Assume The Position, Karl
Karl (a.k.a. "Frankie") gloated:
"Oh, last time around was '06...not '04...see, six comes after 4. We liked that (i.e. the '06 midterm elections) a lot."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc5lHXkrdQ8Suckers.
Ouch. That shit hurts.
(Thanks fj)
posted by John | 2:59 PM
50 Comments:
My pleasure, John.
I guess lying to the voters and later admitting that you played them for suckers just to get elected is a sure way to get re-elected... NOT!!! LOL!
Karl's mind follows the contours of the lefty paradigm precisely.
Note the persistent projection:
He explicitly blurted out that I--and, by association, all of my like-minded allies here--are "flat-earthers" (twice, I believe), to name but one absurd blanket notion he has of conservatives.
And yet:
"maybe you could start debating someone you don't have to project your asinine stereotypes onto."
And he's completely unconscious of doing that, and is sure to vehemently deny doing so even with the proof.
Indeed, he's a perfect specimen.
John - Didn't you once write about Robert Lowell? Anyway - some parts of his poems sound a bit like yours in spirit. So you might get laugh at this:
http://www.poetryfoundation.org/archive/feature.html?id=178893&message=
I think we all sometimes have difficulty seeing through our 'blind spots'.... especially when they arise out of faulty first principles.
I bet you smelly little apes all wasted the rollicking morn mumbling to nobodaddeh like whored out little monicas on your knees to your superstions, dint ewe, eh? ...do something useful...read up on the flat earth scam that you all believe in, for instance.
John - Didn't you once write about Robert Lowell? Anyway - some parts of his poems sound a bit like yours in spirit. So you might get laugh at this:
hahahahaha...I know I got a laugh out of the comparison. Is there ANYTHING...i mean ANYTHING AT ALL that you ridiculous cretins are not deluded about?
FJ said...
I think we all sometimes have difficulty seeing through our 'blind spots'.... especially when they arise out of faulty first principles.
haha...no shit, FJ?
Oh, ewe all sheep still need to work on that projection thing...you perform it with excellence but yet can't grasp the meaning...go figger
newsflash...that Oregon farmer added a chiropractor, a proctologist and a doctor of religious studies to his list today along with seven more names of guys sans permission...hahaha so long clowns
The Fall of Conservatism
George Packer, of The New Yorker: "The era of American politics that has been dying before our eyes was born in 1966. That January, a twenty-seven-year-old editorial writer for the St. Louis Globe-Democrat named Patrick Buchanan went to work for Richard Nixon, who was just beginning the most improbable political comeback in American history. Having served as Vice-President in the Eisenhower Administration, Nixon had lost the Presidency by a whisker to John F. Kennedy, in 1960, and had been humiliated in a 1962 bid for the California governorship. But he saw that he could propel himself back to power on the strength of a new feeling among Americans who, appalled by the chaos of the cities, the moral heedlessness of the young, and the insults to national pride in Vietnam, were ready to blame it all on the liberalism of President Lyndon B. Johnson. Right-wing populism was bubbling up from below; it needed to be guided by a leader who understood its resentments because he felt them, too."
Will Libertarians Draw Conservatives From McCain? Why, shit and sure, M'sieur Manure...
"For years, conservative-minded home schooling mom Shana Kluck of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, voted Republican. No longer. Fed up with big government at home and military intervention overseas, she worked for Ron Paul in his quest for the Republican presidential nomination. Now that he's fallen short, she's switching parties, traveling to Denver this weekend to help former Republican Congressman Bob Barr win the Libertarian presidential nomination."
Can't say that I blame her. I like Barr better than McCain.
You got it backwards, Booger. That was the fall of liberalism, and the rise of conservatism.
The Republicans are weak right now because McCain's too liberal.
And people don't realize how liberal Obama is.
I ask again:
Why does McCain have to insist that he's conservative, Barack that he's a Christian who was raised on midwestern (read conservative) values, and none of them ever daring to announce "I'm damn proud to be a liberal!" ?
Why will Barack probably pick a white southerner for veep?
Because America has "finally seen the light" and embraced liberalism, as has been ridiculously crowed here and at Mr. Sayet's blog?
Anon:
I'm pretty sure I never wrote anything about Lowell, although the name rings a bell. I must have read a poem or two of his long ago, but I can't even remember which one (if I did).
Karl, how old are you?
You don't sound like a full-fledged adult, a professional, or even a serious university scholar.
Are you even out of high school?
Or are Marxists just perpetual assholes well into middle age?
Amused bystander asked:
"haha...no shit, FJ?"
Yeah. "No shit." Read the post and Karl's own comments.
Although, as I said: "He's sure to vehemently deny doing so even with the proof," just like you (if you're not actually Karl).
Did liberalism fail or did conservatism fail?
There are good reasons for conservatives to vote for Bob Barr. The Republican base has been thinking about fleeing that party because the majority leader right now does not have a real attraction for the conservative base. That has been the heart and soul of the Republicans since we elected Reagan over the totally disastrous presidency of Carter. The conservative ideals of smaller federal government and a smaller federal interference with the populace has had difficulties because we have had leaders that are far too willing to try and get votes by comparing themselves to Democrats.
Does this, by and of itself, mean that conservatism is on the ropes?
Good question, and it needs some historical analysis before a conclusion can be reached.
My answer is that conservatism is not on the ropes. If anything, the Republican party is on the ropes for having denied its own birthright. Why are so many conservatives now willing to leave the Republican Party? It is not because they wish to become Democrats, otherwise the national poles would show something other than a near 50 - 50 split yet again this year. It cannot be because the right has suddenly "seen the light" of the far left socialists that now govern the democrats, because even the democrats are having trouble with that, and the disaffected are leaning towards anything but the Obama crowd or the Clinton crowd.
No, the vast majority of people that make livings, pay taxes and raise children here in this great nation of ours are upset that the McCain Presidency promises more of the Bush alliance and less of the old Reagan understanding of government. What is the Bush alliance?
The Bush alliance is NOT some kind of secret conspiracy with "big oil" or the "Israelis" or Haliburton. Not at all. The Bush conspiracy was that he had no balls when it came to telling the liberals to not spend more on government programs, and then spending a tremendous amount on this last war. The end result was that he only has used the veto pen about 10 or 11 times against congress, and he also has waged a war that exceeds many billions of dollars.
In effect, Bush has managed to thoroughly piss off both major parties.
Regardless of how any of you feel about either reason for pissing off the parties, what is clear is that McCain is a compromise to the Republicans, and either Clinton or Obama represent a socialist government.
The disaffected Republicans are not going to vote for a socialist government, and the Democrats are torn between two socialists.
THIS is why we see conservatives looking around for alternatives. It has nothing to do with the current struggle within the Democratic Party, and it sure as hell does not mean that the conservatives are joining the Democratic Party. Mark my words on this.
Since the election of McKinley, the Republicans have stood for many things, but mostly they have stood for the things that made the GOP in the first place. If the GOP cannot, anymore, provide that, there ARE actually alternatives that I predict will make a great deal of difference in the next three decades.
That being said, also, I wish to address those imbeciles that think that calling a conservative (free thinker) as a "flat-earther." Get a life. Just because you cannot argue your way out of a paper bag does not mean that there are not intelligent people on this planet that see through your own paper bag.
Indeed: "maybe you could start debating someone you don't have to project your asinine stereotypes onto."
OOOhhhh....poor baby. Did I mention your own stereotypes and make you eat them? Did I take up your own arguments and make you think about them? Did I beat you up for mouthing things that made you have to reflect? That is what conservatives do, you know. We use the grey matter and think about things. Maybe you want me to avoid debating you because it hurt you little feelings? You use a term like "asinine" and suddenly I am full of angst and cannot function anymore? Maybe what I should do is debate adults that can keep a civil mouth and STILL argue a point. Maybe there are actually people in your party that are adults, can debate, and do not have to resolve to crying on my shoulder for results?
Piss off. I have not seen them, and I do not believe that they even exist.
So far what I have seen is that American Liberalism has failed along with European Liberalism, but the American branch does not realize that it is dead yet. They are still going to give AlGore millions to enrich his coffers, and at the same time they are going to tell me that the reason that gas is so high is that it is because of those damn foreigners. Eat it, Libs, the reason gas is so high is that we will not drill for our own oil. The reason that the cost of living is so high is that it is related to the cost of that same oil and the high taxes that we pay here in this country already.
You are going to fix it by suing OPEC and raising our taxes????
Jesus Christ on a bike.
That is the most stupid thing I have heard since Mondale.
Wow...that Felonious loser can't seem to do anything but project his asinine stereotypes...whah, I believe it's his whole schtick...he's certainly not a libertarian...they're usually semi-intelligent but naive, unlike the stereotypical conservative trog who is invariably stupid to the bone and often insane as well.
Oh my no, the conservative movement is not dying...they're just about to take one of the biggest baths in history because they're on the rise!!!
Is there nothing you can't twist into it's opposite, pretzel boy?
How many GOP leaders do you have to hear tell you that the GOP brand is pizen? Please, take some.
seen that huge turnout for Obammer? the biiiiig Democratic registration gains?...and all this for those socialist candicates...what a stewpid putzodinkus.
bob barr has had to repudiate his support of the patriot act, his
co-sponsorship of a bill opposing medical marywanny, his opposition to gay marriage and other things to get the nomination....i love me a damn flipflopper when they
flop in the right (left) direction
signs o the times ...everyone has to move left to go anywhere now ... like McCain on climate change etc. ...every liberal issue is a winner...well they were even at the now distant apex of the wingo bowel movement...tribute to their lying machine they were able to hold out as long as they did...all the faster down the crapper now because of it
John, if the conservative movement weren't such a threat to the Liberal movement we wouldn't have to deal with the anger spewing from the left. We would be of little consequence.
As it is, there is obvious anger being spit in this direction. We are a threat to them and they know it.
They're just going ballistic because of the spankings but have to come back using different aliases because of the spankings.
You're right, Kelly, it is cowardliness, but I'm glad--for them-- to see that they feel shame, after all (and hence too embarrassed to show their faces), but sad--for them-- to see how they choose to react to that shame, because it only compounds their shamelessness.
They can gloat and "hahaha" all they want about how demoralized the conservative base is, or about problems with McCain, or even indulge in stunts trying to tar the GOP as the party of criminals while they continue to hyperbolically howl about the "debacle" in Iraq and an economy that was "The Worst Since The Great Depression" (and about to get worse than that) and how Dubya is "The Worst President in History" and Mcain is just McBush, but nothing can change the fact that Obama can't win in a general election because he's too liberal.
...unless, of course, he fools enough Americans into thinking that he's conservative enough to be president.
John, if the conservative movement weren't such a threat to the Liberal movement we wouldn't have to deal with the anger spewing from the left. We would be of little consequence.
Doesn't every stale, little riko twit say EXACTLY that same pathetic, transparent thing every time someone makes fun of their silly idiotology?
After the damage you dupes have done, we are really enjoying rubbing it into your stupid faces.
We're gloating.
We admit it.
We owe it to ourselves.
it's the least we can do.
oinks and away.
nothing can change the fact that Obama can't win in a general election because he's too liberal.
...unless, of course, he fools enough Americans into thinking that he's conservative enough to be president.
See, the way it works, pinhead, is that everyone moves to the middle when they've got it sewn up...it's like McCain posing as much more liberal than he really is. Junkies like me know he's a riko crackpot, but he poses as being more liberal with such things as campaign reform and other "maverick" bullshit because the ONLY way a rightist whack job can win is by posturing further left... as the GOP leadership says dog food wouldn't sell with the GOP brand on it...everyone hates you fools...you even hate yourselves.
"You always know you've struck gold when liberals react with hysteria and rage to something you've said."
Anne Coulter
It's funny that they think they can win more than one election by spewing demonstrable falsehoods and crude fabrications about the war and the economy.
How will they explain to the Americans voters that despite their best efforts to surrender to terrorism in 2006, America ended up winning the war in Iraq? And how are they going to explain an economy that is recovering nicely in 2008 despite the Congress's best effort to torpedo Bush Economic policy? It certainly is a puzzlement.
"How will they explain to the Americans voters...?"
Like this:
"It's like this, pinheads. See..."
Btw, note how Uncle Joe (Stalin, a.k.a. fathead), or Boil (and they could very well be the same troll), simply projects an inversion of what I said when retorting.
I said:
"...but nothing can change the fact that Obama can't win in a general election because he's too liberal.
...unless, of course, he fools enough Americans into thinking that he's conservative enough to be president."
The psychological defense mechanism of projection used as an offensive weapon:
"...but (McCain) poses as being more liberal with such things as campaign reform and other 'maverick' bullshit because the ONLY way a rightist whack job can win is by posturing further left..."
I essentially said (viaa rhetorical question) precisely--but inversely-- the same thing:
"Why does McCain have to insist that he's conservative, Barack that he's a Christian who was raised on midwestern (read conservative) values, and none of them ever daring to announce 'I'm damn proud to be a liberal!'?
Anonymous coward says:
"Wow...that Felonious loser can't seem to do anything but project his asinine stereotypes...whah, I believe it's his whole schtick...he's certainly not a libertarian...they're usually semi-intelligent but naive, unlike the stereotypical conservative trog who is invariably stupid to the bone and often insane as well."
Ok , Booger Boy, or whatever your name is this thrity seconds or so....
You cannot debate the issues I bring up, and you cannot do better than "asinine stereotypes"? I am therefore insane because you do not have a brain that functions? Poor baby.
Since you have no real understanding of what a Libertarian is and is not, that part of the argument is likely lost. I will, in the interests of fair play, allow you once again to debate the actual platform of the Libertarian Party, if you have the guts to do so. The warning I will place is that while you have no courage and want to call names rather than debate, is that I will likely challenge you to dust off your grey matter and actually think about things. That can be uncomfortable to a socialist, so I fully understand that that your estrogen will overtake your testosterone once again and you will be unwilling to actually talk.
Do you not realize that I do not care in the slightest what you think about me personally? That is what a free society mandates. Even perfect mongoloids can talk, and you have the right to be just that.
Debate me you ass! Debate the points of free trade. Debate the points of low taxes. Debate me on the rights of individuals to live without government nannies. Hell, I don't know, start off with something like border protection or drilling for oil or something. Pick something and come out willing to defend your stupidity. I challenge you, Booger Boy. Do it. Even if you have no danglies between your legs, you can at least pretend that you have some balls and debate.
I am home now just bawling my little eyes out right now because you called me a name.....BOO HOO
Gird thy loins, teenager, and bring something to the fight other than your bruised feelings.
Debate! C'mon Booger Boy!
Do it!
How will they explain to the Americans voters that despite their best efforts to surrender to terrorism in 2006, America ended up winning the war in Iraq? And how are they going to explain an economy that is recovering nicely in 2008 despite the Congress's best effort to torpedo Bush Economic policy? It certainly is a puzzlement.
Things seem very pleasant in your head. It's so different from the real world in there. I also gather there's a lot of vacant space.
Could I move in?
...
Boy that one guy is thick...McCain really is crazy right but has to pose as being more liberal because a guy that far right can't win...he can't proudly say he's an extreme rightist...he has to insist through his proposed bills that he is more liberal than he is... duh dud. Just like GDumbo saying he was a compassionate conservative because the real conservative trog can't win as such. For further help with this, go to Miss Krantz in special ed, room 4. We aren't here to educate wingbats; we're here to laugh at them as they eat shit and die.
That is to you, John.
If you like I can reply.
John said...
"You always know you've struck gold when liberals react with hysteria and rage to something you've said."
Anne Coulter
the only hysteria I hear is hysterical laughter
and wingbat losers pretending to thump their skinny little chests
Ok, never mind John. Allow me.
OF COURSE all you want to do is cut and paste nastiness from your overlords, because that is all you are capable of doing.
DEBATE ME on the issues! Do it! Grab your microscopic testicles and actually talk about issues you idiot. Can you do it? I strongly doubt it. Pick one. Just take a chance and do that.
You little weasel. I bet you cannot debate yourself out of a paper bag if your life depended upon it.
How about that Bob Barr...he can't win as the dingbat he really is; he has to pose as a liberal:
bob has had to repudiate his support of the patriot act
his co-sponsorship of a bill opposing medical maryjane
his opposition to gay marriage, etc. to get the nom....i love a flip flopper when they
flop in the right (left) direction
haha...who's this guy talking to? OF COURSE all you want to do is cut and paste nastiness from your overlords, because that is all you are capable of doing.
DEBATE ME on the issues! Do it! Grab your microscopic testicles and actually talk about issues you idiot. Can you do it? I strongly doubt it. Pick one. Just take a chance and do that.
You little weasel. I bet you cannot debate yourself out of a paper bag if your life depended upon it.
now thats hysteria
I gather you're a libertarian... you certainly can't countenance the government interfering with a woman's right to have an abortion, or do you have that rationalized? I like some libertarian shit...BB had to come around on some of faves. Then they get all simple on you and tell you everyone should just do what their greedy short sighted little idiot hearts tell them to do...they're childish romantics about freedom...utterly naive little pinheads
Now, at last we are actually getting somewhere.
Bob Barr is not terribly popular among the Libertarian Party mostly because of his support for the Patriot Act. John may likely digress, but I have never supported the Patriot Act. The LP does not support that act, and that is why Bob has some problems with getting the LP support he wants. His actions against Medical Marijuana have also presented some problems.
What makes Bob attractive to the likes of myself is his staunch support of a free trade attitude and the fact that he has supported good border control while at the same time he has supported an ideal of changing the current immigration laws.
He is not posing as anything other than a Libertarian. Keep it up.
Keep debating.
GOOD! Anonymous! Good!
It is the stance of the LP that a woman's right to an abortion or not should be relegated to the right of the various states to decide what they want in their state, vis a vie, the right of the various states to decide the death penalty.
As to the rest of that blather that you purported to be some kind of argument, WHAT?
Are you telling me that the foundation of individual liberty as brought through the Declaration of Independence is wrong?
The fact that people can act as they want unless they are wronging another person is somehow flawed? You have so little faith in your ability to act as a lawful citizen that you actually WANT a government nannie to watch every thing that you do?
Do not stop now!
DEBATE!
In another place, I would also tell you that I have a fundamental belief that the common citizen acts towards their own good in the normal.
We have millions of citizens in this country, and by the vast multitude, they generally are in fact laws-abiding people. They do so for various reasons, and some of them do so because they fear the rule of law. Most do not need that. They obey the laws because it is in their best interests as income producing citizens to make their way in the world without adding the difficulty of making themselves outside the law. My parents own great great grandfathers fought for freedom because freedom, in and of itself, was worth fighting for.
"...and wingbat losers..."
It's not "wingbat." It's "wingnut," and that itself was tit-for-tat for moonbat, which is better and why "wingnut" has turned into "wingbat."
You're vindictive copycats.
He is not posing as anything other than a Libertarian. Keep it up.
What? Yas, I said he is posing as a libertarian instead of a trog conservative and has had to take those libert views which coincide with liberal views on several matters. Now, P, I ainta got me much time to "debate" right now as I got some drinking to do and setting you straight aint possible anyway but latah gatah
just one more...
It is the stance of the LP that a woman's right to an abortion or not should be relegated to the right of the various states to decide what they want in their state, vis a vie, the right of the various states to decide the death penalty.
this state bullshit is just oppression by more parochial idiots...it often lessens individual right rather than increases them...puts people in the hands of local big wigs and their little fiefdoms...which is why the slavers and Jim Crowers always fell back on it...
Nice, Idiot.
OF COURSE you cannot debate.
OF COURSE you have to take a breather.
Next time you need a wet nurse, you are going to have to look elsewhere.
The challenge still stands.
If any of you anonymous idiots want to debate actual politics, you can look us up. In the meantime, graduate from HS, get a job, and you will have a very different take on a great many things.
Look up the LP on the internet. I suspect that you can do that without too much trouble, but it may require using things like the "alphabet." You can do that in under a week I bet.
Tell that to the California state government who imperiously ruled for same-sex marriage (against the will of the majority of Californians, too).
Socialists are fascist dictators who make up new laws and then treat dissenters of those laws as lawbreakers.
They consider Roe v. Wade like some 11th Commandment given to Moses by virtue of it being decided by the Supreme Court.
"IT'S THE SUPREME COURT!" they cry.
Of course, when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of George W. Bush in 2000, well...
"THE SUPREME COURT IS A POLITICAL ARM OF THE REPUBLICANS/CONSERVATIVES/NEOCONS!"
They're what's wrong with America. Their incessant whining, invectives, and subversion has poisoned the environment a hell of a lot more than Exxon-Mobil has.
That's how they get ahead, though.
Gotta tell you anonymous!
You still do not have the courage to get a name and blog under that, however, you took a first important step.
You graduated to actually bringing up specific points. Good for you! There may be hope yet.
As to your dislike of individual communities making their own laws, you have to realize that there are places in the US that really like the death penalty, for example. I live in Texas, and the State of Texas uses a death penalty. Personally, I abhor the right of any government to take the life of criminals. As a good citizen, I must also realize that it the right of this state to make that kind of law. You would probably call me some kind of robot for accepting that law.
No, that is not the truth. To bring the Roe vs. Wade decision back, the reason that that has caused a lot more problems with the judiciary than the capital punishment issue is that there is no mention of abortion in the Constitution. Those things have always, in every other case, been relegated to the will of the various states, and that is why the LP maintains that stance.
Hey John!
This has been fun!
But, dude, if you want me to back off say the word, otherwise I am really enjoying debating these wet-behind-the-ears teens on the true meaning of good political debate. I am never "not aware" that this is your house, and I only want to help, amigo.
Well, back from my three day...time to unwind and have a little laugh...this is the place for that.
Funny as usual ...goofball theme of the day seems to be we have a hyperactive blowhard Felonious who thinks that the only reason anyone might not spend their entire evening at a computer debating idiots who have nothing else to do is a lack of courage... now, that is funny...think about this...maybe he has a life, loser. No one can rationally defend libertarianism ...unless they're living in the wilderness in 1750. And they're just so tiresome to debate with their wide eyed gullibility about the wonders of human nature. Well nitey nite...gotta little meeting with Lana B....eatcher heart out, Johnny...she does think you're funny though. The couple that redasses apes together stays together.
Hey there Anonymous Moran!
You said: "this state bullshit is just oppression by more parochial idiots...it often lessens individual right rather than increases them..."
Really? It is bullshit to give the local governments more power than the federal government? Let me see if I follow the logic there. Giving local people more power to determine their individual laws than the federal government is a way of taking away their true liberty? Does that not seem to be an oxymoron? Let me rephrase: taking away the ability of local communities somehow lessens their god-given right to self government?
Good, there, Frankie Machine.
You demonstrate the gutless ability to call names and not talk about issues.
Glad you got yourself a mate there, God help the human race. Maybe you can raise yourself some mindless socialist kiddoes if you can figure out the whole mating thing. I reckon you can. Hell, dogs do. I figure you can.
YOU, though, still do not know how to debate ideas at all, do you?
OH NO! Frankie Machine called me some names....what am I ever going to DO? Expected.
You dog, debate me if you have the nads to do it. I am sure that you come by here for entertainment, you seem to have no other reason. You cannot argue your way about anything, so you have to once again attack personally.
YAWN.
Whatever, idiot.
Phelonius said:
"But, dude, if you want me to back off say the word, otherwise I am really enjoying debating..."
By all means, indulge yourself. I'm enjoying the show.
Karl has been going ballistic because he's nothing but an insecure, big-mouthed punk who's been roughed up pretty badly by the superior intellects of a real--and bigger-- man in front of the girl who has nothing better to do than play with his little wee-wee.
Now he's just trying to "prove" his manhood because she's had someone else on her mind while he's been grunting and sweating over the poor girl (although she's probably the one on top).
So lana thinks I'm funny, eh Karl? You know what they say, Karl, about laughter being the #1 aphrodisiac for women?
And all you can do is lumber in here like the angry baboon you are hoot-hooting and waving your arms about and picking up a stick and hitting the ground with it and throwing back what's thrown at you along with your feces.
I think he might be a teenager. If not, he's very childish.
However, liberalism has that effect on people. It arrests development.
Post a Comment
<< Home