Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, January 08, 2018

President Donald Trump was greeted with a booming chorus of cheers mixed with some boos as he took the field Monday for the national anthem ahead of the college football title game between Georgia and Alabama.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

LOL!

#1 | Posted by Angrydad at 2018-01-08 09:47 PM | Reply

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#2 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-01-08 09:52 PM | Reply

funny that he clearly doesn't know the words...

#3 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-01-08 10:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

If it's more booing you're looking for, Trump's reception outside the game might just fit the bill:

www.msn.com

#4 | Posted by Foreigner at 2018-01-08 10:27 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

He's such an oaf.

I have to imagine that pretty soon he's not going to be let out in public because there just isn't a positive experience to be had letting him loose.

Put him in a bathrobe and you'd think he was a retirement home escapee who wandered onto the field.

#5 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-08 10:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

His spokeswoman opened her first press conference this year celebrating Georgia and Alabama -- "both in the heart of Trump country" ...

Silly me, I thought he was the President of the whole USA.

#6 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2018-01-09 01:12 AM | Reply

He looks like he has parkinsons with the way he cannot stand still for the anthem.

#7 | Posted by 726 at 2018-01-09 08:35 AM | Reply

You're boasting about something that made Trump look like an idiot, Boaz. He mouthed a few words and then stopped, like he didn't know the words.

How low will your expectations go to prop up this clown? Will you post a link in a few months about how presidential it was when Trump managed to give a speech without going tinkle in his pants?

#8 | Posted by rcade at 2018-01-09 08:46 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

www.cnn.com

#9 | Posted by 726 at 2018-01-09 08:48 AM | Reply

Oh gee, the audience at the game between Alabama and Georgia was an accurate sampling of America, more like an accurate sampling of spoiled frat boys. I didn't watch, wouldn't waste my time watching the semi-pro league, don't even pretend that these teams are actual students. They are professional athletes who just aren't getting paid what they are worth. If they survive college they can graduate into the pros when they can make real money but if they are injured their dreams evaporate and the colleges the play for don't have to provide an income for them much less replace the incomes they lost.
Personally, I don't watch college or pro football. I don't like blood sports.

#10 | Posted by danni at 2018-01-09 08:57 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

"The hate displayed by Trump is disheartening. "

FTFY

Yesterday he revoked DACA for 200,000 people from Guatemala where the country is already one of the poorest nations in the world, where gang violence is out of control. So, he wants to send 200,000 people who have lived, worked and obeyed the law for 20 years back into that hell hole. Trump is evil and so are you if you agree with him. In my personal life, I will not tolerate Trumpeters without calling them out as the racist haters that they are and I've had battles because of that within my own extended family. I don't regret alienating those haters a bit. My life is better knowing that they know I hate them.

#12 | Posted by danni at 2018-01-09 09:32 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The hate displayed by the leftists here is disheartening. "

And who are us evil "leftists" trying to send back to one of the poorest nations on Earth? To a nation being destroyed by gang violence?
We aren't the haters stupid, you are. You seem to want to sentence 200,000 people who have worked, lived, had children, are families, who obeyed the laws, etc. to a total hell and for what/
How are Americans going to benefit from this crime against humanity? Because, that is what it is. America should be ashamed. I know I am ashamed of America under Trump while I never felt that under Obama. But hey, that's just me. Sawdust, either you are really stupid or you are really evil, you choose.

#13 | Posted by danni at 2018-01-09 09:36 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You should also realize that remittances constitute 20% of the economy of Guatemala. Sending 200,000 people back to that nation, eliminating their remittances, would create a humanitarian crisis of starvation, violence, and shame on America which the world would see clearly and judge us appropriately. I see Merkel and Germany accepting far more refugees than they want but they feel a humanitarian obligation which the U.S., under Trump, seems to think they can ignore without consequences. This is not my America anymore. Tear down the statue of Liberty, it's a sham.

#15 | Posted by danni at 2018-01-09 10:00 AM | Reply

- He mouthed a few words and then stopped, like he didn't know the words.

A little lip-reading indicating he was singing this....

www.youtube.com

#16 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-09 10:10 AM | Reply

#11 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-01

I hate the man no more than I would a rabid dog. But you DO have to do something about rabies.

#17 | Posted by Zed at 2018-01-09 10:33 AM | Reply

"The hate displayed by the leftists here is disheartening."

Rightists, who hate Hillary and would have continued to hate her if she had become president ("Lock her up!" "Hang the bi$ch!" and so on), are so cute when they lecture leftists about hating The Donald.

#18 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-09 10:41 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 8

Julia Davis‏ @JuliaDavisNews

#Russia's state TV reports Trump being mocked for forgetting the words to the national anthem 'Star-Spangled banner' -- or inventing his own version. The host points out that, according to some, Trump may have been singing the Russian anthem instead. Hosts conclude: "It's possible." twitter.com

#21 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-09 11:42 AM | Reply

#15 Danni: "I see Merkel and Germany accepting far more refugees than they want but they feel a humanitarian obligation which the U.S., under Trump"

And Germany has had to deal with much higher violent crime rates because of the 'refugees' they brought in. In fact, German women are far more at risk for assaults or rapes from said refugees than German men. They tend to downplay such incidents in the press (just like the U.S.).

And to make this personal, a good friend from Guatemala worked very hard for three years in the U.S. and went back to his home country a fairly wealthy man. He would help me with my Spanish and I helped him with his English.

#22 | Posted by AKat at 2018-01-09 04:40 PM | Reply

#12

Wow, that must be news to the Guatemalans.

Actually, Trump ended TPS for 200,000 Salvadorians, but to Danni they all look alike.

#23 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-09 04:59 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"And Germany has had to deal with much higher violent crime rates because of the 'refugees' they brought in. In fact, German women are far more at risk for assaults or rapes from said refugees than German men. They tend to downplay such incidents in the press (just like the U.S.)."

Have a source for that or did you just pick it up at your biweekly Klan meeting?

#24 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-01-09 05:54 PM | Reply

Have a source for that or did you just pick it up at your biweekly Klan meeting?

#24 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN

You may be the biggest douche on this site. The ease at which you ascribe the most vile labels to those with whom you disagree is astounding. I hope you pull this crap in person when drunk off Zima.

#25 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 06:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

You may be the biggest douche on this site. The ease at which you ascribe the most vile labels to those with whom you disagree is astounding. I hope you pull this crap in person when drunk off Zima.

Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 06:00 PM | Reply

I concur.

#26 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-01-09 06:06 PM | Reply

"You may be the biggest douche on this site. The ease at which you ascribe the most vile labels to those with whom you disagree is astounding."

I'll start worrying about it when I get any real indication that my characterizations are at all unfair. But by all means, tell me more about conversational civility you Nazi-coddling, regressive deflection-drone.

"I hope you pull this crap in person when drunk off Zima."

And there's the violence fantasy, right on cue.

#27 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-01-09 06:12 PM | Reply

"You may be the biggest douche on this site. The ease at which you ascribe the most vile labels to those with whom you disagree is astounding."

I'll start worrying about it when I get any real indication that my characterizations are at all unfair. But by all means, tell me more about conversational civility you Nazi-coddling, regressive deflection-drone.

You prove my point.

And there's the violence fantasy, right on cue.
#27 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN

No fantasy at all. My hope is that if you act this way with such ease in an anonymous setting such as this, that you'd have the courage to act in the same manner when discussing issues of this nature in person. And if you don't, you may consider asking yourself why. I can tell you right now, anyone on this site who has communicated with me privately will tell you that how I carry myself on this forum is consistent with how I am in private.

#28 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 06:43 PM | Reply

I hope you pull this crap in person when drunk off Zima.

Zima? Now that's funny. I approve of Zima-flavored invective.

#29 | Posted by rcade at 2018-01-09 06:46 PM | Reply

I can drink more Zima than any of you fat man-children!

#30 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 06:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

" I can tell you right now, anyone on this site who has communicated with me privately will tell you that how I carry myself on this forum is consistent with how I am in private."

Disturbing. You are a tireless enemy of justice. What sort of awful people do you associate with in person?

#31 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-01-09 06:52 PM | Reply

" how I carry myself on this forum is consistent with how I am in private.""

So you make up stories about Antifa burning down homes in real life, not just here?
Congratulations, I believe you when you say you are consistently dishonest in life.

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 06:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

What sort of awful people do you associate with in person?

#31 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN

Between family and friends it's a pretty diverse crowd both in the superficial sense that you likely judge diversity (skin color, sexual orientation, etc) and intellectual diversity - diversity of politics, etc.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 06:57 PM | Reply

#32

I get that you are most likely clowning, but I will point out that I never accused Antifa of burning down a house, specifically, the house of that Roy Moore accuser. My Antifa comment was a lame deflection that Clownshack called out as such, and after considering what he said, I agreed - it was a lame deflection.

#34 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 06:59 PM | Reply

I can tell you right now, anyone on this site who has communicated with me privately will tell you that how I carry myself on this forum is consistent with how I am in private.
#28 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Do you want an award for being an ass in person and online?

#35 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-01-09 07:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Jeffie, probably time to stop talking about it.

#36 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-09 07:01 PM | Reply

you'd have the courage to act in the same manner when discussing issues of this nature in person.

They don't call him "Toothless Boyd" for nothing...

#37 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-09 07:06 PM | Reply

#35 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES

Ah! Dirk's Mini-Me chimes in. Here's a scone to go along with your sippy-cup of Zima. *Pats head Benny Hill style*

#38 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 07:07 PM | Reply

They don't call him "Toothless Boyd" for nothing...

#37 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

His alternate nickname is "Gaping-Maw Cooper".

#39 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 07:08 PM | Reply

#33

Where would you troglodytes be without the "I have black friends!" defense?

#40 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-01-09 07:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

They don't call him "Toothless Boyd" for nothing...

#37 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER AT 2018-01-09 07:06 PM | FLAG:

Violence fantasy, like I said. Conservatives love to imagine people hurting others.

#41 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-01-09 07:10 PM | Reply

His alternate nickname is "Gaping-Maw Cooper".

#39 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-01-09 07:08 PM

When his dentist saw him he said, "you have certainly had a Badweek".

#42 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-09 07:25 PM | Reply

Do you want an award for being an ass in person and online?

#35 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES AT 2018-01-09 07:00 PM

How cute, now Mini-Me is projecting just like Boyduhh.

#43 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-09 07:28 PM | Reply

...liberals wanted more boos
I read the entire linked article and there was nothing in there about "liberals" wanting anything.

But, typical of pfc. boazo to resort to making things up about his beloved.

#44 | Posted by Hans at 2018-01-09 07:41 PM | Reply

Where would you troglodytes be without the "I have black friends!" defense?

#40 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN

I'm a genuinely nice person. As such, I have a large circle of family and friends and with that many people with whom I have a positive relationship, diversity is an inevitability.

I'm guessing you are shunned by your family and your only friend is 'Pajama Boy'. So you surely don't understand.

Here's a primer if you are unaware of the nickname of your only friend:

Pajama Boy, An Insufferable Man-Child

www.politico.com

Although, not unlike The 3 Faces of Eve, perhaps your only friend inhabits the same body you inhabit. I'm beginning to wonder....

#45 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 07:55 PM | Reply

I'm a genuinely nice person.
SNIP
#45 | Posted by JeffJ

Jefe, here is an article you may enjoy.

www.nytimes.com

#46 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-09 07:58 PM | Reply

When his dentist saw him he said, "you have certainly had a Badweek".

#42 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

And then he put Barney on the flat-screen for him to watch as he began repairing the oral damage.

#47 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 07:59 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"I'm a genuinely nice person."
--Hillary Clinton

#48 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 07:59 PM | Reply

" but I will point out that I never accused Antifa of burning down a house, specifically, the house of that Roy Moore accuser."

Then what's this?

Whose house did Antifa burn down, JeffJ?
#12 | POSTED BY SNOOFY
Surely you've seen footage.
#13 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-01-08 12:51 AM | FLAG:
www.drudge.com

#49 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 08:00 PM | Reply

Just like old times...

#50 | Posted by madscientist at 2018-01-09 08:03 PM | Reply

#46

Interesting, Troofy. I clearly fall into the 10-15% who are self-aware :-)

Whose house did Antifa burn down, JeffJ?
#12 | POSTED BY SNOOFY
Surely you've seen footage.
#13 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-01-08 12:51 AM

Ah! So now I get why you keep bringing that up. In the past year, we have plenty of documentation of Antifa engaging in property damage and other violent acts. When I responded to your question, you obviously thought I was referring to the house of the Roy Moore accuser that was burned down. That's not what I was referring to, but I see how you construed it that way. My apologies for being unclear in my initial response.

#51 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 08:05 PM | Reply

"When I responded to your question, you obviously thought I was referring to the house of the Roy Moore accuser that was burned down."

No, I didn't think that.

You were referring to video of Antifa burning down some other house, as a deflection from Roy Moore supporters burning down one of his victim's houses.

#52 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 08:10 PM | Reply

"That level of self-awareness is quite elusive: Although some 95 percent of people think they're self-aware, only about 10 percent to 15 percent truly are, according to one study."

Like being a Never Trump guy, and then being a Trump is Actually Okay guy starting November 9, 2016.

#53 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 08:12 PM | Reply

Actually, the deflection was directed at JPW and what I unfairly perceived as selective outrage on his part. You know, deflecting to pointing out hypocrisy, be it real or imagined. It's something you are able to spot :-)

#54 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 08:13 PM | Reply

" It's something you are able to spot :-)"

Anyone can spot hypocrisy.
Tu Quoque a logical fallacy.
So, pointing it out only proves that your thinking embraces logical fallacies.
Thanks for reading and understanding.

#55 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 08:15 PM | Reply

I hope you got that I was acknowledging that I called out a deflection earlier today that was calling out a deflection.

That was a zinger to which I had no response, but felt I should acknowledge, at some point. This seemed like the appropriate time.

Nicely done.

#56 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 08:20 PM | Reply

How cute, now Mini-Me is projecting just like Boyduhh.
#43 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

People on the right were never very creative with insults. Call it projecting if that gets you off, but I agree with Jeffj. I do treat people the same online and off. If you are a good person with reasonable politics that properly understands your policy ideals, I'll treat you with respect. If you're a mindless sheep that cannot help but repeat the talking points dictated to you by the propagandist media you willfully consume, if you are an anti-free market "coal worker for trump" that doesn't need Obamacare because you have insurance through the ACA and vote republican since they are the "fiscally responsible party of family values", if you are an anti-vaxxing chemtrail huffer that believes in the flat earth society and thinks the illuminati are still prevalent today, or anything like any of those; I will treat you like you deserve -- no respect at all.

If you take issue with that, strive to exit the group I described instead of whining about how people treat you as a consequence of your ignorance.

#57 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-01-09 08:58 PM | Reply

"I'm a genuinely nice person."

In a "Hitler was kind to animals" kind of way? Your conduct on this forum speaks for itself. So do your vile political and social beliefs.

#58 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-01-09 09:05 PM | Reply

"I'm a genuinely nice person." - #45 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 07:55 PM

I'll affirm that comment.

#59 | Posted by Hans at 2018-01-09 09:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Thank you, Hans. :-)

#60 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 09:22 PM | Reply

Who knew Hans was such an ass kisser?

#61 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-09 09:24 PM | Reply

So do your vile political and social beliefs.

#58 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN

Genuinely curious: Which of my political and social beliefs do you deem to be vile? Please be specific.

#62 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 09:29 PM | Reply

Genuinely curious: Which of my political and social beliefs do you deem to be vile? Please be specific.

#62 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-01-09 09:29 PM | FLAG:

Selective strict constructionism that empowers the wealthy and exploitative. Belief that Antifa is at all equivalent to fascists and their ilk. Opposition to sanctuary cities (see that selective constitutionalism again). Knee jerk outrage at anyone with the gall to agitate for social justice and reform. Shall I go on?

You spent MONTHS here defending Nazis all the live-long day...

#63 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-01-09 09:55 PM | Reply

Supporting school vouchers, which the private schools can of course refuse to accept, this giving rise to a two-tier education system as the public schools are drained of the funding of all but the poorest parents who can't afford to send their kids elsewhere.

That's vile, both politically and socially.

Same goes for the Medicare vouchers you support.

#64 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 09:56 PM | Reply

Your frequent objections to a policy based solely on an evaluation of perceived Constitutional grievances, without ever addressing policy itself, is also the coward's way out.

No better morally than a school that expels a kid for bringing Tylenol to school because of mindless obedience to a "Zero Tolerance" policy on drugs.

#65 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 09:59 PM | Reply

Your incessant characterization of abortion as murder is perhaps your most repulsive talking point. Like the time you called my old girlfriend a baby killer. Or, like the time you called me a father, for that matter. It's almost like you're trying to be offensive with that one, are you?

#66 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 10:00 PM | Reply

I'll address your responses a point at a time. I'll start with abortion. Characterizing it as state-sanctioned murder is intellectual honesty. I think it needs to be legal for a number of reasons that, in my view, override the moral repugnance of the act itself. That doesn't change what it is. My then-girlfriend (now wife), agreed that were she to get pregnant while we were in college, she'd get an abortion. I agreed to this. Had that happened it wouldn't have changed the fact that we would have arbitrarily decided to terminate a life. As to being a father, the moment I watched the first ultra-sound of my first son, I knew right then and there that I was already a father, even though he was still in the womb.

As for Constitutional objections...I view this country's policy-enactment via the bureaucracy, completely divorced from accountability to the voters, completely contrary to how laws are supposed to be enacted, as one of the biggest problems facing this country. It's extremely important to me. The ends do NOT justify the means, if the means circumvent the process. I think it's morally repugnant that the ends are considered sacrosanct. It matters how we get there; very much so. If legislative ends can't be achieved through the legislative process it means it lacks the popular mandate to be enacted.

Onto school vouchers...I think it's vile to trap poor children into failing schools with no means to seek a better education. That vouchers and school-choice are overwhelmingly popular in poor neighborhoods and cities tells me much about the need for school-choice.

I am less sold on Medicare vouchers. Actuarial reality is that unchanged, Medicare+Medicaid+Social Security+servicing the debt will absolutely bankrupt this country. And it's not something that we can solely tax/grow our way out of. If serious cost reductions for these three programs can be achieved by means other than changing the structure of how benefits are distributed, that is fine. I am not wedded to vouchers. On this I am completely pragmatic.

Selective strict constructionism that empowers the wealthy and exploitative

Straw man.

Belief that Antifa is at all equivalent to fascists and their ilk.

Staw man.

Opposition to sanctuary cities (see that selective constitutionalism again)

This is basic Civics101. If you don't understand how our government is structured - federalism - supremacy - etc
then your understanding of some of the arguments I make are a caricature borne out of ignorance.

Knee jerk outrage at anyone with the gall to agitate for social justice and reform.

Straw man.

You spent MONTHS here defending Nazis all the live-long day...

#63 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN

Completely false. A bald-faced lie.

#67 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 10:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Characterizing it as state-sanctioned murder is intellectual honesty."

If you were in fact being intellectually honest, you'd not ignore the meaningful difference between a fetus and a person. And you'd also not call it "murder" if you killed the person who was inside you without your consent. You'd intellectually honestly call that self-defense.

Characterizing the death penalty as state sanctioned murder, on the other hand, would be intellectually honest.

#68 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 11:23 PM | Reply

I'll address your responses a point at a time. I'll start with abortion. Characterizing it as state-sanctioned murder is intellectual honesty.
SNIP
#67 | Posted by JeffJ

mur·der
ˈmərdər/
noun
noun: murder; plural noun: murders
1.
the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

hu·man be·ing
noun
noun: human being; plural noun: human beings; noun: human being; plural noun: human beings
a man, woman, or child of the species Homo sapiens, distinguished from other animals by superior mental development, power of articulate speech, and upright stance.

OOOPS

See your argument is intellectually DIShonest

#69 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-09 11:24 PM | Reply

"As for Constitutional objections...I view this country's policy-enactment via the bureaucracy, completely divorced from accountability to the voters, completely contrary to how laws are supposed to be enacted, as one of the biggest problems facing this country."

That's not addressing my point, which was you bleating nonsense like "DACA is blatantly unconstitutional" or, better yet, things like your opposition to certain pieces of legislation not based on what they achieve or even hope to achieve, but solely on how they were enacted. Doing that is a dodge of the issue, and you do it a lot.

#70 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 11:24 PM | Reply

"The ends do NOT justify the means, if the means circumvent the process."

So the American Revolution was not justified, is apparently a thing you want us to believe you believe.

#71 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 11:25 PM | Reply

"Onto school vouchers...I think it's vile to trap poor children into failing schools with no means to seek a better education."

Which is what vouchers do. Yet, you support vouchers. Vouchers that give an "out" to parents who can make up the difference between the voucher and the private school tuition. Something the poorest parents won't be able to do.

#72 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 11:26 PM | Reply

"I am less sold on Medicare vouchers."

