Newt Gingrich Accused of Hating Mankind by 'Conservative' Kathleen Parker
Moments after being introduced by Face the Nation host Bob Schiiffer as a "conservative" columnist, the Washington Post's Kathleen Parker on Sunday referred to Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich as a "misanthrope" - aka a mankind hater (video follows with transcript and commentary):
BOB SCHIEFFER, HOST: And we're back now with our panel. Kathleen Parker, of course, a columnist for the Washington Post who writes kind of from the conservative side, I would say. Dee Dee Myers, President Clinton's press secretary, National Journal's Major Garrett who moderated the debate last night along with our own Scott Pelley. And our CBS News political director just named to that post yesterday John Dickerson. John, congratulations.
Despite the absurdity of calling Parker a conservative - she last year admitted that she won the Pulitzer Prize for being a conservative basher - wasn't it fascinating how the political leaning of none of the other panelists - accurate or not! - was identified?
Such is typically the case on these Sunday shows.
Funnier still, when the subject of Gingrich arose, Parker took a swipe that was anything but conservative:
BOB SCHIEFFER: Kathleen, do you see Gingrich now being the alternative to Romney, various ones that have been put in that position and have risen and then fallen. Where-- where do you see Gingrich now?
KATHLEEN PARKER: Well, he's-- he's certainly the flavor of the week. And-- and Newt Gingrich does very, very well in debates. You know, he's not really much of a campaigner. In fact, he's been described as sort of a misanthrope. That would be sort of interesting wouldn't it to have a misanthropic President.
For those unfamiliar with the term, a misanthrope is someone that hates mankind.
And that's the so-called conservative columnist CBS News brought on to discuss the Republican presidential race.
Might as well have an Obama adviser there instead.
At least then the viewer would know where her sympathies truly lied.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Her "expertise" is . . . Spanish literature. Who the F cares
Submitted by ConservaSerb on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 4:38pm.
about her "opinion?" CNN certainly didn't care to air it very long.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Parker
***Parker grew up in Winter Haven, Florida, graduated from Winter Haven High School in 1969, and attended Converse College before transferring to Florida State University where she majored in Spanish Literature. She also holds a Master's degree in the subject from Florida State.
She is married to an attorney, has three sons, and currently resides in Camden, South Carolina.[2]
Parker made news during the 2008 U.S. presidential election when she called on the Republican vice presidential nominee, Governor Sarah Palin, to step down from the party ticket, saying that a series of media interviews showed that Palin was "clearly out of her league."[3][4][5] Parker received over 11,000 responses, mostly from conservatives criticizing her.[6]
In April, Kathleen Parker won the 2010 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary with a selection of political opinion columns.[7]
Starting in the fall of 2010, Parker co-hosted the cable news program Parker Spitzer on CNN with former New York governor Eliot Spitzer.[8] On February 25, 2011 CNN announced that Kathleen Parker was leaving the show to focus more on her writing.***
A wise & frugal government, which shall leave men free 2 regulate their own pursuits of industry & improvement, & shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. T. Jefferson
A Nolie
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 5:10pm.
So Parker is a graduate of Clown College.
Color me unsurprised.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
If she didn't have this gig
Submitted by ricklail on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 5:57pm.
If she didn't have this gig she would be right at home with the OWS crowd. About all of them have worthless degrees.
I wrote a comment in the Charlotte Disturber that Thunder Thighs didn't put her hand over her heart as the colors were lowering Friday night on the USS Carl Vinson. (In the Army we called it retreat.) Many mocked me. Here is the proof
ricklail
Submitted by rockyracoon on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 7:12pm.
A picture is worth a thousand words. So all I can add is wow...just wow! Thanks for the link.
Facts are like kryptonite to the liberal.
Notice the Faux Bomber Jacket, rick
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:22pm.
Bambi (unlike GWB) has on a faux jacket....with the Presidential Seal (in case he forgets who he is, I suppose)....you can google the prior CinC on an AC Carrier....wearing the real deal, with a real unit designator.
Now, get ye over to MOTUS, to see the whole story about MOO's "black heart" garb. *rolls eyes*
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde
Submitted by rockyracoon on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 7:15pm.
Why do you call Florida State University, clown college? Just to let you know, I'm neither a Seminole fan, nor am I from Florida, just a curious.
Facts are like kryptonite to the liberal.
Rocky
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:23pm.
It's a Gator thing, I guess.
We also call them SOW (school of women).
Clown College and SOW are a few of the friendlier names we have for FSU.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Not fair Blonde -
Submitted by Agnostic on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:35pm.
Clown school takes skill and ends in a legitimate trade that is physically strenuous and entertains.
Liberal Arts degrees - not so much.
"misanthrope is someone that hates mankind."
Submitted by Newsbubba on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 4:40pm.
Can I be a misanthrope? I don't really hate ALL of mankind, but I'm pretty well pissed off at an ever growing segment of them.
Maybe I can be a hit-and-misanthrope?
It's getting close to Happy Hour. Think I'll go find some of "mankind," or preferably "woman-kind" that are hard to hate.
Well said,
Submitted by dr-go on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 4:58pm.
well said.
The media will now focus on destroying Gingrich
Submitted by OxyCon on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 4:45pm.
It's obvious, isn't it?
it wont work...there is a growing tolerance..
Submitted by Paarl on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 7:05pm.
ie I mean like an addictive drug...the MSM would have to launch so much heavy artillery to take out Newt....it would get a negative response except from the lefttards....Newt's baggage is all in the open...like Clinton..he has many failings...unlike Clinton..Newt has a lot to contribute to the republic....and we on the Conservative side know it...and will not allow his destruction.
Paarl of Rhodesia
Newt should neither be destroyed...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 5:37pm.
nor be president. He should be teaching history or political science at a small liberal arts college somewhere in the American midwest.
Jer
Why stop with mankind?
Submitted by zenman1661 on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 4:46pm.
Why not just say he hates evey kind of lifeform in the universe? That makes as much sense as her claim.
Newt is far from being a Misanthrope.
Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 4:46pm.
I believe the good, Miss Florence King would agree.
If a misanthrope hates
Submitted by ant on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 4:47pm.
If a misanthrope hates mankind, can we call Obama a misAmerica?
"That would be sort of interesting wouldn't it, to have a President that hates Americans?" -what Parker should have been asking in 2008.
There are degrees..
Submitted by sergeant stogie on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 4:48pm.
Sort of misanthropic..specifically toward lying, evil, "journalists"..
The stupid, stupid, stupid,
Submitted by TE on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 4:49pm.
The stupid, stupid, stupid, boilerplate leftist Bob Schieffer had wanted Megan McCain, David "I get a tingle up my leg looking at the crease in Obama's pants" Brooks or Andrew Sullivan to fill the "conservative" seat on Schieffer's show, but they were unavailable. Schieffer then turned to Kathleen Parker to fill that role.
I would say that liberals are
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 5:02pm.
I would say that liberals are a better example of those who hate mankind.
After all, they put humans at the bottom of the list of what should be taken care of, behind the earth and every other living creature, including snail darts.
so Newt is this weeks Conservative whack-a-mole?
Submitted by kata on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 5:29pm.
Good for him :)
the whack-a-moles
Submitted by jon_torlin on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 5:47pm.
That's a very good point, and one that should be met with serious consideration.
They whacked Perry, they've been whacking Cain like crazy, and the others, so it's safe to say that the ones they really haven't been whacking would be Romney and Huntsman.
Yeah, many of us have problems of one kind or another with the various candidates, especially those being whacked, but when you get right down to it, I'll take any of those over Huntsman and Romney any day of the week. For me specifically, Perry(yeah, I'm biased), Cain(yeah, I'm getting a little better about him), Gingrich(maybe not too late for an old dog to learn new tricks?), those guys are my top three picks.
The thing is, those being whacked like they are obviously scare the crap out of the lib media and quite honestly, that's a good thing.
It's time to take our country back from the lib media commies and the muslims trying to take it over.
-Jon
it seems very calculated
Submitted by kata on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 6:53pm.
The Perry smear was probably being held in reserve. Somewhere someone had the "In case of Perry declaring candidacy - Break Glass" story for just such an emergency. Unfortunately, Perry seems to be his own worst enemy. Cain's smear took some time. (While I am not one to disparage the women, I do find it fascinating they are all residing in Chicago). Despite indicators that the rumors haven't hurt his likability - his campaign seems to be losing steam anyway.
Gingrich is a tough nut and I think the exposure might be counter productive to a smear attempt. (Although, the MSM may be slow in realizing it). Newt is sharp enough to use any time given to him to forward himself by exposing the deeply disliked journalists-turned-lobbyists for the fools they are. Free airtime on a low budget campaign is a bonus.
Still, I get the sense we're being herded toward Romney. Apathy will be the hardest candidate to beat.
Devil's advocate
Submitted by Model850 on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 5:37pm.
No fan of Parker but in Jer's absence I'll play devil's advocate here. <grin>
I'll suggest perhaps she was thinking of a related synonym to "misanthrope" but decided to use that word because she thought it would make her sound more intelligent, more in fitting with her opinion of herself as one of the elite intellectuals.
Related to MISANTHROPE
Synonyms: cynic, naysayer, pessimist
Hypersensitive much?
Submitted by fenngibbon on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 5:57pm.
Oh, for the love of God, take a Valium, Sheppard.
First, Schieffer called her kind of a conservative, which, like it or not, she is. I think she's an insufferable jackass who bashes conservatives to get attention, but I'm familiar enough with her work to characterize her general position as right of center. She's the John McCain of the columnists, but she's no Chuck Hagel, much less a Lincoln Chafee.
Second, she didn't call him a misanthrope to stigmatize him; it was descriptive. I personally would characterize him as more of a curmudgeon who doesn't suffer fools gladly, but misanthrope isn't that far off the mark. That's part of the reason I'm considering voting for him. Considering that a somewhat negative view of humanity, based on the experience of millenia, is at the core of conservatism, I don't see why being called a misanthrope is an insult -- it means you're paying attention. Read Federalist 51: the whole premise for checks and balances is that humans are messed up.
And before anyone disputes my characterization of conservatism, you're confusing conservatism with libertarianism: that's the belief system that has the irrationally optimistic view of humanity.
A certain degree of contempt for one's fellow man only becomes a problem when, like Obama, the person thinks they're somehow special and exempt from this human condition. That's when you get the standard liberal mentality that they can boss the rest of us around because they're better than us. As far as I know, Gingrich doesn't suffer from that delusion.
he doesn't hate ALL of mankind
Submitted by spepper on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 6:03pm.
Kathy baby, Newt doesn't hate ALL of mankind-- just the part that is made up of so-called "journalists" that spew sniveling verbal hand grenades.......
I sure do miss her CNN "News" show...
Submitted by bigdaddy on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 6:08pm.
..."Swallow Spitzer"
Kathleen must be undergoing a vast hormonal change
Submitted by rpeeler42 on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 6:17pm.
Three or four years ago, Kathleen used to make some sense in her column. Lately though she seems fixated on bashing conservatives.
I think she must be undergoing a big hormonal change, what else could it be? I have stopped paying any attention to anything she says. Her TV show with Spitzer was really good, though.(not)
Kathleen is just trying to
Submitted by rockyracoon on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 7:19pm.
Kathleen is just trying to remain relevant for her Marxist media masters.
Facts are like kryptonite to the liberal.
Schiiffer was right.
Submitted by DumbCanuck on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 7:36pm.
"kind of"......
"There... Are... Four... Lights!"
Another eat you own - and throw the bones under the bus article
Submitted by Clevenative on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 7:44pm.
Noel's good at telling us what "real" conservatives are - and "real" Christians too I bet. LOL
More of the usual - "If it's not "my kind", it ain't worth listening to".
Another example of just how FAR right the Republican pendulum has swung. Someone takes note of the rage, hate, and anger - and you get all defensive and play the usual heads-in-the-sand deny, deny, deny game.
There aren't 25% of you who can even settle on a Presidential candidate - and so it's no surprise we should expect that Christian "brotherly love" to shine through in your dysfunctional "family".
"There aren't 25% of you who can even settle on a Presidential
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:40pm.
candidate". Nice one,very good.
I do believe we have until August or September to "settle" on a candidate, unlike you and yours. So, why don't you toddle on back to the high school you graduated from last year, and get your money back. You failed American Government, and they passed you anyway. Social promotion?
They DO give out a 'P' (pass)
Submitted by killa37 on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:03pm.
They DO give out a 'P' (pass) grade to high-school seniors - I had a kid working for me who got a 'P', just so he wouldn't have to return. (Actually, he was a pretty OK kid, who was just going through that adolescent 'thing'..........he even got to where he wanted to listen to Rush everyday at work!!!)..........so maybe this dope is in the same category.
And I'd rather be in the 25% category of people who are still actually TRYING to find out WHO our next candidate will be and WHAT he/she stands for, and WHERE they've been before they got to this point......................I'd say that would be a much better process than being in the 100% of the ignorant, misinformed, uninformed, fooled, scammed, brainwashed, and stupid voters that gave us our most current 'President' (remember the anti-Bush bumper stickers - 'he's NOT my President'???), along with their willing accomplices in the MSM.
Did 'out of this realm' suddenly re-appear as 'clevecreep'???
That's a thought, Killa.
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:07pm.
I still contend he got a "social promotion" so he wouldn't be back. Trying to infuse him with knowledge must have been like trying to hammer jello to the floor.
I think it's time for you to go....
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:43pm.
I, for one, am sick and tired of your "you people" and other ugliness.
Anyone else tired of this asshat?
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde*
Submitted by cajun2 on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:56pm.
Cajun raises her hand ^
May we have an approximate time frame?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:59pm.
;)
To coin a phrase, SoL
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:00pm.
Time is of the essence.
Or we'll be CherryBombed!
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Yes.
Submitted by The Vet on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:20pm.
Another bigot that hates based on political ideology. The last form of bigotry that is still tolerated.
Cleventine: ..you folks sure sound angry.
Cleventine: ...You people are.....the way you pick....If you want to....you don't pick and chose.... You act as.....
Cleventine: You're doing what...it's Newsbusters trying to change the subject....
Cleventine: ...you folks...right wing media source (Fox News), and a pair of anti-government billionaire brothers, orchestrated a "grassroots" movement...You weren't...Fox News and the right-wing noise machine...you've been listening...
Cleventine: , OK - Got it, NEWSBUSTERS!....Why do you try to...Why do you paint...The things you crybabies...Newsbusters article starts with that silly statement...Obviously you folks...lust for dog-eat-dog ruthlessness and nitpicking of the right just astounds me...You folks just......You people and your vengeful judgmental voodoo religious end-of-days Rapture crap.....
Cleventine: ...your lack of support for civil rights for nearly the past 50 years....You're only kidding yourselves...your un-Christlike demeaning of the downtrodden minorities and outright bigotry towards all things....your handful of poster boy sell-outs...
Cleventine: Republicans...fought tooth and nail to restrict or deny the rights to minorities and the poor - including women and gays.
Cleventine: ...today's Republican Party the only "real Americans" are a wealthy landowners...everyone else should be denied the right to even vote.
Cleventine: Most of you "states' rights" (hear the dog-whistle?) folks still believe The Articles of Confederation take precedence over the Constitution...
Cleventine: I love hearing teabaggers defend their insanity.....You folks should...Your worst traits....
Cleventing: ...the types of email "your kind" throws...usual projections (from hate to insanity) ... that oozes from this website...
Yeah, and we are to argue against any of that how again?
'You are lost and gone
Submitted by killa37 on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:50pm.
'You are lost and gone forever.........dreadful sorry, Cleventine'...................
Isn't that what you're here for?
Submitted by Clevenative on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 11:28pm.
Not really. I suppose not, guess - You're all just here to jump on the bandwagon and wring your wrists to a simultaneous bashing of all things not like you. It's the sort of thing most of you live for. The dittohead mentality in full view.
Sorry if my holding up a mirror and asking you to face up the truth is such a challenge. I know you're not used to outsiders playing in your sandbox, but it's healthy to step out of Fantasyland and hear what the outside world really thinks of you every once in a while. I know that for most of you visiting this website is like going to church - safety in the masses - a group-think mentality - and "reaffirmation" and forgiveness for your sins is expected. I'll probably last here a few more days before the hand of your god comes down on me.
BTW - Nice synopsis, Vet. Great job of picking and choosing my points out of context. If you don't already, you should work for Little Angry Andy Brietbart. I hear he's looking for a few good moles with such treasured Gestapo journalist skills.
Deja Vu?
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 11:28pm.
Is it just me or does this swan song sound vaguely familiar?
It can be confusing CX*
Submitted by cajun2 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:29am.
These sto' bought trolls all use the same talking points from the master printer (moveon.org). When forced to "opine" with depth or substance, or heaven forbid, facts, they then run whining about those right wing nuts. So, after awhile, they all seem to be the same poster. All sound alike, all look alike, all speak the same lies and drivel is the epitome of lib think. Total equality of sharing the stupid.
I'm so easily confused!!!
Submitted by 26CX on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:47am.
Good evening, c2. Good to see you hanging around.
I thought these libs were all
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:58am.
I thought these libs were all about 'sharing the wealth'.............but it seems that their common sense and intelligence and ability to think for themselves is now bankrupt...........so they're 'sharing the ignorance'.
Ahhh..........but ignorance is bliss to a lib, since they are such open-minded and tolerant people, right???
Hey, Cleventine...........go back to whereever you came from.............I'm sure that 'out of this realm' and 'hate #2' and a few of your other buddies are waiting for you, so that you guys can talk about how you laid waste to NewBusters.
Clevie
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 11:36pm.
You never did get back to me about the hypocrisy of the left. I guess that was to difficult a subject for you to deal. No worries, I understand how you guys on the left like to stick your collective heads in the sand.
Yeah, that's the ticket.
Submitted by The Vet on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 11:48pm.
Iz juz holding up a mirror to stupid conservatives. Iz not a bigot that hates anyone that has a different political ideology. Iz not. Rilly.
Kindly point out the proper context of any one of those quotes. Because, really, my taking them out of context did you a big disfavor and you need to put them in the proper context. Mmmmmkay?
I'll tell ya sumpin,
Submitted by killa37 on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 11:56pm.
I'll tell ya sumpin, meat..........if you've been registered here for close to FOUR years - and these weak-ass posts are all you can do, then you probably WILL be gone pretty soon, because you haven't said a damn thing that has any substance to it, and you won't back up any of your idiotic and one-sided statements..............but you can go back to the Kos, and regale all of those clowns about how you came over to Newsbusters and really blew things up..............just don't tell them that you actually blew yourself up.
This website allows all kinds of conversation, debate, interaction, exchange of ideas, as well as differences in opinion - but if you're gonna show up like a big fart and stink up the joint, and pretend that it wasn't you.............nobody's going to give you any credence or respect, since you don't have the capacity to show it around here.
Don't let the door slam on your dumb okole on the way out...........nobody's gonna miss you, because you haven't added anything to the conversation....................you must be studying your Boy Barry pretty well, since he never makes anything better either.
Oh........the only mirror that you're probably using is right under your nose,with a razor blade laying next to some white residue, and a rolled up dollar-bill nearby...............unless you're getting your Boy Barry's 'stash', in which case you might have a C-note rolled up.........that was confiscated from ME, since I actually pay taxes!!!
I suppose I am "meat"?
Submitted by Clevenative on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:06am.
Let me guess... "Meat" is some old liberal poster who played the thorn in your side around here for a while - and so now I must be him?
Can you tell I've been around the block enough posting on conservative websites to know and understand exactly what to expect? It's that paranoia - conspiracy theory - thing at work. Conservatives are so predictable really - Way too many boogeymen under their beds.
For the record, I never posted here as anyone other than "Clevenative" - and I may or may not be the same "Clevenative" you may have seen posting elsewhere on the web. It's a BIG web, in case you weren't aware, and nicknames don't require a long-form birth certificate. LOL
Time to just make crap up.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:17am.
Cleventine: ...who played the thorn in your side around here for a while....
Yes. All 6 posts and we iz now so thorny. Ouch. Meanwhile, I have 44 pages of posts in one year. Wow. Perspective. I iz missing it.
Wait. That cannot be it.
Crash" Davis, a veteran of 12 years in the minor leagues, is sent down to the single-A (advanced) Bulls for a specific purpose: to educate hotshot rookie pitcher Ebby LaLoosh (Robbins, playing a character loosely based on Steve Dalkowski)[1][2] about being a major-league talent, and to control Ebby's haphazard pitching. Crash immediately begins calling Ebby by the degrading nickname of "Meat", and they get off to a rocky start.
Hmmmm. A degrading nickname. Hmmmm. Looks like you missed it Meat.
So that makes your batting average .0000003. Good job Meat.
Don't flatter youself,
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:13am.
Don't flatter youself, Cleventine............you're 'meat' because you're a prick............and a very precidictable prick, and pretty damn sanctemonious for a guy who can't come up with much more than your weak-ass posts. Try writing something that will expand the conversation and enhance the subject matter, instead of harping on your paranoia/conspiricy theory BS.................you're displaying a helluva lot more of those characteristics than anybody around here.
killa---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:30am.
two to center mass and a head tap !
Nice work.
MD
Sorry I'm not up on conservative buzz words or "humor"
Submitted by Clevenative on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:11am.
Never been called "meat" before - must be a character from a Rambo movie or something?
Weak-ass posts? Why do you have such a hard time admitting what you are? What is it about conservatives that their always in denial or pretending to be something they're not? I'll at least admit to having some of the less-favorable traits of a liberal. Like Popeye says, "I amz what I amz".
Do a little research - read some books written by someone other than a fellow wingnut - and you might learn something. There have been numerous studies that show paranoia, fear of the unknown, are all traits of a conservative mind. It's locked in you as well as your eye color.
Start here... Differences between conservative and liberal brain - or here - Liberal vs. Conservative: Does the Difference Lie in the Brain? - or here - Study: Conservatives have larger ‘fear center’ in brain
You may not see your propensity toward paranoia and "boogeymen" because you don't see outside that box. Whether it's a simple unwillingness or a genetic inability - the fact is conservatives, by both definition and nature, have blueprint traits. They are also closed minded and unwilling to upset the apple cart. It's why you poked such fun at the "Change" slogan in the Obama 2008 campaign - or Sister Sarah's "How's that hopey-changey thing goin'?" resounded with such affirmation in conservative circles.
There are grey areas everywhere, but as a general rule that is just the way it is. It's why we often accuse each other about living in different worlds or different realities - because they are just that. It's basically true - What is "normal" for you is not "normal" for everyone. That's the biggest "fact of life" conservatives have such a hard time understanding. Their (Tea Party) over-reach and misread of the 2010 elections are a perfect example. The Tea Party (mostly all conservatives) truly believed that they represented the "will of the people" or that "most Americans" think like they do - or that election 2010 was a "mandate" for "full steam ahead" Tea Party extremism. Nothing could be further from the truth - and they are having to face that sad reality today.
Republicans could learn a lot about themselves if they just learned to understand their own nature - and embraced science and logic over "believes" and "traditions". Our value systems are definitely not the same, and we need to stop the extremism and the power-grabbing divide and conquer games or the gap will never be bridged again.
Pegged.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:19am.
Republicans could learn a lot about themselves...
Or trolls could knock it off with the caricature of Republicans but yeah, then they would not be trolls, now would they? And Clementine would have zero reason to exist.
caricature: 1.a picture, description, etc., ludicrously exaggerating the peculiarities or defects of persons or things: His caricature of the mayor in this morning's paper is the best he's ever drawn.
clementine: A clementine is the smallest of the mandarin oranges, or Citrus reticulata. The fruit is a slightly flattened sphere, about 2 inches (5 cm) in diameter. The glossy, deep orange peel is loose on the fruit, making it exceptionally easy to peel.
Hey Clementine, why did you name yourself after a fruit?
Especially since
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 11:06am.
Satsumas are the best
Clevenative, Wow, we have an
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:55am.
Clevenative,
Wow, we have an idiot alert. A full of himself, pompous moron who easily swallows anything that agrees with his Liberal beliefs that Republicans and Conservatives are subhumans.
Hey, Clevenative, where should my wife, children and I go to be gased?
WOW!
I have seen stupid Liberals post on NB, but you Clevenative are beyond help.
Talk about a Liberal who swallows and believes every single anti-Conservative stereotype that the Left wing spews out!
Clevenative is nothing, but your typical, run of the mill can't think on his own Obamabot who honestly believes that Republicans and Conservatives do not embrace science and logic. HAHAHAHA!!! Talk about a tool who lives in a bubble!
You are certainly an easily manipulated tool for the Left.
My goodness, is this the best that the Liberals have to offer? Are you honestly the best that LIberals can dish out? Stereotypes, bigotry and plain and simple Liberal stupidity?
My goodness. I think the smelly, full of black helicopter conspiracy theory OWS group is missing the village idiot. He is here and calls himself Clevenative.
You are soon to be banned. No doubt you will believe it is because of your "great" "debating" skills and no one was able to take you on and destroy your "amazing" "logic".
We really need a better class of idiots here on NB, Clevenative gives idiots a really bad name.
Do you really want to go down that road Clevie?
Submitted by drsamherman on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:30am.
Would you like to discuss the recanted findings of the Dutch social psychologist who recently admitted he faked his data regarding conservative behavior? Or perhaps you would like to discuss the faulty methods and agenda-driven, cooked books that were found with other studies that you quote. Or perhaps you simply want an argument with me as a trained neurologist and psychiatrist in neuroscience and how misused and misunderstood it is by non-scientists? Or perhaps you came here under the impression that we were unprepared intellectually to point out that your arguments are nonsense?
By all means do go down that road. Nothing more I like than discussing neuroscience and misapplication of medical and diagnostic principles with the untrained.
Drsamherman, Sadly and
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:37am.
Drsamherman,
Sadly and predictably, Clevenative is not here to debate anyone. He is here to hear the sound of his own voice and then tell himself, you see, I am right.
Just your typical, ignorant, believe anything that supports his fears, his radical beliefs Liberal.
By tomorrow he will be banned. Of course he will blame his banning on his "excellent" debating skills that us "poor" Conservatives, who you know do not believe in science, were not able to match. :-)
Incredible how easy the Left can manipulate weak minded individuals like Clevenative. The funny thing is that I took the time to read his link to the Times and at the end of the article is clearly says that the scientist warns that no one should take it as fact. That many more studies are needed.
But heck, it confirms the fears, stereotypes and the "fact" that we "poor" Conservatives are subhumans as Liberals have always claimed.
Incredible that such level of stupidity exists in this world.
Isn't it, though?
Submitted by drsamherman on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:43am.
You might have noticed that I take umbrage and assume attack posture immediately when I see a misapplication of medical and scientific purposes to support the kind of nonsense that liberals often push as "scientific". The vast majority of these studies are the worst forms of junk science and rely on methodology that could not make it past the rigors of the lowest tier of medical literature. They usually emanate from psychology, sociology or anthropology departments filled to the rafters with leftwing lunatic faculty out to use any scintilla of data, whether replicable or not, to throw at conservatives in some vain effort to discredit us. You should see some of the garbage I have turned down as the medical practitioner/monitor and voting member of various Institutional Review Boards (IRBs for short) required for review of research protocols involving human subjects. The social science whackademics believe in their garbage, but when you point out to them that it has no basis in clinical practice, they pout and hiss vague threats back. I guess it is one of the privileges of having some kind of review power over this useless waste of research resources.
drsamherman, But that
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:53am.
drsamherman,
But that is just it. That you are a medical doctor in a position of power is an anomaly according to Liberals. It can't be, according to them. Conservatives do not believe in science! So many Liberals have repeated this to themselves that they honestly believe it. They do not realize that it is countless of Liberals in academia who have thrown away all of science in order to have science meet their bigotry and beliefs.
Yes, I have heard from others, including honest Liberals, that there are too many junk science studies out there which the Liberal media loves to quickly print because it helps their narrative about Conservatives and Liberals. They do not bother to look into the data or the political leaning of the so called scientist who led the study.
Sadly, academia is full of Left wing wackos who help individuals like Clevenative ravel in their own fears about Conservatives. The saddest part of all is that Clevenative believes what he wrote about Conservatives.
I had a boss who also spewed this kind of garbage. I got tired of her stupidity and smugness, thus I invited her to a family and friend gathering. It was full of Conservative engineers, biologists, physicists, archeologists, medical doctors, etc, etc, etc. From that day on she stopped telling me how Conservatives do not believe in science or logic. She lived in a bubble and had never bothered to meet scientists who are Conservatives.
Maybe Clevie has a point
Submitted by ant on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:52am.
There does seem to be a certain 'fearlessness' from the left side. They spend our money recklessly, seem to have no worry of economic collapse (they can even golf and vacation with over 14 million un-employed). They have no fear of insulting the voter, so, for some reason, seem to have no fear of losing re-election( wonder why that would be?). No fear of being punished or caught lying, stealing, cheating. So, could be the left is more fearless, or maybe a better term would be foolish or perhaps 'secure' in their safe system of defenses created by the media, cronyism, education system, atheism and voter fraud, not to mention idealogical rigidness and a laser focus on 'transforming' their hateful Country.
drsam, notice the cloud of smoke where Clevenative was standing?
Submitted by Phryj1 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:06am.
Since he realized his whole 'conservative brain' argument was about to be thoroughly and utterly demolished by yourself, he quickly made himself scarce.
I love how the libtrolls will claim liberalism has the monopoly on 'science and logic' and try to back it up with horribly flawed and laughably bad studies. Makes it all the more satisfying watching them invariably flee in terror when an actual expert shows up to call them on it.
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
Monologuing!
Submitted by kata on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:42am.
I ♥ trolls who monologue.
WOW! I really got some folks panties in a knot here didn't I?
Submitted by Clevenative on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:27am.
FYI. I have plenty of conservative friends and family. To suggest that I want to see them all gassed or think of them as defective human beings is laughable. Misguided and unfortunate – maybe, but I respect their rights to their opinions or beliefs and love them as much as anyone else. You people take things way too personal.
I simply provided numerous studies that have shown there are identifiable traits of the conservative and liberal mind. Believe them or not – or take them as smears – I don’t really give a shit. It’s like trying to talk to an alcoholic about their problem. There is really nothing you can do about until they come outside of the shell of denial they’ve created and realize there is a problem.
I’m arguing with the same people who told me for years that the earth was not warming and that it was all a hoax perpetrated by Al Gore. These same people insisted there were 10s of thousands of “scientists” who believed what they “believed”. You people are so badly mislead by corporate media and the 1%ers of the world who control your minds and fund your “think tanks” and political campaigns that it’s almost impossible to breathe in your polluted waters. These are the same people who claim to use “non-partisan” studies from Big-Oil funded research centers like Heritage Foundation or the Koch Brothers Americans for Prosperity to back up their claims. If you people are really as naïve as it sometimes seems, or unaware of the extent of the propaganda you absorb like a released squeezed sponge each day, I feel sorry for you.
Then you accuse me - or “liberals” of being brainwashed. The charges and name-calling choices are the same everywhere. You frickin’ people are like parrots.
Most of you are both anti-logic and anti-science. Many are still arguing about and “don’t believe in” evolution - and some still deny climate change is occurring as a result of increased Co2 levels since the industrial revolution – or that “God will take care of the planet” and (perhaps?) replenish the finite resources that “He left for us” to rape and pillage as we see fit. When you are dealing with people who put religious belief over science, there is no way to win the argument. So hey – you got me I guess. All I can do is just shake my head and walk away. But it works out perfect for you doesn’t it – since you always have the right answer (pun intended).
I should be surprised or even “offended” at any of the name-calling here? I bask in it. It brings a smile to my face – the predictability of it all – and the predictability of the repetition of the same talking points that you people have been taught or use against liberals in every right wing handbook ever created. I don’t think I am brilliant or above anyone – I’m just a wise old man (if 60 is old) and well-learned in the ways of the world and the tactics of the right. (They haven’t changed much since even before I was born) I may not have the degree, but I have spent more time studying American history and politics over the past dozen years than most any political major.
If I am banned from posting here it will be because of the same reason any liberal is banned from any wingnut blog or website. “The “majority” doesn’t like what they hear - I don’t fit the narrative – I’m not playing along with the right wing propaganda machine. So be it. There’s plenty of seas to fish and fun to be had elsewhere. And I will still continue to use this RSS newsfeed on my website. It makes the best conversation starter as a “poster boy” for the latest Republican talking points of the day – and the usual ridiculous whining nitpicking nature of such. But hey, it’s the liberals who are always “playing the victim”, right?
Biggest pile of horse manure
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 5:09am.
Biggest pile of horse manure since the last post you made here,meat..............and you're right - you aren't BRILLIANT - by a long shot...........but you are arrogant and sanctemonious,without any back-up.
Oh yeah............aside from the 'hope and change'..........how's that 'global warming' working out for ya, meat???
Nice whine, need some cheese?
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 10:50am.
Name-calling? Seriously. I've seen oodles of "you people", "wing nuts", "tea-baggers", "parrots" in your posts....and you whine about name-calling! Pot meet kettle.
Your cites have been shredded to bits....I'm surprised you don't quote your own blog in support of your positions. You've yet to defend any post which destroys your prior post. All in all, your time spent here has been nothing short of liberal hypocrisy on display, full of talking points, worn out and disproved here a thousand times before. IOW, all hair, no forehead. You = FAIL.
We need a better class of troll, here. ©
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
How convenient and how borderline for you.
Submitted by drsamherman on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 11:20am.
You cite some studies (Wikipedia? Badly done brain imaging?) then you conveniently leave. You display the standard modus operandi of the American leftist, that is a borderline cluster B pathology (look that up on wikipedia) and then run away crying about those mean conservatives who are more than willing to point out the holes in arguments. Don't defend, just keep yelling that we don't understand science (at least as YOU understand it) and throw around terms such as "typical conservative", etc., ad nauseam.
On whole, you are a portrait of a very badly educated human being. You are taking such drivel as those studies for granted, without bothering to look where the studies themselves are contradictory or simply badly constructed. The conservative-as-dummie meme has been done to death and there is no "scientific" consensus about it, except among those liberals who know nothing of science beyond yelling the term at every conservative they meet. And the pathetic "I know conservatives" is as bad as a 1950s cocktail party liberalism saying "some of my best friends are [fill in the blank minority]".
The script for your nonsense was written the day you might have entered some overpriced college and majored in some whackademic department with the term "studies" at the end.
Thanks for providing comedic relief. Of course, we were not laughing WITH you, we were laughing AT you.
I've never even seen a Rambo
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:00am.
I've never even seen a Rambo movie, so that excuse won't work for you, meat.
I'm not in denial of a damn thing!! I'm a hard-line conservative, freedom-fighter, patriot, believer in TRUE American values, self-employed, property-owner, gun-owner, and firm believer in responsibility, reliability, dependablity, honor, and truthfullness. I don't impose my beliefs on anybody else.........but if they want to try and impose them on me...........KABOOM!!! And don't give me any of your self-perpetuating 'conservative' beliefs, asshole...............I probably know more libs that you do - jeez, I live in Hawaii, which is also known at the People's Republic of Hawaii. And I can tell you that the whacky libs that I know do NOT want to discuss these issues with me..........because they get NOWHERE!!! They end up saying 'whatever'.........or 'I don't want to talk about it'!!! Why?? Take a guess, meat..............
What IS my eye color, asshole?? What the hell are you talking about?? I know MORE peopel of MORE races, creeds, religions, sexual genders, and anything else than you'll every encounter!!! I can't tell if you're farting our spewing this stupid crap from your idiotic mouth.
Hey, meat..........how IS that 'hope and change' working out for you, anyway?? You have yet to tell me what the hell you do for a living and a life. You have yet to tell me what your vision for America is. All you do is insult people here, and skate around any definitive answers. I can tell you EXACTLY where I'm coming from ..................and I can tell you that you aren't even in my ballpark.
Yeah, the 'teabaggers' (as you like to refer to them as............I'm sure you've engaged in this activity, right??) were just some blip on the screen in the 2010 election.........and actually, YOUR people - such as Ms. Botox, Harry the Weasel, Baraby Frump, and the rest of these commie/elitist/big government creeps are really the 'right' people to lead our country over the cliff of economic despair, military weakness, moral decay, and degradation in the eyes of the rest of the world. But I'm sure that is what you want, right?? America is an EVIL place, right meat??? So, I ask you again............what the hell do YOU do??
Can you refute ANYTHING that I have said, asshole?? Where are YOU coming from?? You're lucky my father is dead, because if he met a queebie-assed prick like you - it would be toilet time - and you'd be flushed. What the hell have YOU done to make this country a better place?? Tell me ONE godd**m thing, meat!!! Just one!!!
Yeah..........I'm a conservative..........and f**king proud of it. Let me ask you a very simple question - although you might be too 'nuanced' to answer it. Would you want to go down a dark alley with me.............or would I want to go down a dark alley with you??? ANY kind of dark alley.................
I could throw your ass further than I could EVER trust you or depend on you...............but I might be able to save your ass.........
although that would depend on my mood.
Killa, You used facts and
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:11am.
Killa,
You used facts and research to refute his wacky and radical Left wing propaganda. We all know that when faced with facts Left wingers, Liberals will attack with character assasination since they can't refute the facts.
Don't waste your passion, anger and words on an individual who believes that us Conservatives are subhumans. He is the worst that Liberalism has to offer. He is what Liberals become when they honestly believe their propaganda. Tools, robots, mindless windbags for the Left who are full of hate for the Right.
I have no doubt that NB will ban him. He has not attempted to debate anyone. All he has done is thrown out hate, insult after insult and poor and unequivocal lies and stereotypes.
Ahh, don't worry,
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:47am.
Ahh, don't worry, Lib............I know a LOT of people like this over here - they're REALLY disappointed and frustrated about their lot in life, and their unhappy self-worth, and the fact that they got scammed by Boy Barry and the whole liberal/commie agenda, and now they are finally realizing it. As Bob Dylan said - 'how does it FEEEEEEEEL'????? I'd like to laugh, but I"m in the same town of Obamaville that they are, and it's partially THEIR DAMN FAULT!!!
But I"m an optimistic guy with a sense of humor and good cheer............although it's hard to stay that way these days.
I just don't suffer these delusional assholes very well........these guys would be 'hopeless' in the real world..........and I'd be happy to show them the 'real' world - if they had the guts and the balls to actually want to find out about it!!!
killa, I feel your pain...
Submitted by upcountrywater on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:22pm.
And have same interaction with unionized and non union libs... here on Maui.
Yea sure he's a land owner.... time share maybe.
You Didn't Build That.
Now "KILLA" is giving me personal threats
Submitted by Clevenative on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:50am.
I knew it would come to this. The gun-toting "patriot" is telling me he wants to kick my ass because I don't buy into his world vision. BTW "killa", I'm a gun-owning tax-paying land-owner just like you - and I worked hard all my life as a proud union member to get what I have. Though I (like many hard-working Americans) lost a good portion of a planned pension thanks to Republican legislation allowing corporations to play with my money to cover their losses or pay CEO bonuses before their workers' obligations.
So how big is your gun? LOL
You just turned yourself into a stereotypical poster-boy of right wing hate and violence. I'll have to point my friends at Daily Kos to this thread - it's a classic.
psyKOS - wretched hive of dumb and morony.
Submitted by Phryj1 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 4:53am.
Go back there and enjoy your hate-filled leftist wingnut ego-stroking circle j*rk.
We've seen how mentally diseased and deranged those sick, raging freaks are. It's how most of us managed to peg you as one of Markos' braindead lotion boys so quickly.
Kos stands as a testament to how truly screwed up proggies really are.
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
You said it all when you
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 4:57am.
You said it all when you admitted to be a union member, meat............end of story.........you're owned - lock, stock, and barrel. And don't gripe to me about your godd**n pension...........you're a friggin' employee...........you've never been on MY end of things, so you are clueless about what it takes to pay your dumb ass............especially with the union skimming your employer AND you.
Point this out to your friends at the Kos................they're as clueless as you are. As for 'hate'.........maybe you outta go re-read some of your own posts.
Now get outta my face............go back to Kos...................you're probably some kind of legend over there. You're outta your league here.
Oh, and that wasn't a 'threat',you friggin' pansy..........it was a statement of fact. I know people like you..........useless and worthess. Tell me what you do, union boy.................what union??? Who pays them?? What company are they skimming from?? How much do they skim from you?? How much do they kick back to the Democrats?? Why should somebody else pay your pension?? Why do you think somebody else should be covering your lame ass???
Sky
Submitted by rusino on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:01pm.
What color is the sky in your world?
You imply that Liberals use science and logic! The way I see it liberals have an overactive emotional adolescent view of the world.
Clevenative, Really?!
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:06am.
Clevenative,
Really?! WOW
You do know that once you've heard one Liberal rant and rave, stereotype, act closed minded and lie you've talked to all Liberals, right?
No matter the Liberal website, Liberal friend, Liberal politician that I read, debate or listen to you all sound the same. Poorly informed, full of false anti-conservative stereotypes and in desperate need of the ability to not be Obamabots.
Liberals are quite predictable, Clevenative. But keep on believing that you are the greatest thing since sliced bread. you are displaying all the typical abnormal human behaviors found in all Liberals.
You are not here to debate, you are here to prove to yourself that somehow you are superior to what you consider subhumans, Conservatives and Republicans.
Really troll
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 11:56pm.
I was not going to jump in on this but.............................alas.
You're all just here to jump on the bandwagon and wring your wrists to a simultaneous bashing of all things not like you.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/comment/reply/51715/1594111#ixzz1deEUGB8m
Really? Really? So explain to me your hypocrisy when you are in the safety net of HuffPo,DailyKos, etc. your posts there that are fair and balanced and don`t 'bash things not like you'.
hear what the outside world really thinks of you every once in a while.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/comment/reply/51715/1594111#ixzz1deFSvrNx
Again Really?
YOU infer the word 'you' again? In reference to what?
The outside world thinks of 'US'.
All you have is opinions and no facts, you are an idiot.
Go back to HuffPo and wallow in your idiocy.
Prisondog...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:07am.
Stick to dKos for your website bashing. HuffPo's comments are completely moderated, there are numerous conservatives who post regularly there and are granted very wide latitude in expressing their opinions and criticisms as long as nobody from either side becomes excessively abusive.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:12am.
Please please don`t insult your own intelligence. Also you are defending a fellow 'Lib' so i understand. But do NOT insult your own intelligence.
Prisondog...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:56am.
I'm just telling you the facts. I'm insulting no one's intelligence, and that includes mine and yours.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:02am.
Facts??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Ok you say that HuffPo is not liberal????????????????
Really?
Conservatives may chat on there but your assertion that it is fair and balanced is false, and you know it.
My bedtime
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:03am.
cya later
cya, Prisondog...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:12am.
I never claimed HuffPo wasn't a predominantly lib/progressive website.
Later,
Jer
Prisondog...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:09am.
I was trying to post an addendum to my comment which stated I was not defending any fellow lib on this thread, but if by "fellow lib" you meant HuffPo, then, yes, I was defending that website regarding the mischaracterization of its comment policy.
Jer
Jer, I have been on the
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:25am.
Jer,
I have been on the Huffington Post. I have posted there. I am sorry, but very decent and respectful posts of mine as well as other Conservatives have either been deleted or not posted for no reason at all.
The Huffington Post is an ultra-Liberal website which has a very hard time with Conservative posters who go against it. Much like the DailyKos, Thinkprogress.org and the other crazy and ultra-liberal websites.
Liberallies...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:55am.
When did that occur and what did you attempt to post? I will happily provide you with examples of what long-time HuffPo conservative commenters have posted without deletion or sanction, many of which--although not vulgar--are brutally critical of Obama and would likely result in a lib poster here being banned if he or she posted similar remarks about Bush or any prominent Republican.
There is no way a "very decent and very respectful" post by a conservative would be disallowed by the HuffPo moderators.
Jer
Jer, It was during the 2010
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:00am.
Jer,
It was during the 2010 elections. I attempted to talk to another poster, a Liberal, about what Hope and Changed ment. We went back and forth for about 15 mintues when all of a suddent, all of my posts were deleted and anything I attempted to post, was not being posted.
I have seen you before be an avid defender of the Huffington Post, unsure why, but I can assure you that my posts, while strong and passioante, were far from insulting or mean.
I know that Huffington Post became better policed after Bill O'REilly pointed out their hypocrisy of tolerance and hate that is and was spewed by their Liberal posters, but much like Thinkprogress.or, DailyKos and other ultra-liberal websites, not all posters are treated equal. Funny that that is what Liberals always claim to want, demand and say how it should be. I guess like everything else, easier said than done.
I read the Huffington Post once a day now, but I do not attempt to post since I believe it is a complete and utter waste of my time.
Alright, Liberallies...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:23am.
Apparently I need to provide you with a sampling of some comments posted by HuffPo conservatives. I'll get on it tomorrow. Have a good evening/night.
Later,
Jer
Here are some examples which I had printed out several
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 4:33am.
months ago--I'm surprised I still had this collection--from a HuffPo member whose screen name is/was pwilli1465. He apparently finally got the axe because his profile is no longer available--but not before he posted over 200 comments which the moderators allowed, such as the following "very decent and very respectful" gems:
8/27/2011 at 20:35:58 in Politics
"1000 Hurricane Irenes can't possibly cause as much damage as one Barack."
@13:02:38
"Sure, we're being invaded by aliens. Just look at the White House and Congress."
8/24/2011 at 21:45:57
"Can't argue with stupid, so I won't try. 2012 is on the horizon. Then you could have a good cry."
8/23/2011 at 21:32:58
"...Obama is buying votes by keeping black America dependent on the Government. Case closed."
8/11/2011 at 15:41:44
"The man [Obama] is a phony. If you're too stupid to realize that, then vote for the Marxist again next year." [pwilli's comment was fanned and faved by bredlaum]
@ 15:48:40
"rcarol, this was a photo-op, pure and simple. He can't win with this bullsh*t photo-op and he sure won't win in 2012. This fool is an opportunist and is always in campaign mode. He takes too many vacations but he'll have a long vacation after Nov. 2012."
8/30/2011 at 13:45:28
"I have a great idea...Let's make it a two-fer, deport Uncle Omar and his nephew Barack. Both are criminals, in a sense, Uncle Omar for being here illegally and nephew Barack for the destruction of America...."
7/26/2011
"Itzfatcat, great post. I'm sure you've ruffled a lot of lib feathers, but who cares?"
7/26/2011 at 17:45:22
Now, now, you'd better be careful what you post. We can't have any common sense in these posts. Might make the libs angry. Anyway, fanned and faved.
7/27/2011 at 20:02:39
"More than you did. You can bow at the altar of Obama until Nov. 2012. You ultra-libs are pitiful.
7/28/2011
"Edith, you are 100% correct. Not like the dolt in the White House now."
7/28/2011 at 16:52:23
Phonies, like Obama's wife?
Well, Liberallies, that should give you a sense of the type of comments from a conservative poster which have been allowed on the threads at HuffPo. How did those make it while yours didn't?
Jer
Wow, Jer............that all
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 5:01am.
Wow, Jer............that all looks pretty truthful to me............
I'm sure it does, killa....
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 5:33am.
It's the same stuff that's posted here dozens of times every day. But HuffPo is a lib/progressive site. And NewsBusters is a conservative site.
Can you imagine what would happen if I posted at this website that George Bush is a "criminal", a "fool", a "dolt" and a "Nazi" who "buys votes"; an "opportunist" who poses for "bullsh*t photo-ops" and should be "deported". Plus, his wife, Laura, is a "phony".
And then I raved about Cleve's posts and told him "well, you probably ruffled a lot of conservative feathers, but who cares". "These ultra-conservatives are pitiful."
I would be run out of here before you could take a second gulp of your black cherry/vodka.
That guy had well over 200 comments like that posted at HuffPO over the course of at least six months. You would be hard-pressed to convince me NB is more tolerant.
Jer
Well, that was all pretty
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 5:41am.
Well, that was all pretty standard stuff for Bush, wasn't it?? Between the internet, the blogs, the movies, the MSM, and the bumper stickers??? I don't think you'd be run out of here, because you usually comport yourself in a respectable and reputable manner - whether people agree with you or not. As for Cleventine, and some of these other dopes who have showed up around here.........not so.
Let's just put the shoe on the opposite foot. Do you think that I - the dumb-ass blue-collar country-boy Killa - would go onto the KOS, or Hufy-Puffy, or some other lib zone............and come on like a load of coal, telling them what idiots they were, and insulting them and disrespecting them and acting like I was some kind of know-it-all.........................how long do you think I would last??? But maybe if I went on these places with some ideas and some thoughts and some back-and-forth conversation, without acting like they were a bunch of delusional cretins.............maybe I could have some sort of 'engagement'??? I don't know - I do know a lot of libs...........they are pretty stuck in their mindsets, so maybe I wouldn't get too far. But if I was acting like an asshole, and got treated like an asshole.............I wouldn't be too blind to not be able to see, you know???
That's my whole take on the deal...............you come around here - you act like a man and show a little respect............
otherwise, as Tom Petty (a notorious lib, expect when he's making millions - I know his road manager) says - 'don't come around here no more'..............
It's rare that I even briefly skim dKos, killa, but I would
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 5:51am.
imagine you would get booted pretty quickly if you acted as you describe.
But, back to the original issue. Liberallies says his "very respectful and very decent comments" were disallowed at HuffPo. That's very hard for me to believe given the nature and content of the examples I provided which were accepted and posted at HuffPo.
Jer
Jer---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 5:45am.
Your continuing commentary on how a person would be banned from NewsBusters for bad mouthing Bush or some such makes it seem as though you seek to claim victim status for liberals.
At the very least you exaggerate, and very often you slide right into hyperbole without missing a beat.
Though libs may well get savaged here on occasion, and deservedly so, NewsBusters is not nearly the liberal death trap you make it out to be.
MD
.
Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 6:07am.
Please don't interpret this as playing the seniority card, because that is definitely not my intention. But, having been around for nearly 4 1/2 years, I've witnessed quite a few evictions--a few conservatives, but the vast majority, unsurprisingly, libs. Many, probably most, deserved it. But some I'm still baffled about. Just to name one at random: Professor Truth was aggressive--the "in your face" type--but he wasn't a troll and he wasn't abusive, or to put it differently, he was the target of far more abuse than he dished out. And the back and forth was interesting, entertaining, and informative. I have no idea why he was banned.
Anyway, I won't defend the dKos-type lib websites. But, I'll continue to defend HuffPo, at least with respect to its comment policy.
Jer
A Democrat who leans liberal, Jer,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 7:53pm.
that has survived posting on NB's as long as you have, has done well.
I would point out though, that MY time here leads me to believe that NB's might just be a conservative site.
You might consider factoring that informational nugget into your equation regarding libs getting the heave-ho in what you apparently feel are disproportionate numbers.
That said, it would appear to me that those who have engendered an "ACCESS DENIED" peekaboo on their computer screen have richly deserved same for being, regardless of subject matter, an ass, a chowderhead, a munchkin, and/or a putz.
MD
Jer, Are you honestly
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 11/15/2011 - 9:33pm.
Jer,
Are you honestly comparing the posts you cut and pasted from a Conservative posting in the Huffington Post to calling Bush, Republicans, Conservative Nazis and the other countless of degrading names that Liberals, Left wingers call Righties? Just look at Clevenative name calling on this forum. But if you believe it is comparable, that is on you. I see zero comparision.
it is dumb to call Obama an alien, he is not. But hardly equal to calling Bush a Nazi, a monkey, etc.
And yes, I believe Newsbusters is quite tolerant. You may want to go back to the fight Wrathful Brunette and I got into a few months back. It is still up, unedited, etc.
There are countless of posts from Liberals who say much worst about Newsbuster members, Republicans and Conservatives and they have not been banned, Clevenative on this forum comes to mind!
Honestly Jer, and I do not mean any disrespect by this, it doesn't matter if you believe me or not. The fact is that the Huffington Post is no different than the DailyKooKoos, DumbcraticUnderpants, Can'Thinkprogress and the rest of the other intolerant, radical Left wing wacky websites. The vast majority of the posters in the Huffington Post are as full of hate, are as poorly informed, are as tools of the Left as the aformentioned radical Left wing websites.
The Left wing writers/authors, contributors to the Huffington Post are for the most part radical Liberal wackos. And Ms. Arianna Huffington is an incredibly wacky, crazed out lady who sold her soul for profit and attention. Amazing that the Left embraces her and countless other individuals who love to make millions in profits through the free market and capitalism and then turn around and tell the mindless, poorly informed Liberal tools that the free market and capitalism are evil. I have never understood how there are countless of human beings, 99% of Liberals, who fall for the hypocrisy that radical Left wing millionares sell to them.
But if you feel that you must defend the Huffington Post, Jer, go at it. Do you own AOL stocks or something? An honest question, why do you feel the need to defend the Huffington Post? Are you related to Arianna or something?
Liberallies...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 11/15/2011 - 10:01pm.
At one time--up until a couple of years ago--I was a defender of dKos and a critic of HuffPo. But, I became more and more disgusted by Markos and his website, and HuffPo initiated full moderation of its comments so that the really abusive stuff and vulgarity was no longer tolerated, and the site also began offering a bit more balance by having conservatives/Republicans post guest commentaries [albeit retaining its decidedly lib/progressive slant].
Now, are you suggesting that lib posters here have been allowed to make comments of the following type without repercussions? [From my earlier post on this thread]:
"...Can you imagine what would happen if I posted at this website that George Bush is a "criminal", a "fool", a "dolt" and a "Nazi" who "buys votes"; an "opportunist" who poses for "bullsh*t photo-ops" and should be "deported". Plus, his wife, Laura, is a "phony".
And then I raved about Cleve's posts and told him "well, you probably ruffled a lot of conservative feathers, but who cares". "These ultra-conservatives are pitiful."
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/11/13/newt-gingrich-accu...
If so, I've missed them.
Finally, Liberallies...I know you touched on it before, but do you recall exactly what you attempted to post at HuffPo which was disallowed? Were you banned, or was it just a deletion of one or more comments. It they were respectful comments, I really can't understand why they were removed or rejected out of hand.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:04am.
You can not walk this back. You fell in it.
Really? just Really?
HuffPo not liberal?
Prisondog...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:15am.
Please point out where I "fell in it" by allegedly stating that HIuffPo wasn't liberal. After you fail in that endeavor, I invite you to use the Search function and type "Jer" and "HuffPo" in as keywords. I bet you there are close to a dozen comments of mine acknowledging HuffPo's liberal/progressive slant. And that's just since the site redesign.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:35am.
You ask me to do the work? Look you failed. Please tell your "clients' as a lawyer that you think a 'Lib' website is not "lib"
That's how this website posting deal works, Prisondog..
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:51am.
You make the accusation. You back it up.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:57am.
No real answer?
Sure...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:10am.
The one to which you just responded. If you can't support your claim just admit it and move on. If you think you can support it, by all means, please proceed.
Jer
HuffPo
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:17am.
is a conservative site. HuffPo Loves Reagan. HuffPo likes the TEA Party. HuffPo loves less government.
Bedtime
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:59am.
now. Will see you later.
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:16am.
have long read here before posting. And you have long been the 'Token' Lib with some cred. You however IMO take away from your cred with your last statement. I have respected some of your posts, but really?
You go there?
Really?
Prisondog...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:29am.
I'm referring to the NB site redesign which resulted in the obliteration of years of comments by long-time NewsBusters members.
Now, as far as my going to HuffPo [is that what you object to?], the vast majority of my time is spent here at NB. But, yes, I frequently browse HuffPo. Is that a problem? If so, what sites am I permitted to visit in order to regain your respect?
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:39am.
says "Now, as far as my going to HuffPo [is that what you object to?],
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/comment/reply/51715/1594194#ixzz1devxXJDD
I do not object to any thing you do.
What i do object to is the false claim that HuffPo is not liberal.
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:54am.
you are wrong and you know it. Yet you are trying to defend your position.
HuffPo is not a lib site!!!!!
Conservs post on there.
Aww look, the troll is trying
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:05am.
Aww look, the troll is trying to ratchet up the violence and get banned after activating its account after close to 4 years.
Don't you want to stay around and try to match that lump of cement that is between your ears against us?
Is this Debbie Downer aka Debbie Wheresmybrain Schultz posting? Do we need to let you do a store run to get some mayo for your hair?
Clevenative, that's not how you use a mirror, hypocrite.
Submitted by Phryj1 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:54am.
Mirrors are so people can see themselves and fix their own flaws. If you were using that mirror correctly, you'd see that you and your ilk do EXACTLY what your accusing us of.
Your hypocrisy is staggering.
Or maybe you have been looking in that mirror the whole time and you're just too dumb to realize you're barking at your own reflection.
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
Phryj1---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:03am.
You nailed Clevenative and his tribe perfectly with just four sentences.
Good on Ya.
MD
Matthew..
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:15am.
his tribe? Is that something like his ilk?
:-) :-) :-)
Jer
Thanks MD
Submitted by Phryj1 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:34am.
.
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
Phryj1 - check my post on how
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:04am.
Phryj1 - check my post on how he uses his mirror.............that's all you need to know.
Nailed it, killa,
Submitted by Phryj1 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:37am.
Clevenative is definitely high on something. Whether it's his own ego or something more illicit remains to be seen.
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
Knock off the tea bagger references you stinking commie puke...
Submitted by Dave. on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:50pm.
...or I'll have you, your thong with the red star, and the communist manifesto tattooed your your back banned from this site, you offensive little commie jerk.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
I asked this dolt on another
Submitted by killa37 on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 11:52pm.
I asked this dolt on another thread - since he's so anti-TEA party (to the point that he calls us 'teabaggers', which means that he probably practices what he preaches) - to give us his view and idea of how this country out to operate, and in what direction it should be going...........but I haven't seen any reply yet.
killa, LOL - he's a KOS puke
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:27am.
All he can do is puke up what his commie handlers tell him to.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
OCCUPY CLEVELAND, BABY!
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:03pm.
Oops, not much going on there, it seems.
Sorry for pointing that out.
Carry on.
Kathleen Parker is Arianna Huffington
Submitted by Alpha Tango on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 7:45pm.
I believe that Kathleen Parker has pulled a complete Arianna Huffington without guidance from Al Franken. I don't think that Eliot Spitzer had anything to do with it because she was already showing signs of liberal stupidity before she was hired by CNN. It must be some kind of progressive mental disease that turns a perfectly normal person into a raving idiot.
It is sad when a reasonable, independently minded woman is lured onto the plantation to carry water for her socialist male masters.
duplicate post deleted
Submitted by Alpha Tango on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 7:46pm.
No comment.
Well that's certainly an
Submitted by balboa on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 7:53pm.
Well that's certainly an attention-grabbing headline. Kudos.
Thomas Jefferson was a Misanthrope
Submitted by Henry Clay on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:09pm.
Really, why all the hate for Madam Parker? America already had a misanthrope President in Thomas Jefferson. Was he not the one who wrote the Adam and Eve theory in response to the violence during the French Revolution? Did he not say that it was better for the whole humanity of mankind to be wiped out and have only one man and one woman left to believe in liberty?
Secondly, I would not call conservatives misanthropes; but is not conservatism based off distrust for mankind. It sounds as if some are being a little too harsh to Madam Parker.
The Sally Hemmings thing has been disproven, genetically
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:17pm.
TJ did not hate humankind, nor black humankind, nor female humankind.
Conservativism has nothing to do with it. Why don't you try defining what conservatism is, rather than what it isn't? (Although I'm sure you'll manage to screw that up, too).
Gee, Henry, you've really fallen down of late.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Simple Minds
Submitted by Henry Clay on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:31pm.
I was not referring to Sally Hemmings. If one would simply take the time to read more than US Weekly you would know what I was talking about.
What is US Weekly?
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:37pm.
Please, Henry.
Your lack of verbosity is scaring us.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Jefferson and Hemings
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:59pm.
Actually, genetic testing using DNA from the descendents of Thomas Jefferson's uncle, Fields Jefferson, showed that, while the child James Callender claimed was Thomas Jefferson's was not, one of Hemings children, Eston Hemings, was fathered by one of 24 Jefferson males who lived in the area at the time. Many people believe that the most likely father is Jefferson's brother, Randolph Jefferson, who was known to spend evenings with some of Jefferson's slaves.
"Many people"?
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:01pm.
Is that like "most people" or "some say"?
Many people as in
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:32pm.
based on my reading I would guess there are as many people who think Randolph was Eston's father as think that Jefferson fathered all of Sally Hemings' children.
Many people as in more than a few.
Quite right, FF
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:04pm.
But the usual casting of aspersions at TJ have yet again, gone awry!
As much as the idiots would like us to believe he was a slave humping misogynist pig...this is just not the case.
Poor stupid trolls.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
The ignorance and denialism is unbelievable
Submitted by Clevenative on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 11:53pm.
(See what I mean about living in an alternative reality?)
I hear no one giving any sources of their information, for "what they heard' or "what they read" - so allow me to suggest...
Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: A Brief Account from "The Jefferson Monticello" at monticello.org. It speaks in depth of the results of the DNA studies.
It doesn't get any more "official" than that.
And Cleventine's link confirms 26CX
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:01am.
Since then, a committee commissioned by the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society, after reviewing essentially the same material, reached different conclusions, namely that Sally Hemings was only a minor figure in Thomas Jefferson's life and that it is very unlikely he fathered any of her children.
Is that what you were going for bigot?
26CX: Many people believe that the most likely father is Jefferson's brother, Randolph Jefferson...
From the bigot's link --
This committee also suggested in its report, issued in April 2001, that Jefferson's younger brother Randolph (1755-1815) was more likely the father of at least some of Sally Hemings' children.
So 26CX was correct and truthful. And you bring a link to prove 26CX was truthful when in fact no one was disputing that 26CX was anything but truthful.
I now have a statement ----
The sky is blue.
We now eagerly await the next post of Cleventine with a link to prove I was indeed telling the truth when I said that.
We Report - You Decide
Submitted by Clevenative on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:27am.
LOL - I provided the link - You did what I would have expected and picked a sentence or two that matched your narrative.
Do you work for Fox News or what?
I'll let readers READ THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT and decide for themselves. I will however cut an paste the CONCLUDING paragraph....
Based on the documentary, scientific, statistical, and oral history evidence, the TJF Research Committee Report on Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings (January 2000) remains the most comprehensive analysis of this historical topic. Ten years later, TJF and most historians now believe that, years after his wife’s death, Thomas Jefferson was the father of the six children of Sally Hemings mentioned in Jefferson's records, including Beverly, Harriet, Madison, and Eston Hemings. To learn more, consult the readings, some with differing points of view, listed here.
Just the notion that some of you find it disgusting or repulsive - or a smear on his legacy - that Jefferson fathered numerous children with a "favorite" slave SPEAKS VOLUMES. As does the fact that you are so vehement in denying even that possibility. That's all I'm saying.
The man was only human - and such occurrences and relationships were not out of the norm in those times.
Be careful, I might start posting research literature from well respected theologians past and present that suggests some of the Apostles, or perhaps even Jesus, were (what we would today call) "gay". But I've had enough hate for one day. LOL.
Typical coward, there, Clevenative;---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:33am.
you can dish it out, but you can't take it.
Phony pos.
MD
You're still only providing one side of the debate
Submitted by 26CX on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:34am.
You can't support a report from the Monticello organization with another report from the Monticello organization and expect to be taken seriously.
I provided additional links in a post below this one. Check them out, please.
And that is what the bigot wants to provide.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:48am.
He would rather take a report from 11 years ago that partly confirms what you have stated rather than anything that would case the report from 11 years ago in a less than stellar light.
From 26CX's link ---
...an examination of this report and the methodology used in preparing it, shows it to be an unprofessional, unscientific accumulation of bias and prejudice, and an offense to the memory of the great man that this foundation was chartered to memorialize.
And Meat's batting average drops to yet another low - .0000002
EPIC FAIL
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:38am.
Based on the documentary, scientific, statistical, and oral history evidence, the TJF Research Committee Report on Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings (January 2000) remains the most comprehensive analysis of this historical topic. Ten years later, TJF and most historians now believe that, years after his wife’s death, Thomas Jefferson was the father of the six children of Sally Hemings mentioned in Jefferson's records, including Beverly, Harriet, Madison, and Eston Hemings. To learn more, consult the readings, some with differing points of view, listed here.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/comment/reply/51715/1594142#ixzz1deQsQtdy
So it says Beleive (yes spelled wrong in your post) some believe.
That seems to be an opinion not fact.
Clevenative
Submitted by 26CX on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:54am.
When you wrote "Just the notion that some of you find it disgusting or repulsive - or a smear on his legacy - that Jefferson fathered numerous children with a "favorite" slave SPEAKS VOLUMES. As does the fact that you are so vehement in denying even that possibility. That's all I'm saying" are you taking the position that even trying to understand the truth about the relationship between Jefferson and Hemings is abhorrent?
What a typically liberal ploy!
Really? A liberal ploy?
Submitted by Clevenative on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:54am.
It's just as was explained in the Kos article - you people really don't think your remarks are racist or bigoted.
And what about Blonde's comment?..
"But the usual casting of aspersions at TJ have yet again, gone awry!
As much as the idiots would like us to believe he was a slave humping misogynist pig...this is just not the case.
Poor stupid trolls"
I have every bit as much respect for Thomas Jefferson as you do - despite conservatives thinking they are the only "true patriots" and pretending to be constitutional scholars and history majors.
YES - YOUR HEROES ARE HUMAN. And Newt Gingrich was cheating on his wife while she was in bed with cancer - and Mark Foley dabbled with teen pages - and Larry Craig was soliciting gay sex in an airport public restrooms. You people are not saints - and neither were "our founding fathers". Get over it already!
Your disgust and denial is either because you don't want to think a married man (in a "troubled marriage" at that) who you claim founded America as "a Christian Nation" would violate the "sanctity of marriage" - OR - Is it simply because of the color of his mistress' skin, or her "class"? Which one is it, or both?
You simply don't understand. Most people who live by logic, understanding, and acceptance of historical fact - and a belief that "all men are created equal" - have little to no problem with any of that. Yet you people are up in arms at even the suggestion of such. Talk about "touchy" and "protecting your own" (well you think your own anyhow).
As I mentioned in another post, it's the same with the "Sons of The Confederacy" rewrite of history regarding the Civil War - the reasons for it - or as I mentioned, the Virginia school district who last year distributed text books to 4th graders telling them that slaves fought with the Confederacy. It's all about refusal to own up to historical facts and to whitewash things that might tarnish an ideal or the legacy of some of "your kind". This is exactly the kind of mindset or mentality that caused the Penn State incident to be swept under the rug. (Both Jerry Sandusky and Coach Joe Paterno are registered Republicans BTW - as Glenn Beck would say ... just sayin'.)
I find such blind loyalty to be just another dangerous conservative trait.
I got news for you people - America is not "the greatest" at many things. We have had many flaws, and so did most of our founding fathers and leaders throughout history - of all political persuasions. But I still wouldn't trade that history, leadership, and even hope for the future with any other nation on earth. I just don't believe things simply because I want to believe them.
So the only posts of any
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:39am.
So your only posts of any 'substance' have been about Thomas Jefferson and his illegitimate half-breed offspring?? Big friggin' deal. Who knew??? Your Boy Barry could only WISH that he was blood-related to this lineage, instead of being some bastard son of an Arabic/African Commie drunken skirt-chaser who hooked up with a slutty white commie...............only to produce the biggest scam every perpetrated on the American public in the history of the USA.
So...American is not 'the greatest' at many things.............but you still want to live here and enjoy the life that you have??? And you have 'hope for the future' - even with your Boy Barry and his commie/totalitarian handlers and the toe-the-line MSM covering him every day??? I STILL want to know what you do,meat.................it sounds to me like you're living off the system -the system that is doing it's best to wreck the very foundations of why we became 'not the greatest' country in the world - the country that you want to continue to live in!!!
As my father used to say..........'sh*t or get off the pot'................
You
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:44am.
let us know all about you with this It's just as was explained in the Kos article -
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/11/13/newt-gingrich-accu...
And as I mentioned, Clevenative, in another---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:54am.
post, there were some slaves that fought with (as in FOR) the Confederacy.
Also, Popeye said " I yam what I yam", not "I amz what I amz".
You are a dolt.
MD
Matthew...........I"ve MET
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:58am.
Matthew...........I"ve MET yams that have more sense AND personality than this friggin queebie has!!! Jeez - the 'quality' of trolls around here has REALLY gone downhill lately!!! Last week it was 'out of this realm'.........and that guy set a new low for idiotic trolls...........but this drip seems to have lowered the bar allready!!!
killa---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:05am.
Indeed !
MD
Y'know, MD...........these
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:17am.
Y'know, MD...........these dipsh*ts come in here with a lotta sanctemonious swagga', and a holier-than-thou attitude, and condacendsion that drips from their words...........and loaded to the gills with their 'hands full of gimme and their mouths full of much-obligded'..........and their delusional beliefs that THEY are the only ones who can tell ANYBODY how things really are............yet when you actually LOOK at how things 'really are'......you KNOW that they are living in a parallel reality!!!
And they think that we're just a bunch of low-brow, mind-numbed, non-nuanced, uneducated, brain-washed, un-informed, sub-human cretins from the hinterlands..........................but they ALL end of running out of here with their damn tails between their legs, because they can't COMPETE with the common sense and awareness and intelligence that they encounter in these regions!!! So they go back to the safety of their self-serving moveon.org, or Huffington/Puffington, or KOS websites..........or whereever they can feel comfortable, trying to continue with their delusional agendas and philosophies.................
Meanwhile............ WE have to keep dealing with the 'real' world.............something that they don't have a clue about!!!!
Clevenative
Submitted by 26CX on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 9:37am.
Responses to your comments follow:
"you people really don't think your remarks are racist or bigoted" - I have only referenced articles about the Jefferson-Hemings controversy. I have not commented on the relationship either way.
"And what about Blonde's comment?.." - You will have to ask her about her comment. I am only answering for my own.
"I have every bit as much respect for Thomas Jefferson as you do..." - you don't know anything about me so I am baffled as to how you can make that statement.
"Your disgust and denial is either because you don't want to think a married man (in a "troubled marriage" at that) who you claim founded America as "a Christian Nation" would violate the "sanctity of marriage" - OR - Is it simply because of the color of his mistress' skin, or her "class"? Which one is it, or both?" - Thomas Jefferson was neither in a "troubled marriage" nor violating the "sanctity of marriage" at the time the alleged events took place. Jefferson's wife, Martha, died in 1782 when Sally Hemings was about 9 years old. The claims that Jefferson was in a sexual relationship with Hemings all occur after Jefferson was in Paris in 1784 - two years after Martha died. As I mentioned in another comment, the original allegations by James Callender that Jefferson had fathered a son with Hemings while they were in Paris together (Hemings went to Paris in 1787 with Jefferson's daughter Polly) were proven wrong by DNA testing. It's got nothing to do with what I think: your basic premise is wrong.
"You simply don't understand. Most people who live by logic, understanding, and acceptance of historical fact - and a belief that "all men are created equal" - have little to no problem with any of that." - why don't you try indulging in a little "historical fact" and see if it changes your opinions?
The rest of your comments are superfluous so I'm not going to respond to them.
OHHHHHH
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:06am.
LOOOOOOOOK i can link too. http://www.ashbrook.org/articles/mayer-hemings.html
How do you know that your source is true and fact?
I linked a source, can you say it is false?
Only if you just want one side of things
Submitted by 26CX on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 12:22am.
Take a look at this assessment of the Monticello report.
The article is based on the work done in this book.
You might also check out Annette Gordon-Reed's heavily biased historical novel "The Hemingses of Monticello: An American Family" which is considered by the Monticello organization to be the standard interpretation of Jefferson's times. Ms. Gordon-Reed in the introduction described the emotions she felt when reading Jefferson's original Farm Book, saying "Still, it was wrenching to hold the original and to know that Jefferson's actual hand had dipped into the inkwell and touched these pages to create what
was to me a record of human oppression."
Hardly sounds like an objective look at Jefferson and his times, does it?
I've read the complete Monticello Report and the Report of the Scholars Commission. You might find it enlightening to try getting both sides of the story.
"Madam Parker"?
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:22pm.
Not Madame Parker? Was that a Freudian slip, Hank?
And, your statement "secondly" exposes your ignorance about all things conservative. You never fail to entertain, but it's not for the reasons you think.
UpNorth
Submitted by Henry Clay on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:36pm.
I suggest you read the works of the right Honorable Edmund Burke on his definition of conservatism. He is after all, the father of Modern Conservatism. Although, you most likely think Reagan invented conservatism as well as the exclamation point.
Sterling, is that you?
Submitted by kata on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:39pm.
.
You may on to something good lady...
Submitted by Rukus on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 2:09am.
Sure has the same MO huh? Good call.
Madam Parker, Hank?
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:41pm.
What's the matter, snooky, upset that no one takes you seriously?
Henry Clay
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:28pm.
In what way do you think conservatism is based off distrust of mankind?
I ask because I'd say that it's actually liberalism which is based off of such distrust. I'm curious to know what you base your view of conservatism on.
hydrodynDM
Submitted by Henry Clay on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:45pm.
Classical Conservatives argue that mankind is inherently evil. If mankind was pure and righteous there would be no need for governments. Thus, society must come together to pass laws and regulations so the mankind can live in an orderly society. Classicalists deride any type of Utopia believing that man is incapable of righteousness. Thus any type of social experiment is destined to end up in violence and disorder. Order, long incremental change, and familiar traditions are considered essential to a classicalist. And Thankyou for your respectful post!
We're hardly enthralled with an 18th Century Englishman
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:47pm.
So what do you have to say that's relevant to today, Henry?
Anything?
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
He was Irish.
Submitted by Henry Clay on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:12pm.
He was Irish.
Hank's answer says it all, J.
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:13pm.
He's got nothing.
This is sad
Submitted by Henry Clay on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:40pm.
Personally, I thought my silence was more of a loud roar. Blonde’s answer just summed up modern thinking in general. Oh woo to those who value the forthright knowledge that ancestors sacrificed for us. Despair to those who stand on the shoulders of giants accumulating knowledge with every passing generation. No this generation is a generation of insolence. No nothings who dance at the decaying alter of modern values. Yes, the Right Honorable Mr. Burke lived in a time far away, a simpler time, a time where the ancients of Cicero, Plato, and Archimedes were actually studied and not thrown away to the trash heap of history like a tattered dust jacket. Yes, ignorance may be bliss but even a common barnyard pig is happy.
Woo to all of us
Submitted by kata on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:51pm.
Alas, and forsooth.
woo, in place of woe,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 10:58pm.
madam, not madame, and alter instead of altar.
Henry Clay, who long ago morphed into Hank Mud because of his flowery pretentiousness, has now slipped to the level of Dirt Clod.
I believe UpNorth is correct; ol' Hank just ain't feelin' the love.
Always on the weird side, will Hank once again go batsh*t nutso before exiting once more, stage left?
Stay tuned.
MD
Alter not the altar, md
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 11:35pm.
Nor woe be to the woo.
*rolls eyes*
We need a better class of troll, here. ©
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Henry Clay
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 10:00pm.
Occasionally I will have a student who asks me why we study physical theories which are, in some cases, hundreds of years old.
Instead of dismissing their questions as ignorant and accuse them of having the intellectual curiosity of a farm animal, I actually choose to address their questions seriously.
Just sayin'.
Henry Clay
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:08pm.
OK - I get where you are coming from.
But what about conservatives who don't believe that mankind is inherently evil?
I know my view of conservatism isn't based on that assumption.
hydrodynDM
Submitted by Henry Clay on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:29pm.
Before I answer, I want you to think back to why are you a conservative? Ask yourself, why we have governments. Really think about this, do not just say- to secure the borders, provide for defense, ect. Really ask yourself why we agree to give up some rights to live in order. I am not trying to be clever, I am just curious as to what your answer may be.
Henry Clay
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:49pm.
In my opinion, we have government because fundamentally humans are social animals - humans tend to want to coexist and live and work with other humans as a result of our evolution - both physical and social.
Living within a social structure with others requires some degree of coordination in order for the structure to work and persist. That's where the idea of laws and government comes in.
Having written that, I think you would agree that the above views don't require me to be a conservative so I'm not sure how this is related to my original question about conservatism.
On the contraire my friend it
Submitted by Henry Clay on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 10:11pm.
On the contraire my friend it does. In what prism you see why governments are established lay the foundation for almost all of one’s political philosophy. A philosophical question:
What would happen if governments were disbanded tomorrow; and if one man with physical strength were to take advantage of the situation and terrorize his weaker neighbors robbing them of property.
In what role did government play in preventing him from engaging in that anti-social role before? Was government altruistic? Is the role of government to protect the weak from the strong? Is government Paternal, does it dole out punishment based on actions that are best for each citizen? Or is government coercive? Did the threat of punishment repel the thug from acting in such manner?
Henry Clay, Like shrinking the size of hemorrhoids.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 11:56pm.
We the People, and the 2 ND. amendment.
Firepower is the great thug eliminator. More good guys than bad ones.
Lol get back to me when you get it figured out.
http://www.therightscoop.com/ows-spokesclown-michael-moore-we-will-repla...
we-will-replace-evil-capitalism-with-some-other-system-we-havent-thought-of-yet/
You Didn't Build That.
Just for your edification, Mud.
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 3:32pm.
It's either "on the contrary", or "au contraire". We certainly do need a better class of troll around this place.
You're way off the mark, Henry
Submitted by CobraMan on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:17pm.
"Classical Conservatives argue that mankind is inherently evil."
You're way off the mark, Henry. Classical Conservatism argues that the individual themselves can be ether good or evil and that society needs protection from the evil individual, hence the creation of laws which regulates the behavior of the individual, but not the good individual. Classical Conservatives believes that good behavior needs to be promoted through art and culture (like the monuments we build to those great men and women throughout history) while bad behavior needs to be regulated through laws in an attempt to diminish the effects of the bad individual on the good individual. Classical Conservatives believe it is unnecessary, even evil, to try to regulate the behavior of good men, even for "their own good." That's why Classic Conservatives rejoice at laws that punish murders (for example) while bemoaning laws that punish someone for their eating habits.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Believing that humans are
Submitted by redfish on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:10pm.
Believing that humans are imperfect is not the same thing as being distrustful. Its just being knowingfully wise about our limitations. Conservatives obviously trust that people can make the right decisions, otherwise they would have given up already on convincing them on their ideas.
OCCUPY STRATFORD-UPON-AVON, BABY!
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:11pm.
Master Thespian returns for a belated curtain call.
SickofLibs- Well Done!
Submitted by Henry Clay on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 9:54pm.
You sir may very well be on to something here! We theatre lovers do really despise what the entertainment industry is putting out there; ridiculous movies with sophomoric scripts and trite dialogue. Cold computer generated animation replacing the human element of art. Yes what better place to go than to the master’s own town to stand up and speak with one voice: I WANT MY SHAKESPEARE! I want multi-dimensional characters like Iago! I want art! I want beauty! Yes, you sir are a genius.
Newt does have his problems
Submitted by MinneMike on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 8:14pm.
KP is a conservative only See BS would admire. But let's be clear, Newt does have some serious flaws.
I've dealt with many fast rising executives who have the same characteristics as Newt. They rise because they are smarter than the next person, have fresh new ideas, but are seldom able to convince others to execute them. Why? Because they have sharp, jagged elbows that cut like a knife.
Newt left Congress in 1999 to the delight of Congressmen on both side of the aisle. It doesn't surprise me that his campaign staff came apart early and that he has had his marital difficulties. Newt is not the kind of person who brings others along or bothers to persuade others to follow his lead. In some respects, he is like Obama.
Newt likes the sound of his own voice and has never had an idea he didn't like. He also spends his money loudly. I don't begrudge him his wealth and find his constant take-down of the media viscerally exciting. But at some point he is going to look like the grouchy old man who shakes his cane at others.
There's another way to look at it.
Submitted by pbthinker on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 10:15pm.
Newt doesn't think like the politicians in D.C. who are willing to compromise their conservative principles to get along. Newt didn't win the Republican Majority, by trying to get along and the "moderate republicans" know this.
If you watch Gingrich handle Pelley last night, that isn't compromise, that's not allowing the LSM to control the meme, that's not allowing the LSM, to put forth the ideal, and that's not allowing them to put you in a position to agree with them on a false premise. Newt is really good at controlling the question in a debate. I've seen him handle the best "Tim Russert" and I've seen him handle the underlings. If they set for a premise that's not correct, he will set the premise and then answer the question.
Kathleen Parker???
Submitted by pbthinker on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 10:08pm.
first of all, if you're considered a "conservative" by Chris Matthews, you need to check your credentials at the door. I'm not sure if Kathleen Parker is a conservative or not, I do know that, if she is, she pulls her punches whenever she's writing for the Washington Post or is on some liberal comment show.
The point is, if someone like Chris Matthews wants your opinion, he's looking for a comment that won't completely contradict what he's already expounded on for 5 minutes.
Many comments
Submitted by GerryC on Sun, 11/13/2011 - 10:57pm.
When a thread gets this deep, we can safely assume my comment won't matter. So, there you have it.
In the meantime, can we just assume the LSM must be defeated with our viewership and our purses. Gez
Someone must be desperate
Submitted by NotFondOfLibs on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 4:22am.
Bob Schieffer and those clowns at CBS must be desperate if they have to bring Kathleen Parker on Face the Nation. This nitwit, Parker, is about as conservative at the clown, David Brooks of the NY Times. That this woman was basically kicked off CNN says everything we need to know about her. Between Parker, Brooks, and Joe Scarborough, we have 3 frauds posing as Conservatives. The less attention we pay to them, the better.
Which "kind" of "conservative"
Submitted by CobraMan on Mon, 11/14/2011 - 1:04pm.
"And we're back now with our panel. Kathleen Parker, of course, a columnist for the Washington Post who writes kind of from the conservative side, I would say."
Parker is the only "kind" of "conservative" you'll find at the Washington Post, which says a lot about the Washington Post.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Where's Cleventine??? Has he
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 11/15/2011 - 12:51am.
Where's Cleventine??? Has he returned to answer some of the questions that we asked him??? I 've just come home from working (non union and self-employed!!), and I don't see him around these parts............shucks!! All we want is a few back-ups and answers to your posts, Clevie-boy..........nothing major.