150 Reasons…


Click here for more…

Advertisements

162 thoughts on “150 Reasons…

  1. tiredoflibbs May 19, 2013 / 6:46 pm

    mitchie, the only one who is getting all “wee-wee’d” up is you. You lose all control and sensibility when you reply to any post. It is really pathetic.

    I don’t see you refuting anything with credible sources. You just regurgitate talking points. I know I am repeating myself as far as you are concerned, but it is accurate.

    • sarahbloch May 20, 2013 / 7:16 am

      You don’t mean credible sources because there are no sources you can name that you would not dispute. If Limbaugh Beck Ingraham and Malkin all came out in support of some decision Obama had made or some policy he was putting forward you would immediately call them “traitors to conservatism.”

  2. Matt Margolis May 19, 2013 / 6:48 pm

    On polling? No. But Silver’s assessment is based on a crude method based on electoral college vote count (for reelection) — essentially plotting Obama’s rank based on probability. I would argue that popular vote count is more telling than electoral college count, for starters, but that completely lacking in the assessment is any consideration for Obama’s policies or record. Our book, despite what you said above, is a collection of facts about Obama’s record that support our opinion of where Obama ranks.

    So yeah, Silver’s assessment is purely theoretical, and complete crap. Our book is more credible.

    • mitchethekid May 19, 2013 / 6:59 pm

      Except that Obama won. Twice. And Nate Silver predicted it way ahead of time, so try again. Apparently you know nothing of the science of probability and outcome. Yes, Sliver ranked scores based on probably outcome. So your point is what? That your a biased idiot who stares at his navel? Disagreeing with the world? Remind me never to step foot into any of the buildings that you help design.
      And Tired, please expand your vocabulary. I am disgusted with the same old word garbage that flows from your brain and out through your mouth. What I say is no more “talking points” than anything else that is factual and repeated by various individuals. A talking point implies that one cannot think. Which obviously you can’t since you repeat the same “tired” talking points ad infinitum.

    • meursault1942 May 20, 2013 / 1:36 am

      “Our book, despite what you said above, is a collection of facts”

      Talking points are not facts. Mark has already been taken to the woodshed over this (and, as a bonus, was caught lying). Why do the both of you refuse to admit the obvious: That you’ve written a partisan screed? Why is it so important to you to pretend otherwise?

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 5:45 pm

        No, wino, you wanted desperately to take Mark “to the woodshed” (for reasons we tactfully avoided questioning) but all you did was bellow that he was wrong, with nothing to support your impotent indignation.

    • sarahbloch May 20, 2013 / 7:18 am

      I’m going to email that comment to Mr Silver and see what he says. I hear he enjoys a good debate. Maybe it’ll drive up your book sales even if you are exposed for the opinionated goofs you are.

  3. mitchethekid May 19, 2013 / 7:01 pm

    Oh, and by the way, Obama won the popular vote as well. Twice. Keep swinging for the fences though. I admire your tenacity.

    • Matt Margolis May 19, 2013 / 7:04 pm

      So did Bush. Hell, so did Richard Nixon, by a far wider margin than Obama did. So, are you saying that Nixon was better than Obama?

      • M. Noonan May 19, 2013 / 10:51 pm

        Wonder how long we’ll wait for a reply on that fact…

      • mitchethekid May 20, 2013 / 9:35 am

        In some ways, yes Nixon was better.

      • M. Noonan May 20, 2013 / 9:27 pm

        Well, at least we know he approves of Presidents who seek to subvert the Constitution…

    • tiredoflibbs May 19, 2013 / 8:39 pm

      mitchie: “A talking point implies that one cannot think.”

      Physician heal thyself!

      For someone who thinks that a plane flies because there is a vacuum under the wings reveals that you cannot think for yourself in any regard.

  4. tiredoflibbs May 19, 2013 / 8:34 pm

    mitchie: ” I am disgusted with the same old word garbage that flows from your brain and out through your mouth.”

    Wow mitchie, the irony of your statement. You regurgitate the same old refuted and debunked crap day in and day out. “It’s Bush’s fault”, “illegal war”, and whatever your forker pals say.

    Again, you don’t want to hear me accurately describe your “debating” style then give me a reason to change it. You haven’t. You say the same things over and over no matter how many times we prove you or your dumbed down talking points wrong.

    Pathetic.

    • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 12:49 am

      Ozero STOLE the election TWICE BFD!!

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 12:53 am

        mitchethekid

        time to DUMP this POS bag of garbage!!

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 8:18 am

        scandal? what scandal?
        Drudge =
        Anonymous IRS official — everything comes from the top…

        McConnell: ‘There is culture of intimidation throughout administration’…

        Portman: IRS will need special counsel…

        ————————————————————————————-

        meanwhile back in the raunch donkRat paradise with the strictest gun laws, and OzerO’s bestes bud in charge and stellar results of barry’ and je$$ie’s community agitating…….

        CHICAGOLAND: 5 Dead, 15 Wounded In Weekend Violence…

        (black) Teen mobs run wild in downtown…

      • mitchethekid May 20, 2013 / 9:37 am

        Prove it Neo. Prove the elections were stolen. Not links to Unskewed Polls, but actual proof. And when you have the evidence, contact the board of elections.

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 2:48 pm

        bmitch

        stolen election?
        see Sheriff Joe for the forged BC……

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 2:52 pm

        Obama lost Democrat votes in the 2012 election. He won because Republicans stayed home. Democrats got their vote out, we didn’t. The contrast between Republican turnout in 2010 and 2012 can be summed up in two words: Tea Party.

        Now we know the answer to all those questions about what happened to the Tea Party. It was busy being abused and silenced by the Obama Administration IRS.

        You think it coulda had an effect on the election results?

        Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/05/squelching_the_tea_party_gave_obama_the_election.html#ixzz2TrPLQwDm

  5. mitchethekid May 20, 2013 / 10:00 am

    By attacking the reputation of Nate Silver you Matt, are opening yourself up to criticism. Silver has established himself as a very accurate pollster. In 2008 he correctly predicted the winner in 49 out of 50 states and in 2012 he was 100% correct. The only crude element is your dismissive attitude towards his polling accuracy. Lets compare the predictions made on this blog in both ’08 and ’12 when McCain and Romney were supposed to win by never before seen margins. Lets compare your methodology; which is based on hopes, dreams and wishful thinking and actual science that measures probability. Nate Silver is a very accomplished person. In 2010, Silver’s FiveThirtyEight blog was licensed for publication by The New York Times. The newly renamed blog, FiveThirtyEight: Nate Silver’s Political Calculus, first appeared in The Times on August 25, 2010. In 2012 and 2013, FiveThirtyEight won Webby Awards as the “Best Political Blog” from the International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences.
    Silver’s book, The Signal and the Noise, was published in September 2012. It subsequently reached The New York Times best seller list for nonfiction, and was named by Amazon.com as the #1 best nonfiction book of 2012. How will your book compare? Perhaps next you will claim that Silver’s accuracy was a result of 2 elections being stolen, but this would fail to take into account his developing PECOTA, a system for forecasting the performance and career development of Major League Baseball players, which he sold to and then managed for Baseball Prospectus from 2003 to 2009.
    Be big enough to give credit where it is due.

    • James0601 May 20, 2013 / 11:48 am

      Matt will never give credit to someone like Nate Silver because Nate is smarter than Matt.

      You can see it from conservatives on this blog all the time. they are patently below the intelligence curve when compared to the general public.

      People like Neo, Mark, and Spook are blinded by their religious beliefs and couldn’t possibly be wrong about anything…until they are!

      Spook and Mark have been wrong about American politics for as long as I’ve been here.

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 2:24 pm

        People like Neo, Mark, and Spook are blinded by their religious beliefs and couldn’t possibly be wrong about anything

        sniff sniff

        Goat? or camel? I say goat, but I could be wrong.

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 3:18 pm

        Yup

  6. Cluster May 20, 2013 / 10:52 am

    Ruh Roh ….

    the very day after the president of the quite publicly anti-Tea Party labor union — the union for IRS employees — met with President Obama, the manager of the IRS “Determinations Unit Program agreed” to open a “Sensitive Case report on the Tea party cases.” As stated by the IG report.

    http://spectator.org/archives/2013/05/20/obama-and-the-irs-the-smoking

      • mitchethekid May 20, 2013 / 2:53 pm

        That’s some exposure! Don’t you know that Obama had Breitbart assassinated? Neo does! Attention. The moon landing was faked.
        In my opinion James, the danger is when one’s politics is rooted in one’s religion and the religion is the primary blueprint for governance. Everything else is just shut out, ignored or disputed. There are never any counter-arguments for that would expose the person who bases his entire world view on elements of faith and belief as being fundamentally irrational. We can believe anything. Whales speak French at the bottom of the sea.
        Both religion and politics have an important place, but the mixing of the two is toxic and produces events such as The Crusades and radical Islam. Your mention of religion brought to mind the following:

        The Bible is an anthology of Hebrew and late Greek literature, edited and put forth by a council of Catholic bishops who believed that they were acting under the direction of the Holy Spirit. Before this time the Bible as we know it did not exist. There were the Hebrew Scriptures and their translated into Greek the Septuagint, which was made in Alexandria between 250 B.C. and 100 B.C. There were also various codices, or Greek manuscripts, of various parts of the New Testament, such as the four Gospels. There were numerous other writings circulating among Christians, including the Epistles of Saint Paul and Saint John, the Apocalypse (Revelation) and such documents (later excluded) as the Acts of John , the Didache , the Apostolic Constitutions and the various Epistles of Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp.

        In those days, and until the Protestant Reformation in the 16th Century, the Scriptures were not understood exclusively in a narrow literal sense. From Clement of Alexandria (Second Century) to Saint Thomas Aquinas (13th Century), the great theologians, or Fathers of the Church, recognized four ways of interpreting the Scriptures: the literal or historical, the moral, the allegorical and the spiritual and they were overwhelmingly interested in the last three. Origen (Second Century) regarded much of the Old Testament as “puerile” if taken literally, and Jewish theologians were likewise preoccupied with finding hidden meanings in the Scriptures, for the concern of all these theologians was to interpret the Biblical texts in such a way as to make the Bible intellectually respectable and philosophically interesting. Concern over the historical truth of the Bible is relatively modern, whether in the form of fundamentalism or of scientific research.

        But when the Bible was translated and widely distributed as a result of the invention of printing, it fell into the hands of people who, like the Jesus freaks of today, were simply uneducated and who, as the depressed classes of Europe, eventually swarmed over to America. This is, naturally, a heroic generalization. There were, and are, fundamentalists learned in languages and sciences (although the standard translation of the Bible into Chinese is said to be in fearful taste), just as there are professors of physics and anthropology who somehow manage to be pious Mormons. Some people have the peculiar ability to divide their minds into watertight compartments, being critical and rational in matters of science but credulous as children when it comes to religion.

        Such superstition would have been relatively harmless if the religion had been something tolerant and pacific, such as Taoism or Buddhism. But the religion of the literally understood Bible is chauvinistic and militant. It is on the march to conquer the world and to establish itself as the one and only true belief. Among its most popular hymns are such battle songs as “Mine eyes have seen the glory” and Onward, Christian Soldiers. The God of the Hebrews, the Arabs and the Christians is a mental idol fashioned in the image of the great monarchs of Egypt, Chaldea and Persia. It was possibly Ikhnaton (Amenhotep IV, 14th Century B.C.), Pharaoh of Egypt, who gave Moses the idea of monotheism (as suggested in Freud’s Moses and Monotheism). Certainly the veneration of God as “King of kings and Lord of lords” borrows the official title of the Persian emperors. Thus, the political pattern of tyranny, beneficent or otherwise, of rule by violence, whether physical or moral, stands firmly behind the Biblical idea of Jehovah.

        When one considers the architecture and ritual of churches, whether Catholic or Protestant, it is obvious until most recent times that they are based on royal or judicial courts. A monarch who rules by force sits in the central court of his donjon with his back to the wall, flanked by guards, and those who come to petition him for justice or to offer tribute must kneel or prostrate themselves simply because these are difficult positions from which to start a fight. Such monarchs are, of course, frightened of their subjects and constantly on the anxious alert for rebellion. Is this an appropriate image for the inconceivable energy that underlies the universe? True, the altar-throne in Catholic churches is occupied by the image of God in the form of one crucified as a common thief, but he hangs there as our leader in subjection to the Almighty Father, King of the universe, propitiating Him for those who have broken His not always reasonable laws. And what of the curious resemblances between Protestant churches and courts of law? The minister and the judge wear the same black robe and “throw the book” at those assembled in pews and various kinds of boxes, and both ministers and judges have chairs of estate that are still, in effect, thrones.

        The crucial question, then, is that if you picture the universe as a monarchy, how can you believe that a republic is the best form of government, and so be a loyal citizen of the United States? It is thus that fundamentalists veer to the extreme right wing in politics, being of the personality type that demands strong external and paternalistic authority. Their “rugged individualism” and their racism are founded on the conviction that they are the elect of God the Father, and their forebears took possession of America as the armies of Joshua took possession of Canaan, treating the Indians as Joshua and Gideon treated the Bedouin of Palestine. In the same spirit the Protestant British, Dutch and Germans took possession of Africa, India and Indonesia, and the rigid Catholics of Spain and Portugal colonized Latin America. Such territorial expansion may or may not be practical politics, but to do it in the name of Jesus of Nazareth is an outrage.

      • Majordomo Pain May 20, 2013 / 3:34 pm

        Neocon1 Nate Silver was correct in his analysis of the 2012 election. Posting this link simply proves that Silver was correct.

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 5:57 pm

        but to do it in the name of Jesus of Nazareth is an outrage.

        TS
        be outraged, BFD vacuum head.

        your insane rants prove the validity that atheists are as dangerous as muslims.

      • Norma Stitz May 20, 2013 / 8:00 pm

        Ouch.

  7. mitchethekid May 20, 2013 / 4:10 pm

    Major:
    That aspect apparently escaped the steel trap mind of Neo. What difference does it make if Breitbart’s website proclaimed that he was a propagandist, he was 100% correct in his prediction. That’s the important issue, his personal politics are irrelevant. I liked it when they claimed “he was hiding behind his math”. Yep, that’s how Obama won. Again. Math has a well known liberal bias. Like gravity. It’s no different than saying Romney lost only because people like Obama better! Talk about sour grapes and sore losers. These people have no shame and no self awareness. Another dead branch on the phylogenetic tree of the evolution of human intelligence.

  8. The Return of Rathaven May 20, 2013 / 5:00 pm

    THIS is what passes for debate among liberals?

    I hope you waste no more of your time on them Cluster.

    If you aren’t tired of wasting your time on people that think personal attack and relentless demonstrations of recalcitrance then Bless your Heart Cluster.

    I, for one won’t waste another minute on these imbeciles .

    • mitchethekid May 20, 2013 / 5:34 pm

      Personal attacks? Have you been following this blog for long? Much of the time my comments are snark, sarcasm. It’s OK for me to be subjected to the low witted hysteria of Neo, Amazona, Tired, etc but when I display the same it’s heresy! By using the word Recalcitrance in describing me, it proves what a fearful authoritarian you are.
      re·cal·ci·trant
      /riˈkalsətrənt/
      Adjective
      Having an obstinately uncooperative attitude toward authority.
      Noun
      A person with such an attitude.
      Synonyms
      insubordinate – contumacious – refractory – disobedient

      Sorry I don’t march in lockstep with your gun to your head monkey mind. Did Neo lend you his .380? I can think for myself, thank you very much. Don’t piss down my back and then try to convince me it’s raining. And get upset when I don’t believe you.

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 9:36 am

        No, sweetie, when you display low-witted hysteria it is quite clearly and unmistakably low witted hysteria. To refer to your mental droppings as “heresy” would not only elevate them but be totally off base as they have nothing at all to do with heresy.

        Too bad your Word Of The Day calendar hasn’t gotten to “recalcitrant” yet. Maybe in October………………

    • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 5:53 pm

      RoR

      on these ****imbeciles**** .

      you have got that right, I guess that is why they are deemed TROLLS

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 20, 2013 / 6:22 pm

        Recalcitrant was used absolutely correctly by RoR; liberal trolls (like mitche) on this blog demonstrate recalcitrance with every rant they post; they are contrary, contumacious, defiant, fractious, indomitable, intractable, obstinate, opposing, radical, rebellious, refractory, resistant, resisting, stubborn,undisciplined, ungovernable, unruly, untoward, unwilling, wayward, wild, willful, withstanding.

        Nothing authoritarian about that context.

        But, that’s what we’ve come to expect from mitche; no substance just mindless ad hominum and prissy little tantrums.

        Rathaven was here before I was. Those who know, know that’s a fact.

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 9:33 am

        Count, you forgot “obdurate”….

    • Cluster May 20, 2013 / 6:18 pm

      ROR,

      What we do here can’t be called debate. This is primarily a site where insults are hurled at each other – of which I have grown tired of and hope that it stops at some point. The great thing about freedom however is that everyone is free to be as offensive and mindless as they want to be and that is what we see here daily. The ironic thing is that if everyone would just stifle the noises in their head, and let go of the false impression we have of each other, we might actually get to the point where we could debate.

      My daughter is a full blown liberal, but she and I can actually discuss things without calling each other racist or a communist. Imagine that. Through our discussion, she has learned that she is more of a supporter of free markets and smaller government than she realizes, and I have come to accept that I am not right 100% of the time – LOL.

      • The Return of Rathaven May 20, 2013 / 6:33 pm

        Cluster,

        That’s because your daughter can’t hide behind the anonymity of the Internet when you discuss these issues.

        Fools like mitche and “James” make absurd threats toward neo because they haven’t seen the photos you and I have. They remind me of my neighbor’s Chihuahua yapping angrily at our other dogs safely ensconced behind his master’s leg.

    • M. Noonan May 20, 2013 / 9:29 pm

      Does seem pointless – no attempts to actually get at the issues, just long-winded rants about how stupid we are.

  9. mitchethekid May 20, 2013 / 5:54 pm

    Lets contrast and compare. Since this thread is a weak attempt to put Nate Silver’s polling accuracy in a biased and negative framework, here is the prediction of the co-author of the book.

    “Hello everyone! I’m back! Just want to put my two cents in. When I first heard the news I immediately thought “good pick”, but now that I’ve seen how things have played out over the last 24 hours I have to go with “inspired pick”. The clear uptick in GOP enthusiasm combined with the meltdown on the left shows that Romney hit the target.

    Its going to be a great campaign and we are going to win. And, liberals, when you’re sitting there crying in y0ur [sic] beer as Biden gives a concession speech (Obama not having the guts to do it just as Kerry sent Edwards out to face the electoral music in 2004), just think it over: you signed on to this nauseating, un-American thing which will forever be known as the “2012 Obama re-election campaign”. You went down in to the lowest gutter in American history and you came up a complete loser. Maybe it will finally be time for you to reconsider your views…”

    Or maybe it’s time for others to reconsider their views, but hey, like the punchline says “there’s got to be a pony in here somewhere”.

    • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 6:00 pm

      bmitch

      “there’s got to be a pony in here somewhere”.

      Im sure there is/was…see your proctologist asap forker KID

    • rustybrown2012 May 20, 2013 / 6:11 pm

      Aww, everybody’s just upset that the latest “scandals” are petering out like soggy firecrackers on a stormy 4th of July. Hey, did you see the Dow today? America is doing better than many other countries crawling their way out of the global recession. The recovery continues while the loser-right desperately wishes for this country to fail for their own petty, partisan purposes. What anti-American dinosaurs.

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 6:18 pm

        crusty

        BS
        TROLL!!

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 6:23 pm

        Godless liberals at work …….

        Man Forces Pre-Teen Rape Victim to Abort at Planned Parenthood

        A Washington state man who impregnated a 12 year-old girl forced her to have an abortion at a Planned Parenthood clinic in order to cover up his sexual assault on the girl.

        there are nearly 3,500 abortions done in America every single day,” explained Crutcher. “The abortion industry and government figures show 25 percent to 40 percent of abortions are done on minor girls.”

        http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/05/20/Man-Forces-12-Year-Old-Girl-To-Abort-At-Planned-Parenthood-To-Hide-Rape

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 20, 2013 / 6:28 pm

        Of course we’re doing better in the US; the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives. just like in 1995 after the dimocrats mucked-it-up the Republicans won control and the DJIA went from 3,600 to 14,000. The dims took control in 2006 and the economy (and the DJIA) tanked; DJIA rocketed from 14,000 to 6,000 after the dims won the House in 2006.

        Once again, in 2010 Republican get the House and the economy begins to improve.

        You’re welcome.

      • rustybrown2012 May 20, 2013 / 6:53 pm

        Count,

        That’s interesting, so what specific republican initiatives led to this increase in the DJIA?

      • Majordomo Pain May 20, 2013 / 7:04 pm

        Count you can no longer be taken seriously

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 7:08 pm

        Count
        100% on the money…..

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 7:09 pm

        moredumbo

        nothing about the church, the criminal was prosecuted ans is where he belongs.

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 7:10 pm

        ROTFLMAO……….

      • Majordomo Pain May 20, 2013 / 7:12 pm

        Count you must understand while mechanically what you suggest is possible We Ourselves must decline

      • rustybrown2012 May 20, 2013 / 7:14 pm

        Oh, hey – and it’s great that count recognizes that we’re doing better! Now were just waiting for his explanation that gives rublicans the credit.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 20, 2013 / 7:16 pm

        Actually, that’s not fair.
        Rusty, I’ll quote for you what one of your own said during the run-up of the Dow after the Republicans took the House in 1994;

        Eleanor Holmes Norton (D).” Mr. Speaker, my mother always said, `Do not let me have to tell you twice.’

        We heard you, Moody’s. We do not need to hear from Standard & Poor’s, too. We need to respond that we are not the kamikaze Congress. The markets actually responded positively all during our tortured balanced budget negotiations. There were Dow Jones records broken. The reason, of course, is that they expected a balanced budget. A more balanced budget compromise would have the same effect, only this time the benefits would not be only to the markets, but also to jobs, to renewed confidence in our economy, and especially in much needed renewed confidence in the Congress of the United States.”

        major, why are you still here, I told you what to do!

      • rustybrown2012 May 20, 2013 / 7:16 pm

        Thanks count! We’re doing better under the Obama administration – glad you agree!

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 20, 2013 / 7:24 pm

        I should also point out here, that just like today, Congress did not take the President’s Budget seriously; Clinton’s budgets had deficits as far as the eye could see and was rejected by both parties; just as Obama’s was rejected.

        Also, “we’re” doing “better” now than we’ve been doing under the Obama/dimocrat socialist experiments. But, still a long way to go to reach the level we were at prior to the dims in 2006.

        Morally, economically, trust in government, internationally and domestically. We have a way forward if the progressives would just admit they’re wrong (have been for more than a century) and get the hell out of the way.

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 7:39 pm

        count

        funny the TROLLS amazingly seem to forget about the price of gas under barry’s regime.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 20, 2013 / 7:55 pm

        Neo,
        $1.84 January 2009- $3.58 now.

        But, by rusty’s logic, because it was over Four Dollars a Gallon last year, “We’re doing better under the Obama administration“.

        Economics-FAIL!

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 20, 2013 / 8:14 pm

        Rusty’s Economic Corollary; “Now we’ve taken this theory one stage further. If we increase the size of the penguin until it is the same height as the man and then compare the relative brain sizes, we now find that the penguin’s brain is still smaller. But, and this is the point, it is larger than it was.

        How can you argue with logic like that?

      • rustybrown2012 May 20, 2013 / 10:09 pm

        Hey, that’s great there count! If only it had anything remotely to do with what I said. How much lithium are you on?

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 21, 2013 / 12:19 pm

        Seriously? That’s your answer rusty? Really?

        Next time just admit to yourself you have nothing to add and then dummy-up.

        Or, just hang your head and say “d’oh”.

      • rustybrown2012 May 22, 2013 / 2:26 pm

        Yeah, “count”, that’s my answer. Your analogy is fatuous, and we weren’t talking about gas prices at all. The “we’re doing better” refers to the DJIA, in case you lost point of the thread, as you often do.

        And you might want to massage your talking points about how low we’re sinking “morally, economically, etc.” – this administration continues to dig us out of an inherited recession, many economic indicators are improving and Obamas steady poll numbers (in spite of the Republican Manufactured Outrage Machine) reflect that.

      • tiredoflibbs May 22, 2013 / 5:15 pm

        crusty to count: “The “we’re doing better” refers to the DJIA, in case you lost point of the thread, as you often do.”

        Yeah count, how dare you show an indicator that does not make obAMATEUR look good! Don’t you know you are only allowed to look at economic indicators that makes it appear we are in a fabulous recovery! Don’t bring up higher energy, food, clothing and higher health care costs. That is unacceptable!

        Just like you are not supposed to count all those people who are out of work but still looking for work. You can only count those who are out of work AND receiving unemployment and calculate the unemployment numbers that way – remember DON’T COUNT EVERYBODY OUT OF WORK AND STILL LOOKING.

        Just pick and choose the positive data forget all the negative!

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 5:24 pm

        So ‘…the latest “scandals” are petering out like soggy firecrackers on a stormy 4th of July..”

        Sure they’re not drowned in the ink from thousands of terrified squid?

        Who knew there was a degree in Tortured Metaphors?

  10. mitchethekid May 20, 2013 / 7:38 pm

    Irrelevant.

    • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 7:43 pm

      Irrelevant.

      • sarahbloch May 20, 2013 / 8:21 pm

        Irrelevant.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 20, 2013 / 8:31 pm

        Yeah, right “sarah” because you have such credibility!

        Why wouldn’t we believe you?

        Oh, i know, is it because you’ve demonstrated a reality-challenged psychosis?

        What a jerk!

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 8:39 pm

        Irrelevant.

    • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 7:46 pm

      : the elections were stolen, the President is not a citizen and was born in Kenya, that he is a crack smoking Muslim, a homosexual, a person dedicated to the destruction of America,

      WOW….you read his book also??

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 7:55 pm

        Chihuahua Boy,

        bmitch, woofy woofy, bowsie wowsie….with a lisp….LOL

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 20, 2013 / 7:58 pm

        Hey neo,

        Get Chihuahua Boy! He acts like we owe him something for invading our blog; as if anything he writes has any consequence.

        What a chump!

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 8:03 pm

        a PUNK and a chump, who CLAIMS to have called in artillery AFTER all US troops were gone from Viet Nam………..kerry is dat you??

        and aircraft fly because of a vacuum UNDER the wing…..OMG
        way too much ganja out there is so cal for the KID!

    • sarahbloch May 20, 2013 / 8:01 pm

      Irrelevant.

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 8:06 pm

        blatch

        just more pervs like bmitch go there for the pornography….you cretins must be soooo proud.

      • sarahbloch May 20, 2013 / 8:10 pm

        Irrelevant.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 20, 2013 / 8:06 pm

        And more people watch re-runs of Gilligan’s Island than Upstairs Downstairs.

        There’s no accounting for stupid.

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 8:14 pm

        There’s no accounting for stupid.

        and no shortage of it either, as proven by the TROLLS who pollute here.

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 8:18 pm

        LOL

        These trolls are taking that as a challenge!

        they are a “challenged” little bunch arent they?

  11. sarahbloch May 20, 2013 / 8:23 pm

    Okay Count here something political for you to gnaw on. Which will happen first a GOP in the next five elections a GOP presidential candidate wins California or a Democratic candidate wins Texas?

    • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 8:25 pm

      see nate silverman…….you all think he is the best thing since barrys limo ride.

      • mitchethekid May 20, 2013 / 10:46 pm

        Irrelevant.

  12. sarahbloch May 20, 2013 / 8:24 pm

    I’ll give you plenty of time to go ask Breitbart for the answer.

    • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 8:26 pm

      na the KO’s and huff po like you losers do.

      • sarahbloch May 20, 2013 / 8:31 pm

        Actually we have five news feeds here NBC Breaking, Reuters Breaking, BBC Breaking, Agence France Presse and Pressju Hellac.To see what’s going on up there I sift through the breaking political US news. I never read the Daily Kos it’s Breitbart for liberals. I really don’t read many right wing blogs either that’s Fred’s job.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 20, 2013 / 8:44 pm

        See what I mean neo?

        Just when you think they can’t prove new levels of stupid “sarah” presents the Hobson’s Challenge!

        They have Pressju Hellac in the Wonderful World of Psychotic Reality! A place so special they have to post here to get attention!

      • neocon01 May 20, 2013 / 8:55 pm

        count

        and their “news” is what someone from THIS site said or posted…..they have to repost and argue it there in the echo chamber of loons…..funny stuff.
        Maybe the gumdrop computer has freddy and sarah mixed up, one died in the civil war and the other thinks exit signs are entrances with revolving doors…..DOH!!

  13. mitchethekid May 20, 2013 / 10:45 pm

    Irrelevant.

    • neocon01 May 21, 2013 / 6:29 am

      mitchethekid May 20, 2013 at 10:45 pm #

      Irrelevant.

      100% so….as usual!!
      and 100% TROLL

  14. mitchethekid May 21, 2013 / 8:17 am

    Neo, a photo of a nude is not pornography. Pornography is in the mind of the viewer and some of us know what you think about when you see one. I can guarantee that none of the women in your life are as attractive. It’s disappointing that you haven’t gotten the memo.

    • neocon01 May 21, 2013 / 10:57 am

      Ay Chiwowa

    • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 9:02 am

      Hmmmm…mitche is offering a “guarantee” that none of the women in neo’s life are as attractive (read: appealing to mitche) as the shemales whose photos so attract him.

      Again……hmmmmmmmm

      Tuck up the dangly parts, put on some false eyelashes and lipstick, and you’ve got mitche’s ideal “woman”.

      Hmmmmmmmmm

      And neo is supposed to feel abashed that his lovely Princess is not the type to be posing for such as mitche? I think not.

  15. mitchethekid May 21, 2013 / 8:27 am

    Matt:
    What I said is not irrelevant. It is an exposure of the double standard that exists here. A long time ago you established as a rule no profanity. The F word is understood as being profane and yet you allow one person to say these things but not others. Why is that? Are you that blatantly hypocritical?

    Tired:
    I didn’t claim I wrote those words, I said they came to mind. That article is 40 yrs old but it still rings true and the fact that I can remember an obscure article from that long ago written by a semi-well known philosopher is a testimony to my brain power. Lets compare it to your limited ability to express yourself. But you do know how to make a search. It’s a sure bet you didn’t bother to read the entire thing.

    • tiredoflibbs May 21, 2013 / 12:15 pm

      mitchie: “I didn’t claim I wrote those words.”

      You did not credit them either. You are a plagiarist and a regurgitator.

      mitchie: “the fact that I can remember an obscure article from that long ago written by a semi-well known philosopher is a testimony to my brain power.”

      and yet, you don’t know the simple affect that gives lift to an aircraft after claiming to be a pilot. Again, your posts give evidence to the contrary that your “brain power” is very limited in scope and ability. You regurgitate talking points and by your own admission – people who regurgitate talking points do not have the ability to think for oneself.

      You constantly regurgitate the “Bush invaded Iraq with faulty (sometimes you use made up) intelligence when each and every time we have shown stronger evidence to contrary. You show nothing but regurgitation of the talking points VERBATIM!

      That is one example among DOZENS.

      Yes I did a search and the reason is clear. You could not think of anything like that on your own. You on the other hand cannot make a search to verify what we say is true and to discredit what you regurgitate time and again.

      In short, you are scared of the truth that is contradictory to what is spoon fed to you.

      • mitchethekid May 21, 2013 / 1:21 pm

        You have regurgitated the word regurgitate 6 times in one post. This is good as well, and I quote Tired. “…we have shown stronger evidence to the contrary”. What’s up with this we business? Do you have a mouse in your pocket. The we you are referring to have no authority, no credibility and consist of opinionated folks such as yourselves who will defend the invasion until your last breath. The invasion was sold by WMD’s. There were none. Bush even made a video, humorless as it was, pretending to look for them under his desk. Collin Powell was used as a patsy for the administration. But you are free to think whatever you want. It’s still America. Until Obama gets through with it. Then it will be more like Nirvana.

      • tiredoflibbs May 21, 2013 / 3:37 pm

        mitchie: “You have regurgitated the word regurgitate 6 times in one post.”

        Oh good, you can count. Again, I use the word to accurately describe your posting/responding skills.

        mitchie: “This is good as well, and I quote Tired. “…we have shown stronger evidence to the contrary”. What’s up with this we business? Do you have a mouse in your pocket.”

        Uh, you seem to have no problem with your forker friend majordumb@ss pain, using “we”. In his world it is a collective. Here, I and the other clear thinking members have posted responses refuting your REGURGITATED talking points and yet you still REGURGITATE them – see an accurate description of you failures.

        mitchie: “The we you are referring to have no authority, no credibility and consist of opinionated folks such as yourselves who will defend the invasion until your last breath. The invasion was sold by WMD’s. There were none. Bush even made a video, humorless as it was, pretending to look for them under his desk.”

        I guess the 500+ tons of multigrade uranium from yellow cake to partially refined uranium does not count. This was posted several times and was one of many such posts refuting the LIES REGURGITATED by you mindless drones – another accurate description. Plus, WMDs was ONE REASON and not the only reason – again more lies REGURGITATED by you mindless drones.

        From the opinionated folks with no authority at NBC news:
        http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25546334/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/secret-us-mission-hauls-uranium-iraq/

        This is one of many instances of finding WMDs. The UN still has weapons that were not accounted for in the years since the first Gulf War. Plus the authorizations for restarting hostilities are in the FIRST Gulf War resolutions that you drones conveniently ignore. Maybe you should read them, but you won’t since you are far from a free thinking individual.

        Bush made a video – wow that is all the proof you drones need. It shows he has a sense of humor and you drones go into spasms because of it. Hysterical!

        mitchie: “Collin Powell was used as a patsy for the administration.”

        Absolutely no proof for this statement – more REGURGITATED DUMBED DOWN talking points from especially LOW INFORMATION VOTERS – YOU included.

        mitchie: “But you are free to think whatever you want. It’s still America. Until Obama gets through with it. Then it will be more like Nirvana.”

        Snort! I sure hope you are not serious.

        Wow, WE can add delusion to your list of traits. If Nirvana is higher deficits, higher debt, reduced credit ratings, higher foreclosures, record numbers of people on food stamps and welfare, higher numbers of people out of the workforce then you can have your “nirvana”.

        My statements are still accurate no matter how many times I say them or the single word you hate because it so accurately describes you.

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 8:58 am

        “Collin Powell” ? “COLLIN” Powell????????

        Whoosat?

        Oh, yeah, he was a pattssy for Busssssh.

      • tiredoflibbs May 22, 2013 / 3:22 pm

        crusty: “Meanwhile, well-adjusted adults understand that such a minor error in a blog forum is inconsequential and certainly undeserving of a post calling attention to it. ”

        Wow crusty I guess you are not so well adjusted by your own standards. Just last week you felt the need to point out a simple typo on my part and go into a giddy spasm and try to make a pathetic point that was directly related to my intelligence.

        Nice try drone you have been caught using your own words again.

    • tiredoflibbs May 21, 2013 / 12:20 pm

      mitchie: “The F word is understood as being profane”

      Uh, mitchie like pornography, “profane” is in the mind of the listener.

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 8:55 am

        mitche thinks nude photos of boys pretending to be girls and girls pretending to be boys is art and not pornography, and that objecting to the F-bomb on a public blog is prudish and spinsterish—-as if we need MORE proof he is a loon.

    • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) May 21, 2013 / 12:50 pm

      Mitche,

      You seem to be under the mistaken impression that, if your posts are civil, they have merit. They don’t.

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 8:53 am

        Civil? mitche? Since when are nonstop insults and name calling “civil”?

        Surely we have not fallen into the Leftist habit of redefining words to mean what we need them to mean at the moment.

    • neocon01 May 21, 2013 / 10:54 am

      Trillion dollar deficits, six trillion in ADDED debt in 4 years, 20% REAL unemployment, record number of welfare and food stamps, foreclosures at record levels……stellar performance of your boy, KID!!

      • tiredoflibbs May 21, 2013 / 12:23 pm

        see mitche, neo’s post on deficits, the debt, the record number of welfare and food stamp recipients, foreclosures and the reduced number of people looking for work because they have given up (this is the reason that unemployment is “low” – they are no longer counted) are all at record levels. Yet, you look at the DOW as your only measure – shows that you cannot think for yourself.

        You are currently regurgitating the latest in a string of dumbed down talking points. You don’t like my repeated use of those words. I don’t like your repeated use of yours which have very little truth behind them.

        You want me to say something different then give me a reason not to ACCURATELY describe your behavior.

      • dbschmidt May 21, 2013 / 12:35 pm

        The DOW is only doing well because the treasury keeps printing money (QE forever) making my dollars worth less and the need to make more money in the markets to account for that. Getting crushed by CSCO today but doing well in several others.

        Bet Mitch thinks that buying stock gives one some kind of ownership in the company?

      • rustybrown2012 May 22, 2013 / 4:10 pm

        Whoops! Mommy saves your bacon again tired! Don’t you get “tired” of that? I would find it frustrating (and humiliating) to have somebody constantly stepping in to fight my battles for me, circumventing my ability to debate my arguments on their merits – I guess to you it’s just a relief!

    • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) May 21, 2013 / 12:30 pm

      Mitche,

      The Forbes article completely ignores a couple facts: (1) there really isn’t any such thing as an “average investor” any more. over 70% of Wall Street trades are flash trades by traders at Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley using free Fed money, and (2) adjusted for inflation, the average 401K is about where it was in 2007.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 21, 2013 / 1:40 pm

        db, JR,

        If you’ll permit me, I believe something else might be at play here. I believe the investor is seeing the long term effect of a Congress working toward unraveling this socialist mess.

        Historically,we see evidence that investor confidence responds to Republican Congresses positively. they are slowly beginning to realize that ObamaCare will collapse and the danger will be mitigated if they play their investments correctly now.

        Of course, I’m no Michel de Nostredame and if I could predict with accuracy I’d be investing in high risk stocks instead of playing it safe. Whatever …

        Just my observations

      • neocon01 May 21, 2013 / 4:54 pm

        they are slowly beginning to realize that ObamaCare will collapse and the danger will be mitigated if they play their investments correctly now.

        listening to Rush today. A young 30yo something listener called in stating cant find anything but part time work because the cost of obama care will bankrupt them if they will have to implement it.

        PART time = Obarrys new normal.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 21, 2013 / 5:02 pm

        Cluster pointed out on another thread that the Sebelius fundraising is yet another scandal. I agree.

        But, more to the point, its one more example of Obamacare imploding on itself; if they need to strongarm contributions because they haven’t been able to steal enough tax money to make this abomination function, then it’s only a matter of time before the entire house of cards collapses.

        Each desperate action these socialists take to protect their Multi-Trillion Dollar Boondoggle is one step closer to it’s eminent demise; investors are banking on this.

  16. mitchethekid May 21, 2013 / 4:58 pm

    I quote the tiring Tired:
    “This was posted…” Posting something doesn’t make it true. Lets see, Obama is the 2nd coming, vanilla ice creme is horrid, horses evolved from unicorns and dragons live Idaho.
    Perhaps you should do a bit of research on Collin Powell. He might not have said the actual word patsy, but if you paid an attention to his subsequent discussions about that incident, it was clearly; by his own subjective experience of it, what he felt. He felt used, angry and ashamed.
    Not matter. Iraq is history and equally shameful as any act of imperialism.
    You my friend, are quantitatively defensive and bereft of vocabulary. You might ease your frustration and lower your blood pressure if you bought one of those words of the day books.
    One reason out of many is not a lie, it was a lie and still is a lie but by using your own logic you are admitting that it was a lie.
    NBC biased? OK, sure. But that applies to all news outlets as well. ALL news outlets. You are capable of being fair, are you not??

    • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 8:49 am

      “You might ease your frustration and lower your blood pressure if you bought one of those words of the day books.”

      Aha, a mystery solved. I have wondered how one so demonstrably stupid could still use so many big words, and now you explain it to us. I’ll bet you have a “word of the day” calendar, too.

      Here’s a helpful tip: Instead of polluting this blog with your half-witted “ideas” dressed up in The Word Of The Day, why don’t you hustle on down to the bookstore and pick up some books on grammar and punctuation. “Eats, Shoots, and Leaves” would be a start. Rassle that damned ol’ Rogue Apostrophe to the ground, learn that those thingies at the end of your footsies are not “tows” and in general do something to improve yourself.

      I know, it is a daunting prospect, particularly as you have left it to so late in life, but it would keep you occupied and too busy to spout your ridiculous nonsense here.

      • mitchethekid May 22, 2013 / 9:42 am

        Ah yes, the Panda Bear. Move the circle with the square.

  17. mitchethekid May 21, 2013 / 7:10 pm

    Each desperate action these socialists take to protect their Multi-Trillion Dollar Boondoggle is one step closer to it’s eminent demise; investors are banking on this.

    So Count, who are you betting on? The so called socialists or the Wall Street bankers who bet on and make money off of failure? And just whom do you support? The Socialists who are trying to make things better for everyone or the very privileged few who can afford to bet money they do not have in order to enrich themselves privately?
    Doesn’t seem to conservative to me, according to the definition.

    • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 21, 2013 / 7:56 pm

      mitche,

      You just can’t help yourself can you Shit-wit?

      There’s an actual possibility of a discussion going on and your idea of joining in is to deflect into moronic straw man choices.

      I am puzzled as to why Cluster thinks you have anything worthwhile to offer; you sure haven’t demonstrated it here.

      I’m embarrassed that we are of the same generation, embarrassed that we’re from the same part of the country, and embarrassed for your obvious limited skills which you so proudly demonstrate with every word.

      If it’s true that ignorance is bliss; you must be the happiest man alive.

  18. mitchethekid May 21, 2013 / 8:15 pm

    What discussion? Calling me names because I don’t tow the line here on this teeny tiny blog? The relationship that Cluster and I have established; at MY request, is based upon mutual interests and commonality. We both are in agreement that our political views differ but those issues are inconsequential. The things we have in common is our humanity and our personalities. You Count, seem to be incapable of such broad mindedness. You Count, are a tribal entity who views he world in stark black and white terms and recoils at even a wiff of trying to get along. I knew allot of jerks like you growing up in NY State. Small minded bigots like Neo from Buffalo. So your point is what? That you are representative of NY kids from the 50’s through the late 70’s? Or are you just an ahole who happened to be lucky enough to grow up under Rockefeller?

      • neocon01 May 21, 2013 / 10:48 pm

        Count

        and I hardly broke sweat doing it.

        a fine c gar, a glass of scotch, and a B slap for the KID…LOL
        all in the matter of 10 minutes.

    • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 8:43 am

      Sweet to hear that you and Cluster have a “relationship”. Awwwwww. Of course any “relationship” based on your “humanity” and “personality” is going to be pretty one-sided, as you have so little of either, and what you have is rank.

      I don’t get it. Cluster is reasonable, bright and decent, while you are…..not. You show your true colors (red and yellow and a suspiciously odorous shade of brown) whenever you post here, and neo has quoted your two-faced attacks on us that you have posted with your fellow travelers over at the pitchfork. You must put on quite a show when you and Cluster are engaging in your, ahhhh …… “relationship”.

      You sneer at being referred to as a “leftist” and deny it, and then you indulge in a passionate defense of socialists, claiming they only want to “…make things better for everyone…”

      You say, after spouting more of the Leftist pap fed to your by your heroes, “Doesn’t seem to (sic) conservative to me, according to the definition.”

      Really? By what definition? By whose definition? Hell, you can’t even DEFINE “conservative” much less “Liberal” yet you make a statement like this.

  19. Jeremiah May 21, 2013 / 11:20 pm

    Cluster,

    A little advice – You need to re-evaluate your relationship with Mitche. Several years ago, I became acquainted with a fellow who had similar interests as I, and we established a “friendship” that lasted for a few years despite our political beliefs…we made periodic phone-calls to one another chatting about our interests. Well, one thing led to another and I started taking him to task on some of his arguments regarding George W. Bush, as well as social and economic issues. He wasn’t interested in hearing the truth. Soon, he stopped calling, and I tried to call but received no answer on numerous occasions. I decided I was wasting my time and have not called since.

    The problem I see here, is that – while you and Mitche have mutual interests, you might find hi as one who could possibly become a positive force for Conservative grass-roots in the event that he would have a change of mentality of more maturity, as well as a mentality that rejects big government liberalism in favor of small-government, which centers around giving the individual more opportunity, and allowing freedom of thought and ideas that comes through Conservative philosophy. I’m afraid it’s all wishful thinking on your part.

    While it’s all good and well that you want to befriend Mitche. I think you could do that without giving him a place here at Blogs for Victory. It does a tremendous disservice to the blog owners to allow him a space to continue diverting political discourse away from important issues that affect our nation, that others would like talk about, and offer ideas on.

    Continuing to debate liberals here is an exercise in futility, and does nothing to solve any of the problems that our nation faces.

    Let me state, that my hands are not clean when it comes to being guilty of falling into the liberals trap of diverting discussion, I have participated in their game, and I am sorry. I can only find some redemption in the fact that I and others would have no reason to feel guilty of playing the liberals game, if their comments had not appeared on the blog, or were not allowed to stay on the blog. Not much of an excuse, no … but you get the point.

    Not critiquing … just offering something for consideration.

    Your call…

    • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 7:39 am

      Jer

      hear hear

    • Cluster May 22, 2013 / 8:37 am

      Jeremiah,

      I appreciate the concern, but I am under no such delusion with Mitch in re: to changing his politics and nor would I try. There is much, much more to life than politics and Mitch and I have found common ground with our interests in real estate, entertainment, travel, food and he has a good sense of humor to boot. We disagree politically but that’s ok. I also disagree with my daughter politically, but that’s ok. Mitch is my brother in Christ and I always strive to be a good follower of Christ, so I look for the good in everyone and find it. I am able to over look our differences and find the joy in our common interests.

      I have to say that life is just too short and potentially too abundant, to walk around angry that others don’t share your political interests. And we as a country had better learn this basic truth of life, or we will rip each other apart before too long.

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 9:25 am

        Cluster, I think that what so many of us find odd is that a relationship with mitch such as that you describe means a complete disconnect with the mitche we see here on the blog. It’s as if you see two completely different people here, when in fact they are one and the same and you are just focusing on the parts that you find compatible while the other, toxic, vile parts are here for us to wade through, and which are just as much a definition of mitch as your perceptions of his alleged humor and interest in food and travel.

        It is quite dismissive and rather insulting to say that we don’t want anything to do with mitch just because of his differing political views. Nonsense. It is because he is a deeply, thoroughly, to-the-bone hateful and toxic person. He is dishonest and he is nasty and as for his political views, no one can tell exactly what they are beyond his knee-jerk loathing of all he mistakenly thinks is “conservative”.

        I have done this. When I got into the horse world I was taken under the wing of a woman who mentored me, and though I knew she was reviled and actually hated by those who had known her longer, I liked her, and I just separated the reality known to others from the one she showed me.

        You all can see this coming, can’t you? Yep. I had a couple of experiences which proved that the other people were right and that she was truly a toxic and hate-driven person, and when I tried to gently extricate myself from the close friendship without making a big deal out of it she turned on me, just as she had turned on everyone else in her life.

        I freely admit, looking back on it, that there was a big ego factor here—that I could find good qualities in her that no one else could, that she respected me more than she did those other people and therefore what she showed me was her real self, etc. There was, I now realize, a lot of patting myself on my own back for my deeper understanding, my ability to see beyond the petty concerns of others, and so on.

        But what I learned was that what the rest of the world saw was her real self, and that she was playing me. She could zero in on what mattered to me, and she did it with great skill, and I was distracted from the reality of her world outside our relationship.

        But it’s a lesson each of us has to learn for himself.

      • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) May 22, 2013 / 9:47 am

        There is much, much more to life than politics and Mitch and I have found common ground with our interests in real estate, entertainment, travel, food

        How about you go meet on a food, travel and entertainment blog?

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 10:02 am

        Cluster

        If mitch is a “brother” in Christ you maybe should re evaluate your position on that term.
        mitch may be a brother to some but he is as far away from Christ and his teachings as any one could be. If you are attempting to evangelize him that is fine.
        At this point it is mitch and his ilk that are destroying this country and very rapidly.
        Believe me he would follow ayres and his evil minions and participate in the murder of “up to 25 million americans” if he had the opportunity.
        I know your daughter is a big lib but do not make the mistake and project her goodness though misguided onto these other people. Many of them are VERY dangerous.
        Remember che and fidel were once “freedom” fighters against the evil capitalists.

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 10:07 am

        JR

        Bingo!!

      • Cluster May 22, 2013 / 10:58 am

        I am possibly, for one of the few times in my life, at a loss of words on how to respond. To say that Mitch and I have relationship is a stretch. We have exchanged a few emails, and I got to know another side of him separate from politics and found some commonalities. I am not sure why that is determined to be wrong.

        If, as JR indicated, Mitch would fully endorse the slaughter of innocents for purely political reasons, why then yes, I may have different feelings, but I think we are far from that. Mitch is a fully invested “hippie” liberal – he believes that “right wingers” are racist, homophobes, theocratic oppressors and it would be diffcult to change his mind on that, so I don’t even try. Mitch also believes that the “left” is peace, love, flowers and all that is righteous. So again, a pretty entrenched individual, but he is not the only one.

      • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) May 22, 2013 / 11:29 am

        If, as JR indicated, Mitch would fully endorse the slaughter of innocents for purely political reasons, why then yes, I may have different feelings

        Sorry — wasn’t me. However, I do believe that, when the SHTF, people like Mitch, while they may not openly participate in politically motivated violence, will, nonetheless, not physically oppose
        it. And he can deny it, but I would neither believe him or trust him.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 22, 2013 / 1:15 pm

        Cluster,

        If what you say is true and I have no reason to doubt you, assuming that Mitch is a fully invested “hippie” liberal described by you as “entrenched” then what exactly is the point of carrying on with political discourse from our point of view?

        The idiocy of an aging hippy fixated on in-serious logic and unquestioning dogma has no appeal, adds nothing to our conversation and does not one damn thing to further our understanding or provide clarity to our debate.

        The sheer inanity of the positions doesn’t even provide the kind of demonstrations Leo was hoping to find in progressives posting here.

        The vast majority of Lo-Fo voters drawn to the Progressive message of spreading the wealth of the rich republicans to the once and forever democrat voters are not drawn to the Summer of Love buffoonery of balding middle-aged men with pony-tails in Birkenstocks and patchouli preaching Siddhartha-lite.

        Scrape ’em off Cluster

        @ least spare us the embarrassment on this Blog. Hold your Bic Lighter high with him if you wish, but not on a political Blog.

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 1:34 pm

        Cluster, it is mitche who likes to tell us how close you two are.

        It’s just that your defense of him has such a strong taste of “Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?”

        When we see the mitche we see here—vile, foul-mouthed, seething with rage and hatred, blindly attacking anyone and everything he associates with his bogeyman, “the conservative”, and really liking the forkers, hearing that when he is the Other Mitch he is really not such a total ass is just not very convincing, and it indicates that for some reason you have decided to assign different personalities and characters to him. There is Blog Mitche, who is absolutely awful on every level, and then there is Pen Pal Mitch, who can be funny and likes real estate and food.

        Super, if that is all it takes. But as for me, I wouldn’t really care if Nancy Pelosi is an absolutely wonderful granny to her kids’ kids—I still have no use for her. I don’t care if Chuck Schumer has a dozen horses, I am not going to buddy up with him to talk about mane and tail grooming, because I think he is a vile human being. And so on.

        But that’s just me.

        I am very close to several Libs, good people all. They are not spiteful hate-spewing creeps who just suck up to me by talking about a couple of things I find interesting, they are great people who simply have a different political point of view (and give me unintentional entertainment by actually sharing many of the same truly political points of view I have, while clinging to a superficial identity of Democrat). I don’t have to compartmentalize them, to separate out really horrible characteristics so I can enjoy the bits and pieces with which I a more comfortable.

        I used to do that kind of thing, but no more. I have learned that awful is awful even when it is not pointed directly at you, and that character matters. My observation of mitche’s character is that it is quite toxic and negative enough to approach evil on occasion, so it would not matter to me if he loved my family and had a Joke of The Day book next to his Word of the Day and could provide valuable insight into any of the things I value.

        But again, that’s just me.

        I do know that my life got a lot better when I started to develop and apply standards regarding the people I allow into it.

        And I really think you should reexamine this comment: “I have to say that life is just too short and potentially too abundant, to walk around angry that others don’t share your political interests”

        As I said, it is quite condescending and dismissive and even rude, to assert that anyone is “walking around angry that others don’t share (his) political interests.” It’s not about “political interests” and it sure as hell isn’t as petty as “walking around angry”. It is about standards of decency, politics aside.

        And again, no one even knows what “political interests” mitche has. He won’t talk about politics, just about people and scandals and how much he hates so many people for so many reasons, blah blah blah blah blah.

    • Cluster May 22, 2013 / 8:41 am

      In regards to blog disruption – I agree. I think that anyone who posts insults, or attempts to obfuscate the issues or thread, then that post should be deleted, and if it becomes a pattern, then that commentator should be banned. That includes me and everyone else.

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 10:05 am

        it is almost impossible not to respond to the vile and constant BS spewed by TROLLS.
        Once they have posted and those posts remain for several minutes then they have become part of the thread and open to discussion and rebuttal.

  20. Jeremiah May 21, 2013 / 11:49 pm

    This administration doesn’t work because they are largely dishonest; therefore their integrity and reputation are destroyed.

    • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 7:58 am

      Jer

      and that dishonesty starts at the top where appointments and policies and directions are made.

      We need a strong GOP congress and a takeover of the Senate to stop the sort of thing we are now hearing about. Dangerous times my friend.

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 8:32 am

        neo, while I agree with you I think we also need to be honest about the underlying foundation of this corruption, and that is the people who elect the crooks in the first place.

        Blame blind partisanship, blame utter stupidity, blame weakness that makes people vote because of emotional chaos, but put the blame on the voters who cast the ballots for these people.

        I suggest that very very VERY few voted for Obama because of an objective analytical belief in Leftist government and what it means. What we have seen from every Lefty here, anyway, and I do mean EVERY one of them, is a complete lack of political awareness much less allegiance, and instead a mishmash of hyper-emotional reaction to the superficial aspects of politics, the personalities and the scandals and the distortions of reality that allow them to indulge in their personality disorders of hatred and hostility while posturing as political commentators.

        But the end result is that they vote for the crooks, so that makes them as responsible as the crooks themselves.

        They could begin to redeem themselves by saying, in effect, “I was wrong, the people I helped put in office are wrong, and we need to fix this”. The damage would be done, but at least there would be some progress, some moving forward, in analyzing and correcting the situation.

        But what we see is strident and hysterical defense of those they put in office, and attacks on those who correctly identify the problems. This tells me that they were not just duped but that they are eager participants in the corruption.

        In day to day life, we all know what rolls downhill. We need to remember that in Leftist politics it rolls uphill, and that the corruption we see in the headlines started with the voters who made the choices they made, to put these people back in office even after four years of seeing what they were like.

        There are no more excuses—not from the top and certainly not from the bottom.

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 9:21 am

        ama

        I think we also need to be honest about the underlying foundation of this corruption, and that is the people who elect the crooks in the first place.

        You are absolutely 100% correct.
        However we also have to look at the party and those in charge of it that has veered so far to the left and convinced a very large population of our country it is preferable to to collect OPM and provide nothing in return.
        A party that sells young women and men sex, drugs, rock n roll, and if they become pregnant? Hell just kill the kid…no big deal.
        A party that condemns fellow citizens who work hard and are honest and successful that we are greedy bastards who hate them because of the color of their skin, national origination, or religious beliefs.
        A party that sells divisiveness as snake oil that will either lead to tyranny or chaos due to a collapse of the system due to overload planned or not.

        I am not sure we can convince enough of these people to understand what is awaiting them if they do not wake up to stave off the surely coming train wreck before it occurs.

        Us becoming more like them is part of the problem NOT the solution.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 22, 2013 / 12:13 pm

        It starts with an objective look at where we are and how we got here. It starts with an honest debate about the principles and applications of those principles. It starts with talking to people instead of at them.

        In 1994 the Republicans spanked the democrats on an unprecedented scale. National and local political positions shifted from democrat to republican as a reaction to the over-reach of the democrats from the 1992 election. We wanted a return to normalcy and the Clintons were trying to cross a bridge too far.

        We cheered!

        Within a few years the citizen legislators swept in to DC on a promise of do the peoples’ business then go home had become as entrenched as previous legislators. Doing the business of re-election.

        We questioned their intentions.

        A few more years went by and many on the right denounced the culture that had replaced the culture we railed against. Prominent conservative voices from George Will to Bill Buckley took umbrage with the “new boss” of the conservative movement, as the new boss was inside the beltway power at the expense of the very ideals that put them there.

        We demanded they change!

        All along this timeline something was changing the landscape we had never intended; it all became personal.

        In the new Us vs. Them dynamic us demanding they return to our principles became more dangerous than allowing them to stray; when a person of conscience said it was, “too far” the opposition pounced, but so did we. And here I need to be clear; I’m speaking of both sides, ”they” didn’t tolerate dissent any better than we did. This blog is an example of that dynamic; how often do we disagree with one another on issues fundamental when we know they are out there waiting to pounce?
        And why is that? Because we are put in the position of defending whereas they need only raise doubt, and we rush to defend our beliefs.

        They don’t; when you believe in nothing you have nothing to defend.

        This brings me (finally) to my point; WE cannot discuss openly with one another as long as THEY are allowed to harass, incite and berate us in every opportunity. This very post is rife with prospects for derision and misdirection, whom and when we spoke out against the direction/programs; We don’t believe what we say; Republicans are corrupt; we’re corrupt; it’s all payback for Clinton; Bush lied … and on and on it goes.

        With no effort to discuss the substance based on our governing philosophy we are reduced to pissing contests with intellectual inferiors, and never getting to the meat of the issues. This is political debate in the Brave New World of Saul Alinsky ” Life is a corrupting process from the time a child learns to play his mother off against his father in the politics of when to go to bed; he who fears corruption fears life.”

        That is the standard of political discourse on this blog.

      • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) May 22, 2013 / 12:48 pm

        That is the standard of political discourse on this blog.

        Count, absolutely right on the money. Any suggestions on how we fix it?

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 1:09 pm

        If one were to start a blog called “Christian Thoughts and Ideas” I don’t think anyone would argue that there was some unwritten law or rule that the blog founders had an obligation to allow atheists and other attackers of religion to infest the blog with hateful attacks on religion and people of faith.

        But for some reason there seems to be an attitude that no one should have a blog for libertarians and conservatives to gather to discuss their ideas and beliefs and their take on the news of the day, without providing space for oppositional posters to attack, insult, harangue and otherwise disrupt the flow of discourse among libertarians and conservatives.

        It would be different if the blog vandals who infest this allegedly politically-oriented blog had ever, even once, tried to present a coherent political philosophy and argue for it and defend it and actually engage in political discourse. But all we have seen over the many years is efforts to derail comments from conservatives, to attack and distract and generally disrupt the blog.

        I see no reason to admit people like this to the blog.

        It’s not as if we have not tried. We have explained conservatism, only to have our explanations discarded in favor of bizarre, wildly erratic claims of “conservatism” being defined by various personalities,events, and social issues that have nothing to with a belief in how the nation should be governed and only about their own TMZ concept of politics. We have set out templates for political discourse, asking for views on governance,and only gotten strange side trips into evolution and AGW. We have suggested that we might even find common ground if we could step away from personalities and into the arena of discussion of, say, the Constitution, only to have those efforts be largely ignored by the Libs here in favor or more carrying-on about Bush, “Republicans”, etc.

        We have tried, and the Libs have not only refused to cooperate but have escalated their efforts to derail and disrupt, evidently because the only thing that matters to them is having a forum that allows them to indulge in their personality disorders.

        The only two choices I see are to let the blog go down the toilet or to make it a clearly stated forum for libertarian and conservative discourse.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) May 22, 2013 / 1:25 pm

        JR,
        My advice is simple ~ same advice I gave to Cluster;

        Scrape ’em off.

        I see no reason to disallow liberals from the conversations except that I know to be liberal is to be in-serious. But, I also see no need at all in allowing them into our living-room, feeding them at our table, making them feel welcome & comfortable while they crap on our carpet.

        If the moderator were 24/7 I’d say delete-delete-delete!

        Short of that, I’d delete-delete-ban then hunt them down and pee in their baby-carriages.

        Disclaimer: That last step is only a suggestion and might constitute a desperate act rather than an actual course of action.

        Your choice.

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 3:43 pm

        count

        I believe some of my fellow Marines are in trouble for doing something very similar. LOL
        could have been buds of KID Chihuahua

  21. mitchethekid May 22, 2013 / 3:31 pm

    I made the suggestion a long time ago to have this blog become a pay to post site. Part of the problem, and I agree with Ama here, is that if one were to start a blog that was for (as her example) the discussion of religious beliefs, it would be perfectly reasonable that someone who wasn’t interested in religion would not want to participate. But if a Catholic and a Baptist joined and got into a conflict, or an evangelical and a Hindu it would be relevant to the purpose of the blog. In a way, the topic is like a hobby. A special interest wherein there is no right or wrong. Just opinion and suggestions on how to improve one’s craft. Lets take cooking for example. To get into a shouting match over which is better, foie gras or Hamburger Helper is at it’s core absurd.
    But by asserting that the purpose of this blog is to discuss conservative and libertarian ideas and then to insist that subjective personal morality should be dictated to all, is decidedly not libertarian. It invites descent from someone like me, who does trend libertarian, which is then vociferously defended by ridicule. There is an element of blind fanaticism and a wholesale rejection of counter points that instantly devolve into mock sessions. Stereotyping, sweeping generalizations and objectifying ideas is not high minded nor does it present an element of curiosity about conservative ideas. Rather, it does the opposite. If you were truly interested in gaining more converts, you wouldn’t present yourselves as being intolerant absolutists. Stating that a person who is more liberal in their views is intellectually inferior, or is overwhelmed by the power of emotion does not appeal to a large group of people. And a large(r) group is what is needed to win elections.
    But maybe you are not interested in that. Maybe it is that you enjoy luxuriating in your own smugness, cloistered from the vicissitudes and diversity of unselfconscious reality.
    To reject any point of view that challenges the demand for uniformity that is a requirement here, all the while trying to one up each other in how smart and insightful you are and to express profound skepticism at irrefutable facts that undermine belief, based foregone conclusions is not a precept of intellectually based conservatism. Rather it is the definition of a cult.
    The blithely ignored comments that would be expected on an Alex Jones website, rather as one who envisions themselves as being a savior of America, only exemplify my opinion that the moderator(s) not only agree with such delusions, they are appealing to it. Which very well might explain the lack of participants.
    You can look at this as an other opportunity to feebly make fun of me, or take it to heart and prove your ability to live up to the reputation you hold in your collective minds or the moderator can be honest and say that yes, this is the type of low common denominator I am appealing to because I can’t reach any higher. I sincerely hope it’s the middle one.

    • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 3:41 pm

      KID C

      worth repeating and 100% on the money

      “When we see the mitche we see here—vile, foul-mouthed, seething with rage and hatred, blindly attacking anyone and everything he associates with his bogeyman, “the conservative”, and really liking the forkers, hearing that when he is the Other Mitch he is really not such a total ass is just not very convincing, and it indicates that for some reason you have decided to assign different personalities and characters to him. There is Blog Mitche, who is absolutely awful on every level,

      I personally agree with every word in Ama’s ASSessment of you.

      You are a proven LIAR on your (supposed) military experience, and your ability to fly an aircraft in a vacuum. I have never known another vet to hate America and our constitution as you do, there fore I agree with others you are a poser and a liar.

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 4:25 pm

        jimmah

        YAWN…..camel? naw I say goat!

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 4:27 pm

        jimmah

        in Fla, no surprise where you focus your attention…ahem!!

    • dbschmidt May 22, 2013 / 4:18 pm

      Mitch,

      I, for one on this blog, am Libertarian. Can’t remember off-hand who said it the other evening but “I was a Liberal until their views made me a Conservative and I was a Conservative until their views made me a Libertarian.”

      Now in all intellectual honesty—it only takes a short trip around the internet and/or quotes (not out of context) from elected, as well as non-elected, leaders of this nation to disprove your statement (in part) “ Stating that a person who is more liberal in their views is intellectually inferior, or is overwhelmed by the power of emotion does not appeal to a large group of people.

      I would also have to state that irrefutable facts are not your strong suit—that takes no more effort than looking at the “review” of Matt & Mark’s latest book to conclude your primary form of exercise is jumping to conclusions. “ It invites descent from someone like me, who does trend libertarian, …” which is where you make the major misjudgment of being able to pick and choose parts of an ideology based on issues. You can “trend” on issues but not ideology. Either you are for larger government or not. It is not an option to say I am for larger government but only in these areas.

      As I stated—I am a Libertarian which is to the right of Conservatism but stopping short of Anarchy. You may think an issue like gay marriage should be a nationwide “right” whereas Conservatives would lean more towards DOMA—I believe government (at the Federal level) has no business in marriage at all—take it up with your church or whatever. Same with drugs and most other issues. I am from the bottom up type where the closer the control—the better. Neighborhood, City, County, Regional, State but only 17 duties are enumerated to the Federal government. That could be why conservatives tolerate me.

      Just to be clear—as a Libertarian I am for abolishing all (non-enumerated) government agencies and allowing the decision to be at the State level or lower where it belongs. Are you that Libertarian? Don’t think so.

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 4:31 pm

        DB

        Just to be clear—as a Libertarian I am for abolishing all (non-enumerated) government agencies and allowing the decision to be at the State level or lower where it belongs. Are you that Libertarian?

        Damn near, I have no problem with local control of standards.
        Heck sodomy was illegal in all (57) states at one time and so was abortion, until the left took control of the donk party and pushed their federal power grab…….began in earnest with kennedy!!

      • mitchethekid May 22, 2013 / 4:47 pm

        Well, it’s difficult to respond when the level of discourse is an association with how a goat smells. That’s what I am talking about. Not in reference to you, DB, because you didn’t say it but as long as this neanderthal discourse is allowed to prevail you are complicit in it by not calling it out for what it is. You need an example of filth and vile? Look no further. Neo has personality issues and as long as he is tolerated here there can be no leap forward. To someone like me, who would really like to exchange ideas, I cannot until this disease is surgically cut out. This guy is doing none of you any favors. When he was Former Marine and Kahn he was not welcome. What’s the difference now? Different name? Same reptile. And BTW, goats don’t smell. Shit does and his is gagging.

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 4:56 pm

        actually KID if you knew anything iranians like (jimmah/sasan) are goat herders, so when he arrives to drop his garbage his herd odor accompanies him…….sorry if you cant handle the truth KID.

        ps no mention of HIS threats? his discourse?
        thought not.
        birds ( or goats) of a feather flock together as they say…..forker.

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 4:59 pm

        KID

        And BTW, goats don’t smell

        Im sure you would be intimately familiar with that subject and all.

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 5:40 pm

        Goats do smell, as they have a highly developed olfactory system, and they also stink, as anyone who has visited a stock show can attest.

        However nothing smells as bad as mitche’s mental excrement.

      • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 5:44 pm

        mitche whimpers that he wants o “exchange ideas” yet so far all we have seen from him is interminable blathering on about whatever has lodged in his brain that day, lengthy tirades which he seems to think reflect intelligence and deep thought but which are just mental masturbation masquerading as thoughtful discourse.

        Polysyllabic crap is still crap. It’s just funnier when it is also ungrammatical, misspelled, and convoluted in an effort to imitate educated exposition of actual thought processes.

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 6:18 pm

        Breaking

        (mitch) = Man ‘Controlled By Satellites’ Calls Police 100 Times A Month…

        drudge….

    • Amazona May 22, 2013 / 5:16 pm

      ” But if a Catholic and a Baptist joined and got into a conflict, or an evangelical and a Hindu it would be relevant to the purpose of the blog.”

      Not if the Catholic and the Baptist got into a conflict over tires or a Baptist who got arrested for drunk driving in 1977.

      This is what we face with people like you.

      The biggest issue in front of Americans today is how to govern the nation, yet it is impossible to engage the Left in any discussion about this. What we get from you people is endless blather about evolution and AGW and religion and what gay couples can call their relationships, all your pet obsessions that have nothing to do with how to govern the nation.

      Conservatives and Libertarians are increasingly concerned about the basic building blocks of governance of the United States and feel a need/desire to talk about the problems and how to address them. And you people not only add nothing to a discussion about any of this, you actively do everything you can to disrupt it.

      What gets your attention is anything you think you can use to attack or just annoy a conservative, but you just refuse to talk about government. You seem to think that “politics” is really about gay “marriage” or who did what with whose wife or how many polar bears drowned in what year. You focus on scandal, personality, and other superficialities, and I for one am tired of you cluttering up a political blog with your dumbed-down jibber-jabber about your latest talking points, none of which have anything to do with actual government.

      To you, viewed through your lenses of superficiality, the latest IRS scandal is just a pissing match between Dems and Republicans, nothing more than opposing teams vying for points. But from a political perspective, it is about big government with no restrictions on growth, authority or scope, vs the Constitutional model of a central government severely restricted as to size, scope and power. This is a real, grown-up, and necessary conversation Americans need to have, and you people can’t get past your cheerleading for your team and your trivializing the situation to make it fit into your tiny little cartoonish perception of what is going on.

      Your posts are annoying, irrelevant, and disruptive, but never add to the discourse. So why should we bother with you?

      • dbschmidt May 22, 2013 / 6:55 pm

        Ama,

        To you, viewed through your lenses of superficiality, the latest IRS scandal is just a pissing match between Dems and Republicans, nothing more than opposing teams vying for points.” is exactly why I am all in on trying to finally abolish the IRS in total scope with a FAIR or FLAT tax. In all honesty, I fully believe we should only be paying our State governments taxes which would in turn allow the Federal government monies to carry out their enumerated duties. After that–folks could once again “vote with their feet.” Even though they are doing that today without the State’s rights advantage.

        I would enjoy seeing repeal of the 16th amendment, after all, at first income taxes were considered a temporary tax to help raise money for war. Just one of the many things President Woodrow Wilson did to start driving us towards Socialism and beyond. Throw in the Federal Reserve and President Wilson is quickly closing in on the “150 reasons…“. 2 down~ 148 to go.

      • neocon01 May 22, 2013 / 7:51 pm

        db

        I think if we scrutinized slick willy the worlds worse count would be much closer than wilson.

Comments are closed.