You voted for them in 2012. I'd call you "sold."

#73 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 11:27 PM | Reply

" If you don't understand how our government is structured - federalism - supremacy - etc
then your understanding of some of the arguments I make are a caricature borne out of ignorance."

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say there can't be sanctuary cities.
Heck, the states could even choose to let non-citizens vote.
And, according to your understanding of how government is structured, you'd support that.
(Except you wouldn't, if sanctuary cities is any guide.)

#74 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 11:29 PM | Reply

"And it's not something that we can solely tax/grow our way out of"

If we can't tax our way out, and we can't grow our way out, cutting spending is the only way out, yeah?

This is why you make comments like "we can't tax and grow our way out."
Because you favor the cuts, as a moral and social agenda.

#75 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 11:31 PM | Reply

JeffJ what do you think the reaction would be at the mostly-white private school your kids go to if 100% of the kids hoping to use a voucher were impoverished, poorly educated black kids from single parent households?

You think you and the rest of the parents would just welcome your school turning half-black overnight, and your kids being held back while the school adjusts to the newer, dumber, slower herd?

Take a look at what happened in Ferguson to the schools there, when they were so bad the state de-certified them and tried to send the Ferguson kids to neighboring more affluent more white schools. Since you won't look it up, I'll tell you: The white parents freaked. They refused to accept the "bad" black kids in their good white schools. Eventually Missouri un-decertified the Ferguson schools and opened them back up to the blacks.

This is the future vouchers brings. It's a return to segregation. It's not credible that you don't know that, which means your support of vouchers is because you are morally comfortable with this method of segregation.

#76 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-09 11:40 PM | Reply

you were in fact being intellectually honest, you'd not ignore the meaningful difference between a fetus and a person

I don't see a meaningful difference. What I see is staunch supporters of abortion engage in - what I view as disingenuous - mental gymnastics to try and dehumanize a developing life in order to avoid dealing with the moral implications of their advocacy. As for the death penalty - I oppose it.

That's not addressing my point, which was you bleating nonsense like "DACA is blatantly unconstitutional" or, better yet, things like your opposition to certain pieces of legislation not based on what they achieve or even hope to achieve, but solely on how they were enacted.

I am assuming you are capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time. It is possible to discuss both the Constitutionality of something like DACA and the implications of what it attempts to achieve.

Which is what vouchers do. Yet, you support vouchers. Vouchers that give an "out" to parents who can make up the difference between the voucher and the private school tuition. Something the poorest parents won't be able to do.

#72 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

In D.C. they had to create a lottery system due to the fact that demand for vouchers greatly exceeded their supply. Video of parents and children sobbing and wailing when their number wasn't called is pretty heart-wrenching. So, your opposition to vouchers is that they don't cover the cost of tuition of every non-public school (they do fully cover the cost of some, if not most) so lower middle class recipients might be able to get their kids into the most exclusive private schools whilst the poor who receive vouchers are only able to get into schools that are measurably better than the public schools they are trying to escape, but not the best of the best? That's a pretty terrible argument IMO.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say there can't be sanctuary cities.

Immigration policy is expressly granted to the federal government. While sanctuary cities, in practice (refusing to cooperate with the federal government when it comes to handling detained illegal aliens) isn't unconstitutional, I oppose it on policy grounds - the very thing you accuse me of trying to avoid.

#77 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 11:40 PM | Reply

"Straw man."

I gave an example of your selective strict constructionist nonsense. Predictably, you punted.

"Belief that Antifa is at all equivalent to fascists and their ilk.
Staw man."

Up thread we all had a good laugh at your LITERAL inability to keep yourself from deflecting to them.

"This is basic Civics101. If you don't understand how our government is structured - federalism - supremacy - etc
then your understanding of some of the arguments I make are a caricature borne out of ignorance."

Clearly I understand these things better than you, or you wouldn't make the absurd claim that local law enforcement can be compelled to do a job for which they are not hired, staffed, or trained.

"Knee jerk outrage at anyone with the gall to agitate for social justice and reform.
Straw man."

You are one of the idiots here who uses SJW as an insult. QED, pal.

"You spent MONTHS here defending Nazis all the live-long day...

Completely false. A bald-faced lie."

Months and months. We all remember.

#78 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-01-09 11:46 PM | Reply

JeffJ what do you think the reaction would be at the mostly-white private school your kids go to...

The private high school my oldest son attends has an entrance exam and enforces disciplinary measures. If children from poor parents test-in and they aren't disruptive in class and in general, by all means. But, of course, you are laser-focused on the elite schools as if they are the ONLY option vouchers provide for poor children.

Also, conflating self-segregation with forced segregation is very disingenuous. Forcing children to ride buses for an hour and a half, passing a half dozen other schools en route to the school the state chose for them based on a quota-based system of forced desegregation is not in the best interest of the children. Giving poor, inner-city children only one choice of school - a failing school - that will put these children behind the ball is not acting in the best interest of the children.

#79 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 11:48 PM | Reply

I gave an example of your selective strict constructionist nonsense

No, you didn't.

Up thread we all had a good laugh at your LITERAL inability to keep yourself from deflecting to them.

Actually, it was on a commenbt on a completely different thread that Snoofy brought into this thread. I have, several times now, acknowledged that it was a lame deflection. It was a mistake. (Paraphrased from memory) "He who has never sinned shall cast the first stone." If you don't know what that quote is referring to, I can explain it to you.

Clearly I understand these things better than you, or you wouldn't make the absurd claim that local law enforcement can be compelled to do a job for which they are not hired, staffed, or trained.

Except that I am not making that claim.

You are one of the idiots here who uses SJW as an insult. QED, pal.

That's because people who fancy themselves as "social justice warriors" aren't interested in justice of any kind. It's a mob mentality that seeks to punish nonconformity.

Months and months. We all remember.

Liar.

#80 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-09 11:53 PM | Reply

That's because people who fancy themselves as "social justice warriors" aren't interested in justice of any kind. It's a mob mentality that seeks to punish nonconformity.
Months and months. We all remember.
Liar.
#80 | Posted by JeffJ

I loved it when Jefe told me I'm not a SJW when I claimed to be one.

#81 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-09 11:57 PM | Reply

#81

Actually, my recollection is that I said you are not an SJW progressive, you are a liberal.

SJW progressives accuse white college girls, quite aggressively, of 'cultural appropriation' for wearing hoop earrings.

SJW progressives harass college professors, to the point of credible threats of violence, for penning an email suggesting that people should take a chill pill over the Halloween costumes people choose to wear.

SJW progressives relentlessly hound, to the point of credible threats of violence, a college professor for vocalizing opposition to their call for ALL white students to vacate campus for a day.

I can cite countless more examples, but I am sure you get my point.

You are a reasonable liberal. You are no SJW progressive. As a reasonable liberal, you make genuine calls for social justice in the face of social injustice. I take no issue with that.

#82 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 12:02 AM | Reply

No, that is YOUR pejorative description of SJW, taking the example of a few extremists as representative of the whole movement. Like any movement the SJ movement has extremists but it is also a revolution, a revolution covering gender, sexuality, identity, race, class, etc. The whole #MeToo movement is SJ in action. It is the wave of the future. You, like most reactionaries focus on the few extremists like their representative, when they are not. You also conflate the action of idealistic teenagers, high schoolers and college kids to violent extremists, like their radicalism is something wrong. They are idealistic, more power to them. They will have plenty of time to be jaded adults. You are almost a stereotypical adult, "WHY THESE KIDS!!!!". Yes a few go too far, but the revolution follows in their wake when people begin to absorb the message that passive aggressive statements, jokes, costumes is destructive and harmful. They change!

Viva le Revolution!

BTW I am a PROUD Social Justice Warrior! Because it teaches my children good morals. Treat people as individuals, each of value, judge by the content of their character, expand your mind to other cultures.

#83 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-10 12:11 AM | Reply

Actually, my recollection is that I said you are not an SJW progressive, you are a liberal.

SJW progressives accuse white college girls, quite aggressively, of 'cultural appropriation' for wearing hoop earrings.

SJW progressives harass college professors, to the point of credible threats of violence, for penning an email suggesting that people should take a chill pill over the Halloween costumes people choose to wear.

SJW progressives relentlessly hound, to the point of credible threats of violence, a college professor for vocalizing opposition to their call for ALL white students to vacate campus for a day.

I can cite countless more examples, but I am sure you get my point.

You are a reasonable liberal. You are no SJW progressive. As a reasonable liberal, you make genuine calls for social justice in the face of social injustice. I take no issue with that.

Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 12:02 AM | Reply

Actually you did back in the day. You argued with him about taking part in protests many times until I showed you that it was SanAntonioRogue that attended many protests.

#84 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-01-10 12:13 AM | Reply

And again, I argue that this generational gap has been around for ages. I am watching Dragnet 1967 right now and listening to Joe Friday complain about how the kids of the time have lost their way, lost good old fashioned values. Well those kids helped stop Viet Nam, stop segregation, fought for women's rights and raised kids to get gay rights, transgender acceptance and are fighting the latest battles in the war against racism.

#85 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-10 12:15 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Actually you did back in the day. You argued with him about taking part in protests many times until I showed you that it was SanAntonioRogue that attended many protests.
#84 | Posted by LauraMohr

Jefe is talking about a more recent argument. I do think it funny he denies me my right to self identify.

#86 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-10 12:16 AM | Reply

Jefe is talking about a more recent argument. I do think it funny he denies me my right to self identify.

Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-10 12:16 AM | Reply

I myself Self Identify SJW Sweat Juicy Woman.

#87 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-01-10 12:19 AM | Reply

That be Sweet Juicy Woman! I've seen pictures of you!

#88 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-10 12:20 AM | Reply

I don't deny you anything.

The modern SJW 'movement' that is emblematic of the examples I cited is NOT some kind of 'fringe. It's actually become quite mainstream. Identity politics is part and parcel of this. Denying individual identity in favor of putting everyone into groups as an exploitative means of trying to acquire power. That is not who you are and you do yourself a disservice by self-identifying with some pretty loathsome things that are the antithesis of who you are.

#89 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 12:20 AM | Reply

Actually you did back in the day. You argued with him about taking part in protests

I didn't "argue" with him. I brought up his participating in an anti-war protest and he responded that he had never done such a thing. I told him I could have sworn he had said he had, but in so doing I also was adamant that I would take him at his word. At the time he and I had that discussion, more than 10 years ago, it was never contentious in any way.

#90 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 12:22 AM | Reply

That be Sweet Juicy Woman! I've seen pictures of you!

#88 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-10 12:20 AM | Reply | Flag

That's what I said isn't it??? Oh God my eyesight is giving me fits.

#91 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-01-10 12:22 AM | Reply

Good night, all.

I am going to watch a 10 minute 'BBQ Pit Boys' video on Youtube and then I'm going to bed.

#92 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 12:24 AM | Reply

"I don't see a meaningful difference"

That's a ridiculous, self-deluded lie.
What was my child's name, you know, the fetus my old girlfriend murdered?
What was his or her gender?
What color were his or her eyes?
These are all things you can say about a baby, not so much a fetus.

But since you are going to double down on your lie, tell me if you see any meaningful difference between a girl and a woman. Or between a man and a woman.

#93 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 12:25 AM | Reply

There is a big difference between Sweat and Sweet!

#94 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-10 12:26 AM | Reply

"Also, conflating self-segregation with forced segregation is very disingenuous."

Which kind of segregation is it when the government gives you a voucher, but nun of the better, whiter schools will take it?

#95 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 12:26 AM | Reply

There is a big difference between Sweat and Sweet!

Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-10 12:26 AM | Reply

There is when certain letters are a tad blurry.

#96 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-01-10 12:27 AM | Reply

"Immigration policy is expressly granted to the federal government"

I'm gonna assume you don't realize you're hidinig behind the Constituition with that comment, and not even discussing policy, which is one of the morally reprehensible things you continue to do. It's probably your #1 modus operandi of being a bad person.

Anyway, immigration policy has nothing to do with sanctuary cities, since the immigrants are already here, and the government policies have not kept them out.

Why can't your law-and-order-worshiping ass agree with the police in sanctuary cities that sanctuary cities help them fight crime? Just try and explain that one, to yourself, for once.

#97 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 12:30 AM | Reply

"SJW progressives accuse white college girls, quite aggressively, of 'cultural appropriation' for wearing hoop earrings."

No, your carictaure of SJW's do that.

SJW's are the reason we have civil rights in this country. And labor rights. And, well, pick any right.

#98 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 12:31 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

"Forcing children to ride buses for an hour and a half, passing a half dozen other schools en route to the school the state chose for them based on a quota-based system of forced desegregation is not in the best interest of the children."

Yes, it is.
It's been shown to work.
It's about the only thing that's been shown to work.

#99 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 12:32 AM | Reply

"You are a reasonable liberal. You are no SJW progressive. As a reasonable liberal, you make genuine calls for social justice in the face of social injustice. I take no issue with that.
#82 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

^
This is the type of talk of someone who thinks they can draw a meaningful distinction between black people and n***ers.

#100 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 12:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

" Giving poor, inner-city children only one choice of school - a failing school - that will put these children behind the ball is not acting in the best interest of the children."

What you refuse to acknowledge is the voucher doesn't give all these children a brighter future. Maybe one in ten, max. They have to have someone gleaned enough education to pass the entrance exam for your son's private school. How many do you think are going to pass? And those who fail, which is most, are still in that crappy school, except now it's even crappier because it has even less money since some of it left with the vouchers.

It's like you are saying it's okay for most poor kids to be write-offs; we'll uplift a few, that's the best we can hope for. Oh, and that taxpayer money that supports the vouchers? It goes to private schools now, which is government wealth redistribution, which you pretend to hate, except when it suits you, because you lack a moral core; or rather, your moral core is a rotten piece of racist trash.

#101 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 12:38 AM | Reply

"No, you didn't."

Sure I did. Your prattle about sanctuary cities is precisely such nonsense.

"Actually, it was on a commenbt on a completely different thread that Snoofy brought into this thread. I have, several times now, acknowledged that it was a lame deflection."

But the fact remains, you just can't help yourself.

"Except that I am not making that claim."

Then you aren't saying anything. What does enforcement mean?

"That's because people who fancy themselves as "social justice warriors" aren't interested in justice of any kind. It's a mob mentality that seeks to punish nonconformity. "

Reactionary garbage, per your usual.

"Months and months. We all remember.
Liar."

Cry some more, Nazi coddler.

#102 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-01-10 12:57 AM | Reply

"I don't see a meaningful difference. What I see is staunch supporters of abortion engage in - what I view as disingenuous - mental gymnastics to try and dehumanize a developing life in order to avoid dealing with the moral implications of their advocacy."

We get it, Jeffylube: bioethics is hard and you don't understand it at even a basic level.

#103 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-01-10 01:02 AM | Reply

"You are a reasonable liberal. You are no SJW progressive."

It's funny. He can make that distinction, but can't tell a fetus from a person. The amount of willful self-delusion going on in his mind, and the reasons why, would take years of therapy to unravel.

#104 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 01:10 AM | Reply

#102 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN

I gave you the opportunity to sort of, kind of, be taken slightly seriously for a couple of posts.

In typical fashion, you failed big time. But then, a post-modern jerk with no friends should have been expected to be ridiculous at all times. It's like expecting Trump to become 'presidential', it's not who he is.

How is Pajama Boy doing?

#105 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 06:56 AM | Reply

It's funny. He can make that distinction, but can't tell a fetus from a person. The amount of willful self-delusion going on in his mind, and the reasons why, would take years of therapy to unravel.

#104 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

"Person" is a philosophical construct. A fetus is simply a stage of development of a person. To say that at 22 weeks a fetus is not a person, but then at 22 weeks and 1 day, all of a sudden abortion is no longer an option except for a rare medical circumstance, because it all of a sudden morphed into a 'person' is a logical fallacy. At what point in development do you 'snap your fingers' and conclude a living organism instantly changes from a parasite to a person? If a person is involve in a horrible accident that puts them in a vegetative state, do they cease being a person at that point in time?

#106 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 07:00 AM | Reply

What you refuse to acknowledge is the voucher doesn't give all these children a brighter future. Maybe one in ten, max. They have to have someone gleaned enough education to pass the entrance exam for your son's private school. How many do you think are going to pass? And those who fail, which is most, are still in that crappy school, except now it's even crappier because it has even less money since some of it left with the vouchers.

You clearly don't understand how the voucher system, coupled with school choice, work. Democrats tried to end school choice in DC during Obama's tenure, clearly to appease teachers' unions, only to be met by fierce resistance from the very people (the poor residents of DC) who they purport to be champions of. Your refusal to acknowledge the overwhelming popularity of vouchers and school choice among the very poor people you are claiming (and I believe you do care) to care about is odd, to say the least.

My point is, if it's SO awful it wouldn't be so damned popular with the people who are being targeted with it - the people who you claim will be harmed by it.

#107 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 07:05 AM | Reply

"Forcing children to ride buses for an hour and a half, passing a half dozen other schools en route to the school the state chose for them based on a quota-based system of forced desegregation is not in the best interest of the children."

Yes, it is.
It's been shown to work.
It's about the only thing that's been shown to work.

#99 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Forcing a child to spend 3 hours a day on a bus is NOT in the best interest of that child. Or does this fall into the category of "in order to make an omelette we have to crack a few eggs"? If you were to personally try and force me to put one of my kids in that situation - to force them to spend 3 hours on a day to satisfy your racially-obsessed version of 'justice' - I'd end up being arrested for assault.

#108 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 07:08 AM | Reply

3 hours a day on a bus

#109 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 07:09 AM | Reply

"You are a reasonable liberal. You are no SJW progressive. As a reasonable liberal, you make genuine calls for social justice in the face of social injustice. I take no issue with that.
#82 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"
^
This is the type of talk of someone who thinks they can draw a meaningful distinction between black people and n***ers.

#100 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

It's amazing how you can manage to bring race into a subject that isn't about race. Do you think about anything else?

#110 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-10 07:10 AM | Reply

Boaz, it must make you so proud to boast that you fell for this cheap publicity stunt. Trump doesn't give a crap about college football and couldn't even make it past half-time. You got played as usual.

#111 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2018-01-10 07:55 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"What was my child's name, you know, the fetus my old girlfriend murdered?"

You had a girlfriend?

Like, one that wasn't paid by the hour?

#112 | Posted by madbomber at 2018-01-10 03:42 PM | Reply

Why would it matter if she was paid by the hour, I'm still a daddy, right?

#113 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 11:19 PM | Reply

"Forcing a child to spend 3 hours a day on a bus is NOT in the best interest of that child."

It is if it gets them to the right school.

#114 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 11:20 PM | Reply

"You clearly don't understand how the voucher system, coupled with school choice, work."

A voucher, and a choice, is not enough to get a kid into the exclusive private school your son attends.

And, if that were enough, wouldn't it dilute the value of the school?

This is why vouchers won't work. At best, you are robbing some kids of a good education to give other kids a good education.

#115 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 11:22 PM | Reply

"It's amazing how you can manage to bring race into a subject that isn't about race."

School vouchers is very much about race.

#116 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 11:22 PM | Reply

"Person" is a philosophical construct."

Sure. A very different philosophical construct than "fetus." Hence, the separate words. Duh.

#117 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 11:24 PM | Reply

" To say that at 22 weeks a fetus is not a person, but then at 22 weeks and 1 day, all of a sudden abortion is no longer an option except for a rare medical circumstance, because it all of a sudden morphed into a 'person' is a logical fallacy."

It's likewise a logical fallacy to say a fertilized egg is a person.
We even have a term for that mistake.
It's called counting your eggs before they hatch.

#118 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 11:25 PM | Reply

"Your refusal to acknowledge the overwhelming popularity of vouchers and school choice among the very poor people you are claiming (and I believe you do care) to care about is odd, to say the least."

Popularity should not be the yardstick by which vouchers are measured.
Educational outcomes is how they should be measured, along with cost and other societal concerns.

Poor people like to drink smoke and gamble, generally more than rich people, that doesn't make those things good.

#119 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 11:29 PM | Reply

I will say this, JeffJ. The education system especially for the poor is so dire that I'm willing to abandon my principles to try some unorthodox things.

I just don't think we can voucher our way to a better school system for the poor. This is just throwing money at the problem from a different angle, one where the money ends up at private schools, which already are doing okay, and don't need more money, and most of all don't have the capacity to take every kid that needs a solid education.

#120 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-10 11:33 PM | Reply

#8 Reminds me of a lot of the stories that were on the Drudge about Obama doing silly things and still being fawned over.

Craziness knows no partisan bounds, .com either.

#121 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2018-01-11 05:50 AM | Reply

OOOPS See your argument is intellectually DIShonest - #69 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-09 11:24 PM
human being
noun
1. any individual of the genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens.

Did you really not look to see if there WAS a meaning that made his statement honest, or is your argument an example of intellectual DIShonesty?

#122 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-01-11 03:54 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort