Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs

The GOP cheered wildly at President Obama's Olympic bid folly. In a rarity, they actually got some of the reasons they cheered for his defeat right. The games would have been a nightmare for Chicago.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

cookfish

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

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

"I'll take care of the 'black thing' as soon as I tackle health care. And gay marriage. And Gitmo. And the enviornment. And illegal immigration. Oh, and Afghanistan. And jobs. And...."

--Head "Present" Voter-in Chief

What a lousy SOB. What a rotten bastard. It wasn't Right to celebrate Obama's loss at the Olympics. Party ofver Country with these slimeballs.

Larry

...Obama's loss ...

Obama's loss? So it was a personal thing for him -- not something for America.

Thanks for the rare glimpse of the honesty in your heart, Larry.

Party ofver Country with these slimeballs.

I'd say it was party over country for the democrats, Larry. Every Olympics ever held with the exception of one of them has been a money loser for the host. That the democrats were willing to attach their name to it by sending their president over to endorse it and put his country into a money losing proposition screams party over country for the democrats.

BTW You can kiss My ass as per post number 3

???

So you are saying that wasn't honesty? That you were lying again? Thanks for the truth about your lying. LOL

You useless fuck. The OIlympics brings employment to the area that hosts it. I don't know where the fuck You got Your info from but it's BULLSHIT like usual.

Really? I don't know why I post links since you never believe them. (btw still waiting for that senatorial district map LOL)

The hosts of the next two Olympics have found themselves laden with debt already with no relief in sight. Vancouver's city council had to advance cash to the builders of the Olympic village just to be sure of their solvency and now have to wonder if they'll be able to sell off the housing to private developers for condos after condo development has practically ceased in that city

Also, the London Olympics have already run up a $15b bill with more to come. As the Credit Crunch has sapped private donations expected for the 2012 Games, the government has been forced to step in and drain the contingency fund more quickly than expected. No wonder they're talking about saving money on flowers.

So, uhm go Chicago 2016? Right? Maybe they can sell the CTA in time to afford the Games. It's worked so well for their bridges and airports.


Why I bother, I don't know. You don't have the balls to admit when you are wrong. So just like the senator thing and the blue blood thing, you will just continue to call me names instead of growing a pair and admitting you are wrong. That's OK. It's funnier that way. LOL

Olympic bid = party (democrat) over country, Larry. They were willing to pour money we don't have into that event. Sorry if you don't like the facts, but maybe if you call me a useless fuck again it will make you forget reality and allow you to live in your own little democratic dream world.

Good luck with that, Larry

Goat if they were going to bring the Olympics would you fight it? I know if they were going to Bring them to Nor Cal I would be ecstatic to see my hometown area get the recognition it deserves.

I meant to say San Antonio

he should never have tried to steal the event from rio - this is a great day in south american history. he should get used to being let down - not everyone bows at the knees to this farcical character.

Obama didn't try to steal the Olympics from Rio Nanc My G-d get real please. He went to copenhagen to sell America to the IOC and failed. At least He Himself put in the work instead of sending one of His subordinates. That shows class.

Larry

"he should never have tried to steal the event from rio.."

I'll talk s l o w l y so you can understand, Nanc.

There were FOUR countries competing for the Games. If Obama hadn't gone you'd be bitching he didn't care about America. No winning with you right wing nuts.

rio was always at the top of the list, larry - how much money did he spend on this trip?

here's their carbon footprint:

www.examiner.com

here is an approximate cost of their little jaunt:

http://blog.taragana.com/ sports/2009/10/02/obamas-trip- to-copenhagen-cost-1-million- or-more-33732/

get a clue. they're still free, larry.

blog.taragana.com

wonder why that second link didn't take...

timex - this is no time to be speculating. our resources, along with everything else are dwindling as fast as two rabbits in heat.

Messiah fiddles while Rome - er- USA burns.

timex - this is no time to be speculating. our resources, along with everything else are dwindling as fast as two rabbits in heat.

Shouldn't you be holding a big "Second coming" party for Jesus?

Nanc

And that's a shame considering we had surpluses when Clinton left office along with a plan to pay off the national debt by this year. We also didn't have 2 rounds of tax cuts in a time of war, an unneccessary trillion dollar (and counting) war, a trillion dollar Medicare Part D, a trillion dollar TARP, and an economy in the tank that's now resulted in falling tax revenues and half a trillion a year to pay on the debt that could have been zero by now.

Our resources have never dwindled so far so fast under one President in our history as they did under Bush and the GOP, nor has the size of government grown so far so fast in so few years. But, you're still a die hard Republican, aren't you? I don't understand where you get your attitude from in light of indisputable facts.

It's also a friggin' shame when people root against America as the Republicans are now.

oh please. like y'all did when the previous potus was in office? suddenly it's unpopular to go against the grain? rich.

Carbon Footprint bwhahahahaha too fucking funny. Oh and it is the duty of every President to promote commerce to America. Obama was doing His duty by going to the IOC to sell America to the Olympics. I am sorry You don't understand this Nanc.

Larry

Mohron:


Commerce? The trip was an attempt to payoff his Chi-town election favor deals.

larry - it sprung up out of nowhere - it wasn't even a consideration - why did he leave our troops in harms way by not okaying additional troops beforehand - i'm sure there are ten sets of parents, spouses, and children whose soldier is dead who are wondering the same thing. do you NOT see the larger photo? he took a four billion dollar promise from the thugs in chitown to go up against rio who had already had fourteen billion on the table for MONTHS! i usually fold on an inside flush.

"oh please. like y'all did when the previous potus was in office?"

Nanc

You're referring to support or not of the Iraq War?

The Iraq War had nothing to do with rooting for or against America. In fact, it had nothing at all to do with America. Wrong country. It saddened me Bush went charging into Iraq undermanned, underplanned, and underarmored with disastrous results. It saddened me we went in there at all and left Afghanistan to dangle in the breeze. Now, it may be a lost cause because the Taliban were allowed to regain control of 80% of the country while W and Cheney fought their ill conceived war in Iraq.

Should be noted we still have 120,000 troops in Iraq and will spend another trillion dollars in the next few years because of that stupid Neocon idea. Didn't work, did it? The ME hasn't broken out in democracy, have they? No. Iran is now stronger than they would have ever been and we have a whole new set of problems.

By the way, there's no such thing as an inside flush. Think you meant 'straight'. :-)

It's also a friggin' shame when people root against America as the Republicans are now.>

Can you provide an example of that please? I've seen this idiotically repeated by the left, but they never provide an example. Please do.

Thanks

"Can you provide an example of that please?"

Absolutely no problem. A couple:

- Cheering the failure of the U.S. to get the Olympic Games

- Rush Limbaugh and others saying aloud they hope Obama fails. If he fails the country fails.

Rush Limbaugh and others saying aloud they hope Obama fails. If he fails the country fails.

So Rush said all that -- including the "If he fails the country fails", or did you add that part?

Cheering the failure of the U.S. to get the Olympic Games

My bad. I didn't realize that rooting against the games was rooting against America. I thought it was possible to not want the games but still love this country. I know I saw it when I lived in Cobb County GA when Atlanta was bidding on the games.

When did this profound connection of the Olympic Games to the America take place? I missed the memo.

Goatman-
Do you understand that hosting the Olympics is a boon to the private sector of any host nation?

When did this profound connection of the Olympic Games to the America take place?

It has always been an honor to host the games, and also an honor to win medals. Why is this something you need to have explained to you?

Do you not cheer when Americans win medals? Are you not honored when we host the games? Are you suddenly oblivious to the influx of profit to the private sector when the games are here?

Do you understand that hosting the Olympics is a boon to the private sector of any host nation?

I don't answer your questions until you admit that you are a liar who puts words into people's mouths and assigns them false positions.

You need to write this down on a post-it note and stick it to your monitor so you don't waste keystrokes asking me question, boyd. Your memory is obviously too weak to retain that simple condition no matter how many times I tell you.

Don't cry. Dullifidian will soon be jumping in to defend you and your assigning of false positions to people.

re: Dullifidian will soon be jumping in to defend you and your assigning of false positions to people.


"Dullifidian". That's clever. What are you, like twelve years old?

In any case, it wasn't too long ago (about nine months) that folks such as Limbaugh and you understood that hosting the games was good for the host nation's private economy. I guess those days are gone.

My bad. I didn't realize that rooting against the games was rooting against America.

Now you do.

Now you do.

No I don't

I ask you every night why you play this game of assigning false positions. You never answer. And here you go again assigning a false position to me.

Grow up, asshole. Honestly. I say it every night, but I sincerely mean it. Grow up and stop assigning false positions to people and putting words into their mouths.

Later, loser -- go do your nightly crying jag. It was a pretty good one last night, btw

I'd like to add that I've not seen such petty bullshit from the 'conservatives' displayed and defended with such fervor for several days, and that's really saying something - as they seem to top themselves on an hourly basis.

Thank you for your contribution, Goatman.

Goatman, your position on this topic is quite clear.

Olympic bid = party (democrat) over country, Larry. They were willing to pour money we don't have into that event. Sorry if you don't like the facts, but maybe if you call me a useless fuck again it will make you forget reality and allow you to live in your own little democratic dream world.

Good luck with that, Larry

#8 | Posted by goatman at 2009-10-04 08:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Your position is pretty fuckin' clear, Goatman. Your sources are bullshit and your partisan flunkery is evident; your ability to swallow gallons of crap from opposition sources is legendary, but your position is quite clear.

"Olympic bid = party (democrat) over country, Larry."

-Goatman

I just had to see that again before I logged out.

Goatman

I put a period at the end of the sentence.

And yes, there has always been national pride related to the Olympic Games. It was an honor to host them in Atlanta, L.A., Salt Lake City, and everywhere else they've been in the U.S. Most of us cheer our athletes on and root for Americans as the Games go on.

Hosting again would have been terrific PR at a time when we could have used all we can get after Bush pissed off the world. That's my take.

I give props to Obama for making the effort. Every other country competing to host sent their head of state. He used the trip there and back to confer with Gen. McCrystal on Afghanistan.

PS Goatman

You know exactly what Limbaugh said.

My reaction to Limbaugh's incredibly inappropriate comment was: "WTF? Limbaugh wants Obama to FAIL?! If Obama fails the country fails."

Been that way with every President R or D. I hoped Bush would do well. Sorely disappointed for obvious reasons including hundreds of thousands dead, loss of respect for America by the world, and trillions of dollars of debt we'll be struggling to get out from under for decades thanks to the 'deficits don't matter' crowd among other things too numerous to mention.

"Olympic bid = party (democrat) over country, Larry."

WOW! I thought the Olympic Games were one time we put aside differences and come together to root for our country. Guess there are some who don't see it that way.

WOW! I thought the Olympic Games were one time we put aside differences and come together to root for our country.

They are. But 1) they are supposed to be apolitical, but the president steps into it 2) not everyone wants the olympics. Just because you or anyone else has certain ideas and ideals about them doesn't mean the rest of the country doesn't love America because they don't share them with you. I'm trying to figure out how this misconception that "you hate the Olympics, you hate America" thing got started. Sounds suspiciously like bOoB logic

And yes, there has always been national pride related to the Olympic Games.

Not Always. I lived near Atlanta when they were vying for the nod. Not everyone wanted it. They didn't want the crowds and the expense of it.

But at any rate, just because someone doesn't share you pride on the olympics does not mean they hate America, as I said in the other post.

What if I said, "If you hate baseball, you hate America". It makes about as much sense.

BTW, timex, you never answered my question about your "quote" by Rush. Did you doctor it or did he really say, "If Obama fails, America fails". Your silence on that question is very telling.

I doctored nothing. I paraphrased Limbaugh's comment that he hopes Obama fails. End of sentence. See how that works?

"They are. But 1) they are supposed to be apolitical, but the president steps into it 2) not everyone wants the olympics.

Uh, so what the President stepped into it? So did the heads of state of the other countries vying for the Games There will always be people who don't want this or that.

"Just because you or anyone else has certain ideas and ideals about them doesn't mean the rest of the country doesn't love America because they don't share them with you."

Well, at least YOU feel that way. I remember everyone who were called "Un-American", a "traitor", and "defeatocrat" because they (rightly) opposed invading Iraq.

Olympic bid = party (democrat) over country, Larry. They were willing to pour money we don't have into that event. Sorry if you don't like the facts, but maybe if you call me a useless fuck again it will make you forget reality and allow you to live in your own little democratic dream world.

Are you being intentionally obtuse just to get to Larry? Hosting the Olympics brings prestige and spotlight to the host country. I can't figure out any valid reason for why the Repubs would want to deny that for the US in a time when it sorely needs prestige and GOOD press time.

oh please. like y'all did when the previous potus was in office? suddenly it's unpopular to go against the grain? rich.

No, it's absolutely fine to go against the grain.

The problem is that most of the shit the right comes up with to bash Obama with is so nauseatingly stupid you can't help but ask them to can it.

But, then again I have a very good memory. I don't conveniently forget when it suits my purposes as so many do.

"Did you doctor it or did he really say, "If Obama fails, America fails"."

Rush Limbaugh would never say something so sensible. Please quit playing semantics. You know very well what Limbaugh said in that regard. Anyone with a computer or TV knows.

And I agree 100% with JPW.

The Olympic Games bring prestige to the host country.

This was just another round of 'gotcha' by the GOP. I'm glad Obama tried. In any case if he hadn't the line would be 'Obama didn't care enough about America to try".

The GOP run our country into the ground and then (like you) want to shift the blame to the paramedic instead of the drunk who caused the crash.

lease quit playing semantics.

???

I asked for an example of someone on the right rooting against America. you said:

- Rush Limbaugh and others saying aloud they hope Obama fails. If he fails the country fails.

Rush Limbaugh rooted against American unless he said what you said he did. And you clearly indicated that by adding that last line. Without that last line, you cannot say Rush rooted against America/

It is you playing fast and loose with words, my friend.

So yes, I see people rooting against Obama. I'll ask again: Can you provide an example of someone rooting against America (without you adding your own biased interpretation to their words)

I paraphrased Limbaugh's comment that he hopes Obama fails

Yes, I see how that works. However, I did not ask for an example of someone saying they wished Obama failed. I asked for an example of someone rooting against America.

You know timex, it is entirely possible to hate the president and love the country. Ask anyone who was a democrat from 2000-2008

" However, I did not ask for an example of someone saying they wished Obama failed. I asked for an example of someone rooting against America."

