I wonder if it was the same guy who threw his shoe at George Bush…….

GOOD! Obama has been throwing the book at the American people for almost two years now. What a colossal mistake it was to elect someone whose only qualification was that he was the “first black” to be president.

The man isn’t black and doesn’t have the tools to be president (hence the 13 $Trillion deficits), you liberals and so-called independents have been “bamboozled” by a guy that has run the old “okie-doke” on you.

Two years later and Obama is still campaigning. Shouldn’t someone tell him he has a job he’s not doing?

Not Your Typical New Yorker said:
GOOD! Obama has been throwing the book at the American people for almost two years now. What a colossal mistake it was to elect someone whose only qualification was that he was the “first black” to be president. The man isn’t black and doesn’t have the tools to be president (hence the 13 $Trillion deficits), you liberals and so-called independents have been “bamboozled” by a guy that has run the old “okie-doke” on you.

You hideous human, vile trash, permeating stench. It is never acceptable to assault anyone, and it is particularly inappropriate to assault our President, whoever he or she may be. America is a far worse place because of the likes of you.

Not Your Typical New Yorker said:
GOOD! Obama has been throwing the book at the American people for almost two years now. What a colossal mistake it was to elect someone whose only qualification was that he was the “first black” to be president. The man isn’t black and doesn’t have the tools to be president (hence the 13 $Trillion deficits), you liberals and so-called independents have been “bamboozled” by a guy that has run the old “okie-doke” on you.

BTW: I am contacting the Secret Service. No promise anything will happen, but it sure worked with the even more hideous, vile Jeff Merrill.

The Real Royal King said:
BTW: I am contacting the Secret Service. No promise anything will happen, but it sure worked with the even more hideous, vile Jeff Merrill.

Dude…do wake up with your Jack Boots on?

Kspraydad said:
Dude…do wake up with your Jack Boots on?

Sorry, I don’t take lightly the kind of smears and slurs upon our nation, the type of hatred and violence, that NYTNY and RIC seem to thrive upon on.

While Obama is in Florida today , will he campaign for Meek ? Put in a good word for Rep. Grayson ? Why not ?The Obama fan who threw the book for the President to autograph should really learn some manners .

That actually looked like a Charlie Crist type of throw .

Love the fact that conservatives hate Obama so much that they’re willing to support an assault on our President, yet they keep wrapping themselves in the flag. Faux patriots.

So when shoes are thrown at Bush, it’s funny, but when a book is thrown at Obama it’s disgraceful? Nice try libs.

Shoes = funny… Book = serious assault. Gawd RRK and his lib buddies know no level of hypocrisy deep enough. Wonder if MSNBC will have their “hardy-har-har” over this like they did the shoe “assault”. Come on libs laugh it up like you did 2 years ago. What’s wrong??? Not so funny now???

Shut your pie-hole king, you and your ilk had your day and look at the damage you have done…

The Real Royal King said:
You hideous human, vile trash, permeating stench. It is never acceptable to assault anyone, and it is particularly inappropriate to assault our President, whoever he or she may be. America is a far worse place because of the likes of you.

Don’t get your panties in a bundle there, Robert. Come on, it was funny when they threw the shoe at Bush and it’s funny now. Your fake outrage is embarrassing.

I’m wondering if the book thrower was the woman who thought she was going to get a new kitchen once BO was elected. Maybe she got sick of waiting for it.

You remember:

http://www.breitbart.tv/tearful-homeless-woman-asks-obama-for-kitchen-bathroom-during-florida-town-hall/

Robert’s whole life is nothing but “fake outrage”. He knows nothing else. Without it he would just fade into nothing… Like Marty McFly in BTTF.

Looks fake

Wow, even I’mJustPlainAwful thinks this could have been a staged event to garner Obama sympathy and try to paint opponents as violent. I think you may be onto something, for once, Awful!

The Real Royal King said:
Sorry, I don’t take lightly the kind of smears and slurs upon our nation, the type of hatred and violence, that NYTNY and RIC seem to thrive upon on.

I agree. TRRK, while you’re on the phone with the Secret Service, could you mention all of this to them as well:

http://www.anonymousfinch.com/2010/03/27/democratic-cognitive-dissonance/

I’m sure they have a phone record of all the calls you made during the Bush administration.

The royal king will return shortly, the orderlies are changing his diapers and cleaning the vomit from his wheelchair.

He seems to have had some kind of seizure, anyway, patience, he will be wheeled back into the solarium shortly.

That’s really unfortunate.

I can’t stand Obama. That being said, let me say this clearly – HE’S THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD WE TOLERATE THIS KIND OF ASSAULT ON THE OFFICE.

This isn’t a third world country where you can throw a shoe at our president. Obama is a loathsome socialist, but he’s still our president. We cannot lower ourselves to this level, nor can we endorse it when others do.

Don’t like him? I don’t either. That’s what we have elections for.

It would be nice to see the book-thrower get the same punishment as the shoe-thrower.

Harry Flashman said:
I can’t stand Obama.

Don’t like him? I don’t either. That’s what we have elections for.

Exactly. Both Left and Right need to take chill pills. Go to Stewart’s “Dial it back a bit” Sanity festival in DC. Laugh some.

Most people thought the first one to throw the book at Obama would have been the Judicial System.

“I don’t have any facts. but, the Chamber of Commerce acted illegally” – BO

exiledtruther said:
So when shoes are thrown at Bush, it’s funny, but when a book is thrown at Obama it’s disgraceful? Nice try libs.

Hey, Michelle-in-Utah, for a short time, Soccermon, thence Exhiledtruth, albeit more appropriately Exhiled LIAR and all your other names: It wasn’t funny when shoes were thrown at W, and it isn’t fun when a book is thrown at President Obama. Why must you persist in your lies?

exiledtruther said:
Wow, even I’mJustPlainAwful thinks this could have been a staged event to garner Obama sympathy and try to paint opponents as violent. I think you may be onto something, for once, Awful!

Peabrain!

Do we know what the book was, and who threw it? Is it possible it was someone who wrote the book, and wanted Obama to read it? Someone who was hoping to give it to Obama, but couldn’t get close enough? A political version of *panties*?

I didn’t like it when someone threw the shoe at Bush (and didn’t approve at ALL when Democrats set up *Throw the Shoe at Bush* games afterward, and I DON’T approve of someone throwing a book at Obama, either.

But, until we know who it was and the intent, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. It might have been an over zealous fan. Ya never know…

King says:

It wasn’t funny when shoes were thrown at W, and it isn’t fun when a book is thrown at President Obama. Why must you persist in your lies?

Stop trying to rewirte history. Here’s a link to the comment section of Think Progress when the shoe was thrown at Bush:

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/12/14/bush-iraq-shoe/

Then there’s the Daily Kos comment section:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/12/14/125953/48/270/673002

Why must you persist in your lies?

That’s a real kneeslapper coming from you royal ping, heh.

exiledtruther said:
King says: It wasn’t funny when shoes were thrown at W, and it isn’t fun when a book is thrown at President Obama. Why must you persist in your lies? Stop trying to rewirte history. Here’s a link to the comment section of Think Progress when the shoe was thrown at Bush: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/12/14/bush-iraq-shoe/

Give it a rest, Michelle-in-Utah. You take puerile comments from the most unstable ideologues on the left whilst disregarding puerile comments from the most unstable ideologues on the right? I swear, you don’t have an ounce of intellectual integrity. Not an ounce.

sarainitaly said:
Do we know what the book was, and who threw it? Is it possible it was someone who wrote the book, and wanted Obama to read it? Someone who was hoping to give it to Obama, but couldn’t get close enough? A political version of *panties*?

I didn’t like it when someone threw the shoe at Bush (and didn’t approve at ALL when Democrats set up *Throw the Shoe at Bush* games afterward, and I DON’T approve of someone throwing a book at Obama, either.

But, until we know who it was and the intent, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. It might have been an over zealous fan. Ya never know…

Yes, we do! The book was titled, “Economics for Dummies”

sarainitaly said:
Do we know what the book was, and who threw it? Is it possible it was someone who wrote the book, and wanted Obama to read it? Someone who was hoping to give it to Obama, but couldn’t get close enough? A political version of *panties*? I didn’t like it when someone threw the shoe at Bush (and didn’t approve at ALL when Democrats set up *Throw the Shoe at Bush* games afterward, and I DON’T approve of someone throwing a book at Obama, either. But, until we know who it was and the intent, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. It might have been an over zealous fan. Ya never know…

The motivation doesn’t make any difference here, you Vacuous Twit.

We get it. You hate President Obama. You only regret an entire bookshelf didn’t fall on him, or that you weren’t there to push it on top of him. We get it. President Obama had the unmitigated gall to run a better campaign than Hillary!, and the chutzpah to beat Gramps and the Drop Out Governor. For that alone, he should be held in utter contempt, subjected to ridicule and assault. We get it. Your vengeance must be satiated. We get it. Now, run out and get some pasta for supper.

King says:

You take puerile comments from the most unstable ideologues on the left whilst

In other words, your peeps.

The Daily Mail said:
The flying missile narrowly missed hitting the President yesterday

Whatever it was (it looked like a magazine with wings) this “flying missile” appeared to “narrowly miss” by about 10 feet. It doesn’t even look real, it looks like something you’d see in an online video game.

Attacking a political figure because of policy disagreement is wrong. Bottom Line. Period. The fact that the right has become so comfortable with the full spectrum from jocular speculation of harm to fantasies of death and bloody revolt represents a sickness within the fringe. They will likely implode as a consequence of their anger.

Hey Greg,
Feel free to post your evidence that this was someone from the right. We’ll be waiting!

Greg said:
The fact that the right has become so comfortable with the full spectrum from jocular speculation of harm to fantasies of death and bloody revolt represents a sickness within the fringe.

Yeah Greg, it’s only the right that makes terrible comments and has vile thoughts – LOL

Funny how the media doesn’t report on the casting call for Obama’s TV appearance. MTV wants to put appropriately starstruck “actors” and “actresses” in the audience for the President. This will make sure that Obama doesn’t face another embarrassing question from a “supporter” as at his recent Town Hall meeting.

Here is the casting ad:

PRESIDENT OBAMA TOWN HALL, DC
PRESIDENT OBAMA TOWN HALL, DC MTV, BET, and CMT (prods.) are casting the audience for a town hall meeting with President Obama. Shooting Oct. 14 at 4 p.m. in Washington, DC. Seeking—Audience Members: males and females, 18+. To apply, email townhallaudience@mtvnmix.com and put “Town Hall” in the subject line. To ensure that the audience represents diverse interests and political views, include your name, phone number, hometown, school attending, your job and what issues, if any, you are …[more]

http://casting.backstage.com/JobSeekerX/SearchJobs.asp?SearchStartingPoint=MainSearchForm&txtaction=CREATE&ProfileID=&SubmitToSearch=Search&lctr=1&rvsd=-1&o1=2&p1=1&ipp=10&city=&fromsearchpage=True&kwrd=&kwdt=1&lcta=1&st=DC&cn=1&btnSearch=Run+Search+Now

Gee, King. When I told you about assaults going on at my high school, you think it’s funny.

The Real Royal King said:
Your vengeance must be satiated. We get it. Now, run out and get some pasta for supper.

Don’t let him bother you, Sara. This is a dude who has called opponents GOPigs, Bushwipes, etc. for years, at various sites and under a multitude of aliases. Who has endlessly distorted their arguments just as he is now trying to imply that you support violence towards the president.

He especially plays rough with women. Shake him off, as you would an overly frisky Shih Tzu.

The King thinks anyone who would laugh at assaults is a horrible person. Does that include himself?

My statement on violence was categorical… violence is wrong period… independent of party affiliation in any case…
The right is currently particularly active in the traffic of violent fantasy… Beck has pretended to poison the Speaker of the House on his national show (jocular)… Christian and Robbins effectively advocated bloody revolt in IBD… plenty of examples to pick from… It was Beck who claimed that progressives “don’t mind blood in the streets”… just the kind of thinking that propels a man like Byron Williams to engage in a paranoid attempt to start revolution by killing members of progressive organizations… Sitting on his hilltop home feeding on Michael Savage and Beck’s paranoid lessons prepared him to graduate to armed attack on the institutions he consequently believed to be evil incarnate… Ignore those facts if you wish…

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2149713/posts

http://aragonhitchhikers.blogspot.com/2008/12/show-thrown-at-bush.html
Read some of the comments:absolutely pathetic.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/19/bush-protest-shoes-thrown_n_159223.html

Yep, lot of outrage there. What a joke.

Greg, your outrage is selective.

It was not the fear of conservative violence that caused Ann Coulter’s speech to be cancelled this week.
It was a liberal who bit the finger off a man who disagreed with him on healthcare.
It was Obama-loving Amy Bishop who took a gun to work and murdered co-workers.
Joseph Stack flew his plane into the IRS building after writing an anti-conservative manifesto.
It was liberals who destroyed AM radio towers outside of Seattle.
It’s liberals who burn down Hummer dealerships.
It was progressive SEIU union thugs who beat a black conservative man who spoke his mind.
It’s doubtful that a conservative fired shots into a GOP campaign headquarters.
In fact, Democrats have no monopoly on having their offices vandalized.
Don’t forget it was Obama’s friend Bill Ayers who used terrorism as a tool for political change. SDS is still radical, with arrests in 2007 and the storming of the CATO Institute in July 2008.
It was a liberal who was sentenced to two years for bringing bombs and riot shields to the Republican National Convention in 2008.
It was a liberal who threatened to kill a government informant who infiltrated her Austin-based group that planned to bomb the RNC.
It was liberals who assaulted police in Berkeley.
It was liberals who intimidated and threw rocks through the windows of researchers.
The two Black Panthers who stood outside polls intimidating people with nightsticks were probably not right-wingers.
Every time the G20 gets together, it’s not conservatives who destroy property and cause chaos.

It’s not the right that is consistently violent, Greg, it’s the left. Nice try though.

Oh, I get it, King. Assaults are only funny if a black person is assaulting a white person. If it’s the other way around, it’s an outrage.

It wasn’t funny when Bush was assaulted and this certainly is not funny. We should not condone or tolerate violence like this. Tolerance will only invite more violence.

I don’t care if that book left the hands of a conservative or a liberal. Whoever did it should be arrested. There was a clear intent to illicit harm on the President. That is reprehensible, regardless of whoever is President.

RRK, Dhuran Ravi and Lori Drew. Three peas in a pod

The Internet provides the perfect forum for cyberbullies, individuals whose aim is to gain gratification from the distress caused by provoking and tormenting others.

Serial bullies harbour a lot of internal aggression which they direct at others. This may include projection, false criticism and patronising sarcasm whilst contributing nothing of any value.

Most serial bullies are also serial attention-seekers. More than anything else they want attention. It doesn’t matter what type of attention they get, positive or negative, as long as they can provoke someone into paying them attention. It’s like a 2-year-old child throwing a tantrum to get attention from a parent. The best way to treat bullies is to refuse to respond and to refuse to engage them – which they really hate.

In other words, do not reply to their postings, and on forums carry on posting without reference to their postings as if they didn’t exist. In other words, treat nobodies as nobodies. The anger of a serial bully is especially apparent when they come across someone who can see through them to espy the weak, inadequate, immature, dysfunctional aggressive individual behind the mask.

The objectives of bullies are Power, Control, Domination, Subjugation. They get a kick out of seeing you react. It doesn’t matter how you react, the fact they’ve successful provoked a reaction is, to the bully, a sign that their attempt at control have been successful. After that, it’s a question of wearing you down. The more your try to explain, negotiate, conciliate, etc the more gratification they obtain from your increasingly desperate attempts to communicate with them.

Understand that it is not possible to communicate in a mature adult manner with a disordered individual who’s emotionally retarded.

The Number One rule for dealing with this type of behaviour is: don’t respond and don’t engage. This is not as easy to do as it sounds. It’s a natural response to want to defend yourself, and to put the person right.

However, never argue with a serial bully; it’s not a mature adult discussion, but like dealing with a child or immature teenager; whilst the serial bully may be an adult on the outside, on the inside they are like a child who’s never grown up – and probably never will.

Decide if you want to take action, and if so, prepare carefully and strike hard. Sometimes refusing to respond and engage will result in the cyberbully losing interest and going off to find someone easier to torment.

Sometimes though, especially if there has been interaction in the past, the cyberbully is so obsessed that s/he cannot and will not let go. You will have to make that person let go, but only through swift, hard, legal action, and only when the time is right.

exiledtruther said:
Joseph Stack flew his plane into the IRS building after writing an anti-conservative manifesto.

To be fair, his manifesto was all over the political map.

Both sides are brutal to each other. A laundry list of previous actions made by people that claim to be liberal or you claim to be liberal can be matched, at length, with one regarding those that consider themselves conservative.

Instead of arguing about which side is more violent, why not ask why there is any violence at all? Why not spend our energies trying to put a stop to it, rather than turn it into another medium to express political self-righteousness?

Exiled, I am only replying to yours because of this list, however I am directing this to everyone involved.

This action is reprehensible, just as it was when that jackass hurled his shoe at Bush.

Cecelia said:
Don’t let him bother you, Sara. This is a dude who has called opponents GOPigs, Bushwipes, etc. for years, at various sites and under a multitude of aliases. Who has endlessly distorted their arguments just as he is now trying to imply that you support violence towards the president. He especially plays rough with women. Shake him off, as you would an overly frisky Shih Tzu.

You are mistaken, Cecelia, on many counts herein. I respond only to the language you say I used. I have never used those terms you set forth. I find particularly objectionable the B—w-p–. There is no rhetorical situation in which I would use such a foul and filthy term. You owe me an apology.

And if you need further proof, just look at the King’s posts concerning Palin’s daughter.

exiledtruther said:
King says: You take puerile comments from the most unstable ideologues on the left whilst In other words, your peeps.

How very intellectually dishonest, again, Michelle-in-Utah, to use only the portion of a quote which suits your nefarious purposes. You’d be laughed off any decent college campus. If I wire you US $200.00, will you go try to buy some personal integrity?

When Crips are assaulting white people, that’s still a laugh riot, though. Right, King?

writer said:
And if you need further proof, just look at the King’s posts concerning Palin’s daughter.

Hey, Kumquat, I have never assaulted Brisket. You’ve missed the point, again, haven’t you?

King says:

If I wire you US $200.00, will you go try to buy some personal integrity?

Unlike the casinos in Las Vegas, I don’t accept food stamps.

sarainitaly said:
RRK, Dhuran Ravi and Lori Drew. Three peas in a pod

Yes, anyone with the temerity to disagree with HRH Sara N. Italy is out of line.

By the way, thanks for your lengthy and tedious, unattributed and diversionary copy and paste.

Only verbally, King. BTW, how many Crips members went to your all white private school?

exiledtruther said:
King says: If I wire you US $200.00, will you go try to buy some personal integrity? Unlike the casinos in Las Vegas, I don’t accept food stamps.

The question, however, dealt with your wholesale lack of integrity. A deceitful retort hardly addresses that.

sarainitaly said:
The objectives of bullies are Power, Control, Domination, Subjugation.

This is certainly true too of a hardcore political operative type who excuses the most dishonest and destructive sorts of internet behavior by telling themselves its for the most worthwhile of causes.

Run like hell from this type of political partisan. At heart they are simply control freaks who want nothing more than to make the entire planet dance to their drumbeat. If they can justify this urge via utopian solipsisms, so much the better. God help anyone who gets in their way.

The Real Royal King said:
You are mistaken, Cecelia, on many counts herein. I respond only to the language you say I used. I have never used those terms you set forth. I find particularly objectionable the B—w-p–. There is no rhetorical situation in which I would use such a foul and filthy term. You owe me an apology.

Oh, cut it out, Patsy.

Bad news for BO, he’s lost TIME:

Barack Obama is being politically crushed in a vise. From above, by elite opinion about his competence. From below, by mass anger and anxiety over unemployment. And it is too late for him to do anything about this predicament until after November’s elections.

With the exception of core Obama Administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusions: the White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters. This view is held by Fox News pundits, executives and anchors at the major old-media outlets, reporters who cover the White House, Democratic and Republican congressional leaders and governors, many Democratic business people and lawyers who raised big money for Obama in 2008, and even some members of the Administration just beyond the inner circle.

Mark Halperin

I want to make sure I have this correct:

Posters Favoring Random Assaults Upon our President:

Cecelia, Kspaydad, Kumquat, Michelle-in-Utah, Mr. B, NYTNY, Penguin, Phelicia, Powerslave, RIChris, Sara N. Italy, Tatboy.

Psters Having the Decency and Civility to Oppose Assaults Upon our President:

Atticus Finch, Between Woevils, Greg, Harry Flshman, M, RRK, Some Dude, Stephen Hogan.

Is this correct, so far?

exiledtruther said:
Greg, your outrage is selective.

It was not the fear of conservative violence that caused Ann Coulter’s speech to be cancelled this week.
It was a liberal who bit the finger off a man who disagreed with him on healthcare.
It was Obama-loving Amy Bishop who took a gun to work and murdered co-workers.
Joseph Stack flew his plane into the IRS building after writing an anti-conservative manifesto.
It was liberals who destroyed AM radio towers outside of Seattle.
It’s liberals who burn down Hummer dealerships.
It was progressive SEIU union thugs who beat a black conservative man who spoke his mind.
It’s doubtful that a conservative fired shots into a GOP campaign headquarters.
In fact, Democrats have no monopoly on having their offices vandalized.
Don’t forget it was Obama’s friend Bill Ayers who used terrorism as a tool for political change. SDS is still radical, with arrests in 2007 and the storming of the CATO Institute in July 2008.
It was a liberal who was sentenced to two years for bringing bombs and riot shields to the Republican National Convention in 2008.
It was a liberal who threatened to kill a government informant who infiltrated her Austin-based group that planned to bomb the RNC.
It was liberals who assaulted police in Berkeley.
It was liberals who intimidated and threw rocks through the windows of researchers.
The two Black Panthers who stood outside polls intimidating people with nightsticks were probably not right-wingers.
Every time the G20 gets together, it’s not conservatives who destroy property and cause chaos.

It’s not the right that is consistently violent, Greg, it’s the left. Nice try though.

Exiled,

You have clearly copied a list (uncritically) that has been passed around by conservative sites, without citation. The first problem is that the list does not refute my initial argument. The second is that each point is an oversimplification in the least or a falsehood at the worst. Independent of those two points, my position is categorical. Violence by left or right is wrong. Period. I would like to see some conservatives take such a firm stance and stop excusing the facts by reference to past offenses both real and imagined.

Cecelia said:
Oh, cut it out, Patsy.

Then you, Cecelia, are simply a liar.

exiledtruther said:
It’s not the right that is consistently violent, Greg, it’s the left. Nice try though.

Don’t forget the Prez who himself…. “hand to hand combat” …. no projections of violence there, right?

Somebody should tell these a-holes…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isaW_aAFF2I

and these…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoNlhJAPmaM&feature=player_embedded

and this one too….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v60oNUoHBYM

Anyone who would make fun of any form of assault is a horrible, horrible person.

The Real Royal King said:
You’d be laughed off any decent college campus.

mmmm, ya think? Naval Academy, Citadel, VMI,West Point, Air Force Academy? I wonder who in this thread would be laughed off those campuses?

exiledtruther said:
Bad news for BO, he’s lost TIME: Barack Obama is being politically crushed in a vise. From above, by elite opinion about his competence. From below, by mass anger and anxiety over unemployment. And it is too late for him to do anything about this predicament until after November’s elections. With the exception of core Obama Administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusions: the White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters. This view is held by Fox News pundits, executives and anchors at the major old-media outlets, reporters who cover the White House, Democratic and Republican congressional leaders and governors, many Democratic business people and lawyers who raised big money for Obama in 2008, and even some members of the Administration just beyond the inner circle. Mark Halperin

just another rat jumping. My popcorn is popping……

The Real Royal King said:
Then you, Cecelia, are simply a liar.

sheesh…

Only you, Patsy, would be able to call me a liar after blithely saying this, “Posters Favoring Random Assaults Upon our President: Cecelia,…”

I’ve noticed that SNL hasn’t done any parodies of the doofus Dems, yet. I’m starting to think we have state-run comedy now. LOL.

Check it out:
http://twitter.com/#!/brenteverett/status/25092789997

King, could you show me where I said I favored an assault on Obama? If you’ll check my posts, I said that anyone who would laugh at any form of assault would have to be a real asshole. What kind of person would ever make jokes about the subject of someone being assaulted?

The Real Royal King said:
I want to make sure I have this correct: Posters Favoring Random Assaults Upon our President: Cecelia, Kspaydad, Kumquat, Michelle-in-Utah, Mr. B, NYTNY, Penguin, Phelicia, Powerslave, RIChris, Sara N. Italy, Tatboy. Psters Having the Decency and Civility to Oppose Assaults Upon our President: Atticus Finch, Between Woevils, Greg, Harry Flshman, M, RRK, Some Dude, Stephen Hogan. Is this correct, so far?

Where in my post did I “favor” an assault of any kind of either president??? My post was about hypocrisy you DUMBASS. How low is your IQ. Read my post again you inbreeding. knuckle-draggin, unshaven-hippie, mouth-breather. My Gawd you have to be the dumbest person in all of Texas. Take off that stupid Obama hat it’s WAY to tight and cutting of blood flow to your brain.

Greg said:
Violence by left or right is wrong. Period. I would like to see some conservatives take such a firm stance

Nobody on the right thinks a stand against violence needs to be stated out loud. It’s a given. We just point out that leftwingers aren’t always so outraged and that ….. wait for it…… they MAY actually be WORSE than the right. Hmmm.

Of course, perhaps it was just in response to this post by some hypocrite who was talking out of both sides of his mouth……

Greg said:
My statement on violence was categorical… violence is wrong period… independent of party affiliation in any case…
The right is currently particularly active in the traffic of violent fantasy… Beck has pretended to poison the Speaker of the House on his national show (jocular)… Christian and Robbins effectively advocated bloody revolt in IBD… plenty of examples to pick from… It was Beck who claimed that progressives “don’t mind blood in the streets”… just the kind of thinking that propels a man like Byron Williams to engage in a paranoid attempt to start revolution by killing members of progressive organizations… Sitting on his hilltop home feeding on Michael Savage and Beck’s paranoid lessons prepared him to graduate to armed attack on the institutions he consequently believed to be evil incarnate… Ignore those facts if you wish…

“Ignore those facts if you wish”….. right. Not a single example of a LWNJ… just the ‘particularly active’ rightwing violence traffickers. And after all that one sided citation you dismiss the valid examples given with EVEN MORE partisan BS…. and then the nerve to come back with this….

Greg said:
Violence by left or right is wrong. Period.

Well Duh.

Good grief. Do you even read what you write? How many examples of LWNJ’s have we had (just lately) who killed a buncha people and injured a bunch more? No room for them in your condemnation?

The King constantly laughs at assaults. It just depends on who’s being assaulted.

FearMonger said:
Don’t forget the Prez who himself…. “hand to hand combat” …. no projections of violence there, right?

Somebody should tell these a-holes…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isaW_aAFF2I

and these…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoNlhJAPmaM&feature=player_embedded

and this one too….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v60oNUoHBYM

Because a reasonable person would believe that the President is actually advocating that Democratic Congressmen engage in physical violence instead of alluding to a difficult political fight to advance a progressive agenda… and a reasonable person would hope that the President would deal with political battles through acquiescence…

The Real Royal King said:
I want to make sure I have this correct: Posters Favoring Random Assaults Upon our President: Cecelia, Kspaydad, Kumquat, Michelle-in-Utah, Mr. B, NYTNY, Penguin, Phelicia, Powerslave, RIChris, Sara N. Italy, Tatboy. Psters Having the Decency and Civility to Oppose Assaults Upon our President: Atticus Finch, Between Woevils, Greg, Harry Flshman, M, RRK, Some Dude, Stephen Hogan. Is this correct, so far?

Hurry queeney, run down the hall, put a quarter in and call the Secret Service. First you’ll need proof, then you’ll need them to remove the straightjacket.
That is got to the most literally insane post I’ve read here. Waaaayyyy off the deep end.

Greg said:
Because a reasonable person would believe that the President is actually advocating that Democratic Congressmen engage in physical violence instead of alluding to a difficult political fight to advance a progressive agenda… and a reasonable person would hope that the President would deal with political battles through acquiescence…

Agreed.

Now… do you think LWNJ’s would make political theatre out of comments like that from a (R)???

How about dabbling in witchcraft as a teenager?

Penguin60 said:
Hurry queeney, run down the hall, put a quarter in and call the Secret Service. First you’ll need proof, then you’ll need them to remove the straightjacket.
That is got to the most literally insane post I’ve read here. Waaaayyyy off the deep end.

tatboy said:
Where in my post did I “favor” an assault of any kind of either president??? My post was about hypocrisy you DUMBASS. How low is your IQ. Read my post again you inbreeding. knuckle-draggin, unshaven-hippie, mouth-breather. My Gawd you have to be the dumbest person in all of Texas. Take off that stupid Obama hat it’s WAY to tight and cutting of blood flow to your brain.

See:
sarainitaly says:
October 11, 2010 at 11:27 am (Quote)

Penguin60 said:
Hurry queeney, run down the hall, put a quarter in and call the Secret Service. First you’ll need proof, then you’ll need them to remove the straightjacket.
That is got to the most literally insane post I’ve read here. Waaaayyyy off the deep end.

Long before Obama was elected, and TRRK was calling the Secret Service on the poster he referenced, he and his friends snooped out that same poster’s personal demographics, via the internet.

The deep end is definitely their side of the pool.

newzmaker said:
I’ve noticed that SNL hasn’t done any parodies of the doofus Dems, yet. I’m starting to think we have state-run comedy now. LOL.

I don’t even watch and know about Governor Patterson, and Gloria Allred.

sarainitaly said:
Check it out:
http://twitter.com/#!/brenteverett/status/25092789997

And you watch this guys twitter because……

Fear-

“Nobody on the right thinks a stand against violence needs to be stated out loud.”
— Not true on it’s face… Beck occasionally balances his rhetoric with reminders to avoid violence… Conservative comments sections from FOX Nation to Stormfront contain a constant tension between those who openly advocate for violence and those who wish for measured opposition… Resistnet.com has created a small uproar in it’s posting community by taking a strong stance and censoring violent revolutionary rhetoric… their strong controls are certainly not the consequence of self control on the part of their posters…
“some hypocrite who was talking out of both sides of his mouth……”
—It is not hypocritical to take a categorical stance but demand that examples (of violence on any part) be actual and not contrived and partisan political narratives…
“Do you even read what you write? How many examples of LWNJ’s have we had (just lately) who killed a buncha people and injured a bunch more? No room for them in your condemnation?”
—I do, and by my reading I have been clear…

FearMonger said:
Agreed.

Now… do you think LWNJ’s would make political theatre out of comments like that from a (R)???

How about dabbling in witchcraft as a teenager?

Glad you agree that taking issue with either serves only as political theatre…

Greg said:
Because a reasonable person would believe that the President is actually advocating that Democratic Congressmen engage in physical violence instead of alluding to a difficult political fight to advance a progressive agenda… and a reasonable person would hope that the President would deal with political battles through acquiescence…

i would say ‘reasonable people’ wouldn’t try to say TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK is code for I WANT TO GO BACK TO SLAVERY but but but….. I’ve seen plenty of that horseshit coming from the left.

Not to mention unreasonable teary-eyed trips down memory lane equating violent protests of the past with peaceful (dare I say EXEMPLARY) protests of the present.

It could be said that ‘reasonable people’ would not say… out of one side of their mouths… “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism” and then…. out of the other side…. say it’s “racist/ mob rule/ venemous/ hateful/ bullying”.

“Reasonable people” indeed.

FearMonger said:
i would say ‘reasonable people’ wouldn’t try to say TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK is code for I WANT TO GO BACK TO SLAVERY but but but….. I’ve seen plenty of that horseshit coming from the left.

Not to mention unreasonable teary-eyed trips down memory lane equating violent protests of the past with peaceful (dare I say EXEMPLARY) protests of the present.

It could be said that ‘reasonable people’ would not say… out of one side of their mouths… “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism” and then…. out of the other side…. say it’s “racist/ mob rule/ venemous/ hateful/ bullying”.

“Reasonable people” indeed.

Fear,

You have changed the subject… equated argument with feces, failed to address the new arguments you introduce further than that equation and some rather sloppy juxtaposition… then provide a final lament about the lack of “reasonable” folks… certainly giving all of us much to think about.

Greg said:
It is not hypocritical to take a categorical stance but demand that examples (of violence on any part) be actual and not contrived and partisan political narratives

Oh really? But you reference “Stormfront”? Geez. Shall I go to DemocraticUnderground or any of a dozen other LWNJ sites and…… oh nevermind. I already took a shower today.

btw… are you trying to say that all of the examples in exiledtrruthers list are false? And isn’t every example you have posted on this thread examples of ‘contrived and partisan political narratives’?

Nothing more to add about the videos I posted? The way I see it… the difference is (usually) that some RWNJ’s PROBABLY fantasize about doing stupid things but but but…. LWNJ’s ACTUALLY do them.

Most times the rest of the left LOUDLY and PUBLICLY projects those LWNJ’s actions onto ‘the right’… until the truth comes out…

At which point they just ignore it.

Fear,

Here is my position excised from above…
“The second is that each point is an oversimplification in the least or a falsehood at the worst. Independent of those two points, my position is categorical. Violence by left or right is wrong. Period. I would like to see some conservatives take such a firm stance and stop excusing the facts by reference to past offenses both real and imagined.”
I will loudly and proudly denounce left wing violence and left wing participation in any sort of political confrontation…
Why so little attention to the Byron Williams coup attempt then? He himself describes the sources of his inspiration… does shooting cops not rise to the standard of the “actual”?

Hmmm…….

Was it a Koran?
Was it his LSAT scores at Harvard Law School?
Some of Michelle’s papers?

right-is-wrong said:
And you watch this guys twitter because……

I don’t, I was looking for something specific, and found that instead.

Greg said:
You have changed the subject… equated argument with feces, failed to address the new arguments you introduce further than that equation and some rather sloppy juxtaposition… then provide a final lament about the lack of “reasonable” folks… certainly giving all of us much to think about.

Wow. Surely you must realise you are talking about yourself…

Refresh my memory…. who brought up Glenn Beck and ‘fantasies of violence’ and blah blah blah? Have you ever listened to Ed Schultz? Good grief!

As for this….

Greg said:
equated argument with feces

Please let me know how you characterise this feces laden phrase too…

Greg, you are full-0-shit.

Harry Flashman said:
I can’t stand Obama. That being said, let me say this clearly – HE’S THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD WE TOLERATE THIS KIND OF ASSAULT ON THE OFFICE.

That is the only correct response from a right-winger here.

Thank you, Harry, for showing there is still some integrity on the right.

Fear,

“refresh my memory…. who brought up Glenn Beck and ‘fantasies of violence’ and blah blah blah?”
— I did… but you engaged the position and then retreated from my response, establishing a new front… you are either intentionally or mistakenly de-contextualizing the meaning of “changing the subject”.

Then you attack… as is your impulse.

I said it too, paul. Don’t think the King was listening, though.

CBS’s Mark Knoller wrote on Twitter late Monday morning that the Secret Service “says this morning it was aware of the book thrown at Pres. Obama yesterday” but that, after interviewing the “overexuberant” book thrower, it “deemed there was no threat intended – he just wanted Obama to have a copy of his book.” No arrest was made.

Reporter Tweet

Cecelia said:
Long before Obama was elected, and TRRK was calling the Secret Service on the poster he referenced, he and his friends snooped out that same poster’s personal demographics, via the internet. The deep end is definitely their side of the pool.

All the Marys in Heaven, Cecelia, another lie. You known very well that I wasn’t the one who uncovered Jeff Merrill’s faux pas, and you also know he was the infamous poster at this very site, when he wasn’t home at Koldys’ PHOX Phan Klub who made a tangible threat against our President and has since been unseen. Care to back off?

writer said:
I said it too, paul. Don’t think the King was listening, though.

But, you will notice where Flashman landed when the roll was called. His post was most admirable. Oppoistion without condoning threats. A good American is he.

sarainitaly said:
See:sarainitaly says:October 11, 2010 at 11:27 am (Quote)

Actually, you didn’t say it and you didn’t attribute it to the author, either, did you?

exiledtruther said:
So when shoes are thrown at Bush, it’s funny, but when a book is thrown at Obama it’s disgraceful? Nice try libs.

Did you find the shoe being thrown at Bush offensive by American standards or do you feel like it was an assualt? Just asking..trying to get a gauge on it.

And where did I condone threats, King? Went out of my way to say that anyone who would joke about assaults is a reprehensible person.

bealzebubba says:

Did you find the shoe being thrown at Bush offensive by American standards or do you feel like it was an assualt?

Actually, I didn’t think either, I thought the guy was just an idiot.

While we’re on the subject, King, let’s hear some more jokes about being ‘chased’, whenever I mention the violence at my inner city high school. Those are real knee slappers.

writer said:
While we’re on the subject, King, let’s hear some more jokes about being ‘chased’, whenever I mention the violence at my inner city high school. Those are real knee slappers.

Writer is solid, curious… what city do you teach in?

exiledtruther said:
Did you find the shoe being thrown at Bush offensive by American standards or do you feel like it was an assualt?

If he was intending on hitting Bush, which he clearly was, then that was assault.

I was a student, Greg, not a teacher. The teachers would regularly be threatened, too.

Paul Westlake said:
That is the only correct response from a right-winger here.

Thank you, Harry, for showing there is still some integrity on the right.

It is the norm for people to think that things thrown at the President is wrong, it is the exception when people are entertained by it.

writer said:
I was a student, Greg, not a teacher. The teachers would regularly be threatened, too.

Writer,

Got you… nothing funny about any of that… once taught in one of the worst schools in Chicago… criminal what some kids have to go through on a daily basis….

Hey Paul, any comment now that it turns out it wasn’t a right-winger? Any at all?

That’s what I keep telling the King, Greg. When you’re living it, it’s not quite so funny.

My post about the Prez bringing up ‘hand to hand combat’ was obviously tongue-in-cheek. You took it seriously,,, as is your impulse.

I then continued down the ‘reasonable people’ track and for that silly tangent I take the blame.

But for you to admit that YOU changed the subject and then accuse ME of doing it because I ‘engaged you’ is the same old circuitous BS that leftwingers pride themselves on.

Tell me again WHY we are talking about Williams? Has anyone with any credibility at all ever condoned his actions? Is he a republican? Can you think of any examples of people doing crazy shit because a crazy idea popped into their crazy skull that involved something a leftwinger said or did?

Last but not least….wtf does he have to do with some jerk who threw a book at POTUS? Seriously. ..

Greg said:
you are either intentionally or mistakenly de-contextualizing the meaning of “changing the subject”.

Methnks it’s YOU who needs a refresher on ‘the meaning’ of CHANGING THE SUBJECT.

As for this…..

Greg said:
They will likely implode as a consequence of their anger.

It’s pretty clear who is imploding/ angry. It’s also pretty clear who has ZERO sense of humor. Some pissed off leftwinger tosses some paper at the Prez and…. next thing you know…. leftwingers are conjuring images of bloody revolution.

Good grief! Subject-changer know thyself!

Paul Westlake said:
That is the only correct response from a right-winger here. Thank you, Harry, for showing there is still some integrity on the right.

Paul, yours is the correct response to a correct response from a right winger here. Thank you for showing there is still some integrity on the left.

By the way, if you look at my last post w-a-a-a-y up north, I said that the “flying missile” that the Daily Mail reported “narrowly missing” the President in the video looks more like a magazine with wings that appears to have missed by at least 10 feet. Frankly, the video doesn’t even look authentic. Not a condemnation of the actions of the person with the lousy aim, but certainly not condoning the act. I only posted to question the authenticity of the video.

That said, If someone in the crowd actually DID throw something at the President, then despite their brutally bad aim I call their actions reprehensible – no question. There, now we have two morally decent right wingers roaming these boards!

sarainitaly said:
Do we know what the book was, and who threw it? Is it possible it was someone who wrote the book, and wanted Obama to read it? Someone who was hoping to give it to Obama, but couldn’t get close enough? A political version of *panties*?

I didn’t like it when someone threw the shoe at Bush (and didn’t approve at ALL when Democrats set up *Throw the Shoe at Bush* games afterward, and I DON’T approve of someone throwing a book at Obama, either.

But, until we know who it was and the intent, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. It might have been an over zealous fan. Ya never know…

Nice call.

writer said:
I said it too, paul. Don’t think the King was listening, though.

I missed it but credit where it’s due. ;-)

The Real Royal King said:
ll the Marys in Heaven, Cecelia, another lie. You known very well that I wasn’t the one who uncovered Jeff Merrill’s faux pas, and you also know he was the infamous poster at this very site, when he wasn’t home at Koldys’ PHOX Phan Klub who made a tangible threat against our President and has since been unseen. Care to back off?

Well, since you posted there as Clucker AND as AAP, which one wasn’t you?

Paul Westlake said:
That is the only correct response from a right-winger here

Wow Paul…. “correct response”? Really? Thanks for wise judgement.

Again I say “DUH”.

sarainitaly said:
But, until we know who it was and the intent, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. It might have been an over zealous fan. Ya never know…

You were on the money, Sara!

I think TRRK, who equated your commonsense with support for violence, owes you an apology.

bealzebubba said:
Did you find the shoe being thrown at Bush offensive by American standards or do you feel like it was an assualt? Just asking..trying to get a gauge on it.

Knew this would come up. An Iraqi throwing something at an American President, while rude and threatening, is not the same as an American doing the same. It’s un-American to treat a President of any party that way.

But it’s good to know it wasn’t an actual attack of any kind. Just an overzealous book “peddler.” ;-)

Wouldn’t hold my breath on that one, Cecelia.

FearMonger said:
Wow Paul…. “correct response”? Really? Thanks for wise judgement.

Again I say “DUH”.

No, FM. There is a correct response here and Flashman nailed it. Period.

Corvax said:
It is the norm for people to think that things thrown at the President is wrong, it is the exception when people are entertained by it.

I would agree with that. But it doesn’t excuse the easily entertained. No?

Oh Please! There were people with assault rifles walking around tea party rallies, and you people are shocked.

exiledtruther said:
Hey Paul, any comment now that it turns out it wasn’t a right-winger? Any at all?

Yeah, I’m glad it wasn’t an actual aggression of any kind, as I would be if that was Bush standing there. But it was the response to the assumption that it WAS an aggressive act that prompted my comment to Flashman.

I thought the Iraqi was out of line – but I thought it was funny later when we re-watched the moves Bush used to avoid the shoe, and the expression on his face that said, “really!?” It was classic American: “nyah, nyah, you missed me… oh, and you’re an asshole!”

Bush had his moments and I try to give him credit for them when they pop back into memory.

Pauls says:

But it’s good to know it wasn’t an actual attack of any kind. Just an overzealous book “peddler.” ;-)

So can we take that as your apology for accusing a right-winger of violence?

Andy Lamb said:
There, now we have two morally decent right wingers roaming these boards!

I don’t recall anyone condoning it. Perhaps I should go back and re-read the thread?

Too funny but oh so typical….

“The Secret Service said Monday it questioned and released an overexuberant fan of Obama’s who had tossed a paperback book near the president.”

lmao…. seriously lmfao!
_____________________

My question is….. what did this thread EVER have to do with anybody on ‘the right’? From the story to the comments ‘the right’ has behaved just fine. The faux outrage from the left is friggin’ hilarious, though!

The unusual thing about this story as it relates to Mediaite is that there are no (R)’s to smear but but but…. that sure as hell didn’t stop it form happening. No tolerance for EVEN JUST ONE thread NOT devoted to sliming the right…. just like FOX News.

Like I said… too funny but oh so typical.

Andy Lamb said:
Paul, yours is the correct response to a correct response from a right winger here. Thank you for showing there is still some integrity on the left.

You’re welcome. Well said, and thanks for the acknowledgment.

Andy Lamb said:
By the way, if you look at my last post w-a-a-a-y up north, I said that the “flying missile” that the Daily Mail reported “narrowly missing” the President in the video looks more like a magazine with wings that appears to have missed by at least 10 feet. Frankly, the video doesn’t even look authentic. Not a condemnation of the actions of the person with the lousy aim, but certainly not condoning the act. I only posted to question the authenticity of the video.

I can see why you would say that, but internet video is severely compressed, and small, moving objects with moving edges (like a flapping book) is tough for digital cameras to capture cleanly to begin with. The still image is a better reference for judging post-produced artifice, and the clarity of the book cover is consistent with the lighting and color temperature of the rest of the frame. So the video is authentic – unless LucasArts got a hold of it. ;-)

Andy Lamb said:
That said, If someone in the crowd actually DID throw something at the President, then despite their brutally bad aim I call their actions reprehensible – no question. There, now we have two morally decent right wingers roaming these boards!

Agreed. I may disagree with your ideas, but I appreciate your ethics in general. :)

exiledtruther said:
Pauls says:

But it’s good to know it wasn’t an actual attack of any kind. Just an overzealous book “peddler.” ;-)

So can we take that as your apology for accusing a right-winger of violence?

Show me where I accused right-wingers of violence in this incident and I will gladly retract and apologize.

Sorry Paul, it was Greg. We’ll await his apology.

Isidro Garcia says:
Oh Please! There were people with assault rifles walking around tea party rallies, and you people are shocked.

Isidro, perhaps you didn’t hear it was an Obama supporter. We’ll await your apology as well.

Harry Flashman says: “Obama is a loathsome socialist,…”

YOu watch too much Fox Republican/Tea Party propaganda. Obama is a liberal corporatist. That’s why GM is being put back into the marketplace. If Obama were a “socialist,” either the government or the workers there would end up with the stock.

Your statement is another piece of evidence that Fox is misinforming and therefore damaging the people who watch that nonsense.

personally, i think i had the most correct response…
;O)

Paul Westlake said:
I would agree with that. But it doesn’t excuse the easily entertained. No?

You learn a lot about the people that find it entertaining and devalue their opinion for future reference. I very much dislike the President’s policies, I also equally dislike the throwing of objects in his direction. It is highly disrespectful and in certain situations could be a safety concern.

Word just came out that the title of the book was “When Dinosaurs and Jesus Roamed the Earth”.

Isidro Garcia said:
Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

Oh Please! There were people with assault rifles walking around tea party rallies, and you people are shocked.

Any credibility you may have had just disappeared with that asinine statement.

Andy Lamb said:
There, now we have two morally decent right wingers roaming these boards!

FearMonger said:
I don’t recall anyone condoning it. Perhaps I should go back and re-read the thread?
Too funny but oh so typical….

My comment was light sarcasm directed at Paul, that’s all. There may have been one poster who said “good!” about the book toss. Everyone knows that plenty of vitriol comes from both extremes, right and left, and Mr. Westlake would admit that too. His comment only made it SEEM like he thinks left wingers are better behaved. Paul and I go way back, like Muhammad Ali and joe Frazier……just imagine me as Ali and Paul as Frazier.

sarainitaly said:
personally, i think i had the most correct response…
;O)

I give you a lot of credit for your clinical approach. You started out well enough, but fell off the rails when you brought the shoe incident in. It’s not the same as an American citizen, and I don’t remember any “throw the shoe at Bush” games, but if they happened, I condemn those actions with equal vigor. Your initial point would have been better made without the partisan qualifiers. The reason I singled out Flashman’s comment, was because he made it clear he wasn’t an Obama fan, and then made an unequivocal statement of respect for the Office. No qualifiers, no “Dems do it, too” excuses. Just a clean, clear statement on the merits of this incident. Sometimes, that’s really the only approach, as when I said yesterday, to exiledtruther, no less:

Paul Westlake said:
exiledtruther said:
Paul, I’ve had the death of loved ones mocked and been called a c**t on this sight by libs

I would never do that and I’m sincerely ashamed of those liberals who have done that personal wrong to you. I didn’t do it, and I wouldn’t do it, but I apologize for it being done all the same. No other point to make here. That’s wrong and intolerable and I’m sorry it happened to you.

Sometimes there aren’t points to score. Sometimes there’s just humanity and civic responsibility. I hope you’ll be able to do better next time. ;-)

Andy Lamb said:
My comment was light sarcasm directed at Paul, that’s all. There may have been one poster who said “good!” about the book toss. Everyone knows that plenty of vitriol comes from both extremes, right and left, and Mr. Westlake would admit that too. His comment only made it SEEM like he thinks left wingers are better behaved. Paul and I go way back, like Muhammad Ali and joe Frazier……just imagine me as Ali and Paul as Frazier.

[whistling past the graveyard]

;-)

Corvax said:
You learn a lot about the people that find it entertaining and devalue their opinion for future reference. I very much dislike the President’s policies, I also equally dislike the throwing of objects in his direction. It is highly disrespectful and in certain situations could be a safety concern.

Agree with everything except the “dislike the President’s policies” part… I’d like to see one get through clean. ;-)

And it’s true, the unfettered nature of these boards does indeed provide remarkable insight sometimes… lots of times… OK, all the time! ;-)

Paul Westlake said:
You started out well enough, but fell off the rails when you brought the shoe incident in. It’s not the same as an American citizen, and I don’t remember any “throw the shoe at Bush” games, but if they happened, I condemn those actions with equal vigor.

“I didn’t like it when someone threw the shoe at Bush (and didn’t approve at ALL when Democrats set up *Throw the Shoe at Bush* games afterward, and I DON’T approve of someone throwing a book at Obama, either.”

Off the rails? To say I didn’t like it when it happened, even though it was celebrated widely on the Left?
You don’t remember any games? really?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/01/obama-site-link.html
http://www.killeryellow.com/blog/2009/01/20/inauguration-day-and-the-bush-legacy-2/
http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/01/19/Pre-Inaugural-shoe-toss-in-DC/UPI-27381232417642/
http://www.evite.com/pages/invite/viewInvite.jsp?x=1&inviteId=ZKJCZFXABLGMIXOWUJYX&viewAll=true
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/throwing-shoes-blow-bush-dc-during-inau

http://www.throwashoeatbush.com/
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×4662121
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2008/dec/17/bush-shoe-throw-game
http://kotaku.com/5113244/even-more-bush-shoe-throwing-games-surface

Paul Westlake said:
An Iraqi throwing something at an American President, while rude and threatening, is not the same as an American doing the same.

Splitting hairs Paul, I believe it’s reprehensible no matter who did it. Wouldn’t you find it equally disturbing for an American to throw a Keilbasa at the let’s say President of France? Well, maybe not France how about Canada?

Andy Lamb said:
Paul and I go way back, like Muhammad Ali and joe Frazier……just imagine me as Ali and Paul as Frazier.

So you’re the good looking one?

Paul Westlake said:
Sometimes there aren’t points to score. Sometimes there’s just humanity and civic responsibility. I hope you’ll be able to do better next time. ;-)

And that’s exactly what I did in my post when I held off accusing anyone, and said:

Do we know what the book was, and who threw it? Is it possible it was someone who wrote the book, and wanted Obama to read it? Someone who was hoping to give it to Obama, but couldn’t get close enough? A political version of *panties*? I didn’t like it when someone threw the shoe at Bush (and didn’t approve at ALL when Democrats set up *Throw the Shoe at Bush* games afterward, and I DON’T approve of someone throwing a book at Obama, either. But, until we know who it was and the intent, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. It might have been an over zealous fan. Ya never know…

Paul Westlake said:
You’re selfish and rude and wrong about everything and I’m done with treating you with the same respect you refuse to afford others. Fuck you.

Paul Westlake said:
You’re an idiot on your best day. I will never click on one of your links so don’t bother, sophist.

Paul Westlake said:
you’re an ass, AND an idiot. buh bye

Paul Westlake said:
You’re a sophist and a fool to think that shit works on me.

Paul Westlake said:
And you condescending rhetoric is of the same cloth as the rest of your conservative cohorts.

sarainitaly said:
“I didn’t like it when someone threw the shoe at Bush (and didn’t approve at ALL when Democrats set up *Throw the Shoe at Bush* games afterward, and I DON’T approve of someone throwing a book at Obama, either.”

Off the rails? To say I didn’t like it when it happened, even though it was celebrated widely on the Left?
You don’t remember any games? really?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/01/obama-site-link.html
http://www.killeryellow.com/blog/2009/01/20/inauguration-day-and-the-bush-legacy-2/
http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/01/19/Pre-Inaugural-shoe-toss-in-DC/UPI-27381232417642/
http://www.evite.com/pages/invite/viewInvite.jsp?x=1&inviteId=ZKJCZFXABLGMIXOWUJYX&viewAll=true
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/throwing-shoes-blow-bush-dc-during-inau

http://www.throwashoeatbush.com/
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×4662121
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2008/dec/17/bush-shoe-throw-game
http://kotaku.com/5113244/even-more-bush-shoe-throwing-games-surface

That’s fucked up, Sara. I won’t support it or apologize for it. But I want to point out a few things…

Some of those links reference the same thing, and flash animation game makers are well-known for their utterly irreverent and repulsive web games – some of which are so vile that even WE can’t cover that ground on THIS site. ;-)

And the link to the Obama campaign was tenuous at best, and certainly NOT something the campaign leadership would have endorsed – sure, they don’t mind when Americans take it upon themselves to help the pro-Obama cause, but they know it can backfire and wouldn’t even think about wading into those waters.

One other thing in this link – http://www.killeryellow.com/blog/2009/01/20/inauguration-day-and-the-bush-legacy-2/

Notice the sign over the booth – “To Obama: No War!” Whoever setup this booth has a BIG axe to grind on America’s overseas adventurism under Bush and is taking out anger in a juvenile and unpatriotic way. But the inclusion of Obama in that sentiment is telling – it seems less like automatic partisanship and more like anti-war beatnik.

All that being said, you’re absolutely right about Bush shoe-throwing games, and it was wrong. Nobody gives a crap what I think but I condemn it all the same. No argument, no qualifiers.

Penguin60 said:
Splitting hairs Paul, I believe it’s reprehensible no matter who did it. Wouldn’t you find it equally disturbing for an American to throw a Keilbasa at the let’s say President of France? Well, maybe not France how about Canada?

It may have been an Iraqi who threw the first shoe, but I think you can see from just a few of the links above, it wasn’t Iraqis who were throwing them at Bush’s likeness at Obama’s inauguration, and that were even linked to Obama’s web site. And it wasn’t just Iraqi’s who were laughing and setting up games online, as Penquin and Exiled truther pointed out.

sarainitaly said:
and didn’t approve at ALL when Democrats set up *Throw the Shoe at Bush* games afterward

What I meant was, leave that comment at the door. There’s ample opportunity for you to score that point later. That’s why I pasted my comment to exiledtruther from yesterday – no qualifiers, no “they do it, too” excuses. Sometimes the best and most respectful thing to do is simply say “that’s wrong and I’m sorry.” Nothing else. I think I’ve demonstrated my capacity to do that quite amply. I’m fair and I expect fair treatment in return for my attention. I don’t think that’s out of line.

And when I went off on you the other day, we were both going off, and I still have plenty of bones to pick with you on those points but I’m willing to let it go in the interest of amity. Whaddaya say? ;-)

sarainitaly said:
It may have been an Iraqi who threw the first shoe, but I think you can see from just a few of the links above, it wasn’t Iraqis who were throwing them at Bush’s likeness at Obama’s inauguration, and that were even linked to Obama’s web site. And it wasn’t just Iraqi’s who were laughing and setting up games online, as Penquin and Exiled truther pointed out.

You’re right, and I unequivocally condemn those actions. You wouldn’t catch me throwing a shoe at a likeness of Bush in a public space like that – and I only qualify it that way because I’m pretty sure I threw a rolled-up sock at the TV in my living room during a SotU address several years ago… but I bet if I asked for a show of hands, we’d see a lot of similar stories vis-a-vis Obama. Venting in the privacy of our homes is all good. Making a spectacle of an un-American activity is just plain wrong. No question.

Paul Westlake said:

And the link to the Obama campaign was tenuous at best, and certainly NOT something the campaign leadership would have endorsed

Asked about the “Bush Shoe Toss” advertised on Obama’s site, Douglass said, “That obviously does not sound like any description of public service that we have in mind. But again, we are not in the business of regulating this. We’re just in the business of giving people opportunities.”

A few minutes later, after talking with her colleagues, Douglass called back to say that the committee has removed the “Bush Shoe Toss” from the site because “it does not appear those activities are connected to community service.”

Gazan, who was inspired by the Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at Bush, is undeterred. Asked if he plans to go forward with the “Bush Shoe Toss” contest now that it has been deleted from USAService.org, Gazan said, “Oh, yeah, we have 22,000 students across the street at Los Angeles Community College.”

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/01/obama-site-link.html

Paul Westlake said:
And when I went off on you the other day, we were both going off, and I still have plenty of bones to pick with you on those points but I’m willing to let it go in the interest of amity. Whaddaya say? ;-)

I think I’ll take a pass.
I wasn’t “going off on you”. i read your out of the blue, over the top attack on me (and others), and questioned/challenged the reason for your attack. http://tinyurl.com/3yz48ng

This is just a smidgen of what I got back:

Paul Westlake said:
You’re selfish and rude and wrong about everything and I’m done with treating you with the same respect you refuse to afford others. Fuck you.

Paul Westlake said:
You’re an idiot on your best day. I will never click on one of your links so don’t bother, sophist.

Paul Westlake said:
you’re an ass, AND an idiot. buh bye

Paul Westlake said:
You’re a sophist and a fool to think that shit works on me.

Paul Westlake said:
And you condescending rhetoric is of the same cloth as the rest of your conservative cohorts.

Even when you were wrong about the viagra amendment, as I pointed out, you replied to me with smug condescension. So, sorry if I am unwilling to attempt to engage you in another civil exchange. You have proved to be incapable of civility.

sarainitaly says: “But, until we know who it was and the intent, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. It might have been an over zealous fan.”

It was: http://www.mediaite.com/online/update-obama-book-tosser-is-a-fan-of-the-president-not-a-detractor/

Stephen Hogan said:
If he was intending on hitting Bush, which he clearly was, then that was assault.

Well obviously, we now know that the book being thrown was a fan so that seems to close the story. However, had we not known…could this not be considered assault as well?

Paul Westlake said:
It’s un-American to treat a President of any party that way.

At least I know you’re on the level with that. ;)

sarainitaly said:
I think I’ll take a pass.
I wasn’t “going off on you”. i read your out of the blue, over the top attack on me (and others), and questioned/challenged the reason for your attack. http://tinyurl.com/3yz48ng

This is just a smidgen of what I got back:

Even when you were wrong about the viagra amendment, as I pointed out, you replied to me with smug condescension. So, sorry if I am unwilling to attempt to engage you in another civil exchange. You have proved to be incapable of civility.

You know, Sara, this is the very last time I attempt to engage you seriously. You were right about ONE thing in this thread and ONE thing in that thread, and WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING ELSE! And even when I relax my guard and meet you halfway, you continue to believe you’re the only one wronged, the only one who is ever correct, the only one who ever says anything of relevance, and continue o be rude, condescending and patronizing to everyone you disagree with.

sarainitaly said:
Paul Westlake said:
You’re a sophist and a fool to think that shit works on me.

Paul Westlake said:
And you condescending rhetoric is of the same cloth as the rest of your conservative cohorts.

And your only response to this…

Paul Westlake said:
sarainitaly said:
I can see how you got *socialized medicine is evil* from socialized medicine is fun!… oh please.

You’re a sophist and a fool to think that shit works on me.

sarainitaly said:
And FWIW, I was replying to James, and it had NOTHING to do with you.

I’M the one you chimed in on with your “prove it” mantra, and THEN I revisited your lies about socialized medicine. You continue to be as unimpressive as your ideology. Here’s why:

sarainitaly said:
So, AGAIN – you are wrong. It was sarcasm…

Paul Westlake said:
You said “socialized medicine is fun” or something to that effect. Are you saying you were serious, that it wasn’t sarcasm? Get real.

Thanks for proving both of my points – you’re an ass, AND an idiot. buh bye

…was this…

sarainitaly said:
Paul Westlake said:
You’re selfish and rude and wrong about everything and I’m done with treating you with the same respect you refuse to afford others. Fuck you.

Paul Westlake said:
You’re an idiot on your best day. I will never click on one of your links so don’t bother, sophist.

Paul Westlake said:
you’re an ass, AND an idiot. buh bye

Paul Westlake said:
You’re a sophist and a fool to think that shit works on me.

Paul Westlake said:
And you condescending rhetoric is of the same cloth as the rest of your conservative cohorts.

Can you just *feel* all that respect!?

You’re busted. You lie and lie and when you lose, you run away. Enough. I don’t care if you ARE the broken clock that’s right twice a day, I’m never going to bother treating anything you say seriously again, since that’s obviously the way you treat me. Good riddance.

Penguin60 said:
Splitting hairs Paul, I believe it’s reprehensible no matter who did it. Wouldn’t you find it equally disturbing for an American to throw a Keilbasa at the let’s say President of France?

No, I said it was disrespectful of the Iraqi, too. But calling an Iraqi “un-American” isn’t exactly an insult. ;-)

But this is MUCH more telling of your attitude…

Penguin60 said:
Well, maybe not France how about Canada?

My, don’t we hold a grudge. Do you still call them “freedom fries?” Do you really think it would be OK to throw a book, or a Polish sausage, at the President of France? Do you realize how quickly you negated the point you were trying to make? Seriously, dude. You’re like an automatic blow-up bop bag that keeps hitting itself – http://www.amazon.com/Rocket-USA-Bozo-Bop-Bag/dp/B00067TAWG/ref=sr_1_1?s=toys-and-games&ie=UTF8&qid=1286841967&sr=1-1

As most readers, I hate the throwing of anything at anyone. We can disagree strongly, but we are not permitted to hit. My only hope is that the intent was not to hit the President, but to give him a copy of the Constitution…

Just like the baggers to pat the back of someone who will end up in jail! The baggers do have a history to be proud of, love of nazi games, hate of gays, burn the books, lie and have Fox scare grandma and crazie old gramps! Long live the tea party!

Paul Westlake said:
You’re busted. You lie and lie and when you lose, you run away.

Busted? Lie? Run away? How in the heck do you think you proved any of that? By repeating your nasty insults back to me? Busted for WHAT? Lied about WHAT? Ran away? Sitting here on my computer, replying to you every time, how do you get *run away*?

Seriously dude…. ?

“You were right about ONE thing in this thread and ONE thing in that thread, and WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING ELSE! And even when I relax my guard and meet you halfway, you continue to believe you’re the only one wronged, the only one who is ever correct, the only one who ever says anything of relevance, and continue o be rude, condescending and patronizing to everyone you disagree with.”

I was not wrong about anything. You disagree, and you attack when you can’t prove it, but that doesn’t make me *wrong*. Never do I claim to be the only one wronged, correct or relevant. There are many great posters here, you just aren’t one of them.

I am rude to people who are rude to me – I do try to be polite, and was quite polite to you, but it becomes quite difficult when called an ass, liar, and told to fuck off BY YOU (after I thought we had actually engaged in a few civil discussions), and am harassed repeatedly by a certain person here.

Paul Westlake said:
My, don’t we hold a grudge. Do you still call them “freedom fries?” Do you really think it would be OK to throw a book, or a Polish sausage, at the President of France? Do you realize how quickly you negated the point you were trying to make? Seriously, dude. You’re like an automatic blow-up bop bag that keeps hitting itself

Seriously dude, get a life, it was a joke. Are you that thick? You are so obsessed with “making points” trying to get the upper hand, always being right. You are one of the reasons that this great divide is now in this country. Automatic blow-up bag? Man, get some help.

Penguin60 said:
Seriously dude, get a life, it was a joke.

I lmao when I saw that Penguin. You gotta excuse Paul and Greg and their ilk. Their party keeps doubling down on stupid and the shit ain’t funny. Now they are barking up the ‘political contributions’ tree and EVERYBODY KNOWS the backlash that’s gonna come from them demanding ‘transparency’ on THAT particular issue. Desperation is dangerous and ABSOLUTELY NOT FUNNY!!

Also, they keep putting all their eggs in the November 3rd basket with the hope that We The People haven’t revoked their ‘mandate’. Thing is, there never was a ‘mandate’. There was an opportunity for progressives to build concensus (which they could not even do within their own party) and ‘put politics aside’ in pusuit of ‘hope and change’. Instead they decided they knew what was best and thwarted the will of the people (not to mention our representative government) all in the name of some nonexistent ‘mandate’.

How many (D)’s got elected running on fiscally conservative platforms? How fiscally conservative have the (D)’s been? There goes your ‘mandate’. Not to mention all the ‘pay as you go’ BS which was almost as quickly abandoned as the ‘no new taxes’ promises and the ‘close Gitmo’ joke.

So…. on November 3rd will they admit that they had it wrong when they ignored their promises to rise above politics and instead treated their OPPORTUNITY as a hammer to drive leftwing policy?

I doubt it. I have no reason to expect anything other than “It’s Bush’s fault/ Boehners fault/ Tea Partys fault/ (R)’s fault”…. anybody and everybodys fault EXCEPT Paul’s, who pines for socialism.

Tell me Paul, have you ever lived in a socialist society? Can you show me an example where it has worked?

FearMonger said:
I lmao when I saw that Penguin. You gotta excuse Paul and Greg and their ilk.

I had a go around with him before, but seemed to chill. It’s quite amusing when a broadbrush is used to paint everyone, and that’s what I see when reading their posts. Telling me as a conservative I want to throw old ladies and children under a bus just makes me bust a gut. They have know idea. Being passionate is one thing being a “reactionary” to use their term is another.

Penguin60 said:
Seriously dude, get a life, it was a joke. Are you that thick? …

Automatic blow-up bag? Man, get some help.

Oh, you can dish it out but can’t take it, eh? When have I seen that before? Oh, right last time I spoke with you!

LOL

Penguin60 said:
You are so obsessed with “making points” trying to get the upper hand, always being right. You are one of the reasons that this great divide is now in this country.

Translation: “When I make my points, it’s rational critique based on civic pride, but when a leftie makes his points, it’s just ego and selfishness and nobody cares so go away.”

Now let’s wander over to FM’s sophistry…

FearMonger said:
Desperation is dangerous and ABSOLUTELY NOT FUNNY!!

Then why do you employ it so often? Why do you need so many exclamation points and GIANT BLOCK LETTERS all the time? Could it be because you’re trying to let us know you’re SHOUTING? AND IF YOUR SHOUTING ALL THE TIME, ISN’T IT MAYBE YOU WHO COMES ACROSS AS A TAD DESPERATE?

FearMonger said:
Thing is, there never was a ‘mandate’. There was an opportunity for progressives to build concensus

And more typical conservative hypocrisy – Bush lost the popular vote, barely edged Gore in the Electoral College and ultimately was appointed to the office by SCOTUS, which people like FM perceived as the mother of all mandates. Obama dominated in both popular vote AND the Electoral College, even winning over some fairly red states, but that “an opportunity to build consensus.”

