Patterico's Pontifications

12/21/2008

Emanuel-Blago Contacts Sound Like A Lot of Nothing

Filed under: Obama — Patterico @ 11:59 am



There are now more details of what Obama plans to reveal regarding Emanuel-Blago contacts. The part conservatives will seize on is this:

Sources also confirm that Emanuel made the case for picking Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett during at least one of the conversations. In the course of that conversation, Harris asked if in return for picking Jarrett, “all we get is appreciation, right?” “Right,” Emanuel responded.

Ed Morrissey says:

That question from John Harris to Rahm Emanuel may not be explicit enough to qualify legally as an offer to bribe, but it clearly shows that Harris wanted a better deal than gratitude for the Senate seat. After making that clear to Emanuel, did Emanuel tell Obama what was going on in Illinois? And more to the point, did he pick up the phone and inform the FBI and/or Patrick Fitzgerald?

If he did, then he and Team Obama should be commended. If he didn’t — if he knowingly ignored the fact that Blagojevich had put up the Senate seat for sale and put out a bid request for it — then Obama and his team are off to a disastrous start, ethically speaking.

I don’t know. If that was the question, it could be nothing more than a request for favor-trading — which is, after all, politics as usual and not particularly startling.

I think it’s quite possible that there is no scandal here.

102 Responses to “Emanuel-Blago Contacts Sound Like A Lot of Nothing”

  1. Depends on whether or not there were back channel talks that defined “appreciation” a little more broadly.
    People who think they might be being wiretapped use code.
    Why Blago didn’t is a job for a psychoanalyst.
    The depth of this is held by the feds. We’ll see who is in trouble soon enough, but in the meantime it seems like a great chance to peel the Chicago onion to it’s rotten core.

    SteveG (d0dc77)

  2. Oh no there is real scandal brewing here! Rahm had a secret meeting with Blago in which there were discussions about how much he should ask for for the vacant senate seat. They were supposed to split it 50-50 between them until the whole thing blew up. This is from a very reliable source. Worst case scenario; Obama gets convicted and declared unqualified and Biden gets a heart attack and dies. And the Dems decide to nominate Hillary who goes on to become President on 20th Jan with Sarah Palin as her VP. Six months into her presidency, Hillary gets shot “mistakenly” by Palin while going moose-hunting and power falls into Sarah Palins hands. Just watch this play out.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  3. It doesn’t matter anyway. They could have tapes of Rahm, Blago and Obama bidding diamonds and cash, it would be ignored. Because of the hopenchange!

    Peter (dda662)

  4. You don’t read what gets posted here, do you Love…

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  5. Comment by Scott Jacobs — 12/21/2008 @ 1:00 pm
    aawww come on Scotty. Don’t tell me you are not choking up with laughter right now? :)

    love2008 (1b037c)

  6. Obviously the SEIU guy thought there was trading to be done between the Obama camp and Blago.

    I want to point out also that during the Libby thing, it was not Fitzgerald’s practice to publicly correct things said by the parties. Unless they were a target and he said it at trial.

    I’m trying to recall the details, but I remember when something damaging to Bush was released and reported upon during the Libby pre-trail era, and Fitzgerald waited several days to correct it.

    I believe he never released any statement to refute the Leopold/Wilson/Johnson fantasy that Karl Rove was going to be indicted in 24 hours, and that Fitzgerald had been in Rove’s lawyers offices for a day.

    So, the Obama people know they can say whatever they want to say, as long as they are confident Fitzgerald isn’t after them.

    MayBee (9614ff)

  7. This is so much fun. Like I wrote in the other thread, the wingnuts done got themselves sucked right into the trap. I am rolling on the floor laughing at you people!

    I grew up in Chicago, my naive little children, and anyone with any experience in reading that city’s political tea leaves could see that Obama and his people were going to come out smelling like roses on this one. It was obvious right from the get-go.

    But not to the Rushbo-Pajamas-wingnut-Hannity-O’Leilly-FauxNews crowd. You people really and truly had better wise up, because at this rate there ain’t gonna be enough of a right wing left to make a good punching bag!

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  8. HL do you have any conception of what a colossal bore you are not to mention just a plain and simple grade-A asshole?

    Jack Klompus (b0e238)

  9. Yes it does, Jack, on both counts. The goal is to get banned, and prove what a darned tough guy it is.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  10. It is not even original.

    To me, the only “scandal” in this whole thing is that at a time where the truth likely would have absolutely acquitted him, Baracky’s initial gut reaction was to tell a bald faced lie, and then he and Axelrod started re-writing history. It is a window into what we can expect for the next 4-8 years.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  11. There may not be a scandal per se here, but we have learned something. We’ve learned just how fast Obama resorts to lying to cover his own backside.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  12. There’s another interpretation, suggesting that it was actually Obama doing the pushing.