I don't recall a single Democrat or high profile media person who hoped Bush would fail. He did that all on his own and THEN he was called to the carpet. If you can find a single high profile Democrat who said anything like that about Bush - especially a week into his Presidency - let's hear it. I'm an avid media follower and can't recall a single comment like that - especially before the guy even had a chance.

As I've said, I for one gave Bush the benefit of the doubt and wished him well when he took office, but Bush started down a road most of us knew would lead to disaster and left the country in horrible shape in the end. If I were on the other side of the aisle I'd be rooting for Obama's success in pulling us out of it 100%. Those who don't? There are the Americans you should be criticizing.

I do recall that 90%+ of Americans stood behind Bush after 9/11. For him to have ended his Presidency with 21% approval was his own doing.

PS Hoping a President fails (especially so early in a Presidency) IS rooting against America. The President fails, we all lose.

Goodnight

I don't recall a single Democrat or high profile media person who hoped Bush would fail. He did that all on his own and THEN he was called to the carpet

If you are using that as "proof" that someone has rooted against America, it doesn't fly. That's faulty logic

If you can find a single high profile Democrat who said anything like that about Bush - especially a week into his Presidency - let's hear it.

You made the claim that the Republicans were rooting against America. Therefore you have te burden of proof. It's not up to me to disprove it.

Outside a legal context, "burden of proof" means that someone suggesting a new theory or stating a claim must provide evidence to support it: it is not sufficient to say "you can't disprove this." Specifically, when anyone is making a bold claim, and especially a positive claim, it is not someone else's responsibility to disprove the claim, but is rather the responsibility of the person who is making the bold claim to prove it. In short, X is not proven simply because "not X" cannot be proven (see negative proof).
So timex, do you or do you not have proof that people have been rooting against America as you claim?

There are the Americans you should be criticizing.

Why? Because you said so? Since they have differing political opinions than your's, the world should be criticizing them?

Wow.

PS Hoping a President fails (especially so early in a Presidency) IS rooting against America.

You are cetainly entitle to your opinion and because of that I'm not going to suggest that other people criticize you for it.

There were a lot of democrats rooting against America 2001-2009, weren't there?

Ya know, I remember clinton wanting to take over health care, pushing a lib agenda, and he failed... massively. Then the repubs took over in 94 and pulled clinton back to the middle (he signed welfare reform and other such legislation)...

So, yes, it is possible for a leftist president to fail, and the result be a country that doesn't fail.

[and I don't know that not winning the olympic bid is the same as America loosing]

Blaming Obama for the Olympic debacle is a stretch by any means, although party politics always seems to get in the way of things.

Even in Madrid, there are some hard-line righties that want the head of Madrid's mayor Gallardon, even though that bid was supported by President Zapatero (Left), President Commundiad de Madrid, Aguirre (Right) and the afore mentioned Gallardon (center Right).

There are 3 important lessons to learn from this years voting.

1. Any city that doesn't get at least 80% support from their voters should be automatically eliminated. In fact, a referendum should be held to evaluate if the public really wants the Olympics. Fort this reason it was totally correct to knock off Chicago, although in fairness, it should of been Tokyo in the first round.

2. Speaking geographically, make it a written rule that the Olympics cannot repeat in the same continent. Here is one aspect that Gallardon could be rightfully criticized. Paris, Rome and Moscow did not submit bids because they correctly concluded that 2020 would be a more realistic date.

3. Flying in for 2 hours to support a bid is not the way to do things correctly, and the Obama team erred in that.

General consensus was that Madrid had the best bid but lost out to Lula's world map. Sadly, so true.

Finally, there have been some posters, including rcade, that have criticized Olympic committee as being unfair, biased or down right money grabbing thieves. On what bases do this critics make such strong allegations without any tangible proof? If anything, giving the games to Rio proves the opposite.

Crisis

Good post, crisis.

I keep getting the feeling that AMericans were acting a bit arrogant -- acting as if we deserved the Olympics or something, then crying when we didn't get it.

By 2016, the US will have had 2 out of 9 of the summer games. That ain't bad considering there are dozens of other countries capable of holding them.

Grow up and quit whining, America. We didn't get it this time. BFD

Until the Olympics have MMA there isn't anything worth watching.

what is MMA? And why would that make the olympics worth watching?

I'll take a pass... read the score card at the end of the day / end of the week to see how our country is doing in the medal count and then go on to thing that are more important... like cleaning the lint out of my belly button or something.

I ratsa wants to see it, it's probalby Man on Man Assholing

What rock have you been under Lib? UFC has been around since 1994. Greatest sport ever invented.

Of course MMA has been around long before the UFC. Pancrase was around since ancient Greece. Boxing and Taekwondo is the only striking sports in the olympics. There needs to be more avenues for violence.

I'll answer your questions, boyd

Do you not cheer when Americans win medals?

No. I don't. There's not pride. No thrill at a professional athlete doing what he's trained to do for years. Plus, I don't have a tv. So, unless I hear it on the radio, I don't even know. That's how unconcerned most people are.

Are you not honored when we host the games?

No, I'm not. Why would I be? The Olympics is nothing special. Let me know when you can get all those people in the same room together and work out our differences so we can ALL make progress.

Are you suddenly oblivious to the influx of profit to the private sector when the games are here?

I live about 4 hours from Atlanta, Ga. You know what I saw of an influx of profit for the private sector? Zip. Zilch. Zero. So, if you mean oblivious as in "not aware of", in a sense, yes I am. Because I've never seen any of that money so why should it make a difference to me?

Most of us cheer our athletes on and root for Americans as the Games go on.

Most of you are easily led automatons who are incapable of realizing you want some coffee unless you see a starbucks. Maybe you are, maybe you aren't.

I live about 4 hours from Atlanta, Ga.


Posted by Axiom


You must be a real backwoods redneck. I used to live close to Atl and I truly hate that place. I used to wish death on everyone I met there.

Mitt Romney is qualified to be president BECAUSE of his involvement in the olympics.

-- the riiight

I used to wish death on everyone I met there.

I'm sure they lost a lot of sleep over that

#25 | Posted by Timex - no, i wasn't referring to the war - i was referring to everything about the man - from his pronunciation of "nukular" to all the myths surrounding him. when i was disappointed in him, i let it be known.

all in all, the left thinks this potus can do no wrong.

Excerpts from THE POLITICS OF SPITE by Paul Krugman (www.nytimes.com):

There was what President Obama likes to call a teachable moment last week, when the International Olympic Committee rejected Chicago's bid to be host of the 2016 Summer Games.

"Cheers erupted" at the headquarters of the conservative Weekly Standard, according to a blog post by a member of the magazine's staff, with the headline "Obama loses! Obama loses!" Rush Limbaugh declared himself "gleeful." "World Rejects Obama," gloated the Drudge Report. And so on.

So what did we learn from this moment? For one thing, we learned that the modern conservative movement, which dominates the modern Republican Party, has the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old.

Krugman writes:

But more important, the episode illustrated an essential truth about the state of American politics: at this point, the guiding principle of one of our nation's two great political parties is spite pure and simple. If Republicans think something might be good for the president, they're against it whether or not it's good for America.

To be sure, while celebrating America's rebuff by the Olympic Committee was puerile, it didn't do any real harm. But the same principle of spite has determined Republican positions on more serious matters, with potentially serious consequences in particular, in the debate over health care reform.

Now, it's understandable that many Republicans oppose Democratic plans to extend insurance coverage just as most Democrats opposed President Bush's attempt to convert Social Security into a sort of giant 401(k). The two parties do, after all, have different philosophies about the appropriate role of government.

But the tactics of the two parties have been different. In 2005, when Democrats campaigned against Social Security privatization, their arguments were consistent with their underlying ideology: they argued that replacing guaranteed benefits with private accounts would expose retirees to too much risk.

Krugman goes on:

The Republican campaign against health care reform, by contrast, has shown no such consistency. For the main G.O.P. line of attack is the claim based mainly on lies about death panels and so on that reform will undermine Medicare. And this line of attack is utterly at odds both with the party's traditions and with what conservatives claim to believe.

Think about just how bizarre it is for Republicans to position themselves as the defenders of unrestricted Medicare spending. First of all, the modern G.O.P. considers itself the party of Ronald Reagan and Reagan was a fierce opponent of Medicare's creation, warning that it would destroy American freedom. (Honest.) In the 1990s, Newt Gingrich tried to force drastic cuts in Medicare financing. And in recent years, Republicans have repeatedly decried the growth in entitlement spending growth that is largely driven by rising health care costs.

But the Obama administration's plan to expand coverage relies in part on savings from Medicare. And since the G.O.P. opposes anything that might be good for Mr. Obama, it has become the passionate defender of ineffective medical procedures and overpayments to insurance companies.

How did one of our great political parties become so ruthless, so willing to embrace scorched-earth tactics even if so doing undermines the ability of any future administration to govern?

The key point is that ever since the Reagan years, the Republican Party has been dominated by radicals ideologues and/or apparatchiks who, at a fundamental level, do not accept anyone else's right to govern.

Anyone surprised by the venomous, over-the-top opposition to Mr. Obama must have forgotten the Clinton years. Remember when Rush Limbaugh suggested that Hillary Clinton was a party to murder? When Newt Gingrich shut down the federal government in an attempt to bully Bill Clinton into accepting those Medicare cuts? And let's not even talk about the impeachment saga.

Krugman concludes:

The only difference now is that the G.O.P. is in a weaker position, having lost control not just of Congress but, to a large extent, of the terms of debate. The public no longer buys conservative ideology the way it used to; the old attacks on Big Government and paeans to the magic of the marketplace have lost their resonance. Yet conservatives retain their belief that they, and only they, should govern.

The result has been a cynical, ends-justify-the-means approach. Hastening the day when the rightful governing party returns to power is all that matters, so the G.O.P. will seize any club at hand with which to beat the current administration.

It's an ugly picture. But it's the truth. And it's a truth anyone trying to find solutions to America's real problems has to understand.

Christ almighty, Doc.


Krugman is ridiculously biased and partisan; almost shamefully so.

Now, I don't point that out as a means of smearing the messenger; but to appeal to you to take what he says with a modicum of a grain-of-salt in lieu of hoisting him onto the same pedestal that Yassir Arafat enjoyed as a Nobel-Prize winner.

I just read an op-ed by him on the early morning edition of Realclearpolitics via a link and it was shameful.

My disagreement with his economic philosophies has ZERO to do with my consternation toward his ridiculously partisan bullshit.

Look - the shifty-eyed Krugman is free to argue his central-controlled economic philosophies until he's blue in-the-face. However, he becomes a pathetic hack when he, via revisionism of recent history, lamely attempts to paint the DNC on a vastly higher-plane when it comes to the issue of public discourse.

In this regard he is not only a fucking hack, but is an absolute dildo to the nth degree.

"Krugman is ridiculously biased and partisan; almost shamefully so"

So's everyone on the DR. So are most of the articles posted for thread material. So, for that matter, are you, Jeff.

Please don't tell me this comes as a revelation to you.

#78 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Are you going to label 'Kanrei' as fiercely partisan?

How about 'Hagbard Celine'?

'Live_or_die'?

'Oohrah'?


Your argument, such as it is; is bullshit.

Krugman could be the smartest and most well-educated person in the world; but if his POV on a given subject is horrendously premised (which is occasionaly the case), a retard like Trig Palin could fuck him up in the arena of public discourse.

He is not always right.

He is not always wrong either.

Fine.


Just don't sit there on some bullshit high-horse and hang his 'status' over my head as if it's unassailable when, in point of fact, it's not.

#76 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

What a huge bunch of whiners the DNC has become.

You are "so" much smarter than everybody else; yet you are unable to sell your 'wisdom' to the ignorant masses that your purport to represent.


Here's a clue: Ditch the fucking arrogance.

People, no matter how stupid you deem them to be; don't like being told, in no uncertain terms, that they are absolute imbeciles who are awaiting your enlightened superiority.

So's everyone on the DR. So are most of the articles posted for thread material. So, for that matter, are you, Jeff.

I'm not.

There are some things I agree with the right on. Although, lately, that list has become very very short, and I believe they feel that way because it's now politically expedient.

Then, there are the things that I agree with the left on. For instance, while I wouldn't want a woman I'm with to have on, abortion is a woman's decision. Maybe she should talk it over with the man involved, but the decision still rests with her.

Then there's regulation. Some regulation is fine, and even necessary. Using regulation as a hidden tax or as a means to intrude upon Constitutionally granted rights isn't fine, though.

Using your own inability to empathize with both sides of an argument as an excuse to label everyone else around you as partisan hacks is an intellectually devoid cop out.

#81 | Posted by Axiom


Don't waste your time with Starvis on an opinion such as your own.


According to that dick you either worship Obama to a degree that he would deride ANY other fundie for doing so toward ANY other deity other than Obama - or you are scum to the nth degree, worthy of the rack...or worse...a cell with a Koran, rice pilaf, private facilities, and a private, warm shower.

"How about 'Hagbard Celine'?"

Leave me out of this.

You could just refer to me as hagbard, you know.

But maybe Commandant Celine is more appropriate.

Are you going to label 'Kanrei' as fiercely partisan?

How about 'Hagbard Celine'?

'Live_or_die'?

'Oohrah'?

#79 | Posted by JeffJ at 2009-10-05 09:37 AM

Buncha fence sitters imo. Especially Kanrei.

Buncha fence sitters imo. Especially Kanrei.

#85 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

No kidding. It's an existential crisis every time a grocery clerk asks him "paper or plastic?"

The GOP cheered wildly at President Obama's Olympic bid folly.

We don't need all those jobs.

We don't need the tourism revenue.

Nah, everything is just fine in wingding world so long as Obama fails.

Party over Country every single time.

UFC has been around since 1994. Greatest sport ever invented.

LOL it's organized brawling.

You must be easily amused.

People, no matter how stupid you deem them to be; don't like being told, in no uncertain terms, that they are absolute imbeciles who are awaiting your enlightened superiority.

That's because people, no matter how stupid they really are, always think they ARE the enlightened ones.

Nah. It's great whenever an American city gets the Olympics. It was wrong to cheer for the defeat.

But, BO was stupid for going. I don't think it helped, and it probably hurt.

Jeff, Jeff, Jeff, what a puling little whiner you've become.

For everyone on the DR there is bound to be some issue on which they are fiercely partisan. That you react so childishly to that statement merely reflects your own status as a hopeless fool/tool.

And here's a clue for the clueless (in this case that'd be you, Jeff): You're getting worse and stupider with each every post.

Sarvis is going to need a chiropractor after todays posts.

You're getting worse and stupider with each every post.

#88 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-10-05 04:43 PM

You tell him.

There's nothing self-retorting about a spelling/typo/grammar mistake, and the grammar cops are bores.

#93 | Posted by nullifidian

Fucking B!

How the hell are my posts getting where they are?

Leave it to the HuffPosh to make it GOP vs. Obama thing. C'mon Independents~ y'all are smarter than that...right? Man, that sh*t they call a blog is really partisan.

"And here's why you shouldn't play at spelling and/or grammar cop..."


What cop would cover this?

"puling little whiner"

A whining little whiner?

Something strange about post #94's time stamp. I just posted that a few minutes ago.

HuffPosh has to make it seem to be GOP vs. Obama. But, independents know better. The dems are gonna have a hard time if they keep on lumping independents in with repubs. The author singles out the Grand ol' Party as if THEY'RE the only ones hoping for a loss. Mr. Hutchinson could paint the Whitehouse red and yellow with a broad brush like that.

I've always thought the "self-retorting retort" thing was a light hearted game around here, and that posts calling someone stupid while making typo / grammar mistake were included, the classic being "your stupid." (which would be seperate from simply being a grammar cop) One of those things we laugh at, while understanding their lack of importance. I've always been quick to laugh at my own posts of that nature.

I see that some are more emotionally fragile than others, and will be more cautious in who I joke around with in the future.

I've always thought the "self-retorting retort" thing was a light hearted game around here. One of those things we laugh at, while understanding its lack of importance. I also thought it included the posts calling someone stupid, while the post itself contains grammatical / spelling errors, the classic being "your stupid." (which would be seperate from simply being a grammar cop)

I see that some are more emotionally fragile than others, and will be more careful with who I joke around with in the future.

Gerbil eating posts?

89 - Uh oh, one more idiot setting himself up as a grammar and/or spelling cop.

There's nothing self-retorting about a spelling/typo/grammar mistake, and the grammar cops are bores.

#102 | Posted by nullifidian at 2009-10-05 06:43 PM

The self retort was in saying that Jeff was getting stupider with each post, not just a grammar mistake. Shouldn't have had to explain that. Guess we're all a bunch of tight asses tonight! lol

#90 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-10-05 06:14 PM | Flag: PMS

LOL, who gives a shit about grammar and/or spelling?

It's the self-retort that's funny. As Danforth puts it, "Gotta love the self-retorting retort!"

And don't pretend to have never pointed one out.

"LOL, who gives a shit about grammar and/or spelling?

It's the self-retort that's funny. "


There's nothing self-retorting about a spelling/typo/grammar mistake, and the grammar cops are bores.

"It's the self-retort"

What a hoot. Jeff doesn't know what "partisan" actually means and you're clueless as to the meaning of the word "retort." I don't care what Frank Luntz tells you these words mean, you're obviously in the dark.

And here's why you shouldn't play at spelling and/or grammar cop:

I just wish the "shit" we were buying was proportionally more American and less from asian countries.
Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

While Americans have to get their news from England these days CNN actually fact checks SNL's skit on Obama.

www.youtube.com

#97 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-10-05 06:04 PM
#98 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-10-05 06:08 PM
#99 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-10-05 06:09 PM
#101 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-10-05 06:15 PM

Something went terribly wrong. haha!

#104 | Posted by Cock_Starvis


You are an unmitigated tool.

"There's nothing self-retorting about a spelling/typo/grammar mistake,"

There is when you're pointing out someone's igorance or stupididty.

#107 | Posted by JeffJ

Clearly, for you "patisan" means anyone who disagrees with you. But that's only because you're ignorant.

Do yourself a favor: Find a reputable dictionary and spend a little time checking out the primary meaning and etymology of those big words before you use them and maybe you wouldn't come across as such an arrogant, whining, and pedantic horse's ass.

And before Live shows up with his Spelling Nazi armband pinned around his spaghetti biceps, "patisan" above should read "partisan."

JOE SCARBOROUGH: REPUBLICANS "HAVE GONE OFF THE DEEP END" IN OLYMPIC CRITICISM
tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.
com

From the story:

[O]n Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough slammed Republicans for their gleeful reactions to President Obama's failed attempt to help Chicago land the 2016 Olympics.

Scarborough first showed a clip of Rush Limbaugh merrily declaring that "the world has rejected Obama," chanting "Barack Hussein Obama" and shimmying with delight.

In response, Scarborough asked, "I would like Rush Limbaugh to tell me...who's he helping there other than Rush Limbaugh?" He went on: "Middle Americans that swing elections see that and think, 'Oh my God, Republicans have gone off the deep end.'"

This echoed a piece Scarborough wrote for The Huffington Post last Friday, titled "Thank You, Mr. President," in which he praises Obama for his trip to Copenhagen. Scarborough goes on to criticize both Republicans and Democrats for "narrow-minded partisanship," but calls conservative reactions to Obama's failed bid "just plain stupid."

Joe finished up his Morning Joe segment with a final dig at Limbaugh et al., calling the jovial responses "disgusting."


Maybe you'll do the world a favor and use your chest to catch some lead while trying to use your mad awesome ninja skills to steal some rotten cabbage.

#69 | Posted by Axiom

Death threats Axiom?? I flagged that for you.

I guess I am a backwoods redneck though. I grow most of my own food, can track deer and kill it with a bow. I've used snares to catch rabbit. Animal guts don't bother me that much. And my hands are rough from working for a living and I can figure out how to fix shit.
#69 | Posted by Axiom

What do you do with the shit, exactly? Make faux topiary Br'er Rabbits? For bait in dog traps? Construct mailboxes? Build SCV monuments?

There is when you're pointing out someone's igorance or stupididty.

#108 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-10-06 01:55 AM

Yeah, that's what I thought. I also thought it was a light hearted game, not likely to invoke fascist imagery. Who hasn't made their own self-retorting retort? We have some sensitive people around here.

Starvis is a Class A pussy.
I'll bet he's still bullied to this day.

Easy to get inside your pointed noggin, isn't it, Cher?

I slap you for the sake of slapping you, and you think you're inside my head?
What a silly little lady you are. Especially considering the hissy fit you threw here over JeffJ and LoD.

You've just got to love the questions you pose in #113. "That all sounds so manly and intimidating. It's a world I know nothing about, and frankly it scares me!"

Boo!

Even funnier is the fact you're now going through my posting history and trying desperately to strike back.
Lashing out like that after claiming you were inside of my head just makes this even more funny.

It's as if you're completely unaware of your surroundings.

"you think you're inside my head?"

I know I'm inside your head, Cher.

"Who hasn't made their own self-retorting retort? We have some sensitive people around here."

Another puling, little whiner Doc?

the fact is real clear
this was all about obama and his chicago crook buddies who stood to make millions while the whole thing could have easily ended up like most of the other olympic TAXPAYER boondoogles

surely you smart and informed people saw the report that the olympics in canada JUST GOT PAID OFF..
the MONTREAL OLYMPICS of 30 years ago...

Another puling, little whiner Doc?
#119 | Posted by crispee_oc

Yes, Crispee, you're certainly are.

"going through my posting history"

Ohmygawd, heaven forfend! LOL. Cher, that's something you do on a regular basis, lamely trying to make juvenile "jokes" or -- and on this one you usually fail -- rarely attempting to make a legitimate point. You no like? Tough shit. Just do what the rest of us do: stop clipping your grandma's coupons, pick yourself up, see if you can act like an adult, stop pretending you're such a dainty little thing, cease the incessant whining, and live with it.

You poor thing. Where did I say I didn't like it? I simply made the point that you were in such a tizzy over the fact I swatted at you that went and responded to my last 3 or 4 posts (showing that I'm clearly in your head) in an effort to lash out and attempt to get even. You failed, as usual.

As for claiming I check post history on a regular basis, you're frigging nuts. But hey, that's something your pal AmericanUnity/AllAmerican used to claim, and we all know how truthful the Colonel was...

Butch up Starvis. JeffJ, LoD, and I have managed to get you all a flutter in just this thread alone. It's time for you to tone it down, Monroe.

There's no fluttering, Cher, other than the waggling of bat wings in your noggin.

But I'll give you this: Your impersonation of a Twankeesque bartender with a bad comb-over working a Sausalito fern bar in roller skates between sessions whipping up Ramos Fizzes, trailing a colostomy bag strapped to a miniature schnauzer, beer belly bulging out over a Hawaiian shirt decorated with pictures of hula dancers and portraits of Don Ho, a tattoo of a sailor on one forearm and the faded inky image of Snoopy as the Red Baron on the other, can't be far from the real thing.

Boy, you sure are smarting (and going out of your way to prove I pull the strings).
Let it go Monroe, let it go.

"1) they are supposed to be apolitical, but the president steps into it.

#42 | Posted by goatman"


Huh? Because the POTUS made a speech trying to get the Games, he violated the goal that it be apolitical? What a fucking moron.

#125 | Posted by 101Chairborne

Wow, you really are snagged on the line, aren't you?

Come on buttercup, the list of hooks (threads) I've caught you on just today is evidence enough of who's doing the fishing here.

Maybe you could run back to Colonel AmericanAllAmerican and ask him for some more "winning" tactics?

Now run along cupcake.

Do yourself a favor and impale yourself on the gaff. You'll suffer less in the long run.

Post a comment
Comments are closed for this entry.
Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable