Patterico's Pontifications


A Very Special White House

Filed under: Obama — DRJ @ 4:16 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

The WSJ recently reported that, last August, Rahm Emanuel criticized as “F___king retarded” those liberal activists who wanted to attack Democrats opposed to President Obama’s healthcare reform. Now Emanuel has apologized to the head of the Special Olympics:

“Last August, Emanuel “showed up at a weekly strategy session featuring liberal groups and White House aides,” the Journal’s Peter Wallsten reported last Tuesday.”Some attendees said they were planning to air ads attacking conservative Democrats who were balking at Mr. Obama’s health-care overhaul. ‘F—ing retarded,’ Mr. Emanuel scolded the group, according to several participants. He warned them not to alienate lawmakers whose votes would be needed on health care and other top legislative items.”

A White House official confirms that Emanuel made the remark and reports that Emanuel called Tim Shriver last week when the Journal story first appeared to apologize to the disabled community and the apology was accepted.”

In March, President Obama compared his limited bowling skills to the “Special Olympics, or something,” a comment he also had to apologize for later.

I’m sure every White House has its own culture and in-house jokes, but is it too PC to expect this Administration’s leaders to avoid Special Olympics and “retard” comments? Apparently it is.


238 Responses to “A Very Special White House”

  1. So let me get this straight. Rahm apologized to the retarded people because he had equated them to liberal activists?

    Roscoe (c63744)

  2. I don’t think that a good man would have the likes of Emanuel (and Wright, and Ayers, et al) around him.

    Old Coot (ddf8be)

  3. What can you expect from an administration that, policy wise, rides the short bus? (OK, OK, I apologize…)

    John (d4490d)

  4. This is the least of the administration’s problems. I saw that Palin had made a stink over this as well, demanding an apology from Emanuel,

    “Just as we’d be appalled if any public figure of Rahm’s stature ever used the “N-word” or other such inappropriate language, Rahm’s slur on all God’s children with cognitive and developmental disabilities — and the people who love them — is unacceptable, and it’s heartbreaking,”

    It all seems and feels melodramatic and overly sensitive. He’s a caustic guy and he’s a politician. What on earth do people expect? I believe it is, however, different when one is the POTUS. The bar is and should be raised to the highest possible standard that position.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  5. Since when is Tim-Fucking-Shriver the God Damn spokes-person for all things retard-related? Why the holy fuck couldn’t Rahm make a fully public statement of appology?

    I’ll tell you why – because Shriver is a toadying little shit who would accept an important Dem’s apology if that Dem raped and murdered Timmy’s wife. As such, Rahm could be sure that his apology would be accepted quickly, and that Timmy would come to his defense saying “well, he apologized to me, and I’m the head of the Special Olympics, so you gotta go along with me on this, or you hate Special People…”

    If Rove had said this, he’d have been lynched by sundown.

    I become more disgusted with the left as the days march on by. I’m not asking for Rahm’s head, his crucifixion, public flogging, or anything or the sort… I just want the Left to pick one standard of behavior and God Damn stick to it, and apply it to EVERYONE…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  6. Dana,

    I agree a President should be held to a higher standard but I also think there are different levels of slurs. Maybe I’m too sensitive since I’m the parent of one of these kids, but the “r—” word strikes me the same as the “n—” word. IMO every politician, especially those in the White House, should avoid these words.

    But, as I said, maybe I’m too sensitive about this.

    DRJ (84a0c3)

  7. I think it’s just psychological projection.

    htom (412a17)

  8. I think a lot of Mrs.Palin’s response was driven by Mr.Emmanuel’s use of the modifying f-bomb inserted before the word “retard”.
    Perhaps Mr.Emmanuel should return to Chicago and electoral politcs, or ward heeling.

    AD - RtR/OS! (eadee4)

  9. I’m pretty sure Rahm has used the n word as a suffix to M******F***ing… maybe back when Jesse Jackson wasn’t all in on Obama

    SteveG (909b57)

  10. I don’t get how the R word is the same as the N word.

    But it matters that he wasn’t using the R word to describe for real actual… Rs I think.

    This is how the R word and the N word are different.

    happyfeet (713679)

  11. I missed the part where we elected this Tim Shiver guy to accept apologies in our behalf. It ought take more than a phone call to some administration buddy. Be a man. Man up and go in front of the press. Opps. I keep forgetting. The press is also administration buddies.

    Charlie B (46471a)

  12. Sarah Palin is just making hay I think Dana. She’s a very opportunistic person.

    happyfeet (713679)

  13. I’m old enough to remember when ‘retarded’ was in way too common usage and I was part of that. Then 30 years later came short bus jokes and at least I’d learned not to buy in too deep.
    That said, I still every once in a while get sideways with the word and try to switch it to “ridiculous” on the fly.
    Funny how old speech habits reemerge at the most awkward times (freud was on to something… what I dunno, but something)
    It takes concentration to overcome bad lazy habits….

    SteveG (909b57)

  14. Silly folk – Obama was commenting on his limited bowing skills being the-r-word-ed …

    Alasdair (a134e0)

  15. the-r-word-ed

    this is why banning words is kind of feckless I think

    happyfeet (713679)

  16. but for Sarah Palin to call for his job over this was just nuts… that’s not America and it’s fundamentally unserious … does this daffy woman really want to live in the world she’s working to create? God help us.

    happyfeet (713679)

  17. really? You want him fired for something he said in private last year, Sarah?

    You’re psychotic.

    happyfeet (713679)

  18. Yeah, because God Forbid someone with a child that’s developmentally disabled take offense to that word…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  19. Take all the offense you want but it’s not something you fire someone for. That’s a very common expression.

    happyfeet (713679)

  20. And where does Sarah freaking Palin, quitty quitting quitter extraordinaire, get off calling for someone to be fired?

    happyfeet (713679)

  21. That’s a very common expression.

    Ah yes… The venerable “Everyone else is doing it” defense.

    Indeed, you make a compelling argument, and I find myself swayed by it.

    quitty quitting quitter extraordinaire

    Well, aren’t you being extra asshole-ly this evening…

    What, is Jeffy not returning your calls anymore or something?

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  22. Obama of Rahm Emanuel at a roast in in 2005 (at 5:08 minutes into the clip):

    It hasn’t been easy for Rahm, though. As a young man, he had a serious accident. I think many of you are aware of this. He was working at a deli. In an accident with a meat-slicing machine he lost part of his middle finger. As a result of this, this rendered him practically mute.

    This got a big laugh, but like all of the best jokes it’s grounded in absolute truth. Emanuel did lose part of his middle finger, and yes, he is noted even in the rough-and-tumble world of Washington’s power politics as being particularly profane, blunt, and rude.

    (Watching this clip, I’m struck by how visibly Obama has aged since 2005. His comic delivery has also gotten better, at least when he has the benefit of a teleprompter.)

    Beldar (8c5ee1)

  23. DRJ, as a parent, I certainly understand your sensitivity toward the issue. Whether or not it’s being overly sensitive is nobody’s business, nor should you ever feel the need to justify or explain it. You love your child just the way he is and a slur hurts at some level. Period.

    With that, I think my expectations of Rahm E. are much lower than yours. From all I’ve read and seen of him, my opinion was informed by the crude, crass, arrogant, ruthless player he is.

    While I don’t to see this slur as equivalent to the N-word, I do see it as a small angry man intentionally targeting a vulnerable group unable to defend themselves, which reveals all I need to know about him.

    My concern is where does this end? Everyone has sensitivities, or matters that hit close to home. What is reasonable and what becomes unreasonable, and possibly stifling speech? Being tasteless, rude, and offensive is still protected – whether in the WH or not. But again, POTUS should be held to the highest standard.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  24. Team R seems a lot eager to destroy people lately. Personally. Ruin their lives.

    It’s not America.

    The life ruiny ones are the ones we don’t want to be like.

    But for Sarah Palin to use a year-old comment said in private for political gain and try to wreck someone’s life while doing it is pretty shallow and not a little evil.

    happyfeet (713679)

  25. happyfeet, I re-read Palin’s comments and because she’s got such an indignant air of the self-righteous scold, it’s difficult for me to objectively weigh out her words. It’s the presentation that’s rubbing me wrong, not the words per se. Perhaps that is also causing you a negative reaction?

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  26. Rahm Emmanuel should apologize to retarded people for comparing them to Democrats. In my experience, people suffering from a deficit in such abilities are usually wholesome, honest, hard-working and caring people. Unlike Democratic politicians and Democratic activists.

    Rahm should be fired. If only we were so lucky.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  27. Sarah Palin is ……well, you know what.

    The Emperor (859d3d)

  28. That was part of it.

    The creepy way she talks about a “patriot” tipster is …

    a little over the top let’s say.

    happyfeet (713679)

  29. Catnip for people with issues?

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  30. The Emperor, what we know is that she’s brighter than you.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  31. and when they say it’s not about politics…

    happyfeet (713679)

  32. here’s the screed we’re talking about…

    happyfeet (713679)

  33. Sarah’s right, happyfeet and the emperor are wrong, unsurprisingly, so we’re back at the status quo.

    next subject please.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  34. I’ll wager that a bit of Mrs.Palin’s over-the-top reaction to this is that it ensures that she gets traction in the media, who would just as soon ignore her unless, of course, they can tar-and-feather her with some ginned-up scandal.
    That, plus her new affiliation with FoxNews, has put this issue into play.

