weird isolated incident (http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/02/20/racist-attacks-on-obama-growing-more-heated/).  I wonder where that guy got those kooky ideas (http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/238245.php)?

In less camera-shy quadrants of the wingnutosphere, Rush Limbaugh (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/20/limbaugh-powell/), Mike Gallagher (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/20/gallagher-powell/), Pat Buchanan (http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/pat-buchanan-says-colin-powell-endorsed), the Freepi (http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/10/19/powell-endorses-free-republic-reacts/), Judith Apter Isosceles Perambulate Marcalculate Klinghoffer (http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/55838.html), and many, many others determine that Colin Powell is a huge racist for endorsing Barack Obama.  Because, you see, they are both black. The Media Blog (http://themediablog.blogspot.com/2008/10/colin-powell-racist.html) goes a half-step further, proving by induction that all black people are racist, and the only option for decent people is to repay them in kind:

QuoteSo, the next time a black person throws around the charge of racism feel free to ignore it. Better yet, you might want to tell them that it is nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black.

A bold stand for equality, one which reminds me of a non-racist MLK, Jr. (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2008/08/national_review_and_martin_luther_king_jr.php), or a Rosa Parks who stood up for racial equality. Over at Floppy Asses (http://hillbuzz.wordpress.com/2008/10/18/is-colin-powell-a-racist/) they advance a slightly different theory: that it's not so much that black people are racist for voting for Democrats, as that they are morons, duped by the Demoncrats strategy of lying to negroes (http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2004/10/conservative-columnist-kerry-is-lying.html). Hello? Abraham Lincoln was a Republican (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy), durr!

Jammie-Wearing Fool goes even further, noting that both black AND white people who vote for Obama are huge racists (http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2008/10/racist-democrats-for-obama-theyve-all.html):


QuoteYes, because it's OK for them to be racist, so long as they project their racism upon Republicans with their incessant cries of racism. Naturally, it's fine if 105% of blacks (with ACORN's help, naturally) vote for Obama. We can't call that racist, because we'd be racist for pointing that out.

Oh, and I forgot how these racists call anyone who isn't a racist - i.e., decent white conservatives from real pro-America America (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/10/17/palin_clarifies_her_pro-americ.html) - "racists".  In an amazing twist, white conservative republicans are History's Secret Victims - again!  Completing the agony, Donald Douglas attempts a bit of post-racist meta-projection something-or-other which would require a team of psychotherapists and a Klein bottle full of LSD to make sense of (http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2008/10/racists-for-barack-obama.html):

QuoteJust contemplate the loaded racism in that passage: Essentially, folks see Kwame Kilpatrick (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kwame_Kilpatrick.jpg) as a big, black threatening "nigga (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nigga)" (used here non-pejoratively (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_xEw_wnCvE_0/SPkACIM7TSI/AAAAAAAAFAM/omGo1kH6Mk8/s1600-h/artistic_expression_hate_crime.jpg), in the hip-hop sense, but perhaps differently by the working-class whites identified in the Politico).

I swear, one has to be a contortionist to make sense of Democratic Party racial politics.

I mean, think about it: What's the difference between Kwame Kilpatrick and Barack Obama?

Naturally, Prof. Douglas concludes that there is no relevent difference between these two black men, and that one would have to be a huge racist to think there was.  The next 4-8 years are going to be utterly insane.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 21, 2008, 02:23:48 PM
Olbermann's special commentary last night was about how divisive the Republicans have become with their "My America" talking points:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58vsFGTdyx0
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 21, 2008, 05:30:42 PM
Welcome to the end of America. It's been a fun experiment, unfortunately it appears the petri dishes got contaminated with stupid.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 21, 2008, 05:32:18 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on October 21, 2008, 05:30:42 PM
Welcome to the end of America. It's been a fun experiment, unfortunately it appears the petri dishes got contaminated with stupid.
WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA!!!!

:mullet:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 21, 2008, 07:05:09 PM
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=a.hk4HvCkpiE

The legislative aspects of the 08 campaign are interesting.  Nobody's letting this election fall through the cracks either way, apparently.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on October 21, 2008, 08:22:33 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 21, 2008, 03:52:58 AM
Quote from: vexati0n on October 21, 2008, 03:48:59 AM
PROTECT MARRIAGE
From the Religious Right

:mittens: 

anti mccain stealth sign might be good option too
http://earthfirst.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/daily-show-mccain.jpg
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 21, 2008, 08:33:03 PM
Quote from: YattoDobbs on October 21, 2008, 08:22:33 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 21, 2008, 03:52:58 AM
Quote from: vexati0n on October 21, 2008, 03:48:59 AM
PROTECT MARRIAGE
From the Religious Right

:mittens: 

anti mccain stealth sign might be good option too
http://earthfirst.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/daily-show-mccain.jpg

*cackles*  Yeah, I  likey that one too
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on October 21, 2008, 09:02:42 PM
bonus points if you replace their sign with yours and they dont notice
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 24, 2008, 04:48:40 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_rOCDG_btk
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on October 25, 2008, 12:49:20 AM


BREAKING: CRAZED OBAMA SUPPORTER ASSAULTS WOMAN OVER MCCAIN BUMPER STICKER


http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/24/mccain.sticker/index.html?eref=rss_topstories (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/24/mccain.sticker/index.html?eref=rss_topstories)


...except not.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on October 25, 2008, 01:04:41 AM
This is being posted EVERYWHERE on this forum today.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jasper on October 25, 2008, 01:07:41 AM
Quote from: Payne on October 25, 2008, 01:04:41 AM
This is being posted EVERYWHERE on this forum today.

Horrormirth is a highly particular sort of humor, and when a goldmine of it plops at your feet you indulge.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on October 25, 2008, 01:12:45 AM
Indeed, I will just spam this pic everytime it comes up then.

(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/BackwardsB.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 25, 2008, 01:21:48 AM
:lol:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 25, 2008, 04:36:04 AM
Motherfucking Sarah Palin  :argh!:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCXqKEs68Xk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCXqKEs68Xk)
Kai!  She's ripping on Drosophilia now!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 25, 2008, 05:13:08 AM
I just saw that on Pharyngula.  I liked the end of PZ's rant:

QuoteThis is where the Republican party has ended up: supporting an ignorant buffoon who believes in the End Times and speaking in tongues while deriding some of the best and most successful strategies for scientific research. In this next election, we've got to choose between the 21st century rationalism and Dark Age inanity. It ought to be an easy choice.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 25, 2008, 10:49:47 AM
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/mccain_aide_gave_reporters_inc.php

QuoteJohn McCain's Pennsylvania communications director told reporters in the state an incendiary version of the hoax story about the attack on a McCain volunteer well before the facts of the case were known or established -- and even told reporters outright that the "B" carved into the victim's cheek stood for "Barack," according to multiple sources familiar with the discussions.

John Verrilli, the news director for KDKA in Pittsburgh, told TPM Election Central that McCain's Pennsylvania campaign communications director gave one of his reporters a detailed version of the attack that included a claim that the alleged attacker said, "You're with the McCain campaign? I'm going to teach you a lesson."

Verrilli also told TPM that the McCain spokesperson had claimed that the "B" stood for Barack. According to Verrilli, the spokesperson also told KDKA that Sarah Palin had called the victim of the alleged attack, who has since admitted the story was a hoax.

The KDKA reporter had called McCain's campaign office for details after seeing the story -- sans details -- teased on Drudge.

The McCain spokesperson's claims -- which came in the midst of extraordinary and heated conversations late yesterday between the McCain campaign, local TV stations, and the Obama camp, as the early version of the story rocketed around the political world -- is significant because it reveals a McCain official pushing a version of the story that was far more explosive than the available or confirmed facts permitted at the time.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 25, 2008, 02:21:37 PM
By the by, Obama is going to murder his grandmother for votes

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2008/10/bull.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 25, 2008, 03:36:16 PM
Someone, somewhere actually thinks that a Palin/Bachman 2012 ticket is a good idea:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/greenwald/39922
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 25, 2008, 03:45:30 PM
 :lol:

Ah, Commentary....is Stormin' Norman Podheretz still insisting its 1938 and that Ayman al-Zawahiri is worse than one hundred Hitlers?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 25, 2008, 06:31:34 PM
Joe Biden shows you have to deal with real "gotcha" questions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQXcImQfubM
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 25, 2008, 09:08:35 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 25, 2008, 06:31:34 PM
Joe Biden shows you have to deal with real "gotcha" questions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQXcImQfubM
video no longer available, what was it?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 25, 2008, 09:23:49 PM
markets continued failure show a vote of no confidence in  Obama as lead increases
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10132008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/an_obama_panic__133374.htm
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 25, 2008, 09:26:53 PM
 :lol:

Jonah Goldberg has been peddling this line for months as well.  Apparently, Obama is behind the credit crunch.  Well, of course he is, he's a minority, and a Marxist.  And possibly secretly gay.  And we all know gay communist blacks were behind the credit collapse, as we can deduce from Washington Mutual's tolerant employee policy.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 25, 2008, 11:56:25 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on October 25, 2008, 09:08:35 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 25, 2008, 06:31:34 PM
Joe Biden shows you have to deal with real "gotcha" questions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQXcImQfubM
video no longer available, what was it?
Hmm.. it still works for me.  It was a video of Biden getting interviewed by a local Orlando reporter.  Very very loaded questions.  Try this link instead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXEbs_Rw7MU
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 26, 2008, 02:54:57 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 25, 2008, 11:56:25 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on October 25, 2008, 09:08:35 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 25, 2008, 06:31:34 PM
Joe Biden shows you have to deal with real "gotcha" questions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQXcImQfubM
video no longer available, what was it?
Hmm.. it still works for me.  It was a video of Biden getting interviewed by a local Orlando reporter.  Very very loaded questions.  Try this link instead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXEbs_Rw7MU
i loved the Marx question :lulz:
i like the tough questions, wingnutie as they are, all reporters should all have her balls
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 26, 2008, 04:42:29 PM
I hate that reporter and that news station.
They report the most ridiculous stories and then ask questions that make you look bad no matter how you answer them. (even if it's a good story they make you look bad)






and I voted yesterday.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 26, 2008, 05:02:33 PM
i don't know the station except the above posted video , her questions were biased and probably geared to try to make bidden look dumb. I just like the point blank no soft balls, no pitching to your talking point approach. the press should always be adversariaL.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 26, 2008, 05:04:29 PM
McCain is endorsed by the Time Cube website

http://episkoposcain.wordpress.com/2008/10/26/best-mccain-endorsement-ever/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 26, 2008, 05:34:53 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/23/AR2008102302081_2.html?hpid=opinionsbox1?callitaweasel

QuoteFirst, with the financial meltdown, the federal government is now acquiring a huge ownership stake in the nation's financial system. It will be immensely tempting to officeholders in Washington to use that stake for political ends -- to reward friends and punish enemies. One-party government, of course, will intensify those temptations. And as the federal government succumbs, officeholders will become more and more comfortable holding that stake. The current urgency to liquidate the government's position will subside. The United States needs Republicans and conservatives to monitor the way Democrats wield this extraordinary and dangerous new power -- and to pressure them to surrender it as rapidly as feasible.

Second, the political culture of the Democratic Party has changed over the past decade. There's a fierce new anger among many liberal Democrats, a more militant style and an angry intolerance of dissent and criticism. This is the culture of the left-wing blogosphere and MSNBC's evening line-up -- and soon, it will be the culture of important political institutions in Washington.
So in other words, the Democrats will become the Republicans of 2000-06.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 26, 2008, 07:35:18 PM
Quote from: fnord mote eris on October 26, 2008, 05:02:33 PM
i don't know the station except the above posted video , her questions were biased and probably geared to try to make bidden look dumb. I just like the point blank no soft balls, no pitching to your talking point approach. the press should always be adversariaL.

it's a central florida station.
her questions were trying to dig for some dirt to give them something to blow up into something huge.
he didn't take the bait.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 26, 2008, 07:58:36 PM
http://chatterbyrondavis.blogspot.com/2008/10/scene-from-rally.html

Scene from a Palin rally:

(http://img78.imageshack.us/img78/5962/palinrallycl4.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 26, 2008, 09:11:18 PM
QuoteJim Nuzzo, a White House aide to the first President Bush, dismissed Mrs Palin's critics as "cocktail party conservatives" who "give aid and comfort to the enemy".

He told The Sunday Telegraph: "There's going to be a bloodbath. A lot of people are going to be excommunicated. David Brooks and David Frum and Peggy Noonan are dead people in the Republican Party. The litmus test will be: where did you stand on Palin?"

Mr Frum thinks that Mrs Palin's brand of cultural conservatism appeals only to a dwindling number of voters.

He said: "She emerges from this election as the probable frontrunner for the 2012 nomination. Her supporters vastly outnumber her critics. But it will be extremely difficult for her to win the presidency."

Mr Nuzzo, who believes this election is not a re-run of the 1980 Reagan revolution but of 1976, when an ageing Gerald Ford lost a close contest and then ceded the leadership of the Republican Party to Mr Reagan.

He said: "Win or lose, there is a ready made conservative candidate waiting in the wings. Sarah Palin is not the new Iain Duncan Smith, she is the new Ronald Reagan." On the accuracy of that judgment, perhaps, rests the future of the Republican Party.

http://www.alternet.org/election08/104705/republican_fears_of_an_obama_landslide_victory_unleash_civil_war_within_the_party/?page=2
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 26, 2008, 09:42:26 PM
 :lulz: Has a Bush aide ever been right about anything ever?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 26, 2008, 10:06:19 PM
ZOMG!!1!  BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS GOING TO CANCEL CHRISTMAS!!11!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OHyf9QbzC4
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 27, 2008, 06:31:11 AM
Proof that Palin is really Bush in drag:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KF5ZkgNNBQE
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 27, 2008, 04:37:01 PM
Poster/Flyer for Yes on Prop 8 ("Preserve Marriage" proposition in CA) from my email box:

QuoteYES ON PROP 8

RALLY & BUS TOUR STOP IN LOS ANGELES



  WHAT:   A Yes on 8 decorated bus stopping in 16 cities throughout CA is coming to Los Angeles.  Bring signs and banners, crowds etc. 



  WHEN:    This Friday, October 24, 2008, 12:00 noon



WHERE:   St. Frances X Cabrini
1440 W. Imperial Hwy.
Los Angeles, CA  90047


  WHO:   Everybody.  Bring family, friends, neighbors, children, invite congregations of your friends churches and organizations.  This is the day to take an extended lunch of a half day off, personal time etc.  Tell everyone you know.  Send this to them by email or handout



  WHY:   We want the crowd to be as larges as possible to demonstrate to those who have not made up their minds and the MEDIA that most people are in support of YES ON 8.



Parking available, bring your lunch and stand up for marriage the rights of our kids, freedom of speech and freedom of religion!  Bring all to greet the bus and the guest speakers.
 
Contact:  Friar Cesar Raffo,  323-757-9162

Sonja Eddings Brown, Deputy Communications Director
Protect Marriage California - sonja@protectmarriage.com

818-993-4508  818-723-9446 cell

It was a word doc, so the graphics are all shitty.  But you get the point.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: hooplala on October 27, 2008, 05:41:49 PM
I'm assuming when they say "Everybody" they don't mean "bring all your gay friends!!" - right?

Also, I like how they refer to freedom of religion, but I wonder how a bunhc of satanists would be welcomed?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 27, 2008, 05:46:57 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on October 27, 2008, 05:41:49 PM
I'm assuming when they say "Everybody" they don't mean "bring all your gay friends!!" - right?

Also, I like how they refer to freedom of religion, but I wonder how a bunhc of satanists would be welcomed?

Come now, Hoops, you oughtta know better than to think these people see beyond the end of their sanctimonious noses!

I know, you're being facetious...me too, though.  This type of thing just makes my ass twitch.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 27, 2008, 05:59:11 PM
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl-flbsign1017sboct17,0,5028216.story

(http://www.sun-sentinel.com/media/photo/2008-10/42947924.jpg)

Signage in a Fla McCain campaign office.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 27, 2008, 06:00:24 PM
They forgot Michael Jackson and Mickey Mouse
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 27, 2008, 06:01:38 PM
And the Young Republicans....
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 27, 2008, 06:02:35 PM
They also forgot Ghenghis Khan, that kid who stole your lunch money, the clerk who always shortchanges you and your asshole boss as well.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: hooplala on October 27, 2008, 06:08:16 PM
Well, why should anything ever change?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: hooplala on October 27, 2008, 06:12:05 PM
Of course, McCain is saying "change" too, but these poster makers were savvy enough to know he's full of shit when he says it.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on October 27, 2008, 06:33:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 26, 2008, 05:04:29 PM
McCain is endorsed by the Time Cube website

http://episkoposcain.wordpress.com/2008/10/26/best-mccain-endorsement-ever/

aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhahhahahahha

:cramstipated:

well shit
I'm officially converted
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on October 27, 2008, 06:48:52 PM
Jon Stewart responds to last week's hilarious right wing "Pro-America vs Anti-America" media blitz

Pro America vs Anti America
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=188635&title=Pfriend-or-Pfoe?


Quiz: Are you a real American?
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=188637&title=quiz-are-you-a-real-american


Interviews with "Real Americans"
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=188638&title=understanding-real-america-in


A clarification for Governor Palin
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=188640&title=Governor-Palin-Clarification


Jon Stewart is at 100%
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 27, 2008, 06:50:44 PM
Didja see he and Colbert are teaming up for election night.  Fuck yeah--I'm so grabbing a bottle of whatever I can and drinking to that come Tues evening.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 27, 2008, 06:54:23 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2008, 06:50:44 PM
Didja see he and Colbert are teaming up for election night.  Fuck yeah--I'm so grabbing a bottle of whatever I can and drinking to that come Tues evening.

No watching election day coverage for me.   :x

I'm gonna be stuck in the woods with the teenagers again. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 27, 2008, 06:55:48 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 27, 2008, 06:54:23 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2008, 06:50:44 PM
Didja see he and Colbert are teaming up for election night.  Fuck yeah--I'm so grabbing a bottle of whatever I can and drinking to that come Tues evening.

No watching election day coverage for me.   :x

I'm gonna be stuck in the woods with the teenagers again. 

Does yer cellphone have interbutts?  Like as not one of the teens would have that...yeah, that would suck ass, but hey, you're in the trenches now, RWHN. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 27, 2008, 06:58:23 PM
I would watch, but Comedy Central has disallowed UK IPs.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on October 27, 2008, 06:58:37 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 27, 2008, 06:54:23 PM
No watching election day coverage for me.   :x

I'm gonna be stuck in the woods with the teenagers again. 

in a way, I envy you
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 27, 2008, 06:59:23 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2008, 06:58:23 PM
I would watch, but Comedy Central has disallowed UK IPs.


Who the what they doing?




That sounds fairly retarded.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 27, 2008, 07:01:15 PM
Quote from: Rabbi LMNO on October 27, 2008, 06:59:23 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2008, 06:58:23 PM
I would watch, but Comedy Central has disallowed UK IPs.


Who the what they doing?




That sounds fairly retarded.

Channel 4 has the rights to air the Daily Show in the UK, and FX has the rights to the Colbert Report.  They worry that people watching on the internet mean they will have reduced prices for those advertising slots.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 27, 2008, 07:04:54 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2008, 06:55:48 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 27, 2008, 06:54:23 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2008, 06:50:44 PM
Didja see he and Colbert are teaming up for election night.  Fuck yeah--I'm so grabbing a bottle of whatever I can and drinking to that come Tues evening.

No watching election day coverage for me.   :x

I'm gonna be stuck in the woods with the teenagers again. 

Does yer cellphone have interbutts?  Like as not one of the teens would have that...yeah, that would suck ass, but hey, you're in the trenches now, RWHN. 

I'm a bit Ted Kascynski about cell phones.  I only have a TracFone which I just use for emergencies, and it's rather ancient.  Cellphone coverage in that part of Maine is pretty spotty anyway. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Eve on October 27, 2008, 07:22:59 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 27, 2008, 07:04:54 PM
I'm a bit Ted Kascynski about cell phones.  I only have a TracFone which I just use for emergencies, and it's rather ancient.  Cellphone coverage in that part of Maine is pretty spotty anyway. 

(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/ted.jpg)



RWHN, plz to supply WOMP with a picture of you directly facing camera!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 27, 2008, 07:26:42 PM
But it will steal my soul!!!!   :eek:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Eve on October 27, 2008, 07:37:55 PM
Lies! It just makes you even prettier.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 27, 2008, 09:09:39 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2008, 06:50:44 PM
Didja see he and Colbert are teaming up for election night.  Fuck yeah--I'm so grabbing a bottle of whatever I can and drinking to that come Tues evening.
I'll be working, no drama for me.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Golden Applesauce on October 27, 2008, 11:53:40 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on October 27, 2008, 06:48:52 PM
Jon Stewart responds to last week's hilarious right wing "Pro-America vs Anti-America" media blitz

Pro America vs Anti America
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=188635&title=Pfriend-or-Pfoe?


Quiz: Are you a real American?
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=188637&title=quiz-are-you-a-real-american


Interviews with "Real Americans"
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=188638&title=understanding-real-america-in


A clarification for Governor Palin
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=188640&title=Governor-Palin-Clarification


Jon Stewart is at 100%

I think the real reason McCain/Palin are losing is because they pissed off David Letterman, John Stewart, and looked stupid in front of the SNL people.

Comedy is kicking their ass.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 28, 2008, 04:21:48 AM
Do NEVER piss off the court jester. They are experts at controlling the crowd around them.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 28, 2008, 08:02:39 AM
http://www.npr.org/blogs/politics/2008/10/plot_uncovered.html

Via the AP (and confirmed by NPR):

    The ATF says it has broken up a plot to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and shoot or decapitate 102 black people in a Tennessee murder spree.


    In court records unsealed Monday, agents said they disrupted plans to rob a gun store and target an unnamed but predominantly African-American high school by two neo-Nazi skinheads.

Read an excerpt from the US Department of Justice press release after the jump.

-- Sean Bowditch

According to the Complaint, approximately one month ago, [Daniel] Cowart and [Paul] Schlesselman met via the internet through a mutual friend and both claim to have very strong beliefs regarding "White Power" and "Skinhead" philosophy. Cowart and Schlesselman began discussing going on a "killing spree". The Complaint further alleges that Cowart and Schlesselman discussed robbing a gun shop (Federal Firearms Licensee) in order to gather weapons and ammunition. The Complaint notes the defendants were in possession of a sawed off shotgun.

On October 20, 2008, Cowart allegedly traveled from Tennessee to Arkansas to pick up Schlesselman in order to carry out their plan. The Complaint states that at this time, the defendants further discussed their killing spree to include targeting a predominately African American School and to continue their spree until their final act of violence which would be to attempt to assassinate Presidential Candidate Barack Obama. "The United States Secret Service takes all threats against Presidential Candidates seriously and is actively investigating the allegations," said Richard Harlow, Special Agent in Charge of the Secret Service-Memphis Field Office. "The Secret Service does not comment on this type of investigation."

The Complaint further notes that the defendants stated that they would be willing to die during this attempt. According to the Complaint, after soliciting a friend, to drive their car, between 11:00pm on October 21, 2008 and 2:00am on October 22, 2008, the defendants made plans to rob a house but were diverted when they arrived and observed a dog and two cars at the location. Cowart and Schlesselman then dropped Stafford back off at her residence and then went to a local retail store and allegedly purchased nylon rope and two ski masks.

"It is critical that the alleged plot was interrupted," said James Cavanaugh, Special Agent in Charge of ATF. "We give credit to the Deputies of Crockett and Haywood Counties. All forces of law enforcement have come together to stop this threat."

The Defendants were arrested on October 22, 2008 by the Crockett County Sheriff's Office. "Once we arrested the defendants and suspected they had violated federal law, we immediately contacted federal authorities, " said Sheriff Troy Klyce of Crockett County. "The Sheriff's Department is committed to keeping Crockett County a safe place for our all of citizens."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 28, 2008, 02:35:37 PM
The word "terrorist" is surprisingly lacking from that article too.   :|
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 28, 2008, 04:54:45 PM
Effigy of Sarah Palin hanging by noose in Hollyweird...

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-palineffigy28-2008oct28,0,3849487.story

Heh

(http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h183/Jenne73/sarahhanging.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 28, 2008, 04:59:42 PM
Um.... WEST Hollywood.



You know, Queertown?  if they DIDN'T hang her in effigy, I would be concerned.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on October 28, 2008, 05:08:53 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 28, 2008, 04:54:45 PM
Effigy of Sarah Palin hanging by noose in Hollyweird...

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-palineffigy28-2008oct28,0,3849487.story

Heh

The girl they interview in the video is full of Hollywood win. That is all.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 28, 2008, 05:38:41 PM
I still find the whole notion fucking cool as Hell.  Guess it helps it's Halloween.  :lol:

ETA:  This is the sort of shit that happens at Knott's Scary Farm--they do this live-action show called "The Hanging" where they violently kill pop icons and political figures.  Very entertaining.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 28, 2008, 06:10:00 PM
Seems Reuters is all but calling this election for Obama:

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSTRE49R6GX20081028

QuoteWith one week left in a raging fight for the presidency, Republican John McCain is running out of time and options.

McCain trails Democratic rival Barack Obama in national opinion polls and is struggling to defend about a dozen states won by President George W. Bush in 2004 -- with the number still growing.


Quote"At this point John McCain is climbing Mt. Everest without oxygen," said Chris Kofinis, a Democratic strategist and aide to John Edwards's failed 2008 presidential bid. "The battleground map could not look worse for a Republican."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 28, 2008, 08:32:28 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 28, 2008, 06:10:00 PM
Seems Reuters is all but calling this election for Obama:

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSTRE49R6GX20081028

QuoteWith one week left in a raging fight for the presidency, Republican John McCain is running out of time and options.

McCain trails Democratic rival Barack Obama in national opinion polls and is struggling to defend about a dozen states won by President George W. Bush in 2004 -- with the number still growing.


