President Downgrade’s Pity Party Continues
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here. Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.]
You really have to be aggressively self-centered to say something like this:
At his campaign-style town hall meeting in Decorah, Iowa, President Obama compared the criticism he has received from Republicans and other political opponents to the troubles faced by President Abraham Lincoln during the civil war. “Lincoln,” the president said, “they used to talk about him almost as bad as they talk about me.”
Really, this is why he uses the teleprompter so much—because when he doesn’t have a script he says idiotic things like this.
Don’t let your admiration for Lincoln fool you. Lincoln was so hated in his time that half the country seceded in reaction to his ascendency to the Presidency. He was so hated that he was shot in the head. No, President Downgrade, you are not being treated that badly.
And you all know this is not the first time the president threw a pity party. Or even the second.
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
And why shouldn’t we talk about him as though he were a dog? He’s one dumb SOB and that’s for sure.
Comanche Voter (0e06a9) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:11 amSo far, it seems like Jesus and Gandhi are the only remaining historical figures he jas not compared himself favorably to. What a megalomaniacal douchenozzle.
JD (2da347) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:17 amObama’s just having a run of bad luck. You can’t blame him for the stupid policy choices he’s focused on or issues he’s ignored or dithered to death.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:19 amI can’t think of any president we’ve had that was so self-pitying. He really had no clue about this job.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:21 amI like how he is out using taxpayers money to actually question the patriotism of his political opponents.
JD (0d2ffc) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:24 amLincoln was routinely caricatured as a chimp or an ape. I’m sure Mr. Obama wouldn’t want that said about him.
Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:27 amWow. Poor widdle Obama.
I seem recall Obama calling me a “teabagger” and his vice president calling me a “terrorist”. They say “punch back twice as hard” and say nothing about the fact people actually stared getting punched for opposition to Obama that day.
Then they cover up their demonization of people who want spending cuts by whining that it’s really they who are the victims.
Obama is playing a game with our country. He’s taught the principles for doing so, and he’s actually playing a game here.
But America knows that great men do not spend all their days explaining how great they are. This is fundamentally unlike our culture for leadership. He’s sinking fast.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:32 am__________________________________________
aggressively self-centered to say something like this:
I don’t know what’s worse: that the guy currently in the White House loves placing himself in the middle of a pity party or is such an egotist that he inserts himself against a backdrop of Abraham Lincoln or, a few days earlier, Martin Luther King.
Then again, Obama in various ways ends up as the worst of both worlds.
Mark (411533) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:36 amHey, he had a bit of bad luck. Who would have thought it .. bad luck.
I don’t remember ever reading in the newspapers or seeing on TV anything about “bad luck” before.
Bush never had “bad luck.” Neither did Clinton or Carter.
“I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God” … with “bad luck”
I guess only a “sort of god” has “bad luck.”
[Please keep a consistent name. –Stashiu]
Islamic Rage Boy (d1c681) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:36 amJD –
Ganfhi, yes, but I’m not so sure about Jesus. After all, Obama said the future would say this about his nomination:
“this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”
jim2 (a9ab88) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:51 am“Gandhi” (sigh)
jim2 (a9ab88) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:52 amPresident Downgrade’s becoming my favorite sobriquet for Obama. What a self-pitying jackass.
no one you know (325a59) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:53 amBad luck to have to follow Bush and be saddled with the current crop of R unprecedented obstructionists in the Senate and downright R loons in the House.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:55 amThe democrat congress, including Obama, inherited what in 2007? ‘Obstructionists’ is a pathetic excuse. If democrats can’t do their job with the white house and both houses of congress, it is not about luck. It’s because they failed.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:01 amObama is the end result of years of the Self Esteem movement. Obama is of the age (born in 1961) and grew up in a left-wing environment where he very clearly spent his entire life being told how wonderful he is and how everything he does is just super, altruistic, and wise. These last two and one-half years have almost literally been the first time in his entire life that Barack Obama has been faced with anything other than obsequent fawning and hero-worship.
This may sound a little bit flippant, but I think Barack Obama would be better off had he joined a fraternity in college and been subject to a bit of hazing. It might have helped him get over the idea that he was the end result of the perfection of man. It goes without saying that he would have been much better off learning that lesson in the military, but picturing Obama in uniform is too far of a stretch for my imagination.
JVW (4d72aa) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:01 am?
Exactly the point. Under normal circumstances perhaps they could have. But when the minority party in the Senate is committed to blocking anything and everything by requiring a super majority for every damn thing, then the Senate grinds to a halt and government becomes totally dysfunctional.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:07 amSpartacvs, the Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress, and the White House and intentionally failed to pass a budget. Your excuse is simply false. The Democrats were not obstructed by anything other than their own incompetence.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:09 amWhich is a good thing.
Ag80 (f1a661) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:09 amBreaking Rasmussen Poll:
GOP Primary: Perry 29%, Romney 18%, Bachmann 13%
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Texas Governor Rick Perry, the new face in the race for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, has jumped to a double-digit lead over Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann with the other announced candidates trailing even further behind.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary voters, taken Monday night, finds Perry with 29% support. Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who ran unsuccessfully for the GOP presidential nomination in 2008, earns 18% of the vote, while Bachmann, the Minnesota congresswoman who won the high-profile Ames Straw Poll in Iowa on Saturday, picks up 13%.
Texas Congressman Ron Paul, who was a close second to Bachmann on Saturday, has the support of nine percent (9%) of Likely Primary Voters, followed by Georgia businessman Herman Cain at six percent (6%) and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich with five percent (5%). Rick Santorum, former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, and ex-Utah Governor Jon Huntsman each get one percent (1%) support, while Michigan Congressman Thaddeus McCotter comes in statistically at zero.
Sixteen percent (16%) of primary voters remain undecided.
ropelight (c63139) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:11 amThis is where spurty advocates for genocide against those that do not simply submit.
JD (2da347) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:16 amBark-at-us is all over the pity party concept.
He could be Bambi’s interpreter for the deaf on the subject.
Icy Texan (9cf674) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:22 amRasmussen Poll
No big surprise there. Republicans haven’t been enthused about their field of candidates for some time now. That’s a big reason why Perry jumped into the contest, because he thought the GOP field was weak and that he could beat any of the current contenders easily.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:23 amWaaaah. This is what democracy looks like. Your party rammed too many unpopular and disastrous policies through.
The idea the economy would be wonderful had the GOP simply sat aside is simply a hack level argument.
You got your stimulus. We know it made the economy worse. Policies from Obamacare onward have been dishonestly calculated.
At no point has Obama tried to cut spending. Huge tax increases and tons of inflation, are his plan for paying for all this huge government. Since Obama is a moral coward, he wishes for most of the paying to occur after he no longer needs the support of voters.
And he whines like a baby when the voters veto his agenda, as they did in 2010 and likely will in 2012.
Poor Obama got criticized, so now he’s like Abraham Lincoln. Obama thinks he’s the greatest president in American history. We are probably in for quite a show in the days after Obama is defeated.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:24 amHe didn’t have to follow Bush. He could have decided not to run for the office. It was Obama’s choice.
Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:25 amFrom 2001-2007, the Republicans never had a super-majority in the Senate. So, by your own logic, the Repubicans in the Senate are exonerated.
Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:27 amObama is g-d and I am but his humble servant. You are all racists!!!!
BT (74cbec) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:30 amChuck fails basic math and civics again, is there a limit on #’s of re-takes.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:31 amNo, he’s right. You refuse to hold the democrats accountable, but they were much more powerful than the GOP was at times you blame the GOP for things.
One of your favorite hack points is to blame Bush for the spending during the Pelosi house, but you won’t blame Obama for his.
It’s clear to all you are a hack.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:33 amYes it was Obama’s choice to come in and clean up GW’s mess, doesn’t invalidate the point chuckles.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:33 amThere is no point in responding to fools. The Democrats, after 1972, were taken over by the radical left who opposed the Vietnam War and gave us the rampant inflation of 1979. They have learned nothing.
“Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded—here and there, now and then—are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as ‘bad luck’.”
– Robert A. Heinlein
Mike K (8f3f19) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:33 amAnd isn’t it Obama spart should whine about? I never said Obama could solve our problems. Obama said that. Spart now says it’s a failure of civics to not understand Obama was lying. How is that my fault?
Obama shouldn’t have promised he would fix everything, cutting the deficit, taxes, and increasing spending programs radically. Of course Obama couldn’t live up to his word.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:34 amWhat spending?
The wars Bush started? the tax cuts he gave away to his base? the stimulus that stabilized an economy in freefall?
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:35 amShow your work, liar.
JD (6e25b4) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:36 amI’d say something, but I feel so bad for the Grat Black Dope, that all I can do is weep piteously.
Dave Surls (9b942e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:38 amhahahahahahahaha
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:39 amSpurty – explain why not one Dem voted for Barcky’s deficit bomb debt explosion budget proposal. Explain why the stimulus is now included in the budget baseline. Explain why the dxems have not passed a budget since 2009.
JD (822109) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:42 am“The wars Bush started?”
Uh oh. The usual lefty lies, I see.
You liars should come up with some new material, the old stuff is getting a little stale.
Dave Surls (9b942e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:44 amOh, that’s the obstructionists! Why blame the democrats for not doing their legally mandated jobs as the economy implodes?
It’s true that the democrats are not getting much help from the GOP. They would if they compromised. It’s incumbent on Obama to do it. Give us a balanced budget, or at least huge cuts in government.
He just can’t do it. Blaming the Republicans for ‘obstructing’ his stubborn vision is stupid.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:44 amComment by SPQR — 8/16/2011 @ 10:09 am
Incompetence?
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:48 amSpvrkles is incapable of recognizing what he typifies.
American voters made a big mistake in the 2010 midterms. Obama’s task now is to tactfully explain how things can only get better if they reverse that error in 2012.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:49 am“What spending?”
The $3.8 trillion the feds are spending this year, silly Spurty.
That’s what spending.
Dave Surls (9b942e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:52 amAs opposed to the horrific error made in 2006 and 2008?!
JD (d56362) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:53 amWhen Obama’s faux stimulus failed, by the standards that Obama himself set for it, and the Democrats had demonstrated their malfeasance by intentionally refusing to even adopt a budget for the Federal government, it was not foolish of the American people to remove control of the House of Reps from Democrats.
When the Democrats frittered away a legislative year creating a mess of legislation that they couldn’t even explain to the American people, a mess that has killed job growth to an extent not seen in seven decades, it was not foolish for the American people to remove their control of the House of Reps.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:54 amTax cuts are not spending. They don’t add one dime to federal expenditures.
You are such a butt nugget.
Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:54 am“American voters made a big mistake in the 2010 midterms.”
True, a lot of them voted for Dems.
Of course, if they don’t do that, they’ll likely lose their government salaries, welfare checks, food stamps or stimulus payments.
And, every one knows how hard is to stop stealing, once you’ve formed the habit.
Dave Surls (9b942e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:54 amThen it wasn’t bad luck, was it?
Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:55 amWow.
Having first claimed that the downgrade means “nothing”, the right is now using it to disparage Obama (“President Downgrade”).
What’s more remarkable is the attempt here to completely divorce oneself from the REASON for the downgrade. Folks, the downgrade isn’t ancient history. It just happened and should still be fresh in everyone’s memory.
S&P was explicit about the reasoning secret: congressional Republican expressed skepticism about the serious consequences of a credit default; they undermined confidence in the American political system; refused to compromise; they ruled out additional revenue; and they deliberately played a radical game with the full faith and credit of the United States. S&P didn’t leave much doubt about which side of the aisle the agency considers responsible.
I know, I know. This site is becoming a propaganda machine, rather than a serious site for stating, you know, the TRUTH. Sad.
Kman (5576bf) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:57 amI’m much better at math than you are, butt nugget. The Republicans never controlled 60 seats in the Senate from 2001-2007. But the Democrats did have 60 seats in the Senate in 2009.
Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:58 am‘“Lincoln,” the president said, “they used to talk about him almost as bad as they talk about me.”’
Yeah, except Lincoln was trying to get rid of government enforced slavery, while Obambi is trying to create government enforced slavery.
The actual tax rate in this country is over 40%. You can’t even buy a light bulb or a toilet without clearing it with the feds first.
How much of that kinda thing does it take before you consider yourself enslaved?
Dave Surls (9b942e) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:01 amOf course not, they reduce federal income. Which has precisely the same effect on the deficit and the debt as would an increase in expenditure. Distinction without a difference.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:02 amIt has gotten so bad that not only have the Dems in the Senate not passed a Budget Bill in over two years, but the Senate Budget Committee Chairman, the Hon. Kent Conrad (D-ND), has repeatedly refused to even present one to his committee for perusal, let alone approval.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:02 amThey have progressed from malfeasance, to nonfeasance.
Numbers, cite, you know the drill.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:03 amSparticles is nothing if not consistent.
All ad hom, all of the time.
Icy Texan (9cf674) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:06 amSpartacvs, once again you demand that others cite figures when you’ve demonstrated you are too incompetent to do so.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:09 am#49 is it in a nutshell: “You can’t reduce taxes because spending less is impossible.”
Drunken sailor indeed
Icy Texan (9cf674) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:11 amSP – Dems haven’t produced a budget, but the House Republicans have and they will have to campaign with that vote hung around their necks in 2012. Looking forward to it.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:11 amWhen you add up government spending at all levels, and factor in the costs of regulations imposed upon the private sector by governments at all levels, the government makes up over 55% of GDP (to the misinformed such as spvurkles – but I repeat myself – any regulation that forces taxpayers to expend funds in observing that regulation, such as having to hire a CPA to do your taxes, or to hire office help just to fill out forms showing compliance with a regulation, is a tax by another name).
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:12 amUnder current conditions, using a factor of 55% is a best-case scenario.
Is it Socialism?
Perhaps not, but it sure smells like Crony Capitalism, aka, Fascism!
But we weren’t talking about federal income, butt nugget, we were talking about spending. And the fact is that federal spending has increased since the Dems took over Congress in 2007.
Further, tax cuts do not reduce federal income. Federal revenues increased from 2003-2006 by over $600 billion, and even faster than the GDP as a whole. In fact, federal revenues as a % of GDP increased in that time from 16% to 18.4%. (This is according to CBO).
Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:14 amSpartacvs, the Democrats refused to produce a budget, their primary responsibility in controlling the government, and you think that’s an advantage? That is how you personify the fundamental dishonesty and lack of integrity of Democrats.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:14 amcounterproductive given the fragile state of our demand dependent economy.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:14 amSpartacvs, the Democrats claim that spending less is impossible for the next 10 years. So obviously you and they think that their policies will result in 10 years of fragile economy.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:15 amThis logic thing really baffles you, doesn’t it Spartacvs?
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:16 amDems haven’t produced a budget, but the House Republicans have … and the Senate voted it down on a straight party-line vote
(which was a better reception that the President’s 2012 Budget received in the Senate, being voted down Zero-Ayes v. 97-Nays),
and Conrad refuses to release to the Committee and the public his draft of a budget.
And, in further news, the ususal suspect is a Maroon.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:16 amTax cuts reduce revenue? He should be able to back that up. 2001-2006, for example.
JD (0d2ffc) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:18 amTax cuts reduce federal income, do they Spartacvs?
Explain this, then.
Oh wait, that would require understanding economics.
Robin Munn (347954) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:19 amJD & Robin
Hauser’s law
Kinda like the laughter curve.
Smarter conservatives please.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:26 amSpartacvs, all the conservatives here are smarter than you, so why you would want smarter still is a mystery.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:30 amAnd by the way, it was not long ago that you were claiming that I’d made up the idea that Federal revenues do not exceed 19% historically.
Yet another example of your incompetence.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:31 amAnd he does it again, linking to something that doesn’t prove what he thinks it does!
Smarter trolls, please.
(Clue: That graph was demonstrating that taxing “the rich” more, or taxing them less, has little-to-no effect on overall revenue. The general economic picture, however, has a HUGE effect. Now: what happened in 2008 to cause that sudden drop in tax revenues? Answers in #2 pencil, please, not crayon this time.)
Robin Munn (347954) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:32 amSo, spurty is now simply denying reality?
JD (d56362) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:32 amSo, butt nugget’s answer is to suck more money (read that: ability to consume) out of the fragile, demand-dependent economy.
Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:34 amJust another example of a troll linking to something that contradicts its argument.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:34 amStupid this strong has to be painful.
He’s got nuthin’
Icy Texan (9cf674) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:34 amRobin, its not the first time. I mentioned the 19% limit historically in another thread, and he purported to “prove” me wrong and linked to a piece where the second chart had a graph of historical fed revenue by percentage of GDP and it matched my description.
Spartacvs is incompetent.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:36 am“incompetent” would be a step up!
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:42 amYes. Don’t stray from the teleprompter.
Lincoln’s stalker just jumped the shark.
Vermont Neighbor (6d8a47) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:44 amSparty must have gotten his paycheck from the Puffington Host or George Soros today.
bob (either orr) (6713b4) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:45 amObama is trying to hide in plain sight. He snuck into the back of NICC for his lecture sessions. His astroturf was well out numbered, therefore Obama runs.
PCD (dde2a7) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:45 amSpurty
Obama had the “bad luck” to inherit an economy from Bush?
You know who also inherited an economy from Bush?
Rick Perry.
Kman
YOU are searching for truth?
Mmmm…. Yeah.
Aaron Worthing (6e25b4) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:26 pmIf kmart were interested in the truth, Ashford could have never typed that paragrpah of lies that he did above.
JD (d48c3b) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:35 pmAW, it is amusing that kmart is accusing us of being a propoganda machine.
Haven’t these fools ever read the definition of “Projection”?
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:38 pmOops …. propaganda … Where’d that damn “o” come from?
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:40 pm‘Pity Party’ is a pretty good name for the democrats. It really captures what they are.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:46 pmOf course, anyone who actually looks into this story (even by following A.W.’s links) will see that Obama was merely giving example of how democracy has ALWAYS been contentious and messy (in response to a woman’s question).
There was no “woe is me”; there was no so-called “pity party” — that’s just right-wing spin of something Obama said, taken out of context and placed into a fabricated one. You all DO know that right?
Kman (5576bf) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:19 pm…and the beat(down) goes on…
James Taranto in todays BestoftheWeb concludes:
“…Obama’s ascension to the presidency redeemed the worldview of the liberal elite. His failure in office is shattering it.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:12 pmThat explains the primal reactions from the faculty lounges and the liberal editorial boards.”
…and of course these don’t help things much:
Rassmussen says Perry @ 29%, Mitt @ 18% among GOP;
Obama falls to 36% approval in NY!
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:25 pm‘His Job Performance Has Not Fallen, It Has Tanked’
Spurty
By the way, I have cleaned out all the comments where you were insulting to others here. cut it out.
Kman
> Having first claimed that the downgrade means “nothing”, the right is now using it to disparage Obama (“President Downgrade”).
Who exactly pretended it was nothing? I certainly didn’t and I have hung it around his neck from the beginning.
This is his fault. The debt was cited and Obama has contributed more to the debt than any president in years.
> S&P was explicit about the reasoning secret: congressional Republican expressed skepticism about the serious consequences of a credit default;
That is an out and out lie. They said the problem was the debt.
And there was never any danger of credit default, only your precious non-debt spending.
> they ruled out additional revenue
That is the only thing they did actually mention. Meanwhile, they also mentioned the liberals’ unwillingness to consider spending cuts.
> and they deliberately played a radical game with the full faith and credit of the United States.
Proving you are actually illiterate about the constitution, too.
Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:11 pmSure, Aaron.
Did you make sure to clean out all the insulting comments going the other way while you were at it?
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:25 pmspvrty, truth is an affirmative defense.
When you stop lying about the Right, the Right will stop telling the truth about you.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (ce6d84) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:28 pmI love it when someone comes into another person’s living room, takes a steaming sparty in the middle of the room, then gets the vapors when the host notes that was a jackarse thing to do. Wah. You and Barcky are a perfect couple in your ability to claim victimhood, especially when self-inflicted.
JD (109425) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:30 pmspurty has been crowned
ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:33 pmdiverticulitis now
pre-colostomy
spurty
You come here, lie out your a__ and insult people and then get shocked someone insults you.
The way i see it, it is your fault that you get treated like that and i guess in some screwed up way you enjoy it.
Why would i rob you of that enjoyment?
Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:35 pmTranslation-Did you manage to delete your racist comments aaron. No? you deserve to die.
We get it spartac you thug.
DohBiden (d54602) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:41 pmHow long before Summit comes in here and demands I get banned for telling Sonia Satanmayonnaise to ESAD?
DohBiden (d54602) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:43 pmFeel free to point out exactly where on this thread I may have lied out my a__ why don’t you. Look, I get that y’all prefer the echo chamber and judging by the standard of argument on display here, I quite understand why.
Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:47 pmyou leak out your ass
ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:49 pmdiverticulitis mope
lying only half
Says the King of Self Refuting Links.
JD (822109) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:52 pmOh, my HDB… Are you freaking serious?
Well, remember when you claimed that NONE (your word) of the Founders had ever worked to fight slavery? You were skooled instantly by other people, including myself. Even a two minute jaunt to Wikipedia could have taught you what an insult you had dealt to people you clearly had never heard of in your so-called education.
Anyway, when called on it, you ran away, Sir Robin. Which might be a great name for you: arrogant, lazy, and well, not so very smart.
You have done the same thing, time and time again.
The point is that you were called on that bit of lazy dishonesty, and then you just ran around to other threads to squeeze out your nuggets of wisdom (Breitfart, teatards, and so forth). You didn’t own you laziness or dishonesty.
And now you get irritable? That’s the funniest thing I have heard in days.
No, what you are is a reflexively partisan rube who got played by a Chicago pol in 2008. And your backside is chapped about it. So you have to insult and be crude toward those who were not rubes.
Just a little troll. You might be many things, but honest is not among them.
And that’s not just my opinion.
Simon Jester (cdcfc2) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:05 pmFIFY, JD.
Darth Venomous (c8614a) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:08 pm