Patterico's Pontifications


White House dodges Jake Tapper on Hoffa’s “SOBs” comments

Filed under: 2012 Election,General — Karl @ 2:05 pm

[Posted by Karl]

Jay Carney gives his boogie shoes a workout:

(h/t Matt Lewis)  Yet all Carney does is make Team Obama’s double-standard on civility painfully apparent.  Incidentally, when assessing Carney’s claim that the White House had no idea that Hoffa was going to call Republicans sons-of-bitches who need to be “taken out,” keep in mind that this White House vets the prayers said at Obama’s rallies.  Carney is either dancing in horse manure or needs to explain why religious speech is getting singled out for vetting.

It’s nice to see ABC’s Jake Tapper doing his job; he does it more often than many of his colleagues.  It remains to be seen whether he and his colleagues will now treat any future Democratic demands for a “new tone” as the cynical, partisan sham it has always been.



  1. I actually like Tapper. He is the only journalist there from the MSM.

    Comment by S. Carter aka J-Z (049336) — 9/6/2011 @ 2:06 pm

  2. I generally like Tapper also, though he’s probably never forgiven my needling his blog for dropping the term “Obamacare” at the insistence of lefty trolls. He got snippy with me on Twitter about it, as is his wont. But I do give him credit for working harder than most to treat this admin the way he treated the last one.

    Comment by Karl (f07e38) — 9/6/2011 @ 2:11 pm

  3. Liking Tapper personally has little to do with the fact he’s actually doing his job. There are very few journalists like him. I don’t really like the guy, but I definitely respect him. He’s earned it.

    I’m amazed at how Obama never hears anything bad from his allies. Quite a trend at this point.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/6/2011 @ 2:13 pm

  4. I go with manure.

    Comment by PatAZ (9f2f0b) — 9/6/2011 @ 2:22 pm

  5. Jake, you’ve been around this town for a while now. Was that a trick question? You know as well as I do that there is one set of standards for Democrats and another set of standards for Republicans. As usual, we plan on making up the standards for Republicans as we go along.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/6/2011 @ 2:25 pm

  6. So does this mean that we’re all going to be fitted for our cement shoes, or something?

    Comment by rochf (f3fbb0) — 9/6/2011 @ 2:27 pm

  7. Well, at least Jake doesn’t have to sit next to Norah O’Donnell.

    The more Carney tries to defend the indefensible, the more he comes off as a moron.
    He’s only a few steps removed from “Baghdad Bob” at this point.

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (260081) — 9/6/2011 @ 2:45 pm

  8. Who knew that I would one day long for the return of Bhagdad Bob Gibbs? This little Opie look a like makes Gibbs look like a tower of integrity.

    Comment by Comanche Voter (0e06a9) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:17 pm

  9. I think by “noticing”, Tapper is wisely positioning himself to be able to sleep at night and also to be able to face his children after some almost inevitable tragedy arises out of the obviously scripted Obama/Hoffa/Waters/Carson violence-inciting language. It probably won’t make an inch of difference to the Progs or their media enablers, but at least Jake isn’t selling his own soul to the devil.

    Comment by elissa (a93389) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:26 pm

  10. They should vet the prayers at the White House. It might get out that their prayers are satanic.

    Comment by AZ Bob (7d2a2c) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:40 pm

  11. Maybe after you guys recover from this fainting and swooning course in method acting, you’ll be able to chuckle and move on to something real. (Though I guess if you don’t have anything substantive to flog, this’ll have to do.)

    For chrissakes, of course the labor movement thinks the Tea Partiers are S.O.B.s.
    And what, pray tell, might the Tea Partiers say about the Labor Movement: S.O.B.s., of course.

    But, please, do keep flogging this silliness. It’s worthy of your, um, gravitas.

    Comment by Larry Reilly (e2c259) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:41 pm

  12. “Team Obama’s double-standard on civility”

    They can take whatever standards they have an shove them.

    I’m not going to be nice to lefties…no matter what.

    Comment by Dave Surls (3e75f4) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:43 pm

  13. And Larry misses the point entirely…

    What a surprise. /sarc

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:43 pm

  14. colonel know in heart
    that we’re the sons of bitches
    we’ve been waiting for

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:47 pm

  15. And what people are not noting, here, is that the Teamsters are typically one of the most violent unions around. again, maybe i am biased because of personal connection to the trucking industry, or maybe educated by it. and i have worked for major anti-union firms, even though i have not worked in labor and employment myself.

    but still, its like clockwork. every time the teamsters go on strike, they resort to violence. Hoffa has to know that, and even if he is not personally ordering this sort of thing, he knows that he just gave a big signal to the rank and file to get violent. This is barely protected speech, and borders on an unprotected threat (meaning unprotected by the first amendment).

    Not that the teamsters are alone. For instance, it wasn’t the teamsters who ran the verizon strike (as far as i know). But they often deliberately sabotaged phone systems including those of hospitals. my home care agency lost its phones due to alleged sabotage. its mob mentality at its most ugly.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:49 pm

  16. hey lawee weilly
    take your weak suck politics
    with your sorry ass

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:49 pm

  17. Larry, would it kill you to read the posts and comments?

    Scott’s right. You act like the point here is to actually be afraid of this Hoffa loser’s threats. That’s stupid.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:50 pm

  18. What color tie do you prefer, Larry? Do you like Carney better than Gibbsy or not as much as Gibbsy? Who do you think is the more riveting and inspirational speaker–Hoffa or Andre Carson? Are you jonesing over Maxine Waters’ “trillion dollar or more” jobs bill suggestion? C’mon. Share the gravitas. Show us the way.

    Comment by elissa (a93389) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:51 pm

  19. I’m a Teamster, btw, and Jimmy Hoffa, Jr. doesn’t speak for me.

    Comment by Dave Surls (3e75f4) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:51 pm

  20. LOL, Elissa.

    Anyway, it gets really old seeing hard left hacks like Larry, whose comments are always identical ‘you are pathetic for talking about this, but I expected that’.

    So if he thinks Hoffa’a comments actually intimidate people, putting them in fear for their safety, that’s a defense for Obama?

    But the real issue here is that Obama claimed the mantle of demanding civility. His handling of the Giffords shooting is now exposed as ghoulish politicizing of a tragedy.

    Larry, it must get old parroting the same hack day in and day out.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/6/2011 @ 3:55 pm

  21. “now you’re messing with
    a son of a gun” don’t have
    same bite, Karl… okay?

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/6/2011 @ 4:01 pm

  22. Jake tries to make point
    but character is hard to
    explain to Carney

    Comment by elissa (a93389) — 9/6/2011 @ 4:14 pm

  23. There’s been a terrible shooting in Carson City. Shooter opened fire in an IHOP at some National Guardsmen in uniform; 4 people dead, including the shooter (who took his own life).

    Already some folks online are trying to blame conservatives for this.

    Comment by Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 9/6/2011 @ 4:21 pm

  24. Chuck, it never stops. The need to score a political point any possible way, never ever stops. Some of these people are so trashy that they actually hope for tragedies like the Giffords shooting or that time square bomber (a tea partier! oh wait…).

    That’s the point of holding Obama’s feet to the fire. He would say Hoffa’s language was out of line if it came from the NRA, or a GOP congressman, or Glenn Beck.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/6/2011 @ 4:27 pm

  25. Hey Jay: some day your
    lavender neck tie will make
    you look back with shame

    Comment by elissa (a93389) — 9/6/2011 @ 4:30 pm

  26. the Carney Barker
    whatever they pay this flack
    at what cost, his soul?

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/6/2011 @ 4:55 pm

  27. Except, um, here’s the thing, Teamsters. The Tea Party really loves the Constitution, particularly the Second Amendment. I don’t think they will start anything, but I do believe they will finish it.

    Damn those TEA Party activists for demonizing our troops…

    Oh, wait…

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 9/6/2011 @ 4:59 pm

  28. Jake is helplessly & hopelessly in love with The One just like the rest of the WH Press Corpse – he just likes to play hard-to-get.

    Not so long ago he was schmoozing with da Prez & Chuckie Todd and traitorous (for dissing Fox) Major Garrett at the home of former ABC “reporter” turned ObamaCare lobbyist Linda Douglass:

    The only bona fide journalist in the WH briefing room is Keith Koffler. Check out his site – I wouldn’t call him conservative – but he is fair – and definitely stays away from the Kool-Aid provided in the WH. He also asks tough ?’s of the Carny when’s picked – which of course is rare.

    Comment by Miranda (2cc71c) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:08 pm

  29. What happens if he[the shooter] were some pro-palestinian communist?

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:11 pm

  30. What happens if he[the shooter] were some pro-palestinian communist?

    Well, if he was, we’ll certainly never hear about it from the Media.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:24 pm

  31. Miranda–
    Jake Tapper leans left and is part of the DC media bubble. But a fair reading of his work over a period of years -especially when the same political story is viewed split-screen with him against his peers’ versions–shows that he is much more likely to report in a reasonably balanced manner than most. I know this is small comfort and it may sound like I think we should be grateful to accept crumbs when America deserves better. But I look at it as I do a teenager who half-ass cleans his room, or a guy who gives up smoking but has a half dozen cigs a day. It’s better than nothing.

    Comment by elissa (a93389) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:34 pm

  32. too bad he wasn’t able to keep that Sunday morning gig he took over from Georgie Steponpoopoulus.

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:37 pm

  33. Perhaps Tapper should have boldly read the President’s own words (since the President speaks for himself) because clearly Carney missed these,

    “At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized, at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do, it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.

    –President Barack Obama, calling for “a new era of civility” after the shootings in Arizona, January 12, 2011

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:38 pm

  34. Dana-
    Heh! Cody Keenan wrote that Arizona speech. So the President prolly doesn’t even recall that those noble words ever crossed his lips.

    Comment by elissa (a93389) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:53 pm

  35. There’s been a terrible shooting in Carson City. Shooter opened fire in an IHOP at some National Guardsmen in uniform; 4 people dead, including the shooter (who took his own life).

    Already some folks online are trying to blame conservatives for this.

    And no one has blamed Code Pink or the Westboro Baptist Church?

    Comment by Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:56 pm

  36. colonel know in heart
    that we’re the sons of bitches
    we’ve been waiting for


    Comment by carlitos (49ef9f) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:57 pm

  37. Hmmm. Did Mr. Reilly ever opine about the Jeffords’ shooting? Or “Tea Party violent rhetoric”?

    I’ll bet he did. I just don’t feel like looking it up. But if I am wrong, that would be interesting.

    As it stands, all he has is the “that’s different” defense. Complete with petulant foot stomp.

    After all, the President called for words that heal, not wound, right?

    Comment by Simon Jester (58eb1d) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:58 pm

  38. Jay Carney dances in poop
    he’s a loyal little troop
    But what can he say
    When he’s in the pay
    Of a Prez who’d rather shoot hoop

    Comment by The Limerick Avenger (f68855) — 9/6/2011 @ 5:59 pm

  39. I agree, Elissa. It would be great if Tapper were a conservative, or if there were a more even mix of conservatives. In a fair world, Tapper’s mere asking a hard question wouldn’t amount to something newsworthy. But he’s near the head of the class for journalists these days.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/6/2011 @ 6:00 pm

  40. And whether or not anyone likes Jake Tapper, that was a remarkable exchange. Tapper pushed silly little Carney hard: is this the new standard? We don’t have to care what associates of a candidate or an official say?

    It was lovely to watch the limbo.

    Because it is simple: it was okay for Hoffa to say what he did, but wrong, wrong, wrong when a Republican says anything at all questionable. The latter contributes to a corrosive political landscape, according to Carney at earlier press conferences. The former is…


    Comment by Simon Jester (58eb1d) — 9/6/2011 @ 6:05 pm

  41. In fact…has Carney (great name, given his carnival job) ever held forth on the subject of violent rhetoric from Republicans?

    Just asking.

    Comment by Simon Jester (58eb1d) — 9/6/2011 @ 6:07 pm

  42. Cody Keenan wrote that Arizona speech. So the President prolly doesn’t even recall that those noble words ever crossed his lips.

    Doesn’t matter, elissa – Carney told us “The President speaks for himself”. He was very emphatic about that. Unfortunately, the President erred greatly believing the Giffords shooting demanded his personal intervention and subsequent scolding of the right (let’s call it what it was), but now its backfired with this debacle.

    He once again looks weak and fearful, caught between a rock and a hard spot of his own making. This seems to be his typical posture…

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 9/6/2011 @ 6:10 pm

  43. I feel sorry for poor old Jay Carney
    He could not have learned this back in J school
    He’d have to put out a bunch of blarney
    When signing on with a Prez who’s a fool

    Yale may have made him a red, flaming lib
    But when on the stage he must want to die
    For the cause he’s prob’ly willing to fib
    But now he’s having to out-and-out lie.

    But he works for a Chicago pol
    What else could he have really expected?
    The truth? Well it will have to take a fall
    That’s something the boss can’t have detected.

    But there’s still some hope for poor Jay Carney
    He’ll get a job on MSNBC.

    Comment by The Sonnet Avenger (f68855) — 9/6/2011 @ 6:18 pm

  44. agreed Dana @41–

    Hope you didn’t think I was providing a defense for Barry upthread. I was actually intending that comment as serious snark (on several levels). I do wonder if the topic of civility and/or campaign rhetoric will come up at the Reagan Library debate tomorrow.

    Comment by elissa (a93389) — 9/6/2011 @ 6:20 pm

  45. Laryy Reilly claims to be a JournoLista, folks. Does his asshattery surprise you?

    Bravo, Jake. Carnie is spitting out the same crap DWS and the rest are running with. They are coordinated.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 9/6/2011 @ 6:33 pm

  46. Jay Carney does nothing but squirm
    well-coiffed, elegant for a worm
    he minces a lot
    never gives good as got
    with luck, he will squirm for one term

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/6/2011 @ 6:46 pm

  47. Transcrpt excerpt in which President Obama, Chris Christie and Maxine Waters are discussed on CNN. In the immortal words of DJ: Good Allah! (Bolded highlights are mine)

    CHARLES BLOW, op-ed columnist, The New York Times: “I’m not necessarily advocating he (Obama) hit harder as much as he needs to figure out a way to connect. Leadership is about leading people, having people follow. If more and more people who would be following you are falling away then you have a problem.

    The President was able to tell America what America wanted to hear in 2008. That changes over time. It’s just like, you know, you go to your doctor and sometimes you want your doctor to say, oh don’t worry about it, we’ll fix it, it’s going to be okay But when you keep having to come back and you’re still ill, you start to lose faith in the doctor and then you say, doctor give it to me straight. How did I get here, what’s the problem, you know, how long will I be sick?

    That’s kind of what America wants to hear now, and the President is having a little bit of time adjusting his messaging to deal with what America wants to hear. That’s why you keep hearing rumblings about people like Chris Christie. Because even if you disagree with his politics you kind of feel like the guy is going to give it to you straight.

    CAROL COSTELLO CNN host, That’s right. Somebody who is trying to give it to people straight, perhaps, is Congresswoman Maxine Waters. Out in California, she was at a jobs fair and she said the Tea Party can go straight to hell. Is that the kind of thing that voters are looking for?“

    Comment by elissa (a93389) — 9/6/2011 @ 6:58 pm

  48. Obama’s Tucson speech does not apply to his buddies. Do as I say not as I do.

    Comment by AZ Bob (aa856e) — 9/6/2011 @ 7:36 pm

  49. Btw if there were some hate speech from Palin supporters to conservatives[which might just be a few] than it is wrong even though I like Palin.

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/6/2011 @ 7:41 pm

  50. In the words of Austin Powers…

    Comment by Gazzer (45bcff) — 9/6/2011 @ 7:48 pm

  51. Obama’s Tucson speech does not apply to his buddies. Do as I say not as I do.

    Clearly not an equal opportunity scold.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 9/6/2011 @ 7:49 pm

  52. Jake Tapper is the only WH press corps member outside of Fox to ask the hard questions. All the rest hide behind him, afraid to do the same. They don’t want their liberal credentials sullied.

    But recently I have noticed two major papers more willing to challenge Obama. They are the LA Times and the Washington Post. The rock solid hold the WH has had on them seems to be crumbling a bit. And it isn’t just the opinion columns, its in the reporting.

    It’s not overwhelming, but it’s there.

    Comment by Corky Boyd (96df15) — 9/6/2011 @ 8:02 pm

  53. So that’s the party line: the President’s view of Mr Hoffa’s incendiary remarks is that we need to focus on job growth. What a brilliant political feint.
    By the way, I’ve read again and again that Hoffa spoke of “sons-of-bitches”; what the oaf actually said was “son-of-a-bitches”. Perhaps he is as illiterate as he is corrupt, but more likely he speaks gutteral English to show he has the common touch. Respect for The Working Man dontchya know…

    Comment by jbspry (0c8a41) — 9/6/2011 @ 10:55 pm

  54. hahahahahaha! What a bunch of bunk! Talk about hypocrisy! Comments EVERYBODY took out of context (breitbarted vid, go figure ;^)Rush actually admitted on his show that he cut out the preceding line “Everybody here’s got a vote” THEN “let’s take ‘em out” WITH VOTES kids. SOB’s, meh :) See this?
    Rush 3/22/2010: ”We need to defeat these BASTARDS.
    We need to wipe them out. We need to chase them out of town. But WE NEED TO DO MORE THAN THAT.”
    Too easily lead by the nose, kids :)

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:50 am

  55. tifosa…

    Please explain how “take them out” is out of context.

    Next, please explain how “don’t retreat, reload” wasn’t out of context.

    and for extra credit, please explain how violent rhetoric is ok if you are on the Left, but never if you are on the right.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:54 am

  56. His PRECEDING STATEMENT was as noted above. “Take them out” WITH VOTES! Violence is “second amendment remedies” as a CURE for the Harry Reid problem. The cross-hairs with names (Gabby Giffords’ included) What’s NOT violent, taking them out with votes. puh-leeez steve

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:02 am

  57. I don’t believe Sarah meant that she wanted people to kill when she said don’t retreat reload. She just likes her gun rhetoric, and knows that her audience does too.. :^)

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:05 am

  58. Violent rhetoric is NOT ok on the left, btw. That doesn’t appear violent. I’m personally not into the name-calling (SOB) on either side.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:07 am

  59. IMO the left isn’t being specific enough that they’re referring to the CONGRESSIONAL Teas.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:10 am

  60. SO why is the violent rhetoric OK for the left, but not for the Right?

    Why are Palin’s words condemned (even blamed for things) while the Left’s never are?

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:38 am

  61. Mawy Reilly thinks that anyone who supports “the new civility” is an effing a-hole deserving of ridicule.

    Comment by Icy Texan (eea751) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:51 am

  62. Violent rhetoric on the left is NOT ok…examples that lead to violence? Violent rhetoric on the right has DIRECTLY lead to (some thwarted) violence: Byron Williams, Adkisson, Wilson, Giusti, Poplawski, VonBrunn…

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:56 am

  63. tifosa thinks that it’s okay for one man to insult the mothers of every member of the Tea Party.

    Comment by Icy Texan (eea751) — 9/7/2011 @ 2:22 am

  64. Ever heard of Bill Ayers, tifosa?

    Comment by Icy Texan (eea751) — 9/7/2011 @ 2:26 am

  65. Bill Ayers and Rev Wright were the most overblown stretches to link Obama to violence.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 2:30 am

  66. Of course, if your general argument is that liberals usually talk tough but all-too-often fail to act on their promises . . .

    Comment by Icy Texan (eea751) — 9/7/2011 @ 2:31 am

  67. I was speaking of the left. You know, the group mentioned by YOU?

    You can’t move the goal posts that you set up yourself!

    Comment by Icy Texan (eea751) — 9/7/2011 @ 2:34 am

  68. so, icytexan, you’re saying that the left is all-talk-no-action? k, I’ll buy that ;^)

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 2:34 am

  69. My question (not challenge, just QUESTION) is: are there examples of how “violent rhetoric” on the left has lead to violence. You go back to Ayers in the 60′s?

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 2:46 am

  70. As a principled conservative I believe in personal responsibility. I mentioned Ayers because he is an avowed leftist that threatened violence and then acted upon that threat.

    It is total bs for you to suggest that only those on the right carry out their alleged threats of violence.

    Comment by Icy Texan (eea751) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:11 am

  71. That’s the one? k. I didn’t even mention the bombings at “abortion clinics,” Roeder, Sodini, the bombing of the mosque in FL, the Turnidges…it goes on and on.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:30 am

  72. Turner, Cummings, Daniel Knight Hayden… Sen Coburn 3 weeks ago saying that “It’s just a good thing I can’t pack a gun on the Senate floor” expressing his frustration with congress vs HoffaJr. saying to “take them out” with votes. Really?

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:44 am

  73. No, you go on and on.

    Comment by Icy Texan (eea751) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:46 am

  74. Individual responsibility, yes. When do the individuals like Mike Savage, Beck, Rush admit that their overheated rhetoric amps the intellectually vulnerable to believe that there’s no other recourse? Remember the heated rhetoric that Obama would be the “most anti-gun” president, that he’d be coming to get your fire-arms? uh-yeh…

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:49 am

  75. Thank you Icytexan, I may just :)

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:50 am

  76. tifosa,

    Since I don’t happen to trust anything you say, how about a link for each of these names you’re throwing out so randomly? Maybe you could add Tinkers, Evans, Chance, Larry, Moencur, Lee, and Barney to the list?

    Comment by Stashiu3 (601b7d) — 9/7/2011 @ 4:14 am

  77. Oh yeah, I forgot, Glenn told you not to Google. :P Many are from local papers. I did the work, you can’t?

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 4:43 am

  78. ==heated rhetoric that Obama would be the “most anti-gun” president, that he’d be coming to get your fire arms? uh-yeh…==

    Heh. Prolly not the smartest idea for you to link the words “Obama” and “fire arms” in an internet posting these days, Tiffy–what with that nasty, violent, Fast and Furious scandal leading all the way from the Holder Justice Dept. to inside the Obama White House. Just sayin’.

    Have your lefty sites where you get all your skewed and pre-packaged information mentioned Fast and Furious yet? Are you all prepared for Holder’s inevitable resignation over it? Or will that be another surprise heartache for you on the left to deal with?

    Comment by elissa (d992ac) — 9/7/2011 @ 5:14 am

  79. Violent rhetoric is NOT ok on the left, btw. That doesn’t appear violent. I’m personally not into the name-calling (SOB) on either side.

    Comment by tifosa — 9/7/2011 @ 1:07 am

    Teatards and teabaggerz ring a bell? Hoffa said he was not taken out of context, and stood behind his rhetoric. Do you claim to speak for him? The rest is the standard leftist BS from this predictable asshate.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 9/7/2011 @ 5:29 am

  80. Awww JD…You think he meant what? Vote them out he stands behind. You see something different? He said “teatards, teabaggerz?”

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 5:39 am

  81. This troll is slow. Really slow.

    Comment by JD (68ff46) — 9/7/2011 @ 5:50 am

  82. The much prettier Dana wrote:

    Clearly not an equal opportunity scold.

    Why, that would mean he’s an Affirmative Action scold, and you can’t denounce Affirmative Action; you must be a raaaa-cist!

    I just so denounce you!

    Comment by The indignant Dana (3e4784) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:00 am

  83. You EVER directly answer JD? Is name-calling all you’ve got?

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:11 am

  84. Of course our friends on the left don’t see the problem as being violent rhetoric on their part; with their constant worry that President Obama has turned out to be a big pussy, their worry is that the rhetoric, and the deeds, aren’t strong enough.

    Comment by The Dana who understands our friends on the left (3e4784) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:16 am

  85. ay! que linda es
    hija retardada de
    una cogida!

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:24 am

  86. You did not respond to what I said, why should I care what you said? You claim to not like name calling, yet teabagger and teatards, etc … Are standard fare from you. I don’t think he meant he would take anyone out, he does not have the balls to do so. He just wants his folks to do so. You claim he meant that at the ballot box, yet do not give those on the other side of the aisle the same latitude. I don’t think you would have the stones to say these things to someone’s face either, so you hide behind your passive aggressive words, your duplicitous double standards, and your mendoucheity.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:27 am

  87. Big Zero is but
    un coño who loves to spend
    other peeps money

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:27 am

  88. Tifosa is butt
    Wipe who lies in service of
    Teh Narrative yuck

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:29 am

  89. Because to “your friends on the left” take them out at the ballot box doesn’t mean the same as kill them. Go figure.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:30 am

  90. “You claim to not like name calling, yet teabagger and teatards, etc … Are standard fare from you.” Find a quote from me where I called anyone those words, JD.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:32 am

  91. btw, “teabagger” was a self-description:

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:34 am

  92. Is that you, kmart:

    Comment by ian cormac (4e0dda) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:36 am

  93. Are you seriously claiming that you have not used teabagger, or other variants?!

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:36 am

  94. C’mon, JD, you know the drill. It’s only scary bad if an “R” person says something. When a “D” person says something rude or crude, why, anyone complaining is a wimp.

    But most of all, you and I (and everyone else) knows that “tifosa” is just playing troll games.

    Comment by Simon Jester (58eb1d) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:54 am

  95. Plenty of name-calling from you JD. You have us confused…My beef is not with the teaple, it’s with the Teapublicons in congress.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:58 am

  96. Thank you for demonstrating your hypocrisy.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:02 am

  97. Are you seriously claiming that you have not used teabagger, or other variants?!
    Comment by JD — 9/7/2011 @ 6:36 am

    He hasn’t. Closest is teapublicon which IMO a description of Tea Party Congress members that he doesn’t like. I don’t agree with tifosa, or trust him one bit, but he hasn’t engaged in ad hom even once. You might have him conflated with sparty.

    Just sayin. :)

    Comment by Stashiu3 (601b7d) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:08 am

  98. The apple doesn’t fall from the tree. Hoffa Jr intends to take-out the TEA Party the same way his daddy took-out Bobby Kennedy.

    Comment by ropelight (1e59f2) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:10 am

  99. tifosa – Are you seriously forgetting bomb threats and death threats earlier this year in Wisconsin plus death threats in Maine to the governor. Media does not like to cover threats of violence against the violence against the right because they don’t motivate the base, but there are numerous examples.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:17 am

  100. teapublicon is a portmanteau (tea party, republican, conservative) as is teaple (teaparty people) Not name-calling.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:19 am

  101. I asked because I wanted to know daleyrocks, not because I’m implying there is none.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:22 am

  102. Comment by tifosa — 9/7/2011 @ 7:19 am

    I understood. I don’t think of it as name-calling either, in case I wasn’t clear. I thought the “hasn’t engaged in ad hom even once” covered it.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (601b7d) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:25 am

  103. liberal m00nbat
    let big mouth take wing in flight
    that brain can’t maintain

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:25 am

  104. “I asked because I wanted to know daleyrocks, not because I’m implying there is none.”

    tifosa – Your usual blog haunts don’t cover it for obvious reasons and the media downplay the stories. Lefties are often clueless about the amount of violence from their side as a result.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:29 am

  105. Knauf, accused of bomb-threat in WI is suing the sheriff for being wrongly accused. Will check the maine case…

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:29 am

  106. es para usted, tifosa…

    ……..(‘(…´…´…. ¯~/’…’)
    ……….”…\………. _.·´

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:29 am

  107. hahahaha “usual blog haunts” (if you only knew :^)

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:31 am

  108. de nada

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:31 am

  109. es el “fickle finger of fate”…

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:33 am

  110. Aww ╫╟╖A╥╖K╙╢O╙╜ Colonel. But I already have that one. I only use it on special occasions, so I’m flattered :^)

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:34 am

  111. with the Big Zer0
    BLT ain’t no sammich
    by any means nezzzzz

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (c7aeaa) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:40 am

  112. el dedo de fe
    ya ha decidido que
    no hay problema

    Comment by carlitos (49ef9f) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:49 am

  113. “Knauf, accused of bomb-threat in WI is suing the sheriff for being wrongly accused.”

    tifosa – Good for him. Somebody made the threats, right.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/7/2011 @ 7:57 am

  114. tifosa – I believe they nailed the woman emailing death threats to legislators in Wisconsin. The bonehead was using her own email account.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:00 am

  115. The Maine guy pleaded innocent, but also threatened Steve King (R) and will likely be CONVICTED. So that’s one… wow, wrong on both sides, but certainly appears the right follow through and actually kill people

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:02 am

  116. Congrats for being big and brave and following through.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:07 am

  117. Name that Chicago Thug

    Name that Chicago Thug.

    Comment by j. galt (2f6005) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:19 am

  118. Deep down you really are embarrassed by the crudeness and inappropriateness of the Hoffa thing, aren’t you Tifosa? And you know it was the wrong thing for him to say on a national holiday which is meant to honor all Americans who work. We understand that you can’t admit that publicly, but your comments which stretch, and try (and fail) to find comparable rhetoric from the right are not working for you here–at all. The attempts are too pathetic to even be annoying. Please stop. You’ll feel better.

    Comment by elissa (d992ac) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:25 am

  119. Oh, I don’t know, elissa. Over at The Blaze, our new friend wrote this, about the “crosshairs” business with Palin:

    “…Aggressive language replaces intellect in her world…”

    So yes, I suppose that “tifosa” believes the same about Hoffa and Obama, I’m sure.

    Comment by Simon Jester (c8876d) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:28 am

  120. “So that’s one… wow, wrong on both sides, but certainly appears the right follow through and actually kill people”

    tifosa – I thought you were just asking because you wanted to know. If you want to keep score, that’s a completely different matter.

    Offset your abortion clinic bombings with your eco terrorists.
    Look up the Kansas stabber who got the wrong guy last year.
    Wright who flew his plane into the IRS office.
    That loopy UAB Huntsville Obamanoid professor that offed her colleagues.
    The guy who shot up the Florida school board meeting.

    Seriously, you don’t want to go down this path.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:29 am

  121. Sure he or she does, daley. Because he has a flippy floppy yardstick to measure behavior.

    Comment by Simon Jester (c8876d) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:32 am

  122. #119 not true? where’s the rest of it?

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:37 am

  123. $arah is a laugh to the left at this point. We aren’t the ones sending money down the drain…

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:40 am

  124. And who didn’t love Ingraham and Coulter toss that around….

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 8:41 am

  125. tifosa, you appear to lack focus. Just FYI.

    Comment by carlitos (49ef9f) — 9/7/2011 @ 9:11 am

  126. I’m not nearly as well versed in all things politic and debate as others on PP and would appreciate response to whether someone accusing another of using ‘polemics’ is always an insult.

    I know it was intended as an insult, but I don’t know if it was an accurate insult.

    Does ‘polemics’ accurately describe:
    “What were the healing properties of the media’s attempt to pin the horrific Tucson shootings on Sarah Palin, conservative talkers, and the Tea Party? Then when the assailant inconveniently did not fit the template, the media immediately started calling for politicians and pundits to tone down the rhetoric. Is that call to be applied ONLY to one side of the discussion?”

    which generated this response:
    “Polemics are as inappropriate now as they were following January’s tragedy but no one thought you’d be able to hold your tongue. I hope it was healing for you to let your thoughts be known, even if months after the fact.”

    Would polemics be applicable to:
    Is it your inability to see the truth in the questions, your inability to answer the questions, or your own insecurity in your beliefs that causes you to resort to insults and deflection?

    I haven’t found information anywhere else on the net regarding polemics that explained it in a way that answered my questions.

    Thank you!

    Comment by kay2the2nd (c22a82) — 9/7/2011 @ 10:13 am

  127. So, it’s not okay for someone on the left to engage in hateful rhetoric; but, conveniently, Hoffa “wasn’t really being hateful.”

    Rush, Beck, et al need to watch what they say because their words might trigger a violent act by an impressionable radical . . . but not in the case of Hoffa’s words, because he didn’t mean it that way — and leftists never commit acts of violence (Soviet Union, China, Cambodia) against innocents.

    Comment by Icy Texan (63dd9e) — 9/7/2011 @ 10:43 am

  128. Rush, Beck need to watch what they say? Since when?

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 10:46 am

  129. Those violent acts have ALREADY happened. Without the breitbarting, Hoffa was talking about VOTING!

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 10:49 am

  130. So was Rush, tifosa. So was Palin.

    And yet Obama cried for the right to be more civil in talking about voting.

    Not that you’re really accurate, tifosa. Hoffa isn’t just talking about voting. He’s talking about America belonging only to Obama supporters. He’s talking about and endorsing violence, too.

    Hoffa’s commentary is completely unlike anything you’ll ever heard from Rush.

    All caps might make you feel righteous, tifosa, but they make you look hysterical.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/7/2011 @ 10:51 am

  131. To demonstrate that Junior Hoffa was only speaking in metaphors, tiffy should, the next time he sees a Teamster’s picket-line, cross it as if going to work at the site, which will illustrate dramatically the courtesy and good-will of the Teamster rank-and-file.

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (64cedc) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:00 am

  132. Thank you Dustin for reminding us that Hoffa labeled the Tea Party as un-American.

    Does that sit well with you, tifosa?

    Comment by Icy Texan (63dd9e) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:01 am

  133. If he’s talking about the Teapublicons in Congress-agreed. Bachmann even said they’d allow default. Default on the debt already accrued by Bush, btw.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:07 am

  134. As we see in the townhalls, the teapartiers are often themselves on Medicare, are supportive of taxing the wealthier/corporations. They don’t appear to feel represented by their new “Reps” in the House.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:11 am

  135. No one was speaking of default, as the Treasury receives, each month, more than enough funds to service the debt, and back the SocSec and Medicare checks.
    It is the rest of the Federal expenditures that would have to be prioritized, and that is what the TEA Party Caucus was talking about.
    You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts, Sir!

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (64cedc) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:12 am

  136. ..and tiffy, Obama has increased the National Debt more in his less than three years in office, than Bush did in eight years.
    As Casey Stengel is known to have said: You can look it up!

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (64cedc) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:14 am

  137. You know, for a fellow who eschews ad homs, we are not fooled.

    I particularly enjoy the “breitbarting” nonsense. You are just ticked because your side can’t communicate effectively.

    One look at the aptly named Carney’s face in his exchange with Tapper says it all.

    Which is why trolls like tifosa play games. They are worried. And they should be. They were played by Axelrod, and are saps, reduced to tu quoque argumentation.

    Just trollery.

    Comment by Simon Jester (c8876d) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:16 am

  138. tifosa’s stance laid bare: Tea Party congresspersons are treasonous; the staunchest defenders of the Constitution constitute its biggest threat.

    Comment by Icy Texan (63dd9e) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:27 am

  139. Speak like Hoffa did about Obama, and the secret service will probably contact you.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:30 am


    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:33 am

  141. Dustin: to vote him out? Calling him an SOB?

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:34 am

  142. BTW, tiffy, we on the right start the clock on Obammy’s debt with the beginning of the Pelosi/Reid regime that he avidly supported with his votes and rhetoric whilst a Senator – such as his deriding the need to raise the Debt Ceiling.

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (64cedc) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:37 am

  143. Dustin: to vote him out? Calling him an SOB?

    Comment by tifosa — 9/7/2011 @ 11:34 am


    If someone said, quote “we need to take that SOB out” about Obama, using the word “war”, it wouldn’t go over well.

    Sure, he could just say he was talking about voting, but frankly Hoffa’s comments weren’t just about voting.

    You, Tifosa, know that. You are simply lying now. You are a hack, and it’s obvious and I’m delighted you are so upset that people are seeing Obama as a vicious thug who also cries for apologies at much milder commentary.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:39 am

  144. tifosa, the wikipedia article misrepresents the allocation of FY2009 to George W. Bush. First of all, George W. Bush was not presented with the FY2009 budget in October of 2008 as implied. Secondly, Obama’s budget stimulus bill and other spending adopted in early 2009 contributed billions to the budget deficit of FY2009 that that article attempts to put on George W. Bush.

    You continue to be incompetent like so many Bush attackers.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:41 am

  145. They are, SPQR, what they are – deranged!

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (64cedc) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:43 am

  146. President Obama this is your army. We are ready to march. And President Obama we want one thing: jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. That what we’re going to tell him. He’s going to be – and when he sees what we’re doing here he will be inspired. But he needs help and you know what? Everybody here’s got to vote. If we go back and we keep the eye on the prize, let’s take these son of a bitches out and give America back to America where we belong!

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:47 am

  147. yeh, wiki misrepresented it~mhm. Bush didn’t put the wars on the books, Obama did as soon as he took office

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:48 am

  148. Tifosa do the world a favor and down a cyanide milkshake.

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:50 am

  149. tifosa, that’s false too. The wars were always “on the books” and their costs were always part of the deficit. The wars were supplemental appropriations and not in the baseline budget. By putting the wars into the baseline budget, all that changed was that Obama could falsely claim “spending cuts” from troop drawdowns that had already been planned.

    Another fail on your part.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:50 am

  150. Why is it that Democrat shills are so ignorant of basic Federal budget practices and repeat lies about them so easily?

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:51 am

  151. Bush didn’t put the wars on the books

    Sorry, Tifosa, but the reason for the Obama debt boom is not the wars. That’s a ridiculous defense. He’s left those off, until it’s time to count savings, at which point he adds the wars on as though they were permanent expenses. So you’re lying in both directions.

    We’re talking about bailouts and shovel ready jobs.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:52 am

  152. They avoided econ in school ’cause “math is hard”.

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (64cedc) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:53 am

  153. The stimulus was over 40% tax cuts, you get yours :D

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:54 am

  154. btw, Perry got his cut

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:55 am

  155. yeh, wiki misrepresented it~mhm.

    I guess this is some attempt at sarcasm? Obama signed the FY 2009 budget. the GOP rejected it. Bush refused to sign it, promising a veto.

    Simple as that. Obama is much worse on spending than any other president in American history. The deficit is much worse because democrats were given a second chance and blew it.

    But this is all a nice diversion from Obama’s failure to live up to his own demand for civility. He is exposed as a ghoul for making the Tuscon shooting about benign political speech such as Palin’s crosshairs, while tolerating 100X worse ‘voting’ messages when it favors Obama.

    What’s the explanation? Is it because Obama is a shameless liar, or because he’s too cowardly to take on Hoffa?

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:56 am

  156. tifosa, you really just keep repeating false claims, I see.

    Is it a compulsion on your part to keep making false claims to display your basic ignorance of these issues?

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:56 am

  157. btw, Perry got his cut

    Comment by tifosa

    I guess you think you’re being super witty and clever in your attempt to dodge the subject, but all you’re doing is losing one argument after another, and just dropping it for a new smear. You make democrats look terrible.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:57 am

  158. You see the statement, you think it means what? Kill? where??

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 11:58 am

  159. The stimulus was over 40% tax cuts, you get yours

    Another lie, but then that 40% would have all been borrowed debt by Obama that can’t be blamed on Bush.
    Which is it?

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (64cedc) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:00 pm

  160. You should sue your parents tifosa.

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:01 pm

  161. He looked for them, but all cow-pies look alike.

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (64cedc) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:06 pm


    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:07 pm

  163. politifact?

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (64cedc) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:08 pm


    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:09 pm

  165. yeh, you didn’t appreciate your taxcut Andrew? Whodathunkit…

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:09 pm

  166. That isn’t a real website but if it were it would fit tifosa to a T.

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:09 pm

  167. I thought tax cuts were bad you sniveling snot.

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:11 pm

  168. awww, let me guess. The people you believe have told you not to trust anybody else (a little JimJonesy, no?)

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:11 pm

  169. Did a democrap ultra-lefty just accuse me of being a bit JimJonesy?

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:12 pm

  170. “sniveling snot?” wow, scary. Very 2nd grade. :^)

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:13 pm

  171. When you fill your car or truck with gasoline, or buy a gallon of milk, you pay the inflation tax. It’s around 100% on many goods. That’s right. Your dollar buys half as much as it did when Obama was inaugurated.

    That’s because Obama’s man Bernanke is treasonously dilluting the value of a dollar in order to keep Obama’s enormous government growing at a blistering pace.

    Politifact aside (they are hacks), Obama has increased taxes on the poor and middle class even before you look at direct taxation. We are paying for Obama’s deficit in many everyday ways.

    Another problem is that Obama has declared war on employers with Obamacare and EPA regulatory abuses, among other things, killing job creation.

    Tifosa loses another argument. But again, the whole point here is to distract from how Obama endorsed and praised Hoffa after these disgusting comments.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:13 pm

  172. Well, tifosa, you’ve certainly proven that you are completely ignorant of basic facts regarding the Federal budget, Federal deficit, the amount attributable to Obama (already more than George W. Bush in less than half the time) and so much more.

    You really need to learn some of these basic facts, because your entire understanding of Obama’s performance as President is based on a foundation of falsity.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:18 pm

  173. Sounds like you’re not doing well…sorry :(

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:19 pm

  174. Everything on the internet is a lie built to boost Obama and deceive you. Must be tough…

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:22 pm

  175. Disenfranchised, victimized. Were you happy with the outcome of the debt ceiling debacle? Boehner said they got 98% of what you wanted. Yeh?

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:24 pm

  176. tifosa, if you really don’t understand why the Polifact article didn’t prove your earlier claims, you really are ignorant. If you don’t understand why the wikipedia article is misleading, then you only double down on your ignorance.

    More likely, you just know that you are engaging in misrepresentation and enjoy lying to people.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:25 pm

  177. Your one to talk about victimhood.

    Like I said you should sue your parents :roll:

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:25 pm

  178. Let me guess, unless it fits your narrative, it’s a a lie, or stupid.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:27 pm

  179. I don’t feel victimized at all. Not even a tiny bit.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:28 pm

  180. Let me guess, unless it fits your narrative, it’s a a lie, or stupid.

    You’re very tiresome. You never present an argument. Any argument you don’t understand you just dismiss. You project that bad faith onto people who went out of their way to provide a detailed argument.

    It’s all a troll to dodge Obama’s endorsement of Hoffa.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:31 pm

  181. SPQR – do you think it is stupid or willfully ignorant? How many trolls are going to try that blaming Bush for Barcky/Pelosi/Reid spending?

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:32 pm

  182. tifosa, I gave specific reasons why the wikipedia piece did not prove what you claimed.

    But you are too ignorant to understand my point.

    Which only reinforces that your political opinions lack any real foundation in reality and are the product of your fantasies.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:32 pm

  183. JD, even if you don’t accept the argument about Congress being controlled by Democrats, the basic fact that George W. Bush did not sign the FY2009 budget and that Obama doubled its deficit with his own programs after January 2009 are basic, objective facts that contradict the Wikipedia article that tifosa believes proves that Bush had more deficits.

    That kind of objective falsehood being accepted by tifosa tells us just how hard tifosa will lie to others or to him/herself to maintain a quasi-religious belief in Obama’s superiority.

    Its not a healthy mind.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:34 pm

  184. elissa wrote:

    Deep down you really are embarrassed by the crudeness and inappropriateness of the Hoffa thing, aren’t you Tifosa?

    That would require him to have a sense of shame. Given that he inhabits this site to defeend President Obama and his fellow travelers, it would seem impossible for him to have a sense of shame.

    Comment by The Dana who understands our friends on the left (3e4784) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:36 pm

  185. That old liberal dodge of quoting Hoffa’s words verbatim.

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:39 pm

  186. I don’t feel “embarrassed” for what other people do. Did it embarrass you when the brinksmanship caused by the Teapublicons caused the downgrade?

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:42 pm

  187. tifosa, the “brinkmanship” was Obama’s. Why are you not embarrassed by his brinkmanship? Not to mention that he flip-flopped from one demand to its opposite week by week?

    You really don’t have a clue about these topics at all, do you?

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:48 pm

  188. In tifosa’s world, ad Homs are bad, but overt lying is hunky dorey.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:49 pm

  189. You live in an alternate universe of “facts.” Interesting though… ;)

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:52 pm

  190. You can read the S&P downgrade pdf and come out with “Obama caused the brinksmanship….”

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:54 pm

  191. You live in an alternate world where reality is only acceptable if it coincides with your agenda… I hope your ready for the thrashing you will receive in the polls by 2012 :evil:

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:56 pm

  192. You need to go see a shrink.

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:56 pm

  193. I am a shrink, sort of :p

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:58 pm

  194. well, in between trips to the mailbox for welfare checks

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:59 pm

  195. tifosa, yes you can. But that’s because I actually read the S&P report. Obviously you did not.

    But more to my actual point rather than your pathetic strawman, Obama started off demanding a “clean” debt ceiling increase, and switched to threatening a veto of a “clean” debt ceiling increase.

    Yet more examples of how ignorant you are in this topic.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 12:59 pm

  196. had it been clean, no downgrade

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:00 pm

  197. tifosa, not true. The S&P report specifically cited that there was no adequate solution to out of control deficit spending.

    Its in the actual S&P report, the one that you didn’t read.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:01 pm

  198. tifosa, you really need to pay attention to reality. Because your comments are getting farther and farther from reality.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:02 pm

  199. I am a shrink, sort of :p
    Comment by tifosa — 9/7/2011 @ 12:58 pm

    Let me guess… social worker?

    Comment by Stashiu3 (601b7d) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:03 pm

  200. However, tifosa, lets assume your false claim that a clean debt ceiling bill would have resulted in no downgrade. Then Obama’s threat to veto a “clean” bill was the cause of the downgrade.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:03 pm

  201. Stashiu he means shrunken testicles.

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:13 pm

  202. Patterico/Stashiu3 – does this software allow for a given comment to show up as some form of minimised – where one can see that it is there, but one does not have to see the actual words it contains ?

    While my comments can be obscure/excessively-punny-for-some-tastes, our new little friend tifosa is being way too successful at baiting regulars who should *know* better!

    Perhaps if the actual words were not visible until one clicked on something to ‘open up’ the full text, that could simplify our respective lives and our enjoyment of this fine blog ?

    Does anyone else have comments/opinions on this idea ?

    Comment by Alasdair (86b5c7) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:20 pm

  203. (And, yes, in the bold text, I am channeling Billy Connolly ! (grin)

    Comment by Alasdair (86b5c7) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:20 pm

  204. Tifosa ran off like a dog with its tail tucked between its legs.

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:23 pm

  205. Alasdair,

    No, there is no option like that I’m aware of. There is an “ignore” script available. I don’t use it because I need to see all the comments, but I highly recommend it’s use in select cases. It has to be installed by each individual user however.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (601b7d) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:23 pm

  206. hahahah lmao at the comments

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:29 pm

  207. oh you’re big boys and girls, just ignore…good grief

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:30 pm

  208. When I leave I leave, not “run off like a dog” hahahahaha

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:31 pm

  209. “Caption for the Bush photo, above:
    “I’m smiling because I didn’t have to deal with those crazed triangle-heads, when I was in the WH. Dick Cheney and Karl Rove took care of everything for me, God bless `em” LOL

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:41 pm

  210. White House-Who is this Tifosa guy?

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:47 pm

  211. tiffy, like all Leftists, can never feel shame, for they would have to renounce the entire history of their movement,
    thereby destroying their entire identity, revealing themselves for the non-entities that they are.
    Little zero’s, like their Big Zero!

    Comment by Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (64cedc) — 9/7/2011 @ 1:48 pm

  212. #ReaganDebate Pre-show at 7:30. Lotsa choices, jiffy-pop, Orville Reddenbacher, or pop secret!

    Comment by tifosa (bea49c) — 9/7/2011 @ 2:05 pm

  213. DohBiden, someone who thinks plagiarized snark substitutes for an understanding of the issues.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:37 pm

  214. Tifosa is funnier if you pretend it’s Helen Thomas. Same intellectual level.

    Comment by Dustin (b2fb78) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:40 pm

  215. Crazed triangle heads is not ad hom. No way.

    Comment by JD (7c90f3) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:42 pm

  216. “well, in between trips to the mailbox for welfare checks”

    That sums up lefties perfectly.

    Who care whether they’re polite or not? They’re using government to steal OUR money. And we need to put a stop to it, by any means necessary…including violence, if you ask me.

    So, why beat around the bush? Lefties are a bunch of lying thieves and, they need to have the bejesus beat out of them…either figuratively (at the ballot box) or literally…or we’re all going to wind up in the poor house because we have to pay THEIR bills.

    Comment by Dave Surls (a65c62) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:47 pm

  217. tifosa believably wrote:

    well, in between trips to the mailbox for welfare checks

    Dude! You’re computer and internet literate enough to at least read — note: this does not necessarily imply read with comprehension — and write on this blog, but you can’t figure out how to get your welfare checks directly deposited?

    Comment by The computer-savvy Dana (f68855) — 9/7/2011 @ 6:30 pm

  218. Oh, those fun-loving, well-meaning union guys.

    Comment by Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 9/8/2011 @ 8:50 am

  219. Liberals like communists don’t believe in actual liberalism.

    Comment by DohBiden (d54602) — 9/18/2011 @ 10:16 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4450 secs.