1 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 11:46:51am

But but Megyn Kelly said no major broadcaster at Fox ever spouts NAzi stuff that she can recall! She watches Fox all the time! She said it with a straight face! She would never lie! This must be a librul frame up!

2 CarleeCork  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 11:49:09am

It only means she can lie with a straight face.

3 Vicious Michigan Union Thug  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 11:49:29am

Nobody can be compared to the nazis except for other nazis.

Godwin'ing everybody you don't agree with does nothing except diminish the horrors of the real Holocaust.

4 Kronocide  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 11:49:44am

Stewart has already been knocking em out of the park recently: now they're throwing him even more hangin curveballs to hit out.

5 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 11:49:47am

re: #2 CarleeCork

It only means she can lie with a straight face.

Botox

//

6 Kragar  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 11:51:03am

re: #3 Alouette

Nobody can be compared to the nazis except for other nazis.

Godwin'ing everybody you don't agree with does nothing except diminish the horrors of the real Holocaust.

Well, Stalin and Pol Pot maybe.

7 elizajane  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 11:53:38am

OK, that was hilarious, and the speeding "but I was late!" analogy worked perfectly.

However, the fact it that the right has no recourse but to fume with indignation when the left does a smidgen of what they do all the time. Otherwise they would have nothing to be indignant about.

Running up the deficit to incredible levels? "You spendthrift, wealth-redistributing Commies, we are fiscally responsible God-fearin' folks." They have to say it. Otherwise they'd have to say, "Yep, we f*cked up, instead of banking a massive budget surplus to put Social Security into the black for generations to come, we channeled all that money to our uber-wealthy donors and started a couple of unfunded wars. Wow, that was a mistake! We're really sorry. And we won't call anybody Nazis this week either."

Not going to happen, right?

8 Vicious Michigan Union Thug  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 11:56:41am

re: #6 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Well, Stalin and Pol Pot maybe.

There should be a corollary to Godwin's Rule about comparing people to Stalin and Pol Pot.

9 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 11:57:20am

re: #7 elizajane

Started a couple of unfunded wars. I would maybe give you one but I think a little group called Al-Qaeda started the other one.

10 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 11:59:58am

Just point something out. For some time, I have been railing abuot the ablity of the wingnuts to scream A for weeks or years and then pretend they were always shouting not A with equal fervor. They are willing to lie about the most obvious things that are utterly easily fact checked.

Think about it, if they are willing to lie, unblinking about making false claims they have made dozens of times a day, day in day out for years, that they themselves broadcast over and over, and they expect you not to notice, then what other lies do they tell?

It's like a man in a gorilla suit standing in front of you claiming he is not in a gorilla suit - and then asking you to trust him on things you can't verify instantly.

11 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:02:18pm

re: #8 Alouette

There should be a corollary to Godwin's Rule about comparing people to Stalin and Pol Pot.

Except that one should not let the indignation of a false or careless comparison stop one from making an obvious comparison when people go goose stepping down the same path. The ways that the RW rhetoric echos that of the actual no-Godwin Nazis are numerous, terrifying and contagious. They will spread if we do not call it for what it is.

Never Again, implies the need for vigilance against the same evils in the future. Those evils are happening now, in America.

12 Amory Blaine  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:03:02pm

re: #9 Lateralis

Started a couple of unfunded wars. I would maybe give you one but I think a little group called Al-Qaeda started the other one.

Maybe we should have invaded Saudi Arabia considering most of the scum who attacked us came from there. Afghanistan was a reaction not well thought out. If Bush was a real leader, he wouldn't have instinctively satisfied the call for blood. But then he was the shittiest President I've ever seen.

13 Kragar  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:03:34pm

Cairo fire threatens Egypt's national museum

A fire broke out on Friday near Tahrir Square in central Cairo, where thousands of Egyptians have been protesting since Tuesday, and is currently threatening the world-famous Egyptian Museum.

The fire, which started in the offices of Egypt's ruling party, has spread to a building next to the museum, which contains the world's most famous collection of ancient Egyptian antiquities.

A powerful explosion was also heard in the area.

Some reports that protestors are breaking off from the protests to protect the museum.

14 davesax  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:03:56pm

Saw Stewart and Springsteen at John's on Bleeker two weeks ago. They were with some young guys talking music. Probably a band interviewed on Stewart's show.

15 Tigger2  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:04:17pm

re: #10 LudwigVanQuixote
"Think about it, if they are willing to lie, unblinking about making false claims they have made dozens of times a day, day in day out for years, that they themselves broadcast over and over, and they expect you not to notice, then what other lies do they tell?"

That's how propaganda and brainwashing works.

16 Stanghazi  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:05:03pm

re: #13 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Cairo fire threatens Egypt's national museum

Some reports that protestors are breaking off from the protests to protect the museum.

Al Jazeera "1000s of Egyptians form human-chain around Egypt Museum to protect it from looting" #Jan25 RT @SultanAlQassemi @gloriahere

17 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:05:49pm

re: #15 Tigger2

"Think about it, if they are willing to lie, unblinking about making false claims they have made dozens of times a day, day in day out for years, that they themselves broadcast over and over, and they expect you not to notice, then what other lies do they tell?"

That's how propaganda and brainwashing works.

And that is one of the major points of comparison to the actual no-Godwin Nazis. My complaint about Stewart here and others is that they are not linking the remaining dots.

18 Kragar  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:06:48pm
19 darthstar  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:06:59pm

China shoots down Maverick, or Goose, or someone.

At least they didn't use clips from Tora! Tora! Tora!

20 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:07:21pm

well, jonah goldberg has helpfully re-defined the word "nazi" so that every government that has ever existed in the history of the world would qualify. the republican party had already done the same thing with the word 'socialist'. so, i'm resigned to the idea that the entire world is a bunch of nazi socialists now, since all it takes, it seems, is to collect taxes and promulgate legislation

21 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:07:42pm

re: #13 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Cairo fire threatens Egypt's national museum

Some reports that protestors are breaking off from the protests to protect the museum.

That's good news.
The Al Jazeera coverage is focusing a lot on anti-American sentiment among the protesters. Let's hope that's not a sign of things to come.

22 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:07:50pm

I would like to suggest a new TAG. In addition to the /SARC tag... a /NEWTONE tag.

I am not responding to the hate rhetoric that is addressed simply to the Right, but I really think it is uncalled for, and is only gasoline for a destructive fire, and not light to show anything.

23 Kragar  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:08:55pm

re: #21 Killgore Trout

That's good news.
The Al Jazeera coverage is focusing a lot on anti-American sentiment among the protesters. Let's hope that's not a sign of things to come.

They got their gimick, they'll run with it.

24 lawhawk  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:09:03pm

re: #19 darthstar

Yeehaw... Jester's dead.... /

25 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:09:03pm

re: #22 Buck

What on earth are you talking about?

Is this just more 'The amount of vile rhetoric is equal on both sides' bullshit?

26 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:09:34pm

re: #22 Buck

I would like to suggest a new TAG. In addition to the /SARC tag... a /NEWTONE tag.

I am not responding to the hate rhetoric that is addressed simply to the Right, but I really think it is uncalled for, and is only gasoline for a destructive fire, and not light to show anything.

And the kneejerk defense of the indefensible comes from Buck right on time and without fail. You are fortunate I missed you defending Palin's Blood Libel crap. You sick bastards are ruining my nation. It is assholes like you who enable it and are too blind, arrogant and stupid to see it.

27 Ericus58  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:10:17pm

re: #21 Killgore Trout

That's good news.
The Al Jazeera coverage is focusing a lot on anti-American sentiment among the protesters. Let's hope that's not a sign of things to come.

It's Al Jazeera. It's what I would expect them to do.

28 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:10:27pm

re: #26 LudwigVanQuixote

And the kneejerk defense of the indefensible comes from Buck right on time and without fail. You are fortunate I missed you defending Palin's Blood Libel crap. You sick bastards are ruining my nation. It is assholes like you who enable it and are too blind, arrogant and stupid to see it.

Yep, there is a great example. Thanks.

29 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:11:08pm

re: #10 LudwigVanQuixote

Just point something out. For some time, I have been railing abuot the ablity of the wingnuts to scream A for weeks or years and then pretend they were always shouting not A with equal fervor. They are willing to lie about the most obvious things that are utterly easily fact checked.

Think about it, if they are willing to lie, unblinking about making false claims they have made dozens of times a day, day in day out for years, that they themselves broadcast over and over, and they expect you not to notice, then what other lies do they tell?

It's like a man in a gorilla suit standing in front of you claiming he is not in a gorilla suit - and then asking you to trust him on things you can't verify instantly.

I was watching John Oliver's stand-up show last night, on Netflix. He comments that you could grab any Fox employee, and scream 'Be worse at your job!" at them, and they would be entitled to look right back at you and ask 'How?'

30 Alexzander  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:11:11pm

White house press conference right now...

31 Ericus58  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:11:27pm

Gibbs live press talk.

32 lawhawk  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:12:25pm

OT (Egypt):

#
2009: Reports suggest Egypt's army chief, Lt General Sami Hafez Enan, has cut short a visit to Washington - where he has been discussing defence issues with Pentagon officials - to return to Cairo.

33 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:13:08pm

For O'Reilly's sake - I hope he drops it at this point.

34 darthstar  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:13:17pm

Heh...Biden was fucking with Boehner at the SOTU.

"The essence of what I was saying was: 'John we've got a lot of work to do'; 'Did you hear that? That's a good idea the president had right there.' Joking back and forth a little bit about how we had to make things work."

It turns out that their conversation says a lot about their relationship. Biden described Boehner (R-Ohio) as a "good guy" and a "friend," although he joked with Boehner about that, too. "I was kidding John by saying: 'I hope this doesn't hurt you with your Republican friends knowing you and I are friends."

[Link: news.yahoo.com...]

35 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:13:21pm

re: #28 Buck

Yep, there is a great example. Thanks.

Buck, you come here on this thread and try to defend these monsters, like you always do.

You are a sick, reprehensible bastard. After reading your blood libel crap, I will never give you a pass again when you try this shit.

36 Alexzander  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:13:25pm

I think there is new footage on AJ right now too..

37 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:13:48pm

Fatima the Kissing Bandit strikes again....
Image: 610x.jpg

Image: 610x.jpg

38 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:14:29pm

re: #29 SanFranciscoZionist

I was watching John Oliver's stand-up show last night, on Netflix. He comments that you could grab any Fox employee, and scream 'Be worse at your job!" at them, and they would be entitled to look right back at you and ask 'How?'

That is brilliant.

39 simoom  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:14:42pm

CNN Video iReport: Cairo Kasr Al Nile Bridge 3:30 pm

wileyh23 and her father are American tourists in Cairo. Her father shot this video from their hotel room along the main bridge into El Tahrir Square.

'Initially we were just in awe of all of the people coming across the bridge towards the square, then it started to become more violent. There was a constant sound of police firing tear gas canisters, sirens, and sounds of people pulling signs and benches from the street to drag over to the police lines. It was frightening to see the police regroup and retreat and to see the protesters throw things at those vehicles. ...'

40 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:14:46pm

re: #35 LudwigVanQuixote

Buck, you come here on this thread and try to defend these monsters, like you always do.

You are a sick, reprehensible bastard. After reading your blood libel crap, I will never give you a pass again when you try this shit.

And you are going straight to your happy place, making stuff up, and spewing insults and profanity.

41 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:15:09pm

re: #35 LudwigVanQuixote

Buck, you come here on this thread and try to defend these monsters, like you always do.

You are a sick, reprehensible bastard. After reading your blood libel crap, I will never give you a pass again when you try this shit.

Who exactly is a monster? Bill O'Rielly? Your kidding right?

42 Decatur Deb  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:16:50pm

re: #41 Lateralis

Who exactly is a monster? Bill O'Rielly? Your kidding right?

(They're talking about something else.)

43 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:17:00pm

re: #22 Buck

I would like to suggest a new TAG. In addition to the /SARC tag... a /NEWTONE tag.

I am not responding to the hate rhetoric that is addressed simply to the Right, but I really think it is uncalled for, and is only gasoline for a destructive fire, and not light to show anything.

could you help out by admitting - just so that we "liberals" could breath a sigh of relief if nothing else - that progressivism and liberalism bear no resemblance to nazism, and that obama is not a socialist?

also, if you would like to tender some examples of inflammatory rhetoric from the left, i would be happy to consider it for repudiation

44 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:18:21pm

re: #22 Buck

I would like to suggest a new TAG. In addition to the /SARC tag... a /NEWTONE tag.

I am not responding to the hate rhetoric that is addressed simply to the Right, but I really think it is uncalled for, and is only gasoline for a destructive fire, and not light to show anything.

And one other thing that fits with my earlier point about righties shouting A and then not A and expecting folks not to notice. You are always one of the first to dredge up some minor leftwing infraction whenever a wingnut gets caught being odious. Now that you have no such easy target you weep over rhetoric that correctly castigates you and demand folks play nice.

Well we are not going to fall for it.

45 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:19:05pm

re: #43 engineer dog

could you help out by admitting - just so that we "liberals" could breath a sigh of relief if nothing else - that progressivism and liberalism bear no resemblance to nazism, and that obama is not a socialist?

Why should I do anything of the sort? How is that on topic?


also, if you would like to tender some examples of inflammatory rhetoric from the left, i would be happy to consider it for repudiation

Almost everything LVQ has posted in this thread.

46 Feline Fearless Leader  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:19:34pm

re: #19 darthstar

China shoots down Maverick, or Goose, or someone.

At least they didn't use clips from Tora! Tora! Tora!

I'm waiting for the Onion to have the article on China unleashing the world's first virtual jet fighter.

47 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:21:14pm

re: #41 Lateralis

Who exactly is a monster? Bill O'Rielly? Your kidding right?

Of course O'Riley is a monster - or even worse, an amoral hack who knowingly shills for them.

48 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:22:48pm

re: #22 Buck

I would like to suggest a new TAG. In addition to the /SARC tag... a /NEWTONE tag.

I am not responding to the hate rhetoric that is addressed simply to the Right, but I really think it is uncalled for, and is only gasoline for a destructive fire, and not light to show anything.

If you feel it is wrong/incorrect you owe it to us to stand up for what you believe and say why you feel it is wrong and incorrect.

Or do you feel it is factually fine but just not praised in the nicest most "political correct" way possible?

49 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:23:35pm

re: #45 Buck

Why should I do anything of the sort? How is that on topic?

Almost everything LVQ has posted in this thread.

please be serious

jonah goldberg has published a very popular book where he equates liberalism with nazism

do you or don't you agree?

50 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:25:11pm

re: #47 LudwigVanQuixote


That is so over the top. Part of your problem is identifying who are real threats to this country. O'Rielly is much of a monster as Olbermann.

51 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:26:49pm

re: #49 engineer dog

please be serious

jonah goldberg has published a very popular book where he equates liberalism with nazism

do you or don't you agree?

I am on record about how I feel about that.

It is my belief that the political spectrum does not sit on a line, but is actually on a circle. The political center is at the bottom of the circle, and different ideoligies can be placed left or right of that spot. With the extreme left and extreme right meeting at the top in crazyville. That is where they share many views and traits.

I don't think that it is ok to put Hitler squarely on the Left or Right. He had a lot in common with people like Mao, and Stalin certainly. But I would not easily lable him that way.

52 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:28:22pm

re: #50 Lateralis

That is so over the top. Part of your problem is identifying who are real threats to this country. O'Rielly is much of a monster as Olbermann.

And what is over the top about it? The man is a propagandist shill for an immoral and evil movement, hell bent on destroying all the values that make this nation great. He is a shill against women's rights, a shill against the rights of the poor or those not white, a shill against science and an unredeemable liar. He does this to serve his corporate masters to the detriment of us all.

53 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:28:39pm

re: #48 jamesfirecat

If you feel it is wrong/incorrect you owe it to us to stand up for what you believe and say why you feel it is wrong and incorrect.

Or do you feel it is factually fine but just not praised in the nicest most "political correct" way possible?

I think I did exactly that. "stand up for what you believe and say why you feel it is wrong and incorrect."

54 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:30:11pm

re: #53 Buck

I think I did exactly that. "stand up for what you believe and say why you feel it is wrong and incorrect."

So just so we're clear your issue is with tone, or are their any facts you'd like to dispute?

55 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:30:22pm

re: #53 Buck

I think I did exactly that. "stand up for what you believe and say why you feel it is wrong and incorrect."

Yes you are always quick to lie, obfuscate or whine like a baby when your rightwing heroes are shown to be the no-Godwin Nazi like thugs they are.

56 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:31:20pm

unnre: #50 Lateralis

That is so over the top. Part of your problem is identifying who are real threats to this country. O'Rielly is much of a monster as Olbermann.

Your Tu Quoque needs work. At the moment only one of those two has a cable TV show from which to voice their opinions at the moment and it isn't Keith....

57 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:32:20pm

re: #56 jamesfirecat

unn

Your Tu Quoque needs work. At the moment only one of those two has a cable TV show from which to voice their opinions at the moment and it isn't Keith...

And Keith doesn't lie nearly as much.

58 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:32:56pm

re: #54 jamesfirecat

So just so we're clear your issue is with tone, or are their any facts you'd like to dispute?

Seriously James.... reread the posts I am talking about. They are one degree separated from a lot of Reginald Perrine posts. This person is not disputing facts, he is just unloading bile.

59 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:36:25pm

re: #58 Buck

Seriously James... reread the posts I am talking about. They are one degree separated from a lot of Reginald Perrine posts. This person is not disputing facts, he is just unloading bile.

I feel that LVQ is not doing a very good job because he's falling into broad brush strokes rather than arguing particular events and facts.

Do you have any facts you'd like to argue at the moment because if not I'll just go focus my attention elsewhere...

60 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:39:31pm

re: #59 jamesfirecat

I feel that LVQ is not doing a very good job because he's falling into broad brush strokes rather than arguing particular events and facts.

Do you have any facts you'd like to argue at the moment because if not I'll just go focus my attention elsewhere...

OK, if you wish.

Be is resolved that LVQ is posting hate rhetoric that is both uncalled for, and not constructive.

I will take the affimative.... Go.

61 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:39:37pm

re: #51 Buck

I am on record about how I feel about that.

It is my belief that the political spectrum does not sit on a line, but is actually on a circle. The political center is at the bottom of the circle, and different ideoligies can be placed left or right of that spot. With the extreme left and extreme right meeting at the top in crazyville. That is where they share many views and traits.

I don't think that it is ok to put Hitler squarely on the Left or Right. He had a lot in common with people like Mao, and Stalin certainly. But I would not easily lable him that way.

i'll take that as a "no, i don't think that liberalism is nazism", and a "no, i don't think that obama is a socialist". ok?

i define nazism as an aggravated form of fascism, which i would define as an extreme form of authoritarian government which ruthlessly represses and denies its citizens freedom of speech, assembly, conscience, and due process under law

as for socialism, the strict definition is a form of economic organization where the government owns and operates all major industries. however, all governments in the world now have some form of government run pension schemes and health insurance arrangements, which can therefore be called 'socialized' to some extent

are we in agreement so far?

62 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:40:17pm

re: #51 Buck


Any simplistic 2-dimensional rendering of the political 'spectrum', like that one, is incorrect. It is normally done in order to place sufficiently dangerous people outside of normal politics.

The problem is that such people really do arise inside normal politics. We're seeing it right now, with the right-wing assault on abortion rights, and on science.

Theocracy is neither on the 'right' or the 'left', it is not described by your simplistic spectrum. It is being propagated by the right, and the hateful, exclusionary rhetoric that is being used by the right is light-years, eons, tons more vitriolic and prevalent on the right-wing in the US than on the left.

63 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:42:01pm

re: #61 engineer dog

i'll take that as a "no, i don't think that liberalism is nazism", and a "no, i don't think that obama is a socialist". ok?

i define nazism as an aggravated form of fascism, which i would define as an extreme form of authoritarian government which ruthlessly represses and denies its citizens freedom of speech, assembly, conscience, and due process under law

as for socialism, the strict definition is a form of economic organization where the government owns and operates all major industries. however, all governments in the world now have some form of government run pension schemes and health insurance arrangements, which can therefore be called 'socialized' to some extent

are we in agreement so far?

Sure why not. Except that I think you are going way off topic....

64 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:43:24pm

re: #60 Buck

OK, if you wish.

Be is resolved that LVQ is posting hate rhetoric that is both uncalled for, and not constructive.

I will take the affimative... Go.

I will agree with your second premise that hate rhetoric is uncalled for and not constructive.

Your first that what LVQ is posting is hate rhetoric as opposed to possibly just being an ugly truth is an issue that needs to be addressed on a sentence by sentence basis of everything he has said.

65 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:43:32pm

re: #60 Buck

OK, if you wish.

Be is resolved that LVQ is posting hate rhetoric that is both uncalled for, and not constructive.

I will take the affimative... Go.

be it resolved that fox news commentators, as well as rush limbaugh, ann coulter, and jonah golberg, frequently and egregiously make untrue which they know to be untrue, and aggravate these untruths by delivering them using inflammatory rhetoric that defames and denigrates

i'll take the affirmative, thank you

66 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:44:30pm

re: #63 Buck

Sure why not. Except that I think you are going way off topic...

from the point of view of those of us in this country who consider themselves progressives, it would be exactly the topic

67 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:45:13pm

re: #65 engineer dog

be it resolved that fox news commentators, as well as rush limbaugh, ann coulter, and jonah golberg, frequently and egregiously make untrue which they know to be untrue, and aggravate these untruths by delivering them using inflammatory rhetoric that defames and denigrates

i'll take the affirmative, thank you

Again, off topic. I am talking about here. I certainly don't support anyone doing what LVQ is doing. Not left, or right or tv personality or not.

68 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:45:26pm

re: #58 Buck

Seriously James... reread the posts I am talking about. They are one degree separated from a lot of Reginald Perrine posts. This person is not disputing facts, he is just unloading bile.

And now you are the whiny victim of an unfair attack when the complaint against you has been clearly stated. Yes it is stated with bile Buck. YOu are standing up for the indefensible and you crossed the line way too many times before.

It is like clockwork with you people.

Do you want a martyr cookie?

69 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:46:15pm

re: #67 Buck

The topic of the thread is not LVQ being mean to you.

The topic is the Nazi allegories of Bill O'Reilly.

You are the one trying to make it about LVQ and your victimhood.

70 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:46:46pm

re: #64 jamesfirecat

I will agree with your second premise that hate rhetoric is uncalled for and not constructive.

Your first that what LVQ is posting is hate rhetoric as opposed to possibly just being an ugly truth is an issue that needs to be addressed on a sentence by sentence basis of everything he has said.

Nope, there is only one premise. Re read the resolution.

71 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:47:29pm

re: #67 Buck

Again, off topic. I am talking about here. I certainly don't support anyone doing what LVQ is doing. Not left, or right or tv personality or not.

Of course you don't support me refusing to not call your scummy heroes evil. How the fuck could you defend Sarah's Blood Libel garbage?

72 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:48:07pm

re: #70 Buck

Nope, there is only one premise. Re read the resolution.

Want a martyr cookie?

73 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:48:22pm

By the way, I'd like to note that Buck has a filter set up to literally ignore my comments, because he doesn't like dealing with them.

So if anyone wonders why he's not responding to my points which are clearly showing the massive flaws in his rhetoric, it's because he prefers to ignore such things.

74 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:49:18pm

re: #71 LudwigVanQuixote

Of course you don't support me refusing to not call your scummy heroes evil. How the fuck could you defend Sarah's Blood Libel garbage?

/newtone

75 Interesting Times  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:50:11pm

re: #73 Obdicut

By the way, I'd like to note that Buck has a filter set up to literally ignore my comments, because he doesn't like dealing with them.

So if anyone wonders why he's not responding to my points which are clearly showing the massive flaws in his rhetoric, it's because he prefers to ignore such things.

QFT (yet he still posts on your Pages...weird)

76 CarleeCork  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:50:23pm

re: #73 Obdicut
I did wonder, you have excellent observational skills.

77 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:50:23pm

re: #67 Buck

Again, off topic. I am talking about here. I certainly don't support anyone doing what LVQ is doing. Not left, or right or tv personality or not.

you see, buck, here's the thing

we all progressives are flinging a lot of rhetoric against right wing commentators because we feel we have been buried in a bullshit storm of lies and absurdly unfair and inflammatory insults by them for many years now

if you want any sympathy for a few angry remarks, you're also going to have to address our concerns that put us in this pissed off state of mind in the first place

so, what i am talking about is exactly on topic

78 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:50:29pm

re: #65 engineer dog

be it resolved that fox news commentators, as well as rush limbaugh, ann coulter, and jonah golberg, frequently and egregiously make untrue which they know to be untrue, and aggravate these untruths by delivering them using inflammatory rhetoric that defames and denigrates

i'll take the affirmative, thank you

Individuals in media or politics on both sides speak untruths on a daily basis. This garbage of the right is doing a majority of it is a weak argument. You could take President Obama's speeches and identify intellectual dishonesty throughout. For example, when he talks about healthcare reform saving money he leaves out the fact that they left out the money they are going to have to pay to Medicare docs to make them whole. Is he a liar for spinning it that way. I would say yes but I am adult enough to know that politicians to this all the time because they know no one is going to hold them accountable.

79 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:50:45pm

re: #70 Buck

Nope, there is only one premise. Re read the resolution.

Then my response would be that LVQ has made too many posts on this thread for me to make any reasonable statement concerning all of them being hate speech or note.

Find me a particular post of his you find especially egregious and I'll tell you what I view it as.

80 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:51:16pm

re: #70 Buck

Nope, there is only one premise. Re read the resolution.

i'm sorry, you're not empowered to dictate the terms of debate

81 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:51:21pm

Actually, I figured out a way to explain things to Buck even inside his simplistic spectrum idea:

Right now, in the USA, the GOP and those allied with them on the right have moved so far along in the political spectrum the are outside normal political discourse and are in the crazy portion of it.

The left has not. The left is still in the rational zone.

82 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:52:24pm

re: #78 Lateralis

You could take President Obama's speeches and identify intellectual dishonesty throughout. For example, when he talks about healthcare reform saving money he leaves out the fact that they left out the money they are going to have to pay to Medicare docs to make them whole.

You mean the 'doc fix' that has to be passed regardless of health care reform?

Man, hypocrisy is a strong suit with you. you're literally using a lie about Obama to show that he's a liar. Weird.

83 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:53:11pm

re: #76 CarleeCork

I did wonder, you have excellent observational skills.

Well Buck knows that he has bubkas when it comes to facts, and people here won't let him make up new ones. Obdi is very nice when he speaks, so Buck can't possibly address him and win. On the other hand, Buck can hope that when I point out the same things, but also call Buck out for being the wingnut sycophant he is, that he will get a sympathy vote.

Help help I'm being oppressed and all that.

84 Feline Fearless Leader  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:53:31pm

re: #81 Obdicut

Actually, I figured out a way to explain things to Buck even inside his simplistic spectrum idea:

Right now, in the USA, the GOP and those allied with them on the right have moved so far along in the political spectrum the are outside normal political discourse and are in the crazy portion of it.

The left has not. The left is still in the rational zone.

But by the rolling goalpost model of discussion the rationality spectrum is centered on the goalpost and moves along with it. Therefore, the GOP is still highly rational and the left has moved even further into irrationality.

85 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:54:02pm

re: #82 Obdicut

You mean the 'doc fix' that has to be passed regardless of health care reform?

Man, hypocrisy is a strong suit with you. you're literally using a lie about Obama to show that he's a liar. Weird.

Disgusting but not weird. This is SOP with wingnuts. There is no truth but the parties truth and all that.

86 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:54:47pm

re: #78 Lateralis

For example, when he talks about healthcare reform saving money he leaves out the fact that they left out the money they are going to have to pay to Medicare docs to make them whole. Is he a liar for spinning it that way.

this proposition, which you haven't proven, amounts to pretty weak tea when tallied up against the shitstorm of lies from fox, rush, etc, etc, etc

87 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:56:26pm

re: #59 jamesfirecat

I feel that LVQ is not doing a very good job because he's falling into broad brush strokes rather than arguing particular events and facts.

If you read any of my essays ont eh rise of American Nazism and the parallels you will see that I have been up and down the topic with dozens of links and points of comparison. I am just tired of rewriting it all over and over.

88 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:56:51pm

re: #83 LudwigVanQuixote

I'm actually not nice to Buck. He is one of a very, very few people who I can't muster more than contempt for in most of his positions. His defense of the use of blood libel by Palin, and his saying that he knew there would be 'assholes like you' who would attack her for it, cemented that for me.

89 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:58:00pm

re: #88 Obdicut

I'm actually not nice to Buck. He is one of a very, very few people who I can't muster more than contempt for in most of his positions. His defense of the use of blood libel by Palin, and his saying that he knew there would be 'assholes like you' who would attack her for it, cemented that for me.

Ohh I missed that bit.

Well really good thing I was doing more important work than arguing with poor deluded Buck. He's delusional scum.

90 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 12:58:18pm

re: #80 engineer dog

i'm sorry, you're not empowered to dictate the terms of debate

Actually that is exactly what James asked me to do.

91 andres  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:01:46pm

re: #86 engineer dog

this proposition, which you haven't proven, amounts to pretty weak tea when tallied up against the shitstorm of lies from fox, rush, etc, etc, etc

But, but... The power of the Magical Balance Fairy balance everything!!1

/ The "They do it too, Mom!" excuse didn't work on first grade. Why is it now a favorable tactic to use?

92 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:02:48pm

re: #90 Buck

Actually that is exactly what James asked me to do.

Actually no, I set the terms that the debate had to be about facts, and I'm still waiting for a response to my #79....

93 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:03:11pm

re: #90 Buck

Actually that is exactly what James asked me to do.

it seems to me that we are complaining about lies from national media sources, best selling authors, and prominent office holders, and you are complaining about lvq's tone

94 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:05:32pm

re: #92 jamesfirecat

Actually no, I set the terms that the debate had to be about facts, and I'm still waiting for a response to my #79...

I really don't think you need me to point out the hateful, non-constructive, rhetoric in LVQ's posts. If you really need me to list them, then you are not really willing to have this discussion.

95 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:05:47pm

re: #86 engineer dog

this proposition, which you haven't proven, amounts to pretty weak tea when tallied up against the shitstorm of lies from fox, rush, etc, etc, etc

i would like to take this opportunity to revise and extend my above remarks with this:

etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc...

96 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:06:18pm

re: #93 engineer dog

it seems to me that we are complaining about lies from national media sources, best selling authors, and prominent office holders, and you are complaining about lvq's tone

Complaining, or pointing out...

97 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:07:45pm

re: #82 Obdicut

You mean the 'doc fix' that has to be passed regardless of health care reform?

Man, hypocrisy is a strong suit with you. you're literally using a lie about Obama to show that he's a liar. Weird.

That is one way to spin it. So if he was being intellectually honest should he not include that in his projections? Doc fix is part of health care so how do you not include those numbers when you are trying to sell a program to the public. Oh wait, that is because politicians (right or left) always use smoke and mirrors to put the best face on what they are trying to sell to the public.

98 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:08:32pm

Oh and one other thing for the record.

To all wingnuts, here and elsewhere:

I absolutely admit and understand that the way I made my argument about the Fox "news" women used utterly inappropriate language. Mea culpa. No sarcasm.

However, my premise still stands. Those women certainly are part of a sleazy propaganda campaign and they are certainly using their bodies to sell it. I still find that disgusting, and no, I am not ashamed or embarrassed by having said so.

So any attempts to shame me for the view - even if I expressed it terribly - will not work. They are just the feminine side to the sickness that the boys like Rush and Beck and O'Riley represent.

99 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:09:33pm

re: #97 Lateralis

Doc fix is part of health care so how do you not include those numbers when you are trying to sell a program to the public.

Because it's not part of the health care reform. It's just something we have to do regardless of whether or not health care reform was passed. So it's actually dishonest of you, and the GOP, to argue that it's costs are part of health care reform. It's like suddenly trying to charge the whole VA budget as part of health care reform.

100 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:09:39pm

re: #94 Buck

I really don't think you need me to point out the hateful, non-constructive, rhetoric in LVQ's posts. If you really need me to list them, then you are not really willing to have this discussion.

Sorry LVQ has done too many posts for me to judge them all with a broad brush.

If he's done so much that is wrong it should be easy for you to find an example for me....

101 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:09:54pm

re: #94 Buck

I really don't think you need me to point out the hateful, non-constructive, rhetoric in LVQ's posts. If you really need me to list them, then you are not really willing to have this discussion.

Actually Buck we are pointing out the hateful, non constructive and evil rhetoric of your heroes that you came to defend. So sorry this isn't about me.

102 Interesting Times  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:10:20pm

How ironic, when Jon Stewart himself pointed out in the above video how dumb it is to equate comments from a random blog poster to issues of national importance (like, say, the GOP's vicious policies against rape victims).

How telling a certain right-wing apologist here is metaphorically flapping his arms, saying, look, look, a mean blog commenter, pay no attention to actual GOP actions!

103 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:10:37pm

re: #96 Buck

Complaining, or pointing out...

we get the point that your feelings were hurt by lvq's tone. ok?

now perhaps we could move on to acknowledging that the right wing movement has been attempting to bury the progressive and liberal wings of american society under an avalanche of lies and distortions?

104 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:11:54pm

Gotta get ready for Shabbos. Be well all!

105 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:12:24pm

re: #103 engineer dog

we get the point that your feelings were hurt by lvq's tone. ok?

now perhaps we could move on to acknowledging that the right wing movement has been attempting to bury the progressive and liberal wings of american society under an avalanche of lies and distortions?

Actually, you don't get my point. I don't remember talking about my feelings.

106 webevintage  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:12:49pm

re: #22 Buck

I would like to suggest a new TAG. In addition to the /SARC tag... a /NEWTONE tag.

I am not responding to the hate rhetoric that is addressed simply to the Right, but I really think it is uncalled for, and is only gasoline for a destructive fire, and not light to show anything.

So if I call Republicans fucking bastards for not focusing on jobs, but instead focusing on redefining what is rape you won't respond to tell me how they really are just trying to help women and the bill actually is all about jobs?
Just checking......

107 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:13:58pm

re: #106 webevintage

So if I call Republicans fucking bastards for not focusing on jobs, but instead focusing on redefining what is rape you won't respond to tell me how they really are just trying to help women and the bill actually is all about jobs?
Just checking...

All republicans are redefining what rape is?

Just checking.

108 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:14:04pm

re: #95 engineer dog

i would like to take this opportunity to revise and extend my above remarks with this:

etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc...

So naive. re: #99 Obdicut

Medicare is a huge part of health care reform and not to include the doc fix as part of the budget is complete bs and typical politics.

109 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:14:50pm

re: #107 Buck

All republicans are redefining what rape is?

Just checking.

NO just the ones in power. Seriously Buck, you are such a tool.

110 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:15:02pm

and with that, I am out of here.

111 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:16:07pm

re: #105 Buck

Actually, you don't get my point. I don't remember talking about my feelings.

you know, buck, i'm a little slow, so i'm only figuring this out now:

we thought you wanted to have a rational debate on the state of overheated rhetoric in american politics, but it seems that in reality you just want to complain about lvq and talk about nothing else

at least that's how i interpret it since that is the only issue you seem to want to discuss

112 webevintage  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:16:18pm

re: #107 Buck

All republicans are redefining what rape is?

Just checking.

Damn.
I thought you wouldn't respond.

113 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:16:44pm

re: #110 LudwigVanQuixote

and with that, I am out of here.

good shabbos, lvq!

114 webevintage  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:17:19pm

re: #107 Buck

All republicans are redefining what rape is?

Just checking.

So if I call Republicans IN THE HOUSE fucking bastards for not focusing on jobs, but instead focusing on redefining what is rape you won't respond to tell me how they really are just trying to help women and the bill actually is all about jobs?
Just checking...

115 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:18:27pm

re: #107 Buck

All republicans are redefining what rape is?

Just checking.

The majority of elected republicans in the House are.

116 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:19:51pm

re: #108 Lateralis

So naive. re: #99 Obdicut

Medicare is a huge part of health care reform and not to include the doc fix as part of the budget is complete bs and typical politics.

i should only hope for there to be just the typical bs and typical politics!

the discussion was, i thought, about incredibly inflammatory rhetoric such as declaring entire major segments of american society to be nazis and suchlike

117 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:20:24pm

re: #114 webevintage

So if I call Republicans IN THE HOUSE fucking bastards for not focusing on jobs, but instead focusing on redefining what is rape you won't respond to tell me how they really are just trying to help women and the bill actually is all about jobs?
Just checking...

I don't agree about the redefining of rape but is that all they are doing in the House?

118 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:21:05pm

re: #117 Lateralis

I don't agree about the redefining of rape but is that all they are doing in the House?

Have they done anything in the house that doesn't count as political grandstanding, and if so, what?

119 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:23:38pm

re: #116 engineer dog

i should only hope for there to be just the typical bs and typical politics!

the discussion was, i thought, about incredibly inflammatory rhetoric such as declaring entire major segments of american society to be nazis and suchlike

I believe untruths was part of the discussion along with inflammatory rhetoric.

120 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:25:44pm

re: #119 Lateralis

I believe untruths was part of the discussion along with inflammatory rhetoric.

Speaking of untruths, what do you have to say in response to Obdicut's #99 because clearly one of the two of you is lieing at the moment...

121 andres  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:26:59pm

re: #115 Obdicut

The majority of elected republicans in the House are.

I can only imagine Buck's next response: Is it a simple majority, or a super majority?

re: #117 Lateralis

I don't agree about the redefining of rape but is that all they are doing in the House?

What have been the great projects from the new House Congress?

1) Repeal the so called "Obamacare".
2) Representatives from non-state territories lost their ability to vote (which they gained with the 2006 House Congress).
3) Redefine rape.

None of this involve their campaign promises of creating more jobs, reducing taxes, and reducing the deficit.

122 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:28:38pm

re: #121 andres

I do think that one of their campaign promises was to repeal Obamacare.

123 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:28:56pm

re: #121 andres

I can only imagine Buck's next response: Is it a simple majority, or a super majority?

re: #117 Lateralis

What have been the great projects from the new House Congress?

1) Repeal the so called "Obamacare".
2) Representatives from non-state territories lost their ability to vote (which they gained with the 2006 House Congress).
3) Redefine rape.

None of this involve their campaign promises of creating more jobs, reducing taxes, and reducing the deficit.

///I'm pretty damn sure that they did include getting rid of Obamacare as a campaign promise......

124 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:29:29pm

re: #122 Lateralis

I do think that one of their campaign promises was to repeal Obamacare.

Of course the way they went about doing it is empty political grand standing, don't you agree?

125 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:29:46pm

re: #122 Lateralis

Yep. But doing so adds to the deficit, and kills jobs.

126 CarleeCork  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:30:21pm

re: #125 Obdicut

Yep. But doing so adds to the deficit, and kills jobs.


You LIE!
///

127 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:30:58pm

re: #119 Lateralis

I believe untruths was part of the discussion along with inflammatory rhetoric.

and i responded that a dispute you have over the scoring of savings and spending in regard to whether the doc fix should be included amounts to a pretty small issue when compared to publishing best selling books purporting to "prove" that liberalism is the same as nazism

that is the scale of lying that concerns me - do you have any complaints about lying from the democratic side of the aisle to compare with that?

128 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:31:00pm

re: #114 webevintage

So if I call Republicans IN THE HOUSE fucking bastards for not focusing on jobs, but instead focusing on redefining what is rape you won't respond to tell me how they really are just trying to help women and the bill actually is all about jobs?
Just checking...

Just to be clear, I don't believe there are different stages of rape. Rape is forcible by definition.

–noun
1. an act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.
2. the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.

I am not sure that adding that word is really changing the definition of rape, AND I consider the addition of that word forcible unnecessary. AND I certainly don't think this is about jobs.

BUT I do think that trying to link this to jobs legislation when it clearly is not is not constructive. Dehumanizing and demonizing people based on the addition of that word is not constructive. We don't know the final version of the bill. It just might have been added to emphasize the brutality of the act of rape. There is nothing in the bill that addresses non-forceable rape.

You might note that the swearing, and insults are not necessary, and a discussion can take place without it. That is what I prefer.

129 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:31:43pm

re: #120 jamesfirecat

You tell me. If you are selling health care reform I would think if you are being intellectual honest about a key component, Medicare, you would include the doc fix. But that is not how Washington works, it is a shell game with our money that they treat as their own monopoly money.

130 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:32:51pm

re: #128 Buck

Just to be clear, I don't believe there are different stages of rape. Rape is forcible by definition.

I am not sure that adding that word is really changing the definition of rape, AND I consider the addition of that word forcible unnecessary. AND I certainly don't think this is about jobs.

BUT I do think that trying to link this to jobs legislation when it clearly is not is not constructive. Dehumanizing and demonizing people based on the addition of that word is not constructive. We don't know the final version of the bill. It just might have been added to emphasize the brutality of the act of rape. There is nothing in the bill that addresses non-forceable rape.

You might note that the swearing, and insults are not necessary, and a discussion can take place without it. That is what I prefer.

Here's what it breaks down to Buck.

Do you have a problem with the government putting money forward to paying for abortions of girls who suffered statutory rape or women who were date rapped?

131 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:33:55pm

re: #129 Lateralis

You tell me. If you are selling health care reform I would think if you are being intellectual honest about a key component, Medicare, you would include the doc fix. But that is not how Washington works, it is a shell game with our money that they treat as their own monopoly money.

Well since I'm a little slow, how about you tell me exactly what this "doc fix" is since you're so interested in my opinion....

132 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:34:08pm

re: #128 Buck

Holy shit that's lame.

The entire point of putting the 'forcible rape' part in there was specifically to exclude some forms of rape, and yet you're defending them. This is a bill specifically changing existing law. It is not a case of 'they just didn't put it in yet'.

Every time I think you can't be more appalling, you are.

133 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:34:12pm

re: #125 Obdicut

You mean the jobs that were just cut by one of the pharmaceutical companies because of the increase cost of Medicare contracts. I don't argue that their needs to be health care reform but even by calling it health care reform is a half truth. A huge component of health care reform is a simple and costly expansion of health care.

134 andres  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:34:38pm

re: #122 Lateralis

I do think that one of their campaign promises was to repeal Obamacare.

Of course. But it runs against another of their campaign promises, reducing the deficit. Not that symbolic logic is necessary for politicians.

135 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:35:41pm

re: #133 Lateralis

How is it an expansion of health care, please?

136 andres  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:36:01pm

re: #132 Obdicut

Holy shit that's lame.

The entire point of putting the 'forcible rape' part in there was specifically to exclude some forms of rape, and yet you're defending them. This is a bill specifically changing existing law. It is not a case of 'they just didn't put it in yet'.

Every time I think you can't be more appalling, you are.

And they are changing the law, not the dictionary. How many everyday words have a very different, or limited meaning when speaking legally.

137 webevintage  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:36:22pm

re: #128 Buck


You might note that the swearing, and insults are not necessary, and a discussion can take place without it. That is what I prefer.

and I happen to find fuck to be one of the most useful words in the English language so it would seem we part ways here never to correspond via this message board again.

138 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:36:37pm

re: #130 jamesfirecat

Here's what it breaks down to Buck.

Do you have a problem with the government putting money forward to paying for abortions of girls who suffered statutory rape or women who were date rapped?

I do not. And I don't think the bill in question does either. I feel that a court would define all rape as forcible, if it were to come to that.

‘The limitations established in sections 301, 302, 303, and 304 shall not apply to an abortion--

‘(1) if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest; or
1
‘(2) in the case where the pregnant female suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the pregnant female in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.

139 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:37:24pm

re: #138 Buck

Why do you think that all rape is forcible, including rapes where force isn't used?

Oh right, you need to at least pretend to believe this so you can defend the GOP.

140 Feline Fearless Leader  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:37:47pm

re: #138 Buck

I do not. And I don't think the bill in question does either. I feel that a court would define all rape as forcible, if it were to come to that.

Buck counts on a activist judge stepping in and preventing any injustice from occurring...

141 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:37:51pm

re: #138 Buck

I do not. And I don't think the bill in question does either. I feel that a court would define all rape as forcible, if it were to come to that.

If they don't feel it makes a difference why do they feel a need to add in the word "foreceable" in the first place?

Guess the GOP is just wasting the tax payers money then....

142 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:39:06pm

re: #141 jamesfirecat

If they don't feel it makes a difference why do they feel a need to add in the word "foreceable" in the first place?

Guess the GOP is just wasting the tax payers money then...

We will see if the word is in the final bill or not. I don't think it will be. I do not think that it was placed there to leag

143 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:39:11pm

re: #131 jamesfirecat

The formula for medicare reimbursement is way to low so they are going to have to adjust it to increase the payments to docs. If it stays as is physicians will drop coverage. The argument is that it needed to be done regardless so it should not be factored in as healthcare reform.

144 andres  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:39:17pm

re: #133 Lateralis

You mean the jobs that were just cut by one of the pharmaceutical companies because of the increase cost of Medicare contracts. I don't argue that their needs to be health care reform but even by calling it health care reform is a half truth. A huge component of health care reform is a simple and costly expansion of health care.

Take a look at this Daily Show video. It's rather fascinating where the "lost jobs due to Obamacare" meme comes from.

145 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:40:10pm

re: #144 andres

Its not a meme. Look at healthcare news from yesterday.

146 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:40:28pm

re: #144 andres

Take a look at this Daily Show video. It's rather fascinating where the "lost jobs due to Obamacare" meme comes from.

I can't see the video, it wont play in canada. Does it address the issue of why companies are asking for waivers?

147 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:41:16pm

re: #142 Buck

We will see if the word is in the final bill or not. I don't think it will be. I do not think that it was placed there to leag

"We will see if the word is in the final bill or not. I don't think it will be. I do not think that it was placed there to leag"

You got cut off there my friend.

But the point still stands... if they aren't trying to change the definition then why change the wording?

148 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:45:18pm

re: #147 jamesfirecat

"We will see if the word is in the final bill or not. I don't think it will be. I do not think that it was placed there to leag"

You got cut off there my friend.

But the point still stands... if they aren't trying to change the definition then why change the wording?

I did get cut off, I don't know why.

They might have been trying to emphasize the brutality of rape.

I actually find the concept that there is any kind of rape that is not forced to be offensive. Rape by definition is forced.

149 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:47:09pm

re: #148 Buck

I did get cut off, I don't know why.

They might have been trying to emphasize the brutality of rape.

I actually find the concept that there is any kind of rape that is not forced to be offensive. Rape by definition is forced.

They weren't trying to emphasize the brutality of rape. They were trying to chip away at abortion rights. It's what they do. You know this.

There are many members of the GOP on record as opposing the right for abortion for all rape victims, anyway.

The lengths you'll go to avoid condemning anything done by the GOP is fucking amazing.

150 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:48:42pm

re: #143 Lateralis

The formula for medicare reimbursement is way to low so they are going to have to adjust it to increase the payments to docs. If it stays as is physicians will drop coverage. The argument is that it needed to be done regardless so it should not be factored in as healthcare reform.

Sounds reasonable to me. Obama care is a package and this falls outside that package.

151 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:49:37pm

Can anyone find the legislation that is in place now? I don't actually know that the word was added.

152 andres  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:51:19pm

re: #145 Lateralis

Its not a meme. Look at healthcare news from yesterday.

It's a meme when the battle cry is a phrase taken out of context.

re: #146 Buck

I can't see the video, it wont play in canada. Does it address the issue of why companies are asking for waivers?

The "lost jobs because of Obamacare" meme comes from an study of the bill where it states that, thanks to the health care reform bill passed in Congress last year, more people can retire early instead of staying on their jobs for health care benefits waiting for Medicare. As you can see, the Republicans took the statement of the study, and morphed it into the "job-killing" meme.

153 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:54:51pm

re: #152 andres

The "lost jobs because of Obamacare" meme comes from an study of the bill where it states that, thanks to the health care reform bill passed in Congress last year, more people can retire early instead of staying on their jobs for health care benefits waiting for Medicare. As you can see, the Republicans took the statement of the study, and morphed it into the "job-killing" meme.

I don't think you answered my question. A huge number of businesses and unions are asking for a waiver from complying with this legislation. I think it is due to the costs. If the costs are too high (per employee) then yes, it could be said that adding this cost would make companies think twice about hiring, and therefore it would "kill Jobs".

154 MinisterO  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:59:10pm

Tone troll dances with magical balance fairy. How delightfully unexpected.

155 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 1:59:36pm

re: #130 jamesfirecat

Here's what it breaks down to Buck.

Do you have a problem with the government putting money forward to paying for abortions of girls who suffered statutory rape or women who were date rapped?

The Bill specifically covers minors (statutory rape), and how would anyone be able to describe date rape as not forced?

I seriously don't understand.

156 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:00:10pm

re: #150 jamesfirecat

Healthcare reform is supposed to decrease the cost of healthcare. Correct? That projection is made by excluding the doc fix. How is that reasonable? It's like me selling you are car on the basis that is 8,000 cheaper than the model you were going to buy, but the fine print tells you that in a year you are going to have to pay an additional 10,000. Not cheaper. It is exactly why our budget deficits continue to rise. Is that reasonable?

157 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:00:11pm

re: #155 Buck

The Bill specifically covers minors (statutory rape), and how would anyone be able to describe date rape as not forced?

I seriously don't understand.

The bill specifically does NOT cover minors.

158 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:02:23pm

re: #152 andres

Whatever you want to call it, there will be lost jobs because of Obamacare and it is already starting.

159 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:03:48pm

H.R.3 - No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act
[Link: www.opencongress.org...]

‘SEC. 309. TREATMENT OF ABORTIONS RELATED TO RAPE, INCEST, OR PRESERVING THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER.
1
‘The limitations established in sections 301, 302, 303, and 304 shall not apply to an abortion--
3
‘(1) if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest; or
1
‘(2) in the case where the pregnant female suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the pregnant female in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.

The word minor emphasis by me. Also note that the section is titled "TREATMENT OF ABORTIONS RELATED TO RAPE, INCEST, OR PRESERVING THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER." No use of the word forcable.

160 MinisterO  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:04:26pm

re: #156 Lateralis

Healthcare reform is supposed to decrease the cost of healthcare. Correct? That projection is made by excluding the doc fix. How is that reasonable? It's like me selling you are car on the basis that is 8,000 cheaper than the model you were going to buy, but the fine print tells you that in a year you are going to have to pay an additional 10,000. Not cheaper. It is exactly why our budget deficits continue to rise. Is that reasonable?

Fantastic display of innumeracy. If you're going to pay X whether or not you take action A, then X is not part of the cost of A.

161 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:07:51pm

In fact it reads to me to cover ALL acts of rape (as there are no unforced rapes) all Incest, and all minors. Plus preserving the life of the mother.

162 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:12:27pm

re: #161 Buck

You just can't read, because you don't want to.

if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest;

If the pregnancy occurred if the child was a minor and it was incest.

163 andres  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:13:52pm

re: #153 Buck

I don't think you answered my question. A huge number of businesses and unions are asking for a waiver from complying with this legislation. I think it is due to the costs. If the costs are too high (per employee) then yes, it could be said that adding this cost would make companies think twice about hiring, and therefore it would "kill Jobs".

I won't answer your question because your purpose is to derail my point.

However, just as we are supposed to find comparable examples of left wing rethoric, you are free to answer your own question. Hint: it's not about losing jobs.

164 Lateralis  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:14:23pm

re: #159 Buck

re: #160 MinisterO

I understand the numbers. The problem is that the apologist for Obama are giving him a pass. If you are not reforming healthcare should not look at the overall cost of healthcare. What is the bottom line cost? The reality is that with his "reforms" the overall cost is going to be more.

165 Coracle  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:14:51pm

re: #161 Buck

In fact it reads to me to cover ALL acts of rape (as there are no unforced rapes) all Incest, and all minors. Plus preserving the life of the mother.

Hogwash. The inclusion of the adjective "forced" in the language of the bill invites differentiation. It invites people to claim "well that case wasn't 'forced' rape". To pretend that won't happen very quickly after such a law passed is disingenuous.

166 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:15:36pm

Now it is time for me to leave to go home. So, I will only add this:

I am very Pro Choice. I, of course, would prefer that the woman choose life, but I would not to place any impediment on her right to choose. The only exception I have on that is very late term abortions, like the ones we read about in Philadelphia recently.

Frankly in the third term, there should be some rules. I don't think it should be NEVER in the third term, but I do feel there needs to be some laws in place that protects the womans health and welfare, and the babies life.

167 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:16:22pm

re: #166 Buck

Then why are you spending so much time defending the GOP's latest assault on abortion rights?

What you say you believe in, and what you actually defend, are diametrically opposed to each other.

168 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:20:28pm

re: #165 Coracle

Hogwash. The inclusion of the adjective "forced" in the language of the bill invites differentiation. It invites people to claim "well that case wasn't 'forced' rape". To pretend that won't happen very quickly after such a law passed is disingenuous.

Well that is your opinion. Mine is different and is based on actually reading the bill. I would like to read the bill that is existing to see if the word was added.

However, as it is not in the Section title, AND the definition of rape does not include non-forced, AND as no one has been able to give an example of rape that would not be classified as forced. Also the use of commas in the line is clear to show that it would include all incest, all minors and all rape. (plus the health of the mother).

Again, based on actually reading the bill as it is now.

169 Naem  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:20:38pm

re: #159 Buck
3
‘(1) if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest; or
1

emphasis, the English language. Certainly enough wiggle room at any rate for a suitably motivated lawyer to lock a court case up beyond the time when the legality moves from early to late-term abortions, which are illegal.

170 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:22:43pm

re: #168 Buck

AND as no one has been able to give an example of rape that would not be classified as forced

You've just ingored all of them.

Coercion without force. Taking advantage of an intoxicated girl. A girl saying 'no' but not physically resisting.

Also the use of commas in the line is clear to show that it would include all incest, all minors and all rape. (plus the health of the mother).

Nope. It would include minors in cases of incest, but not otherwise. You just can't read, because you don't want to admit what the GOP has become.

It's sad.

171 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:24:32pm

re: #169 Naem

3
‘(1) if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest; or
1

emphasis, the English language. Certainly enough wiggle room at any rate for a suitably motivated lawyer to lock a court case up beyond the time when the legality moves from early to late-term abortions, which are illegal.

Well neither of us are lawyers, so I will just say we are clearly reading the same sentence very differently. If they meant minors ONLY in the case of incest, I think they would no either NOT placed a comma there, or added the word AND.

The word OR means to me something different that you I suppose.

172 Naem  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:25:32pm

re: #171 Buck

Well neither of us are lawyers, so I will just say we are clearly reading the same sentence very differently. If they meant minors ONLY in the case of incest, I think they would no either NOT placed a comma there, or added the word AND.

The word OR means to me something different that you I suppose.

try saying it out loud. without chocking, of course.

173 Coracle  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:25:40pm

re: #168 Buck

Well that is your opinion. Mine is different and is based on actually reading the bill. I would like to read the bill that is existing to see if the word was added.

However, as it is not in the Section title, AND the definition of rape does not include non-forced, AND as no one has been able to give an example of rape that would not be classified as forced. Also the use of commas in the line is clear to show that it would include all incest, all minors and all rape. (plus the health of the mother).

Again, based on actually reading the bill as it is now.

Tuppence for trying. I read it, too. And you should damn well know that what you or I read from it doesn't matter, but what an alleged rapist's defense lawyer reads into it will. And you had damn well better know that a shrewd defense lawyer will use every legal and linguistic arrow in his quiver to help his client. Why hand him one so frivolusly and foolishly?

174 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:27:24pm

re: #171 Buck

Here is the actual diagram of the sentence-- which you won't see, since you ignore my posts.


‘(1) if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of (an act of forcible rape)-- or, (if a minor, an act of incest); or

Those are two separate conditions. Subject of an act of forcible rape. Subject of an act of incest while a minor.

175 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:27:28pm

re: #173 Coracle

Tuppence for trying. I read it, too. And you should damn well know that what you or I read from it doesn't matter, but what an alleged rapist's defense lawyer reads into it will. And you had damn well better know that a shrewd defense lawyer will use every legal and linguistic arrow in his quiver to help his client. Why hand him one so frivolusly and foolishly?

The rapist has nothing to do with this. It is only to decide if the abortion would be paid for by the health care act. There is no defense lawyer here. It is not about convicting a rapist.

176 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:29:27pm

and anyway, legally ALL sex with a minor is rape, and yes forceable rape. As no one is saying that minors can consent, and ANY TIME YOU DON'T CONSENT TO SEX, it is rape. Period.

177 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 2:31:48pm

re: #176 Buck

and anyway, legally ALL sex with a minor is rape, and yes forceable rape. .

Nope. There isn't a legal definition of 'forceable rape' in most states. That's the whole point. But of course, you won't bother to read the article, the only important thing to you is defending the GOP.

178 Mark Winter  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 3:06:21pm

The term "forceable rape" is nonsense. Rape is about non-consent and nothing else.

It doesn't really matter whether a woman is raped by physically overpowering her, holding a gun to her head, blackmailing her, threatening her or drugging her. It's rape if she does not consent to sex.

179 William of Orange  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 3:57:00pm

Tech question here.
Is anyone else having problems watching the Comedy Central videos? I live in the Netherlands and the clips as of this week seem to be as slow as molasses, buffering 2 seconds at the time. Terribly annoying since I'm a fan of the show. I hope my US connection doesn't run via an Egyptian server, but that would at least clarify the problem....

180 Coracle  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 4:37:19pm

re: #175 Buck

The rapist has nothing to do with this. It is only to decide if the abortion would be paid for by the health care act. There is no defense lawyer here. It is not about convicting a rapist.

if you think that this law would not be used in a rape defense case, you're delusional. Denial of care based on absence of 'forcible' rape would absolutely be used in defense of an accused.

181 Buck  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 5:41:10pm

re: #178 Mark Winter

The term "forceable rape" is nonsense. Rape is about non-consent and nothing else.

It doesn't really matter whether a woman is raped by physically overpowering her, holding a gun to her head, blackmailing her, threatening her or drugging her. It's rape if she does not consent to sex.

That is what I am saying. Only I get downdings, and you get updings.

182 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 5:42:05pm

re: #181 Buck

That is what I am saying. Only I get downdings, and you get updings.

Because you're trying to claim that a sentence that clearly is pretending there's a distinction between forcible rape and other forms, doesn't really say that. So that you can keep defending the GOP.

183 Decider  Fri, Jan 28, 2011 6:20:58pm

foxnation.com is no different than stormfront. If someone just dropped you in either website without knowing the URL you would not be able to tell the difference.

184 RabbitRunner  Sat, Jan 29, 2011 11:39:33am

It is so true, once someone reaches for the N word, they have already lost the debate


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh