Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Sunday, November 13, 2011

In a recent speech at the Family Research Council, Republican presidential candidate Michelle Bachmann suggested that if you don't have a job, you should stop eating. She said, "Our nation needs to stop doing for people what they can and should do for themselves ... self reliance means, if anyone will not work, neither should he eat."

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

reinheitsgebot

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Okay, that's pretty funny, but come on. I don't believe she really meant the unemployed should die of starvation. I have nothing good to say about Bachmann (well, the "Devil is in the details" line a few weeks back was pretty good), but this is absurd.

Guess Reinosass didn't want a link to this site showing his family?

www.democraticunderground.com

"Lately it doesn't even seem like many Republicans even care about hiding the fact that they want to hurt Americans and Michele Bachmann is a prime example."

Look, idiot, republicans don't wanna hurt Americans. A little polluted water and dirty air never hurt anyone. Besides, republicans don't REALLY wanna kill women, just make 'em have lots and lots of unwanted babies. You don't really think they want granny to eat cat food either, do you? Besides, they're gonna throw most of the grannies off the cliff anyway. It's the children that republicans wanna starve, not granny. Get your shit straight.

"I have nothing good to say about Bachmann..."

How did I know that? No surprise, you have nothing good to say about anyone who doesn't spout your "progressive" ideals. Certified Obama voter for sure. You fit right in.

"How did I know that? No surprise, you have nothing good to say about anyone who doesn't spout your "progressive" ideals. Certified Obama voter for sure. You fit right in."

You have nothing better to throw at me than insults and suppositions? First of all, I was DEFENDING Bachmann here and ripping on Rein. But you don't read beyond one little line--what, were you looking for an attack? Brilliant.

Second, nothing good to say about blah blah blah? Bullshit. Have you ever read any of my posts, especially those about current and former Republican candidates? I actually like some of what Ron Paul has to say. I don't think he has a chance in hell of winning the nomination, but he's not an idiot and he says lots of stuff that is nowhere near my " 'progressive' ideals" (about which you apparently know little, btw).

Christ, man, has Mrs. Jest been holdin' back the nookie lately? You weren't always like this, and you and I have had some fairly open and interesting direct conversations.

You're right; I'm vastly liberal in my worldview. You're right; I will most likely vote for Obama in the next election, as I did in the last one. But having nothing good to say about Bachmann (who, from everything I've seen out of her, is either crazy or stupid--or at best amazingly ineloquent) hardly equates to having nothing good to say about anyone who's not like me politically. And if the GOP could offer someone who was moderate and rational, I'd be really interested. I'd be THRILLED to see a serious, smart, consistent candidate face off against Barack Obama. (Several of the reasons I liked Obama back in 2008 were things that he has not lived up to...) If you ever want to have a serious conversation again, let me know. I'll be around.

I don't believe she really meant the unemployed should die of starvation. |

Posted by pragmatist

Bachmann meant it if the Tea Party means it.

Bachmann (who, from everything I've seen out of her, is either crazy or stupid--

Posted by pragmatist

"Or"?

I personally would like to see Michele Bachwards out of a job long enough to practice what she preaches.

Her own roots are lower-class, and she has taken great, great care to distance herself from them by any means available, including government programs. While I don't claim her behavior justifies that of any of our entitlement-dependent slackers, I think Bachwards needs to examine her own methods for getting through life before criticizing anyone else's.

#8 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

I've seen this dynamic personally. A fair share of people who make it in life, or think that they have made it, become ashamed of where they come from and who they've been.

As if they had a supersitious dread that if they acknowledged that reality they'd lose their money somehow. Like being frightened to summon a wood goblin by mentioning the name.

I think I've established why so many on the Right appear to hate the poor and middle-class, actually.

Posted by reinheitsgebot

Earth to Rbot, Harry Reid is sitting on 17 jobs bills passed by the House.

Earth to Rbot, Harry Reid is sitting on 17 jobs bills passed by the House.

#10 | Posted by KBM at 2011-11-12

If you can cite them, I'd love to look at them. Public information, you know.

If you can't cite them, sorry to say, I might not believe they are there at all.

"I will most likely vote for Obama in the next election, as I did in the last one."

No doubt.

"And if the GOP could offer someone who was moderate and rational,..."

I have to assume then, that you consider Obama to be "moderate and rational" which makes ME consider YOU to be immoderate and irrational.

"If you ever want to have a serious conversation again, let me know."

It would probably be like my trying to have a conversation with danni....LOL.

Never mind. Did your work for you. Yes, the GOP has advanced some "jobs bills". The short story is that they are mostly a vehicle for tax breaks and repeal of regulations.

I'm going to be interested in what the Republican house does with the veteran's employment act passed by the Senate yesterday. It offers tax breaks to small companies who hire vets.

I'll bet it dies an ugly, ugly death.

For someone who rails against bailouts and 'the government' Bachmann sure hasn't minded taking over $250,000 in government farm subsidies.

I have to assume then, that you consider Obama to be "moderate and rational" which makes ME consider YOU to be immoderate and irrational.

#13 | Posted by jestgettinalong

Even accepting the truth of your statement, Obama looks fabulous by comparision.

Gets us back to that same mystery: Why are these particular clowns all you guys can come up with?

It's almost as if thw GOP conducted a nationwide screening process to find the biggest mutts possible to run for president.

13--Go ahead and assume things about my behavior that are contrary to fact. If you put me in the same camp as Danni, I can only conclude you've read none of my posts in my nearly three years on DR. That says a whole lot more about you than it does about me. And yes, I think Obama is fairly moderate, much more so than most of his critics seem to think, and quite rational. I don't think that means he's right all the time. I can see the difference. Hell, I thought George Bush was fairly moderate and fairly rational. You see, I don't have to assign a "crazy" or "stupid" label to someone I don't agree with. I did it with Bachmann 'cause I've read a lot of what she's said and I think she's out there (FEMA camps, to start with). But--now try to read this carefully--I didn't say what I said about a moderate and rational GOP candidate to compare such a phantom to the current president; I said I'd like to see such a person because I don't see one among the current crop, or at least not among the likely nominees. All right, Romney's not insane or irrational, nor is he far right, but he is at least as much of a flipflopper as some of you like to say Obama is. A Romney-Obama fight will be interesting.

At this point, you're not really reading my posts anyway, Jest; you're just looking for reasons to call me a member of Obama's Army or a closed-minded progressive (preferably with scare quotes). It's funny at this point. In a sad sort of way.

"Why are these particular clowns all you guys can come up with?"

It's ironic you should say that, Zed. If you're talking about the "clowns" who seem to have a record of getting reelected MUCH better than the "progressive clowns" who seem to have difficulty after we've had four years of them, it must be your ass talking 'cause you mouth should know better. THIS "clown" in the Oval Office now is destined to join the one-termers before him. You know, don't you, that onlyONE democrat has been reelcted president since 1944, don't you? You ARE aware of what happened in 2010, aren't you. You did see the results in VA and IN last Tues? Semms to me the "clowns" are doing right well....

Virginia:
Virginia Republicans added seven new seats to their majority in the House of Delegates, giving them two-thirds of that chamber's votesâ€"the party's largest margin in history. The GOP also took over the Virginia Senate in results that were especially notable, given that Virginia Democrats this spring crafted an aggressive redistricting plan that had only one aim: providing a firewall against a Republican takeover of that chamber. Even that extreme gerrymander didn't work.

Every Republican incumbentâ€"52 in the House, 15 in the Senateâ€"won. The state GOP is looking at unified control over government for only the second time since the Civil War. This is after winning all three top statewide officesâ€"including the election of Gov. Bob McDonnellâ€"in 2009, and picking off three U.S. House Democrats in last year's midterms.

Topline figures aside, what ought to really concern the White House was the nature of the campaign, and the breakout of Tuesday's election data. Mr. Obama may have big plans for Virginia, but the question is increasingly: him and what army?"

Indiana:
After Tuesday's elections, Republicans have reason to be hopeful about next year. Before the elections, Democrats held a 68 to 48 majority of the mayor's offices. Now, Republicans hold a 61 to 54 majority with 2 Independents. According to the Indiana GOP, the Republicans retained control of city hall in "Indianapolis, Terre Haute, Mishawaka, West Lafayette, Valparaiso, Marion and others, and picked up seats in Columbus, Jeffersonville, Evansville, Logansport, LaPorte and Portage, among others." Two other mayoral races have yet to be decided and may be headed for recounts.

The results come on the heels of big electoral gains for the GOP after last year's midterm elections. Republicans won majorities in the congressional delegation and flipped a U.S. Senate seat from 'D' to 'R.' They won 60 seats in the state house to the Democrats' 40, reversing the Democratic majority of 52 to 48. Republicans also gained four state senate seats."

Self reliance means, if anyone will not work, neither should he eat."

Great idea. Now all I need is Bachman's explanation of how she can get business owners to end the lockout and stop moving factories overseas. Get the job creators to create jobs here, not in the developing world.

