32 thoughts on “If Republicans are Terrorists, Then Democrats are Pedophiles

  1. Green Mountain Boy August 2, 2011 / 10:24 pm

    First Johah Goldberg, now Jim Treacher. Seems some conservatives are biting the dogs back. Wonder why it took so long and how long will it last?

  2. bardolf August 2, 2011 / 10:27 pm

    The key difference is that the debt ceiling vote showdown was without historical precedence and shouldn’t occur if congress does its job properly. The GOP has increased the debt ceiling repeatedly under previous administrations so unless they were pedophiles back then it doesn’t match.

    • Green Mountain Boy August 3, 2011 / 6:18 am

      Bardolf, I was making more of a comment on the so called “new tone”. The question i would ask you is. Do agree with the choo choo that TEA Partiers are terrorists?

      • bardolf August 3, 2011 / 11:59 am

        Of course I don’t think the Tea Partiers are terrorists and have said so on B4V many times. I don’t think it is reasonable to sign a pledge not to raise taxes for a congressman since that handcuffs you. I have doubts that the Tea Party is becoming a tool of corporate America, but not serious doubts. Spook is a fine advocate for the Tea Party and if we didn’t interact on B4V it would be easy to drift toward the Koch brothers control the Tea Party meme.

        I do think the GOP isn’t serious in compromising with the Democrats to achieve a balanced budget. It would be political suicide for the Dems to offer up trillions in non-military cuts in exchange for practically nothing. A previous thread on how one would balance the budget showed that conservatives can’t make the hard decisions. They would raise payroll taxes before corporate taxes and gut 70% of the discretionary non-military budget without a clue what services that 70% pays for in reality.

      • Amazona August 3, 2011 / 1:13 pm

        It would be political suicide for the Dems to offer up trillions in non-military cuts in exchange for practically nothing.

        And herein lies the ugly truth—that it is about what is best for the Democratic Party, and not what is best for the country.

        And it is increasingly obvious that the two are in conflict.

        Perhaps if we could have a political party, or even just a political movement, which was focused on what is BEST FOR THE NATION, we could move forward.

        Hmmmmmmm—–I wonder what that movement might call itself? It would be pretty cool if it could come up with something that would also have a historical reference. You know, something to remind us of our FIRST effort to create a functional government.

        Hmmmmmmm……..

      • Amazona August 3, 2011 / 1:22 pm

        …..without a clue what services that 70% pays for in reality.

        Really? And you know this—how? Please give us references to your sweeping claim that “the GOP” wants to slash expenditures “..without a clue what services that 70% pays for in reality.”.

        You are the self-proclaimed math expert, so perhaps you can break down the different areas of entitlement spending to show us that 70% of it is for mystery “services” other than, say, Medicare and Social Security and welfare and earmarks and Planned Parenthood and the dozens of other specific mentions that have been made about where spending has to be cut, reined in, or restructured.

        Now that we know they only total 30% of the “discretionary non-military spending”, that is. And then we can find out how the Republican members of Congress can be so completely unaware that these other “services” even exist.

        It seems to me that if 70% of “discretionary non-military spending” is so secret that not even the GOP Congresscritters have a clue as to where it goes, we need to fix that immediately.

        Are you saying that the Dem members of Congress DO know? Why aren’t they telling? Is it a secret?

        Do YOU know? Will YOU tell?

      • bardolf August 3, 2011 / 3:05 pm

        Amy

        Did you try your hand at balancing the budget on the thread Mark had last week? Last I checked not a single conservative on B4V aside from Mark himself had attempted an honest reckoning. Mark had offered up 70% cuts without explanation. Since nobody else had the guts to try their hand I took his as what conservatives would like but are afraid to say.

        https://blogs4victory.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/how-would-you-balance-the-budget/#comments

        Whenever there is a need to commit to actual deals or even to simply declaring whether you feel closer to the boomer generation or GenX the blog is almost silent. This is the blank slate theorizing always leave room for interpretation jello on the wall nonsense that you and the non-rigid conservatives practice.

  3. Dvindice August 2, 2011 / 11:08 pm

    In some cases the title “Pedophile” fits like a glove.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds

    Gerry Studds (D) was elected 6 times after being busted. Mark Foley (R) was forced to resign by the GOP.

    • neocon1 August 3, 2011 / 8:54 am

      dv
      bwany fwank
      sex with under age boys
      running a gay bath house/brothel out of DC apt
      still in a high seat of power…one of the architects of the housing collapse.
      darkness and light have nothing in common.
      The rat party is the party of the KKK, SDS, NBB. NOI, code pinh, SEIU
      talk about terrorists?????
      WTF X10,000

  4. Jim Treacher August 3, 2011 / 5:21 am

    “The GOP has increased the debt ceiling repeatedly under previous administrations so unless they were pedophiles back then it doesn’t match.”

    But “terrorist” does, presumably.

    • neocon1 August 3, 2011 / 8:49 am

      arthurtreacher

      Be AFRAID be VERRRRRY AFRAID JT,… ve know whar du live…signed
      wright
      faracan
      ayers
      hamas
      shabaz
      soetoro
      je$$e
      al
      SEIU
      code pink
      NAMBLA
      SCLC
      and many many more…..

    • bardolf August 3, 2011 / 12:10 pm

      There isn’t a proper parallel. The GOP always raised the debt ceiling without fanfare under Bush. The Democrats didn’t push the government to the brink of default under Bush. The pedophile meme won’t work on any fraction of the voting public in the same way that holding the economy hostage meme work will work because of the inconsistency of the GOP not the inconsistency of the Democrats.

      The real problem is that for whatever reason one wants to give the Tea Party appeared very shortly after Obama became president when it should have appeared under Reagan, Clinton or Bush.

      The word terrorist doesn’t match the Tea party. It is poor name calling on par with saying Obama is a Marxist or Bush was Hitler or liberals are Fascist. It shows a complete disconnect from true terrorism, fascism etc.

      • Amazona August 3, 2011 / 1:29 pm

        “There isn’t a proper parallel. The GOP always raised the debt ceiling without fanfare under Bush.”

        Define “fanfare”. I kind of thought the Dem opposition, as shown by the speech by Barack Obama, would be considered “fanfare”.

        “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure,” he said. “It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

        Or did you mean LITERAL “fanfare”–because there were no trumpets that I recall. So hard to know, with you…….

      • bardolf August 3, 2011 / 4:09 pm

        The FILTER is STRONG with this ONE.

        Amy has been to free republic or NRO to get a talking point. Without actually processing the facts she has confused a speech against the debt ceiling in March well before the deadline with a game of chicken in August right before the deadline.

        To add to her historical ignorance (who knew 2006 was so long ago but could be dementia as well) we need only recall that at least superficially, the US economy was in a positive position in 2006 vs. a recession in 2010. In good times you shouldn’t be borrowing as if it were a recession.

        Chirping sounds about the GOP being a bunch of pedos in 2006.

    • Bodie August 3, 2011 / 3:42 pm

      Well? Were Republicans pedophiles for increasing the debt ceiling?

  5. tiredoflibbs August 3, 2011 / 8:12 am

    Balddoof, ALL administrations since WW2, with the exception of Truman, have increased the debt ceiling.

    • neocon1 August 3, 2011 / 8:50 am

      tired

      facts mean nothing to dumbed down useful idiots.

    • Retired Spook August 3, 2011 / 9:13 am

      Tired,

      Now that may not actually be true. According to Dennis in another thread, the truth all depends on the angle from which you view it. I will say this, that POV certainly makes it easy to believe whatever the hell you want and still have a clear conscience.

      • neocon1 August 3, 2011 / 10:14 am

        spook

        stupid is as stupid does, dennistooge fits the bill.

    • bardolf August 3, 2011 / 12:11 pm

      Which is why the GOP is inconsistent in its gamesmanship.

  6. mitch August 3, 2011 / 10:32 am

    Terrorism is a tactic. It’s purpose is to insight fear and tread and that is exactly the result of the histrionics of the teapeople who manged to get elected to congress. We’ll see how their constituents react to them when they vacation at home. It might come as a shock.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60421.html

    There are now 3 parties. The ruling party, the opposition and a protest party who have no idea about how to govern effectively. Ideological purity is the only thing that they care about and their desire is to destroy the country is tantamount. So all of the screaming and yelling and the gnashing of teeth that they participate in about being patriots and real Americans is rank with hypocracy.

    • Cluster August 3, 2011 / 10:40 am

      Ideological purity is the only thing that they care about and their desire is to destroy the country is tantamount. – Mitch

      I couldn’t agree more, but liberalism will be defeated in 2012.

    • neocon1 August 3, 2011 / 10:57 am

      Bmitch

      marxist/leftist/communism isnt being an American patriot.
      trying to save the country from financial ruination is.
      how stupid can one be?
      Oh wait you are a donk = DAMN stupid.
      silly me. TROLL

    • Amazona August 3, 2011 / 1:55 pm

      “Terrorism is a tactic. It’s (sic) purpose is to insight (sic) fear and tread (sic) and that is exactly the result of the histrionics of the teapeople who manged to get elected to congress. ”

      Well, yes, terrorism IS a “tactic”. And its purpose IS to incite fear and dread. So far so good.

      But terrorism is a tactic of violence, of unexpected and unpredictable death and destruction, of carnage and mindless slaughter.

      Terrorism kills.

      The Left’s efforts to simultaneously smear a peaceful and philosophical movement with the images of death, maiming, devastation, and real physical fear of being slaughtered, while at the same time pretending that the word “terrorist” is really just a reference to political rhetoric is typically despicable Leftist gamesmanship.

      mitch is trying to gloss over the reckless and slanderous use of the word “terrorists” by using the Leftist tactic of simply redefining terms.

      Still wondering just how insane mitch really is? Don’t wonder–let him show you. Here are two examples.

      Well, the first is not an example of insanity as much as of total political ignorance.

      “i> …a protest party who have no idea about how to govern effectively. ”

      The TEA Party is not a political party at all. It never has been, it has never postured as such. It is a philosophical movement, not tied to any party. (Do you think mitch is truly ignorant of the origin of the name and its historical reference? Do you think he really believes it is a political PARTY?)

      As for having “no idea about how to govern effectively”—now mitch wanders into the weeds of sheer goofiness.

      OF COURSE they have an idea, a very clear idea, of how to govern effectively. What’s more, this idea is clearly and concisely laid out, and has a history of over two centuries of effectiveness. It’s an idea which, when implemented, allowed this fledgling nation to leapfrog over established countries around the world, rapidly outdistancing them in the areas of personal liberty, economic prosperity and national security, while becoming a beacon of freedom and opportunity. On top of that, it is already in place as the law of the land in this country. Duh, One would wonder, if one had not already consigned mitch to the scrapheap of political irrelevance, just what the hell he smokes all day, to come up with such totally stupid and, yes, crazy comments.

      You know what else this political movement has? It has the contrast between its clear, concise, proven method of government with that supported by mitch and his fellow travelers. Yep, they not only have the track record of their preferred method of government, they have the relentless parade of inevitable failures of mitch’s preference.

      But wait…mitch is not finished. He still has this to say, and this is where we see true insanity: Ideological purity is the only thing that they care about and their desire is to destroy the country is tantamount.

      Yep, to the truly nuts, an effort to pull the nation back from the brink of a proven failure of a system, that of the Left, and return it to the tried-and-true (and by the way, LEGAL) form of government of our own Constitution, is really a “desire to DESTROY THE COUNTRY”.

      As for “ideological purity”, this is the sneer of one who can’t be bothered with actual ideology, not even that of the system he defends and enables. It’s the effort of the intellectually lazy to justify his lack of knowledge or commitment.

      Yeah, mitch is quite a piece of work, all right.

  7. Bodie August 3, 2011 / 3:41 pm

    Wow, evidently a nerve was struck to get Jim Treacher to last out so ridiculously. But then again, this is Jim Treacher we’re talking about…not exactly a reservoir of rationality. But hey, Jim, if you’re really interested in pedophiles, take a look at the Catholic church.

    • Cluster August 3, 2011 / 4:04 pm

      Wow, evidently a nerve was struck to get Jim Treacher to last out so ridiculously.

      And you did not lash out on the other thread??? ROTFLMAO

      Your fun to mess with Bodie. Thanks for coming around

      • bardolf August 3, 2011 / 4:57 pm

        “You’re fun” not “your fun”. The typos are running amok today.

      • Bodie August 3, 2011 / 5:06 pm

        Nah, I just pointed out that you said something astronomically stupid. Which you did (and are now desperate to avoid acknowledging). Treacher, however, can’t seem to gain control of his emotions, hence his sad little outburst.

      • Bodie August 4, 2011 / 11:13 am

        Hahaha, a press release from WIlliam Donahue? That’s as stark an admission of defeat as you can make, Mark. But still, if Treacher is so interested in pedophilia, the Catholic church is the best place for him to look–there he’ll find not only molesters, but plenty of people who will protect molesters.

  8. dennis August 3, 2011 / 11:21 pm

    Spook: ” According to Dennis in another thread, the truth all depends on the angle from which you view it.”

    No Spook, that’s not what I said. Not even close. This kind of misrepresentation, often on critical points, happens frequently here, which indicates either very sloppy reading or a very loose attitude toward truth on your own part.

    Truth doesn’t depend in the least on how you view it. I made quite plain that what changes with different perspective is one’s perception of reality. That is a fact – and it’s a huge difference of meaning. Reality itself remains unchanged. (I never spoke particularly of “truth” in that post, although you may sometimes use the words interchangeably.)

    In fact the only thing I said that could be construed as any kind of relativism toward truth is that I was reluctant to call you or others here liars, even when you say things that are demonstrably untrue (as above). I said “I accept that at least some of the time they are describing what they see. No matter if the whole rest of the world sees something plainly, demonstratively, objectively different.”

Comments are closed.