Quote"At this point John McCain is climbing Mt. Everest without oxygen," said Chris Kofinis, a Democratic strategist and aide to John Edwards's failed 2008 presidential bid. "The battleground map could not look worse for a Republican."
From the numbers I've seen all Obama has to do is win the states Kerry won in '04 plus either Ohio or Pennsylvania.  He wins both and it's a boat race.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 28, 2008, 08:39:43 PM
There are three states to watch.  Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Colorado.  If he wins those 3 states, he wins the election. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 28, 2008, 08:45:29 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 28, 2008, 08:39:43 PM
There are three states to watch.  Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Colorado.  If he wins those 3 states, he wins the election. 
I don't know.  Colorado will be an after-thought if Obama wins Ohio and Florida.  If he somehow wins Florida and Indiana then they shouldn't even bother to count the votes west of the Mississippi. This thing could be over very early.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 28, 2008, 08:48:04 PM
Yes, you're right.  If he does manage to win Ohio and Florida, along with Pennsylvania, Colorado will be moot.  I'm just saying that I think those are his keys to victory.  Because if he wins those three, and doesn't have any surprises in the states that are solidly in his column.  McCain can win Ohio AND Florida and still lose. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 28, 2008, 08:57:44 PM
From FiveThirtyEight.com's Scenario Analysis:

Obama loses OH, wins election: 80%
Obama loses OH/FL, wins election: 71.07%
Obama loses OH/FL/PA, wins election: 1.96%
McCain loses OH/FL/PA, wins election: 0%
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 28, 2008, 09:01:02 PM
The fascination I have with this is where all the usually-Red states like Montana are waffling.  Swing, swing, swing-away from the McCain camp they go.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 28, 2008, 09:02:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 28, 2008, 08:57:44 PM
From FiveThirtyEight.com's Scenario Analysis:

Obama loses OH, wins election: 80%
Obama loses OH/FL, wins election: 71.07%
Obama loses OH/FL/PA, wins election: 1.96%
McCain loses OH/FL/PA, wins election: 0%

The electoral-vote.com site is awesome for this too.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 28, 2008, 11:38:54 PM
just for shits n giggles, what are the realistic scenarios for a McCain win?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 28, 2008, 11:40:31 PM
Those sites do that--break it down to near-Vegas odds for you.

www.fivethirtyeight.com has it off to the right.  It's called "Scenario Analysis"
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 29, 2008, 02:28:22 AM
Quote from: Rabbi LMNO on October 28, 2008, 11:38:54 PM
just for shits n giggles, what are the realistic scenarios for a McCain win?
Realistic?  Obama majorly screws up (kicks a puppy, eats a baby on live tv). Or Bradley Effect.  Or massive voter fraud.  There is also a possibility that every single poll is off by 10 points. I guess anything is possible.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 02:31:48 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 29, 2008, 02:28:22 AM
Quote from: Rabbi LMNO on October 28, 2008, 11:38:54 PM
just for shits n giggles, what are the realistic scenarios for a McCain win?
Realistic?  Obama majorly screws up (kicks a puppy, eats a baby on live tv). Or Bradley Effect.  Or massive voter fraud.  There is also a possibility that every single poll is off by 10 points. I guess anything is possible.

That's all tinfoil hat schtuff, though. :tinfoilhat:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 29, 2008, 02:32:50 AM
well, I meant the ever-so-precise state breakdown as the Obama predictions, but it looks like no ones being even handed at this point.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 02:33:50 AM
Quote from: Rabbi LMNO on October 29, 2008, 02:32:50 AM
well, I meant the ever-so-precise state breakdown as the Obama predictions, but it looks like no ones being even handed at this point.

You don't like 538's take on it then?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 29, 2008, 02:57:21 AM
see, this is me not wanting to do reasearch.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 03:03:46 AM
Quote from: LMNOsee, this is me not wanting to do reasearch.

:lulz:  lazyass.  Here, I'll screenshot.



(http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h183/Jenne73/scrnshot538.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 29, 2008, 03:14:30 AM
Early voter turnout total for FL:
1,185,554

Early voter turnout for NC: (Northhhhhh Carolinnnna)
1,284,177
ballots cast by:
dem- 771,549
rep-396,109


just sayin.


source:cnn.com
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 03:15:34 AM
Swing-swing goes Fla.  But that's fine--hopefully those AARP fucks have got their acts together and help the grannies vote properly this time.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 29, 2008, 03:17:14 AM
Quote from: Rabbi LMNO on October 29, 2008, 02:32:50 AM
well, I meant the ever-so-precise state breakdown as the Obama predictions, but it looks like no ones being even handed at this point.
Fine, I'll play around with Daily Kos's map thingee (http://scoreboard.dailykos.com/map) until I get a realistic scenario for McCain winning.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 29, 2008, 03:19:50 AM
Quote from: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 03:15:34 AM
Swing-swing goes Fla.  But that's fine--hopefully those AARP fucks have got their acts together and help the grannies vote properly this time.

I helped my mom (who is a granny) fill out her ballot  :)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 03:28:26 AM
Quote from: Squiddy on October 29, 2008, 03:19:50 AM
Quote from: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 03:15:34 AM
Swing-swing goes Fla.  But that's fine--hopefully those AARP fucks have got their acts together and help the grannies vote properly this time.

I helped my mom (who is a granny) fill out her ballot  :)

Yay Squiddy!  I really don't want a repeat of "Recount."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 29, 2008, 03:33:23 AM
Ok, I'll give McCain the current battleground states: Indiana, Missouri, Florida, Nevada, North Carolina. That makes it Obama 309, McCain 229.  Giving McCain Ohio and North Dakota (which he isn't likely to win right now) brings him up to only 252. Winning Pennsylvania would put him over the top after that.

The odds of all of that happening at the same time is roughly 4%.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 29, 2008, 05:36:55 AM
Quote from: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 03:28:26 AM
Quote from: Squiddy on October 29, 2008, 03:19:50 AM
Quote from: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 03:15:34 AM
Swing-swing goes Fla.  But that's fine--hopefully those AARP fucks have got their acts together and help the grannies vote properly this time.

I helped my mom (who is a granny) fill out her ballot  :)

Yay Squiddy!  I really don't want a repeat of "Recount."

Oh honey this is Florida. We're gonna have a recount.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 06:46:29 AM
Quote from: Squiddy on October 29, 2008, 05:36:55 AM
Quote from: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 03:28:26 AM
Quote from: Squiddy on October 29, 2008, 03:19:50 AM
Quote from: Jenne on October 29, 2008, 03:15:34 AM
Swing-swing goes Fla.  But that's fine--hopefully those AARP fucks have got their acts together and help the grannies vote properly this time.

I helped my mom (who is a granny) fill out her ballot  :)

Yay Squiddy!  I really don't want a repeat of "Recount."

Oh honey this is Florida. We're gonna have a recount.

:sadbanana:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 29, 2008, 10:20:42 AM
www.realclearpolitics.com is the site I use.  They do averages of all the polls.  Plus they have an interactive map where you can do your own scenarios.  There is one where Obama can win without FLA OH and Penn.  But it means he has to win Virginia and Nevada, and hold all the other states.  If he does that it's 270-268 Obama/McCain.  If McCain were somehow able to pick off the 1 EV from Maine, we'd have a dead heat 269-269.  Wouldn't that be fun?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 29, 2008, 11:24:30 AM
This is how it will work, every day until the election:

1. Rumor of big, game-changing October Surprise damaging to Obama appears on Drudge
2. Fox News runs with it
3. McCain campaign pushes it
4. Wingnuts start prematurely ejaculating
5. Rumour is debunked
6. Right wing blogosphere tries to clap louder and bring rumor back to life
7. Snarky left wing blogs reap the comedy gold
8. Repeat until election ends
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on October 29, 2008, 12:36:48 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 29, 2008, 10:20:42 AM...If McCain were somehow able to pick off the 1 EV from Maine, we'd have a dead heat 269-269.  Wouldn't that be fun?
Then we would have to resolve the issue with a cage fight.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: LMNO on October 29, 2008, 01:41:37 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 29, 2008, 11:24:30 AM
This is how it will work, every day until the election:

1. Rumor of big, game-changing October Surprise damaging to Obama appears on Drudge
2. Fox News runs with it
3. McCain campaign pushes it
4. Wingnuts start prematurely ejaculating
5. Rumour is debunked
6. Right wing blogosphere tries to clap louder and bring rumor back to life
7. Snarky left wing blogs reap the comedy gold
8. Repeat until election ends

:potd:


Nothing like a well-placed Peter Pan reference.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 29, 2008, 02:21:03 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 29, 2008, 11:24:30 AM
This is how it will work, every day until the election:

1. Rumor of big, game-changing October Surprise damaging to Obama appears on Drudge
2. Fox News runs with it
3. McCain campaign pushes it
4. Wingnuts start prematurely ejaculating
5. Rumour is debunked
6. Right wing blogosphere tries to clap louder and bring rumor back to life
7. Snarky left wing blogs reap the comedy gold
8. Repeat until election ends
I saw that they tried that with the "ZOMG, Obama said that the Constitution has flaws" soundbite a couple of days ago.  LAEM.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 29, 2008, 02:33:55 PM
Quote from: Rabbi LMNO on October 29, 2008, 01:41:37 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 29, 2008, 11:24:30 AM
This is how it will work, every day until the election:

1. Rumor of big, game-changing October Surprise damaging to Obama appears on Drudge
2. Fox News runs with it
3. McCain campaign pushes it
4. Wingnuts start prematurely ejaculating
5. Rumour is debunked
6. Right wing blogosphere tries to clap louder and bring rumor back to life
7. Snarky left wing blogs reap the comedy gold
8. Repeat until election ends

:potd:


Nothing like a well-placed Peter Pan reference.

Just like Peter Pan, the right wing blogosphere will never grow up.  Its an apt reference indeed.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 29, 2008, 02:38:51 PM
My governor is strategically avoiding Sarah Palin:

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081028/NEWS0502/810280411

QuoteGov. Mitch Daniels today began his final campaign swing in his now-famous RV, heading to southern Indiana.

One place Daniels won't include on his tour is the Jeffersonville stage where Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president, will be campaigning Wednesday evening.

Daniels said he plans to talk to folks in the parking lot, but can't fit into his schedule a joint appearance with Palin.

This is Palin's third trip to Indiana, and Daniels has yet to campaign with her, though Lt. Gov. Becky Skillman was with Palin at the previous rallies in Noblesville and Fort Wayne.

"I'm going by (the Palin rally.) I've got another event scheduled at the same time, but it is close by, so I'm going to go by and spend as long as I can there and hang out in the parking lot and spend some time with the folks standing in line or patiently waiting to get in," Daniels said. "I'm not speaking at the rally, no.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 29, 2008, 02:40:52 PM
Doesn't he know he's a dead man?

You go against Palin, and Krauthammer and Rove will be on yo ass.  Bush's advisors have said so.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 29, 2008, 02:45:56 PM
When Palin was here in Maine, Olympia Snow (R) who is not up for re-election was at the event with her.  Susan Collins (R) who IS up for re-election this year was not there.  Susan Collins also begged and pleaded with the McCain campaign to not direct their robocalls into Maine.  She doesn't want to be associated with Bush, Palin, OR McCain at this point. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 29, 2008, 02:47:03 PM
Cocktail conservatives....tsk tsk.  Why wont they risk their careers for the Glorious Leader and his heir apparent?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 29, 2008, 02:56:41 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 29, 2008, 02:40:52 PM
Doesn't he know he's a dead man?

You go against Palin, and Krauthammer and Rove will be on yo ass.  Bush's advisors have said so.
Mitch was Bush's budget director for his first 2 years in office and depending on who you ask a) is responsible for the $236 billion annual surplus turn into a $400 billion deficit or b) was forced to resign for not letting them spend faster.  He also said that the Iraq War would cost between 50-$60 billion. And yet, I'm still thinking about voting for him because the democratic candidate is an idiot.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 29, 2008, 04:04:45 PM
I'm going to an Obama rally tonight.
Once in a lifetime, ya know.

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 29, 2008, 04:16:42 PM
be sure to bring your brown shirt (http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=igDoHZ0hVUY)!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 29, 2008, 05:29:41 PM
Israel leaders worried about Obama position http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1031943.html
palestinians cold call Americans to support Obama http://usatoday.feedroom.com/index.jsp?fr_story=FRdamp312921&rf=rss
every one Obama associated with is a Marxist socialist http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/28/obama-affinity-marxists-dates-college-days/
be afraid very afraid http://michaelsavage.wnd.com/?pageId=2154
Obama supporters macing republican supporters http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=207493

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 29, 2008, 06:18:51 PM
Quote from: vexati0n on October 29, 2008, 04:16:42 PM
be sure to bring your brown shirt (http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=igDoHZ0hVUY)!

:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:

yeah, I'm sure that he meant what they were trying to make it look like.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 29, 2008, 08:51:13 PM
Joe the Plumber on Obama:


"I'm honestly scared for America," Wurzelbacher said.

He later said Obama would end the democracy that the U.S. military had defended during wars.

"I love America. I hope it remains a democracy, not a socialist society. ... If you look at spreading the wealth, that's honestly right out of Karl Marx's mouth," Wurzelbacher said.

"No one can debate that. That's not my opinion. That's fact."

http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2008/10/29/joe-the-plumber-is-now-joe-the-foreign-policy-advisor/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 29, 2008, 08:58:08 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 29, 2008, 08:51:13 PM
Joe the Plumber on Obama:


"I'm honestly scared for America," Wurzelbacher said.

He later said Obama would end the democracy that the U.S. military had defended during wars.

"I love America. I hope it remains a democracy, not a socialist society. ... If you look at spreading the wealth, that's honestly right out of Karl Marx's mouth," Wurzelbacher said.

"No one can debate that. That's not my opinion. That's fact."

http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2008/10/29/joe-the-plumber-is-now-joe-the-foreign-policy-advisor/


Somehow, he seems like a great choice for the GOP, maybe Palin/Wurzelbacher '12?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 29, 2008, 08:59:14 PM
Socialism and democracy are totally mutually exclusive, too.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 29, 2008, 09:00:16 PM
Quote from: vexati0n on October 29, 2008, 08:59:14 PM
Socialism and democracy are totally mutually exclusive, too.

Thats why we laugh at social democrats.

Silly socialists.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 29, 2008, 09:04:24 PM
I can't believe Sam Shepherd defended Obama. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 29, 2008, 09:06:06 PM
I can't believe Andrew Sullivan backs Obama.

Or Christopher Buckley.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 29, 2008, 09:06:23 PM
And another thing.

Leave it to the extreme Right to fret that a left-leaning (although in America's case, "Left-leaning" means anybody less conservative than Mussolini) President would ascend to the White House as if climbing onto an imperial throne.

If the Executive has the power to simply wave a staff and declare democracy "over," then I'm pretty sure democracy is already over. And if such power rests in the hands of the President, then we only have the "conservatives" to thank for it. Over the past decade their single greatest accomplishment has been the boundless expansion of executive power.

And now that they're about to lose their asses, all of a sudden it's a bad thing to have such a powerful Presidency. Go figure.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 29, 2008, 09:07:40 PM
Thats because you don't understand, the President is like a magickal emperor, who can unilaterally make everyone in the country bow to Mecca five times a day, because checks and balances are for faggots.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on October 29, 2008, 09:12:42 PM
Well why not? Apparently the President can unilaterally do anything else, from raping and pillaging entire sovereign states to eating cake while cities in his own country literally drown to death.

No joking: the American President in all seriousness now has at least as much power over American citizens as King George had over the American colonists in 1776.

Maybe conservatives are finally beginning to realize what they've done to the Presidency, but I doubt it. They just want it to stay in their hands.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 29, 2008, 09:17:00 PM
Well, they have realized.

But only because they know they are going to lose.  They don't want anyone but their guys to have that power, but they're too stupid (or coveteous of such power) to think that the solution might be to institutionally limit such powers.  Which is why they are reverting to 1990s, Patriot/Militia mode, so they can play freedom fighter to Obama's iron rule.  Bien pensant anti-authoritarianism.  Then, once they regain power, they'll do the same stupid reversal again...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 03:32:37 AM
Fundies Chicken Little it over Prop 8 in California
http://link.brightcove.com:80/services/player/bcpid1815825713
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 30, 2008, 03:42:15 AM
Quote from: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 03:32:37 AM
Fundies Chicken Little it over Prop 8 in California
http://link.brightcove.com:80/services/player/bcpid1815825713

OMG!!!  I fucking hate them!!!!!   :argh!:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on October 30, 2008, 03:52:05 AM
My cousin got married to her life partner last sunday.
Shit like this pisses me off.
IF GAYS ARE ALLOWED TO GET MARRIED, THEY WILL RANDOMLY SODOMIZE YOU WITH MIXED VEGETABLES IN FULL PUBLIC VIEW!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 03:58:33 AM
Quote from: TheScarletReaper on October 30, 2008, 03:52:05 AM
My cousin got married to her life partner last sunday.
Shit like this pisses me off.
IF GAYS ARE ALLOWED TO GET MARRIED, THEY WILL RANDOMLY SODOMIZE YOU YUOR CHILDREN WHILE YUO AND GRAMPA WATCH WITH MIXED VEGETABLES IN FULL PUBLIC VIEW!

Fixt.  Srsly.  Their paranoia knows few bounds.  If any.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 30, 2008, 06:14:04 AM
Palin's already making plans for 2012:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMwv74rIGDU
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 30, 2008, 10:27:03 AM
Obama is going to round up conservatives and put them in death camps

hxxp://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/31747_Obamas_Civilian_National_Security_Force

Note: I have changed the link because Chuckles likes to block mocking and critical referrals.  Also, your work may filter LGF as a hate site.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on October 30, 2008, 11:34:37 AM
You think LA times is actually hiding that video of Barack with the former PLO leader?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 30, 2008, 11:53:09 AM
Dunno, but if it gets released, expect the Democrats to crow about McCain's personal donations to the man.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on October 30, 2008, 12:05:04 PM
All I've been hearing about is how "Republicans are richer than Democrats and Democrats NEVER take extra funding, kickbacks or special interest money"

Local newspaper did a general poll here and the Democrats are richer than the Republicans,
and it seems people forgot the 600 MILLION dollar gift to Obama.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 30, 2008, 12:06:58 PM
Democrats also have more invested in companies profiting from the Iraq war (or they did, at least).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on October 30, 2008, 12:11:17 PM
The whole thing is just built on hypocrisy and a self image built of glass.
I believe people are generally evil, and with that being said, you see my dim view and mistrust of ANY politician.
Modified - Dim view of ANYONE.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 30, 2008, 12:31:40 PM
I had a dim view of YO MOMMA last night.

She forgot to turn the lights on, you see.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on October 30, 2008, 12:33:57 PM
Forgetful woman. Needs gingko.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 30, 2008, 01:02:29 PM
It's official.  John McCain is playing for, a tie. 

John McCain announced that he will be coming to Maine, yes, MAINE, before Election Day.  This means he is making a strong push to pick off the 1 EV from our State.  And that part of the State, the 2nd District, does tend to be somewhat Conservative.  It is where Susan Collins came from. 

If he were somehow able to pick off that EV, win Ohio, Florida, AND Pennsylvania, and hold all of the other states in his column, we could end up with a 269-269 result.  I personally don't think he can win Pennsylvania, so I think this is a "just in case" strategy. 

I think it pretty much signals that the McCain campaign's internal polls are showing that the best they can hope for is that 269-269 tie. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 30, 2008, 01:35:26 PM
1 more reasons to fear Obama article http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_politics_change/2008/10/29/145434.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on October 30, 2008, 01:40:53 PM
I liked that article. I find a lot of it to be true.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 30, 2008, 01:58:04 PM
most wingnuttery starts out with a grain of truth and then is turned into a silo of stupid with    :lulz: and :argh!:
i keep posting the best of anti Obama wingnuttery, figuring pd'ers have as good a shot as anyone at separating the  :argh!: from the truth and enjoying the  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 30, 2008, 02:11:17 PM
Hah, Thomas Sowell.

What a moron.  He's usually writing for Clownhall, but obviously thats not paying for the cheetos anymore.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 02:20:52 PM
Heh...scaremongering document put out by Focus on the Family--what 2012 will look like should Obama win:

http://focusfamaction.edgeboss.net/download/focusfamaction/pdfs/10-22-08_2012letter.pdf

(apologies if it's been posted before)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on October 30, 2008, 02:57:41 PM
Quote from: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 02:20:52 PM
Heh...scaremongering document put out by Focus on the Family--what 2012 will look like should Obama win:

http://focusfamaction.edgeboss.net/download/focusfamaction/pdfs/10-22-08_2012letter.pdf

(apologies if it's been posted before)

wow a long read but worth the effort required to get through the christian heavy style
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 30, 2008, 03:01:25 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 30, 2008, 10:27:03 AM
Obama is going to round up conservatives and put them in death camps

hxxp://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/31747_Obamas_Civilian_National_Security_Force

Note: I have changed the link because Chuckles likes to block mocking and critical referrals.  Also, your work may filter LGF as a hate site.
Dumb question, but how is this "civilian national security force" different from the National Guard? Wouldn't it just be easier to bring all National Guardsmen back from all other countries and have them do what they were originally supposed to do?

Quote from: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 02:20:52 PM
Heh...scaremongering document put out by Focus on the Family--what 2012 will look like should Obama win:

http://focusfamaction.edgeboss.net/download/focusfamaction/pdfs/10-22-08_2012letter.pdf

(apologies if it's been posted before)
I think I posted that, but I don't remember.  I surely meant to.  Christian Sci Fi = worst genre ever.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 30, 2008, 03:12:22 PM
Bill O'Reilly's hilariously awful Electoral Vote map:

(http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/oreillymap_2.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on October 30, 2008, 03:18:33 PM
Yes, he also, all of a sudden, believes the Nielsen ratings system is rigged.  Because Olbermann has beat him in the 24-55 demo 3 nights in a row. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 30, 2008, 03:21:45 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on October 30, 2008, 03:18:33 PM
Yes, he also, all of a sudden, believes the Nielsen ratings system is rigged.  Because Olbermann has beat him in the 24-55 demo 3 nights in a row. 
I really hope that an Obama presidency sends O'RLY over the edge and he has a mental breakdown on air.  He's already halfway there. I want more of this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tJjNVVwRCY).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on October 30, 2008, 05:18:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-teM03FPUow (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-teM03FPUow)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on October 30, 2008, 06:51:03 PM
Quote from: trillian on October 30, 2008, 05:18:14 PM
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-teM03FPUow[url]

:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 30, 2008, 08:33:51 PM
AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/10/how-could-stanl.html

Obama is Malcolm X's lovechild!

No, really, that is the latest claim!   :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 08:38:34 PM
:lulz: 

NEXT THEY WILL BE SAYING HIS DAUGHTERS ARE REALLY THE LOVE CHILDREN OF MONKEYS FROM OUTERSPACE WHO CAME AND RAEPED HIS WIFE!!!

WTF is *wrong* with these people?  I mean, it's not like I'm afraid people will believe this shit, I know they will, it's just that I get tired of the ante.  UP UP AND AWAY it goes.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on October 30, 2008, 06:51:03 PM
Quote from: trillian on October 30, 2008, 05:18:14 PM
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-teM03FPUow[url]

:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:!

2ded.  Yoinked and sent.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Golden Applesauce on October 30, 2008, 08:44:10 PM
QuoteAtlas reader Rudy emailed both the University of Washington and the University of Hawaii, and they sent him back dates of enrollment.  It didn't match the dates Wikipedia had for Stanley Ann Dunham. Bob tried to update Wikipedia and his updates got deleted within minutes.  The big question is how was Ann having Barack in Honolulu in Aug 1961 AND enrolled at the U of Washington the same month?

When public record information from the University of Washington was added to Wikipedia's biography of Stanley Ann Dunham (Barack Hussein Obama Jr's mother), it was removed in 35 minutes the first time and 34 minutes the second time.  Read what Obama's team of internet thugs doesn't want you to know.

Wait, their argument for a conspiracy is that being enrolled in college means that you have to physically be on campus the entire time the college says you were enrolled?

And the proof is that wikipedians obama internet thugs have been removing their original research from Wikipedia?

Dear god that is levels of stupidity I haven't seen in a while.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 30, 2008, 08:47:47 PM
Pammy Atlas is full of win.

She has also does Youtube videos where she gets hilariously drunk and falls over a lot.  Amateur conspiracy theorism from Christian Zionists has never been this funny.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on October 30, 2008, 09:41:30 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on October 30, 2008, 06:51:03 PM
Quote from: trillian on October 30, 2008, 05:18:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-teM03FPUow (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-teM03FPUow)

:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:!


also, this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zuOPDCr7oM&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zuOPDCr7oM&feature=related)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on October 31, 2008, 05:02:59 AM
Quote from: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 08:38:34 PM
:lulz: 

NEXT THEY WILL BE SAYING HIS DAUGHTERS ARE REALLY THE LOVE CHILDREN OF MONKEYS FROM OUTERSPACE WHO CAME AND RAEPED HIS WIFE!!!

WTF is *wrong* with these people?  I mean, it's not like I'm afraid people will believe this shit, I know they will, it's just that I get tired of the ante.  UP UP AND AWAY it goes.

Well you know Jenne, Obama has never denied being a flesh vehicle for tiny space aliens, so...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on October 31, 2008, 01:12:48 PM
Quote from: Squiddy on October 31, 2008, 05:02:59 AM
Quote from: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 08:38:34 PM
:lulz: 

NEXT THEY WILL BE SAYING HIS DAUGHTERS ARE REALLY THE LOVE CHILDREN OF MONKEYS FROM OUTERSPACE WHO CAME AND RAEPED HIS WIFE!!!

WTF is *wrong* with these people?  I mean, it's not like I'm afraid people will believe this shit, I know they will, it's just that I get tired of the ante.  UP UP AND AWAY it goes.

Well you know Jenne, Obama has never denied being a flesh vehicle for tiny space aliens, so...
Quote from: Squiddy on October 31, 2008, 05:02:59 AM
Quote from: Jenne on October 30, 2008, 08:38:34 PM
:lulz: 

NEXT THEY WILL BE SAYING HIS DAUGHTERS ARE REALLY THE LOVE CHILDREN OF MONKEYS FROM OUTERSPACE WHO CAME AND RAEPED HIS WIFE!!!

WTF is *wrong* with these people?  I mean, it's not like I'm afraid people will believe this shit, I know they will, it's just that I get tired of the ante.  UP UP AND AWAY it goes.

Well you know Jenne, Obama has never denied being a flesh vehicle for tiny space aliens, so...

True...that plausible deniability is worthless if you don't outright invoke it in today's media culture...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 31, 2008, 04:04:43 PM
Republican strategist Dan Perrin, world's funniest comedian.

http://www.redstate.com/diaries/dan_perrin/2008/oct/28/the-seven-reasons-mccain-palin-are-a-lock-to/

There are seven serious, historic, demographic and other wise culturally compelling reasons Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin will win the election on November 4, 2008 – a date of defeat that will sear itself into the Democratic Party's collective consciousness.

The first and foremost reason McCain-Palin will win is the absolute arrogance, elitism, condescending, patronizing and in-your-face voter suppression campaign – don't vote for McCain, he can not win -- being conducted by the national media on Senator Obama's behalf.

Americans do not like to be told what to do. But the national media has become a feminized, electronic vote-for-Obama nagging machine. There is plenty of precedent for the average American telling those telling them what to do, to go pound sand, especially to those who tell them over, and over, and over again. Just ask the HMOs. Their you-can't-do-this or you-must-do-only-this business strategy ended with the average American saying NO to joining HMOs.

Essentially, the media have been frolicking in the streets in an orgy of Obama adulation and McCain bashing. Now, they will wonder why anyone would be disgusted by their behavior, or want to knock them back in their place? This is a symptom of their chronic and insular world condition.

The media's blindness is fueling the anti-media web-networks with oceans of gasoline. This is why the proliferation of lawsuits challenging Obama's claim of natural born citizenship (the original filed by a life long Democrat who is a former Deputy Attorney General of the State of Pennsylvania) and the beating up of the LA Times about its refusal to release the video of Obama speaking at a pro-Palestinian dinner, are just the tip of the anti-media iceberg the media themselves has created.

In short, the media cannot be fair. The media will not ever, not ever admit they had anything to do with the November 4th backlash. They listen to these criticisms just like an alcoholic listens to concerns, but who insists they can still have a drink. The media have hatred and contempt in their hard hearts for any views that do not meet their pro-Obama criteria. Stand by, national media, for the big smack down.

Here are the six other reasons McCain-Palin will win:

   1.      The Gallup poll after Labor Day has historically been a predictor of the winner of the Presidential election. The person leading in that poll wins the Presidency. The Republican convention, pushed onto Labor Day by the Summer Olympics muddied the waters on this historic fact, but the Gallup poll a week later showed McCain ahead of Obama, predicting the McCain victory.
   2.      There are six states that since 1972 have voted for the winning Presidential candidate. These are predictor states. They pick winners every time. McCain will win every one of the following six states: Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Ohio and Tennessee.
   3.      Elderly and some other Jewish voters were already uncomfortable about voting for Obama, but the recent comments by Farrakhan that when Obama speaks, the Messiah is speaking, or that Obama's victory will do great things for the Nation of Islam, or the statement by Jesse Jackson that there will be "fundamental change" in America's foreign policy, especially with regard to Israel – is causing a hemorrhaging of Jewish support.
   4.      Women who feel Senator Clinton was treated unfairly by the Democratic Party, by the media and by Senator Obama -- who did not even vet Senator Clinton to be his running mate – will remember. This voting block, you will recall, lay in the weeds in the pre-New Hampshire primary polling. The win by Senator Clinton was a shock, undetected by the polling. And these were Democratic Party voters who were undetected – not the other voters Obama will face November 4th. Obama's youth vote will not post to the polls, they never do. The young think: the media says Obama will win, so why should I vote? But the 40 and 50 and 60 something women voters who voted for Senator Clinton have three alternative plans to make sure they get to the polls, regardless of a hiccup in their work or child care responsibilities. They will vote, and they will vote against Senator Obama.
   5.      Today's unstable world does not bode well for Senator Obama. The instability in the stock market and related job and mortgage fears do not equate with voting for the ING (Inexperienced New Guy.) In an affirmation of Mark Penn's observation that the strong leader almost always wins the Presidential election, a mid-west hairdresser with no party affiliation told me the country has very serious problems, and that is why she is voting for the strongest leader.
   6.      Finally, the reason that the world and the media incorrectly will tag as the reason for McCain's victory (despite the foregoing six other reasons) will be the Wilder or Bradley effect. Simply put, Asians, Whites and Hispanics have and will lie to pollsters about their intention to vote for Senator Obama. According to the Associated Press, this will cost Obama six points at the polls. The AP estimate could be low. In the case of Bradley and Wilder, the spread between a "lead" in the polls and actual votes cast was in the low double digits.

So, when McCain-Palin wins – credit or blame the media. Their harping and yelping for Senator Obama created massive Obama over-exposure, anger and resentment that will be expressed in the voting booth on November 4th.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trillian on October 31, 2008, 04:40:08 PM
well shit, if a midwestern hairdresser says it's so...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 31, 2008, 05:18:18 PM
Quote from: trillian on October 31, 2008, 04:40:08 PM
well shit, if a midwestern hairdresser says it's so...
This election is going to be decided by Midwestern hairdressers and plumbers named Joe!!!
  \
:nigel:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mangrove on October 31, 2008, 06:58:10 PM
Holy holy fuck.

Mrs Mang' called. She said that she was speaking to one of her bosses on the phone. The subject of the election came up. She siad that she 'was thinking about voting for Obama'. Well, the truth is, she was never going to vote for McCain in 10 zillion years, but she was being diplomatic.

Well, he absolutely went fucking AWOL. He verbally abused her and Obama for 25 minutes. And yes, it goes without saying that some of it included:

Douchebag: I'm not racist....but I know niggers when I see them, and he's nothing but a fucking nigger!

Add a slice of:

Douchebag: He's in with TEH TERRURISTS!

Sprinkle with irrelevance:

Douchebag: His father died in a car crash because he was a fucking alcoholic.

And stir in some paranoia:

Douchebag: When he gets in, the country will go to all hell and it'll be YOUR FAULT. Hope you enjoy your tax increases!!


Current mood:  :eek:  :argh!:  :?  :roll:



Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on October 31, 2008, 07:12:56 PM
Wait, Mang, your wife earns $250,000 profits per annum?

Do you need a valet or something?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on October 31, 2008, 07:17:31 PM
sounds like a winning lawsuit waiting to happen.

enjoy your newfound riches!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 31, 2008, 08:21:59 PM
During biochem lab today my prof was complaining about Palin.  Not McCain, she said she could live with him as president.  The fruit fly comment really pissed her off.
Video of her speaking. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCXqKEs68Xk)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 31, 2008, 10:58:52 PM
Quote from: Vene on October 31, 2008, 08:21:59 PM
During biochem lab today my prof was complaining about Palin.  Not McCain, she said she could live with him as president.  The fruit fly comment really pissed her off.
Video of her speaking. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCXqKEs68Xk)
Palin really pissed off the powerful biologist voting bloc with that comment, didn't she?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 31, 2008, 11:34:56 PM
The way I handle it when people ask me who I'm voting for:

"Who are you voting for?"

...
...
...

"That's kind of personal, isn't it?"

"Oh, I'm sorry... I didn't mean..."

"No, that's OK. What were we talking about?"
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on October 31, 2008, 11:47:51 PM
Quote from: Leslie Hall on October 31, 2008, 11:34:56 PM
The way I handle it when people ask me who I'm voting for:

"Who are you voting for?"

...
...
...

"That's kind of personal, isn't it?"

"Oh, I'm sorry... I didn't mean..."

"No, that's OK. What were we talking about?"
Believe it or not, no one has actually asked me who am voting for.  Which means that either people already know that I'm liberal tree-hugging hippie wannabe, or they don't really care.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on October 31, 2008, 11:58:27 PM
Quote from: Homsar on October 31, 2008, 10:58:52 PM
Quote from: Vene on October 31, 2008, 08:21:59 PM
During biochem lab today my prof was complaining about Palin.  Not McCain, she said she could live with him as president.  The fruit fly comment really pissed her off.
Video of her speaking. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCXqKEs68Xk)
Palin really pissed off the powerful biologist voting bloc with that comment, didn't she?
Now if only we were actually a powerful voting bloc.  Besides, I think that campaign already pissed off most scientists.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 01, 2008, 01:14:34 AM
Quote from: Vene on October 31, 2008, 11:58:27 PM
Quote from: Homsar on October 31, 2008, 10:58:52 PM
Quote from: Vene on October 31, 2008, 08:21:59 PM
During biochem lab today my prof was complaining about Palin.  Not McCain, she said she could live with him as president.  The fruit fly comment really pissed her off.
Video of her speaking. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCXqKEs68Xk)
Palin really pissed off the powerful biologist voting bloc with that comment, didn't she?
Now if only we were actually a powerful voting bloc.  Besides, I think that campaign already pissed off most scientists rational thinking people.
Let's be honest, the only people the Republicans haven't pissed off is their base.  And they are called "base" for a reason.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 01, 2008, 06:30:10 AM
Palin, not exactly a Constitutional scholar:
Quote"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on November 01, 2008, 09:48:07 AM
<----independant.
Both parties pissed me off with their sassery.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 01, 2008, 02:49:35 PM
the pied piper of Hyde park
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/31/marching-toward-a-dark-river/

Obama clause, list of things he promises to put under your tree
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/obama-claus.html

Obama and his campaign staff want you to lower your expectations of what he can get done  if elected
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5051118.ece

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 01, 2008, 02:53:58 PM
I find myself agreeing with Tim Reid.

Then again, I heard a rumour out of Brussells that Obama is going to ask Germany for 25,000 troops, no questions asked or caveats on their operations, for Afghanistan.  Which if it is true, is simply preposterous, and totally unacceptable.  Which it is likely meant to be, so Obama can use their rejection to sideline Europe as being "unserious", and act unilaterally when it comes to the South Asia theatre.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 01, 2008, 03:01:19 PM
Obama cant afford to keep his promises
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/29/eveningnews/realitycheck/main4557520.shtml

and if you don't want a tax increase you are selfish
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/29/eveningnews/realitycheck/main4557520.shtml
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mangrove on November 01, 2008, 09:55:54 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 31, 2008, 07:12:56 PM
Wait, Mang, your wife earns $250,000 profits per annum?

Do you need a valet or something?

:lulz:

I wish!

Srsly, we're very far from having an income of $250,000.

However if we were rich and needed a valet, I'd hire someone from PD.com  :fap:

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 02, 2008, 04:29:11 PM
Palin got owned by the now infamous comedy duo Marc-Antoine Audette and Sebastien Trudel, posing as President Sarkozy of France.

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/11/01/palin-brutally-punkd.html

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/11/1/151958/557/577#c577
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 03, 2008, 05:14:36 AM
Since LMNO asked for it, What a McCain Win Would Look Like:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/what-mccain-win-looks-like.html

Looks like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida, and Colorado are going to be very huge.  If McCain loses more than one of those then it is all over.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on November 03, 2008, 01:29:52 PM
That's a scary sight for the people in fear of Obama winning. 3.7% chance that McCain wins the popular vote, I thought it would be more than that honestly.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 03, 2008, 02:21:09 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 03, 2008, 05:14:36 AM
Since LMNO asked for it, What a McCain Win Would Look Like:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/what-mccain-win-looks-like.html

Looks like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida, and Colorado are going to be very huge.  If McCain loses more than one of those then it is all over.

I think McCain will indeed lose Colorado.  Virginia polls close at 7:00 P.M.  Their results will most likely be known by 8:00 PM at the latest, unless it's "too close to call".  If Obama wins Virginia, I think that pretty much seals the deal.  So, if this ends up being a bloodbath, Virginia will be the canary in the cave.  If it's a squeaker, Colorado will be the clincher. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on November 03, 2008, 02:55:02 PM
Quote from: TheScarletReaper on November 03, 2008, 01:29:52 PM
That's a scary sight for the people in fear of Obama winning. 3.7% chance that McCain wins the popular vote, I thought it would be more than that honestly.

thankfully, no one cares about those people.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 03, 2008, 03:05:20 PM
I do.  They are hilarious to watch. 

The BBC had a street team somewhere in Ohio, and was interviewing people, many who were saying Obama was a Marxist and heavily implying he was a Muslim too.  I'd probably complain to the BBC if I was American.  They're basically interviewing your versions of Abu Hamza and treating that as a fair balance to the Obama supporters.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on November 03, 2008, 03:08:05 PM
I laugh at misdirection and pathetic as much as the next guy, but it almost sparks a feeling of disgust when those phenomena are too strong.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 04, 2008, 01:47:09 AM
hxxp://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2123986/posts

The Freepers are having a field day with this Obama grandmother death business.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 04, 2008, 02:21:25 AM
:facepalm:

I'm not even going to click.  It will only piss me off.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 04, 2008, 02:26:42 AM
Ok, so I lied and went ahead and clicked.  That was actually the most civil I have ever seen a Freeper thread.  Did someone slip something into their coffee?

I must say that this was retarded though:

QuoteA PUMA in my office said she died last week and that this is a set up.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 04, 2008, 02:45:37 AM
Mods must have cleaned it.  I know Chuckles and Malkin were both working overtime in their comments, I suspect the Freepers are doing the same.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 04, 2008, 10:49:38 AM
Gentlemen, I bring you.....WINGNUT FANFIC.

By none other than the Doughy Pantload himself.  http://www.nypost.com/seven/11012008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_2012__four_years_later_136356.htm

Even worse, Ralph Peters, veteran member of the 101st Chairborne, and Nicole Gelinas (who?) have their own contributions, linked to in the article above.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 04, 2008, 06:15:17 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 04, 2008, 10:49:38 AM
Gentlemen, I bring you.....WINGNUT FANFIC.

By none other than the Doughy Pantload himself.  http://www.nypost.com/seven/11012008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_2012__four_years_later_136356.htm

Even worse, Ralph Peters, veteran member of the 101st Chairborne, and Nicole Gelinas (who?) have their own contributions, linked to in the article above.
Copied and saved for 2012.   :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trippinprincezz13 on November 04, 2008, 06:48:00 PM
Quote from: Mangrove on October 31, 2008, 06:58:10 PM
Holy holy fuck.

Mrs Mang' called. She said that she was speaking to one of her bosses on the phone. The subject of the election came up. She siad that she 'was thinking about voting for Obama'. Well, the truth is, she was never going to vote for McCain in 10 zillion years, but she was being diplomatic.

Well, he absolutely went fucking AWOL. He verbally abused her and Obama for 25 minutes. And yes, it goes without saying that some of it included:
*snip*

Damn. That's why when my boss started talking politics with me or anyone else in the office I just smiled and nodded. Although he didn't go as far as "nigger" this and that, there was still the "Muslim!" "Terrurist connections!" spiel.

Funny too, because about a month ago I was at his house getting an appeal brief put together with his wife and while I was there the mail came. There was an envelope from the McCain campaign and his wife was "oh god, don't tell me he actually sent money to them". Opened it up and there was some autographed picture of McCain and Palin with a letter thanking for his contribution. Made me lol cuz she was pretty pissed about it and went off about how much she hated Palin. I just thought it was funny cuz I thought they were both pretty hardcore Republicans, which she still may be, but she did not seem happy about them at all.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 04, 2008, 07:57:21 PM
A little last minute Wingnuttery: 

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/03/tbruce_11103/

Why McCain is totally gonna win:

QuoteFor several months now, before the polls were in a dead heat, before Joe the Plumber, before Obama let it slip he's a socialist with Marxist tendencies, even before he revealed his plan to make the bitter and clingy unemployed by bankrupting the coal industry, I have been predicting a McCain win on November 4th. Now, as the campaigning comes to a close, I am more confident than ever.

In the simplest of terms McCain will win because he is the better, more decent man. Obama, not having those virtues, relied on hype and hoped celebrity would give people the impression of greatness. Obama's celebrity strategy did make an impression–one of arrogance and elitism, exactly the things in Washington with which we're disgusted and rejecting. McCain's victory will rely on a number of reasons but ultimately it's because he is a vote for our future, while Obama is a vote for wallowing in victimhood.

Bottom line: John McCain will prevail because we have grown tired of men who think more of themselves than they do of us.

Despite his efforts to remain as blank a slate as possible, in the last few months we've actually learned quite a few things about Barack Obama, and Americans we don't like what we see. His arrogance and presumption reeks of elitist snobbery. We've endured an Obama presidential seal,
"O-Force One," a Styrofoam-pillared Greek temple, and an infomercial replete with pseudo-Oval Office replica and Really Presidential Looking desk. In other words, Obama insists he looks the part so he insists we give it to him. On November 4th Obama will find we are not quite as shallow as he thinks we are.

After two years and spending almost half-a billion dollars through the primary and general election seasons, Obama still has not convinced the American people, and if they haven't been swayed yet they're never going to be. The latest Investor's Business Daily and Battleground state polls, both the most respected and accurate, have this race in a dead-heat. Undecideds are staying steady at about 8-10 percent, almost double where they were this time last year, and the super-majority of them will vote for McCain.

The comment section is pure comedy gold, btw.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 04, 2008, 09:11:13 PM
Fux News, for the Fucked in the Face.

Seriously, those guys are a riot--they're probably going to declare McCain a winner at 5 pm eastern.  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mangrove on November 05, 2008, 06:14:21 AM
 :news:

OBAMA RUNS THE COUNTRY INTO THE GROUND!!!





(just getting a headstart on the morning's wingnut news coverage)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 05, 2008, 06:19:52 AM
I'm surprised that I haven't heard the Republicans crying about voter fraud.  I guess it's hard to do that with a straight face after McCain just had his ass handed to him.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 05, 2008, 01:57:09 PM
And now this thread can retire, as a momument to batshit insanity everywhere.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 05, 2008, 02:13:08 PM
Schedule for BUMP during the next mid-term elections.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on November 05, 2008, 02:16:10 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 05, 2008, 06:19:52 AM
I'm surprised that I haven't heard the Republicans crying about voter fraud.  I guess it's hard to do that with a straight face after McCain just had his ass handed to him.

McCain conceded. When you do that, game over. Ask Gore.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 05, 2008, 04:43:30 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 04, 2008, 10:49:38 AM
Gentlemen, I bring you.....WINGNUT FANFIC.

By none other than the Doughy Pantload himself.  http://www.nypost.com/seven/11012008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_2012__four_years_later_136356.htm

Even worse, Ralph Peters, veteran member of the 101st Chairborne, and Nicole Gelinas (who?) have their own contributions, linked to in the article above.

That was horribly written. Not to mention the content.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 05, 2008, 05:33:59 PM
I like how it turned out that rather a lot of people saying they were going to vote for Obama and then not doing it, basically the opposite happened.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 05, 2008, 05:49:17 PM
Reverse-Bradley effect.

Lots of people in the Deep South said they were going to vote McCain, as to not be set upon by wild Freepi
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on November 05, 2008, 07:47:32 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IshiClQqCM

Ralph Nader asks, "Will Barack be Uncle Sam or Uncle Tom?"

:facepalm:

come on Ralph, I WANT to like you,
WHY would you say shit like that?

Meanwhile, this guy Shep from Fox News, keeps earning small points in my book. He called out Joe the Plumber, he gave a really good monologue following Obama's victory, and now he's calling a spade a spade to Ralph Nader's face. WHY, Ralph?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 05, 2008, 07:50:30 PM
Shepard Smith is alright in my book, when it comes to Fox News.  I remember the guy was very critical of the Bush response to Katrina and he called Joe the Plumber on the carpet when he supposed himself an expert on Israel affairs. 

McCain was doomed the minute he decided he wasn't going to be John McCain.  If the John McCain from 2000 had run, insted of this new right-wing McCain, I think this would've been a lot closer. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mangrove on November 05, 2008, 07:58:30 PM
Joe the plumber is a fucking numbskull. He was on 'ET' (or similarly vapid nonsense show) complaining that he hadn't had much business lately. Well, it turns out that if you spend all your time being the GOP's performing monkey instead of GOING HOME AND DOING SOME WORK, you might actually get some clients.

Speaking as a self-employed small businessman of course.  :D
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 05, 2008, 08:03:02 PM
Well, Sarah Palin can take some comfort to know that ole Joe will share some of the blame with her.  But she's still going to get a lot of the blame. 

Also, I'm calling it now.  If Ted Stevens ends up in Prison, Sarah Palin will name herself as his replacement in the Senate to start her march to 2012. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: That One Guy on November 05, 2008, 08:39:53 PM
One way or another, the Palin 2012 campaign is already underway ...

:omg:

Also, Ralph ... um ... and I say this as someone that voted for you 3 times ...

SHUT

THE

FUCK

UP

Already!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 05, 2008, 08:47:06 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 05, 2008, 07:50:30 PM
Shepard Smith is alright in my book, when it comes to Fox News.  I remember the guy was very critical of the Bush response to Katrina and he called Joe the Plumber on the carpet when he supposed himself an expert on Israel affairs. 

McCain was doomed the minute he decided he wasn't going to be John McCain.  If the John McCain from 2000 had run, insted of this new right-wing McCain, I think this would've been a lot closer. 

My kid felt sorry for McCain last night, seeing the tears in his eyes as he gave his concession speech.  I rather coldly said, "Don't feel sorry for that asshole--he sold out.  He LOST his chance and fucking GAVE it away."

I'm heartless towards the man, and I think he deserved the smack he got across the face.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 05, 2008, 08:48:26 PM
Quote from: That One Guy on November 05, 2008, 08:39:53 PM
One way or another, the Palin 2012 campaign is already underway ...

:omg:


Just gives her more opportunity to be lailtastic.  She's motherfucking Dan Quayle in a skirt.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: That One Guy on November 05, 2008, 09:02:38 PM
Oh, I can't WAIT for what Palin is going to do in the next 4 years. No matter what it's going to be non-stop entertainment. She's shown the ruthlessness the neo-cons love, the willingness to spout whatever message her handlers/advisers tell her to, and she has serious campaign ability (love her or hate her, there's no denying she knows how to work a crowd).

She reminds me of a cross between Dick Cheney, George Wallace, and a malfunctioning Stepford Wife. She'll be dangerous once the neo-cons make her actually learn foreign policy and how to better deal with the national press, and they'll have 4 years to teach her. McCain's concession speech all but said "Sarah Palin will be the 2012 GOP nominee, so don't worry everyone!", so the groundwork has been laid (just like Obama laid the groundwork in 2004 at the Dem convention).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 05, 2008, 09:13:53 PM
Nah, she's empty-headed, I tell ya.  She comes off as "folksy" because she's uh, not Ivy League.  But that shit is where her "savvy" stops.  She's like Dan Quayle--in it for the celebrity.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: BADGE OF HONOR on November 05, 2008, 09:18:54 PM
Palin was the nail in McCain's coffin.  Putting her up for president in four years isn't going to help the GOP at all.



...in which case, by all means they should go ahead!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 05, 2008, 09:23:36 PM
Badges now forms a seekret plan by campaigning for the redneck barracuda...aka pig-with-lipstick...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Doktor Loki on November 05, 2008, 09:33:15 PM
Evil bitch hunted wolves from helicopters.  I'm not fucking cool with that.

On the other hand, good GOD she's a laugh.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trippinprincezz13 on November 05, 2008, 10:24:56 PM
Quote from: Jenne on November 05, 2008, 08:47:06 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 05, 2008, 07:50:30 PM
Shepard Smith is alright in my book, when it comes to Fox News.  I remember the guy was very critical of the Bush response to Katrina and he called Joe the Plumber on the carpet when he supposed himself an expert on Israel affairs. 

McCain was doomed the minute he decided he wasn't going to be John McCain.  If the John McCain from 2000 had run, insted of this new right-wing McCain, I think this would've been a lot closer. 

My kid felt sorry for McCain last night, seeing the tears in his eyes as he gave his concession speech.  I rather coldly said, "Don't feel sorry for that asshole--he sold out.  He LOST his chance and fucking GAVE it away."

I'm heartless towards the man, and I think he deserved the smack he got across the face.

Awww. I didn't see his concession speech, but I probably would've felt bad too. Not bad in a way that I voted for him (or would have voted for him), but I have a soft spot for old people, since all my grandparents were dead by the time I was in 6th grade. Plus he's only a few years older than my dad, so I probably woulda felt kinda bad.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 03:28:12 AM
Quote from: trippinprincezz13 on November 05, 2008, 10:24:56 PM
Quote from: Jenne on November 05, 2008, 08:47:06 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 05, 2008, 07:50:30 PM
Shepard Smith is alright in my book, when it comes to Fox News.  I remember the guy was very critical of the Bush response to Katrina and he called Joe the Plumber on the carpet when he supposed himself an expert on Israel affairs. 

McCain was doomed the minute he decided he wasn't going to be John McCain.  If the John McCain from 2000 had run, insted of this new right-wing McCain, I think this would've been a lot closer. 

My kid felt sorry for McCain last night, seeing the tears in his eyes as he gave his concession speech.  I rather coldly said, "Don't feel sorry for that asshole--he sold out.  He LOST his chance and fucking GAVE it away."

I'm heartless towards the man, and I think he deserved the smack he got across the face.

Awww. I didn't see his concession speech, but I probably would've felt bad too. Not bad in a way that I voted for him (or would have voted for him), but I have a soft spot for old people, since all my grandparents were dead by the time I was in 6th grade. Plus he's only a few years older than my dad, so I probably woulda felt kinda bad.

I felt a frisson, a soupcon, if you will, of pity, and then threw that shit to the winds when they panned the camera to Sarah Bumfuckcunta.  Dude is a SELL.OUT.

Fucker had my HUSBAND (who's pretty damned cynical after fleeing from Communist Russia's invasion and all) contributing to his campaign in 2000...and now we're $-supporters of Obama.  It was about integrity.  Pure and simple--and I didn't see Obama (for whatever his wishy-washiness and faults galore) waiver on who he was. 

McCain started out much more Obama-esque, and he ever so clearly moved due-right of the center pole that it was hard to see where his nose ended and the elephant's hindquarters began.  "Maverick" became doublespeak for "yeah, I used to have cajones, but then I sold them and all I got is this crazy-talkin' trailer trash beauty queen from the back of beyond."

Sad.  Sad end to a pretty illustrious career (if you don't count his tomfoolery in the 90's with the S&L market/Keating 5 debacle)...very pitiful how soundly his ass got kicked back to AZ.

But he damned well deserved it.

GITMO, MOTHAHFUCKA...GITMO
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on November 06, 2008, 05:42:18 AM
A brief reminder for anybody who is thinking that Abe Lincoln would be proud:

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

- Abraham Lincoln, 1858
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 05:55:09 AM
Vex...throws a cold dash of water on us all...

Wow, that left a bitter taste in my mouth...and it's not like I hadn't read it/heard it all before.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 06, 2008, 01:57:06 PM
And so the post-mortem begins:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27568012/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27568012/)

According to some from the McCain camp, Palin was directly involved in the purchasing of the clothes that caused the big brouhaha.  Apparently she went hogwild clothing herself and her clan.  And some in the RNC were quite displeased with how much she had spent. 

Also, according to one of the sources, Palin couldn't name the countries involved in NAFTA.  The North American Free Trade Agreement.  I know it's pretty rough to be able to come up with the 3 countries in North America.  Especially when you live in one of them, are a head of a State that borders Canada, and are trying to court the Hispanic vote.  Anyhoo.

Also, she thinks Africa is one big country. 

But the best part was that she wanted to give a speech as a part of the Concession speech.  The heads of the campaign pretty much told her "Fuck no!" 

I'm thinking that as soon as McCain wrapped up his speech, and they were off stage he told Palin to get lost.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: singer on November 06, 2008, 02:02:10 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 06, 2008, 01:57:06 PM
And so the post-mortem begins:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27568012/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27568012/)

According to some from the McCain camp, Palin was directly involved in the purchasing of the clothes that caused the big brouhaha.  Apparently she went hogwild clothing herself and her clan.  And some in the RNC were quite displeased with how much she had spent. 

To the degree that Olbermann quoted an unnamed McCain campaign staffer referencing her clan and their purchasing proclivities as "Wasilla Hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast"
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 06, 2008, 02:05:10 PM
Oh yeah forgot about that part. 

So, now that Bush will be out and Obama will be in, does that mean MSNBC becomes the Fox News and Fox News becomes the MSNBC? 

This will be very interesting because for most of Fox News' and MSNBC's existence, GWB has been in power.  It will be interesting to see how they evolve during this power shift. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trippinprincezz13 on November 06, 2008, 03:15:59 PM
Quote from: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 03:28:12 AM
Quote from: trippinprincezz13 on November 05, 2008, 10:24:56 PM
Quote from: Jenne on November 05, 2008, 08:47:06 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 05, 2008, 07:50:30 PM
Shepard Smith is alright in my book, when it comes to Fox News.  I remember the guy was very critical of the Bush response to Katrina and he called Joe the Plumber on the carpet when he supposed himself an expert on Israel affairs. 

McCain was doomed the minute he decided he wasn't going to be John McCain.  If the John McCain from 2000 had run, insted of this new right-wing McCain, I think this would've been a lot closer. 

My kid felt sorry for McCain last night, seeing the tears in his eyes as he gave his concession speech.  I rather coldly said, "Don't feel sorry for that asshole--he sold out.  He LOST his chance and fucking GAVE it away."

I'm heartless towards the man, and I think he deserved the smack he got across the face.

Awww. I didn't see his concession speech, but I probably would've felt bad too. Not bad in a way that I voted for him (or would have voted for him), but I have a soft spot for old people, since all my grandparents were dead by the time I was in 6th grade. Plus he's only a few years older than my dad, so I probably woulda felt kinda bad.

I felt a frisson, a soupcon, if you will, of pity, and then threw that shit to the winds when they panned the camera to Sarah Bumfuckcunta.  Dude is a SELL.OUT.

*snip*

Oh know, I understand. I just have pretty awful guilt/pity complexes occassionally when I'm being mean to someone, even if they deserve it. I feel bad for a little, but not enough to really care. Usually it's just with people I interact with, so probably only because McCain was old. Meh.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cramulus on November 06, 2008, 03:37:04 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 06, 2008, 02:05:10 PM
Oh yeah forgot about that part. 

So, now that Bush will be out and Obama will be in, does that mean MSNBC becomes the Fox News and Fox News becomes the MSNBC? 

This will be very interesting because for most of Fox News' and MSNBC's existence, GWB has been in power.  It will be interesting to see how they evolve during this power shift. 

oh my GOD you just reminded me--
that's basically what Jon Stewart was wondering last night as he TORE APART Fox News Anchor Chris Wallace. I've gotta find the link, it's Stewart shitting his hate like I haven't seen since he basically got Crossfire cancelled.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: trippinprincezz13 on November 06, 2008, 04:52:57 PM
hah, I saw that last night. That was great.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=209408&title=Chris-Wallace&byDate=true

ETA: meh, nevermind. Didn't see Cram's thread before I posted this...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 06, 2008, 05:36:25 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 06, 2008, 01:57:06 PM
And so the post-mortem begins:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27568012/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27568012/)

According to some from the McCain camp, Palin was directly involved in the purchasing of the clothes that caused the big brouhaha.  Apparently she went hogwild clothing herself and her clan.  And some in the RNC were quite displeased with how much she had spent. 

Also, according to one of the sources, Palin couldn't name the countries involved in NAFTA.  The North American Free Trade Agreement.  I know it's pretty rough to be able to come up with the 3 countries in North America.  Especially when you live in one of them, are a head of a State that borders Canada, and are trying to court the Hispanic vote.  Anyhoo.

Also, she thinks Africa is one big country. 

But the best part was that she wanted to give a speech as a part of the Concession speech.  The heads of the campaign pretty much told her "Fuck no!" 

I'm thinking that as soon as McCain wrapped up his speech, and they were off stage he told Palin to get lost.
:lulz: I can't wait until 2012 now. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 06, 2008, 05:39:57 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 06, 2008, 05:36:25 PM
:lulz: I can't wait until 2012 now. 
I'm sure the campaigning will begin this upcoming year... :argh!:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 05:50:15 PM
(http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/political-pictures-sarah-palin-mayans.jpg)

Repost/cock, but it fits
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 06, 2008, 06:22:22 PM
Breaking:  AP is calling North Carolina for Obama.  So, final score Obama 364, McCain 173
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 06:28:55 PM
Damn.  If that ain't a clear as day bitchslap to the GOP, I don't know WHAT is.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 06, 2008, 06:35:47 PM
Quote from: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 06:28:55 PM
Damn.  If that ain't a clear as day bitchslap to the GOP, I don't know WHAT is.
Haven't you heard?  Bush winning by 3.5 million = Mandate. Obama winning by 7.5 million = not a mandate. Robert Novak said so!!!

http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/1260688,CST-NWS-novak05.article

QuoteHe may have opened the door to enactment of the long-deferred liberal agenda, but he neither received a broad mandate from the public nor the needed large congressional majorities.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 06, 2008, 06:38:39 PM
The ONLY demographic that McCain won was the 65+ demographic.  And the 65+ women was actually pretty close.  The DEMs won young men and women, 30-65 yo men and women, blacks, latinos, the jewish vote, I believe they even won the evangelical vote.

So, basically as of today, the GOP are the old white guy party.  If they don't find a way to appeal to some of these, GROWING, demographics, they are fucked for the next two decades at least.  And no, Palin is not their ticket.  However, I think they do have some promise with Gov. Jindal from Lousiana.  They need to approach that angle if they have any hope at being competetive.  Either that, or cross their fingers that the Dems royally screw the pooch, which as we've seen, is quite possible AND likely.  
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 06:43:33 PM
I'm hoping the Dems see they were fuckin' lucky with McCain's choice in running mate, and that if he'd have had the balls to choose Joe Lieberman, there might still be a race going or they might have lost.  Palin screwed their pooch but good.

Nonetheless, it's a wait-and-see as we watch the GOP scramble to look less and less catastrophic.  Their pleadings of "real change" got the "yeah, right" sarcasm from every corner but the oldsters.  And I was going to say something age-ist about that, but I'll leave it for now since obvious comment is obvious.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 06, 2008, 07:00:12 PM
Quotethat the Dem's royally screw the pooch, which as we've seen, is quite possible AND likely. inevitable

my post election cynicism is out of control, i will wish the Dem's and Obama the best of luck and i am glad the young are taking a interest but if past performance is any indication there will soon be a large group of cynical young voters saying WTF was i so optimistic about.

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 06, 2008, 07:05:20 PM
Well that depends on their level of expectations.  If they listend to Obama's acceptance speech, and if they listened to his previous speeches, they'd know he has never promised immediate solutions.  That is simply not in the cards right now.  The best he can offer in one term is the beginning of progress, not the entirety of it. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on November 06, 2008, 07:10:42 PM
Voters' expectations are never realistic. Obama and the new Congress need to get something big pushed through ASAP to avoid breaking the electoral system (further) for a very long time. If all the wide-eyed optimists are disappointed in 2010, that'll be the end of the Democrats for a while.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 06, 2008, 07:15:12 PM
my cynicism runs deep...  the change he promised will  be no solution, the change that happens will benefit the few and hurt the people. the comment i just made would apply to a McCain presidency no less than an Obama presidency...  

its out of control way out of control,
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 07:19:51 PM
Quote from: vexati0n on November 06, 2008, 07:10:42 PM
Voters' expectations are never realistic. Obama and the new Congress need to get something big pushed through ASAP to avoid breaking the electoral system (further) for a very long time. If all the wide-eyed optimists are disappointed in 2010, that'll be the end of the Democrats for a while.

...smells like universal healthcare...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on November 06, 2008, 07:30:31 PM
I dunno. The only thing keeping me from being 100% cynical is the fact that Obama has such a starkly different background from most politicians. The guy survived on food stamps for a while, he's lived in more places than Sarah Palin has read about, and he actually worked his way up to where he is, as opposed to being bred for it or having it bestowed on him like a birthright.

He's the first person in a long fucking time to achieve the presidency by his own hard work and determination. For now, I'm assuming that counts for something. His personal motives have to differ from motives of the last 20 presidents.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 07:34:07 PM
I thought Clinton worked his way up/married his way up?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on November 06, 2008, 07:37:42 PM
no. clinton only got to be president because Hillary needed something to stand on.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 07:42:10 PM
So he married his way up.

Who said there aren't casting couches in politix?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: BADGE OF HONOR on November 06, 2008, 09:11:28 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 06, 2008, 06:38:39 PM
The ONLY demographic that McCain won was the 65+ demographic.  And the 65+ women was actually pretty close.  The DEMs won young men and women, 30-65 yo men and women, blacks, latinos, the jewish vote, I believe they even won the evangelical vote.

So, basically as of today, the GOP are the old white guy party.  If they don't find a way to appeal to some of these, GROWING, demographics, they are fucked for the next two decades at least.  And no, Palin is not their ticket.  However, I think they do have some promise with Gov. Jindal from Lousiana.  They need to approach that angle if they have any hope at being competetive.  Either that, or cross their fingers that the Dems royally screw the pooch, which as we've seen, is quite possible AND likely.  

They weren't already?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 06, 2008, 09:15:17 PM
Quote from: BADGE OF HONOR on November 06, 2008, 09:11:28 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 06, 2008, 06:38:39 PM
The ONLY demographic that McCain won was the 65+ demographic.  And the 65+ women was actually pretty close.  The DEMs won young men and women, 30-65 yo men and women, blacks, latinos, the jewish vote, I believe they even won the evangelical vote.

So, basically as of today, the GOP are the old white guy party.  If they don't find a way to appeal to some of these, GROWING, demographics, they are fucked for the next two decades at least.  And no, Palin is not their ticket.  However, I think they do have some promise with Gov. Jindal from Lousiana.  They need to approach that angle if they have any hope at being competetive.  Either that, or cross their fingers that the Dems royally screw the pooch, which as we've seen, is quite possible AND likely.  

They weren't already?

Well sure, but they had some of the other demographics as well.  For example, in the past two Prez elections they drew more of the Hispanic vote than did the Dems.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: BADGE OF HONOR on November 06, 2008, 09:17:53 PM
Eh, I keep forgetting that my perceptions are skewed since I live in Utah where, while there are brown people, they are ignored if not persecuted by the old white guys.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 07, 2008, 12:10:05 AM
The GOP also attracts young, frustrated male virgins, such as Ben Stein.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: BADGE OF HONOR on November 07, 2008, 12:10:57 AM
Quote from: Cain on November 07, 2008, 12:10:05 AM
The GOP also attracts young, frustrated male virgins, such as Ben Stein.

Yes, the people who want to grow up to be old white guys.

Rich old white guys, let's not forget.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 07, 2008, 12:14:43 AM
Ben Stein just wants a woman who wont laugh at him, I think.  That explains his traditional values rantings, he just wants arranged marriages to be back in fashion.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on November 07, 2008, 12:15:51 AM
And to not lose 5,000 dollars on his old corny gameshow.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: BADGE OF HONOR on November 07, 2008, 12:23:49 AM
He should just go back to doing Visine commercials.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on November 07, 2008, 12:24:28 AM
He busted out a new one about a week ago, but it's not the same.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 07, 2008, 12:54:43 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the highest level of wingnuttery in the known universe:  Conservapedia's page on Barack Obama:

hxxp://www.conservapedia.com/Barack_Obama

Obama pretends he's not a socialist, responding to the criticism "Socialistic", [6] but his own memoir admits that he chose his "friends carefully .... The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists."[7] He was previously a member of a socialist political party, and appears to have strong socialist tendencies.[8]

Obama is the first person having ties to a known terrorist to gain control over America's nuclear weapons.[12][13] Author and blogger Jack Cashill compared the writing style of Bill Ayers' 2001 memoir, Fugitive Days, with Barack Obama's earlier 1995 book, Dreams From My Father, and came to the conclusion that Ayres had ghostwritten Dreams.[14] [15] Dr. Peter Millican, who was hired to do a computer analysis comparing the two works, called the charges "very implausible". [16] Ayers admitted that he was "guilty as hell" in planting bombs in the 1970s, and that he has no regrets and felt he "should have done more."[17]

Catholic Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver, where Obama received his Democratic Party nomination, recently criticized Obama as the "most committed" abortion-supporting candidate "since the Roe v. Wade abortion decision in 1973.[18] Obama said "the first thing I'd do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act."[19] That bill "would invalidate virtually all state and federal limitations on abortion, and would make partial-birth abortion legal again."[20] Indeed, Obama was upset with the decision of the Supreme Court not to strike down the law passed by the United States Congress to prohibit partial-birth abortion, believing that partial-birth abortion is guaranteed right of the Constitution and that there should be no ability to legislate against it.

Doctors from the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons have stated that Obama uses techniques of mind control in his speeches and campaign symbols. For example, one speech declared, "a light will shine down from somewhere, it will light upon you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will say to yourself, 'I have to vote for Barack.'"[21] The doctors observe that "Obama's logo is noteworthy. It is always there, a small one in the middle of the podium, providing a point of visual fixation ... [that] resembles a crystal ball, a favorite of hypnotists."[21]

President-elect Obama will likely become the first Muslim President, and may use the Koran to be sworn into office at his inauguration on January 20, 2009.[22][23] The evidence that he is a Muslim includes:

Obama's background, education, and outlook are Muslim, and fewer than 1% of Muslims convert to Christianity.[24][25]
Obama's middle name (Hussein) references Husayn, who was the grandson of Muhammad, which most Christians would not retain.[26]
Obama recently referred to his "Muslim faith."[27]
Obama stated that the autobiography of Malcolm X, a Nation of Islam leader who became a Muslim, inspired him in his youth.[28]
Obama raised nearly $1 million and campaigned for a Kenyan presidential candidate who had a written agreement with Muslim leaders promising to convert Kenya to an Islamic state that bans Christianity.[29]
Obama's claims of conversion to Christianity arose after he became politically ambitious, lacking a date of conversion or baptism.[30]
On the campaign trail Obama has been reading "The Post-American World" by Fareed Zakaria,[31] which is written from a Muslim point-of-view.[32]
Contrary to Christianity, the Islamic doctrine of taqiyya encourages adherents to deny they are Muslim if it advances the cause of Islam.
Obama uses the Muslim Pakistani pronunciation for "Pakistan" rather than the common American one.[33]
Many of Obama's statements about religion conflict with Christianity, leading one group to demonstrate with a 7-part video series, "Why Barack Obama is Not a Christian."[34]
Obama was thoroughly exposed to Christianity as an adult in Chicago prior to attending law school, yet no one at law school saw him display any interest in converting. Obama unabashedly explained how he became "churched" in a 2007 speech: "It's around that time [while working as an organizer for the Developing Communities Project (DCP) of the Calumet Community Religious Conference (CCRC) in Chicago] that some pastors I was working with came around and asked if I was a member of a church. 'If you're organizing churches,' they said, 'it might be helpful if you went to a church once in a while.' And I thought, 'I guess that makes sense.'"[35]
Obama is mentioned as helping to organize the 1995 million man march led by black Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan from the Nation of Islam. [36]
Obama tries to downplay his Islamic background by claiming that his Kenyan Muslim father was a "confirmed atheist" before Obama was born, but in fact less than 1% of Kenyans are atheists, agnostics or non-religious.[37] There is apparently no evidence of any Christian activities or local church participation by Obama while he was in Massachusetts from 1988 to 1991. Finally, Obama abruptly left his church in Chicago in 2008 when it became politically controversial, without first finding another church to join.


And that's just the stuff above the content box!!!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on November 07, 2008, 01:02:49 AM
I suppose conservapedia is the well-meaning fool?

"If this is too blind for your taste, consult some well-meaning fool (there is always one around) and ask his advice. Then vote the other way. This enables you to be a good citizen (if such is your wish) without spending the enormous amount of time on it that truly intelligent exercise of franchise requires."
Robert Heinlein
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 07, 2008, 01:04:47 AM
Conservapedia is owned by the son of Phyllis Schafly. Thats right up there with Richard Mellon Scaife in movement conservativism.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 07, 2008, 01:20:20 AM
Quote from: Cain on November 07, 2008, 01:04:47 AM
Conservapedia is owned by the son of Phyllis Schafly. Thats right up there with Richard Mellon Scaife in movement conservativism.
Yeah.. Andy's a special kind of stupid.  For instance, I love the fact that he strongly opposes special and general relativity and complex numbers despite the fact that he has a fucking Electrical Engineering degree!!!  Rational Wiki does a great job of covering all the craziness that goes on on Conservapedia.  I've spent way too much time on both sites lately.  It's starting to eat at my brain.

http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Main_Page
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 07, 2008, 01:26:03 AM
wait, what?
He's opposed to complex numbers?!
what does that mean?!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on November 07, 2008, 01:26:19 AM
Why would conservapedia even have a page on complex numbers and relativity?  Are math and physics now a liberal lie?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Dark Monk on November 07, 2008, 01:27:10 AM
Evolution never happened, remember?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 07, 2008, 01:30:07 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 07, 2008, 01:26:03 AM
wait, what?
He's opposed to complex numbers?!
what does that mean?!
Apparently imaginary numbers are a big part of "liberal deceit":

http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Conservapedia:Conservapedian_mathematics#A_digression_on_complex_numbers

Quote from: Vene on November 07, 2008, 01:26:19 AM
Why would conservapedia even have a page on complex numbers and relativity?  Are math and physics now a liberal lie?
They are trying to get acceptance as a one-stop-shop for homeschoolers so they cover math, physics, history, etc.  It's all very very very hilarious.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 07, 2008, 01:55:59 PM
Operation Leper is GO!

http://www.redstate.com/diaries/erick/2008/nov/05/operation-leper/

QuoteRedState is pleased to announce it is engaging in a special project: Operation Leper.

We're tracking down all the people from the McCain campaign now whispering smears against Governor Palin to Carl Cameron and others. Michelle Malkin has the details (http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/05/the-mccain-campaigns-classless-cowards/).

We intend to constantly remind the base about these people, monitor who they are working for, and, when 2012 rolls around, see which candidates hire them. Naturally then, you'll see us go to war against those candidates.

It is our expressed intention to make these few people political lepers.

Rumour has it that Rush Limbaugh has also signed on.  Other well known wingnut bloggers, such as Ace, are also lining up to take part.  Naturally, I support this project too, since it plays an integral role in the ever-increasing circular firing squad that is now forming.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 07, 2008, 02:40:55 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 07, 2008, 01:20:20 AM
Quote from: Cain on November 07, 2008, 01:04:47 AM
Conservapedia is owned by the son of Phyllis Schafly. Thats right up there with Richard Mellon Scaife in movement conservativism.
Yeah.. Andy's a special kind of stupid.  For instance, I love the fact that he strongly opposes special and general relativity and complex numbers despite the fact that he has a fucking Electrical Engineering degree!!!  Rational Wiki does a great job of covering all the craziness that goes on on Conservapedia.  I've spent way too much time on both sites lately.  It's starting to eat at my brain.

http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Main_Page

Oh, wow! That article made me  :lulz:. What the hell?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 07, 2008, 03:40:37 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 07, 2008, 01:55:59 PM
Operation Leper is GO!

http://www.redstate.com/diaries/erick/2008/nov/05/operation-leper/

QuoteRedState is pleased to announce it is engaging in a special project: Operation Leper.

We're tracking down all the people from the McCain campaign now whispering smears against Governor Palin to Carl Cameron and others. Michelle Malkin has the details (http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/05/the-mccain-campaigns-classless-cowards/).

We intend to constantly remind the base about these people, monitor who they are working for, and, when 2012 rolls around, see which candidates hire them. Naturally then, you'll see us go to war against those candidates.

It is our expressed intention to make these few people political lepers.

Rumour has it that Rush Limbaugh has also signed on.  Other well known wingnut bloggers, such as Ace, are also lining up to take part.  Naturally, I support this project too, since it plays an integral role in the ever-increasing circular firing squad that is now forming.
I love the fact that Sarah Palin is destroying the Republican party even after the election is over. This is gonna be an awesome implosion.

(http://usccampus.com/joomla/images/stories/Random/plaza-implosion-small.gif)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 07, 2008, 03:53:46 PM
Pretending to be a frothing mad Palin supporter on wingnut sites is fun.

DOWN WITH THE (OTHER) SPLITTERS!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 07, 2008, 04:14:21 PM
What a brilliant idea... in fact, running a Pro-Palin Blog would be delicious. We could even have ads on the front.

And all of those 'registered' users would be giving us their email addresses...

:fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 07, 2008, 04:40:34 PM
Running a blog may be an idea....however it sounds like a lot of work.  I am content to merely be that guy in the crowd who stirs the shit and helps direct/articulate the mob mentality.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 08, 2008, 07:23:45 PM
post election wingnuttery will you get the change you wanted?
obama's chief of staff choice pro compulsory government service. (the comments are as interesting as the article including TLDR rant about hitler)

http://www.examiner.com/x-536-Civil-Liberties-Examiner~y2008m11d6-Obamas-chief-of-staff-choice-favors-compulsory-universal-service#comments
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 12:46:53 PM
what's wrong with that?

I think it's ridiculous that there's no mandatory term of civil service in this country.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 10, 2008, 12:56:07 PM
Germany does something similar (you can choose between a military draft or community service, which is less security orientated and more social cohesion based).

I can see the usefulness in some of what he is proposing.  Training people in some of those drills with improve the resilience of local communities, hopefully leading to a decentralization of other security functions (which is currently the only way current society is not going to end up looking like Somalia by 2050).  It would be hard to do this any other way (you have to deal with employers, academic institutions etc who also make demands on a person's time).  By mandating it as some sort of service, it will likely make such groups less likely to complain about their workers being nicked and instead try to work around the issue.

Of course, it would also help if the Federal government had some money, too.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 01:27:09 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 12:46:53 PM
what's wrong with that?
I think it's ridiculous that there's no mandatory term of civil service in this country.
Compulsory service is simply counter to the ideals of the country. (not to say that that has stopped the .gov in the past, though...)  Conscription is slavery.

Quote from: Cain on November 10, 2008, 12:56:07 PM
Of course, it would also help if the Federal government had some money, too.
Faith backed money -> Govt. mandated faith -> unlimited money 
(purchasing power not guaranteed)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 01:33:02 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 01:27:09 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 12:46:53 PM
what's wrong with that?
I think it's ridiculous that there's no mandatory term of civil service in this country.
Compulsory service is simply counter to the ideals of the country. (not to say that that has stopped the .gov in the past, though...)  Conscription is slavery.

says who?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 10, 2008, 01:38:29 PM
Purchasing power seems to be the issue, currently.

Also, it would be nice if people realized that this could actually be fairly important and useful, but I doubt that is the case.  You or I, shown the facts, can look at such works as John Robbs and say "holy shit, society is fall to crap unless we decentralize shit and get people in local communities who know how to do shit up and running" but unfortunately, most people will not because....well because they're lazy or stupid or don't give a fuck or simply unable to concieve of such an event (quite like those Russians in 1989).

The best way would be to give the people who wanted to learn such things the money and resources to do so.  But the problem with that is:

a) the Government's money is worth shit, and
b) most people do not have the financial freedom or resources to take time off from their job to learn such useful skills, and those who do will just run off to their gated communities when whatever it is that is going to happen does happen, and therefore it wont benefit anyone who isn't rich enough to flee such problems anyway.

Now, if the economy were to be restructured to the point of allowing someting like basic income (a la Thomas Paine's proposals), or a high set minimum negative income tax (as proposed by Milton Friedman) then it would likely give the time and financial freedom for more people to take part.  But then there wouldn't be a reserve of nearly optionless poor workers and everything would go to shit (everything being defined as share value and profit margins).

In such a situation, I can see the draft being the imperfect, compromise solution.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:04:41 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 01:33:02 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 01:27:09 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 12:46:53 PM
what's wrong with that?
I think it's ridiculous that there's no mandatory term of civil service in this country.
Compulsory service is simply counter to the ideals of the country. (not to say that that has stopped the .gov in the past, though...)  Conscription is slavery.
says who?
well, it's not really an explicitly stated rule.  the 13th amendment is sometimes trotted out for this argument, but we both know that's not really applicable.  You have to admit, however, that it has always been terribly unpopular, controversial, and unevenly enforced.  It's a 'bad thing'.  And voluntarism seems to have a strong undercurrent in our culture, even if there are signs of it starting to wane.
I guess really i simply don't like the idea.  I think a pretty good chunk or society won't either.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:16:58 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 10, 2008, 01:38:29 PM
Also, it would be nice if people realized that this could actually be fairly important and useful, but I doubt that is the case.  You or I, shown the facts, can look at such works as John Robbs and say "holy shit, society is fall to crap unless we decentralize shit and get people in local communities who know how to do shit up and running" but unfortunately, most people will not because....well because they're lazy or stupid or don't give a fuck or simply unable to concieve of such an event (quite like those Russians in 1989).

The best way would be to give the people who wanted to learn such things the money and resources to do so. 
...
In such a situation, I can see the draft being the imperfect, compromise solution.
This doesn't make sense to me.  You are saying that without local cooperation between citizens that are 'lazy or stupid or don't give a fuck or simply unable to concieve of such an event' society will fall apart, so we must provide them time and money to be industrious, intelligent, concerned, and imaginative?
I don't see any reason that'll work.  I also am not so pessimistic that society will 'fall apart'.  It will get hard to the point that people are motivated into the virtues that you are saying we should force.  That's just the way the wheel of fortune turns, no?  You think we can stop it at the top?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 10, 2008, 02:23:59 PM
From what I read of his civil service proposal (elsewhere) or what he is thinking about it, it was something like 50 hours a year for high schoolers and 100 hours a year for college students, the college portion nonmandatory. Furthermore, you get your first 4000 dollars college education free if you do.

What younger person doesn't have an hour or 2 every week to help people? FUCK, are we really that apathetic?

I think its an excellent idea and wished I had done it in high school on my own anyway.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 02:28:08 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:04:41 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 01:33:02 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 01:27:09 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 12:46:53 PM
what's wrong with that?
I think it's ridiculous that there's no mandatory term of civil service in this country.
Compulsory service is simply counter to the ideals of the country. (not to say that that has stopped the .gov in the past, though...)  Conscription is slavery.
says who?
well, it's not really an explicitly stated rule.  the 13th amendment is sometimes trotted out for this argument, but we both know that's not really applicable.  You have to admit, however, that it has always been terribly unpopular, controversial, and unevenly enforced.  It's a 'bad thing'.  And voluntarism seems to have a strong undercurrent in our culture, even if there are signs of it starting to wane.
I guess really i simply don't like the idea.  I think a pretty good chunk or society won't either.

you don't like the idea of people having to put in some time working for the betterment of their community?

why not?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 10, 2008, 02:30:34 PM
I'm saying people who will afford to bail will, and leave everyone else out in the cold.  And unless you want to see France circa 1789 all over again, you'll take steps to make sure when Bad Shit Goes Down, it doesn't result in everyone going backwards 500 years.  Some people are gonna be lazy useless fucks anyway, and quite frankly I would not cry if those people got, say, eaten by bandits.  However, I am not so down with myself getting eaten by bandits because of their lazy stupidity.

And society is so interconnected and technological power is devolving to such a level that sooner or later it will be exceptionally easy for anyone to carry out a major attack with serious and long-lasting repurcussions.  As time increases, the chances of a systempunkt eventually reach one, regardless of where one is.  And that is not even mentioning natural disasters, which may become less predictable with climate change.  I'd rather, in such a situation, to not have to rely on any central government (which may well decide such a disaster is "too expensive" to bother with) and instead rely on people in the same sort of situation.  It need not be all of them, especially since many are, as previously mentioned, lazy or useless, but without some sort of government program that eventually rounds back around to the people who can afford to take such training and not not have necessary work commitments, and I don't trust those people because they will buy their way out of any problem and leave the rest of us to, say, get eaten by bandits.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:32:39 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 10, 2008, 02:30:34 PM
I'm saying people who will afford to bail will, and leave everyone else out in the cold.  And unless you want to see France circa 1789 all over again, you'll take steps to make sure when Bad Shit Goes Down, it doesn't result in everyone going backwards 500 years.  Some people are gonna be lazy useless fucks anyway, and quite frankly I would not cry if those people got, say, eaten by bandits.  However, I am not so down with myself getting eaten by bandits because of their lazy stupidity.

And society is so interconnected and technological power is devolving to such a level that sooner or later it will be exceptionally easy for anyone to carry out a major attack with serious and long-lasting repurcussions.  As time increases, the chances of a systempunkt eventually reach one, regardless of where one is.  And that is not even mentioning natural disasters, which may become less predictable with climate change.  I'd rather, in such a situation, to not have to rely on any central government (which may well decide such a disaster is "too expensive" to bother with) and instead rely on people in the same sort of situation.  It need not be all of them, especially since many are, as previously mentioned, lazy or useless, but without some sort of government program that eventually rounds back around to the people who can afford to take such training and not not have necessary work commitments, and I don't trust those people because they will buy their way out of any problem and leave the rest of us to, say, get eaten by bandits.

:mittens:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Golden Applesauce on November 10, 2008, 02:32:50 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 10, 2008, 02:23:59 PM
From what I read of his civil service proposal (elsewhere) or what he is thinking about it, it was something like 50 hours a year for high schoolers and 100 hours a year for college students, the college portion nonmandatory. Furthermore, you get your first 4000 dollars college education free if you do.

What younger person doesn't have an hour or 2 every week to help people? FUCK, are we really that apathetic?

I think its an excellent idea and wished I had done it in high school on my own anyway.

I like the idea, provided we get paid ($$ for education is good) and that we get to do something useful.

Iptuous, I agree with you about the 'forced' bit though - even if in this case the plan is fair, I can't think of any way for it to be constitutional without, say, a draft also being constitutional.  And by draft I mean one of those neat systems were the better off can get out of it somehow.

I think a better proposal might be to just have the peace corp match what the army gives out for recruits.  Except, you know, money.  I hear our gov't is running kind of low on that at the moment.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 10, 2008, 02:32:52 PM
Incidentally, the Lib Dem leader here has mentioned something similar, and its about the only smart idea he has ever had. Well apart from that whole "not locking people up for stupid shit" thing.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:33:09 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 02:28:08 PM
you don't like the idea of people having to put in some time working for the betterment of their community?
why not?
well, what is the implied threat if they disobey?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 10, 2008, 02:34:03 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 10, 2008, 02:23:59 PM
From what I read of his civil service proposal (elsewhere) or what he is thinking about it, it was something like 50 hours a year for high schoolers and 100 hours a year for college students, the college portion nonmandatory. Furthermore, you get your first 4000 dollars college education free if you do.

What younger person doesn't have an hour or 2 every week to help people? FUCK, are we really that apathetic?

I think its an excellent idea and wished I had done it in high school on my own anyway.

I completely agree.  For one thing, in high school, it's a way to enhance the run-of-the-mill High School education.  Makes it a little more than straight book-learning.  And I think having some energy vested in the community is a good thing for the student and the community itself.  

I also think the college component is genius.  Who wouldn't turn down a $4000 discount on their education for a few hours of work?  And I would think this experience would tend to be much more meaningful then some work-study job.  I hope he is able to get this into law.  
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on November 10, 2008, 02:40:09 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 10, 2008, 02:23:59 PM
From what I read of his civil service proposal (elsewhere) or what he is thinking about it, it was something like 50 hours a year for high schoolers and 100 hours a year for college students, the college portion nonmandatory. Furthermore, you get your first 4000 dollars college education free if you do.

What younger person doesn't have an hour or 2 every week to help people? FUCK, are we really that apathetic?

I think its an excellent idea and wished I had done it in high school on my own anyway.
Speaking as a selfish asshole, I would gladly do 100 hours of volunteer work for $4000.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 10, 2008, 02:41:05 PM
Also, I'm not saying we will all literally get eaten by bandits.

I'm saying that a cascading system failure (http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2004/05/cascading_syste.html) may result in an infrastructure meltdown (http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2004/06/infrastructure_.html) which will cause people to go back to their primary loyalties (http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2005/01/primary_loyalti.html), which may result in zones of lawlessness which could get occupied by guerrilla entrepreneurs (http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2004/10/guerrilla_entre.html).

In such a situation, which may be brought about either by agency or by accident, I would rather have people in the community with the training and preparation to deal with such an event, minimizing damage and coordinating relief efforts instead of relying on a government agency, such as FEMA or the Environment Agency to get involved.  Might there be better methods than a draft?  Sure.  But a draft does guarantee that some people stuck in the same situation will know how to react.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:51:38 PM
Ultimately, it's FREE training. I like free things, and would subscribe to such a proposal.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:52:03 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 10, 2008, 02:30:34 PM
...It need not be all of them, especially since many are, as previously mentioned, lazy or useless, but without some sort of government program that eventually rounds back around to the people who can afford to take such training and not not have necessary work commitments, and I don't trust those people because they will buy their way out of any problem and leave the rest of us to, say, get eaten by bandits.

huh? i can't quite parse this bit.  but i think the gist of it is, 'we need a .gov program to organize community cooperation'.  If that is what you mean, then i would ask what is preventing people from doing this now?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:54:10 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:51:38 PM
Ultimately, it's FREE training. I like free things, and would subscribe to such a proposal.
ECH likes unicorns, but that doesn't mean he'll ever actually get one.
there's no free lunch.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:55:00 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:54:10 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:51:38 PM
Ultimately, it's FREE training. I like free things, and would subscribe to such a proposal.
ECH likes unicorns, but that doesn't mean he'll ever actually get one.
there's no free lunch.

Don't patronise me.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:58:48 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:55:00 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:54:10 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:51:38 PM
Ultimately, it's FREE training. I like free things, and would subscribe to such a proposal.
ECH likes unicorns, but that doesn't mean he'll ever actually get one.
there's no free lunch.
Don't patronise me.
patronise?   :|
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Golden Applesauce on November 10, 2008, 03:00:03 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:58:48 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:55:00 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:54:10 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:51:38 PM
Ultimately, it's FREE training. I like free things, and would subscribe to such a proposal.
ECH likes unicorns, but that doesn't mean he'll ever actually get one.
there's no free lunch.
Don't patronise me.
patronise?   :|


He spells it with an s, because he's not an Amurrican.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:04:59 PM
Quote from: GA on November 10, 2008, 03:00:03 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:58:48 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:55:00 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:54:10 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:51:38 PM
Ultimately, it's FREE training. I like free things, and would subscribe to such a proposal.
ECH likes unicorns, but that doesn't mean he'll ever actually get one.
there's no free lunch.
Don't patronise me.
patronise?   :|
He spells it with an s, because he's not an Amurrican.
no. not the spelling.
He made a comment, and my response was perhaps flip, but pointed to something he was sweeping under the rug.  So he said i was patronizing without speaking to the issue.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 03:06:46 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:33:09 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 02:28:08 PM
you don't like the idea of people having to put in some time working for the betterment of their community?
why not?
well, what is the implied threat if they disobey?

I don't know, but if it were up to me they would be ineligible for any state or federal benefits of any kind (welfare, financial aid for school, disability, medicare, etc.) until they had completed their service. If you don't want to contribute, that's fine and it shouldn't be any sort of a crime if you don't, but you also shouldn't be able to reap material benefits from other peoples' contributions.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 10, 2008, 03:12:49 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:04:59 PM
Quote from: GA on November 10, 2008, 03:00:03 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:58:48 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:55:00 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 02:54:10 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 02:51:38 PM
Ultimately, it's FREE training. I like free things, and would subscribe to such a proposal.
ECH likes unicorns, but that doesn't mean he'll ever actually get one.
there's no free lunch.
Don't patronise me.
patronise?   :|
He spells it with an s, because he's not an Amurrican.
no. not the spelling.
He made a comment, and my response was perhaps flip, but pointed to something he was sweeping under the rug.  So he said i was patronizing without speaking to the issue.


My problem with your response stems from the fact that you assumed that by "free", I meant "no strings attached". Give me some credit will you?

What the government can do for this: subsidise it so it is free (MONETARILY) for everyone who takes part. They get people who are trained to look after themselves and after their communities in times of need, and in general. The people get training in skills that normally they wouldn't receive.

The "Price" the people pay for it is their own lookout, take the money out of it and the price is whatever people make of it. (Some may call it "brainwashing" or "conditioning", which is their own lookout, I'm not going to THINK for them too. Some may see it as added responsibility, or in a myriad other ways.)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 10, 2008, 03:14:15 PM
While I would prefer that everyone be involved with their community... I think conscription of any sort is unacceptable.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 10, 2008, 03:15:07 PM
Quote from: Kostatar on November 10, 2008, 03:14:15 PM
While I would prefer that everyone be involved with their community... I think conscription of any sort is unacceptable.

National Service |= conscription.

TIA.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:18:50 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 03:12:49 PM
My problem with your response stems from the fact that you assumed that by "free", I meant "no strings attached". Give me some credit will you?

What the government can do for this: subsidise it so it is free (MONETARILY) for everyone who takes part. They get people who are trained to look after themselves and after their communities in times of need, and in general. The people get training in skills that normally they wouldn't receive.

The "Price" the people pay for it is their own lookout, take the money out of it and the price is whatever people make of it. (Some may call it "brainwashing" or "conditioning", which is their own lookout, I'm not going to THINK for them too. Some may see it as added responsibility, or in a myriad other ways.)

I'm not talking about some subtle strings of commitment of possibility of brainwashing.  I am speaking monetarily.  All services by the gov cost you monetarily.  It's not free.

Look, i'm not denying the benefits a program like this would have, but if the population requires it to be foisted upon them by threat of violence, then they deserve whatever fate befalls them if they fail to organize this cooperation on their own initiative.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 10, 2008, 03:25:32 PM
That's why you incorporate it into high school and college education.  Community involvement and civic engagement are skills that need to be learned. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 10, 2008, 03:28:58 PM
Indeed. Incorporate it into existing programs, and reduce funding for unwieldy programs that are NOT delivering value for money, but cover the same kind of ground as this program would.

You'd be building redundancy into the system for little or no extra cost, and make each citizen a greater "resource" by virtue of increased skill.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:31:08 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 10, 2008, 03:25:32 PM
That's why you incorporate it into high school and college education.  Community involvement and civic engagement are skills that need to be learned. 

I'm not opposed to having some community work involved in a civics class in high school.  But what i have heard rumblings about here is in regards to statements about a civil defense force that would be funded akin to the military that will have compulsory service of everybody 18-35 years old blah blah blah.....
it kinda morphed into 'helping old people cross the street' i think.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 10, 2008, 03:32:24 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:31:08 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 10, 2008, 03:25:32 PM
That's why you incorporate it into high school and college education.  Community involvement and civic engagement are skills that need to be learned. 

I'm not opposed to having some community work involved in a civics class in high school.  But what i have heard rumblings about here is in regards to statements about a civil defense force that would be funded akin to the military that will have compulsory service of everybody 18-35 years old blah blah blah.....
it kinda morphed into 'helping old people cross the street' i think.

Well, perhaps you should read more about the actual plan instead of the rumblings. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:37:30 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 10, 2008, 03:32:24 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:31:08 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 10, 2008, 03:25:32 PM
That's why you incorporate it into high school and college education.  Community involvement and civic engagement are skills that need to be learned. 

I'm not opposed to having some community work involved in a civics class in high school.  But what i have heard rumblings about here is in regards to statements about a civil defense force that would be funded akin to the military that will have compulsory service of everybody 18-35 years old blah blah blah.....
it kinda morphed into 'helping old people cross the street' i think.

Well, perhaps you should read more about the actual plan instead of the rumblings. 
This is the wingnut thread.  this started with a discussion of wingnut rumblings....
i kinda got wrapped up.  disregard me as necessary.  :lol:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:44:59 PM
Here are the quotes from Rahm Emanuel that was getting the rumblings going....
Quote
Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, President-Elect Barack Obama's choice for chief of staff in his incoming administration, is co-author of a book, The Plan: Big Ideas for America, that calls for, among other things, compulsory service for all Americans ages 18 to 25. The following excerpt is from pages 61-62 of the 2006 book:

"It's time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.

Here's how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They'll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we're hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities' most pressing needs."
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 10, 2008, 03:46:47 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:44:59 PM
Here are the quotes from Rahm Emanuel that was getting the rumblings going....
Quote
Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, President-Elect Barack Obama's choice for chief of staff in his incoming administration, is co-author of a book, The Plan: Big Ideas for America, that calls for, among other things, compulsory service for all Americans ages 18 to 25. The following excerpt is from pages 61-62 of the 2006 book:

"It's time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.

Here's how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They'll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we're hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities' most pressing needs."

And what's the problem with that?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 10, 2008, 03:48:34 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:44:59 PM
Here are the quotes from Rahm Emanuel that was getting the rumblings going....
Quote
Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, President-Elect Barack Obama’s choice for chief of staff in his incoming administration, is co-author of a book, The Plan: Big Ideas for America, that calls for, among other things, compulsory service for all Americans ages 18 to 25. The following excerpt is from pages 61-62 of the 2006 book:

"It’s time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.

Here’s how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They’ll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we’re hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities’ most pressing needs."

1) Barack Obama is the President-Elect, not Rahm Emmanuel
2) Umm, hello, Katrina?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 10, 2008, 03:52:50 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:44:59 PM
Here are the quotes from Rahm Emanuel that was getting the rumblings going....
Quote
Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, President-Elect Barack Obama's choice for chief of staff in his incoming administration, is co-author of a book, The Plan: Big Ideas for America, that calls for, among other things, compulsory service for all Americans ages 18 to 25. The following excerpt is from pages 61-62 of the 2006 book:

"It's time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.

Here's how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They'll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we're hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities' most pressing needs."
I still haven't gotten an answer from anyone on how this Civil Service group is any different from the National Guard (or what the National Guard was originally supposed to be).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 10, 2008, 03:56:09 PM
Well, it seems much more civilian to me. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 10, 2008, 03:56:23 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 03:46:47 PM
And what's the problem with that?
We've already gone over that.  we seem to disagree, but it's there to review, if you wish.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 10, 2008, 03:48:34 PM
1) Barack Obama is the President-Elect, not Rahm Emmanuel
2) Umm, hello, Katrina?
yes, i know.  but just as the wingnuts are reaching in thinking that his thoughts will necessarily translate into policy implemented, it would be equally naive to think that appointments of people with certain views do not have an influence at all.  Particularly on such an important position, where he will be in charge of appointing other people (who will presumably share his opinion).
Re: the katrina thing.... wut?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 10, 2008, 04:01:51 PM
Incidentally, my town just flooded.  Like literally.  I was lucky to get across the bridge in time.  In theory, I could go to the other end of town and cross via a small road, then walk all the way back down around....which is what everyone will be doing tomorrow. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 10, 2008, 04:13:27 PM
Quote from: Payne on November 10, 2008, 03:15:07 PM
Quote from: Kostatar on November 10, 2008, 03:14:15 PM
While I would prefer that everyone be involved with their community... I think conscription of any sort is unacceptable.

National Service |= conscription.

TIA.

While I would prefer that everyone be involved with their community... I think Required National Service of any sort is unacceptable. However, Civil disaster and emergency skill training being a mandatory aspect of High School, seems entirely reasonable to me.

The most stupid thing about America today, is our astonishing lack of preparedness when it comes to self-preservation. It's as though "modern" reality is simply assumed not to have major disasters just waiting in the wings. When I was a kid, I remember fire safety week and tornado safety week. There were little flyers we had to take home and work with our parents to show what our family plan was if there was a fire or tornado. Yet, how many Americans, right now, do you think have plans for disasters? It's not difficult to figure out which 'bad things' might happen in your geographical area. Here in Columbus, Fire, Tornado and maybe, in some really bizarre and weird turn of events, a earthquake (though the fault line in our area is pretty weak).  If you live in New Orleans... maybe you should have some bottled water, canned food etc. stocked away. Maybe you should also have an exit plan.

One of my friends runs a charity group that has helped a lot NOLA refugees here in town. One of the most interesting things I've picked up form those discussions is the complete unpreparedness of the individuals. They weren't prepared with food or water or even a plan of what to do, where to go and a number of them have commented that they didn't even know what the city's plan for disaster actually was. They didn't know where they were supposed to go or anything else. While NOLA surely bears some responsibility (their plan was not good), their plan was publicly available. It was public knowledge that NOLA was in a position of serious risk... yet, many individuals simply didn't prepare. One single mom of three said to me "Well, we just assumed that the government would tell us what to do."

Somehow, between 1900 and 2000 we have a whol;e load of people that think "The government will tell us"  is a decent plan for survival.

Yet, NOLA shows us EXACTLY why its such a bad idea to trust survival to the government. When the waters are rising, the government may not be there... local 'First Responders' may be saving their own families, the feds may be run by Incompetent Brownie and there may simply be logistical issues with getting someone to where you are (like, having a hurricane in the way or something like that). Simply put, when disaster strikes you, the one person you know will be there is... You. If someone else shows up, all the better.

If Rham's point is that we need to get over this dearth of ignorance and laziness, then I'm 100% behind it. Compulsory government training... good. Compulsory government service... not good.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 10, 2008, 04:19:31 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 10, 2008, 04:01:51 PM
Incidentally, my town just flooded.  Like literally.  I was lucky to get across the bridge in time.  In theory, I could go to the other end of town and cross via a small road, then walk all the way back down around....which is what everyone will be doing tomorrow. 

Further hilarity: the regional flood defence office is having MAJOR communication problems.  The phones are down, email is down and they can only use mobiles, which are unreliable because this is a hilly region.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 10, 2008, 04:40:51 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 10, 2008, 04:19:31 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 10, 2008, 04:01:51 PM
Incidentally, my town just flooded.  Like literally.  I was lucky to get across the bridge in time.  In theory, I could go to the other end of town and cross via a small road, then walk all the way back down around....which is what everyone will be doing tomorrow. 

Further hilarity: the regional flood defence office is having MAJOR communication problems.  The phones are down, email is down and they can only use mobiles, which are unreliable because this is a hilly region.

And that is why Eris is the goddess of Bureaucracy!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 11, 2008, 03:50:12 PM
God Save Ameriuh!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSBNHpLzV7M
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 11, 2008, 06:07:00 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 10, 2008, 04:01:51 PM
Incidentally, my town just flooded.  Like literally.  I was lucky to get across the bridge in time.  In theory, I could go to the other end of town and cross via a small road, then walk all the way back down around....which is what everyone will be doing tomorrow. 

What the fuck. Damn, dude!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 11, 2008, 06:15:54 PM
BTW, the Freepers are boycotting Fox News for being "too liberal".  I wish I was making this up.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2127130/posts
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 12, 2008, 02:36:15 AM
sorry i missed the fun, i was out of town for the new conscription, obama's army argument here is a related article
http://www.examiner.com/a-1683408~Rep__calls_Obama_Marxist__warns_of_dictatorship.html

and some daily mail "new president end of America" wingnuttery
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1084111/PETER-HITCHENS-The-night-waved-goodbye-America--best-hope-Earth.html

say goodbye to your guns the constitution and the second amendment http://www.adn.com/politics/story/585071.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on November 12, 2008, 04:40:24 AM
That Obamer feller's gonna take awr guns.
     \
:mullet:






:roll:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 05:13:27 AM
why the mullet man? Obama has explicitly said so on change.gov that he plans on an AWB and the ones currently in the pipe are would be more extensive than the last one.
(i am a sucker, and will always bite on teh gun control bait..... :|)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: tyrannosaurus vex on November 12, 2008, 05:48:35 AM
There is more to the Constitution than the 2nd amendment, and because he has said he believes the 2nd amendment declares an individual ownership right. And Obama is plainly more concerned with controlling weapons in the inner-city than with disarming the population for some kind of devious master plan.

Besides, civilized countries don't have military-grade weapons available to the general population (except Switzerland). Ultimately, guns are like religion: just because you're allowed to have them, doesn't mean you should.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on November 12, 2008, 06:48:52 AM
Fine, ban assault weapons. but what the government declares to be an 'assault weapon' has nothing to do with what an assault weapon was defined as before politicians got involved.  They banned weapons based on the appearance of the gun, ammo capacity, even things that don't relate to combat ability at all like folding stocks, even things found on historical weapons like bayonets.

Oh, and assault weapon bans don't prevent you from buying a selective fire SKS*, which actually is an assault weapon.



*Actually doing it, assault weapon ban or not, would be difficult, takes a fair bit of money, possibly more than the gun is worth, and is probably coved under an automatic weapons ban most states have.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 12, 2008, 06:49:43 AM
Quote from: Nigel on November 11, 2008, 06:07:00 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 10, 2008, 04:01:51 PM
Incidentally, my town just flooded.  Like literally.  I was lucky to get across the bridge in time.  In theory, I could go to the other end of town and cross via a small road, then walk all the way back down around....which is what everyone will be doing tomorrow. 

What the fuck. Damn, dude!
Anyone know if Cain is alright? He hasn't been around for awhile.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 12, 2008, 07:31:56 AM
Obama and most anti gun politicians are savvy enough to know its a losing issue in America, pre-election the get camoed out and pose with hunters they claim pro hunter and 2ND amendment stances. post election they don't make bold gun grabs they push the anti gun agenda gently down the slippery slope, expect taxes on bullets bad legislation for do nothing ammo identification laws and bans on "the bad type of guns" all of which hurt law abiding citizens right to keep  and bear arms while having no effect (or increasing) the number of crimes committed with guns by criminals (people who by definition ignore the law).
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 12, 2008, 12:19:54 PM
Why do people always equate "anti-assault weapon and pro-safer inter city neighbourhoods" with "anti-guns for safety and protection"?

I really want to know, because I don't see the equation here.

I also don't understand why people have such a hankering NEED to have assault weapons, but thats a question for another time.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 12:31:01 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 12:19:54 PM
I also don't understand why people have such a hankering NEED to have assault weapons, but thats a question for another time.

It's basic strategy and it leads directly to the arms race, megadeath and mutually assured destruction.

Basically if you have a gun and next door gets one then there is a status quo. You have no advantage. However if you get your hands on an assault rifle then you have the advantage.

For some reason logic seems to fly out the window at this point and none of the gun freaks can take on board the concept that maybe their neighbor will get an assault rifle too. This lack of foresight is crucial because without it war would be much less funny.

Mark my words, when the "cold dead hands" squad get the rights to bear assault rifles there'll be a campaign to legalise rocket launchers the very next week. This will continue right up until Johnny redneck is stockpiling Multi yield ICBM's in his back yard  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 01:49:26 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 12:19:54 PM
Why do people always equate "anti-assault weapon and pro-safer inter city neighbourhoods" with "anti-guns for safety and protection"?
I also don't understand why people have such a hankering NEED to have assault weapons, but thats a question for another time.

I don't mind if cities (or states for that matter) have legislation to control firearms. (well, i think they should have the right, at least.  i would lobby against it in my city/state.)  but this shouldn't be implemented at the national level. 
I'm curious if you know what the original technical definition of an assault weapon is, versus what the AWB defined it as, versus what the media defines it as? 
Ask Jenne, we have to exercise our rights in order to keep them, even if it means doing things that seem arbitrary or even counterproductive to society. :D (jk, Jenne)  Honestly, though. the reason for right to bear arms is to defend against the possible tyranny of an overstepping standing army.  it's a deterrent.
Also, come over to my place any time, and we can shoot the browning 1919 and you will get a giant shit eating grin on your face, without feeling the need to commit any crimes.  It's an autonomic response, srsly.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 12, 2008, 02:00:46 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 01:49:26 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 12:19:54 PM
Why do people always equate "anti-assault weapon and pro-safer inter city neighbourhoods" with "anti-guns for safety and protection"?
I also don't understand why people have such a hankering NEED to have assault weapons, but thats a question for another time.

I don't mind if cities (or states for that matter) have legislation to control firearms. (well, i think they should have the right, at least.  i would lobby against it in my city/state.)  but this shouldn't be implemented at the national level. 
I'm curious if you know what the original technical definition of an assault weapon is, versus what the AWB defined it as, versus what the media defines it as? 
Ask Jenne, we have to exercise our rights in order to keep them, even if it means doing things that seem arbitrary or even counterproductive to society. :D (jk, Jenne)  Honestly, though. the reason for right to bear arms is to defend against the possible tyranny of an overstepping standing army.  it's a deterrent.
Also, come over to my place any time, and we can shoot the browning 1919 and you will get a giant shit eating grin on your face, without feeling the need to commit any crimes.  It's an autonomic response, srsly.

Probably not. I'm not into guns really.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on November 12, 2008, 05:21:39 PM
Sounds fun to me.
I'm totally into guns.
Also a gun owner.

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 12, 2008, 05:56:52 PM
Quote from: Squiddy on November 12, 2008, 05:21:39 PM
Sounds fun to me.
I'm totally into guns.
Also a gun owner.


me too
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 12:31:01 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 12:19:54 PM
I also don't understand why people have such a hankering NEED to have assault weapons, but thats a question for another time.

It's basic strategy and it leads directly to the arms race, megadeath and mutually assured destruction.

Basically if you have a gun and next door gets one then there is a status quo. You have no advantage. However if you get your hands on an assault rifle then you have the advantage.

For some reason logic seems to fly out the window at this point and none of the gun freaks can take on board the concept that maybe their neighbor will get an assault rifle too. This lack of foresight is crucial because without it war would be much less funny.

Mark my words, when the "cold dead hands" squad get the rights to bear assault rifles there'll be a campaign to legalise rocket launchers the very next week. This will continue right up until Johnny redneck is stockpiling Multi yield ICBM's in his back yard  :lulz:
i have known many gun owners and have never met one who is gives cold war escalation as a reason for the guns they own.
you seem to be under the common misperception that guns (or certain types of weapons) are some how inherently evil, they are not its the hands they are in that determines the use they are put to, the street gangs (criminals ) who are at war with each other and who assault civilians during the commission of crimes should not have assault weapons,  but they are criminals  make a law against the weapons and they will ignore it. the gun owners i know would pose no more risk to their families neighbours local shop owners or any one else if the gun they owned was an  assault rifle than they do with the guns they own now. 
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 12, 2008, 06:26:28 PM
WND EXCLUSIVE!!!

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80584

A group of people are meeting at a McDonald's in Topeka and are plotting to make Nov. 4th into Obama Day, a national holiday that "marks the day America grew up". This obviously proves that Obama is an uppity elitist snob who isn't fit to rule!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on November 12, 2008, 06:27:48 PM
 :facepalm:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 06:55:46 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 12, 2008, 05:56:52 PM
i have known many gun owners and have never met one who is gives cold war escalation as a reason for the guns they own.
you seem to be under the common misperception that guns (or certain types of weapons) are some how inherently evil, they are not its the hands they are in that determines the use they are put to, the street gangs (criminals ) who are at war with each other and who assault civilians during the commission of crimes should not have assault weapons,  but they are criminals  make a law against the weapons and they will ignore it. the gun owners i know would pose no more risk to their families neighbours local shop owners or any one else if the gun they owned was an  assault rifle than they do with the guns they own now. 

Sorry bout that. I should have explained that I live in one of those non-american countries that finds the whole situation hilarious. In a nutshell we see americans on teevee bemoaning the fact that their friends and family keep getting shot and are convinced the only solution is more guns. :lulz:

If you want empirical evidence look at the statistics. In countries where very few people have guns, very few people get shot. It may sound bizarre to an american but all I can say is trust the statistics, most of the rest of us get the logic.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 12, 2008, 07:00:18 PM
There are countries like Canada where many people own guns and few people get shot.


I really don't know what to think of people owning assault weapons but rifles, shotguns and pistols for protection and hunting, non automatic, seems perfectly reasonable. I'm just not into guns myself.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 07:02:37 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 07:00:18 PM
I really don't know what to think of people owning assault weapons but rifles, shotguns and pistols for protection and hunting, non automatic, seems perfectly reasonable. I'm just not into guns myself.

You keep using that word.....
I do not think it means what you think it means...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 12, 2008, 07:03:24 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 07:02:37 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 07:00:18 PM
I really don't know what to think of people owning assault weapons but rifles, shotguns and pistols for protection and hunting, non automatic, seems perfectly reasonable. I'm just not into guns myself.

You keep using that word.....
I do not think it means what you think it means...

I probably don't.

Why don't you enlighten me?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 07:15:59 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 06:55:46 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 12, 2008, 05:56:52 PM
i have known many gun owners and have never met one who is gives cold war escalation as a reason for the guns they own.
you seem to be under the common misperception that guns (or certain types of weapons) are some how inherently evil, they are not its the hands they are in that determines the use they are put to, the street gangs (criminals ) who are at war with each other and who assault civilians during the commission of crimes should not have assault weapons,  but they are criminals  make a law against the weapons and they will ignore it. the gun owners i know would pose no more risk to their families neighbours local shop owners or any one else if the gun they owned was an  assault rifle than they do with the guns they own now. 

Sorry bout that. I should have explained that I live in one of those non-american countries that finds the whole situation hilarious. In a nutshell we see americans on teevee bemoaning the fact that their friends and family keep getting shot and are convinced the only solution is more guns. :lulz:

If you want empirical evidence look at the statistics. In countries where very few people have guns, very few people get shot. It may sound bizarre to an american but all I can say is trust the statistics, most of the rest of us get the logic.

It's true:

Look, here we have Bob and Tom. Tom slept with Bob's wife and gave them both VD. Bob flips out, gets a gun and shoots Tom. If Tom had a gun, the situation would be: A) Same, because his gun was in the closet when Bob showed up. B) Different, He shot Bob first... of course, still we have dead human from Gun. C) They both get shot.

Obviously, if neither had guns, the situation might go like this:

Look, here we have Bob and Tom. Tom slept with Bob's wife and gave them both VD. Bob flips out, gets a knife and stabs Tom. If Tom had a knife, the situation would be: A) Same, because his knife was in the closet when Bob showed up. B) Different, He stabbed Bob first... of course, still we have dead human from Knife. C) They both get stabbed.

So we need to outlaw knives as well... most of the world gets this logic too. And Bob and Tom would be all better, see:

Look, here we have Bob and Tom. Tom slept with Bob's wife and gave them both VD. Bob flips out, gets a club and beats Tom. If Tom had a club, the situation would be: A) Same, because his club was in the closet when Bob showed up. B) Different, He clubbed Bob first... of course, still we have dead human from clubbing. C) They both get clubbed.

Damnation, we need to outlaw clubs too, bats, tree limbs.... But! Now, Bob and Tom won't kill each other! Let's watch:

Look, here we have Bob and Tom. Tom slept with Bob's wife and gave them both VD. Bob flips out, gets a brick and throws it at Tom's head. If Tom had a brick, the situation would be: A) Same, because his birck was in the closet when Bob showed up. B) Different, He threw his brick at Bob first... of course, still we have dead human from Brick To The Head. C) They both get conked by bricks.

Well, it looks like we need to get rid of bricks too... better get rid of wooden houses, someone will tear off a chunk of siding with nails in it. Of course, that means we need to go back to huts made of branches. Oh damn, a branch might get used like a spear... we'd better just go back to living in the trees.

DAMNIT! THE TREES HAVE BRANCHES!

I guess we're fucked.


Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 07:19:07 PM
Of course, you do know there is only three ways to defeat a security dilemma, right?  And make no mistake, this is a classic security dilemma.

Technically, there are four ways, but the last one is cheating.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 12, 2008, 07:19:34 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 07:15:59 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 06:55:46 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 12, 2008, 05:56:52 PM
i have known many gun owners and have never met one who is gives cold war escalation as a reason for the guns they own.
you seem to be under the common misperception that guns (or certain types of weapons) are some how inherently evil, they are not its the hands they are in that determines the use they are put to, the street gangs (criminals ) who are at war with each other and who assault civilians during the commission of crimes should not have assault weapons,  but they are criminals  make a law against the weapons and they will ignore it. the gun owners i know would pose no more risk to their families neighbours local shop owners or any one else if the gun they owned was an  assault rifle than they do with the guns they own now. 

Sorry bout that. I should have explained that I live in one of those non-american countries that finds the whole situation hilarious. In a nutshell we see americans on teevee bemoaning the fact that their friends and family keep getting shot and are convinced the only solution is more guns. :lulz:

If you want empirical evidence look at the statistics. In countries where very few people have guns, very few people get shot. It may sound bizarre to an american but all I can say is trust the statistics, most of the rest of us get the logic.

Reductio ad absurdum.

Fixed.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 07:26:37 PM
You raise a valid point. Okay, so given that even if we reduced you guys to having to use sticks to kill each other, in defense of your constitutional right or whatever, we can assume that it would only slow you down a bit since it takes slightly longer to wipe out a hundred people with a stick than it does with a semi automatic rifle and a pocket full of bullets.

The issue seems to be more about how we can control or suppress america's mass homicidal urges.

Or do we want to. Strikes me if enough people are supplied with enough weapons the problem will take care of itself  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 07:28:09 PM
How do we historically solve arms races in an anarchical international system with no overarching power?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on November 12, 2008, 07:28:57 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 07:28:09 PM
How do we historically solve arms races in an anarchical international system with no overarching power?
Kill everybody.  No humans, no arms race, no law.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 07:33:42 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 07:03:24 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 07:02:37 PM
You keep using that word.....
I do not think it means what you think it means...
I probably don't.
Why don't you enlighten me?
It was originally used in the German 'sturmgewehr' StG44 which was the result of Germany realizing that combat had evolved from shooting over long distances of no man's land to shooting shorter distances in urban settings.  They developed a medium strength cartridge of smaller caliber and made the rifle select fire (meaning it can shoot fully automatic).  So, those are the features of an assault rifle.
In the AWB of 1994, they used the term 'assault weapon' which they defined as a gun on a 'bad list' or having over a minimum amount of some features which they deemed evil:
QuoteSemi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
        * Folding stock
        * Conspicuous pistol grip
        * Bayonet mount
        * Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
        * Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

    Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
        * Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
        * Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or silencer
        * Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
        * Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
        * A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm

    Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
        * Folding or telescoping stock
        * Pistol grip
        * Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
        * Detachable magazine

They were essentially dictating against aesthetics, and none of these met the actual definition of 'assault rifle' because none of them are fully automatic.
They can all be used for whatever purpose you want.  So to say "...people owning assault weapons but rifles, shotguns and pistols for protection and hunting, non automatic, seems perfectly reasonable" doesn't fly because they are declaring wide swaths of them to be assault weapons.  and they are used for protection and hunting.  This last weekend, when i went out hunting i used a Remington R-25 which would be banned under the current ban legislation in the pipe (which is more restrictive yet) even though it was specifically designed for hunting.

and, again.  the whole point of the 2nd amendment, is not for protection against criminals or for hunting. it is to act as a deterrent against gov tyranny.... we should be armed with the equivalent of an infantryman, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 07:34:37 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 07:19:34 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 07:15:59 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 06:55:46 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 12, 2008, 05:56:52 PM
i have known many gun owners and have never met one who is gives cold war escalation as a reason for the guns they own.
you seem to be under the common misperception that guns (or certain types of weapons) are some how inherently evil, they are not its the hands they are in that determines the use they are put to, the street gangs (criminals ) who are at war with each other and who assault civilians during the commission of crimes should not have assault weapons,  but they are criminals  make a law against the weapons and they will ignore it. the gun owners i know would pose no more risk to their families neighbours local shop owners or any one else if the gun they owned was an  assault rifle than they do with the guns they own now. 

Sorry bout that. I should have explained that I live in one of those non-american countries that finds the whole situation hilarious. In a nutshell we see americans on teevee bemoaning the fact that their friends and family keep getting shot and are convinced the only solution is more guns. :lulz:

If you want empirical evidence look at the statistics. In countries where very few people have guns, very few people get shot. It may sound bizarre to an american but all I can say is trust the statistics, most of the rest of us get the logic.

Reductio ad absurdum.

Fixed.

Hyperbole


Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 07:26:37 PM
You raise a valid point. Okay, so given that even if we reduced you guys to having to use sticks to kill each other, in defense of your constitutional right or whatever, we can assume that it would only slow you down a bit since it takes slightly longer to wipe out a hundred people with a stick than it does with a semi automatic rifle and a pocket full of bullets.

The issue seems to be more about how we can control or suppress america's mass homicidal urges.

Or do we want to. Strikes me if enough people are supplied with enough weapons the problem will take care of itself  :lulz:

IAWTC
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 07:42:53 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 07:33:42 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 07:03:24 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 07:02:37 PM
You keep using that word.....
I do not think it means what you think it means...
I probably don't.
Why don't you enlighten me?
It was originally used in the German 'sturmgewehr' StG44 which was the result of Germany realizing that combat had evolved from shooting over long distances of no man's land to shooting shorter distances in urban settings.  They developed a medium strength cartridge of smaller caliber and made the rifle select fire (meaning it can shoot fully automatic).  So, those are the features of an assault rifle.
In the AWB of 1994, they used the term 'assault weapon' which they defined as a gun on a 'bad list' or having over a minimum amount of some features which they deemed evil:
QuoteSemi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
        * Folding stock
        * Conspicuous pistol grip
        * Bayonet mount
        * Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
        * Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

    Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
        * Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
        * Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or silencer
        * Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
        * Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
        * A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm

    Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
        * Folding or telescoping stock
        * Pistol grip
        * Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
        * Detachable magazine

They were essentially dictating against aesthetics, and none of these met the actual definition of 'assault rifle' because none of them are fully automatic.
They can all be used for whatever purpose you want.  So to say "...people owning assault weapons but rifles, shotguns and pistols for protection and hunting, non automatic, seems perfectly reasonable" doesn't fly because they are declaring wide swaths of them to be assault weapons.  and they are used for protection and hunting.  This last weekend, when i went out hunting i used a Remington R-25 which would be banned under the current ban legislation in the pipe (which is more restrictive yet) even though it was specifically designed for hunting.

and, again.  the whole point of the 2nd amendment, is not for protection against criminals or for hunting. it is to act as a deterrent against gov tyranny.... we should be armed with the equivalent of an infantryman, in my opinion.


The average infantryman has the ability to call in arty, an airstrike or just a couple of friendly gunships to back him up. The second amendment is bullshit because your government has bigger guns - they will win. It's not like the good old days when a couple of hicks with a horse and some black powder could take on the might of the british empire. Your guns are fucking useless against tanks so we're back to my original point - the only way the 2nd amendment would be feasible is if everyone in america had an ICBM in their back yard. I have sky news and a bigscreen teevee so I'm happy enough to support this legislation in any way I'm able. :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on November 12, 2008, 07:45:36 PM
I want a goddamn nuclear submarine. :argh!:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 07:47:33 PM
It's your constitutional right!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 07:50:04 PM
Of course, you could just vote people in who mostly disband the armed forces, thus making them easier to defeat.  But then you'd have to give up the empire.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 07:50:35 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 07:42:53 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 07:33:42 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 07:03:24 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 07:02:37 PM
You keep using that word.....
I do not think it means what you think it means...
I probably don't.
Why don't you enlighten me?
It was originally used in the German 'sturmgewehr' StG44 which was the result of Germany realizing that combat had evolved from shooting over long distances of no man's land to shooting shorter distances in urban settings.  They developed a medium strength cartridge of smaller caliber and made the rifle select fire (meaning it can shoot fully automatic).  So, those are the features of an assault rifle.
In the AWB of 1994, they used the term 'assault weapon' which they defined as a gun on a 'bad list' or having over a minimum amount of some features which they deemed evil:
QuoteSemi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
        * Folding stock
        * Conspicuous pistol grip
        * Bayonet mount
        * Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
        * Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

    Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
        * Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
        * Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or silencer
        * Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
        * Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
        * A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm

    Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
        * Folding or telescoping stock
        * Pistol grip
        * Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
        * Detachable magazine

They were essentially dictating against aesthetics, and none of these met the actual definition of 'assault rifle' because none of them are fully automatic.
They can all be used for whatever purpose you want.  So to say "...people owning assault weapons but rifles, shotguns and pistols for protection and hunting, non automatic, seems perfectly reasonable" doesn't fly because they are declaring wide swaths of them to be assault weapons.  and they are used for protection and hunting.  This last weekend, when i went out hunting i used a Remington R-25 which would be banned under the current ban legislation in the pipe (which is more restrictive yet) even though it was specifically designed for hunting.

and, again.  the whole point of the 2nd amendment, is not for protection against criminals or for hunting. it is to act as a deterrent against gov tyranny.... we should be armed with the equivalent of an infantryman, in my opinion.


The average infantryman has the ability to call in arty, an airstrike or just a couple of friendly gunships to back him up. The second amendment is bullshit because your government has bigger guns - they will win. It's not like the good old days when a couple of hicks with a horse and some black powder could take on the might of the british empire. Your guns are fucking useless against tanks so we're back to my original point - the only way the 2nd amendment would be feasible is if everyone in america had an ICBM in their back yard. I have sky news and a bigscreen teevee so I'm happy enough to support this legislation in any way I'm able. :lulz:


They may have you outgunned...                        
but we have some skills                                      
you might be able to use.                                     Yeah? You one of dem Freedum Fyters?
     \                                                                                   \
:hashishim:                                                                    :mullet:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 07:51:36 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 07:50:04 PM
Of course, you could just vote people in who mostly disband the armed forces, thus making them easier to defeat.  But then you'd have to give up the empire.

The price of guns would skyrocket. Be realistic FFS!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 08:01:57 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 07:42:53 PM
The average infantryman has the ability to call in arty, an airstrike or just a couple of friendly gunships to back him up. The second amendment is bullshit because your government has bigger guns - they will win. It's not like the good old days when a couple of hicks with a horse and some black powder could take on the might of the british empire. Your guns are fucking useless against tanks so we're back to my original point - the only way the 2nd amendment would be feasible is if everyone in america had an ICBM in their back yard. I have sky news and a bigscreen teevee so I'm happy enough to support this legislation in any way I'm able. :lulz:

I'm guessing you're just trolling, since you seem like a fairly smart fellow in an argumentative forum, and i'm sure this isn't a new argument here.  But like i said, i'm a sucker for the gun argument, so i'll bite:

You're saying that assymetrical warfare isn't viable, huh?
You're saying that a gov with tyrannical ambitions is just as likely to use a standing army against a population of millions armed with rifles as they would be against a population armed with sticks, huh?

and you next line is.......
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:05:15 PM
ENJOY YOUR DEATH SQUADS!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 08:10:18 PM
Ba-DOOM! :lulz:
you win! :argh!:
srsly, tho, cain. what do you think about that?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 12, 2008, 08:13:03 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 07:33:42 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 07:03:24 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 07:02:37 PM
You keep using that word.....
I do not think it means what you think it means...
I probably don't.
Why don't you enlighten me?
It was originally used in the German 'sturmgewehr' StG44 which was the result of Germany realizing that combat had evolved from shooting over long distances of no man's land to shooting shorter distances in urban settings.  They developed a medium strength cartridge of smaller caliber and made the rifle select fire (meaning it can shoot fully automatic).  So, those are the features of an assault rifle.
In the AWB of 1994, they used the term 'assault weapon' which they defined as a gun on a 'bad list' or having over a minimum amount of some features which they deemed evil:
QuoteSemi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
        * Folding stock
        * Conspicuous pistol grip
        * Bayonet mount
        * Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
        * Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

    Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
        * Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
        * Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or silencer
        * Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
        * Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
        * A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm

    Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
        * Folding or telescoping stock
        * Pistol grip
        * Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
        * Detachable magazine

They were essentially dictating against aesthetics, and none of these met the actual definition of 'assault rifle' because none of them are fully automatic.
They can all be used for whatever purpose you want.  So to say "...people owning assault weapons but rifles, shotguns and pistols for protection and hunting, non automatic, seems perfectly reasonable" doesn't fly because they are declaring wide swaths of them to be assault weapons.  and they are used for protection and hunting.  This last weekend, when i went out hunting i used a Remington R-25 which would be banned under the current ban legislation in the pipe (which is more restrictive yet) even though it was specifically designed for hunting.

and, again.  the whole point of the 2nd amendment, is not for protection against criminals or for hunting. it is to act as a deterrent against gov tyranny.... we should be armed with the equivalent of an infantryman, in my opinion.


I think I actually agree with the terminology of assault weapons up there as useful. Then again, I'm not really into guns and you'd be fucked to take up arms against the military so *shrug*. Every gun my dad has is within those parameters, and he uses them for hunting.

I just don't see why you need a rifle or pistol with a detachable magazine, or a shotgun that can fit more than 5 shells at once.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 12, 2008, 08:13:36 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 07:42:53 PM


The average infantryman has the ability to call in arty, an airstrike or just a couple of friendly gunships to back him up. The second amendment is bullshit because your government has bigger guns - they will win. It's not like the good old days when a couple of hicks with a horse and some black powder could take on the might of the british empire. Your guns are fucking useless against tanks so we're back to my original point - the only way the 2nd amendment would be feasible is if everyone in america had an ICBM in their back yard. I have sky news and a bigscreen teevee so I'm happy enough to support this legislation in any way I'm able. :lulz:

because a small poorly armed force has never won a war :argh!:
1 there are large numbers of armed Americans
2 they do not need to use force on force tactics (heard of asymmetrical warfare?)
3 they have plenty of ability to cause a occupational army trouble
4 survive long enough to create popular support for the resistance against an  occupying army and bigger weapons get donated (or bought)
5 most members of the military support the 2ND amendment and would defect (with there military weapons ) to the citizens side
and most importantly its not a who would win question, its a government wouldn't dare because the cost is to high answer. armed civilians even poorly armed ones act as a deterrent to tyranny.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 08:15:54 PM
The US government would not win in a real fight against its citizens, unless it was the crazy ass survivalist people that were siding with the government.

They have a large chunk of the army deployed in Iraq and they have serious trouble maintaining control. I doubt that the US Army could do more than MAYBE hold one or two states (Maryland, DC and maybe something else close by).

Of course, that assumes that they haven't first been successful at splitting the nation into opposing, hate filled groups that consider each other to be "Unamerican".

Not that such an obvious ploy would ever work on us... we're way to smart for that. (All of us, except for those other damned unamerican assholes...)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:16:25 PM
I think a government as powerful as the United States, faced with a potential insurgency, would use every tool possible to defeat such insurgents and be free to deny their methods via their friends in the media.  So poison in the water, raping and killing your family and sending you the video, bioengineered weaponry etc etc....the methods are limitless and brutal.

Could such a method work?  Its hard to say.  Terrorism would at best reduce America to a failed state status, and that's assuming this superterrorism stuff ever gets off the ground.  A guerrilla organization may have a better chance....maybe.  Depending on the particulars, such as support, ideology, lines of supply etc

Its not something I'd wish on my worst enemy though.  Counterinsurgency, by its very nature, is the nastiest form of warfare you can see.  All the rules go out the window, though it may not be publically acknowledged.  As I pointed out with my criticism in the other thread, you'd probably need to break the socio-cultural hegemon of the US political system before you could ever hope to win militarily.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 08:19:47 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 08:13:03 PM
I think I actually agree with the terminology of assault weapons up there as useful. Then again, I'm not really into guns and you'd be fucked to take up arms against the military so *shrug*. Every gun my dad has is within those parameters, and he uses them for hunting.
I just don't see why you need a rifle or pistol with a detachable magazine, or a shotgun that can fit more than 5 shells at once.
I don't understand what you are saying you are agreeing with.
I don't think you would be fucked up to take up arms against a military that is being used against you.  I think that makes you a free man.
As far as the 'need' thing goes; why do you have to need something for it to be legal?  You don't need anti lock brakes, but they might save your ass in certain circumstances, no?  I don't need the scroll wheel on the mouse i am using, but it sure is convenient.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 08:21:34 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:16:25 PM
I think a government as powerful as the United States, faced with a potential insurgency, would use every tool possible to defeat such insurgents and be free to deny their methods via their friends in the media.  So poison in the water, raping and killing your family and sending you the video, bioengineered weaponry etc etc....the methods are limitless and brutal.

Could such a method work?  Its hard to say.  Terrorism would at best reduce America to a failed state status, and that's assuming this superterrorism stuff ever gets off the ground.  A guerrilla organization may have a better chance....maybe.  Depending on the particulars, such as support, ideology, lines of supply etc

Its not something I'd wish on my worst enemy though.  Counterinsurgency, by its very nature, is the nastiest form of warfare you can see.  All the rules go out the window, though it may not be publically acknowledged.  As I pointed out with my criticism in the other thread, you'd probably need to break the socio-cultural hegemon of the US political system before you could ever hope to win militarily.

But it's never going to happen, cos they have the 2nd amendment and the right to shoot each other  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 08:26:00 PM
At the end of the day... I don't know how an insurgency would work here.

However, if ever the time comes when a dictator gains control of the nation, if a time comes when jackbooted thugs are rounding up citizens for using their freedom of speech, or freedom of assembly, if a time comes when the gays and the Jews get rounded up for capms.. if the day comes when we are 'the next Nazi Germany'... I'd like to have the best guns available, because I'd rather die after fighting tyranny for five minutes, than serve it for 5 years.

I'd rather die shooting the fucker that had just arrested Kai, than live to a ripe old age, knowing that I could have and didn't.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 12, 2008, 08:28:12 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:16:25 PM
I think a government as powerful as the United States, faced with a potential insurgency, would use every tool possible to defeat such insurgents and be free to deny their methods via their friends in the media.  So poison in the water, raping and killing your family and sending you the video, bioengineered weaponry etc etc....the methods are limitless and brutal.

Could such a method work?  Its hard to say.  Terrorism would at best reduce America to a failed state status, and that's assuming this superterrorism stuff ever gets off the ground.  A guerrilla organization may have a better chance....maybe.  Depending on the particulars, such as support, ideology, lines of supply etc

Its not something I'd wish on my worst enemy though.  Counterinsurgency, by its very nature, is the nastiest form of warfare you can see.  All the rules go out the window, though it may not be publically acknowledged.  As I pointed out with my criticism in the other thread, you'd probably need to break the socio-cultural hegemon of the US political system before you could ever hope to win militarily.
i suspect the government is plenty smart enough to realise the cost of war with its own people, this is why they push the some guns are "bad" propaganda this is why they push biased  gun death statistics in the media and why the gun laws they promote effect the law abiding citizen and not criminals. the long slow approach to disarming the public is the only one that will work, England and Australia are examples of the success of this method.  
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 12, 2008, 08:29:37 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 08:26:00 PM


However, if ever the time comes when a dictator gains control of the nation, if a time comes when jackbooted thugs are rounding up citizens for using their freedom of speech, or freedom of assembly, if a time comes when the gays and the Jews get rounded up for capms.. if the day comes when we are 'the next Nazi Germany'... I'd like to have the best guns available, because I'd rather die after fighting tyranny for five minutes, than serve it for 5 years.

I'd rather die shooting the fucker that had just arrested Kai, than live to a ripe old age, knowing that I could have and didn't.
TITCM
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 12, 2008, 08:30:09 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 08:19:47 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 08:13:03 PM
I think I actually agree with the terminology of assault weapons up there as useful. Then again, I'm not really into guns and you'd be fucked to take up arms against the military so *shrug*. Every gun my dad has is within those parameters, and he uses them for hunting.
I just don't see why you need a rifle or pistol with a detachable magazine, or a shotgun that can fit more than 5 shells at once.
I don't understand what you are saying you are agreeing with.
I don't think you would be fucked up to take up arms against a military that is being used against you.  I think that makes you a free man.
As far as the 'need' thing goes; why do you have to need something for it to be legal?  You don't need anti lock brakes, but they might save your ass in certain circumstances, no?  I don't need the scroll wheel on the mouse i am using, but it sure is convenient.


I think that when people try to make the case for having "assault weapons" they come off to me as crazy ass gun nuts. I think that you are coming off to me like that right now, and its not very convincing. Are you trying to convince me? Are you trying to convince anybody? Then don't talk about how much fun it is to shoot your Browning in your backyard, because if you are talking about using it as protection, its not for fun. If you want someone to take you seriously about needing one of these weapons for protection, be serious when you talk about it.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 08:30:42 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 12, 2008, 08:28:12 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:16:25 PM
I think a government as powerful as the United States, faced with a potential insurgency, would use every tool possible to defeat such insurgents and be free to deny their methods via their friends in the media.  So poison in the water, raping and killing your family and sending you the video, bioengineered weaponry etc etc....the methods are limitless and brutal.

Could such a method work?  Its hard to say.  Terrorism would at best reduce America to a failed state status, and that's assuming this superterrorism stuff ever gets off the ground.  A guerrilla organization may have a better chance....maybe.  Depending on the particulars, such as support, ideology, lines of supply etc

Its not something I'd wish on my worst enemy though.  Counterinsurgency, by its very nature, is the nastiest form of warfare you can see.  All the rules go out the window, though it may not be publically acknowledged.  As I pointed out with my criticism in the other thread, you'd probably need to break the socio-cultural hegemon of the US political system before you could ever hope to win militarily.
i suspect the government is plenty smart enough to realise the cost of war with its own people, this is why they push the some guns are "bad" propaganda this is why they push biased  gun death statistics in the media and why the gun laws they promote effect the law abiding citizen and not criminals. the long slow approach to disarming the public is the only one that will work, England and Australia are examples of the success of this method.  

Other than the fact that I don't get shot as often what's the difference between living here or over there under Freedomtm
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 12, 2008, 08:31:30 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 08:26:00 PM
At the end of the day... I don't know how an insurgency would work here.

However, if ever the time comes when a dictator gains control of the nation, if a time comes when jackbooted thugs are rounding up citizens for using their freedom of speech, or freedom of assembly, if a time comes when the gays and the Jews get rounded up for capms.. if the day comes when we are 'the next Nazi Germany'... I'd like to have the best guns available, because I'd rather die after fighting tyranny for five minutes, than serve it for 5 years.

I'd rather die shooting the fucker that had just arrested Kai, than live to a ripe old age, knowing that I could have and didn't.

I'd rather you didn't, live to tell the tale, build support, and move forward from there. Martyrs are so unproductive.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 12, 2008, 08:40:45 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 08:30:42 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 12, 2008, 08:28:12 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:16:25 PM
I think a government as powerful as the United States, faced with a potential insurgency, would use every tool possible to defeat such insurgents and be free to deny their methods via their friends in the media.  So poison in the water, raping and killing your family and sending you the video, bioengineered weaponry etc etc....the methods are limitless and brutal.

Could such a method work?  Its hard to say.  Terrorism would at best reduce America to a failed state status, and that's assuming this superterrorism stuff ever gets off the ground.  A guerrilla organization may have a better chance....maybe.  Depending on the particulars, such as support, ideology, lines of supply etc

Its not something I'd wish on my worst enemy though.  Counterinsurgency, by its very nature, is the nastiest form of warfare you can see.  All the rules go out the window, though it may not be publically acknowledged.  As I pointed out with my criticism in the other thread, you'd probably need to break the socio-cultural hegemon of the US political system before you could ever hope to win militarily.
i suspect the government is plenty smart enough to realise the cost of war with its own people, this is why they push the some guns are "bad" propaganda this is why they push biased  gun death statistics in the media and why the gun laws they promote effect the law abiding citizen and not criminals. the long slow approach to disarming the public is the only one that will work, England and Australia are examples of the success of this method.  

Other than the fact that I don't get shot as often what's the difference between living here or over there under Freedomtm
the difference is my freedom is defended and yours is subject to the good will and benevolence of your leaders.
also see gun statistics on crime from a pro 2ND amendment source, gun ownership and  getting shot "as often" (crime rates ) work in the opposite way you imagine, private gun ownership reduces crime (even if both sets of statistics are biased the argument still leans toward gun rights)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:44:16 PM
Quotethe difference is my freedom is defended

:facepalm: :cn:

Your leaders could drop a cluster bomb on your house, same as mine.  They could bioengineer a weapon designed to kill someone purely with your DNA, just like mine.  Yours could fake a plane crash, a fatal mugging, a car accident or any other number of things where having a gun is no deterrence because the government has resources beyond your wildest dreams and you have a boom-stick.

The reason it doesn't is because quite frankly, you and I are not worth the effort.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 08:44:49 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 08:30:09 PM
I think that when people try to make the case for having "assault weapons" they come off to me as crazy ass gun nuts. I think that you are coming off to me like that right now, and its not very convincing. Are you trying to convince me? Are you trying to convince anybody? Then don't talk about how much fun it is to shoot your Browning in your backyard, because if you are talking about using it as protection, its not for fun. If you want someone to take you seriously about needing one of these weapons for protection, be serious when you talk about it.
Well, this is a topic that invokes a lot of emotion, and the only people i have ever swayed are those that didn't really have an opinion one way or the other to begin with.  Hoplophobia, once ingrained, seems to be nearly impossible to rid anybody of.
As far as having fun, hell yeah.  You think it's crazy gun nuttery to have fun with firearms, but there's a good population of upright citizens that do just that.  they hunt, target shoot, sport shoot, use them for protection, and use them as the deterrent intended in the 2nd amendment.  Things can have a basis in srs business and still be fun. 
But alright, i'll just shut up since i've been written off anyways.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 08:46:49 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 08:31:30 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 08:26:00 PM
At the end of the day... I don't know how an insurgency would work here.

However, if ever the time comes when a dictator gains control of the nation, if a time comes when jackbooted thugs are rounding up citizens for using their freedom of speech, or freedom of assembly, if a time comes when the gays and the Jews get rounded up for capms.. if the day comes when we are 'the next Nazi Germany'... I'd like to have the best guns available, because I'd rather die after fighting tyranny for five minutes, than serve it for 5 years.

I'd rather die shooting the fucker that had just arrested Kai, than live to a ripe old age, knowing that I could have and didn't.

I'd rather you didn't, live to tell the tale, build support, and move forward from there. Martyrs are so unproductive.

I don't believe in much of anything. However, I grew up with the stories of how Jehovah's Witnesses, Jews and gays died horribly while many of their German citizens chose to 'live to tell the tale', rather than say "Hell, no".

I chose to believe that personal freedom was worth dying for, I guess I still do.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 08:47:35 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:44:16 PM
Your leaders could drop a cluster bomb on your house, same as mine.  They could bioengineer a weapon designed to kill someone purely with your DNA, just like mine.  Yours could fake a plane crash, a fatal mugging, a car accident or any other number of things where having a gun is no deterrence because the government has resources beyond your wildest dreams and you have a boom-stick.
The reason it doesn't is because quite frankly, you and I are not worth the effort.
You're being obtuse.  they don't, and won't do these things (at least as a sop) because the population has the ability to rise up with some effectiveness.  If the population doesn't have that ability, the temptation to do these things is greater.  Don't you think?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:48:15 PM
I think guns can be fun.  I lived way out in the countryside for a while, my friends all had shotguns and rifles and we'd go out shooting most weekends.

I just think the defence against the government idea is severely limited, given the incredible resources a government has.  If They really want to kill you, they have ways.  I'm sure America runs its own version of Project Coast (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Coast), under the auspices of protection against CBW attacks.  I know the CIA certainly had a department that specialized in such exotic weaponry, from the late 50s onwards.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:52:37 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 08:47:35 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:44:16 PM
Your leaders could drop a cluster bomb on your house, same as mine.  They could bioengineer a weapon designed to kill someone purely with your DNA, just like mine.  Yours could fake a plane crash, a fatal mugging, a car accident or any other number of things where having a gun is no deterrence because the government has resources beyond your wildest dreams and you have a boom-stick.
The reason it doesn't is because quite frankly, you and I are not worth the effort.
You're being obtuse.  they don't, and won't do these things (at least as a sop) because the population has the ability to rise up with some effectiveness.  If the population doesn't have that ability, the temptation to do these things is greater.  Don't you think?

I'm not being obtuse, I'm being realistic.  If the population doesn't know, or doesn't think its part of the target, it wont give a shit.  Its called covering it up. Ever heard of COINTELPRO?  I don't recall the 2nd Ammendment ever being a factor in that.  The CIA kidnapped and experimented on humans as part of its MK-ULTRA Program.  If you can take someone alive, you can kill them easily, and silently.  No-one ever needs to know, its just another dead body in the river.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 08:57:54 PM
I have no reason to think that the government wouldn't try to put down any uprising with insane amounts of force, if necessary. I don't think that us having guns would stop them from trying. Though, in my opinion, they would fail, simply because they don't have the resources to pacify a 3000 mile wide continent. They can't pacify Afghanistan and Iraq for Erissake.  :wink: At the same time though, for me, it's not about if my gun would help me Win... its about if my gun will help me survive, or if my gun will help me take a stand, 'martyr' or not.

Maybe that's stupid, perhaps I should stay alive and play meek and mild when Sam Hitlerlite takes over as President. Maybe I should... but I don't think that I would and I think that, at the very least, I'd like the option.

Not that a shotgun or hunting rifle would do much good, but well, what the fuck, it's only life.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 08:58:29 PM
Lets put this in perspective people - the second amendment was invented by a bunch of medieval fucks who were totally buzzed with their recent victory against 'the man' and feeling more idealistic than realistic.

Step forward 6 million years or however long it's been and 'the man' is now a lot closer to home, an with a ubiquitous reach that would have been unfathomable back then.

And you can stop him by buying a gun?

Yeah right!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:00:47 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:52:37 PM
I'm not being obtuse, I'm being realistic.  If the population doesn't know, or doesn't think its part of the target, it wont give a shit.  Its called covering it up. Ever heard of COINTELPRO?  I don't recall the 2nd Ammendment ever being a factor in that.  The CIA kidnapped and experimented on humans as part of its MK-ULTRA Program.  If you can take someone alive, you can kill them easily, and silently.  No-one ever needs to know, its just another dead body in the river.
Yes, i am familiar with these things.....
And i can tell you that because of these limited abuses by the gov against its citizens, there is limited willingness among said citizens to take up arms against it.  If these abuses were made a frequent event, or done on a larger scale, or even perceived to be, there would be a much greater willingness among citizens to take up arms.  You're pointing at isolated incidents and saying that this extrapolates up to large scale oppression that the RKBA is designed for.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 12, 2008, 09:01:16 PM
i wouldn't say the gov doesn't have the resources to make people disappear but the need to do so must be there, if you are a rebel leader then disappearing you makes you a martyr and a rallying point for the armed citizenry, if you are a nobody armed citizen there is no reason to go to the trouble. the strength is in numbers they wont make individuals or groups disappear if they know the result isn't the one they want (unopposed tyranny)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:03:48 PM
Also, to quote Stalin:

"The Pope.  How many divisions has he got?"

That is the mentality of almost every successful leader.  The actual deterrence threat, right now, of guns in the arms of US citizens right now is hovering around zero.  Why?  Because while most people may say they uphold the second Ammendent and have them to defend against government tyranny, they don't mean this (or the incoming government).  Oh no, they mean some hypothetical government, one which presumably does more than just torture and lock people up without reason and so on and so forth.

The practical threat assessment, right now, would say: lone wolves, possibly self-organizing cells, minimal military experience.  Fuck, I wouldn't be scared of that, even if I only had the Swiss Guard as my military arm.

This is what I mean when I talk about breaking the political-social hegemon.  Guns are nothing more than a hypothetical threat, and government's do not give a shit about hypothetical threats.  Sure, some time in the future, maybe some sort of agarian revolution with a measure of popular support will be directed against Washington DC.  But it ain't happening now, and there are no indicators it is about to happen.  So the threat, the deterrent value, don't mean shit.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:05:09 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 08:57:54 PM
...Not that a shotgun or hunting rifle would do much good, but well, what the fuck, it's only life.

Honestly, i stand up for the right to have 'assault rifles' on principle, and there might be a place for that in a resistance, however, i would think that the most useful tool would be a high powered bolt rifle with good optics. (and the requisite skill to put it to use)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 09:06:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:03:48 PM
Also, to quote Stalin:

"The Pope.  How many divisions has he got?"

That is the mentality of almost every successful leader.  The actual deterrence threat, right now, of guns in the arms of US citizens right now is hovering around zero.  Why?  Because while most people may say they uphold the second Ammendent and have them to defend against government tyranny, they don't mean this (or the incoming government).  Oh no, they mean some hypothetical government, one which presumably does more than just torture and lock people up without reason and so on and so forth.

The practical threat assessment, right now, would say: lone wolves, possibly self-organizing cells, minimal military experience.  Fuck, I wouldn't be scared of that, even if I only had the Swiss Guard as my military arm.

This is what I mean when I talk about breaking the political-social hegemon.  Guns are nothing more than a hypothetical threat, and government's do not give a shit about hypothetical threats.  Sure, some time in the future, maybe some sort of agarian revolution with a measure of popular support will be directed against Washington DC.  But it ain't happening now, and there are no indicators it is about to happen.  So the threat, the deterrent value, don't mean shit.

:potd: :mittens:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 12, 2008, 09:10:41 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 08:44:49 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 08:30:09 PM
I think that when people try to make the case for having "assault weapons" they come off to me as crazy ass gun nuts. I think that you are coming off to me like that right now, and its not very convincing. Are you trying to convince me? Are you trying to convince anybody? Then don't talk about how much fun it is to shoot your Browning in your backyard, because if you are talking about using it as protection, its not for fun. If you want someone to take you seriously about needing one of these weapons for protection, be serious when you talk about it.
Well, this is a topic that invokes a lot of emotion, and the only people i have ever swayed are those that didn't really have an opinion one way or the other to begin with.  Hoplophobia, once ingrained, seems to be nearly impossible to rid anybody of.
As far as having fun, hell yeah.  You think it's crazy gun nuttery to have fun with firearms, but there's a good population of upright citizens that do just that.  they hunt, target shoot, sport shoot, use them for protection, and use them as the deterrent intended in the 2nd amendment.  Things can have a basis in srs business and still be fun. 
But alright, i'll just shut up since i've been written off anyways.

I don't see it that way. I see a weapon designed and used exclusively for the purpose of killing living things for the last....300-400 years? Since firearms came into vogue anyway. I see a weapon designed and used exclusively for that purpose as something that you should take only the utmost care and respect with, and certainly not used for fun. Unlike martial arts it has no other purpose. Unlike a knife it doesn't have multiple uses.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:12:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:03:48 PM
...Because while most people may say they uphold the second Ammendent and have them to defend against government tyranny, they don't mean this (or the incoming government). 

...government's do not give a shit about hypothetical threats.

...But it ain't happening now, and there are no indicators it is about to happen.
these points i call  :cn:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:13:05 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:00:47 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 08:52:37 PM
I'm not being obtuse, I'm being realistic.  If the population doesn't know, or doesn't think its part of the target, it wont give a shit.  Its called covering it up. Ever heard of COINTELPRO?  I don't recall the 2nd Ammendment ever being a factor in that.  The CIA kidnapped and experimented on humans as part of its MK-ULTRA Program.  If you can take someone alive, you can kill them easily, and silently.  No-one ever needs to know, its just another dead body in the river.
Yes, i am familiar with these things.....
And i can tell you that because of these limited abuses by the gov against its citizens, there is limited willingness among said citizens to take up arms against it.  If these abuses were made a frequent event, or done on a larger scale, or even perceived to be, there would be a much greater willingness among citizens to take up arms.  You're pointing at isolated incidents and saying that this extrapolates up to large scale oppression that the RKBA is designed for.

Or it just could be that the government does not need to do these things large scale.  Which is more likely?  A string of "isolated incidents" (not so isolated as to not have gone on for decades) done on a number of target populations necessary to get the data required, or because they are scared THE MOB (who, at the time, were bedwetting about Communists IIRC) are gonna knock down the doors of Langley for the sake of some whores and student radicals who they'd probably be abusing themselves if given the chance?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:15:34 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:12:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:03:48 PM
...Because while most people may say they uphold the second Ammendent and have them to defend against government tyranny, they don't mean this (or the incoming government). 

...government's do not give a shit about hypothetical threats.

...But it ain't happening now, and there are no indicators it is about to happen.
these points i call  :cn:


Oh fuck off.  You're not even debating in good faith anymore.

Try: nearly every single government paper ever produced on deterrence.  No, I don't have the time to list them all.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:18:26 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 09:10:41 PM
...and certainly not used for fun. Unlike martial arts it has no other purpose.
Ok. I'm trying to stop gun-nuttery responses to you, but i had to respond to this....
What?!
martial arts (the act of kicking someones ass) can be used for fun, but firearms shot at targets, are not allowed to be recreational?
:|
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:22:59 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 09:10:41 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 08:44:49 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 08:30:09 PM
I think that when people try to make the case for having "assault weapons" they come off to me as crazy ass gun nuts. I think that you are coming off to me like that right now, and its not very convincing. Are you trying to convince me? Are you trying to convince anybody? Then don't talk about how much fun it is to shoot your Browning in your backyard, because if you are talking about using it as protection, its not for fun. If you want someone to take you seriously about needing one of these weapons for protection, be serious when you talk about it.
Well, this is a topic that invokes a lot of emotion, and the only people i have ever swayed are those that didn't really have an opinion one way or the other to begin with.  Hoplophobia, once ingrained, seems to be nearly impossible to rid anybody of.
As far as having fun, hell yeah.  You think it's crazy gun nuttery to have fun with firearms, but there's a good population of upright citizens that do just that.  they hunt, target shoot, sport shoot, use them for protection, and use them as the deterrent intended in the 2nd amendment.  Things can have a basis in srs business and still be fun. 
But alright, i'll just shut up since i've been written off anyways.

I don't see it that way. I see a weapon designed and used exclusively for the purpose of killing living things for the last....300-400 years? Since firearms came into vogue anyway. I see a weapon designed and used exclusively for that purpose as something that you should take only the utmost care and respect with, and certainly not used for fun. Unlike martial arts it has no other purpose. Unlike a knife it doesn't have multiple uses.

You can shoot targets.  We used to use cans, or bullseye targets we put up.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:26:41 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:15:34 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:12:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:03:48 PM
...Because while most people may say they uphold the second Ammendent and have them to defend against government tyranny, they don't mean this (or the incoming government). 

...government's do not give a shit about hypothetical threats.

...But it ain't happening now, and there are no indicators it is about to happen.
these points i call  :cn:


Oh fuck off.  You're not even debating in good faith anymore.

Try: nearly every single government paper ever produced on deterrence.  No, I don't have the time to list them all.

Bullshit. you're spouting things and you won't back them up? 
You say people that support the 2nd amendment aren't referring to it's use on our current gov?  rather pretentious to say that because people have not yet felt that it is necessary to take up arms that they wouldn't use it on the current gov if they committed atrocities at some level. 
You say gov doesn't give a shit about hypothetical threats?  You know full well that they do give a shit. enough so that they spend good resources on planning for all kinds of unlikely events.  The shit like the continuity of govt plans that take into account armed populace proves it.  They do factor an armed populace into their equations, therefore it has some deterrent effect.  you think it isn't sufficient, say that, but don't spout off superlative statements and then tell me to fuck off when i call you on it.
You say that there isn't growing resentment towards the govt, that could lead to popular support against the govt. and i'm wondering how you can possibly say that?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 09:28:25 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:18:26 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 09:10:41 PM
...and certainly not used for fun. Unlike martial arts it has no other purpose.
Ok. I'm trying to stop gun-nuttery responses to you, but i had to respond to this....
What?!
martial arts (the act of kicking someones ass) can be used for fun, but firearms shot at targets, are not allowed to be recreational?
:|

I've never really considered guns as 'fun'... though back in the day I did a lot of target shooting so that I could get good at shooting what I aimed for. In all honesty, there is something extremely 'fun' when you feel the kick and hear the noise and see the little clay disc go *poof*.

Of course, I 'have fun' playing with rapiers... but they had many uses, like killing, maiming and cutting the clothing off of particularly fine looking women, like Catherine Zeta Jones.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:32:48 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 09:28:25 PM
Of course, I 'have fun' playing with rapiers... but they had many uses, like killing, maiming and cutting the clothing off of particularly fine looking women, like Catherine Zeta Jones.

NO! only one (1) use!!!!
I suggest the naked woman one.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 12, 2008, 09:36:18 PM
there is far more to creating a tyranny than having a unarmed populous, the  propaganda to get the cooperation of the masses goes a lot further and usually comes before the confiscating of guns, the deterrent to tyranny starts with not buying into the government's propaganda including their claim you will some how be safer without arms. the threat assessment is a calculation of how much the masses will go along with the establishment of government control if the population resists the slow encroachment of gun control it sends a message that we will resist...

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 10:02:09 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:26:41 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:15:34 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 09:12:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 12, 2008, 09:03:48 PM
...Because while most people may say they uphold the second Ammendent and have them to defend against government tyranny, they don't mean this (or the incoming government). 

...government's do not give a shit about hypothetical threats.

...But it ain't happening now, and there are no indicators it is about to happen.
these points i call  :cn:


Oh fuck off.  You're not even debating in good faith anymore.

Try: nearly every single government paper ever produced on deterrence.  No, I don't have the time to list them all.

Bullshit. you're spouting things and you won't back them up? 
You say people that support the 2nd amendment aren't referring to it's use on our current gov?  rather pretentious to say that because people have not yet felt that it is necessary to take up arms that they wouldn't use it on the current gov if they committed atrocities at some level. 
You say gov doesn't give a shit about hypothetical threats?  You know full well that they do give a shit. enough so that they spend good resources on planning for all kinds of unlikely events.  The shit like the continuity of govt plans that take into account armed populace proves it.  They do factor an armed populace into their equations, therefore it has some deterrent effect.  you think it isn't sufficient, say that, but don't spout off superlative statements and then tell me to fuck off when i call you on it.
You say that there isn't growing resentment towards the govt, that could lead to popular support against the govt. and i'm wondering how you can possibly say that?


They never will. The government has pretty much nailed the coffin shut on this one. Right now, as we speak, "we the people" are begging on their hands and knees to have more of their rights taken away every day and the ones that oppose it are increasingly vilified and marginalised.

You might have stood a chance of organising an uprising if you'd gotten there 40 or 50 years ago but, as it stands, your constitution only means anything to the lunatic fringes. The population who you so desperately wish to save will be the first to call the cops the minute you give it a shot.

By the time the government gets bad enough to satisfy your own criterion there'll be no one left with the will to stand against them. Right now your government is rampaging across the planet, killing and torturing indiscriminately. What more would it take?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 10:41:58 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 10:02:09 PM
They never will. The government has pretty much nailed the coffin shut on this one. Right now, as we speak, "we the people" are begging on their hands and knees to have more of their rights taken away every day and the ones that oppose it are increasingly vilified and marginalised.

You might have stood a chance of organising an uprising if you'd gotten there 40 or 50 years ago but, as it stands, your constitution only means anything to the lunatic fringes. The population who you so desperately wish to save will be the first to call the cops the minute you give it a shot.

By the time the government gets bad enough to satisfy your own criterion there'll be no one left with the will to stand against them. Right now your government is rampaging across the planet, killing and torturing indiscriminately. What more would it take?
It would be foolish of me not to admit that there is a significant possibility of this being true.  But, I'm not going to resign myself to it, and certainly won't tailor my political opinions and actions as if it is.
:sad:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 11:11:07 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 10:41:58 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 10:02:09 PM
They never will. The government has pretty much nailed the coffin shut on this one. Right now, as we speak, "we the people" are begging on their hands and knees to have more of their rights taken away every day and the ones that oppose it are increasingly vilified and marginalised.

You might have stood a chance of organising an uprising if you'd gotten there 40 or 50 years ago but, as it stands, your constitution only means anything to the lunatic fringes. The population who you so desperately wish to save will be the first to call the cops the minute you give it a shot.

By the time the government gets bad enough to satisfy your own criterion there'll be no one left with the will to stand against them. Right now your government is rampaging across the planet, killing and torturing indiscriminately. What more would it take?


It would be foolish of me not to admit that there is a significant possibility of this being true.  But, I'm not going to resign myself to it, and certainly won't tailor my political opinions and actions as if it is.
:sad:

If we do win this war it won't be with guns. It's how much damage you can do with your mind that'll make a difference, that and how much mental punishment you can take and still come back fighting. That's how they're winning on the domestic front. The foreign policy is merely a distraction.

Suppose they had a war and no one realised they were being killed :fnord:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 11:14:23 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 11:11:07 PM
If we do win this war it won't be with guns. It's how much damage you can do with your mind that'll make a difference, that and how much mental punishment you can take and still come back fighting. That's how they're winning on the domestic front. The foreign policy is merely a distraction.

Suppose they had a war and no one realised they were being killed :fnord:

What 'war' are you talking about?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 11:18:42 PM
The one you haven't noticed is being waged right under your nose.

We are at war with government inc. They started it. They're winning and, unless you wise up PDQ, the chances are it'll all be over before you notice.

Run while you still have legs :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 12, 2008, 11:38:58 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 12, 2008, 11:18:42 PM
The one you haven't noticed is being waged right under your nose.

We are at war with government inc. They started it. They're winning and, unless you wise up PDQ, the chances are it'll all be over before you notice.

Run while you still have legs :lulz:

Uh.  yeah.
.
are you talking about the globalization and collaboration between corporate and government interests and the monetary scams we call our economies, etc.?
'cause if so, that's not the war.  It's just the pretext...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 12, 2008, 11:53:03 PM
You're both wrong...

The real war is between Us and the Illuminati, damn it all.

Which is why I have the stockpile of pyramid projectiles and shoulder mounted crystal launchers.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on November 13, 2008, 12:05:52 AM
Quote from: Kai on November 12, 2008, 09:10:41 PM
I don't see it that way. I see a weapon designed and used exclusively for the purpose of killing living things for the last....300-400 years?

13th century, at least, I'm a bit fuzzy, but I know rifles appeared in 1300, smooth bores were around for a while before that.

I don't think an armed uprising is actually possible as long as the perception of democracy remains intact, it will always be easier to lobby for changes than fight for them if you actually have the numbers for an uprising.  (keep in mind only a minority of those willing to vote for an issue would be willing to fight and die for it).  As for the might of the US military question, I don't know of any successful rebellions were a significant chunk of the armed forces didn't support the cause, regardless of the period in history.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on November 13, 2008, 06:57:07 AM
Man, I missed a lot.

The 2nd amendment to me means if our asses are invaded and the military needs or wants civilian help, or some "invader" comes knockin on my door, I have a weapon available to assist and/or defend.

I'm not afraid of my government turning on me and having to defend myself against it. I'm just not. It would be stupid of them to do this. What would they gain by killing off all the citizens? "Weeee, we have the whole country to ourselves!! Now what do we do?"
Really.

Also, way back in the thread all the mumbo jumbo about we have a lot of shootings because we own guns.
I own a gun and have NEVER shot a person. EVER. The only time I would is if someone broke into my fucking house. Which is why I bought the damn thing to begin with.

And guns are fun. I bought it to protect my home sure, and yeah, I like to go to the gun range SAFELY and blow the hell out of paper targets. IT'S. FUN. Doesn't make me a damn gun nut, makes me someone who'd rather take my frustration out on paper than get into a road rage fight.

And P3nT4gR4m, quit hatin up on my country so much. Sure it ain't the best place in the world, but it sure as shit isn't the worst either. Your 2 cents aren't even good, they're lame and weak and frankly kid.. ya bother me.
Sorry my country isn't all chocolate covered kittens and rainbow shitting puppies like yours.


and I'm done.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on November 13, 2008, 11:27:34 AM
NO!

AMERICA WOULD BE MUCH BETTAR IF EVERYONE JUST KNIFED EACH OTHER WHEN THEY WERE MAD INSTEAD OF SHOOTING EACH OTHER.

ALSO GUNS ARE NOT FUN. NEVER MIND THAT PEOPLE TAKE UP FENCING OR ARCHERY AS LEGITIMATE HOBBIES, SHOOTING GUNS IS NOT FUN AND IF YOU ENJOY IT YOU ARE A SICK AND VIOLENT CRIMINAL-IN-WAITING.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 13, 2008, 02:12:15 PM
former Hitler youth says America headed down same path as Nazi Germany
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80644
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 13, 2008, 04:58:08 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 13, 2008, 11:27:34 AM
NO!

AMERICA WOULD BE MUCH BETTAR IF EVERYONE JUST KNIFED EACH OTHER WHEN THEY WERE MAD INSTEAD OF SHOOTING EACH OTHER.

ALSO GUNS ARE NOT FUN. NEVER MIND THAT PEOPLE TAKE UP FENCING OR ARCHERY AS LEGITIMATE HOBBIES, SHOOTING GUNS IS NOT FUN AND IF YOU ENJOY IT YOU ARE A SICK AND VIOLENT CRIMINAL-IN-WAITING.

Sorry.

Done with this thread.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 05:13:30 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 13, 2008, 02:12:15 PM
former Hitler youth says America headed down same path as Nazi Germany
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80644
This article fails before the first sentence is even done.

QuoteBecause it has abandoned moral absolutes and its historic Christian faith...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 05:15:53 PM
OH.MY.GOD!  It gets worse!!!

QuoteEverything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society and Christians become religious bystanders.

:lulz: Revisionist history FTL!
(http://www.claremontmckenna.edu/hist/jpetropoulos/church/tamerpage/buckle.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 13, 2008, 05:29:46 PM
I don't really know that much about it, but didn't the nazis throw out a bunch of christian trappings in favor of a bunch of prechristian germanic trappings?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 13, 2008, 05:35:55 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 13, 2008, 05:29:46 PM
I don't really know that much about it, but didn't the nazis throw out a bunch of christian trappings in favor of a bunch of prechristian germanic trappings?


They liberally mixed Christian and Madam Blavatsky's strange belief system which held that there was once a Master Race etc. and they threw in some old germanic stuff as well, just to cover all their bases. Blaming Hitler on any particular religious view seems like a bad idea... the fucker just used whatever was handy to control the masses, religion, tradition, myth, fear... anything.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 13, 2008, 05:38:09 PM
You forgot Wagner

Most of it was down to Wagner apparently but I forget exactly how.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 05:38:40 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 13, 2008, 05:35:55 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 13, 2008, 05:29:46 PM
I don't really know that much about it, but didn't the nazis throw out a bunch of christian trappings in favor of a bunch of prechristian germanic trappings?


They liberally mixed Christian and Madam Blavatsky's strange belief system which held that there was once a Master Race etc. and they threw in some old germanic stuff as well, just to cover all their bases. Blaming Hitler on any particular religious view seems like a bad idea... the fucker just used whatever was handy to control the masses, religion, tradition, myth, fear... anything.
True, but saying that they "threw God out of government and society" is such a blatant lie that I'm beginning to wonder if the guy who wrote the book has ever even been to Germany.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on November 13, 2008, 05:41:47 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 05:38:40 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 13, 2008, 05:35:55 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 13, 2008, 05:29:46 PM
I don't really know that much about it, but didn't the nazis throw out a bunch of christian trappings in favor of a bunch of prechristian germanic trappings?


They liberally mixed Christian and Madam Blavatsky's strange belief system which held that there was once a Master Race etc. and they threw in some old germanic stuff as well, just to cover all their bases. Blaming Hitler on any particular religious view seems like a bad idea... the fucker just used whatever was handy to control the masses, religion, tradition, myth, fear... anything.
True, but saying that they "threw God out of government and society" is such a blatant lie that I'm beginning to wonder if the guy who wrote the book has ever even been to Germany.

Yep, sounds like a right wing apologist to me.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 05:48:44 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 13, 2008, 05:41:47 PM
Yep, sounds like a right wing apologist to me.
It's Wing Nut Daily so I would expect nothing less.  Maybe he meant to say that the Really Real God was kicked out of government and society and that the Really Real Christians became religious bystanders.  :fnord:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Vene on November 13, 2008, 05:56:54 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 05:15:53 PM
OH.MY.GOD!  It gets worse!!!

QuoteEverything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society and Christians become religious bystanders.

:lulz: Revisionist history FTL!
(http://www.claremontmckenna.edu/hist/jpetropoulos/church/tamerpage/buckle.jpg)
PD.com has destroyed my brain because that now reads as "got mittens?"
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 13, 2008, 05:58:17 PM
Quote from: Vene on November 13, 2008, 05:56:54 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 05:15:53 PM
OH.MY.GOD!  It gets worse!!!

QuoteEverything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society and Christians become religious bystanders.

:lulz: Revisionist history FTL!
(http://www.claremontmckenna.edu/hist/jpetropoulos/church/tamerpage/buckle.jpg)
PD.com has destroyed my brain because that now reads as "got mittens?"

OMG ME TOO!  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 13, 2008, 06:01:29 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 05:48:44 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 13, 2008, 05:41:47 PM
Yep, sounds like a right wing apologist to me.
It's Wing Nut Daily so I would expect nothing less.  Maybe he meant to say that the Really Real God was kicked out of government and society and that the Really Real Christians became religious bystanders.  :fnord:
I think this is correct.  That is how my conventional christian family members would immediately interpret what he said.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Bruno on November 13, 2008, 06:12:52 PM
Quote from: Vene on November 13, 2008, 05:56:54 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 05:15:53 PM
OH.MY.GOD!  It gets worse!!!

QuoteEverything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society and Christians become religious bystanders.

:lulz: Revisionist history FTL!
(http://www.claremontmckenna.edu/hist/jpetropoulos/church/tamerpage/buckle.jpg)
PD.com has destroyed my brain because that now reads as "got mittens?"


We've been over this before.

(http://bp0.blogger.com/_oHk1Hj7wSt8/Rqk6qFGtvaI/AAAAAAAAAAM/umG-0pU47-o/s400/gottmituns.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 06:14:10 PM
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/11/022038.php

QuoteObama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn't raise his standards, he will exceed Bush's total before he is inaugurated.

:lulz:  
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 13, 2008, 06:14:49 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on November 13, 2008, 06:12:52 PM
Quote from: Vene on November 13, 2008, 05:56:54 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 05:15:53 PM
OH.MY.GOD!  It gets worse!!!

QuoteEverything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society and Christians become religious bystanders.

:lulz: Revisionist history FTL!
(http://www.claremontmckenna.edu/hist/jpetropoulos/church/tamerpage/buckle.jpg)
PD.com has destroyed my brain because that now reads as "got mittens?"


We've been over this before.

(http://bp0.blogger.com/_oHk1Hj7wSt8/Rqk6qFGtvaI/AAAAAAAAAAM/umG-0pU47-o/s400/gottmituns.jpg)

(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/GottMittuns.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 13, 2008, 06:20:01 PM
wing nut daily so   :argh!: or :lulz: before you even start
the Nazis did send certain groups of Christians to the gas chamber along with the Jews.
QuoteMaybe he meant to say that the Really Real God was kicked out of government and society and that the Really Real Christians became religious bystanders.  fnord
I think this is correct.  That is how my conventional christian family members would immediately interpret what he said.
this the target audience
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 13, 2008, 06:20:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 06:14:10 PM
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/11/022038.php

QuoteObama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn't raise his standards, he will exceed Bush's total before he is inaugurated.

:lulz: 

:aaa:

Wow.

....


Are you sure this isn't satire?

....

I guess satire is over then. Reality has made it obsolete.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 13, 2008, 06:22:15 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 13, 2008, 06:20:25 PM
:aaa:

Wow.

....


Are you sure this isn't satire?

....

I guess satire is over then. Reality has made it obsolete.

:potd: and should defo be in the news ticker  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 06:25:37 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 13, 2008, 06:20:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 06:14:10 PM
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/11/022038.php

QuoteObama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn't raise his standards, he will exceed Bush's total before he is inaugurated.

:lulz: 

:aaa:

Wow.

....


Are you sure this isn't satire?

....

I guess satire is over then. Reality has made it obsolete.
(http://bastardlogic.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/mission-accomplished.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Ari on November 13, 2008, 06:28:55 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 13, 2008, 06:20:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 06:14:10 PM
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/11/022038.php

QuoteObama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn't raise his standards, he will exceed Bush's total before he is inaugurated.

:lulz: 

:aaa:

Wow.

....


Are you sure this isn't satire?

....

I guess satire is over then. Reality has made it obsolete.

:mittens:
memebomb, news! DO IT
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on November 13, 2008, 07:01:10 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 06:14:10 PM
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/11/022038.php

QuoteObama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn't raise his standards, he will exceed Bush's total before he is inaugurated.

:lulz:  

They pointed this out on some news channel the other night. i think it was msnbc.
and i:
:facepalm:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Suu on November 13, 2008, 07:36:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 06:25:37 PM
Quote from: Kai on November 13, 2008, 06:20:25 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 06:14:10 PM
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/11/022038.php

QuoteObama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn't raise his standards, he will exceed Bush's total before he is inaugurated.

:lulz: 

:aaa:

Wow.

....


Are you sure this isn't satire?

....

I guess satire is over then. Reality has made it obsolete.
(http://bastardlogic.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/mission-accomplished.jpg)

:spittake:

Also: The fact that he is able to fly a fighter jet and land one on an aircraft carrier makes me uneasy. Granted it was an archaic S-3, but STILL!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mangrove on November 13, 2008, 08:29:03 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20081112/pl_bloomberg/ahlrnlvfhsmc

Bush 'regrets' stupid shit he said (apparently)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: AFK on November 13, 2008, 09:00:21 PM
Quote from: Mangrove on November 13, 2008, 08:29:03 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20081112/pl_bloomberg/ahlrnlvfhsmc

Bush 'regrets' stupid shit he said (apparently)

QuoteBush said he would return to Texas when he hands over the presidency Jan. 20 and may write a book.

:omg:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 13, 2008, 10:30:44 PM
QuoteBush said he would return to Texas when he hands over the presidency Jan. 20 and may pay someone else to write a book.
Let's be realistic here...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 13, 2008, 10:38:53 PM
QuoteBush said he would move to his property in paraguay when he hands over the presidency Jan. 20 and may pay someone else to write a book.
Please, goddess, let it be this.....
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 13, 2008, 10:37:47 PM
QuoteBush said he would return to Texas when he hands over the presidency Jan. 20 and may hire an army of bodyguards to make sure they're trained up in time for his Secret Service protection expiring in 2019
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on November 13, 2008, 11:27:58 PM
QuoteBush said he would return to whiskey and hookers when he hands over the presidency Jan. 20 and someone else will probably be bored enough to write a book about him
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cainad (dec.) on November 14, 2008, 04:42:47 AM
QuoteBush said he would invest in hookers and blow for his Texas ranch when he hands over the presidency Jan. 20, and he'll finally get around to burning those books in the library so he can use it to stash more weed.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 15, 2008, 05:19:45 PM
no gun owners allowed on Obama team http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=39345
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 15, 2008, 05:54:34 PM
global socialist government coming soon (increase your paranoia level here)
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/wall-street-socialism-paves-way-for-global-government/

and some more paranoia for your pleasure, terror attack warnings given to Obama by international intelligence community
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5158569.ece
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 15, 2008, 06:05:07 PM
Oh fuck!  Alan Keyes has jumped on the Obama Birth Certificate bandwagon and is filing suit in California.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80931

QuoteThe California secretary of state should refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until President-elect Barack Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office, alleges a California court petition filed on behalf of former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others.

The legal action today is just the latest is a series of challenges, some of which have gone as high as the U.S. Supreme Court, over the issue of Obama's status as a "natural-born citizen," a requirement set by the U.S. Constitution.

And my favorite line from the article:

QuoteThe biggest question is why Obama, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists, simply hasn't ordered it made available to settle the rumors.

:facepalm:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 15, 2008, 11:26:38 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 15, 2008, 06:05:07 PM
Oh fuck!  Alan Keyes has jumped on the Obama Birth Certificate bandwagon and is filing suit in California.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80931

QuoteThe California secretary of state should refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until President-elect Barack Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office, alleges a California court petition filed on behalf of former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others.

The legal action today is just the latest is a series of challenges, some of which have gone as high as the U.S. Supreme Court, over the issue of Obama's status as a "natural-born citizen," a requirement set by the U.S. Constitution.

And my favorite line from the article:

QuoteThe biggest question is why Obama, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists, simply hasn't ordered it made available to settle the rumors.

:facepalm:

That is inutterably stupid.

However, my biggest question is what the hell were Obama's grandparents thinking?

(http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/BO_Birth_Certificate.jpg)

STANLEY?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 15, 2008, 11:38:53 PM
methinks the argument is "certificate of live birth" not=to "birth certificate" and that you can be born any where and get the former but only get the latter if born in the USA. a few of these cases have been turned down already this one will be too regardless of whether the claim against a certificate of live birth is legitimate or not, nobody wants the hassle of a do over election... case dismissed...
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 16, 2008, 02:54:06 AM
Actually, you couldn't be more wrong about the "Certificate of Live Birth" vs. "Birth Certificate". "Birth Certificate" is just shorthand for "Certificate of Live Birth"; they are one and the same and usually the original must be signed by a non-parental witness, usually a doctor/nurse/midwife who attended the birth. In some states (not Oregon) it is possible, at some cost, to obtain a photocopy of the original, and in all states it is possible to obtain a "computer copy" which is actually not a copy at all, but a truncated certified document that contains only a portion of the information that is on the original.

However, the real question is, why is Obama's mom named Stanley?
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 16, 2008, 02:57:15 AM
Because she's a d00d.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 16, 2008, 03:02:56 AM
Quote from: Ten Ton Mantis on November 16, 2008, 02:54:06 AM
Actually, you couldn't be more wrong about the "Certificate of Live Birth" vs. "Birth Certificate". "Birth Certificate" is just shorthand for "Certificate of Live Birth"; they are one and the same and usually the original must be signed by a non-parental witness, usually a doctor/nurse/midwife who attended the birth. In some states (not Oregon) it is possible, at some cost, to obtain a photocopy of the original, and in all states it is possible to obtain a "computer copy" which is actually not a copy at all, but a truncated certified document that contains only a portion of the information that is on the original.

However, the real question is, why is Obama's mom named Stanley?

I don't know or claim that certificate of live birth is not a birth certificate, only  that this is the argument being made in court, and that legit or not its getting thrown out.

obama's dad on hearing news of wife's pregnancy "this is another fine mess you have gotten me into".
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Payne on November 16, 2008, 03:11:07 AM
                                                                 "Barack? I think one day, Barack Jr. will be
                                                                       President of the United States!"
     "Aw hell no!"                                                                 //         
                             \\                            "Why do you say that? Do you think he won't
                           \\                                                  be because he is black?"
"No, cause they could never elect                              //
a dude with TWO dads, woman!"                              //
                \\                                                     //
(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/barackgayadoption.jpg)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Kai on November 16, 2008, 03:33:40 AM
 :)
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 16, 2008, 03:38:38 AM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 16, 2008, 03:02:56 AM
Quote from: Ten Ton Mantis on November 16, 2008, 02:54:06 AM
Actually, you couldn't be more wrong about the "Certificate of Live Birth" vs. "Birth Certificate". "Birth Certificate" is just shorthand for "Certificate of Live Birth"; they are one and the same and usually the original must be signed by a non-parental witness, usually a doctor/nurse/midwife who attended the birth. In some states (not Oregon) it is possible, at some cost, to obtain a photocopy of the original, and in all states it is possible to obtain a "computer copy" which is actually not a copy at all, but a truncated certified document that contains only a portion of the information that is on the original.

However, the real question is, why is Obama's mom named Stanley?

I don't know or claim that certificate of live birth is not a birth certificate, only  that this is the argument being made in court, and that legit or not its getting thrown out.

obama's dad on hearing news of wife's pregnancy "this is another fine mess you have gotten me into".

No, they are claiming that because it is not a photocopy of the original, but a certified computer copy, it is not valid as proof that Obama HAS an original birth certificate in the State of Hawaii. This, despite the fact that it is presented by the State as legal certified proof of live birth in the State of Hawaii. Some states don't even make it possible to access the originals-- I just looked at Hawaii and it appears to be one of them. I can't GET photocopies of my kids' original birth certificates, and you don't get them automatically at birth... they are filed, but they only send you copies if you order them (costs about $20) within two weeks of the birth. I have computer copies, and also a computer copy of my own birth certificate. They are legal and valid, and it would require changing some laws in order to obtain access to the originals, which are archived.

Furthermore, Obama's mother is a natural-born US citizen, which renders the point moot even if he were born in Kenya.

Here is the Hawaii Department of Health birth certificate page:

http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/vital_records.html



Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 16, 2008, 03:41:54 AM
Basically, I am pretty sure the people funding the lawsuit completely realize that it's spurious, but they are hoping the claim sticks in the minds of enough people who won't bother to do any research that it will feed resentment and disapproval. Unfortunately, most people are stupid enough to believe what they're told, even when it's logically flawed and easily debunkable.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 16, 2008, 04:07:31 AM
I just did a bit of quick reading and cant find the claim i thought they were making, i found claims it was forged by daily kos  :argh!: and claims it is missing information found on hawaiian birth certificates of a similar age? I was pretty certain i had read that a lawsuit was the live birth  vs birth certificate argument but I have been wrong before.
any way the tinfoil hat crowed needs a good conspiracy and this case being dropped like a hot potato will give them something to wonder about.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 16, 2008, 05:05:04 AM
I found all kinds of off-the-wall stuff on blogs, and Philip Berg isn't "officially" revealing the details of the case, but every angle I've seen so far has been easily debunkable.

Here's Berg's website:

http://www.obamacrimes.com/
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 16, 2008, 05:21:39 AM
i love that obamacrimes is a website name already
:lulz:
:cry:
:argh!:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 16, 2008, 05:45:38 AM
presidential failures http://www.nypost.com/seven/11152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/fail_to_the_chiefs_138879.htm
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 16, 2008, 05:56:14 AM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 16, 2008, 05:45:38 AM
presidential failures http://www.nypost.com/seven/11152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/fail_to_the_chiefs_138879.htm

Wow. He launches into wingnuttery right away with his anti-Nixon diatribe.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 16, 2008, 06:59:21 AM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 16, 2008, 05:45:38 AM
presidential failures http://www.nypost.com/seven/11152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/fail_to_the_chiefs_138879.htm
That may be the stupidest defense of Bush I have ever seen.  "Other presidents did crappy stuff, therefore Bush isn't the worst ever."  Couldn't he have tried harder.  Like listing one goddamn thing that Bush did right.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Golden Applesauce on November 16, 2008, 07:05:39 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 16, 2008, 06:59:21 AM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 16, 2008, 05:45:38 AM
presidential failures http://www.nypost.com/seven/11152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/fail_to_the_chiefs_138879.htm
That may be the stupidest defense of Bush I have ever seen.  "Other presidents did crappy stuff, therefore Bush isn't the worst ever."  Couldn't he have tried harder.  Like listing one goddamn thing that Bush did right.

Well, Bush didn't plunge the US into civil war, right?  Just other countries in the middle east that nobody cares about.  So that's something he did right.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 16, 2008, 07:10:27 AM
Oh yeah, I keep forgetting that he is a "Uniter".   
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 16, 2008, 07:25:32 AM
OBAMA TO FUND FORCED ABORTIONS!!!

In China...

By letting Congress give money to the UN Population Fund..

http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=16721
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 17, 2008, 05:43:06 PM
bailout on bailout?  http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20081116_16_A1_hHecri880405
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on November 18, 2008, 12:05:42 PM
OMG Obama thugs have shut down the African International Press!

QuoteUrgent Update

African Press International is under attack by those trying to shut down the Cerifi-Gate investigation. Earlier today, there was a fire at the phone exchange in Norway that services API's offices, and, less than an hour ago (as I write this on Sunday afternoon), WordPress has shut down API's site for supposed "Terms of Service" violations. I have read WordPress's TOS, and, in my opinion, API had committed no such violations. All of this took place while Mr. Korir was en route from Norway to the UK regarding arrangements for release of the Michelle Obama Tapes.

We have spoken over the phone with API Chief Editor Arap Korir, and offered our assistance in carrying the API site on our server until he can make permanent arrangements. We have also spoken with Phil Berg to advise him of this situation.

Fortunately, we have PDF file duplicates of most of the API material we have linked to here, are are working on replacing the links to the now-disabled site with links to our PDF files.

Earlier this week, I said this is starting to read like a bad spy novel. That novel has now come to life in a very real, very ominous way.

Is this the "Change" many of you voted for? If there is nothing to hide, why all the herculean efforts to hide it?

—————————————-

API wishes to thank MarchReport for the offer but decline to accept. API will now get its own permanent Website with its own WWW domain. Enemies who are jealous to see API grow managed to create lies and fed WordPress with them, misleading them to take action by closing us. I would like to state that we loved Wordpress and will still do so, because this problem was not created by them by lies envious of us. Now they see us continue to grow.

By Chief Editor Korir

http://africanpress.tripod.com/id15.html

Hopefully we can hear that election sinking tape soon then.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 18, 2008, 04:45:34 PM
This election has shown that the wingnuts will believe any shoddy rumor as long as it makes Obama look bad.  We must use this to our advantage!!!
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 19, 2008, 03:08:29 PM
Obama voters "uninformed victims" of media malpractice http://www.breitbart.tv/html/223033.html
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 20, 2008, 03:29:34 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 13, 2008, 02:12:15 PM
former Hitler youth says America headed down same path as Nazi Germany
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80644

more on this topic http://www.webcommentary.com/asp/ShowArticle.asp?id=andersonb&date=081118

Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 20, 2008, 03:36:34 PM
Jim Jones a lefty communist respected and loved by the liberal establishment before kool aid suicide.
http://www.webcommentary.com/asp/ShowArticle.asp?id=andersonb&date=081118
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on November 20, 2008, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 20, 2008, 03:29:34 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 13, 2008, 02:12:15 PM
former Hitler youth says America headed down same path as Nazi Germany
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80644

more on this topic http://www.webcommentary.com/asp/ShowArticle.asp?id=andersonb&date=081118


Yeah, this guy is a certifiable nutjob.  He says that Obama and the ACLU are exactly like the Nazis but that Augusto Pinochet was a swell guy who was just misunderstood.

http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/11/16/43654/516/Front_Page/Campe_ing_it_Up
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on November 20, 2008, 05:14:14 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 20, 2008, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 20, 2008, 03:29:34 PM
Quote from: F.M.E on November 13, 2008, 02:12:15 PM
former Hitler youth says America headed down same path as Nazi Germany
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80644

more on this topic http://www.webcommentary.com/asp/ShowArticle.asp?id=andersonb&date=081118


Yeah, this guy is a certifiable nutjob.  He says that Obama and the ACLU are exactly like the Nazis but that Augusto Pinochet was a swell guy who was just misunderstood.

http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/11/16/43654/516/Front_Page/Campe_ing_it_Up
good find, some of the commentary at the bottom are worth reading too
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on November 21, 2008, 04:14:37 AM
http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=L-n5qQKJXOA

Just...:lulz:

He had it coming.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on November 21, 2008, 04:39:14 AM
Quote from: Jenne on November 21, 2008, 04:14:37 AM
http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=L-n5qQKJXOA

Just...:lulz:

He had it coming.

duuuuuuuuuuuude.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on February 09, 2009, 07:28:58 AM
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/11/04/gnostic-education/

Yes, I know indecision is over, yes, I know its now 2009.  No, I don't care, this particular piece of wingnuttery is just too damned precious.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Cain on February 09, 2009, 10:26:50 AM
I keep meaning to bookmark Mens News Daily.  Its lower tier places like this, which strip the propaganda of people like Bill Kristol down to its most basic and obvious element, that allow you to know what GOP cheerleaders often really think.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on February 10, 2009, 11:39:27 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/08/ann-coulter-under-investi_n_165007.html  :lulz:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on February 11, 2009, 03:00:27 AM
Quote from: NARF! on February 10, 2009, 11:39:27 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/08/ann-coulter-under-investi_n_165007.html  :lulz:
AGAIN???
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: fomenter on February 11, 2009, 03:59:36 AM
i missed this thread...


  welcome back wingnuttery
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on February 11, 2009, 08:41:37 AM
again?
blame quick search
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on February 11, 2009, 08:43:58 AM
Quote from: NARF! on February 11, 2009, 08:41:37 AM
again?
blame quick search
No, I was actually referring to when she got investigated back in 2006. From your link:

QuoteCoulter was investigated and cleared of wrongdoing in 2006 for allegedly violating Florida's voter registration laws by voting in the wrong precinct.

But Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com reports that Coulter was never actually cleared; the Florida Election Commission dropped the case after deciding that the two-year statute of limitations had run out.
Title: Re: Indecision 09 Wingnut thread
Post by: the last yatto on March 06, 2009, 04:51:11 AM
watching Orly and saw Nancy and Henry speaking at a podium with American flags
except the one on stage left which is this blue flag with an eagle appearing over the world
WUT?  :amurrica:
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Jenne on March 30, 2009, 05:18:19 PM
Anybody seen this site?

http://myrightwingdad.net/

It has such gems as:

(http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h183/Jenne73/crapsoup.jpg)

and

(http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h183/Jenne73/knight2.jpg)

Ok, I'll fix those links, hold on
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on March 30, 2009, 05:38:39 PM
awful crap, that is.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on March 30, 2009, 05:41:04 PM
Quote from: Squid on March 30, 2009, 05:38:39 PM
awful crap, that is.

I chuckled at the Shamwow one, strictly from a WOMP point of view.
Title: Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
Post by: Sir Squid Diddimus on March 30, 2009, 05:51:20 PM
well yes.
there's a chuckle to be had.