Patterico's Pontifications

5/5/2017

Practiced In The Art Of Deception

Filed under: General — Dana @ 8:35 am



[guest post by Dana]

PP

Focus your attention on our righteous sounding words, not on what we actually do.

And don’t let those silent screams distract you.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

44 Responses to “Practiced In The Art Of Deception”

  1. Good morning.

    Dana (023079)

  2. twitter’s just gay

    doing twitters on my doesn’t move the dial in terms of making me give more or less of a poop about other people’s wiggly giggly fetuses

    i love that it’s friday

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  3. The proof that America has disappeared down the rabbit hole of Newspeak is that so many will not see that tweet as hypocrisy and nod their heads in agreement.

    https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-X3svqfUCcR0/WQaCmuSNE3I/AAAAAAABI58/WeBZxbRTo_AiU-MrMqINmXStYDQvLBj8ACLcB/s1600/1ninetymiles5tP051s6lzfwo1_1280.jpg

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  4. There’s a reason I call them moloch’ s minions.

    narciso (945a51)

  5. oh.

    that should have said doing twitters on *me*

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  6. Mr. Reverend i don’t think that sounds like something winston churchy-poop would’ve ever said

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  7. The biggest favor “Those entrusted to protect them” can do for the “no one[s] [who] should fear” is teach them to keep their legs together, I think.

    nk (dbc370)

  8. No, Winston Churchill did not say that. What he did say is: You can pass off all kinds of bullsh!t if you put a famous person’s name after it.

    nk (dbc370)

  9. … you can tell by their bloodstained hands…

    They shouldn’t get the funding they want.

    Colonel Haiku (9298f8)

  10. Thank you nk, for enlightening me. Thanks also for the link. I always thought Gandhi said, “An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind” too. However, regardless of who said them they are both quite true so I don’t think just because these guys didn’t say it means they’re “bullsh!t” as you so gently put it. Hey, can I take credit since neither Churchill or Gandhi have copyrights?

    It is quite revealing that both nk and happyfeet were more interested in the person who was attributed to the saying than they were to the truth underlying the saying itself. Does that mean something is only correct if the “right” person says it? Or does it mean there was more interest generated by my screw-up than the idea behind the statements? As Napoleon once said: “We may never know”. “Nous ne pouvons jamais savoir” (it’s better in the French).

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  11. What he did say is: You can pass off all kinds of bullsh!t if you put a famous person’s name after it.

    Really? Or are you just makin’ that bullsh!t up?

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  12. I can’t take credit for making it up, I only paraphrased it, and I doubt that either Abraham Lincoln or Winston Churchill said it. It mocks statements which seek credibility from attribution to a famous person. “Well, Winston Churchill said it, so it must be so. You gonna argue with Winston Churchill?”

    nk (dbc370)

  13. But many fascists except only in name, in Churchill’s own time and in our own, have called themselves anti-fascist. A famous one is the late Hugo Chavez, who became even more famous when he called the Spanish prime minister a fascist and the King of Spain told him to shut up.

    nk (dbc370)

  14. “We need to protect the children, unless they’re inconvenient”

    harkin (dbcc1e)

  15. I must be the exception to the rule but I don’t seek credibility of a statement by whom it is attributed. I seek it by what I consider the validity of the statement itself. The attribution, if famous, is just a conversational plus but it is nice if it is correct nonetheless.

    Besides I could accurately quote a cockhol$ter like Colbert quite accurately but I doubt very much it would carry much veritas. The guy’s a douche. See, I can quote you because I trust you from experience. I don’t know Colbert or Churchill although I can assume one to be honest. Guess which one. Go ahead, guess.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  16. 14.“We need to protect the children, unless they’re inconvenient”

    Let me guess harkin, Casey Anthony?

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  17. Well, in WWII (the Big One), the Soviets were saying they were fighting fascism although there was not one hair of a difference between Hitler’s way of governing and Stalin’s way of governing. So for the Soviets the statement is correct.

    However, at the same time, America and Britain were also saying that they were fighting fascism but I wouldn’t say that for them the statement is correct.

    These days, fascism is a catchword of the Left which has deteriorated to “I don’t like you” and used indiscriminately by all sides.

    nk (dbc370)

  18. i have no clue as to what that tweet means.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  19. I don’t get that example @17, nk. We were fighting fascism. It’s the Soviets who were merely fighting a Nazi version of themselves.

    18.i have no clue as to what that tweet means.
    AZ Bob (f7a491) — 5/5/2017 @ 10:55 am

    That’s because it’s the usual gobbledygook pabulum leftist pour out about bull crap “justice” in every rant they attempt, AZ Bob. You’re not alone. One must have a sophisticated mind educated at only the finest colleges in America to think as foolishly as the person who wrote that tweet. It takes a lot of schoolin’ to get that phukin’ stooped.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  20. Way OT, “Wrong Curiel, you idiots!”
    http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/05/05/san-francisco-sinkhole-swallows-truck.html

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  21. Some fascists call themselves anti-fascist. Not everyone who is called anti-fascist is a fascist.

    nk (dbc370)

  22. i have no clue as to what that tweet means.
    AZ Bob (f7a491)

    Ditto

    Patricia (5fc097)

  23. The way I read the tweet, Planned Parenthood is showing support for President Trump. The American electorate has entrusted him to protect us and he will keep us free from violence and insure reproductive justice.

    Yeah, I’m kidding.

    nk (dbc370)

  24. Re: #21, and that’s why I trust you, nk. That’s a reasonable statement made by a reasonable man. The ability for those of us who are reasonable to distinguish that those who call themselves “Antifa” are in fact the fascists. And they are dangerous. Our Republic can be strengthened by dissent but it is threatened by sedition. The Antifa is sedition.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  25. It’s not sedition. It’s plain and simple thuggery. Which is what makes the PP tweet stupid, because the antifas are on PP’s side.

    kishnevi (41a4d3)

  26. I disagree kishnevi. Antifa’s actions and tactics may be thuggery but their motivations and strategy are sedition. IMO.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  27. Greetings:

    And the lying lips, having again lied, lied on.

    11B40 (6abb5c)

  28. No clue? But you’ve heard it a million times!

    It is the self-anointment incantation of the God-less. The Tweet references all the New Age virtues. Read it again, but this time imagine it is Linus van Pelt reading the words, then you’ll get it.

    A good friend, who is also a good liberal, was yammering on about something and he used used the word “sustainable” to describe it. So I asked him what “sustainable” meant. He puzzled over it for a while and then said “I don’t know,” and then he went on. To him, the word simply meant good or godly (in the low-G sense).

    That’s the point. These holy words don’t have to mean anything in the normal sense, though they are important none-the-less. Just as some conventionally religious individuals pepper their conversations with praises and thanks to God, these New Age holy words signify devotion and that’s enough.

    The one thing I can’t tell you is what the appropriate response to such a message. Could somebody please tell me what the New Age equivalent is to Hallelujah, Brother!

    ThOR (c9324e)

  29. The antifas might be on PP’s side, but those that the antifa have engaged or earned defense from are at worst largely indifferent and at best quietly supportive (calling to mind the non-religious Right that Glenn Reynolds says that the left should pray never comes to power) of PP.

    Frankly, as juxtaposed, the 2 distinct sentences make no sense together. Sentence #1 is an entree to tort liability (holding PP accountable for a Rx mixup or botched procedure) or a statement referring to PP’s intention to hold politicians who supported the AHCA accountable as in attempt to vote them out. Sentence #2 just seems random as F, but “righteous-sounding”.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  30. Newspeak doesn’t have to make sense, the intention is to reduce thought crime just as the intent of introducing antifa is to re-categorize brown shirt or common thug. The PP baby butchers know what they’re doing.

    Rick Ballard (313992)

  31. A measured and informative post by __ at NRO’s The Corner, , concludes:

    This is spot on, but I’m lukewarm about the term “abortion corporation.” In these days when the ridiculously misinformed Left are so continuously agitated about Citizens United and wicked corporations as boogeymen, “abortion corporation” has assonance going for it, but doesn’t quite punch as hard as it should.

    I’ve always just called Planned Parenthood “the National Abortion Factory,” but YMMV.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  32. ACK: Trying again with links and the quote:

    A measured and informative post by Alexandra DeSantis at NRO’s The Corner, In Meeting with Ivanka, Cecile Richards Shows Her Hand on Abortion, concludes:

    The fact that Richards spurned Ivanka’s compromise shouldn’t come as a shock to anyone who sees the group for what it truly is: first and foremost, an abortion corporation. What should surprise us is how Planned Parenthood still manages to deceive so many Americans into believing that it is anything but.

    This is spot on, but I’m lukewarm about the term “abortion corporation.” In these days when the ridiculously misinformed Left are so continuously agitated about Citizens United and wicked corporations as boogeymen, “abortion corporation” has assonance going for it, but doesn’t quite punch as hard as it should.

    I’ve always just called Planned Parenthood “the National Abortion Factory,” but YMMV.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  33. Beldar, I reflexively thought of your dad when I heard Don Rickles died. Like your dad he served in an auxiliary ship during WWII. The USS Cyrene. The mission was of course different. The Cyrene’s job was to repair, maintain, rearm, refuel, and victual motor torpedo boats.

    Rickles was, to me, the quintessential Navy man. Everybody who knew him said he was a kind and gentle man. So he he had a wit that that would cut you to the bone, but he was always your shipmate.

    I hope he and your father are trading barbs in Heaven. My father, too.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  34. I thought CPO Sharkey was hilarious, but considering its short run I was clearly in the minority.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  35. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOcWkUxbP8s

    “Don Rickles final speech at tribute to Don Rickles (sub Ita)”

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  36. My dad used to watch him on “The Tonight Show,” and thought he was hilarious, Steve57. Thanks! 😉

    Beldar (fa637a)

  37. i mean this from the bottom of my heart, Beldar. I never liked you.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  38. Planned Parenthood rides the double-edged scalpel of Pro-Choice, denying life unworthy and clinical cannibalism for political progress.

    I wonder if they are active in demographic replacement through mass immigration.

    n.n (37e3bd)

  39. Reproductive justice is to elective abortion as social justice is to elective regime change.

    n.n (37e3bd)

  40. Is it just me, or does that not explain infanticide truly is? A mother is entrusted to protect the child growing inside her, and is not only allowed under the law, but in some cases, encouraged to murder her child. This is going to backfire on Planned Genocide wonderfully.

    Let me add, its time to stop referring to this ritualistic murder as abortion. Plans are aborted. Missions are aborted. Murdering a child, born or otherwise, is murder. And in this case, infanticide is the most apt description of what it truly is. Stop sugar coating this satanic practice with niceties. Words have meaning, and its time to say what we mean.

    Joel Walbert (0516c3)

  41. @Joel, Serena Williams wrote this about her unborn child.

    https://au.sports.yahoo.com/tennis/a/35155744/serena-williams-posts-touching-tribute-to-unborn-child/#page1

    Fetus means in Latin offspring. It means your child. Yet under American law women get to kill their own offspring. There was a monstrous exchange between a Planned Parenthood rep and Florida legislators over a bill that would require abortionists to provide care for any baby born alive. The PP rep was dead set against it.

    I have yet to have someone explain to me how a woman’s life or health is aided by knowing her child is dead.

    How is it that we can pretend the child is only a child if the mother admits it’s a child?

    I risk becoming a judgemental prude, and indeed there is more right than wrong here in how Serena Williams went about it in that the end result will be a child. But it’s already a child, even before the child is born. And Serena Williams knows this. Every human being knows this.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  42. This place has come a long way over the years from when I used to relentlessly argue for pro-life. Nice to see.

    Amphipolis (d3e04f)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1037 secs.