    Team Obama may have been able to dance around a greedy governor asking for gain in return for selecting a preferred senate replacement. But all the over-crafted Obama responses are going to explode in his face if it turns out he was the one who was out of bounds. The President-Elect may make his wishes known, but if he was putting political or financial pressure on a sitting Governor to override his choice for the Senate Obama is going to be truly damaged goods.

    …Not only did Obama try to pressure a governor, he lied about the entire affair to the nation many times now. If he was the instigator, how could he or his team have no knowledge?

    This is now a story of a power hungry new president-elect trying to strong arm a governor. This revelation now knits all the news and events surrounding this matter into a coherent context. Obama tried to claim he had no knowledge his Chief of Staff was pressuring a Governor to give up his preferred candidate and use an Obama candidate instead? That ain’t going to fly.

    Evil Pundit (843b74)

  13. …did he pick up the phone and inform the FBI and/or Patrick Fitzgerald?

    That’s what I think. Barack didn’t need him any more and he was turning into a liability, so under the bus with him.

    Patricia (ee5c9d)

  14. did he pick up the phone and inform the FBI and/or Patrick Fitzgerald?

    Just didn’t happen. One, Fitzgerald would have mentioned it. Two, and even bigger, if that was the case, Baracky would not have lied about it, but would have been out in front of this story.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  15. Here’s an even better truth for you people to swallow. Together with the tin-foil hat fake-birth-certificate crowd, the right wing is well on its way to be seen by the general public for what it really is: A festering, pus-leaking, open wound on the American body politic.

    Your crowd is quickly been shoved back under the rocks from whence you came. Those Republicans who do survive (by the way, if you think ’08 was a problem, just wait for the off-year elections. I have a number for you: 1934) will have to do something they haven’t done for a long time: argue on the merits, without any of the FauxNews smear ‘n fear.

    Isn’t it interesting? Not only did Obama get his ass elected in a landslide, but he’s going to achieve something else. He’s going to make everyone in Washington talk about the actual issues. That, by itself, is going to make him an insanely popular leader. And the Republicans? Old habits die hard, so you’ll be seeing plenty of smear ‘n fear between now and 2010, when the wooden stake gets driven through that vampire’s beatin’ heart.

    To top it off, ask yourselves what happens when Republicans have to defend their views on the merits. Your wingnut drunkard of a president, George W., took a country at peace, full employment, a healthy balance sheet, and respect in the world, and drove it off the cliff. You might not think so, but your opinion and $2 will get you Happy Meal. Three-quarters of the public loathes not just Bush, but his policies and Republican ideas.

    Say what you want, peanut gallery. I know you will. But you’re screwed. This little scandalette you tried to push is going to hurt you badly. But what’ll hurt even more is that you won’t learn from it. Rushbo, the freepers, Pajamas, Hannity, O’Leilly, FauxNews, Coultergeist, and all your favorites in Congress will keep it up. That’s why 2010 is going to be the cherry on top of this sundae.

    Merry Christmas, nutcases! And, even more to the point, have the happiest of New Years. I know I will.

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  16. HL, speaking of resorting quickly to lies. Fine example you make of that.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  17. HL is channelling Pauline Kael.

    Another Drew (0403d0)

  18. AD, certainly HL seems to have all of the hypocrisy down. Whines about insults in one breath, and dumps a screed devoid of anything except insults in another.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  19. With all that vitriol, I think we all know how this particular troll is spending the holidays.

    With a bottle of cheap liquor. Alone.

    The fake enthusiasm and angry “joy” give it all away.

    Lonely. Bitter. Failure.

    That is why it comes here to feel all big and strong.

    And more to the point, to try to get Patterico to ban it. Remember, that is a Badge of Courage to someone with this level of nastiness.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  20. I think my favorite line is:
    “He’s going to make everyone in Washington talk about the actual issues.”
    Two “Faux News” references in one post to go along with the always original fixation on nuts too.

    I always like when it pulls out the “statistic” too:
    “Three-quarters of the public loathes not just Bush, but his policies and Republican ideas.”

    Jack Klompus (b0e238)

  21. Hey, in my first or second posting here I wrote that I fully expect to be banned. Wingnut sites can never put up with the truth. I must be banned, and the sooner the better! Ha ha ha!

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  22. I’m guessing 10th grade, or younger.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  23. Probably Eric. Namecalling, troll, begging to be banned. Good guess.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  24. Poor babies. Mad because they’re called “wingnuts” and “nutcases.” Really! Sticks ‘n stones, children!

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  25. Maybe it one of our prior friends, like jharp or levi.

    Or you know who!

    But one sick little boy or girl.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  26. Tell you what, Oh Trollish One. Go ahead and write to Patterico privately and ask to be banned. That is what you are trying to do, right? Why deal with the middle man?

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  27. One more comment, which you might as well enjoy before “patterico” flushes everything down the memory hole: I am the only poster with respect to Obama and Emanuel who called it correctly. The only one. For that reason alone, I must be banned. Wingnut logic absolutely requires it!

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  28. I vote jharp, now that you’ve reminded me of that vicious, insufferable twerp.

    Another Drew (0403d0)

  29. jharp is a good guess, although if so, he’s worked on his grammar.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  30. How can you “call” the outcome of a play when we haven’t seen the third-act yet?
    Oh, who was it who famously said they knew what a report/book said just by reading the title?

    Another Drew (0403d0)

  31. jharp’s new scene is Riehl World View and he’s treated with tremendous respect there. It’s curious what their M.O. satisfies in their lives.

    “I am the only poster with respect to Obama and Emanuel who called it correctly.”
    Epic accomplishment in life noted. Let us known when you ever get laid and we’ll praise that milestone as well.

    Jack Klompus (b0e238)

  32. In all of Rahm Emanuel’s years of being a high-power operator in the Chicago Machine, and the Chicago Wing of the Clinton White House, he’s never once been silent. He’s never walked past a camera, a microphone, a notepad, or a chance to sneer at the weaklings he works against.
    But he’s been silent and unfindable for over a week now.
    Perhaps, indeed, the Jarrett conversation is inocuous. But any suggestion that a Daley Machine guy doing business is clean through and through should automatically bring skepticism. It hasn’t been clean before.
    The key to the deepest parts of the Blagojevich kink is the same as the answer to the question: why a precipitous pre-dawn arrest instead of the usual grand jury-indictment-turn in thing?
    Fitzgerald may not be the best prosecutor ever, or even a Clean Gene himself, but grabbing Blagojevich at six in the morning was something more than a media stunt.
    I wouldn’t even discount any of the wilder theories: that Fitzgerald is protecting his own self by stopping a crime that didn’t happen yet so that the New Big Boss doesn’t get ticked; that Blagojevich was going to do something downright crazy, and believe it, he hasn’t gone there yet; that the Trib blew the whistle early to protect their pet president; or that, finally, someone was going to blow the real prize in the Fitzgerald game plan, Daley, by screwing up the works with this silly low-level “seat-selling” stuff.
    To folks just getting a first look at the Machine-Outfit-unions combine, be assured that the seat-trading gig is just a sidelight around Chicago. There’s much bigger and worse stuff going on.

    WPZ (e1deb7)

  33. I grew up in Chicago, my naive little children

    Who knows if this is the truth, but this nutbag doesn’t live here these days – he/she/it/plankton would’ve been pantsed immediately after uttering this stuff…and a lot worse.

    Dmac (e30284)

  34. love2008,

    I thought your comment was funny.

    DRJ (be6fb0)

  35. Wingnut sites can never put up with the truth.

    How about you cite some actual numbers then, if you wish to have a debate?

    Perhaps you could tell me when when in 2000 Bush’s comments about the economy headed towards recession were the worst thing ever, but now it is the most responsible thing to do?

    Perhaps you have employment numbers for the US? Maybe you could also do some looking at employemnt/economic numbers from 2000 to 2006, and from 2006 to today?

    Or would you rather just be a jackass and reinforce every negative view we have of the left?

    I mean, it’s your call – be a GOOD example of what the left has to offer, or be a BAD example.

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  36. How many lies can you count in #15 ?

    JD (7f8e8c)

  37. Comment by JD — 12/21/2008 @ 3:34 pm
    You’ll have to give me a while to get my shoes off.

    Another Drew (0403d0)

  38. In all of Rahm Emanuel’s years of being a high-power operator in the Chicago Machine, and the Chicago Wing of the Clinton White House, he’s never once been silent. He’s never walked past a camera, a microphone, a notepad, or a chance to sneer at the weaklings he works against. But he’s been silent and unfindable for over a week now.

    Hey, take off your tinfoil hat and think. Do you just kinda-sorta maybe guess that he’s been silent because Fitzgerald’s office requested it?

    Perhaps you could tell me when when in 2000 Bush’s comments about the economy headed towards recession were the worst thing ever, but now it is the most responsible thing to do?

    Perhaps you have employment numbers for the US? Maybe you could also do some looking at employemnt/economic numbers from 2000 to 2006, and from 2006 to today?

    To what end? If you want to try to make the case that the drunken liar in the White House did a good job, do it yourself.

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  39. No, HL. You can speculate about that all you wish. It does not track with what is known.

    If you want to try to make the case that the drunken liar in the White House did a good job

    You are a lying jackass. There is no reason to treat you with anything but mockery and scorn.

    Yet you whine that people are not nice to you. Wah. Wah. Wah. Reinsert your head in your sphincter and tell us about the view … Adios.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  40. All HL does is speculate about if’s and maybe’s …

    If your aunt had nuts, she would be your uncle.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  41. Do you just kinda-sorta maybe guess that he’s been silent because Fitzgerald’s office requested it?

    That would not serve to elevate himself in the eyes of the public. COming out and saying “I turned Blago in for trying to *gasp* sell a Senate Seat” would make him – and therefore his boss – look like god-damn angels. Keeping quiet does NOT.

    Did he have dirty dealings? Maybe – heck, even probably – no. Did he at least have a very good idea that dirty dealings were going on? Very possibly. Was he required to report it? again, no.

    But NOT reporting doesn’t look good to the public, because it makes it look like you don’t care about corruption, which – while true in chicago – is not something the average american likes. Heck, even William Jefferson lost his congressional seat in one of the most strongly democrat-controlled areas of Louisiana.

    Again, it’s quite possible Rahm didn’t DO anything, but the odds that he KNEW something was going on are very, very high.

    This is Chicago, after all. The odds that nearly anything you care to name has more than a hint of corruption makes for safe betting.

    If you want to try to make the case that the drunken liar in the White House did a good job, do it yourself.

    Or, you could provide numbers backing up YOUR claim, you ignorant pile of shit.

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  42. I claims that the economy was good after the internet dot com bubble burst, and then again after 9/11. Leftists like this one are retarded.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  43. Not I, but “It”

    JD (7f8e8c)

  44. I agree pretty much with WPZ. I surmise that the Fitz crew was working hard on that wild card Blago, a piece of low hanging but active, reckless, and rotten fruit. A walking, talking hand grenade, complete with a big mouth.
    All of a sudden they start intercepting a guy who also happens to be the chief of staff of our President Elect. While still not knowing what was said, I think that just having a person like Emmanuel being intercepted got the Feds spooked, cause you never know what might pop up outta anybody’s mouth at this point, and the players on the field have now changed.
    Then a “greater good” decision is made to take the case down. And it was.

    Andrew (8a94e5)

  45. COming out and saying “I turned Blago in for trying to *gasp* sell a Senate Seat” would make him – and therefore his boss – look like god-damn angels. Keeping quiet does NOT.

    You know, kids these days are so impatient. Child, good things come to those who wait. You’ll see. That’s the true beauty of this thing: You people really do seem to think that Rahm Emanuel is stupid. He might not be my favorite guest at the backyard barbecue, but I don’t that man’s mamma raised any fool.

    Again, it’s quite possible Rahm didn’t DO anything, but the odds that he KNEW something was going on are very, very high.

    So that’s what the scandal is now? Tell me, did someone beam the news through the fillings in your teeth, or do you pick up that station through the steel plate in your head? And what did they tell you: “Psst! Rahm knew something! Pass it on!” Christ on a crutch, are you trying to give me a sideache here? Ha ha ha ha ha!!

    Or, you could provide numbers backing up YOUR claim, you ignorant pile of shit.

    I think the correct term is, “Jane, you ignorant slut.” Anyway, what claim are you talking about, wingnut?

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  46. If Emmanuel knew what was going on, Obama’s statements about the situation are shown to be the lies that most of the country spotted them as already.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  47. Tell me, did someone beam the news through the fillings in your teeth

    I used that one on you already. Try and be original, would you? Geeze…

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  48. HL complaining about other people speculating is cute. If, maybe, it is possible, blah, blah, blah, is the base of all of its ramblings.

    SPQR – THings like HL do not care. It is all about servicing Teh Narrative, or in this one’s case, servicing Teh One.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  49. JD, its all about the hypocrisy.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  50. Or, you could provide numbers backing up YOUR claim, you ignorant pile of shit.

    This guy is asking to be insulted, but let’s lay off this kind of talk, which devalues the thread.

    HL, do you have anything new to add? It doesn’t seem like it.

    You’re doing pretty well for a guy with only half a brain and only a shred of independence, as you described yourself.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  51. This guy is asking to be insulted, but let’s lay off this kind of talk, which devalues the thread.

    sorry. I actually didn’t mean to type that bit, just scream it silently inside my head.

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  52. Patterico, this troll fellow is trying to get banned, because it proves he is tough and manly. Or something.

    What to do? Dmac would counsel ignoring him. I do fear he would then amp things up to the point that you and or DRJ would give him what he wants.

    Who knows?

    I am sorry that you have someone who is repeatedly passing metaphorical gas at your dinner party.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  53. Horrible Leftist<———wasnt it the left who were saying that Bush knew that 9/11 was gonna happen and did nothing to stop it…. yeah, i think that was the horrible left. Get off of knees, then think, it’s kinda hard when ur smoking pole.

    slizzle (4c3b4d)

  54. If banning is what it so fervently desires, then goodbye to all that – less is more in this instance. I admire your adherence to accepting differing viewpoints, but this is nothing more than manic – depresssion masquerading as a contrarian.

    Dmac (e30284)

  55. To me, the only “scandal” in this whole thing is that at a time where the truth likely would have absolutely acquitted him, Baracky’s initial gut reaction was to tell a bald faced lie,

    Exactly, JD. It wasn’t enough to just not have been involved in illegal deal making. He needed to not have even discussed it with the Governor. He had not to even know anybody would be discussing it with the Governor. He would rather lie than appear even the teeniest impure.

    He had the audacity to say the seat belongs to the people of Illinois. It does, but pushing Valerie Jarrett into it doesn’t make it look like he’s thinking of them first, does it?

    MayBee (fd43fa)

  56. Exactly, MayBee. What is really ironic is that every senient being in the country knows that Baracky, as President-Elect, and as the former occupant of that Senate seat, would want to have some influence over who was appointed, especially since there is an existing relationship with the Governor who would be making the selection. The idea that their camps had not discussed it is patently ludicrous on its face.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  57. This really is a tempest in a teapot. If this is the worst “scandal” the Obama crew gets involved in, we’ll be very lucky.

    Tom Carter (b086c0)

  58. With the crew of Clinton castoffs he’s appointing, this won’t be the last nor the worst, Tom.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  59. This is just a precursor of what we can expect from Jan. 20th on … a preview, if you will.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  60. “every senient being in the country knows that Baracky, as President-Elect, and as the former occupant of that Senate seat, would want to have some influence over who was appointed”

    JD – By choosing to use the word SENTIENT you are by definition excluding the left and the MSM, so of course they cannot see Baracky’s initial lies or his backtracking as problems.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  61. daleyrocks – Features, not bugs, huh?

    JD (7f8e8c)

  62. “Not only did Obama get his ass elected in a landslide, but he’s going to achieve something else. He’s going to make everyone in Washington talk about the actual issues.”

    How’s he going to do that when his party’s Senate leadership is going to spend about 30% of their time babysitting Al Franken? Obama may have to make quite a few deal WITH REPUBLICANS in order to get some of his initiatives through, especially considering the fact that his cabinet is not exactly built for bold maneuvers.

    HL, you are starting to get as fat-headed as some Righties were in Dec. 2004. I don’t think you have any idea of what’s coming to you, now that the pressure is on YOU to perform and not the Right/GOP.

    Brad S (b5b919)

  63. Maybe Emanuel remembers every call he made to Blagojevich, Harris, or someone on the Governor’s staff since late October 2008. It’s also possible there is a record of every call he made or received. But absent clear evidence, I’ll wait until I see the FBI transcripts of the calls to decide who were the parties to these conversations and what they were talking about.

    DRJ (be6fb0)

  64. Maybe Emanuel remembers every call he made to Blagojevich

    I know it is horrible, but every time I see the name Emanuel, I think of either Emanuelle on Tabboo Island, or Webster.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  65. How’s he going to do that when his party’s Senate leadership is going to spend about 30% of their time babysitting Al Franken?

    That’s Senator Al Franken! Better get used to it, wingnuts. Let it roll around the tongue. Ain’t it grand? Senator Al Franken. Ha ha ha!

    Obama may have to make quite a few deal WITH REPUBLICANS in order to get some of his initiatives through

    No, he will have to LOOK like he’s doing it. You people still seem to think you’re dealing with idiots. Look at what’s just been done to you in Chicago, children. You really ought to wise up, but the great thing is that you won’t wise up.

    I don’t think you have any idea of what’s coming to you, now that the pressure is on YOU to perform and not the Right/GOP.

    Wow, so now your tinfoil hat tells you that I am Barack Obama. I hate to break the news, but I’m not Barack. As for pressure to perform, everyone knows he’ll have a hard time dealing with the shitstorm left by the worst president in American history, the drunken liar George W. Bush.

    Obama’s not going to be blamed for the coming depression. Your idiot prez and his party will. Go check the 1934 elections, wingnuts. The Stupid Party lost 10 more Senate seats and 9 in the House. Here’s what will happen: The wingnut asshole caucus will flame out in the next two years, and you’ll lose your third set of elections in a row. Just in time for national health care and a couple more Supreme Court appointments. Do you realize how screwed you are?

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  66. Wow. Such a great spokestroll for the Party of Tolerance.

    And the deeply ironic part is how this individual reflects so perfectly all the characteristics he or she claims to hate about those awful political opponents.

    Pretty sad, really, at this time of the year in particular.

    It must be awful to be alone and so bitter and so very, very unhappy…as evidence by such immature and angry posts. Literally looking for a fight.

    Of course, doing so quite safely, over the internet. So very, very brave.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  67. Poor Eric. Wingnut bully gets a long overdue punch in the nose and the wailing and crocodile tears flow. Merry Christmas, flaming nutcase!

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  68. Eric – He’s also both a mindreader and a psychic.

    Plus, he’s established absolutely zero crediblilty here by failing to back up a single on of his assertions. Those lame ass links from yesterday actually damaged his claim that Coleman was in legal trouble.

    Meanwhile, DON’T YOU KNOW WHO HE THINKS HE IS?

    Just another run of the mill, obnoxious progressive troll who believes he knows more than he actually does. Growing up for these people is a bitch.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  69. That’s Senator Al Franken!

    The idea that we have to afford that twatwaffle even a modicum of respect is laughable. That a Leftist is calling for same is as predictable as the sun rising, even without a trace of irony.

    Followed shortly by this …

    everyone knows he’ll have a hard time dealing with the shitstorm left by the worst president in American history, the drunken liar George W. Bush.

    Without even a hint of irony, you lying gasbag.

    Patterico – What names has this one posted under in the past?

    JD (7f8e8c)

  70. Ah, the mature and cutting riposte! I am cut to the very quick by the sheer intellectual vigor of this character. Its opponents are mowed down like fragile blades of grass before the mighty sword of its flaming wit.

    Seriously, dude (or dudette): you make truthnjustice look like Albert Einstein. And jharp like Murray Gell-Mann.

    Go sleep it off. Cough medicine isn’t the high you think it is, truly.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  71. Eric – I think he’ll just wake and bake again in the morning.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  72. Hey daley, what is your bet:

    1. Old troll with a new name.

    2. Yet another undergraduate sitting around worried about Fall semester grades and acting all macho and tough (safely over the internet, again) in reaction.

    3. Some person in a mental institution with access to the internet.

    Awfully angry for someone who is supposedly got the world on a string, you know?

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  73. JD – Levi used to love playing the drunken George Bush card.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  74. Some village is missing its idiot.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  75. Eric – I’d go for #1. They don’t like leaving here after getting banned because all they get on the lefty sites is an echo chamber. That’s why so many of them keep coming back.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  76. Those lame ass links from yesterday actually damaged his claim that Coleman was in legal trouble.
    Those lame ass links from yesterday actually damaged his claim that Coleman was in legal trouble.

    This is the best part: You nutcases still don’t realize that the worm has turned. You’re like the ass end of a killer bee that’s been sliced in half, doesn’t know it, and keeps on stinging. I told you yesterday that Obama and Emanuel would come out smelling like a rose. You laughed at that one, and today, guess what happened?

    Children, your buddy Coleman is going to wind up in federal prison right next to Teddy Boy from Alaska. And I understand that the Abramoff case isn’t quite done yet. More of your tribe’s gonna get caught in those legal tentacles. Not to mention next year’s war crimes tribunals.

    Get ready for interesting times, wingnuts.

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  77. “Awfully angry for someone who is supposedly got the world on a string, you know?”

    Aren’t they all?

    Then they demand thet we play nice? Huh?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  78. I’m thinking Prozac or Paxil might help this character.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  79. “And I understand that the Abramoff case isn’t quite done yet.”

    HL – That’s right. Harry Reid never gave back his money. Why is that?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  80. Daley, I really do sense a name tag and a job requiring a servile attitude during working hours. That level of resentment would help explain the weird fake gleeful spleen all over the screen.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  81. “You laughed at that one, and today, guess what happened?”

    I saw Cgenet confirm that he told Leaky Leahy to go fuck himself and that he deserved it. Cheney also mocked Greasy Joe Biden for serving 36 years in Congress and not knowing what Article of the Constitution dealt with the legislative branch.

    What else happened?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  82. Cheney

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  83. HL – Does your father the Colonel know you are posting this kind of garbage?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  84. __________________________________________________

    Horrible Leftist: And, even more to the point, have the happiest of New Years. I know I will.

    Uh, probably not…

    Livescience.com: Individuals with conservative ideologies are happier than liberal-leaners, and new research pinpoints the reason: Conservatives rationalize social and economic inequalities.

    Regardless of marital status, income or church attendance, right-wing individuals reported greater life satisfaction and well-being than left-wingers, the new study found. Conservatives also scored highest on measures of rationalization, which gauge a person’s tendency to justify, or explain away, inequalities.

    The rationalization measure included statements such as: “It is not really that big a problem if some people have more of a chance in life than others,” and “This country would be better off if we worried less about how equal people are.”

    To justify economic inequalities, a person could support the idea of meritocracy, in which people supposedly move up their economic status in society based on hard work and good performance. In that way, one’s social class attainment, whether upper, middle or lower, would be perceived as totally fair and justified.

    If your beliefs don’t justify gaps in status, you could be left frustrated and disheartened, according to the researchers, Jaime Napier and John Jost of New York University.

    “Our research suggests that inequality takes a greater psychological toll on liberals than on conservatives,” the researchers write in the June issue of the journal Psychological Science, “apparently because liberals lack ideological rationalizations that would help them frame inequality in a positive (or at least neutral) light.”
    _____________________

    Pewresearch.org:

    Some 45% of all Republicans report being very happy, compared with just 30% of Democrats and 29% of independents. This finding has also been around a long time; Republicans have been happier than Democrats every year since the General Social Survey began taking its measurements in 1972. Pew surveys since 1991 also show a partisan gap on happiness; the current 16 percentage point gap is among the largest in Pew surveys, rivaled only by a 17 point gap in February 2003.

    Could it be that Republicans are so much happier now because their party controls all the levers of federal power? Not likely. Since 1972, the GOP happiness edge over Democrats has ebbed and flowed in a pattern that appears unrelated to which party is in political power.

    For example, Republicans had up to a 10 and 11 percentage point happiness edge over Democrats in various years of both the Carter and Clinton presidencies, and as small as a three and five percentage point edge in various years of the Reagan and first Bush presidencies. Also, we should explain here a bit about how our survey questionnaire was constructed. The question about happiness was posed at the very beginning of the interview, while the question about political affiliation was posed at the back end, along with questions about demographic traits. So respondents were not cued to consider their happiness through the frame of partisan politics. This question is about happiness; it is not a question about happiness with partisan outcomes.

    Of course, there’s a more obvious explanation for the Republicans’ happiness edge. Republicans tend to have more money than Democrats, and — as we’ve already discovered — people who have more money tend to be happier.

    But even this explanation only goes so far. If one controls for household income, Republicans still hold a significant edge: that is, poor Republicans are happier than poor Democrats; middle-income Republicans are happier than middle-income Democrats, and rich Republicans are happier than rich Democrats.

    Might ideology be the key? It’s true that conservatives, who are more likely to be Republican, are happier than liberals, who are more likely to be Democrats. But even controlling for this ideological factor, a significant partisan gap remains. Conservative Republicans are happier than conservative Democrats, and moderate/liberal Republicans are happier than liberal Democrats. Hmmm, what other factors might be at play? Well, there’s always…

    Religiosity

    People who attend religious services weekly or more are happier (43% very happy) than those who attend monthly or less (31%); or seldom or never (26%). This correlation between happiness and frequency of church attendance has been a consistent finding in the General Social Surveys taken over the years.


    __________________________________________________

    Mark (411533)

  85. Mark – Thanks, liberals absolutely hate those happinesss surveys. Heh!

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  86. The idea that we have to afford that twatwaffle even a modicum of respect is laughable.

    Senator Al Franken!
    Senator Al Franken!
    Senator Al Franken!

    Has your head exploded yet, or should I say it some more? Would you like a copy of his book, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them? Fantastic book.

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  87. Again: is this a real person, or a trollbot? And I am revising the educational status of this individual downward with each childish and oddly frantically self-assured post. It struggles to sound so very tough, but I suspect a lot of D&D in its background.

    Where is Triumph the Insult Comic Dog when you need him?

    Why spend the time doing this, if it is so certain of its own perfection? At least it has mastered spell-check. But good Lord above, how immature can a troll get?

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  88. ________________________________________________

    liberals absolutely hate those happinesss surveys

    This is sort of the other side of the bookend, if you will…

    George F Will:

    Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.” The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives.

    If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

    •Although liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

    •Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

    •Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George W. Bush.

    •Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

    •In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

    •People who reject the idea that “government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

    Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and “the values that lie beneath” liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government.

    The single biggest predictor of someone’s altruism, Willett says, is religion. It increasingly correlates with conservative political affiliations because, as Brooks’ book says, “the percentage of self-described Democrats who say they have ‘no religion’ has more than quadrupled since the early 1970s.” America is largely divided between religious givers and secular nongivers, and the former are disproportionately conservative.

    Reviewing Brooks’ book in the Texas Review of Law & Politics, Justice Willett notes that Austin — it voted 56 percent for Kerry while he was getting just 38 percent statewide — is ranked by the Chronicle of Philanthropy as 48th out of America’s 50 largest cities in per capita charitable giving. Brooks’ data about disparities between liberals’ and conservatives’ charitable giving fit these facts: Democrats represent a majority of the wealthiest congressional districts, and half of America’s richest households live in states where both senators are Democrats.


    ________________________________________________

    Mark (411533)

  89. “Would you like a copy of his book, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them? Fantastic book.”

    It’s lining my cat’s litter box, retard.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  90. This is what the troll needs:

    http://www.psychresources.net/free_anger_management.html

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  91. I told you yesterday that Obama and Emanuel would come out smelling like a rose.

    Then, by all means, it must be true.

    You can say it all you want, he is not the Senator from Minnesota yet.

    JD (7f8e8c)

  92. fap, fap, fap, fap, fap, fap

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  93. Hey JD, maybe Franken will cheat his way into the Senate. Maybe not.

    But whatever happens, it has nothing to do with this silly troll. He is probably the fellow at about 4:05 minutes into this video.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugk37TvIR8E

    Sounds about right. We just need to find out if the troll likes those filet-o-fish sandwiches.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  94. This is hilarious. Your side is dead and you don’t know it yet.

    Horrible Leftist (d9762f)

  95. You really are the guy in the video, aren’t you?

    Seriously: get help. You sound pretty disturbed, and you might consider how much you display the traits you abhor in others.

    If it is a game, go find another one. If you are serious, again, get help.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  96. Something else to consider:

    http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/narcissistic-personality-disorder/DS00652/DSECTION=symptoms

    Just remember: you are not your grades. Lashing out (even in a safely distant electronic environment) is not the answer.

    Eric Blair (e906af)

  97. Liberals are less charitable than hyenas and without the endearing personality of a hyena.
    I guess HD (Huge Douchebag) got tired of posting.
    No great loss. Anyone who claims that Rahmbo is clean as a whistle is just full of it. I don’t necessarily believe that Rahmbo engaged in criminality, but he was raised in Chicago’s quid pro quos and Blago obviously believed that Obama’s team was not averse to horse trading, so the only issue is how far the horse trading went before Obama’s people said no, and how far up the Obama chain the horse trading went. We all know Obama is a liar and charlatan.Everyone knew he would have a big imprint on the next Senator, but the minute a stiff breeze came up, lie, lie, lie.
    I don’t think that Fitzgerald has told Obama to clam up. That’s not Fitzmas’ style. Again, if Obama had proven himself trustworthy, I might believe that Fitzmas, said that, but not based upon Obama’s lies going back to Rev Wright. For my fellow conservatives, don’t get your diapers in a bunch, but there is less than a one half of one percent chance that Fitzmas would involve Obama criminally in this scandal, even if all arrows pointed there. Fitzmas does not have the personality to want to be the one who brought criminal charges or impeachment charges against the first sitting black president. That is not how he would want to be remembered in history.

    eaglewingz08 (76a4d0)

  98. Good morning all. What’s new?

    love2008 (1b037c)

  99. love2008,

    I thought your comment was funny.

    Comment by DRJ — 12/21/2008 @ 3:11 pm
    I am going to wear the above comment as a badge of honour, DRJ. Glad you liked it. :)

    love2008 (1b037c)

  100. Love, sometimes you are quite charming. Sometimes you get yourself into a corner and can’t get out of it.

    We like the first, and try to help you with the second.

    steve miller (af221d)

  101. Hello Steve. Are you of German descent?

    love2008 (1b037c)

  102. Comment by Horrible Leftist — 12/21/2008 @ 1:46 pm:

    I grew up in Chicago, my naive little children, and anyone with any experience in reading that city’s political tea leaves could see that Obama and his people were going to come out smelling like roses on this one. It was obvious right from the get-go.

    You sure got quiet after Team Obama put out the “we were clueless” defense.

    Your assertion of “Obama and his people were going to come out smelling like roses on this one” is in dire need of help. Care to comment on this, or what the LA Times, of all media outlets, put as a headline on its blog: “Obama team probe of Obama team finds no Obama team impropriety.”

    Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (ed9791)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5101 secs.