Also, this plan won't work too well for children and retirees.

It's ironic you should say that, Zed

19 | Posted by jestgettinalong

No, it's a low down miserable shame that I or anyone would have to point out to you what a mix of obvious losers your candidates are.

It's a genuine puzzlement to me why these people are offered up as the very best you folks can do. It's NOT a puzzle that even the GOP seems to be waking up to the idea that they mght lose in 2012 simply because they run a dog as president.

"President Bachmann"? For the love of God why is she there? Sorry to pick on the most obvious cripple, by the way. It's just easier to make my point that way.

Is this the same Michelle Bachman who's family receives $250,000 in farm subsidies every year? Incredible. There has to be something in the water in her district, how could anyone, liberal or conservative, vote for that idiot?

"Topline figures aside, what ought to really concern the White House was the nature of the campaign, and the breakout of Tuesday's election data. Mr. Obama may have big plans for Virginia, but the question is increasingly: him and what army?"

Hey Prag...it's Obama's Army he's counting on. They're on the move in Oakland, New York, D.C., Atlanta, Portland, Richmond...hell, all over. You need to grab some crab salve, louse shampoo, a gun, your stash and condoms and join one of his divisions. Don't go to the one in Atlanta though, TB has broken out there.

"No, it's a low down miserable shame that I or anyone would have to point out to you what a mix of obvious losers your candidates are."

LOL...I think you got the "loser" and "winner" columns confused. That's not a surprise either. You and your little friends are OFTEN confused.

Hey Prag...it's Obama's Army he's counting on

#23 | Posted by jestgettinalong

No, he's counting upon the Independents. It's a long way to next November, of course. But as of this week you guys are losing them, if the results of some major, RECENT, elections are any guide.

LOL...I think you got the "loser" and "winner" columns confused. That's not a surprise either. You and your little friends are OFTEN confused.

#24 | Posted by jestgettinalong at

You guys have had plenty of warning. Damn, you even have the boys at RedState gnawing their own legs off.

Good luck, because there's very, very little talent in the crop to send your various Messiahs over the top in a general election.

And if the GOP could offer someone who was moderate and rational, I'd be really interested ..
#5 | Posted by pragmatist
therein lies the "catch-22 problem", doesn't it ..
once someone has been indoctrinated with Leftist-Marxist ideals (ie, progressive) .. ONLY leftist-Marxist ideals look rational

perhaps as a start, you could point out a Marxist-Progressive social model illustrating a vibrant working middle class ..

I'll wait ...

"Don't go to the one in Atlanta though, TB has broken out there."

Countries with fifty million without healthcare have problems like that. The fact that some OWS protesters are dealing with the problem is no guarantee you won't see it pop up in your own live. Hey, let's all laugh about the homeless and the unemployed now like a bunch of boorish idiots. Ha ha. Your feeble attempts at humor are disgusting.

"No, he's counting upon the Independents."

You GOTTA be shittin' me!

"This is what happens when a recent Quinnipiac poll shows Mr. Obama's approval rating among Virginia independents at 29%."

happenin' all over, ZED, sorry....

"Good luck, because there's very, very little talent in the crop to send your various Messiahs over the top in a general election."

Only you and Pelosi have a Messiah, Zed. Well, gotta include Chris Matthews too. I wonder if he's STILL getting those tingles. Your entire "progressive" world is crashing around your ears and you're just too naive, stupid or ignorant to realize it. I repeat...record defeats for "progressives" in special elections, in 2010 and more in 2011. Independents, young voters, and women abandoning the Great Community Organizer and Race Healer and I just can't see the indicators that Obama is a shoo-in next year. Where are you finding different? Never mind...you're just gonna quote MSNBC and HuffPo, and I can SEE how accurate they have been.

Bachmann should stop eating until she pays back all of the farm subsidies that she's received.

27--Strawman. And the usual reading comprehension and assumptions problem.

#27--Strawman. And the usual reading comprehension and assumptions problem.

#32 | Posted by pragmatist

lol .. even with GOOGLE Prag couldn't offer an example of a working Progressive Social Model

I feel for him .. I'll try to help -

~ Cuba .. oh shit, nevermind
~ there's Venezuela .. oh shit II
~ how 'bout Mexico? .. oh shit III

well, let's try ..

~ Greece .. DAMN nevermind
~ Italy .. damn II
~ France .. oh hell, why did I volunteer 4 this?

I didn't try. I'm not interested in strawmen. Go play that game with someone who thinks your pablum is worth his or her time. And you are conflating progressive and marxist, as usual making me wonder why you bother, when you don't know the meanings of basic political terms.

I was never talking about these concepts. I'm looking for a GOP candidate who is not far right reactionary and not mired in some old-fashioned religious stance. If Ike ran today, you people would call him a RINO. Oh, for good old-fashioned Republican values...

"I think I've established why so many on the Right appear to hate the poor and middle-class, actually."

You have indeed. Very few Americans are more than three generations removed from the farm or the factory floor.

What's unintentionally hysterically funny is that so many people think their present-day la-de-dah lifestyle conceals their origins. I have a very hard time containing my giggles when I'm in a good restaurant, because there is invariably some overdressed piece of trash having a hard time contending with food they don't have to unwrap, to say nothing of being unable to have any Mountain Dew with it.

Is this the same Michelle Bachman who's family receives $250,000 in farm subsidies every year? Incredible. There has to be something in the water in her district, how could anyone, liberal or conservative, vote for that idiot?
#22 | Posted by danni at 2011-11-12 02:22 PM

WOAH, are you kidding?!

What a hypocritical lying sack of shit! Bachmann should be ashamed and run out of every location she has "booked".

I don't doubt she's been bilking the community she lives in for quite some time now.

.. when I'm in a good restaurant, because there is invariably some overdressed piece of trash having a hard time contending with food they don't have to unwrap, to say nothing of being unable to have any Mountain Dew with it.

#35 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

.. that's gotta be one of the "oddest" observations ever expressed, AND a very telling indicator of why you embrace PROGRESSIVE-LIB ideals

.. your ego, id, and super-ego are soooo tortured up that you continuously overcompensate, yet will NEVER accept yourself

"You weren't always like this..."

Bullshit.

Jestgettingstupider has never been anything but an ill-informed, mis-educated, partisan POS who absolutely hates anything she perceives to be even slightly liberal in any way, shape, form or fashion.

.

"absolutely hates anything she perceives to be even slightly liberal in any way, shape, form or fashion. "

Well, that hasn't been my experience (direct experience as opposed to observation) before today. But today, he, she, or it has certainly made that part pretty clear. At least that he, she, or it won't read or look at big picture in yours truly, but will seek the parts of posts that show what he, she, or it wants to see.

It'd be funny if it weren't so fucking sad.

so fucking sad.

#39 | Posted by pragmatist

So fucking sad is moronic Obama voters who put the most worthless, hack, empty suit klown in US history, in the Presidency.

That is fucking sad.

".. that's gotta be one of the "oddest" observations ever expressed, AND a very telling indicator of why you embrace PROGRESSIVE-LIB ideals"

What?

Because I think it's funny when someone drives up to the restaurant in a BMW, has on major jewelry, has acrylic nails done up in a flawless French manicure, has their hair highlighted in three shades of blonde, is wearing Louboutins and an Elie Saab dress - and then obviously doesn't know which is the salad fork and which is for the entree, or that her conversation shouldn't be screamed loud enough to be heard twelve tables away, or that decent people - of all economic strata - don't get drunk in good restaurants, or that waiters and others in service positions deserve civility as much as the next person?

I personally would like to see the return of that good old-fashioned word, "lout." You can spray Chanel No. 5 on a skunk all you please, and what you end up with is still a skunk.

And as far as my "progressive lib" ideals are concerned, I remember when democracy was supposed to be a leveling up, not down.

So fucking sad is moronic Obama voters who put the most worthless, hack, empty suit klown in US history, in the Presidency.
That is fucking sad.
#40 | POSTED BY REXZEITGEIST

Which worthless hack empty suit you talking about George W Bush Jr or Saint Ronald Reagen? Neither of them had clue why they were there, they only knew to puppet what their corporate masters told them to.

Rex prefers we enter two more failed wars at the expense of the tax payers.

That is fucking sad.

"This is what happens when a recent Quinnipiac poll shows Mr. Obama's approval rating among Virginia independents at 29%."

happenin' all over, ZED, sorry....

#29 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2011

It's a point fellows like you keep ignoring, but worth repeating nonetheless:

You hope that Obama will be perceived as a loser by the Independents (or whomever), all the while doing your damnest to elect someone who is going to be an obvious loser himself.

It doesn't make a lick of sense. No sense at all. Obama will at least be a likeable loser. That might be all the reason in the world millions vote for him over a warmed-over piece of shit like Newt.

Who won't get the nomination, by the way. No, Mitt will probably get it and be dogged for an entire year by CONSERVATIVES who state that he's a hateful excuse for whatever. A process that has already begun.

#42 | Posted by ClownShack

You're a nasty little subhuman rat, your vote for the corporate whore Obama fucked America by putting the most worthless indivudual to ever hold office in this country in power.

If trash like you had the capacity for shame, you would be paralyzed with it.

to say nothing of being unable to have any Mountain Dew with it.

#35 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

The only reason you can't get a Mountain Dew in most good restaurants is because Coca Cola has a lock on most of the restaurant trade, but I digress.

#44 | Posted by RexZeitgeist at 2011-11-12 06:10 PM | Reply | Flag: Self Loathing Rant

What's the matter Rex---walk by a mirror? I'm surprised you could even cast a reflection.

I do not hate the poor, I just hate the slackers. There are many good hardworking people who are poor yet doing their best.

I do not hate the poor, I just hate the slackers. There are many good hardworking people who are poor yet doing their best.

#47 | Posted by MSgt

Pretty close to my own Liberal attitude there. But I'd add this insight: there are as many slackers among the rich.

#46 | Posted by Buttfuck_Bob

Speaking of the mentally defective.....Better adjust your antenni, Uncle Martin, it's just past a full moon and the smoke stack is puffing overtime.

Tell us again how Obama 'did' 9/11....

The only reason you can't get a Mountain Dew in most good restaurants is because Coca Cola has a lock on most of the restaurant trade

It's nice to see the Free Market (TM) working so efficiently to get consumers the goods they desire.

But I'd add this insight: there are as many slackers among the rich.

#48 | Posted by Zed

Well, they can afford to be slackers. Or did you mean "There are many slackers among the rich who won't just volunteer to fund any ill-concieved social program Dems can dream up."?

Well, they can afford to be slackers.

#51 | Posted by American1st

Oh, really?

Thanks for pointing out an interesting difference in values between I and Thou.

"there are as many slackers among the rich."

#48 | Posted by Zed

Not for long, scooter.
I've watched the piranhas work.

Well, they can afford to be slackers.

#51 | Posted by American1st at

Gee, I wonder what else they could afford to be? You are positively Roman (ancient) in your attitude.

Tell us again how Obama 'did' 9/11....

#49 | Posted by RexZeitgeist at 2011-11-12 06:41 PM Flag: Thinks lead paint chips are tasty.

You are the only one who thinks Obama did it dumMy. Have some chips.

;-)

"The only reason you can't get a Mountain Dew in most good restaurants is because Coca Cola has a lock on most of the restaurant trade, but I digress."

Believe it or not, there actually is a stratum of restaurants above Olive Garden and Longhorn.

There are a lot of rich slackers who never worked a day in their lives.

Believe it or not, there actually is a stratum of restaurants above Olive Garden and Longhorn.

#56 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

Yes, and they still sell Coke.

Believe it or not, there actually is a stratum of restaurants above Olive Garden and Longhorn.

Really? And they serve Mountain Dew?

On a whim I called the local Ruth's Chris and they serve Coke, Diet Coke, and Sprite; i.e the big KO products.

Not that Ruth's Chris is anything more than Olive Garden on steroids...

As a matter of fact, I've found that most of the REALLY nice restaurants will provide a Mountain Dew when asked, even if they have to send a wine steward out to a machine to find one.

Thanks for pointing out an interesting difference in values between I and Thou.

#52 | Posted by Zed
True, dat. I'm 100% certain you have more accululated wealth than I, yet you're the one bitching about the rich.

You are positively Roman (ancient) in your attitude.

#54 | Posted by Zed
Yeah, so I'm Old Skool...sue me.

As a matter of fact, I've found that most of the REALLY nice restaurants will provide a Mountain Dew when asked, even if they have to send a wine steward out to a machine to find one.

"I'll have a bottle of your finest Ripple."

For someone who rails against bailouts and 'the government' Bachmann sure hasn't minded taking over $250,000 in government farm subsidies.

#15 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2011-11-12 01:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

Of course, AmericanUnderwear did not accept the $1,000 Obama 'stimulus rebate' bribe. Not to mention free cheese and peanut butter.

Now all I need is Bachman's explanation of how she can get business owners to end the lockout and stop moving factories overseas. Get the job creators to create jobs here, not in the developing world.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2011-11-12 02:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

You must have missed this post .......

"Yes, the GOP has advanced some "jobs bills". The short story is that they are mostly a vehicle for tax breaks and repeal of regulations."

Repeal of regulations.

Stop making it harder and harder to employ people.

Why is that such a difficult concept?

Is this the same Michelle Bachman who's family receives $250,000 in farm subsidies every year? Incredible.

#22 | Posted by danni at 2011-11-12 02:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, why do Democrats offer farm subsidies? Are farmers growing something that Democrats think is important? When did Democrats ever advocate an end to crop subsidies?

You offer farmers free money for doing specific things, and then you trash farmers for doing exactly what you requested?

WTF Danni? Don't you have a talking point to cover this?

There are a lot of rich slackers who never worked a day in their lives.

#57 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2011-11-12 07:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Paris Hilton.

Now, name 10 more. If there are "a lot" it should be easy.

When did Democrats ever advocate an end to crop subsidies?

Vermin

Obama proposes end to $5 billion farm subsidy

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Monday proposed to end a "direct payment" subsidy that gives $5 billion a year to farmers regardless of need, as part of his larger effort to reduce the federal budget deficit.

Direct payments, created in 1996 as a temporary measure, will be the largest farm subsidy this year and terminating them would be a dramatic re-shaping of the U.S. farm program.

http://www.reuters.com/
article/2011/09/20/us-debt-
obama-farm-
idUSTRE78J00120110920

1996? Hmm. I wonder who proposed that chestnut in the U.S. House of Representatives? (If Vermin guessed Democrats he'd be wrong).

Vermin also can't comprehend Bachmann's hypocrisy in railing against 'government programs' on one hand, while on the other going so far as to write the Secretary of Agriculture as a proponent of the very same subsidies she benefited from to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Then again, we're talking Vermin's Calculator. The one he doesn't have to use to figure his U.S. taxes since he's exempt as an expat who's lived overseas more than 18 months just to avoid paying U.S. taxes.

For someone who rails against bailouts and 'the government' Bachmann sure hasn't minded taking over $250,000 in government farm subsidies.

#15 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

from a rational viewpoint, someone acting AGAINST their own self-interest is BY DEFINITION, NOT HYPOCRITICAL ..
unless Bachmann herself had originated the program, her stance here gives her MORE credibility, not LESS ..

but I suppose that's why Libs are sooo looney ..
the "moral relativism" they embrace allows LITERALLY ANYTHING to be rationalized .. then un-rationalized and discarded at will, based on their "HANDLERS" whims at any given time

what handlers, you ask?
its hardly co-incidental that widely varying MSM outlets would swarm to target ideals that encourage critical thinking ..
and do it simultaneously using the same talking points and phrases

.Self reliance means, if anyone will not work,

For the Batshit Bachmann's "self reliance" means living off the government.

Now, name 10 more. If there are "a lot" it should be easy.

All the Kardashian's. There has to be at least 10 there.

Earth to Rbot, Harry Reid is sitting on 17 jobs bills passed by the House.
#10 | Posted by KBM at 2011-11-12
If you can cite them, I'd love to look at them. Public information, you know.

#11 | POSTED BY ZED AT 2011-11-12 01:50 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

KaBooM just babbles off Sean Hannity talking points and has no idea what those so called 17 "jobs" bills are.

Now, name 10 more. If there are "a lot" it should be easy.

#67 | Posted by vernon

Name ten poor people who have never worked a day in their lives. Excepting those with a severe and long-standing mentla illness, this will be difficult to do.

Being poor is not only hard, it's hard work.

69--Wow. Great example of twisted logic. She says gov't money is bad, but she takes it. How is that anything but hypocritical? How the program originated is irrelevant. Seems to me she should reject it. Think of this: conservatives often tell liberals, If you want to give more in taxes, just check the box. They're asking us to put our money where our mouth is, right? That's the argument, right? Then analogously, Michelle Bachmann should refect all gov't monies other than her salary.

#75 | Posted by pragmatist

Entirely correct.

75--
refect=reject

A variation on the Bachmann hypocrisy is that she merely took advantage of "the way the system was" at the time.

Now, we'll skate by her apparent desire that no one going forward should be able to take advantage of the same opportuniites she had no choice but to use.

We will talk about how Bachmann's (and the Right's) attitude towards such things resembles that of a professed Abolitionist living in 1850's Georgia who asserts that he/she must take advantage of slavery to accumulate wealth because slavery was the nature of the system when he/she found it.

Horse manure. Not only is it hypocritical on it's merits, the wealth such hard chargers accumulate is not really their's at all. It belongs to the slaves.

"Wow. Great example of twisted logic. She says gov't money is bad, but she takes it. How is that anything but hypocritical?"

Kinda like your hero, the "moderate" Great Community Organizer and Race Healer hates "fat cats" but takes more of their money than anyone else? Maybe hypocritical like how much the "Messiah" hates lobbyists but has them stuffed all over his administration? Kinda like his "jobs czar" appointed to create jobs is creating them in China? Well, you should have a good handle on "hypocrisy" yourself, Prag, tyrying to pass yourself off as a "moderate."

"Not only is it hypocritical on it's merits, the wealth such hard chargers accumulate is not really their's at all. It belongs to the slaves."

Posted by ZED from his location in the Obamaville in Oakland in concert with the patriotic slaves.

"Not only is it hypocritical on it's merits, the wealth such hard chargers accumulate is not really their's at all. It belongs to the slaves."

Posted by ZED from his location in the Obamaville in Oakland in concert with the patriotic slaves.

I never said I was a moderate. I'm a liberal, pretty clear about that. "Pragmatist" means that I recognize that my idealism is not always realistic.

And again, you're confusing me with some other poster. I have never held nor implied that Obama is my hero. Far from it.

Btw, deflect much? I wasn't talking about Obama. I was talking about Bachmann. Wanna talk about Bachmann?

Prag, tyrying to pass yourself off as a "moderate."

#79 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2011-11-13 10:04 AM | Reply

He's just pointing out that Bachmann consciously put aside the chance to be an authentic person in favor of getting rich.

Your point ony has merit if you first acknowledge that's what she did.

Posted by ZED from his location in the Obamaville in Oakland in concert with the patriotic slaves.

#81 | Posted by jestgettinalong

If someone does the work he should get the reward. The Right insists on this principle for high wage earners. In regards to the poor, not so much.

And btw, Jest, the best you have is "Your guy does it too, so it's okay for our gal to do it?" Really? I thought one of the conservative mantras was honesty and holding people personally responsible for their actions. If you're gonna live that, you have to hold Rep. Bachmann responsible for her BS not matter whether President Obama is similarly hypocritical or not.

Is this the same Michelle Bachman who's family receives $250,000 in farm subsidies every year? Incredible.
#22 | Posted by danni at 2011-11-12 02:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I never said I was a moderate. I'm a liberal, pretty clear about that. "Pragmatist" means that I recognize that my idealism is not always realistic."

"She says gov't money is bad, but she takes it."

It is pretty clear you don't recognize anything but being a liberal if you are foolish enough to camp on a danni post. Or Zeddy...

"Btw, deflect much? I wasn't talking about Obama. I was talking about Bachmann. Wanna talk about Bachmann?"

Bachmann is irrelevant. No way is she a major player. However, when you called Obama a "moderate" yesterday it gave me insight to your predilection. In all polls and to most analysts he's farther left than any previous president, most of the population, and was recognized as the most "liberal" in the Senate. If that's YOUR idea of "moderate," well......

"It is pretty clear you don't recognize anything but being a liberal if you are foolish enough to camp on a danni post. Or Zeddy... "

I don't know what this means. What, if someone offers a fact here that I've seen stated in numerous venues, and I respond to it as if it's a fact, I am immediately a stupid follower? Wow.

But then, Jest seems to think I'm Danni, so maybe you and he should get together and shake hands, knowing that you've successfully put all DR left-of-center types in the same basket. God knows I run around asserting that you and Vern and all the other conservatives are exactly the same. Yep, that's what I do.

Let's try this again: Does Bachmann not rail against bailouts, handouts, and social safety nets? Do Bachmann and her family organization not accept farm subsidies (the first hit on a Google search shows an article from Bloomberg Business, hardly a liberal media mouthpiece)? If you can offer proof of the answer to either question being no, I will retract my statements and apologize to Bachmann, not that she gives a shit what some anonymous blogger on some political chat site thinks of her.

"Your guy does it too, so it's okay for our gal to do it?" Really? I thought one of the conservative mantras was honesty and holding people personally responsible for their actions. If you're gonna live that, you have to hold Rep. Bachmann responsible for her BS not matter whether President Obama is similarly hypocritical or not."

I wasn't saying that it's OK for Bachmann, I was merely pointing out that you find it OK to support Obama and will vote for him but won't support Bachmann for doing something even less offensive than taking "fat cat" moneyand bashing "fatcats." As I said, she's really kinda irrelvant in the grand scheme.
You like to pass yourself off as some kind of free thinker and tend to come up with, "I haven't been following that," or some such shitrather than tell us whether you approve or disapprove of someone or something. You kinda profess "mushy" opinion of the teachers' unions involvement in the OWS but you don't seem to hesitate much to disapprove of the Tea Parties. I withheld a strong opinion of you one way or another for a time, but I have come to a decision that you're a phony and just another teacher, another member of a teachers' union who wouldn't hesitate to join with them in creating havoc and indoctrinating young minds.

"Bachmann is irrelevant. No way is she a major player. However, when you called Obama a "moderate" yesterday it gave me insight to your predilection. In all polls and to most analysts he's farther left than any previous president, most of the population, and was recognized as the most "liberal" in the Senate. If that's YOUR idea of "moderate," well......"

I called Obama "moderate"? I believe I said he was more moderate than many of his critics like to assert. I stand by that. Most of his critics seem to put him next to Chavez or Alinsky. I am again left to think you're not reading my posts or understanding them. If you want to talk with me, please take the time to try to understand my position. If you are going to characterize me, get it right. You've been wrong in two threads yesterday and one today.

And whether or not Bachmann is irrelevant, she is the subject of this thread. If you want to talk about Obama's hypocrisy, feel free to start a thread. I'd be interested in various arguments and sets of evidence. And regarding some cases, I'd be right there with you, criticizing this president. You clearly believe I'm an Obama worshiper. Nope. I voted for him because he was better than the option, and I'll do it again in 2012 unless the GOP comes up with someone with more to offer than being a Republican version of this guy (Romney) or a Tea Party fool who appeals to emotionalism and bumper sticker logic. I'm ready. Bring that person forward so we can have politics that mean something in America. At this point, I'd vote for you or for Crispee before I'd vote for any of the Republican nominees. Hell, I'd vote for Afk before that.

"But then, Jest seems to think I'm Danni, so maybe you and he should get together and shake hands, knowing that you've successfully put all DR left-of-center types in the same basket."

Not all, just you and a lot of our other little "progressive" graduates of the Danni Institute of Political Science and Economics.

"You like to pass yourself off as some kind of free thinker and tend to come up with, "I haven't been following that," or some such shitrather than tell us whether you approve or disapprove of someone or something."

Because unlike many here, I am honest about what I don't know. I don't leap in to make a fiery comment when I don't know enough about the topic. You should applaud that. There are too many here who spout off when they have no clue.

"You kinda profess "mushy" opinion of the teachers' unions involvement in the OWS"

Again, no opinion here. You asserted something general about teachers or their involvement in said movement, but you offered ONE video that had a teacher in it. Yeah, serious proof.

"but you don't seem to hesitate much to disapprove of the Tea Parties."

Actually, that's bullshit. I have been extremely fair about the Tea Parties, often calling out others for accusations of racism and such. I was the guy who wanted to go do a Flip video documentary at a Tea Party rally and allow the ralliers to speak for themselves. (I couldn't 'cause the rally in my area was the same night as big doin's at my school.) I was about to write that when I said "Tea Party fool" above it wasn't a comment on the TP but on the pols I've seen wrap themselves in it. But of course, you won't believe me. Check my posting history.

"I withheld a strong opinion of you one way or another for a time, but I have come to a decision that you're a phony and just another teacher, another member of a teachers' union who wouldn't hesitate to join with them in creating havoc and indoctrinating young minds."

And that shows me that you aren't a discriminating reader. I don't do rallies. And in school, I encourage the students to challenge each other and me. You won't believe me, of course, and that's your choice. Have fun continuing to make shit up about me. You seem to enjoy it.

91--continuing to prove my point that he doesn't pay much attention to what I actually write.

Dude, in my estimation, you're becoming LE_Light with spelling and punctuation skills.

In 92, "discriminating" should be "discerning."

And btw, Jest, the best you have is "Your guy does it too, so it's okay for our gal to do it?" Really?

#85 | Posted by pragmatist

ummm .. jest's point being that YOUR logic is "for-shit & disingenuous" ..
AND when called on it you deflect to some strawman argument outa the "moral relativism" playbook .. followed by some whining about how your critics are deflecting
dude .. you are an educator? really? those kids are in a mess o hurt

"I voted for him because he was better than the option, and I'll do it again in 2012 unless the GOP comes up with someone with more to offer than being a Republican version of this guy (Romney) or a Tea Party fool who appeals to emotionalism and bumper sticker logic."

I'm a supporter of Tea Party logic as a member of the Sevier County Tea Party and I support the "emotionalism and bumper sticker logic" of smaller government, less spending, balanced budget, reduced debt and a return to the Constitution. I know you find that I'm a "fool" and just emotional and illogical for supporting those radical positions. I'm also aware that you evidently identify more closely with the denizens of the Obamavilles becuase they espouse everything logical and not emotional at all. They are also supported by the Great Community Organizer and Race Healer (for whom you're voting) and the teachers' unions (to which you belong.) It's obvious to me now where you stand.

It is pretty clear you don't recognize anything but being a liberal if you are foolish enough to camp on a danni post. Or Zeddy... "

"I don't know what this means. What, if someone offers a fact here that I've seen stated in numerous venues, and I respond to it as if it's a fact, I am immediately a stupid follower? Wow."

You don't know what that means? Wow... Then you seem to get it in the next sentence and deflect the gaffe by coming up with nothing more than a clock being right twice a day?

Let's start with YOU camping on someone like danni, who has never had an original thought in her life, much less shown to understand what the hell she reads and spews here. YOU followed her lead about Bachmann's family receiving $250k a year in farm subsidies. Knowing how libs here are mostly stupider than dirt, did you bother to read up on that subsidy, or simply echo it like a trained lib?


I don't think you're a fool at all, Jest, except in your interpretation of me. As I noted later, the "Tea Party fool" descriptor is for politicians, not citizens: "a Tea Party fool who appeals to..." I have similar disdain for Republican Party and Democratic Party fools. And I think you know what I meant about bumper-sticker logic better than you are pretending right now. At least I hope you do.

And LE, you trying to call me out for strawman is too rich for words.

"Because unlike many here, I am honest about what I don't know. I don't leap in to make a fiery comment when I don't know enough about the topic. You should applaud that. There are too many here who spout off when they have no clue."

So instead you follow danni's lead and make it part of your retort?

"YOU followed her lead about Bachmann's family receiving $250k a year in farm subsidies. Knowing how libs here are mostly stupider than dirt, did you bother to read up on that subsidy, or simply echo it like a trained lib?"

Again, I have seen the fact asserted in multiple venues, and the first hit on Google was a Bloomberg news article. Take it up with them. And address my comment: I offered to retract my criticism of Rep. Bachmann on this topic if you showed me proof of the answer to either question being no.

As usual, you ignore at least one major salient point in the post to which you respond.

99--Broken record. See 100.

(Btw, I don't look to see who I'm quoting unless I need to know their name to make a point. I didn't even know I was quoting Danni. And also btw, I've been known to call Danni out, which might indicate to discerning readers that she and I are hardly two peas in a pod. But unlike many of you here, I try to treat each poster as an individual, rather than lumping large numbers together under some label. Sometimes I fail, but I try.)

"Knowing how libs here are mostly stupider than dirt, did you bother to read up on that subsidy, or simply echo it like a trained lib?"

No, Prag will revert to his ol, "I haven't been following that." I wonder if he's aware of ANY of the Great Community Organizer and race Healrs' scam or those of his littl butt buddies. The $250K farm subsidy gives him heartburn, but I bet THIS doesn't bother him:

"Reporting from Washingtonâ€" Over the last year, the Obama administration has aggressively pushed a $433-million plan to buy an experimental smallpox drug, despite uncertainty over whether it is needed or will work.

Senior officials have taken unusual steps to secure the contract for New York-based Siga Technologies Inc., whose controlling shareholder is billionaire Ronald O. Perelman, one of the world's richest men and a longtime Democratic Party donor."

www.latimes.com

OF COURSE that doesn't bother him. It's ONLY $433 MILLION for an unneeded vaccine. A drop in the bucket! Why shouldn't Obama's supporters recive a little reward? AND...the Tea party disapproval would just be emotional and illogical...right, Prag?

Someone who wants to be president should be able to say what they mean. If she didn't mean it literally, she should have been smart enough to figure out a way to convey her thoughts without sounding like a total lunatic.

"Again, I have seen the fact asserted in multiple venues, and the first hit on Google was a Bloomberg news article."

Really? Then why are you running from echoing danni then? If she is correct, why not put it in my face? Simple. Either you lied and never read anything on Bachmann's family. B You did read it, and simply accepted it without doing any of your own research. C You have no clue and are another parroting lib.

The farm in Independence, Wisconsin, received $259,332 in federal subsidies from 1995 to 2008, according to U.S. government data compiled by the Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based research and advocacy organization focusing on public health and environmental issues. The farm hasn't requested federal subsidies since Bachmann's father-in-law, Paul Bachmann, passed away in 2009, her presidential campaign said in a statement released today.

Bachmann said in an April interview that the farm belongs to her in-laws and that her husband administers it for his mother and brothers. She also said the farm is rented out.
www.bloomberg.com

"Someone who wants to be president should be able to say what they mean."

LOL...she has a lot of company in the present administration. However, she's never gonna be president anyway, so not to worry. By the way, "someone" is a singular pronoun and "they" is a plural pronoun. Your sentence should have read, "Someone who wants to be president should be able to say what HE OR SHE means." No need to thank me for helping YOU say what YOU mean correctly.

If she didn't mean it literally, she should have been smart enough to figure out a way to convey her thoughts without sounding like a total lunatic.

She "clarified" it last night in the debate:

“If you look at China, they don’t have food stamps. If you look at China, they’re in a very different situation. They save for their own retirement security … They don’t have the modern welfare state. And China’s growing. And so what I would do is look at the programs that L.B.J. gave us with the Great Society and they’d be gone.”

She lives in a fantasy world, unaware or choosing to ignore reality so it doesn't conflict with her own actions and ideology.

If you look at China, they don't have food stamps. If you look at China, they're in a very different situation. They save for their own retirement security. They don't have the modern welfare state. And China's growing. And so what I would do is look at the programs that L.B.J. gave us with the Great Society and they'd be gone.

Cleaned up (I hope).

Despite repeatedly asserting that she has never received income from a family farm that drew federal subsidies in the past, Rep. Michele Bachmann again listed the farm as a source of income when she filed her 2010 personal financial disclosures late last week.

articles.latimes.com

"By the way, "someone" is a singular pronoun and "they" is a plural pronoun. Your sentence should have read, "Someone who wants to be president should be able to say what HE OR SHE means." No need to thank me for helping YOU say what YOU mean correctly."

You're technically correct about the grammar. But I got my point across without sounding like I was conveying a completely insanse idea. The error didn't change the meaning of what I was saying. So I was able to say what I meant.

But thank you so much for your concern. That was very valuable feedback....

#108 - as Rick Perry would say, "Oops."

From OC's own link..."Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, a critic of federal spending, received between $5,000 and $15,000 in income last year from a family farm that has received more than $250,000 in federal subsidies, according to her most recent House financial-disclosure form."

So that proves what again?

"The $250K farm subsidy gives him heartburn, but I bet THIS doesn't bother him:"

No heartburn at all. You generally enjoy hyperbole, or only when mischaracterizing someone's position? And yep, I'm on record in the other thread: I think no-bids are excoriation-worthy no matter who does 'em. But again, you keep talking about Obama. If I started talking about Bush in a thread about, oh, Obama, you'd accuse me of deflecting.

104: I will take your word (link) for it and willingly, even happily retract my comments. And Rep. Bachmann, if you are reading this, I apologize for the accusation. (Note: It still looks bad, and what Sully said is apt.) See how easy that was? No need at all to hurl accusations, toss suppositions around, or offer mischaracterizations of rival posters. Just argue the point. I could have saved you two posts (or is it three now?) if you'd just offered this up the first time. I'm sure you enjoyed yourself, though, and I'm happy to offer you entertainment on a fine Sunday morning.

#108 - as Rick Perry would say, "Oops."
#108 | Posted by prozacboi at 2011-11-13 11:17 AM |

Like I said, stupider than sand...

The Independence, Wis., farm, Bachmann Farm Family LP, received nearly $260,000 in federal subsidies between 1995 and 2008. At the time, the farm was owned by Bachmann's father-in-law, Paul Bachmann, who died in May 2009.

they - 2 [ singular ] used to refer to a person of unspecified sex : ask someone if they could help.

"She "clarified" it last night in the debate"

Her clarification was more ignorant than the original statement.

"And so what I would do is look at the programs that L.B.J. gave us with the Great Society and they'd be gone."

LBJ was the last democrat president I voted for. Undoubtedly, as far as I'm concerned, his Great Society and "guns and butter" philosophy have done much to cause the nation's troubles and destruction of families. He was also the first to raid the Social Security "lockbox" and use those funds to further his programs. Every other president since has done the same. I don't think it (Great Society) should be completely "gone," but it certainly needs a microscopic inspection and reforming.

It's nice to see we have some old school grammarians on the DR! : ) Jane Austen and Yav's uncited source notwithstanding, I abhor the singular they and eschew its use. The easiest write-around is to go plural with the example: People who... they... But I grant Sully's point that his meaning was absolutely clear. If we all spent time correcting each other's grammar and spelling, we'd have no time for insulting each other's sexuality, parentage, intellect, or taste in beer. Priorities, people!

Maybe I should have included this for the monkey's here unable to determine the definition of Bachmann's family. (Michele Marie Amble)

Seeing as they are too fucking stupid to comprehend the so called subsidies ended in 2008 because her father in law died in 2009, and of course the Farm was inherited by the REST OF THE BACHMANN FAMILY. Is it any wonder why shiny objects attract them?


"Is it any wonder why shiny objects attract them?"

Okay, that was funny.

Like I said, stupider than sand...

The Independence, Wis., farm, Bachmann Farm Family LP, received nearly $260,000 in federal subsidies between 1995 and 2008. At the time, the farm was owned by Bachmann's father-in-law, Paul Bachmann, who died in May 2009.

#113 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2011-11-13 11:20 AM

"Bachmann's financial disclosures paint a different picture: Since 2006, she has reported receiving between $37,504 and $120,000 in income from the farm, including between $5,001 and $15,000 that she recently disclosed for the 2010 calendar year."

www.drudgeretort.com

Not so good at reading are you OC?

"Someone who wants to be president should be able to say what they mean. If she didn't mean it literally, she should have been smart enough to figure out a way to convey her thoughts without sounding like a total lunatic."

Nice... The same person who jumped on the bandwagon Cain didn't know China had developed nukes, brings that skill into another moment void of common sense...

Wrong link on #120...articles.latimes.com

"I think no-bids are excoriation-worthy no matter who does 'em."

There are times when no-bids are absolutely necessary. Having spent twenty years in the navy, I've seen emergencies where there was no time to go out for bids. Do you have any idea how long that takes? HOWEVER, in this case, My concern was not with the no-bid, it was with the MILLIONS to Obama's crony for some absolutely unnecessary purpose. But then, I'm sure you don't consider it cronyism to some "fat cat" and don't see any waste or hypocrisy here at all. Now...you wanna dismiss the the 433 MILLION and we can go back to the 250 thousand subsidy to Bachmann's in-laws which you so strongly disapprove. Talk about HYPOCRISY...(which, by the way, IS an integral part of this thread.)

"Not so good at reading are you OC?"

Damn good at reading. Even better at understanding what I read by doing my own research. How about you? I know you are challenged, but maybe the thought of her in laws receiving subsidies and not her may open your Mr Magoo eyes. Also moron, if her husband receives any income, she has to disclose it. You know being the wife and all...

Damn good at reading. Even better at understanding what I read by doing my own research

#124 | Posted by crispee_oc

So then you agree Michele is a liar then?

Here let's look at how she received a subsidy from fannie/freddie like 90% of all other mortgages. Or how her husbands clinic receives medicare for reimbursed expenses like 90% of all medical related clinics. Get the drift?

MODERATOR: I got a lot of questions from people asking is it fair for you to call for dismantling federal programs you ultimately have been a beneficiary of? So in terms of guaranteeing home mortgages, do you think the federal government has a role in that?

BACHMANN: Now unlike all of you, who I'm sure pay cash for your homes, there are people out there like myself who actually have to go to a bank and get a mortgage. And this is the problem. It's almost impossible to buy a home in this country today without the federal government being involved. Whether it is with the FHA, whether it's with Fannie, whether it's with Freddie, it's almost impossible to buy a home. What's important is that we do dismantle a number of these federal programs that everyone agrees are clearly out of control.
thinkprogress.org

"Nice... The same person who jumped on the bandwagon Cain didn't know China had developed nukes, brings that skill into another moment void of common sense..."

You still bitching about that? Given how many people here rub your nose in your Depends every day, I'd of thought you'd have something else to cry about by now. You must really have a deep attraction to Cain....

"But I grant Sully's point that his meaning was absolutely clear. If we all spent time correcting each other's grammar and spelling, we'd have no time for insulting each other's sexuality, parentage, intellect, or taste in beer. Priorities, people!"

LOL...I was only pulling Sully's tail when he was talking about someone else's failing in speech, grammar or whatever. I do agree, however, that it's much more important to insult our little "progressive" friends over ANY issue. It's difficult for those of us with common sense to see how they could support borrowing and spending to reward unions and "fat cats" while telling taxpayers it's all for reaching properity.
Nobody has yet fully explained to us the intricacies of how that works. Have YOU got it figured out, Prag?

"Despite repeatedly asserting that she has never received income from a family farm that drew federal subsidies in the past, Rep. Michele Bachmann again listed the farm as a source of income when she filed her 2010 personal financial disclosures late last week."

"Bachmann's financial disclosures paint a different picture: Since 2006, she has reported receiving between $37,504 and $120,000 in income from the farm, including between $5,001 and $15,000 that she recently disclosed for the 2010 calendar year."

articles.latimes.com

Maybe you should spend a little more time absorbing what you read and less time with the childish insults that do nothing to further your point....hahaha....who am I'm kidding? You have a good day.

#126 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2011-11-13 11:41 AM | Reply | Flag: Hey let's change the subject!!

#126 is a rationalization Bachmann offers for cognitive dissonance.

"I'd of thought you'd have something else to cry about by now."

Gee, Sully...Prag is gonna have a fit. Your sentence should read, "I'd HAVE thought..." The preposition, "of," is not appropriate as you used it. You don't want folks here to think you're a functional illiterate, do you?

You still bitching about that? Given how many people here rub your nose in your Depends every day, I'd of thought you'd have something else to cry about by now. You must really have a deep attraction to Cain....
#127 | Posted by Sully at 2011-11-13 11:42 AM

Yeah... Like Bush/Cheney anytime I point out the stupidity of others like yourself, I am attracted to X,Y or Z. Or my position has something to do with blah, blah, blah...

Look if you want to remain a fucking moron and jump on the wagon of stupidity, knock yourself out. But don't get your thong bunched when I openly point the finger and laugh at your whining ass.

#126 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2011-11-13 11:41 AM | Reply | Flag: Hey let's change the subject!!

#130 | Posted by prozacboi at 2011-11-13 11:47 AM

Why? Lauging at tools who can't figure out what a financial disclosure is much less understand community property is always something as a running joke.

"Yeah... Like Bush/Cheney anytime I point out the stupidity of others like yourself, I am attracted to X,Y or Z. Or my position has something to do with blah, blah, blah..."

Are you so upset that you're speaking in tongues? Have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Don't care either.

"Look if you want to remain a fucking moron and jump on the wagon of stupidity, knock yourself out. But don't get your thong bunched when I openly point the finger and laugh at your whining ass."

Except you are the one who is clearly whining. I say Bachman should be able to say what she means without sounding like a nutjob. And you waddle over and start bitching about something that I said about Cain last week. YOU are the clearly the butthurt whiney cunt in this case. Deal with it, you old queen.

"Gee, Sully...Prag is gonna have a fit."

Just don't remind Prag of an english teacher messing up a homophone like write and right... lol

'Why? Lauging at tools who can't figure out what a financial disclosure is much less understand community property is always something as a running joke.

#134 | Posted by crispee_oc"

I'm surpised you admit that Bachmann is a tool. Congrats!

Except you are the one who is clearly whining. I say Bachman should be able to say what she means without sounding like a nutjob. And you waddle over and start bitching about something that I said about Cain last week. YOU are the clearly the butthurt whiney cunt in this case. Deal with it, you old queen.
#135 | Posted by Sully at 2011-11-13 11:59 AM

Yeah, the brilliant thinker wanting her to explain if you don't work you dont eat defintion analogy. LMAO. Or a former balistics analyst running for pres didn't know China had nukes...

You got me again Sally. Right up there with repubs want grandma to eat dog food. Repubs want all kids to grow up poor and hungry. Repubs only care about the 1% vote to win elections and hate the other 99% voters...

I'm surpised you admit that Bachmann is a tool. Congrats!
#137 | Posted by prozacboi at 2011-11-13 12:04 PM |

Errrr...The fact Bachmann listed the assets and income from her "husband's family farm" as per rules and laws, means I meant the tools like you Sparky.

"Errrr...The fact Bachmann listed the assets and income from her "husband's family farm" as per rules and laws,..."

I understand she's gonna do Geitner's taxes for him this year so he can get it right. Maybe she can help Charlie Rangel too. You can understand why our little "progressive" friends here don't understand taxes...seeing as how they're part of the 47% not paying any.

"Errrr...The fact Bachmann listed the assets and income from her "husband's family farm" as per rules and laws, means I meant the tools like you Sparky.

#139 | Posted by crispee_oc"

Duhhhh, really? See #129.

The very fact that you think that's any sort of defense for Bachmann's lying is utterly ridiculous as well as your projection.

Now called me some more names so you can have the last word as well as feel like the winner because I'm not coming down to your level.

You can understand why our little "progressive" friends here don't understand taxes...seeing as how they're part of the 47% not paying any.

#140 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2011-11-13 12:16 PM | Reply | Flag: Another big lie.

"Errrr...The fact Bachmann listed the assets and income from her "husband's family farm" as per rules and laws, means I meant the tools like you Sparky."

I'll give her this much credit, she has more integrity than Clarence Thomas.

#142 | Posted by prozacboi

Jest isn't the one on prozac and isn't just a "boi."

"Yeah, the brilliant thinker wanting her to explain if you don't work you dont eat defintion analogy."

Its not really an analogy if she's referring to programs like food stamps or school lunch programs. That her "clarification" was an untrue statement about the Chinese means that we will never be able to figure out what this moron really meant.

One would think that once in a while you would actually think about what is being said and if it makes any sense before deciding to carry water for some idiot just because an R appears after the idiot's name. But I know you don't like to think before reflexively defending anything or anyone associated with the GOP. You'd rather bitch like a girl and bray like a jackass any time anyone criticizes any member of your party whether deserved or not.

It is a tired, pathetic act. Grow the fuck up already you pathetic old twat.

"The very fact that you think that's any sort of defense for Bachmann's lying is utterly ridiculous as well as your projection."

Defense? Why should anyone have to defend reality? You seem to believe everything there is that comes out. Like she was a hypocrite applying for a home loan, like 90% of applicants. She was a hypocrite for her husbands medical facility being reimbursed by medicare for services rendered to the poor, like 100% of medical facilities. Now you want to believe she is a hypocrite for her husband's family farm receiving subsidies before she was even a congresswoman in 2007. LMAO!!!

"Errrr...The fact Bachmann listed the assets and income from her "husband's family farm" as per rules and laws, means I meant the tools like you Sparky."

"And my husband and I have never gotten a penny of money from the farm."

articles.latimes.com

#146 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2011-11-13 12:27 PM | Reply | Flag: Hey let's make things up!!

The facts...Bachmann said neither her of her husband received a penny from the farm. It's really quite simple, she lied no matter how you TRY and spin it.

"Its not really an analogy if she's referring to programs like food stamps or school lunch programs."

Was she referring to that Trig? Let's take a gander, and see if once again, you are being the fucking ignorant pussy whining about shit he never understood or bothered to read up on:

“Our nation needs to stop doing for people what they can and should do for themselves, she said. Self reliance means, if anyone will not work, neither should he eat.

Now read it reeeeeaaaaalllllll sssssllllllooooooowwwwwwww. PEOPLE WHO CAN DO FOR THEMSELVES!!!! MEANING PEOPLE WHO CAN GO TO WORK!!!!! SELF-RELIANCE!!!! NOT GOVERNMENT RELIANCE!!!!!

#146 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2011-11-13 12:27 PM | Reply | Flag: Hey let's make things up!!

Posted by prozacboi at 2011-11-13 12:29 PM

ROTFLMFAO!!!

You seem to believe everything there is that comes out. Like she was a hypocrite applying for a home loan, like 90% of applicants. She was a hypocrite for her husbands medical facility being reimbursed by medicare for services rendered to the poor, like 100% of medical facilities. Now you want to believe she is a hypocrite for her husband's family farm receiving subsidies before she was even a congresswoman in 2007. LMAO!!!

The facts...Bachmann said neither her of her husband received a penny from the farm. It's really quite simple, she lied no matter how you TRY and spin it.

#151 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2011-11-13 12:36 PM | Reply | Flag: Just as big a lie as it was the first time.

How about showing where I posted that I believed any of what you claim?

Re #150 - We don't know what she was talking about. Given the chance to clarify, she made some untrue reference to China - where many children have to work in order to eat, BTW.

You're really going off the deep end, oldtimer. #150 looked and read like a Celisary post. I'm going to watch football now. In the meantime, try not to shit your Depends over the fact that some people have thoughts of their own that aren't approved by the GOP.

"You're really going off the deep end, oldtimer. #150 looked and read like a Celisary post. I'm going to watch football now. In the meantime, try not to shit your Depends over the fact that some people have thoughts of their own that aren't approved by the GOP."

Get some ice on that bleeding vag Sally, before you start cheerleading...

"Now...you wanna dismiss the the 433 MILLION and we can go back to the 250 thousand subsidy to Bachmann's in-laws which you so strongly disapprove. Talk about HYPOCRISY...(which, by the way, IS an integral part of this thread.)"

Please don't bother reading my posts anymore. You clearly don't get them. I am on record as excoriating the thing you are concerned about. It's WRONG. Can I possible be any more clear? Christ, Jest. You're acting like an idiot. Accept that I've agreed and move on.
+++++

136--Boy, talk about not being able to let go. : ) And don't remind a cranky anti-union poster of all the salient points he ignores on a regular basis.

I'd like to eat Bachmann. ;p (if it smells like trout...)

"I'd like to eat Bachmann. ;p (if it smells like trout...)"

Boy!

You are hammered again.

Very dishonest representation of what was said, but not surprising from a lefty. She clearly says that if a person will not work they should not eat. Will not -- not the same as unemployed. This is in reference to a Bible quote where the message was simply that people need to pull their own weight.

But since we now live in the land of OWS and no-loan-repayment the misrepresentation makes perfect sense. I want it all, and I want it now -- for free.

#158 hi mary, lol, no just another sarcasm. BTW I imagine it would smell like perfume ... leave the room ... or cologne... leave it alone. But from a distance there's an idea that's suggested by corn-dog images.

Self reliance means, if anyone will not work, neither should he eat."

"Will not work" is not can't work because they don't have a job.

"Will not work" means get money from the Govt. so they don't HAVE TO WORK.

Really people.

........NOPE in 2012.....

"Will not work" is not can't work because they don't have a job.

"Will not work" means get money from the Govt. so they don't HAVE TO WORK.

You make ridiculous hyperbolic statements like that and expect anyone to take you seriously but your fellow idiot savants?

As much as 64% of the United States adult population is considered either overweight or obese, and this percentage has increased over the last four decades. Given the law of averages there should be some fat ones in the crowds. Therefore it would be kind and good advice for them to cut down on their eating as health preventive measure-not a penalty. John Smith in colonial days had a rule, "no work-no eat." Harsh,but necessary. Worked then should work now.

On the other hand, people who haven't eaten in a while aren't up to much in the way of work....

That no-work-no-eat is a blame the victim mentality. Here have some food - there's more hungry people too so after you're done with that please wash these... and move those...

But before we get back to common sense like that we're arresting Food Not Bombs.

two words:

ear relevant

the next time I hit it big I am going to be such an asshole. the jews will have to look to me for the guidelines on being tight and a prick with my money. no one has really helped us out while we were losing our asses so this next run is purely vindictive justification for all the Michelle Bachmann's in the world. I can do it and lose a little skin and bounce back, but not everyone can. Hell, some people never hit it big once. At least I got to live like a king and act like a fool in my 30's.... now I feel old(er) and it is just not the same. Now it is about preparing for retirement and death. WHOOPIE! sounds bitchin'

even with GOOGLE Prag couldn't offer an example of a working Progressive Social Model

Scandinavia, Germany, Canada,Australia, Brazil, Argentina, Israel....

assuming, of course, you ain't stupid enough to conflate progressive with Stalinist.

Now name me some working capitalist or libertarian nations....

Why just starve them when we could waterboard them too!

Apparently Bachmann doesn't like living in a Great Society. She would rather live in China.

I wonder if Bachmann walked the walk when she was "raising" those oodles of foster children she claims to have raised.

When they didn't work or they misbehaved did she starve them until they cooperated? I hope she didn't spare that rod!

Intelligent civilized peoples have found much more humane ways of getting other humans to cooperate with them than by beating them and starving them and waterboarding them. post #165 showed us one way and I bet he put about 5 seconds of thought into that. Can you imagine what we might be able to do if we actually put some concerted effort into it?

Greece, France, Italy, Portugal, Mexico, Spain.....
There are tons more progressive failures than successes. Not to mention the fact that we are their protectors and absorb the cost of their military for them.

Capitalism is by far the best system for producing wealth and conserving valuable resources. Only under Capitalism are resources driven to those who use them most efficiently. It is by far the most moral economic system too. People just don't like the sharp edges of capitalism plus it does a poor job of satisfying the entitlement mentality.

"Progressive" is political. "Capitalist" is economic.

And this is just Bizarro logic:

"Capitalism is by far the best system for producing wealth and conserving valuable resources. Only under Capitalism are resources driven to those who use them most efficiently. It is by far the most moral economic system too. People just don't like the sharp edges of capitalism plus it does a poor job of satisfying the entitlement mentality."

I'll accept the last sentence. The rest is pure ideological bias. No economic system is inherently more moral or best at conserving valuable resources. It's about how the system is implemented. If you ask me, socialism in its purest form would be the most moral--no one starves; no one is super rich; everyone who is able works and is paid for their work (yes, works; look it up). But that's purest form. No economic model exists, or can exist, in pure form. Humans have this pesky habit of getting in the way, no matter the system.

sully, Bachmann shirley DID accept subsidies .. therefore she MUST be closet socialist ..
therefore YOU MUST send her campaign $400 .. (each month)
therefore YOU MUST also support and vote for her ..

sincerely, "Supervisor-level Lib-Handler"

Prag,
It's both logic and fact. (it's what they teach in the best colleges too). Managed economies fail and also waste resources. Capitalism is the most moral because it gives people what they deserve. It doesn't penalize success or reward failure or rely on coercion like progressive (socialistic) economies. And people get rich because money is also a resource and those that use it the best (most efficiently) are rewarded the most. And, you should leave the Lord's work to the church.

#174 | POSTED BY HUGUENOT AT 2011-11-14 08:38 PM

What your reason lacks is acknowledgement of how easy it is to succeed in the capitalistic marketplace in an uneven, unfair manner (i.e. white collar crime). Government is needed in order for the system to not gorge upon itself. Otherwise it will. History has proven.

God knows I don't support Bachmann, but I do have to point out she said, "will not" instead of "can not"

Let's not kid ourselves here.

We have seen how welfare has become a family tradition.

Public housing and food stamps has become a way of life for some people and even their extended families.

Many, if not most, of those people I am referring probably fall into the group, "will not".

I have no idea what to do about it, but it is the truth that too many people won't do manual labor or work for lower wages. I'm not debating whether or not you can live on it. I'm just saying they won't do it anyway.

There is no doubt in my mind the winds of change are blowing against continually living on the dole. It is going to be more difficult in the future for a variety of reasons to get financial aid.

First, it costs a lot of money and like it or not, our government will have to find ways to cut back without hurting people who "deserve" and "need" assistance and are not simply lazy.

Second, public sentiment is turning against "free money checks" (Early Cuyler, Squidbillies).

Absolutely. Hence the right to Property. Incidentally, governments are probably the biggest abusers of the right to property.

Scandinavia, Germany, Canada, Australia, Brazil, Argentina, Israel....
assuming, of course, you ain't stupid enough to conflate progressive with Stalinist.
Now name me some working capitalist or libertarian nations....
#168 | Posted by northguy
hmmm .. r u being silly?
~ Scandinavia is NOT a country?
~ Germany Is flat-broke
~ Canada? .. the Canadian economy is outperforming that of the USA .. the Canadian dollar is stronger than America's -- In 2011, the Canadian economy is growing faster than any other G-7 nation as a result of its Conservative small-government, pro-business polices .. signaling an endorsement of CONSERVATIVE Prime Minister Stephen Harper's masterful stewardship

~ Australia? .. June 2011, WSJ - Australia's economy UNEXPECTEDLY suffered its biggest contraction in 20 years in the first quarter as resource exports collapsed

Hug,

"And people get rich because money is also a resource and those that use it the best (most efficiently) are rewarded the most"

A serious problem today is those people are being "rewarded" at an exponential rate. The more $ they have, the more power they have and they "reward" themselves even faster.

We have witnessed that the last couple of decades.

Mathematically, this is a doomed scenerio.

~ Germany Is flat-broke

Germany is NOT flat broke. Not even close.

#178 - you didn't help yourself.

....Don't Starve...Shoot!!!

**** Jobless folks who are on the brink of starvation should do what Wall St and its Cronies who make up the US Govt do...and that is STEAL! Thats right Ruthless STEAL what you need like Wall St & Uncle Sam do...and if you have a GUN that will make it that much easier to STEAL from those most deserving "Wealthy Offensive ASSHOLE Thieves" like Michelle Bachman!!!

Germany is NOT flat broke. Not even close.

#180 | Posted by donnerboy

..
Bloomberg News 11/14 ~
~ Deutsche Bank shares have fallen nearly 1/3 as Europe's debt crisis death spirals .. asset value not determinable .. assets not marketable ..

~ Deutsche Bank FIRES CEO and is pleased to announce the appointment of Ex-Goldman Sachs Exec Paul Achleitner, who has previously worked closely with the US's Treasury Sec Geithner

smart folks can already feel somebody grabbing for their wallet ..

"In 2011, the Canadian economy is growing faster than any other G-7 nation as a result of its Conservative small-government, pro-business polices .. "

That is hilarious. National health care, better benefits, etc. Yes, their government is smaller but then their population is a fraction of ours.

That is hilarious. National health care, better benefits, etc. Yes, their government is smaller but then their population is a fraction of ours.

#184 | Posted by danni

kudos danni, I too noticed the irony ..
making significant progress since 2008, Conservatives in Canada have swept to a stunning victory in May's General Election, with CONSERVATIVE Prime Minister Stephen Harper achieving an overall majority in the country's House of Commons for the FIRST TIME.
The Opposition Liberal party was crushed, as was the pro-independence Bloc Quebecois in French-speaking Quebec.

"Will not work" is not can't work because they don't have a job.

"Will not work" means get money from the Govt. so they don't HAVE TO WORK.

You make ridiculous hyperbolic statements like that and expect anyone to take you seriously but your fellow idiot savants?

#162 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2011-11-13 08:38 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

I can't believe you can't tell the difference between the two statements. The difference couldn't be more obvious.

The article title is so misleading it's almost funny.

174--Neither logic nor fact is on your side when you talk about morals of economic systems or conservation of resources. I grant you the "producing wealth" bit, but I stand by my comments. You also ignore that "getting rich" is often achieved through immoral means (I would also argue that much corporate behavior is at least greedy if not downright immoral). And the Lord's work? What in the world does that have to do with anything? You start by talking about logic and fact, then end with a reference to religion? Wow. Can you say "disconnect"? You certainly are entitled to your opinion, but try not to conflate that with fact (though a solid opinion should rest on a foundation of both logic and fact). In any case, I'm happy to continue disagreeing. You're not going to convince me, and I'm not going to convince you. The difference is, I'm not asserting that one system is definitively better than another.

And btw, if any college, good or otherwise, is teaching that one economic system is better than another, or more moral, then that college is doing a piss-poor job at educating. It's not a school's job to teach that one system is better than another--that's indoctrination. It's the school's job to teach how the systems work and to foster in students the ability to think critically about those systems--that's education.

#184 | Posted by danni

Living so close to Canada, most Canadians I know hate their healthcare system. I have noticed that if a person is healthy and takes care of themselves they seem positive about Canadian healthcare. If one is not healthy or has special needs -- way down on it.

It does not provide what most Americans get, WHEN they want it. A lot of waiting -- rationing. You know -- the stuff Obama says will not happen?

The USA system and the Canadian simply should not be compared as they do not provide the same services or coverage.

Twitter twat is the best thing that,s happened for Saturday night live! Go Bachmann go!

"Living so close to Canada, most Canadians I know hate their healthcare system. I have noticed that if a person is healthy and takes care of themselves they seem positive about Canadian healthcare. If one is not healthy or has special needs -- way down on it."

Right, and the Canadians I know speak very highly of their HC system. One of them even told a long positive story about the wonderful care his wife received when she had cancer. Go figure. My anecdotes and your anecdotes tell us different things.

"Living so close to Canada, most Canadians I know hate their healthcare system. I have noticed that if a person is healthy and takes care of themselves they seem positive about Canadian healthcare. If one is not healthy or has special needs -- way down on it."

Right, and the Canadians I know speak very highly of their HC system. One of them even told a long positive story about the wonderful care his wife received when she had cancer. Go figure. My anecdotes and your anecdotes tell us different things.

#190 | Posted by pragmatist at 2011-11-15 04:01 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

I have relatives up there. None speak highly of it. Most complain about excessive wait times and rationed care.

In fact, my grandma had to pay $10,000 to come down to the Mayo clinic because there was a six month waiting period for a MRI. Six months. She passed on from skin cancer not much longer after. She wouldn't have even made her appointment.

If you think their system and our system offer the same quality of coverage, you're not too bright.

There's a reason that other country's politicians and elites come here for health care services. It's because it's the best system in the world, for now.

"I have relatives up there. None speak highly of it. Most complain about excessive wait times and rationed care."

Different experiences for different people, I guess. Just as I said to Franka, your anecdotes and mine don't jibe.

My sympathies on your grandma's passing.

smart folks can already feel somebody grabbing for their wallet ..

#183 | Posted by L_E_Light

Being in debt does not mean you are broke.

europe is in crisis...Germany will be negatively affected. They are still coping with East Germany and now this.

Germany's economy is still very strong and will most likely weather this storm if anybody does.

Grabbing a random link shows this to be true:

Germany economy to grow 3.3% in 2011; Employment to expand by 490,000 people; Budget deficit may dip to 0.2% of GDP in 2012.

The Germany economy is forecast to grow 3.3% in 2011 and employment is expected to expand by 490,000 people, according to the latest economic forecast from the Ifo institute for economic research at the University of Munich. The budget deficit is expected to dip to 0.2% in 2012.
Click Here!

Ifo says in Germany the economic upswing continued at high speed in the half year. The massive decline in output during the financial and economic crisis has now been recouped and current leading indicators point to a continuation of the upswing, but at a slower pace. GDP in 2011 will increase by 3.3% -- at a 67% confidence level by between 2.7% and 3.9% The number of unemployed will fall by nearly 300,000 but employment will grow by 490,000. In the coming year, economic activity in Germany should retain the pace it will have at the end of 2011 and will thus clearly point upwards.

www.finfacts.ie

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable