VIDEO: Palin Won’t Condemn Birthers In Tea Party Movement
Tweet
Can’t piss off such a strong segment of the base.
92 Responses to “VIDEO: Palin Won’t Condemn Birthers In Tea Party Movement”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
David Broder will memory hole this
Wow, it’s pretty hard to make Billo sound like the voice of reason, but Sarah pulls it off without working up a sweat.
Gee, it’s really too, too bad that Sarah Palin hasn’t already been named Honorary President and Spokesperson of the Tea Party of America so she can say who gets membership and who doesn’t. Who she has authority to condemn and who she won’t condemn.
Here, Sarah, watch how a real pro does it:
John Kerry Says WTC 7 Brought Down In Controlled Fashion
Rather than condemn 9/11 truthers, he says he’d be willing to look into any theory “based on fact.”, and “I haven’t been informed about that enough to have an opinion.” Imagine the absurdity of that statement at that point
Sarah just isn’t quite as smooth as John F. Kerry, is she?
And Sarah, not until after you’ve mastered that guy’s technique will you be ready to graduate to this guy’s level.
I gotta admit, this guy was smooth.
John Edwards Confronted About 911 and WTC7
Nope. She’s not. She’s also not as smart as a fifth grader. What’s your point? Let’s make this real simple, where do you stand on the issue? How about this, do you agree with Sarah and her birther beliefs?
Too bad you don’t have the cojones to tell us your views on whether Obama was born a US citizen or not, Dennis.
Sure I do, Dark Avenger. You’re not trying to hit on me to get a mouthful of them, are you?
Also, I’m glad you’re using failed presidential candidates in your analogy to Palin. She will be another loser if she decides to run.
I’ll make it real simple for you. I’ve never at any time thought this was an issue, Joey Donuts.
Do you even know what Sarah’s ‘birther beliefs’ are?
Wow, you rushed in here to defend your girl.
First off, John Kerry in the video you linked to talked about one of the smaller buildings after the WTC attacks; not that 9/11 was an inside job.
Second, you don’t see Sen. Kerry or Sen. Edwards constantly say that the 9/11 truthers have a right to pose questions.
I am glad that you constantly defend her, though. When she eventually runs and makes a complete ass of herself, we will have folks like you to thank for giving the Democratic party an easy ride in 2012.
I love the weaseling here. “I never thought of it as an issue”.
LOL!
Point blank, dude. Do you feel President Obama is a citizen or not?
Well to be honest I do not. Since you are clearly the subject matter expert on the woman, I’m gonna defer to you. If it is determined she supports the concerns of the birthers, will you condemn her. My last name is spelled Doughnuts btw.
Yes, I do, Chris.
Dennis, coupla questions for ya buddy.
John Kerry does not say that “he’d be willing to look into any theory ‘based on fact.’” in the video you linked to. He doesn’t say anything even close to that.
Could you link to the video where he does say this?
When one googles, +John Kerry “he’d be willing to look into any theory ‘based on fact.’” two items show up: This post on Oliver’s blog and a post at Ace of Spades from 2007 which paraphrases Kerry in a manner very similar to your paraphrasing:
Given that Kerry clearly does not say the phrase “based on fact” or anything close to something that could be paraphrased as “he’d be willing to look into any theory ‘based on fact’” in the video that you linked to, is this not just another example of “Cut and Paste” Dennis allowing someone else to do his faulty thinking for him?
Also from the Ace of Spades post from 2007:
Dennis, you cited this as an exact quote from Kerry but he doesn’t say that in the video you linked to either.
Not even Ace, in his post, attributes this statement to Kerry. Ace is actually using it rhetorically as a phrase “used by politicians to dodge questions.”
And yet here you are attributing that quote to Kerry and linking to a video in which he says no such thing.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/223825.php
National Review:
John Kerry Inadvertently Concedes Points to 9/11 Conspiracy Theorist
You need to either get up earlier or work a whole lot harder, fafaroo.
Fail.
Sometimes it’s better to wait before you pounce, fafaroo. Think it over first, maybe sit on it for a while and see if you get any sparks of inspiration or any new lines of attack. Then be smart about it. Don’t just go in guns blazing all half-cocked like a 20 year old college student who’s in love with google and wikipedia.
Remember, first with the head, then with the heart.
Ah Dennis, the 24-hour Sarah Palin defense bot.
No matter what scurrilous libel the liberal weasels fling Sarah’s way, our hero Dennis, armed with nothing but google and a extra-large Costco gross of No-doz, can be counted on to find some Democrat somewhere at some point in history who has done something vaguely similar.
Doesn’t matter if the comparison is farfetched, tenuous, or even completely imaginary. Onward Dennis forges, with absolutely no regard for how ridiculous it makes him look. The dignity and integrity of one small human being does not amount to a hill of beans when the reputation of the Hoo-yeah, hot! future savior of the American Way is at stake.
Dennis, the pride and joy of the Starburst Academy.
Just asking questions, Dennis.
Maybe next time you’ll want to start with full quotations and links to your sources, instead of just ripping off other peoples posts and passing them off as your own “ideas.”
Oh and Dennis, if you’re going to rip off a post from someone accusing Kerry of conspiracy theory mongering, maybe Ace of Spades isn’t the best site to rip off:
“9/11 Commission Suppressed Evidence of Links Between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein”
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/114809.php
Hey! Maybe Palin can team up with another of Dennis’ favorite won’t-dispute-the-birthers Republicans!
What was her name again?
The fact that you can’t offer a straightforward answer to a simple question tells us more about what you’re lacking than what you have physically.
You’re not trying to hit on me to get a mouthful of them, are you?
Actually, I’d rather quote someone who appreciates Palin and folks like you more than I do:
Cavuto on the tea baggers
Cavuto on the teabaggers
When leading Democrats condemn for once their lunatic Nutroots Internet base then Sarah Palin should condemn the Tea Party movement. Why do leftwingers FEAR dissent and people who don’t agree with them?
Kevin H.,
To be fair, Evan Bayh did have some harsh words for nutroots bloggers and all the damage they are doing to the Democratic Party a couple days ago when he announced he wasn’t going to seek reelection.
And don’t quote me on this, but Obama recently told people to stop reading them. Blogs at least; I don’t think he mentioned any of the extreme ones by name.
Just asking questions, Dennis.
No, fafaroo, you weren’t “just asking questions”. You did shoddy work, you screwed up and you made accusations that were wrong and that you couldn’t back up, thinking all along that you were being a combination of Sherlock Holmes and Perry Mason. In the end, you were Inspector Clouseau. Without the decency to admit you fucked up or offer any sort of apology.
Again, if you’re so worried about cut and paste, why don’t you supersleuth this blog post and ask OW where he got his info and commentary?
Yes, sometimes I worry about Dennis using up his allotted amount
of psychic bandwidth defending Silly Sarah. And as Sarah is hellbent on
riding the crazy train every couple of days–I marvel at Dennis’ energy to
defend every bit of lunacy emanating from her as he runs down the tracks
trying to keep up.
First, Gov Palin did not condemn the “birthers” . She is not required to. She said they deserve a “seat at the table” because they have a First Amendment right to political free speech , which they do. She blew off O’Reilly’s silly inference that the “birthers” should be denounced to appease the MSM, because it was , well, silly. [ Mr O'Reilly "the spin stops here" guy is not always the tough guy he pretends to be, now, is he? ].
Final score? Nothing to see here… Move along.
You write far more than I do about Sarah Palin over at HuffPo, Leota2.
You define the word hypocrite.
not that 9/11 was an inside job.
Democratics leave that sort of heavy lifting to Dr. Dean.
Kevin, don’t be a Dennis. Name a demonstrable non-truth that has been spread by the liberal “nutroots”, given voice repeatedly by major media, and given at least some credence by a large percentage of the liberal electorate. WTC7 doesn’t qualify.
In the clips Dennis posted it’s clear that Kerry and Edwards simply had no idea what they were being asked about. This is plausible because the 9/11 truthers are a tiny, insignificant minority with next to no media exposure.
Palin has no such excuse. Birthers constitute as much as half of the republican party, major birther figures like Orly Taitz get exposure not only on the wacko right Fox network but on so-called mainstream media. Unless it’s just another example of her stupendous ignorance of issues that even junior high schoolers are up on, she knew exactly what she was being asked about.
Example #214892 of the general proposition that whenever Frank says “nothing to see here…” it’s because there is something to see.
Sarah could have easily distanced herself from the birthers while affirming their first amendment rights to say stupid things. She failed to do so, thereby giving aid and comfort to lunacy.
Oh Dennis–you hurt my feelings. I’m going to stop posting about Sarah now.
Ummm, okay no you didn’t–and no, I won’t. But it’s nice to have a stalker.
What will Sarah think?
Wilbur, that statement that Kerry and Edwards didn’t know the question is far-fetched that if not coming from you would be laughable and absurd. Both Kerry and Edwards had to have been aware of the 9/11 truthers and their conspiracy theories by 2007 and they both had to be knowing they were being asked to make a statement that they knew they didn’t even remotely want to address. So they both acted like the dodo’s they are and pretended they had no knowledge but would look into it and get back. This is of course acceptable to you. Forget that they didn’t condemn this crazy talk, which is the standard you set here for Sarah Palin. As long as these crazies were implicating Bush and the Republicans, Democrats could all feign ignorance that there were a significant number of people on the left pushing this craziness. So your hypocrisy is quite evident and your ability to have double standards is amazing.
“Dean broached the possibility during a radio interview last week, but dismissed the notion in the same breath. A spokeswoman said Monday the former Vermont governor “obviously doesn’t believe it’s true.”
Once again, farris’ links don’t say what he thinks they say.
If you listen to what she said in her first response, Wilbur, she did distance herself and said it shouldn’t be a part of the debate. She just didn’t condemn them. A double standard that neither you nor nutroots bloggers nor Democratic politicians did with the 9/11 truthers until way after the fact, either. You guys gave aid and comfort to lunacy, too.
Here’s Cindy Sheehan, still saying 9/11 was an inside job.
As Patterico says in the post, “Don’t expect an apology from any of the media nitwits who puffed this woman up during Bush’s presidency. They accomplished their goal: getting a Democrat elected in 2008. If their heroine Cindy Sheehan turns out to have been a lunatic, well, that’s life.”
Seriously, Wilbur, you guys are amazing.
I thought yours and Oliver’s standard was that Palin didn’t condemn the birthers, Enlightened Liberal. And Wilbur’s charge that she gave aid and comfort to lunacy, ask yourself if that’s not exactly what Dr. Dean did.
The answer is yes, he did.
Your point would be relevant if Sheehan had run for any political office like VPOTUS, but thanks for playing false equivalency again, Dennis.
Post all you want, Leota2, here or anywhere else you prefer about anything your heart desires; that’s not the point.
Being shown to be a liberal hypocrite shouldn’t really hurt your feelings. If it does, you aren’t really a true liberal. Be proud of who you are.
That’s one of the few things he’s good at, Dark Avenger. Can’t blame someone for sticking to their strengths.
The point is you guys are very fond of double standards. How long did it take prominent Dem pols start to condemning 9/11 lunacy? At what point did you realize it was ridiculous to the point that it should be condemned, as Oliver and MMFA is ridiculing Palin for here?
Here’s a hint….it was a lot longer than a year and a half. If you were holding Dems to the same standards, there should be a trail a mile long on the internet of people speaking out vehemently about it right about at the 2003-4 time period. By what I can tell, it wasn’t until Bill Maher and Bill Clinton told some of them following them they were crazy or ‘How dare you?’ that there was any condemning from your side going on.
It’s a nice alternative universe you guys live in, isn’t it? I just don’t understand why you all aren’t a whole lot happier in it.
Hey spring chicken,
OT, so I’ll be brief. More eerie parallels to you and Amy Bishop…
“I am Amy Bishop!”
Woah.
Both Kerry and Edwards had to have been aware of the 9/11 truthers and their conspiracy theories by 2007 and they both had to be knowing they were being asked to make a statement that they knew they didn’t even remotely want to address.
Kinda sad for you that you have to resort to such insane conspiracy theories of your own, but for us I’ve gotta admit that it’s kinda fun to watch.
Fact is, you got nuthin. If someone had asked Kerry or Edwards “do you believe that there should be an investigation to determine if 9/11 was an inside job” and they’d said something like what Palin said, then you would have a parallel. If someone nowadays asked a major Dem politician “Do you agree with Cindy Sheehan when she says there should be an investigation…” then you would have a parallel. If this is the best you got, you got nothin.
Fact is, 9/11 truthers have no impact on the debate on the liberal side, whereas the birthers, the secret muslimers, the world governemnters, the racists, account for a huge chunk of the republican base. Whistle past the graveyard all you want, people like Palin are walking a tightrope between alienating their loony base and alienating every sane voter in America. It’s a big problem for them, and will probably only get bigger, which is while you’ll continue to see Palin and others engage in mealy-mouthed equivocation when asked point-blank about such issues.
Three people were violently murdered mere days ago, and yet the only reason you give a shit about it is because you can make snide comments and poorly-considered, faulty parallels between the murderer and someone on a political blog. What kind of person does this? My guesses are that you are just a completely miserable asshole, and/or you make this kind of off-topic insult because I routinely make you look like the fool you are.
You simply cannot deal with the fact that you are intellectually inferior to a person (in fact, a number of people on this board) who holds diametrically opposing political views from you. Maybe you can’t handle the fact that I, an intelligent person, came to be a liberal from a reasoned analysis and logical thought processes. Because if I did that, then that might call into question your own political beliefs… how could we both be rational and logical when we disagree so strongly? Clearly, ONE of us has to be wrong. Since I am your intellectual superior, the odds are that you are probably wrong.
And this drives you batty.
I kinda like that I don’t even have to post new content anymore to respond to your absurd posts. You’re not even trying anymore, Dennis. Shut the fuck up.
The parallels between you and Amy Bishop are astounding. She thought she was highly intelligent, too, and therefore the one in the right all the time. Her superiors rejected and she went nuts. She couldn’t handle reality or living in a world where she had to get along with people she felt were inferior. The list of commonalities is long.
You are someone that needs to be monitored, spring chicken.
Has anybody asked a major Dem. on teevee whether he/she agrees with Cindy Sheehan that there should be an investigation?
Answer, no. The question is ridiculous on the face of it: it would never occur to any interviewer to ask that because the answer is obvious and predictable.
What’s interesting is that the answer of the likes of Palin to a similar question about the birthers is not so obvious and predictable.
So Dem. politicians are supposed to proactively come out and quash any fool thing that gets said by some fringe group?
None of us is saying that Palin should deny every idiot thing that comes out of the mouth of every idiot teabagger. But when she is asked _point blank_ about something that not one, not two, but millions of her base buy into, it’s not unreasonable to expect her to speak some sense on the issue.
If any of us has a double standard around here it’s you, my friend.
You have three quite revealing examples with video and/or transcripts of mealy-mouthed equivocation in Kerry, Edwards and Dean right here, Wilbur. You’re the one with nuthin’. The number of people who thought Bush knew about 9/11 beforehand and/or believed it was an inside job or conspiracy back around the 2004 election approached the same number polled currently who have questions about Obama’s birth certificate. You not only cling to your double standards and blatant hypocrisies, you also have a very short memory, Wilbur.
Not what O’Reilly asked her, Wilbur. How is the question he asked her similar to asking if there should be an investigation into the birth certificate?
I don’t think you even watched the video.
It’s not enough for you to be stupid, deceitful, and willfully ignorant… you have to be an awful human being to boot. Good for you, Dennis, you’re officially a waste of perfectly good living tissue.
You know, Dennis, you clog up enough of these threads with your own brand of stupid so could you give us all a break and stop plagiarizing other people’s stupid as well?
You posted a video that didn’t corroborate what you claimed Kerry said so I googled what you claimed to be direct quotes from Kerry. It turned out that you plagiarized an Ace of Spades post from 2007 only the you tube video Ace linked to was pulled down so what did you do? Pulled a different snippet of the event, obviously without even watching it, and linked to it as if it verified what you were saying.
So you’re a plagiarizing sack of shit in addition to being a complete moron:
Here, Wilbur:
October 26th, 2007
Bill Clinton Tells 9/11 Truthers To Go To Hell
2007, Wilbur. Oliver’s comment? “About time somebody told them.”
October of 2007! “About time”, Oliver says.
Now go read some of the comments and try to defend that you guys aren’t so full of double standard blindness that it’s not even funny.
Here’s one: OW- “Al Gore says it’s outside of the realm of possibility, but clearly in Jay’s ads that’s a tacit endorsement of their conspiracy theory. Only in the head of a conservative.”
So Al Gore says it’s outside the realm of possibility, but doesn’t condemn them per se, as you are expecting Sarah Palin to do in this clip, and Oliver scoffs at Jay for asking why he didn’t, that not condemning 9/11 truthers is in no way a tacit endorsement of their conspiracy theory.
Now with Palin, he has completely reversed himself. By not condemning birthers, Palin is tacitly endorsing them and their lunacy, because she can’t piss of such a strong segment of the base.
This is the type of blatant hypocrisy that you condone, agree with and defend, Wilbur.
Pathetic and sad.
And, Dennis, I’m sure you can point us to, or completely plagiarize, the Ace of Spades post in which he goes after Palin on the birther issue.
Oh yeah, right, you can’t because the blog totally defended her previous birther comments:
Sadly Obligatory: Yes, Palin Made a Statement About “Stupid Conspiracies” Trig Trutherism…and Birtherism
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/295462.php
So please tell us again what you’re point is?
Okay Dennis— I’m a hypocrite and you’re a defender of the imaginary Palin realm.
So– I shall continue to be a liberal hypocrite and comment EVERYWHERE I can about
sleazy Sarah. And you shall continue to drop loony links, point fingers at others &
dangle shiny objects to deflect from the fact that Sarah is a-clueless nitwit.
I’m happy with my hypocritical part! How about you?
And nobody here defended Dean on that point, and he issued a statement immediately afterwards clarifying his position.
Yet here you are defending Sarah, and has Sarah issued a statement clarifying her position? If so I haven’t seen it.
Once again, Den, your desperation is showing.
As for me, Leota? I’m happy with your admission.
It’s a big step in the right direction for you.
What does she have to clarify, that Oliver and MMFA and you are wondering why she didn’t speak out on behalf of the Tea Party and condemn the birthers, that saying that that is not what the debate should be about was not strongly worded enough for you?
Get real.
You’re a coward, fafaroo. You screwed up in your elation when you thought I had plagiarized something. I shouldn’t have put the statement I haven’t been informed about that enough to have an opinion. in quotes. I saw that statement in quotes at Ace’s blog post and thought it was a quote of Kerry’s, instead it was Ace’s paraphrase of what Kerry said, as we see from the transcript that you didn’t bother to look up because you were already at that point in a state of premature ejaculation. It’s not plagiarizing in any way.
You screwed up in your elation when you thought I had plagiarized something.
Dude, you did plagiarize something. The fact that you’re also a stupid plagiarizer doesn’t change the fact.
Here’s a sentence from Ace’s post:
Now here’s your graph:
You lifted everything in bold as if it was your own work. The first part is obviously Ace paraphrasing Kerry because only the words “based on fact” are in quotes, but you cut and pasted the whole phrase anyway as if it was your own sentence.
The sentence you lifted from Ace thinking it was a direct quote which means you didn’t watch the video Ace linked to (of course, you couldn’t because it was pulled) and you clearly didn’t watch the video that you linked to in your post.
That you were too stupid to realize Ace was paraphrasing Kerry is hardly a defense, since you lifted Ace’s own words straight from the post as well.
And Dennis, the only reason why I know any of this is because I wanted to verify what you claimed were direct quotes from Kerry. Since you didn’t source the Ace of Spades post you lifted them from I had no way of knowing they were paraphrases. I took your word for it that they were direct quotes. Silly me.
Now, Dennis, since we’ve established that you like to steal stuff from Ace of Spades, perhaps you would like to weigh in on their rank hypocrisy in accusing Kerry of 9-11 conspiracy mongering while giving Palin a pass on the birther issue.
This is all about hypocrisy, isn’t it, Dennis?
I think any sentient creature (note: I’m not saying “human”, because I think the following statement would also be true of most dolphins, whales, primates and octopuses) would agree that “outside the realm of possibility” is a far firmer disavowal than “well, people will always have their own ideas and we shouldn’t take away their first amendment rights”.
The only thing with DNA that wouldn’t agree is Dexiopteryx Proctocephalus Lyssodes Americanus (aka. the common American Rightwing Asshead Loon, aka. “Dennis”).
How is the question he asked her similar to asking if there should be an investigation into the birth certificate?
How are they similar? Obviously both would be asking whether loony fringe positions in their respective camps should be taken seriously.
Problem for Palin, and other ‘gnuts, the birther movement isn’t really a loony fringe but a really loony substantial chunk of their base.
that saying that that is not what the debate should be about was not strongly worded enough for you?
No, it’s not, it’s mealy mouthed. When the public image of an organization you are associated with is in danger of being identified with the views a bunch of certifiable dickey-bats, it behooves one to be a bit more forceful.
Only slightly firmer, Wilbur. Nowhere did he condemn truthers or their right to say what they believed or that they should have no voice. Like I showed you, it wasn’t until October of 2007 that someone of any stature from your side said what Clinton said “How dare you?” October 2007, and Oliver says about time somebody stood up and said it. Implicating an entire government in orchestrating 9/11 and liberals and Dems looking the other way and not condemning it versus some people wanting to see Obama’s long form birth certificate and Sarah Palin not condemning them is the comparison you are making, Wilbur. One was perfectly fine for you, the other you are outraged. The very epitome of liberal hypocrisy. Not to mention that you won’t even dare try to take a stab at why Oliver mocked Jay then for something he is doing here right now- unless your reasoning is that Al Gore was more forceful than Palin and that’s all the difference you need to justify the flippity-flop.
And I’m happy that you continually don’t get it but always
keep on diving, deeper and deeper and deeper. . . . .
Oh, I do get it, Leota. You guys are so transparent it’s unbelievable.
Occasionally someone comes on here and admits what the strategy is, but it’s rare.
The Tea Party needs you now to organize. We want our Constitution to be “Protected” and not destroyed:
http://www.nationalprecinctalliance.org/main/getting_started
“Protected” in quotes, huh? Why is that?
Also, you’re probably advertising in the wrong place.
The victims of Amy Bishop aren’t even dead a week, Dennis. I’ll leave it to you and your friends to bash the dead as if they just shot your new family pet in your quest to demonstrate “Lefties are all bad!” by using their murderer as a prop.
Classy with a K, Dennis.
Yes, Al Gore’s statement was unequivocal. Palin’s was equivocal. That’s an important difference. Sorry, but no matter how many times you say different things are the same they’re not suddenly going to stop being different and start being the same. That’s not the way the universe works, my son.
“Birthers” constitute as much as half of the Republican party
WTF? Are you kidding me? You should have issued a beverage alert with that whopper! You probably can’t find an unreliable, half – baked nut job source for that lie, let alone a reliable cite.
You can drop that blazer with the elbow patches and the smoking pipe persona now, Wilbur. You are a mental case!
“protected” from “what”? tater head?
Frank, HERE is a pro-birther website that trumpest that statistic proudly.
Ah, you say, that’s a daily kos poll! No, Frank, it is a Research 2000 poll paid for by Daily Kos. Ah, but, you say, surely Daily Kos somehow suborns Research 2000 to produce crooked polls! Prove it, I say.
Anyhow, lets cut the figure by half to discount for any crookedness. You’ve still got a way bigger birther problem among the R’s than you have a truther problem amongst the D’s. Way bigger. To compare the two is just silly.
Blazer, elbow patches and pipe? Sorry Frank, I’m more the Merino sweater, gauloise and grappa type.
Yawn . . . . .
Best ways to protect the constitution:
-Remove the Bush administration from power
-nominate non-right-wing-ideologue judges, especially to the SC
-improve FISA-like processes so that security against terrorism can be enhanced without impinging on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens
-end discriminatory policies that subvert the equal protection provisions of the constitution, particularly in the realm of marriage and DADT.
-amend Senate rules to prevent constitutional processes from being stymied by abuse of the extraconstitutional power of the filibuster.
The Obama administration has already achieved the first, begun the second, made some small (too small) progress on the third, sniffed around the fourth and needs to get its collective ass cracking on the fifth.
I think I know what he means.
“Nice Constitution you got there. Would be a shame if something were to happen to it.”
She is not required to. She said they deserve a “seat at the table” because they have a First Amendment right to political free speech , which they do.
Frank, you’re confusing the right to free speech with the right to be taken seriously.
Take Dennis, for example. No one here is going to take his right away to be constantly wrong and vile. But likewise, we are not obliged to treat him with any sort of respect, much less reverence, whatsoever, nor should we.
Now I remember. I think it was…Schmidt?
Zython, don’t ever , ever , use a response to me, to insult another commenter again. That is toady, juvenile and despicable.
You had better get a hold of some maturity if you wish to prosper in the adult world, or acquire some mad martial arts skills pronto.
I see a life of ass kickings in your future , otherwise.
BTW, you know what set me off ? You, and every one here, is obliged to treat everyone else here with respect, as they are you. You are just plain wrong. I will not respond to any more of your comments, under any circumstances. As you said , I will no longer confuse your right to free speech with the right to be taken seriously.
waaaaaaah!
Zython, don’t ever , ever , use a response to me, to insult another commenter again.
Would you have preferred me to use you and my example?
You, and every one here, is obliged to treat everyone else here with respect, as they are you.
Technically, no, we’re not, but I see what you’re saying. What I should’ve said was we’re not obliged to respect his ideas. Before you say anything, I’m pretty sure there are ideas that you don’t respect, and that many of those ideas we both don’t.
As you said , I will no longer confuse your right to free speech with the right to be taken seriously.
Now you’re getting it!
I don’t think you even watched the video.
Did you write this with a straight face, Dennis?
Mambo and Zython: If only you knew how easy it is to be a wiseass, you wouldn’t be preening and crowing about your ability to be one.
I was the foolish one who continued to contend with you as if you had something substantive and meaningful to contribute to this blog.
How foolish I was: You are trolls in the conventional, original sense of the word, “… an Internet troll is someone who abuses their online anonymity by purposely sowing hatred, bigotry, racism, mysogyny, or just simple bickering between others…”.
Frank, he even sowed his bigotry, racism and misogyny all three at another blog, all in one hate-filled post. Only he did it posing as another person, using her real name. I don’t know if that comes under the definition of the word troll, but it’s about one of the most scumbag things I’ve ever seen done on the internets. And the most revealing, too. The truth came out, as it always does with guys like him and mambo.
Ok, at this point, I know you’re just complaining for the sake of complaining.
And Dennis, stop drunk dialing me.
Why would you pose another person and attribute racist and bigoted statements to that person unless you harbored racist and bigoted sentiments yourself?
Stay classy, Zython.
Whatever, Dennis, you have nothing on me except conjectures. But go ahead and continue your whining.
Well, no, not just conjectures. Enough incontrovertible evidence that you broke down and admitted it; you just don’t remember it.
You admitted it and you justified doing it because you claimed the conservative blogger smeared Code Pink protesters with a photo-shopped picture. Even if that was true, what you did was far worse.
And Zython, you wouldn’t be attributing racist and bigoted statements to someone else in an attempt to smear them unless you harbored those same sentiments yourself and that was a convenient way to get them out of your system.
Calling you a scuzz bucket is an insult to scuzz buckets.
You admitted it and you justified doing it because you claimed the conservative blogger smeared Code Pink protesters with a photo-shopped picture. Even if that was true, what you did was far worse.
Translation: “IOKIYAR”
No, Zython, no racism, bigotry, anti-Semiticism or misogyny like what you displayed in that post is ok if you’re a Republican or a Democrat.
If any Republican said anything half as despicable as what you said, I’d call them a scuzz bucket too.
I’ll believe it when I see it.
Show me a rant half as racist as yours, Zython, and you’ll see.