    AD - RtR/OS! (eadee4)

  35. …Rahm’s slur on all God’s children with cognitive and developmental disabilities – and the people who love them – is unacceptable, and it’s heartbreaking.

    That’s the part that’s so… disingenuous. Even daffy Sarah knows that Rahm was in no way referencing for reals people with cognitive and developmental disabilities.

    And yet she’s “heartbroken” by it. My ass she’s heartbroken. She saw an opportunity and she jumped on it.

    It’s what she does. It’s all she does.

    happyfeet (713679)

  36. Dana,

    I think when officials are elected, appointed or hired to represent the public, they represent all Americans — black, white, brown, Jewish, Christian, agnostic, disabled or abled, etc. — and they owe it to the people they represent not to slur them. I think this is especially true of anyone who works at the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court, because they are America’s highest profile officials and thus should be role models for public officials everywhere.

    DRJ (84a0c3)

  37. feets…we understand that you’ve got some degree of heartburn with Sarah Palin; but, you should give it a bit of rest.

    AD - RtR/OS! (eadee4)

  38. ok fine but thank you for letting me comment what I commented

    happyfeet (713679)

  39. Sarah Palin is a politician, and you get upset because she acts like one? where is your similar outrage when all the other politicians do the same thing?

    that’s what i thought.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  40. Spqr is right. Sarah Palin is the smartest and brightest person in the gop. No one shld dare question her divine wisdom.

    The Emperor (7b90e4)

  41. 1.) for brevity’s sake, yes

    2.) I get plenty similarly outraged. You just notice when it’s your precious I’m outraged about.

    happyfeet (713679)

  42. “Spqr is right. Sarah Palin is the smartest and brightest person in the gop. No one shld dare question her divine wisdom.”

    More of the juvenile insults couched as liberal wit. Yawn.

    GeneralMalaise (55c598)

  43. DRJ,

    Of course elected officials are to represent everyone and to be respectful of all people. However, the reality of *what* people are like and their varied natures insures that not all will rise to the occasion nor meet the expectation. This would be Rahm Emanuel. And a slew of other politicians who have dramatically fallen short of the mark. I am realistic about human nature and the frequent chasm between that reality and the standards the position imposes upon them.

    Thankfully most strive to meet the standard and conduct themselves in a respectful and dignified way.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  44. he said it in private, Dana … who’s putting the
    “slur” on a megaphone?

    Hint: It’s not Mr. Emanuel.

    happyfeet (713679)

  45. the heartbreaking “slur” I meant

    happyfeet (713679)

  46. Dana,

    So because we all know Rahm Emanuel is foul-mouthed and has a hair-trigger temper, he gets a pass?

    DRJ (84a0c3)

  47. there is intentionalism at play here I think, no?… how is this different from the inquisition of Mr. Stacy?

    happyfeet (713679)

  48. Technically Wallison was the one who published in the Journal ,and she took note of it, Don’t deny
    that’s exactly what this clique thinks of us, this
    is why they are still trying to ram this health care bill, well you know. Now we know that this
    crew selected by the ‘good man’ Obama, act exactly
    that way.

    ian cormac (79614d)

  49. but Rahm directed this at liberals, ian

    happyfeet (713679)

  50. Rahm Emmanuel is profane? Alert the media. He was probably tired from throwing damn near everyone within reach “under the bus” – who knew it was a short bus?!

    The great thing about politicos like Rahm is that they would serve drinks in drag at a Klan Konvention for the right price.

    Californio (44dff9)

  51. All of a sudden politicians are expected to be saints because they happen to be Democrats? Ha! Whats next? People shouldn’t fart cos they are called to a higher moral standard? Move on folks. Nothing here…

    The Emperor (08ca41)

  52. I see lovie/chimperor decided to start farting in public again.

    JD (24e83b)

  53. You know, there is something about Sarah Palin that sure gets Mr. Feet writing catty things on the keyboard. He just can’t ignore things like it, even the usual trolls agree with him. Funny, that.

    Again, Sarah Palin seems to be catnip to people with issues.

    Eric Blair (20b3a8)

  54. So because we all know Rahm Emanuel is foul-mouthed and has a hair-trigger temper, he gets a pass?

    It’s not a matter of getting a pass or not, and I don’t think I implied that.

    Is it an offense worthy of firing? No, I don’t believe so.

    Should he have apologized? Yes, if it had been of his own accord, and because his conscience compelled him to. But from what I’ve read, he apologized simply because the story came out and there was blowback, so then he called Shriver. Therefore his “apology” means next to nothing and is rather like a child being forced to apologize to his sibling for hurting them and does apologize, even though he has no actual regret or remorse for his actions. Again, even his apology reveals the man he is…or isn’t.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  55. Well all the more reason, not to say something so stupid, now he is not unique in this, Schmidt seems
    to have the same ‘reserved’ leadership style.

    ian cormac (79614d)

  56. I know this one guy what bought The Hangover and watched it like …. really a lot.

    happyfeet (713679)

  57. I swear that all the reserved parking spaces at the White House must have a sign that shows a wheelchair with a brain in it.

    Neo (7830e6)

  58. Jd, I find public farting most exhilarating and rewarding, thank you very much. You should try it sometimes. Farting to yourself only, is both selfish and criminal. Not to talk of unhealthy.

    The Emperor (da62d2)

  59. Mr. Instapundit is making a funny out of this story. It’s at distinct odds with approach preferred by Sarah Palin.

    happyfeet (713679)

  60. oh. with *the* approach preferred by Sarah Palin I mean

    happyfeet (713679)

  61. Happyfeet is honest. Says it as he sees it. You all should borrow a leaf from him. We dont always agree but I know where he stands on all issues. No bullshitting. No bias.

    The Emperor (8172e8)

  62. There is a difference between happyfeet and The Emperor. It’s not that subtle.

    Ag80 (1592cc)

  63. Of course there is a difference! I support Obama and he doesnt. That’s a big difference. That does not mean I should not commend a rival when it is proper to do so. It’s called maturity, Ag80.

    The Emperor (8172e8)

  64. I bow to your advanced maturity.

    Ag80 (1592cc)

  65. I dont accept bows. I get a lot of that in real life. Try something else. (winks).

    The Emperor (8172e8)

  66. Ag80, I think that Lovie is hitting on you. I think I saw that movie, and it does end well.

    Eric Blair (20b3a8)

  67. Kevin Kevin McCullough at made the following statement with an ad for Sarah right below it.

    “The problem is you’d have the be at least a mildly retarded chimp (read that “liberal”) to believe that there is anything to this non-story “STORY!!!!!”

    But he is conservative and the liberals deserve it in this instance I suppose.
    Where is Sarah and the outrage? /sarc off

    Her Facebook posting was weird and disjointed – starts off with the outrage over the budget but five lines into it she forgets the budget and goes on about Emanuel.
    And people who send her tips are referred to as patriots?? WTH does that mean?

    voiceofreason2 (7118e3)

  68. Rahm Emanuel criticized as “F___king retarded” those liberal activists

    Well, they are. After all, to be so lacking in common sense is a form of mental retardation.

    I’m only bothered that when people like Emanuel and Obama express such sentiments, they’re not also looking in the mirror.

    Mark (411533)

  69. I think you should re-read happy’s comments.

    Back to the subject at hand, one can only draw conclusions based on the evidence:

    Democrats can freely insult the handicapped and when called on it, they can apologize and all is forgiven.

    Of course, Rahm was really insulting his base. So we can now advance the rule to say that Democrats can insult Democrats by using pejorative statements and they actually like it. Because, apparently, the stupid person is Sarah Palin, not whom Rahm was referring to.

    The left lives in an interesting world.

    Ag80 (1592cc)

  70. @66
    Is Ag80 a female? Who knew. Anyway I am not hitting on anyone. As usual, Eric B is making shit up. Always projecting his lurid and repressed fantasies on others. Go out there and get a real partner, eric!

    The Emperor (8172e8)

  71. Comment by voiceofreason2 — 2/2/2010 @ 9:09 pm

    a) He’s saying the Rahm story is a dud, and thus is using the term in a manner agreeing with your side. Why are you against this?

    b) He’s wrong to use the word. Completely wrong. His use and Rahm’s use are equally inappropriate, and are not in the least praise-worthy or even remotely defendable.

    c) This is the first I’ve heard of this comment of his, mainly because I don’t read Town Hall… It’s mostly the Huffington Post or DKos of the right… Idiots who – while they have the RIGHT to say whatever they want – really should just shut up and go back to their Cheetos and NASCAR…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  72. Comment by Scott Jacobs — 2/2/2010 @ 9:17 pm

    Please tell me what “manner agreeing with your side” means to you. What is “my Side” as you perceive it?

    And the article was referring to her buying her books for some donors – nothing to do with Rahm.

    really should just shut up and go back to their Cheetos and NASCAR

    Does this mean you agree with Obama’s statement about people clinging to guns and religion?

    voiceofreason2 (7118e3)

  73. Palin is taking advantage of the PC culture so loved by liberals (ask Don Imus about it).

    But Imus, a private citizen, lost his job over a similar comment. Rahm, a government employee that works for all of us, gets off with an apology to Shriver? Imus did more than that with Al Sharpton and he still got canned.

    If the PC wars are going to end it will have to start with the liberals that got upset with Trent Lott and Don Imus surrendering. Until then Harry Reid and Rahm are fair game for people to take potshots at.

    MU789 (514c52)

  74. According to Levi Johnson, Sarah Palin did call her son “my retarded child” or something like that. Does she get to use the “R” word because she is involved? Just like blacks get to call each other the “N” word? Is that how it works?

    The Emperor (8172e8)

  75. I’m just trying to get things straight here:

    If a conservative says that there’s nothing wrong with calling people “retards,” that means it’s OK to call people “retards.” And if a Democrat calls his supporters “retards,” that makes it OK to call people “retards?”

    But, if Palin calls her supporters “patriots,” that’s bad?

    I can only assume, by this logic, if I call a Pelosi supporter a “retard patriot,” it must be good. Not that I would do that.

    Ag80 (1592cc)

  76. There’s a perfectly good Morons tag just sitting over there in the right sidebar, just waiting to be used for this post.

    Dave (in MA) (6e1206)

  77. Palin wasn’t being unreasonable at all. If you have a problem with Palin’s remarks on this you have a serious problem.

    I don’t mind people using the term ‘retarded’ or swearing, but Rahm is the consumate unprofessional jerk who is all about power and ugliness.

    Palin scored easy points at an easy target because Obama routinely promotes this kind of person.

    Now, Happyfeet points out that Instapundit made fun of this (I didn’t think he was really being super clever in this case so much as shooting out a quick link). Glenn Reynolds is not a politician. He takes a funnier, more frank, and more consistent stance on the world. I wish we lived in a country where people like that could succeed in politics. We don’t. How many places will elevate a person who hopes to see gay spouses with closets of assault weapons?

    Anyway, if Reynolds was a politician, he would probably sound a bit more like Palin, and vice versa. It’s two very intelligent people making very different choices about how they want to accomplish something in the world. Palin is never going to be hip enough.

    And I think making that comparison is unrealistic.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  78. I don’t know what Patterico will do, Dave, but I do appreciate you proving my point.

    Ag80 (1592cc)

  79. vor2,

    I would think someone with the handle of “voice of reason” would recognize that there are unreasonable people on both sides of the debate. Obama generalized. That was the problem. No one seriously thinks there aren’t some people out there who are bitter, cling to a gun, and a bible.

    But that’s a very ugly generalization that doesn’t apply to gun owning Christians on the right very well. It’s like saying you don’t go to Houston because of all the black crack dealing hobos with malt liquor. While I’m sure there’s at least a couple of people like that, it’s a stupid way to see the world or people.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  80. It’s like saying you don’t go to Houston because of all the black crack dealing hobos with malt liquor.

    Man, it’s the white ones you gotta look out for… They act all tough and crap, ’cause they think they have something to prove…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  81. I don’t think “retarded” should be banned, but I think it should be employed niggardly.

    Dave (in MA) (6e1206)

  82. Ag80, my suggestion pertained to the article, not the comments.

    Dave (in MA) (6e1206)

  83. But, if Palin calls her supporters “patriots,” that’s bad?

    It’s creepy. I would say it’s creepy in a proto-fascist kind of way but more I think it’s just she’s an incredibly deluded person what thinks she’s some kind of arbiter of who a patriot is. She’s simply not. She’s every bit as narrow and inexperienced and weird as the doofus what is in our little White House today I think.

    Our little country deserves better than even a moment’s consideration of this foolish flighty lightweight as a possible president.

    It’s shameful what our little country has been reduced to I think.

    You noticed Scott Brown didn’t disavow running in 2012.

    Brack Obama. Sarah Palin. Scott Brown.

    Good God.

    This isn’t American Idol it’s our little country.

    happyfeet (713679)

  84. did someone mention hobos?

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  85. happyfeet,

    I’m afraid it is American Idol.

    That’s shitty, but that’s the way our country wants to pick her leaders, to some extent.

    “She’s every bit as narrow and inexperienced and weird as the doofus what is in our little White House today I think.”

    I think this is absolutely ridiculous. Palin’s a nice person who cleaned up her government of crooks and did a good job. She is pretty patriotic in her personal life. She didn’t attend any parties at Ayers’s house or attend that CIA invented AIDS cult thing. She’s simply in a better category than Obama. Now, the idea that she is experienced enough to be president doesn’t make any sense to me. She’s held an executive job and made tough decisions pretty well. Even resigning her job was a well conceived idea considering her situation. Politicians who have been in DC long enough to be ‘qualified’ by the press are mostly douchebags. Did pre president George Washington or Abraham Lincoln have enough experience to get your nod?

    You’re blaming Palin for playing the game. Don’t have the player, hate the game.

    Now, I wish I could say you didn’t have a point. Palin does ring hollow to me all the time, and I think she’s proof our bench is near-empty.

    However, I don’t really think it matters as much as the fact that she’s building a coalition os fiscal conservatives who want transparent accountable government. She is locking herself into a political position that makes her more reliable than many other choices. Her supporters are patriots. There’s nothing disgusting about that… they are obviously motivated by love for their country and many of their opponents want to see the USA reduced in comparison to the rest of the world. Not all of them to be sure, but some of those folks love Mao and Che and Rev Wright and deserve to be insulted as unpatriotic.

    I honestly hope some GOP contender is credible enough to beat her in the 2012 primary. That Palin is going to be tough to beat is a very good thing, whether she wins or not.

    I know you have pointed out a lot of reasonable points about Palin over the months, and I think you should reconsider. Beating Obama in 2012 is a very important thing, and it will take someone who can weather attacks, utilize the TEA party, raise money, and possess that ‘it’ factor (the american idol thing).

    In the ideal America, Palin would lose to a great person with far less interest in self promotion, probably not very attractive, etc etc. This is not the ideal America. Who can beat Obama better than Palin and show strong affiliation with the TEA folks? Show me that person, and I’ll happily happily support them.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  86. That’s the most thoughtful reply I’ve read and I’ve been fishing for one for days and days. It kind of knocks me off balance. I don’t agree with a lot of it… well, particularly about how to assess her experience… but that’s a nice argument you make.

    Beating Obama in 2012 is a very important thing. And better people need to step up in a big way or you’re right… it kind of is what it is.

    happyfeet (713679)

  87. Well, two years as governor of a low population state really isn’t that impressive compared with running Cali or Texas for full terms.

    I just think we need to keep in perspective that many great presidents didn’t do that. What we want is a decisive and honest leader. I think Palin has given several examples of leadership, some very positive, and some not to positive, and people can make up their minds. Reasonable people absolutely will disagree on this one.

    But by all means, I hope Palin isn’t handed the nomination. While I buy her claims about being sandbagged in 2008, that doesn’t mean she can run a campaign well enough to win. I hope Romney and hopefully much better alternatives really put her to the test. Ideally, someone completely outclasses her and is fiscally intelligent.

    Palin is so easy to defend because a lot of the attacks on her are unfair, but the claim that she’s very similar to Obama in that she only has a couple of years of top level office holding, and is liked for pulchritude or other elements that mirror Obama’s support… well, that’s true. I wish we had some better options. Rick Perry? bleagh (though I’d probably vote for him over Palin anyway) Mitt Romney? bleagh Huckabee? shoot me

    The reason both parties have a shallow bench is that government has been fucking up. No one deeply involved with DC power is anything less than a villian.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  88. Mr. Feet, you have way too much anger on the Palin thing. Seriously, go look at the history of your posts. Sure, some of it is slopover from your Goldstein persona, which is quite different from the offbeat cutesy thing you do here.

    But you act as if Palin is much more important to you than you claim. You don’t like her, find a candidate you like better and push that candidate as being preferable. I don’t hear much of that from you.

    I hope it isn’t that whole “Purity of Essence” thing that many conservatives have. As Dr. K. has observed, perfection is the enemy of the possible.

    All I observe is the absolutely ridiculous meme you have brought up several times equating Palin and Obama. That demonstrates to me that you have some other thought agenda. Fair enough; that is your business.

    I’m old enough to remember hearing how senile and stupid and (fill in the blank) Reagan was. I’m not equating the two. It’s just that there are many pundits today who lionize Reagan now who sure didn’t like him then.

    Again, please…enough with the weird Palin fixation. Instead, spend that same energy telling us who you like, and why. That would be interesting reading.

    Sorry for the sermon. But when Lovey jumps in to defend your side, it should give you pause.

    Eric Blair (20b3a8)

  89. Lovey…

    “..Always projecting his lurid and repressed fantasies on others. Go out there and get a real partner, eric!..”

    You need to quit posting drunk. You know? No one is interested in how self revealing you get when you are angry. Time to throttle back just a smidge.

    Eric Blair (20b3a8)

  90. The real f*cking retards are every person that voted for these assclowns with the expectation that they would make this country better.

    Icy Texan (0c6a85)

  91. eric blair @89,
    You dont like being asskicked, stop being a jerk. You can make comments without being insolent, you know. Conduct yourself in a manner worthy of the educator that you are. To whom much is given much is expected.

    The Emperor (6b9618)

  92. Good sweet Lord, Lovey. Did you actually write:

    “…You can make comments without being insolent, you know….”

    You really wrote that?

    As for “asskicking,” I haven’t experienced that here. Particularly from your creepy self.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  93. A lot of it is just that to nominate Sarah Palin would be to brazenly nominate the person our opposition assuredly finds the single-most vile and contemptible of all possible nominees.

    It’s breathtaking how ugly and cheap our politics have become, and we’re in big trouble if we can’t back away from that.

    happyfeet (713679)

  94. When backed into a corner, the asexual Bobo Doll usually responds with projection and cursing, and at times will spurt out a wall of black ink in order to confuse and/or disgust it’s tormentors. Since it has no other means of defense, observers can expect additional demonstrations of it’s lack of a cerebellum, and that no sexual gonads are identifiable.

    Dmac (539341)

  95. Okay Eric. Let’s call a truce. Dont wanna fight.
    Happyfeet @92 makes an important point about the level of American politics. It’s heartbreaking when substance has been replaced by star quality and ratings. It used to be about depth of knowledge, experience, character and leadership ability. As well as integrity. Now it’s about how one looks on camera and a politician’s popularity with a not so educated majority. Only God knows what the future holds judging from the trend of things today.

    The Emperor (037483)

  96. There really isn’t anything to this story, were there any common sense left in politics.

    However, this is a story in the terms in which Democrats repeatedly try to frame political discussions. So the story is of their hypocrisy. Yet again.

    There is nothing illegitimate ( hehe, cf. Edwards ) about pointing out the hypocrisy of Democrats and their failure to abide by their own values. Just as the Democrats point out when Republicans fail in theirs. It seems that it is Democrats who believe that their opponents should unilaterily disarms domestically, while arguing their friends should internationally.

    Ah, well, I never expected to find intellectual consistency there.

    SPQR (8475fc)

  97. It’s heartbreaking when substance has been replaced by star quality and ratings. It used to be about depth of knowledge, experience, character and leadership ability.

    Nonsense. Such a statement shows complete ignorance of the history of politics in this nation. Its never been true.

    SPQR (8475fc)

  98. I doubt that the commenter has any idea what went on during the campaigns of Lincoln and Jackson, to name just a few of the more notorious slimes that were conducted at the time. Lincoln was called nothing less than a Baboon, and was likened to resembling one at every opportunity by his opponents. These hazy memories of the Marques Du Queensbury Rules in past campaigns is laughable.

    Dmac (539341)

  99. Mr. Feet, in #92, you make an interesting point. When you write the following….

    “..A lot of it is just that to nominate Sarah Palin would be to brazenly nominate the person our opposition assuredly finds the single-most vile and contemptible of all possible nominees.…”

    …I’m intrigued, and not being snarky when I write that.

    Do you believe that what Leftists think should impact who the Right should nominate for higher office? Especially since the Left has a proud history of unfair judgmentalism (comparing Palin to Biden—one gets an electron microscope, the other Mr. Magoo Journalistic Glasses), and out and out falsehood? Do you honestly think that the Left won’t dig for whatever they can to attack any serious contender with an “R” after their names?

    Again, I don’t think you dislike Sarah Palin because Keith Olbermann doesn’t like her. You don’t like her, which is fine.

    My point was: who do you like for President from the Right, and why?

    I don’t want the Left to frame who gets nominated. I want to hear who the Right thinks should be nominated.

    Your argument seems hypocritical of you to me (forgive me), since you detest John McCain so, and many Democrats thought he was a “moderate” candidate.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  100. Dmac, just googl’ing Jefferson and Callendar ought to educate lovie a bit.

    SPQR (8475fc)

  101. Eric I think we dispense with any and all pretense of the president being president of all the people if we nominate such an unprecedentedly reviled figure. It’s needlessly antagonistic in exchange for what little she could possibly have to offer. She’s simply not a particularly distinguished person as presidential candidates go… certainly no more so than the little president man was… and that’s not turning out very well.

    The presidency is being defined down down down as the sad little man what occupies the office today encourages his sad little ilk of both parties to dream silly and grandiose dreams of their silly and grandiose selves sitting behind the desk in our oval office.

    As unlikely as I think it is that she could defeat Obama… if we are to elect Sarah Palin we should do so in the sure and certain knowledge that her legitimacy will be a risible proposition to Democrats and to the world. She’s simply just that hated, and it would be foolish to let such a figure become definitional of Team R at home and of America abroad. Not when there are so many more judicious figures to choose from.

    I like Mitch Daniels. Why? Because he’s sober-minded and uncharismatic and good and decent and smart and competent and experienced. But we’ll see who throws their hat in the ring.

    But to allow an aura of inevitability to form around the unformidable Palin would be a disservice to America and to freedom and to chocolate chip cookies.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  102. Palin read her Sun Tzu.

    She won this little battle. Somehow, people will read about Rahm being an idiot and apologizing and crawling up to the special olympics (reminding us of the bowling comment), and Palin managed to get her name on it as the person demanding professionalism.

    Smart. And Happyfeet’s disgust of this kind of game isn’t unreasonable even though this is exactly the game Palin and the right have to play. There’s a reason Rahm is acting like he got his ass kicked. He did. Every time you read about him he becomes more of a liability.

    Palin is also setting the stage for her future. We all know that there will be some ugliness directed at her and her growing son in the future. Why not establish the idea that many democrats are really ugly about this?

    Did it help the country reduce the deficit or defend itself? No. It is totally unhelpful beyond dumb TV level PR. And that’s why Palin isn’t Bob Dole.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  103. Which is not to say she wouldn’t be better than the little president man what we have now. But it’s quite possible she could be equally as destructive in altogether different ways.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  104. spqr, you’re right that our politics have never been free of stupid arguments and demonizations.

    But that’s not to say they haven’t changed.

    They certainly have. Our culture wants in your face instant messages that fit in 3 words or less. Yes We Can. Hope And Change. They want to feel really good about themselves and find their leaders to be attractive and cool.

    Nixon lost to JFK because of TV (and cheating). The unfortunate need to be pretty and sweet has only grown as we get news on cell phones, from John Stewart, and youtube.

    Things have indeed changed. Not that before was the ideal, but today, our candidate does have to be very attractive, witty, and present a simple narrative instantly.

    Abraham Lincoln was demonized, but he won election. He could never win a major election today.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  105. And Mr. Dustin is it not impossible that Mr. Emanuel has read his Sunny Zoo too?

    What it looks like to me is the dirty socialists were handed a serendipitous opportunity to build up the stature of the candidate they desperately desperately desperately hope will be the Team R nominee in 2012. They took it.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  106. ” it’s quite possible she could be equally as destructive in altogether different ways.

    Comment by happyfeet”

    I don’t know why everyone finds this POV to be hard to understand. I think it’s totally fair to point out that Palin could be a bad president. She couldn’t write Going Rogue on her own? She couldn’t understand Couric was going to cut up that interview if she refused to answer simple insulting questions? Palin has cleaned up Alaska and made a pipeline deal, but is she ready to deal with the complicated nature of foreign policy? She had a hard time with CBS.

    I think she’s the best bet at this early stage, and I do find that unfortunate.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  107. Mr. Feet, thanks for the positivity. But remember: our progressive friends will do whatever they can to demonize any candidate from the Right. Period. And the popular that person is, the more they will advance the meme that the person is “universally reviled” and “impossible to elect.”

    So don’t agree with them about Palin—especially when there is such a history from them of lying and misrepresentation. Just change the subject to a candidate you do like, and why. You can even compare Palin to your favorite candidate. Move on to someone like Daniels, and start pushing.

    Remember that most American actually believe that Palin said that she could see Russia from her house, which was a SNL routine designed to damage her politically.

    The good news about that is that, nowadays, it is starting to happen to Obama (Jon Stewart in particular).

    Just my two cents.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  108. they desperately desperately desperately hope will be the Team R nominee in 2012. They took it.

    Comment by happyfeet

    To be honest, a lot of my arguments are falling apart when I say the GOP has to pick their best chance to beat Obama. Maybe we don’t. Obama is imploding worse than Carter and I’ll be shocked if he is reelected.

    On the other hand, I always hear this crap about how the democrats want Palin to be picked, and it’s just not reflected in how they talk about Palin. Maybe I just don’t get it, but she’s prettier and more righteousy than Obama. She’s got a smart and successful political setup under her feet. She’s probably going to wipe the floor with Romney’s machine (they seem to already do so in the minor points they argue about things).

    Maybe I’m totally wrong on this, but if I were a democrat, I would much rather the GOP pick a white dude or an ugly dude who is boring. Someone who could actually write a good book like Newt.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  109. At least we all agree she’s an improvement over John Mccain.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  110. I do agree that she’s an improvement of John McCain. Which is why I lost it a little when she announced she’s campaigning for him.

    Just change the subject to a candidate you do like, and why.

    I probably have to do that at some point anyway cause it’s so lonely being anti-Palin.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  111. meh. Mccain and Palin are friends who have a strong sense of loyalty. Palin probably should have ignored the race, but Mccain asked for her help and she said yes, knowing damn well that it’s going to piss off a lot of good conservatives. She’s treating Mccain better than Mccain treated her, and it’s going to hurt her.

    I personally don’t think Mccain is a bad person for the job he has. Effective Senators are slimy back door deal making wishy washy characters. Mccain is very effective, especially in a minority.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  112. How exactly was she supposed to know that, if the ‘brilliant’ former Jeb Bush spokesperson Nicole Wallace didn’t know this, that was the greatest hack job ever. Now she could have brought up missile defense, but one might as well speak of unicorns to Couric, who didn’t notice Biden’s massive slipup

    ian cormac (79614d)

  113. “… two years as governor of a low population state really isn’t that impressive compared with running Cali or Texas for full terms…”

    Dustin, if the question for President was between Arnold “The Governator”, or Sarah “Cariboo Barbie”, do you really think Arnold would be the better choice?

    AD - RtR/OS! (b1d1f9)

  114. Comment by Dustin — 2/3/2010 @ 11:02 am

    Disagree! It demonstrates that Mrs.Palin has a stronger sense of personal loyalty than does Mr.McCain, who allowed his staff to trash her.

    AD - RtR/OS! (b1d1f9)

  115. McCain asked for her help and she said yes

    I think it’s pre-emptive. He retains enough credibility that could sink her.

    She’s either forestalling his endorsement of another candidate or forestalling other deprecation of her what McCain might be tempted to offer in future I think. Or at least she thinks that’s what she’s doing.

    But there’s something in it for her or she wouldn’t be doing it.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  116. ian,

    She should have known it. Everyone knows that CBS is ridiculous when covering presidential elections. Everyone.

    Every 5 seconds she spent with Couric should have been considered completely independent interviews that could be taken out of context. When you see Palin in an interview now, that explains some of her behavior. It’s actually kinda annoying, but that’s the game she has to play. Get the same simple message out, over and over and over and over. If she has something detailed to say, type it up on Facebook or the WSJ and refer to it over and over again in the interview.

    The idea that Couric, this upstart democrat who needed to make her show more prominent, was actually someone Palin could trust is simply freaking insane. Sure, Palin had dumbass advisors who didn’t even use the ammo they had on Obama. Sure. She got dumb advice.

    Her willingness to heed these strangers’ counsel shows she wasn’t ready for the national political game in 2008. She hadn’t had anywhere near the time to develop her own cadre of advisors to trust. No Karl Roves. Her best man was actually a Murkowski guy (and back with them now).

    That’s also been Obama’s problem. his people aren’t really his people.

    At some point, Palin started ignoring the Mccain campaign’s assistance, such as in the debate where she won on personality. They hated that, but should have accepted it as the rational reaction to their advice on Couric and many other issues.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  117. oh. He retains enough credibility that *he* could sink her I mean.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  118. “Dustin, if the question for President was between Arnold “The Governator”, or Sarah “Cariboo Barbie”, do you really think Arnold would be the better choice?

    Comment by AD – RtR/OS”

    I was comparing her to Reagan and W. But if Arnold had succeeded with California instead of being part of the problem, I would obviously prefer him. Failing at a hard task is not what I was comparing Palin’s success in Alaska (and easier task) to.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  119. Disagree! It demonstrates that Mrs.Palin has a stronger sense of personal loyalty than does Mr.McCain, who allowed his staff to trash her.

    Comment by AD – RtR/OS!

    I assume you are disagreeing that I think the Mccain endorsement hurts Palin.

    Ultimately, most people aren’t really going to give a shit about it. There will be bigger issues in play when Romney, Palin, and whoever debate the issues in 2012. However, it did cost her. I agree with you that Mccain impliedly permitted his staff to treat Palin very poorly. His mild comments on it were far from what was called for.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  120. “We go to war with the Army we have….”

    AD - RtR/OS! (b1d1f9)

  121. No actually it seems we go to war with the army Meghan’s daddy blesses our having. His influence is a horror what our little country can ill-afford these days.

    The citizens of Arizona need to stand up and free our little country of this odious self-righteous hanger-on’s malefic influence.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  122. …and, you only assume that her task in AK was easier due to the fact that AK is a much smaller state in population. But, it seems to have, or had, the same degree (if not more) of political corruption. Also, we conveniently forget that AK is our largest state (in area), and is one of the most diverse in its’ geographic make-up.

    AD - RtR/OS! (b1d1f9)

  123. No, you have that backward, Axelrod and Emmanuel are his people at least going back to the Illinois Senate race, this is how they roll. If she had refused the Couric interview, and pushed for all these conditions what would they have said, she’s a ‘diva’ she’s afraid of the media. Honestly, I think 2008 was set up in such a way that there was no way Obama couldn’t win. All the money in the world, the media, the coincidental collapse of Lehman bros, the main rival to Paulson’s Goldman Sachs, within sixty days before an election

    ian cormac (79614d)

  124. “…The citizens of Arizona need to stand up and free our little country of this odious self-righteous hanger-on’s malefic influence.”

    Actually, we agree on that.
    Mr.McCain stands #3 on my list of preferrences in this Senatorial contest.
    I would prefer a true outsider, Mr.Simcox, to take the role of “Mr.Smith goes to Washington“.

    AD - RtR/OS! (b1d1f9)

  125. Indeed, AD, and that’s my reason for being a strong Palin supporter. I think she’s much more honest about politics, and has been so thoroughly vetted and shown to be ethical. If someone got into your private email, would they be totally unable to find ANYTHING to embarrass you with?

    After all those lawsuits and investigations, she’s obviously pretty clean. She’s only financially successful now on the power of her personal story. That’s a lot different from other rich politicians whose family wind up on all these boards.

    Palin can handle the hate, and I think her cadre of advisors is obviously very competent now. I am happy to support her and happier if someone can beat her in a primary (who is fiscally conservative). Like trading a Corvette for a Ferrari. But if all I have is a Vette, I’ll manage.

    Since Mccain was brought up, just imagine what a shitty leader he’d have been in the White House! He couldn’t keep his campaign from demonizing his VP choice? What an ineffective leader! Most military guys who move up to Presidential consideration have much more leadership experience than Mccain. I’m always stunned to think of how he was unable to decisively show he was in charge. Of his own campaign. Good grief.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  126. ian, Rahm Emmanual is Pelosi’s man. I think it’s been clear all last year that Obama is following the congressional direction.

    Axelrod is Chicago, and as close to an Obama loyalist as you’ll find, but Rahm was picked because Obama wanted some kind of bridge to Pelosi.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  127. Paulson is the creepiest.


    happyfeet (71f55e)

  128. ian, you’re right that the financial collapse was timed to help Obama win. I think that’s very easy to accept.

    But I don’t understand your point on Couric. All I said was that Palin should have handled that interview like every single second could be plucked out. She didn’t, and this was very stupid and extremely costly. Why did she let an interview go on for 5-6 hours (that’s how long it was)? Why didn’t she put some ground rules in place?

    Look at Obama’s interview with Bill O’Reilly. Someone negotiated aspects of that. Mccain staff just threw Palin to the wolves, and she didn’t realize it in time. I can see the annoyance on her face when asked that “what do you read” question. She was thinking “this is an insulting question that proves you are trying to destroy me” and didn’t thing big picture enough to realize this was potential for ripping out of context.

    To sum up my point, she had a third option. Either don’t interview with assholes (and as you say, this makes her look like a dive), let them tear her apart by not handling them like enemies (what she did, which helped the dems make propaganda), or handle these interviews far more carefully.

    That third option was where it’s all at. There was a huge change in Palin’s reaction to dumb questions between the Couric interview and the Oprah interview (which actually hard harder, dumber, uglier questions).

    You can blame the couric interview on Jeb Bush if you want, but that’s silly. Palin was running for high office and owns every ounce of every problem in 2008. It’s not Couric’s fault and it’s not Steve Schmidt’s fault. Shit like that is part of the national election game Palin agreed to play.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  129. I would prefer a true outsider, Mr.Simcox, to take the role of “Mr.Smith goes to Washington“.

    Comment by AD – RtR/OS! — 2/3/2010 @ 11:29 am

    Chris Simcox?

    The guy who

    In January 2003, while on patrol with Civil Homeland Defense, Simcox was arrested by federal park rangers for illegally carrying a .45-caliber semi-automatic handgun in a national park. Also in Simcox’s possession at the time of that arrest, according to police records, were a document entitled “Mission Plan,” a police scanner, two walkie-talkies, and a toy figure of Wyatt Earp on horseback.

    Two months later, in a speech to the California Coalition on Immigration Reform, a hate group whose leader, Barbara Coe, routinely refers to Mexicans as “savages,” Simcox offered a dire warning to his audience.

    “Take heed of our weapons because we’re going to defend our borders by any means necessary,” he said. “There’s something very fishy going on at the border. The Mexican army is driving American vehicles — but carrying Chinese weapons. I have personally seen what I can only believe to be Chinese troops.”

    or whose ex-wife allged

    Dunbar grew frightened after Simcox left her a series of bizarre voicemail messages beginning that Sept. 13, in which he went on angry diatribes about the Constitution, patriotism, and impending nuclear attacks on Los Angles, and talked about training their 15-year-old son in the use of firearms.

    “I will begin teaching him the art of protecting himself with weapons,” Simcox said in one recorded message he left for Dunbar. “I purchased another gun. I have more than a few weapons, and I intend on teaching my son how to use them.” Simcox added, “I will no longer trust anyone in this country. My life has changed forever, and if you don’t get that, you are brainwashed like everybody else.”

    In phone conversations with his son that his ex-wife recorded and submitted to the court as evidence of Simcox’s mental instability, he challenged the boy to become “a man and a real American.”

    “You better stop playing baseball, buddy, and you better do something real, ’cause life will never be the same,” Simcox thundered. “I’m going to go down to the Mexican border and sign up for the government for border patrol to protect the borders of the country that I love. You hear how serious I am.”

    Simcox’s son asked his father what would happen to his cat, Moe. “Moe may end up on the dead pile, ” Simcox said.


    Yeah he is a real improvement over McCain….

    vor2 (c9795e)

  130. There are so many nutty folks who seem like cool agents of chance until they actually approach having some power.

    Would anyone really want Ron Paul to be president? It’s a scary thought. Or Ralph Nader? I think a lot of those supporters were not seriously hoping to win the election so much as show they aren’t happy with the status quo.

    My ferrari analogy is apt again. A lot of times I think it would be fun to replace my pick-up with a Ferrari. But if that were a serious possibility, I would probably find it miserable. Mccain, like my truck, is a slow ugly unsexy thing that actually is much more practical and enjoyable than some extreme alternatives.

    But that’s not to insult those who are supporting Mccain’s other competitor.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  131. Comment by Dustin — 2/3/2010 @ 12:03 pm

    I find it quite useful to have both a pick-up truck and a Ferrari…
    The PUT allows me to do those everyday errands that life is full of; and, when I need parts for it, by using the Ferrari to shag them, you generate some interesting conversations.

    AD - RtR/OS! (b1d1f9)

  132. LOL, AD.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  133. The GOP has many possible stars in the wings – but they have yet to get their act together and start promoting them. I’ve still got my eye on the GOP Rep from Wisconsin (Paul Ryan), who finally got some well – deserved exposure on the MSM after his polite but insistent grilling of Obama last week. I’ve watched his conduct during the House financial meetings on C – Span, and although his exchanges with Rangell and the other Dems are always cordial and respectful, it’s quite obvious that not only do they return that respect in spades, but that there is an element of intimidation inherent in the fear that they’re going to say something that he’ll pick apart at a a later date.

    And yes, he’s good looking, smart and speaks well. But he also knows what the hell he’s talking about, and he’s one of the leading lights of the party going into the future, no matter what happens in ’12.

    Dmac (539341)

  134. Doesn’t anyone understand that Palin is turning the tables? She is using the demoncrap’s own tactics against them.

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  135. One important upcoming political issue is that Obama was unserious and unqualified, and this is why the USA is suffering. Palin will have to do more than she has to this point to show she is serious and qualified. I think she’s making great strides in that direction, but she will have to do more.

    A policy book, hopefully written by her. Some people will resist Obama style personality movements. They will demand more than Mccain or W offered as candidates, too.

    Paul Ryan is a pretty good example of the model going forward. Liz Cheney is too. Serious people who dig into it. If this trend helps or hurts Palin is totally up to Palin. There are some who think she is “vile” and “evil”, and they won’t ever give her a chance. They are deciding not to be part of the discussion going forward. She can make her case to the rest of us.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  136. vor,

    Using PC against the ones that use PC against you is the best way to illustrate it, or don’t you agree?

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  137. peedoffamerican,

    So she is not sincere? If that is not your view, which position is the sincere one?

    vor2 (8e6b90)

  138. Yes, you need to say the truth, but let’s be blunt, it’s the Administration’s plan that is idiotic, blinkered, fool hardy or as the they say in the Army, FUBAR. This does tie in with the thread up ahead, where it has become politically correct to
    support Wiccans over Christians, Islamists over run of the mill American military personnel. That’s why
    it is necessary to profile for dangerous elements, like Salafi militants

    ian cormac (79614d)

  139. “Yes, Rahm is known for his caustic, crude references about those with whom he disagrees, but his recent tirade against participants in a strategy session was such a strong slap in many American faces that our president is doing himself a disservice by seeming to condone Rahm’s recent sick and offensive tactic.”

    Vor2’s link says this is Palin “demanding” that Rahm be fired.

    It isn’t. But the left has passed that meme in unison because that is what they were told to do on journ-o-list or wherever they get their orders these days.

    She is right, Obama’s condoning this stuff doesn’t help Obama.

    Anyone interpreting that as a demand to fire Rahm is a tool. It’s amusing how these lefty blogs pass that stuff in unison, using the exact same phrasing.

    Palin is right: Obama can do better and this wasn’t decent use of the White House’s people. But the left wants to spin that into this lie that Palin is ordering Obama to fire people. Neat trick.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  140. She’s sincerely opportunistic I think. I don’t know what other conclusion you can reach.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  141. Palin did say Mr. Emanuel should be fired on her facebook.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  142. I would ask the president to show decency in this process by eliminating one member of that inner circle, Mr. Rahm Emanuel, and not allow Rahm’s continued indecent tactics to cloud efforts.

    eliminated no less.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  143. FUCK,

    I totally stand embarassingly corrected.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  144. I guess I could quibble about how that’s not really a demand, or whatever, but no. I got that wrong.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  145. I guess you could say I was being fucking retarded.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  146. Well, he’s not going to fire Rahm “dead fish” Emmanuel, heck yeah

    ian cormac (79614d)

  147. no worries… but that link at #134 renders the whole affair in soft tones of surreal I think…

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  148. Retarded… why did that stop being a medical term for people who are slow to learn or perform normal reasoning?

    It always seemed like a nice and uninsulting way to discuss the general category.

    Not that saying “fucking retarded” about the nutroots isn’t an ugly and insulting thing to say, regardless. But was it just because the term ‘retarded’ became associated with retards? Because the same thing’s going to happen to ‘special’.. a term that is utterly backwards in today’s culture.

    Yeah, happyfeet, it is surreal, and they have caught Palin contradicting herself to some extent. She does think America is a place where seniors in this white house should both not tightrope across the political correct thought police, and not call inconvenient movements ‘fucking retarded’. Whether she has a reasonable view on that or not, she has to expect anything like this to result in extremely critical press. She has to own that, tactically, because this is the landscape she’s in.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  149. 137.peedoffamerican,

    So she is not sincere? If that is not your view, which position is the sincere one?

    Comment by vor2 — 2/3/2010 @ 2:15 pm

    What has sincerity got to do with jacksquat? When an enemy uses assymetrical warfare against you, it is perfectly valid and sincere to use assymetrical warfare against them.

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  150. Or are you a big proponent of; do as I say not do as I do?

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  151. Oh, come on. He said ‘fucking retarded’. If Bush had said that would we really call it PC overkill when people noted how unprofessional that was?

    I guess it’s PC to say someone should be fired for being offensive. I see that argument and Palin should have expected this reaction. But it’s not like he just said ‘retarded’ or some vague comment about the ghetto. He didn’t say men are better at math historically. He said nutroots are ‘fucking retarded’. This is totally accurate, pretty funny, and not very professional.

    It is kinda the paradigmatic Rahm comment, though. And if Palin every makes it to the top, she’s going to have staff say this kind of stuff sometimes too. And she won’t fire them for it if she isn’t an idiot.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  152. Comment by peedoffamerican — 2/3/2010 @ 2:52 pm

    try reading this article

    voiceofreason2 (84baa2)

  153. No thank you, explain it youself and honestly answer the questions that I asked. I answered your question directly, not with a link to an obscure website. Or are you incapable of reconciling your hypocrisy?

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  154. The satire of Moran, who is the Chicago version of Brooks, citing a column by Stein, from the certifiable Huff Po on a Kos poll, and talking about paranoia, just rips the space time continuim
    in twain

    ian cormac (79614d)

  155. Fah, It is always the same thing. The libturds want conservatives to voluntarily disarm, and never ever point out the rank hypocrisy that the libturds are guilty of. Why gasp, it just isn’t fair that someone like Palin uses the libturds own PC against them. After all they are the only ones that are pure at heart. YEAH, pure bullshit.

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  156. Yeah, Ian, notice that he doesn’t pull a website from a demoncrap that criticizes the almost 40% of demoncraps that believe that 9/11 was a government conspiracy. It seems that libturd hypocrisy knows no bounds.

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  157. After all, fire doesn’t melt steel!!!! elenty-eleven

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  158. 152.Yeah, Ian, notice that he doesn’t pull a website from a demoncrap that criticizes the almost 40% of demoncraps that believe that 9/11 was a government conspiracy. It seems that libturd hypocrisy knows no bounds.

    Comment by peedoffamerican — 2/3/2010 @ 4:40 pm

    Where did you pull that information from?

    Intelliology (00d844)

  159. Look it up. Thats what you tell everybody else assiology.

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  160. The study of intell is “special”

    JD (bc26c4)

  161. Haha. I’ll do that poa, but if I get a virus from the website (is it based out of Cuba?) I am blaming it on you.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  162. Oops it was actually 35% that believe this, while 26% are unsure. I guess that means that actually 61% have a feeling that it was a conspiracy. Because if you are unsure, it suggest that it is in the realm of possibility.

    And notice this assiology, I will give you a valid link that is not a conservative site.

    Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  163. DUMBASS

    peedoffamerican (422035)


    So I found this site that claims the number is 35%, but when you follow the link the number is actually 22%. The bottom line is that Democrats have recently come to suspect Rassmussen of being a bit biased… so take that with a grain of salt.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  165. No idiot the 22% is of Americans. The 35% is the percentage of demoncraps that actually believe it. Try going to the link of Rasmussen himself. And as for Rasmussen being biased. it would be to the democrat side if he was. He admitted on Fox News that he has voted demoncratic.

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  166. Is Intelliology still around? Folks, be careful when he uses numbers. They confuse him, and then he gets angry.

    Maybe he means 3.5% instead of 35%, you know?

    It wouldn’t be the first time he had a little trouble with orders of magnitude and mathematical reasoning.

    But hey, the politics agree with him! That’s all that is important in TrollTown.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  167. Oh, and if he says his IQ is 160…well, it probably isn’t 1600. You know?

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  168. Oh… right. 35% of Democrats that aren’t actually Americans…. that doesn’t even make sense. Given what the world thought about George W. I am surprised you are putting so much stock in world opinion. But, I guess this is different.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  169. Gee, thanks for the typical libturd link to a libturd BLOG. Not exactly a neutral site is it?

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  170. Better watch those numbers, Intelliology. They make your head hurt, don’t they?

    Could you at least try not to act like a troll?

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  171. Comment by Eric Blair — 2/3/2010 @ 5:33 pm

    I’ve got a Pet-Rock left over from the 70’s with a higher IQ than “he who studies his ass”.

    AD - RtR/OS! (b1d1f9)

  172. oh, the democrats think Rasmussen is “biased” Why? because he called the Mass race for Brown, the guy who was winning.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  173. The blog suggests that the phrasing of the question is confusing. The blog is right. Answering that question in the affirmative does not necessarily require one to believe that 9/11 was an inside job. It may be that they believe Bush was alerted to this possibility ahead of time. Which, he was. You believe yourselves to be so smart for as dense as you are.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  174. Man you are a total moron aren’t you? Lemme splain this to you in even language that a third grader like you can understand. I will type very slowly.

    You start with the group called Americans. In this group there are demoncraps, republicans, and independents that make up the group called Americans.

    Nowhere does it even mention demoncraps that aren’t actually Americans.

    The 35% of demoncraps are a subset of the group of Americans that actually believe in the government conspiracy.

    Geez, a reading comprehension class on your part would help your confusion.


    “The problem with America is stupidity. I’m not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don’t we just take the warning labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?”

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  175. So, it is a LIHOP or a MIHOP too. SHOCKA!

    JD (bc26c4)

  176. I love the title of this blog post.

    It applies to very special commenters like intell and a couple others.

    He doesn’t care that he got the facts wrong again. He probably wanted to be an easy target. Easy targets make for better trolls, cause it’s hard to resist the low hanging fruit. So of course he can’t add and doesn’t read polls right and always uses left wing blogs to debunk credible authorities. That’s the shtick.

    He’s kinda saying he can’t live in a world where people point out that Rahm and the Obama White House are kinda scummy.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  177. It may be that they believe Bush was alerted to this possibility ahead of time. Which, he was. You believe yourselves to be so smart for as dense as you are.

    Comment by Intelliology — 2/3/2010 @ 5:45 pm

    What part of conspiracy don’t you understand? If Boosh knew, and let it happen, then that means he conspired with others who knew to let it happen. And you just confirmed that you are a moron and 9/11 truther. Hoist on your own petard, I believe the saying goes. No more earnest replies to this moron, just mock and scorn.

    Try even this more damning link once you break it down by its demographics and puts the figure at closer to 51% Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is “very likely” or “somewhat likely” that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them “because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.”

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  178. Rasmussen doesn’t give the Dems the data they want, but they have been more accurate than all others……

    GeneralMalaise (55c598)

  179. poa, he’s goading you. He knows he’s wrong.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  180. I don’t know how we can chalk this up as anything other than a HUGE SarahFail.

    That’s like a kajillion people what heard that.

    happyfeet (713679)

  181. It is striking that Idiotology dismisses one of the more accurate pollsters due to the left’s belief that Rasmussen is biased, but religiously clings to debunked pseudo-science as it services the preferred narrative.

    JD (bc26c4)

  182. Comment by peedoffamerican — 2/3/2010 @ 5:46 pm

    In five, or ten years, when it finally matriculates to college, it will have to take a Statistics class (or should) where all of these mysteries will be explained – probably by someone the age of his Great-Grandfather who actually had to study real stuff to get an advanced degree.

    AD - RtR/OS! (b1d1f9)

  183. AD,

    I actually first studied it in the 7th grade. But that was when schools used to actually teach and not indoctrinate.

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  184. He knew it was a possibility. He did not know it was going to happen. The evidence and the investigation prove that. Bush was given literature suggesting terrorists may use a plane as a weapon and that they were ‘determined to strike in the US’. Ring a bell?

    Intelliology (00d844)

  185. I don’t know how we can chalk this up as anything other than a HUGE SarahFail.

    That’s like a kajillion people what heard that.

    Comment by happyfeet

    I try to be fair with you, man, but that is a dumb argument. Rush was MOCKING Rahm’s ugliness. That’s his shtick. He says things to illustrate just how wrong they are. He’s only done it 10,000 times.

    other points: Rush is not in the White House. Palin’s argument, though easy to criticize, didn’t say anything about what you can say on your own time. It said something was beneath the White House.

    Rush didn’t say “fucking retarded”. That’s worse that “retarded.”

    I think you’ve got a good argument that Palin is, on one hand, saying PC policing is wrong, and on the other, saying someone should be fired for their ‘offensive’ talk. You don’t need to play the media matters game to make that point.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  186. Come on, JD. Use the word meme. Please?

    Intelliology (00d844)

  187. Intelliology is trying to avoid admitting he, too, is a truther. He’s explaining why it’s totally reasonable for people to be “lihop” truthers. After all, out of the thousands of foreign policy problems Clinton ignored, one was that terrorists can still hijack planes and maybe even crash them into stuff. He totally should have started profiling terrorists and whatever.

    Let’s not pretend that if Bush had takent he measures that could have realistically prevented 9/11 he would have not been demonized mercilessly for it. He was demonized for doing this AFTER 9/11 and many find it unforgivable.

    We all fucked up. We didn’t accept reality about islamofacism. Bush, Clinton, most folks. Intelliology is actually trying to justify the ugly nature of democrat truthers. And he’s doing it because it’s a great way to distract us from Rahm being a dick.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  188. Intelliology, another false claim on your part. The briefing that Bush received did not indicated an intention to use an airplane as a weapon.

    PDB here.

    You are making it a habit to make false claims. So far, I’ve ascribed it to your ignorance. But now you are starting to make me doubt my charity.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  189. And since FDR was told that the Japanese might take some agressive action in late 1941, it is his fault for not deploying the Navy in a picket-line from HI to AK?…
    (actually, the best guess was that the Japanese were going to move against South-East Asian positions of France & Britain –
    there was no indication of a move against either Pearl or the PI).
    There was no ACTIONABLE intelligence that the National Command Authority had that could have prevented 9/11 from happening.
    You do not deploy forces on a possibility. What you do, is ramp up the readiness level of the Intell troops to develop additional info that can form the basis for action.

    Plus, IIRC, the airliner scenario was used in a novel in the 90’s…was that actionable intell?

    AD - RtR/OS! (b1d1f9)

  190. Yes, it did SPQR. You should stop swallowing Rush’s special kool-aid.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  191. Those are actually not memes, idiot. They are dishonest, distortions, and lies. LIHOP.

    JD (9ec807)

  192. So what is the official party line? That W. was never told or that he couldn’t have defended? Looks like you need to huddle up and figure out which story you’re going with, boys.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  193. He hasn’t denied he’s a truther. not proof, but that’s what he probably is. No one but a truther peddles those lies.

    Kinda like saying Bush was on the grassy knoll. Maybe you don’t think that means a JFK conspiracy, but that’s obviously the only reason that kind of crap would be peddled.

    Sad to actually see one of the millions of democrats who is a truther. Keep that to yourself, intelliology.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  194. Deny it hell, Dustin. He admitted it here.

    171.The blog suggests that the phrasing of the question is confusing. The blog is right. Answering that question in the affirmative does not necessarily require one to believe that 9/11 was an inside job. It may be that they believe Bush was alerted to this possibility ahead of time. Which, he was. You believe yourselves to be so smart for as dense as you are.

    Comment by Intelliology — 2/3/2010 @ 5:45 pm

    Assiology says, “Bark, bark, bark, arrrrrooooooooooo!”

    Fuckin’ moonbat.

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  195. I know that Bush was given literature indicating that a terrorist strike on US strike was imminent. That makes me informed, not a truther. It wasn’t an inside job.

    Sad to actually see one of the millions of democrats who is a truther.

    You should learn how to read and evaluate, Dusty.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  196. False choice, you dishonest f*ck. BDS is so ugly.

    JD (9ec807)

  197. I read you spreading lies about 9/11 to claim Bush is responsible. I evaluate that you are carefully avoiding admitting that you’re a truther. So I say, while it’s not proven you’re a truther, it’s the best explanation for your strange views.

    I hope I explained that simply enough for you.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  198. Did you pulle “imminent” from the same dictionary as you did “unprecedented” ?

    JD (9ec807)

  199. You should learn how to read and evaluate, Dusty.

    Comment by Intelliology — 2/3/2010 @ 6:44 pm

    This from a moron that lacks any reading comprehension skills at all. What irony.

    Assiology says, “Bark, bark, bark, arrrrrooooooooooo!”

    Fuckin’ moonbat

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  200. BDS is pretty pathetic. He’s wipe the floor with Obama today. Obama would have resigned in 9/11.

    Blaming Bush for 9/11, saying he let it happen, is just pathetic. Just disgusting and pathetic. There are better ways to convince people to support democrats than to lie about this kind of thing. It’s so inhuman. Guess what Clinton was doing about Al Qaida between the time they bombed the WTC in 1993 and entered the USA to commit 9/11 (before bush was in power)?

    Jack and Squat. Doesn’t mean we get to blame 9/11 on democrats. the entire world was shocked into reality.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  201. Leftists have to find a fall-guy for all the things that go wrong in their little world, since it can never be their fault, or the fault of their policies, or of their ideology, since they have nothing but the best of intentions, and CARE!

    Their evil knows no bounds.

    AD - RtR/OS! (b1d1f9)

  202. He let it happen. He fell asleep at the switch and 5,000 Americans died. He was vacationing.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  203. If you think Bush had great intel that 9/11 was imminent and let it happen, you are a truther.

    I think that’s about the most blatant threadjack I’ve ever seen. Yeah, it’s kinda hilarious that Obama’s never hires a person who wasn’t a complete nutjob, but is this really the best way to deflect? 9/11?

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  204. Jack and Squat. Doesn’t mean we get to blame 9/11 on democrats. the entire world was shocked into reality.

    Comment by Dustin — 2/3/2010 @ 6:48 pm

    Except for the 35% fo demoncraps that believe it was a government conspiracy, or the 26% of demoncraps that are not sure if it was a conspiracy. (the unsure just means that they are too pussified to actually admit they believe in the conspiracy)

    Assiology says, “Bark, bark, bark, arrrrrooooooooooo!”

    Fuckin’ moonbat

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  205. How weak are democrats when it’s shown that Rahm is a jerk?

    #203. That’s how weak. It’s like biting your wife in the face when she asks if you watered the lawn. Such a ridiculous and insane way to change the subject with absolutely no self awareness.

    Sadly, the only time Democrats remember 9/11 is to blame Bush. They don’t want to learn the lesson, they want to use all that blood to deflect attention from reality.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  206. LIHOP. The rest is just your end-stage BDS spewing out your ass.

    JD (9ec807)

  207. Intelliology, I linked to the actual PDB which does not match your claims. What do you do? You double down with the falsehood.

    You really are a clown.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  208. 203.He let it happen. He fell asleep at the switch and 5,000 Americans died. He was vacationing.

    Comment by Intelliology — 2/3/2010 @ 6:54 pm

    Damn, he really does have a problem with numbers doesn’t he.

    The actual number killed on 9/11 was 2973 not including the terrorists. The number killed by illegal aliens in this country since 9/11 is approaching 5000.

    Assiology says, “Bark, bark, bark, arrrrrooooooooooo!”

    Fuckin’ moonbat

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  209. poa, you are totally right. truthers are the ones who haven’t absorbed the reality of 9/11.

    They have to blame some all powerful conspiracy or deliberate laziness by their evil demon-bush fantasy.

    They can’t accept that we live in a perilous world where Islamofacism is a legit and ever present threat. For a lot of them, reality is a lot scarier than Bush letting 9/11 happen.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  210. That’s just your meme and you’re a liar and a twatwaffle, JD.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  211. I haven’t kept up with this thread but I just found and released almost 20 comments from the spam filter and I didn’t have time to include notes showing which ones were released. Sorry if it gets too confusing.

    DRJ (84a0c3)

  212. reality is a lot scarier than Bush letting 9/11 happen.

    Correction: The reality is that Bush let 9/11 happen.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  213. We get cheap little smart aleck comments about “Rush’s koolaid”, when unlike Intelliology, I’ve actually read the declassified PDB.

    Pure clown.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  214. Problem is, LIHOP Idiotology, is that your asspulls are demonstrably untrue. SHOCKA

    JD (8f4186)

  215. Correction: The reality is that Bush let 9/11 happen.

    Comment by Intelliology — 2/3/2010 @ 7:09 pm

    Truther Trash, what he is.

    Assiology says, “Bark, bark, bark, arrrrrooooooooooo!”

    Fuckin’ moonbat

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  216. All one has to do is read the declassified PDB. “Imminent” ? Not there. [U]se a plane as a weapon”? Not there.

    Intelliology is a fraud who knowingly makes up stuff that simply is not true. I’ve given up on the charity that he/she is ignorant.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  217. I guess he thinks he’s being double secret clever by completely f-ing up the thread.

    Marvel at his evolution from desperately pretending he isn’t a truther and disputing polls showing there is a problem with tons of them, to pretending he’s proud of being a LIHOP nutjob.

    Like in the last thread he abandoned, his goal is to be as ugly as possible without furthering the discussion.

    Look at his comments in this thread. First one is 158. He never discussed Rahm’s comments. He instantly leapt to insane irrelevant stuff.

    You only resort to that kind of tactic when you know you will lose. But intelliology clearly is a True Believer. So he thinks he will lose because he can’t keep up with the commenters here who intimidate him. That’s why he has to claim he’s intelligent.

    I’d hate to be like that.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  218. I am interested how by pointing out multiple lies told by Rectumology, I somehow became a liar. Projection is not usually so blatant. Combining end-stage BDS with LIHOP and chilidish partisanship is an incredibly ugly combination. Point and laugh. Mock and scorn. It has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is impervious to facts.

    JD (8f4186)

  219. Comment by Dustin — 2/3/2010 @ 7:20 pm

    Interesting assessment, Hannibal. You have me down to a ‘T’. I am very intimidated. The biggesst intimidation comes from your lack of mathematical savvy. Or are you doing ‘new’ math?

    Intelliology (00d844)

  220. Incoherentology.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  221. Assiology says, “Bark, bark, bark, arrrrrooooooooooo!”

    Fuckin’ moonbat

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  222. Rush was MOCKING Rahm’s ugliness.

    No. Listen to him. Rush is severely undercutting Sarah’s stance that it’s a word what is beyond the pale and hurtful and… heartbreaking and the rest.

    There’s no way that’s ironical, what he says.

    happyfeet (713679)

  223. My Hot Air friends think it’s ironical too. But they don’t explain how.

    happyfeet (713679)

  224. #215 SPQR:

    I’ve given up on the charity that he/she is ignorant.

    You’ve been extremely charitable in this case. A paragon, in fact.

    I am not proud that I haven’t been that charitable with this particular liar, but stupid tends to grate.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  225. Well, EW1(SG), when I link to the actual PDB and he/she still insists that it contained things that it plainly does not … well, plain to any english speaker … then its time for charity to end.

    That and his/her behavior in another thread where it became clear that his/her adherence to truth was nonexistant.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  226. Comment by happyfeet —

    I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. I don’t think ‘retarded’ is offensive anyway, but ‘fucking retarded’ is indeed totally beneath the White House’s dignity.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  227. Reminds me of what the general in New Orleans during Katrina told the press, “Don’t get stuck on stupid!”

    Apparently its too late for assiology.

    peedoffamerican (422035)

  228. BTW, happyfeet, I appreciate that you are actually talking about Rahm’s dumb comments and that you’re impervious to trolls.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  229. I’d like to take credit but I didn’t understand this one at all. Not a word.

    happyfeet (713679)

  230. I read the link and I disagree with your very partisan findings, SPQR. Don’t you get tired of basing all of your decisions on letters of the alphabet. R, D… you should use the brain that the Good Lord gave you. (Gasp! A centrist that’s a Christian?)

    Intelliology (00d844)

  231. Centrist?! It is to laugh. Now the actual Presidential Daily Brief is a lie, but Rectumology knows the truth. LIHOP.

    JD (8f4186)

  232. Well that PDB was actually less informative in several places, than the December 1998 PDB, right before Clinton went to war in Kosovo, which included the names Abu Haf al Masri (the late Mohammed Atef) and Seif al Adel (Colonel Mohammed Makkawi) there was no Brooklyn cell, and there was no ransom demand by the hijackers. A great deal of connections like Al Midhar and Al Hamzi’s presence in the United States, the flight school training in Arizona and California, was simply not there. Moussaoui’s arrest as well as the rerouting of Mohammed Quahtani wouldcome later on

    ian cormac (79614d)

  233. “…Don’t you get tired of basing all of your decisions on letters of the alphabet. R, D..”

    Extreme Irony Alert!

    Eric Blair (20b3a8)

  234. Palin Alinskied an Alinskyite.

    nohype (91f25b)

  235. I’m betting Introlliology still doesn’t think Bush beat Gore in 2000. He was still prolly playing with teenage mutant ninja turtles back then and too young to vote anyway.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  236. Intelliology, my “findings” are not partisan. They are factual statements based on the PDB itself. There is no way to find your claims in the PDB. Its plain english. No “imminent”, no planes as weapons. None. All your lies. You have beclowned yourself yet again with your false claims, making stuff up, and doubling down on your lies when presented with the actual facts.

    SPQR (26be8b)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6657 secs.