FM, we had one, long, fairly decent conversation once, and you’ve been rude, condescending, and sophist with nearly every comment you’ve made to me since then. And on top of that, you’ve been utterly wrong.

When you and Penguin are done congratulating each other over how wonderful and clever you are, you can also celebrate my no longer taking either one of you seriously. Mazel tov!

Paul Westlake said:
And more typical conservative hypocrisy – Bush lost the popular vote, barely edged Gore in the Electoral College and ultimately was appointed to the office by SCOTUS, which people like FM perceived as the mother of all mandates.

Do you even read what you write? This is just as ridiculous as the rest of your garbage. Once again you insult millions of people. After Bush’s re-election in 2004 there was some talk of a ‘mandate’…. even my ultra-liberal relatives said ‘I think people just want to see Bush finish what he started” but but but…. to accuse ‘people like me’ of considering an election that close ‘a mandate’ is just sad and pathetic.

Paul Westlake said:
you’ve been utterly wrong.

like you being utterly wrong about a 53% to 46% victory in a down economy with 2 unpopular wars, a civil war in Iraq, a bird flu outbreak and historic levels of liberal bitching. A 3-4% swing and we’d have Prez JMac right now.

And how you are utterly wrong about teh ‘mandate’ for COTUS. After all, the Prez can’t do it alone, right? And yet you are willfully ignorant/ intentionally obtuse about the FACTS that I have pointed out to you many many times. This is a representative government and when a (D) gets elected running on conservative principles that is NOT a ‘mandate’ for liberal legislation.

It’s really not that hard to understand unless you are just thick as a brick or stupid.

And btw… if socialism is ‘utterly right’ then I will gladly accept your label of being ‘utterly wrong’. Whatever is the opposite of YOU, Paul. The ‘mandate’ will soon be here in the form of a landslide vote from We The People rejecting (once and for all) the socialist policies set forth by you and your ilk.

I know, I know, in your opinion they didn’t go far ENOUGH…. so it’s gonna REALLY suck that even this socialism lite is unacceptable to the rest of America. I guess it’s just because you didn’t explain it right. After all, us ‘utterly wrong’ stoopid folk don’t know what’s best for us…

Paul Westlake said:
Then why do you employ it so often? Why do you need so many exclamation points and GIANT BLOCK LETTERS all the time? Could it be because you’re trying to let us know you’re SHOUTING? AND IF YOUR SHOUTING ALL THE TIME, ISN’T IT MAYBE YOU WHO COMES ACROSS AS A TAD DESPERATE?

“Giant block letters”?? LMAO! Good grief Paul. Really? “GIANT”? Why am I not surprised? Now capital letters are GIANT…. a skewed and twisted view of reality…. just like the rest of your interpretations. You are one of the worst I have ever seen about taking license with other peoples words. You’ve done it to me several times in our short history… turning ‘some’ into ALL or ‘sometimes’ into ALWAYS and then tearing down the strawman you created. It’s a BS played out tactic.

FWIW…. i use the caps for emphasis on certain words or phrases because I don’t know how to make italics or bold on this site and I want people …. when they read what I write…. to interpret it the way it sounds in my head. That’s why I use the dots. That’s why I write the way i write….. and it’s NEVER screaming, you miserable fucker.

You wanna accuse ME of being rude? From the first time I remember you on the Grayson thread you have been obnoxious and hateful and almost always condescending. I could provide dozens of examples but but but…. the only ones here who would pay them any mind already know what you are.

FearMonger said:
Do you even read what you write? This is just as ridiculous as the rest of your garbage. Once again you insult millions of people. After Bush’s re-election in 2004 there was some talk of a ‘mandate’…. even my ultra-liberal relatives said ‘I think people just want to see Bush finish what he started” but but but…. to accuse ‘people like me’ of considering an election that close ‘a mandate’ is just sad and pathetic.

Bush never had a mandate of any kind, except immediately after 9/11 when the entire nation rallied to the same cause. He squandered that goodwill within a year and never had a mandate after that. He was re-elected because Kerry was swift boated, plain and simple. Obama swept in on a major victory with massive coattails that openly and obviously repudiated conservative policy, but that’s NOT a mandate. You think I don’t know how your mind works? Please.

OK, giant is hyperbole, which, of course, you’re no stranger to…

FearMonger said:
And yet you are willfully ignorant/ intentionally obtuse about the FACTS that I have pointed out to you many many times.

I have refuted your facts, and those I haven’t I have accepted. The ratio is about 49:1. Just cut it out. You make no progress with me and just reveal your own sophistry in the process. And that first comment on that Grayson thread was made after I had read paragraph after paragraph of right wing venom – and it was my first time looking at these boards closely, so I was pissed, and less familiar with the usual suspects than I am now. You want o keep holding that one against me, I can point out that you’re entire thesis was based on incorrect assumptions that I proved wrong on multiple counts, to the point where you even said I’d opened your eyes about something (the kernel of which escapes me at the moment). And, as you recall, I was more than fair throughout that exchange. You’ve reverted back to form since and compete with the like of Penguin and Pappy for the highest levels of insulting snark, aimed not just at individuals, but at ALL liberals. You have proven yourself to be blinded by hyper-partisan rage and I really don’t care any more.

Paul Westlake said:
Bush never had a mandate of any kind,

That’s what I said, dumbass. YOU accused ME (people like me) of believing the 2000 election was ‘teh mother of all mandates”…..

Paul Westlake said:
Bush lost the popular vote, barely edged Gore in the Electoral College and ultimately was appointed to the office by SCOTUS, which people like FM perceived as the mother of all mandates.

and I said you were sad and pathetic for saying such a stupid thing. I said there was SOME TALK of a mandate after the 2004 election… you really are hard of reading. In other words, YOUR COMPREHENSION SUCKS.

Paul Westlake said:
You think I don’t know how your mind works? Please

I don’t just THINK it… I KNOW it Paul. If you did you wouldn’t misinterpret half of what I write.

Paul Westlake said:
You have proven yourself to be blinded by hyper-partisan rage and I really don’t care any more.

Sophist, know thyself. You can’t even comprehend what is clearly written right in front of your face… THAT’S what happens when ‘hyper-partisan rage’ clouds your vision. So tell me again who is ‘blinded’ Paul. YOU are the only one who is getting pissed off.

And btw…. since your thinking isn’t even clear enough to remember what you yourself are referring to with this….

Paul Westlake said:
the point where you even said I’d opened your eyes about something (the kernel of which escapes me at the moment).

it was that I had overestimated the impact of MSM calling the election for Gore while the polls were still open in Florida. I admitted it openly and that could hardly be qualified as

Paul Westlake said:
that you’re entire thesis was based on incorrect assumptions that I proved wrong on multiple counts

My ‘thesis’ that nothing changes the fact that Bush had more votes in Florida and therefore won the 2000 election? You mean THAT ‘thesis’? Yeah… you really ‘proved wrong’ my ‘incorrect assumptions’. Good grief dude. You really are a pompous fucker but but but… even worse than that…. even though you have been proven wrong on many counts on many threads by many different posters you continue to hold SUCH a high opinion of yourself! Delusion must be a wonderful thing.

Us crazy right-wingers are wrong wrong wrong but the dipshit leftwing wannabe socialist has it all figured out. I’m glad you do actually put great weight on ‘the only poll that counts”. We’ll see if you accept the will of the people graciously of if you continue project your failings onto somebody (anybody) else.

Good luck with the whole ‘socialism is good’ theme, though. Seriously, I want to help you repeat that as often as possible.

Oh yeah… and btw Paul. I read your ‘locomotive’ analogy. It’s EXACTLY what the (D)’s did to Bush for 8 years.

You’ve got a lotta nerve talkin’ that shit about (R)’s who do most of the hard work in This Great Country and carry all those entitlements on their backs. And if some of the ‘fat cats’ have decided to sit on the sidelines until Obama the Attack Dog has been neutered then who can blame them? He’s been demonizing them (just like YOU do Paul) constantly and with the most venemous rhetoric.

Sharp edge on the other side of that particular sword, huh?

After reading your website Paul, I’m rotflmao that you have the audacity to call ME ‘hyper-partisan’. Good grief dude. I encourage anyone who wants to see some REAL partisanship click on Pauls picture.

Paul Westlake said:
the highest levels of insulting snark, aimed not just at individuals, but at ALL liberals.

Replace the last word with ‘conservative’ and that quote describes your rhetoric perfectly.

FearMonger said:
Oh yeah… and btw Paul. I read your ‘locomotive’ analogy. It’s EXACTLY what the (D)’s did to Bush for 8 years.

Total, 100%, Grade-A bullshit. And you know it. The filibusters prove it. False equivalency, as usual.

FearMonger said:
Paul Westlake said:
the highest levels of insulting snark, aimed not just at individuals, but at ALL liberals.

Replace the last word with ‘conservative’ and that quote describes your rhetoric perfectly.

And anyone who reads our comments can infer for themselves who’s being fair and who’s twisting facts to fit preconceived notions. Enough.

Paul Westlake said:
Total, 100%, Grade-A bullshit. And you know it. The filibusters prove it. False equivalency, as usual.

Right. (D) filibusters were rampant. As was the gnashing of teeth over ‘the nuclear option’ those darned republicans were threatening to use. They were REALLY against that whole ‘nuclear’ thing. Remember that Paul?

As for this…

Paul Westlake said:
And anyone who reads our comments can infer for themselves who’s being fair and who’s twisting facts to fit preconceived notions.

Right again. I’ve already seen plenty of inferences regarding your posts Paul. Your bipolar tendencies fool some on certain threads but …. when the manic shit bubbles to the surface…. ‘fairness’ is the last thing on your list.

Jekyll and Hyde comes to mind. I actually quite enjoy the kinder gentler Paul but but but… the combative socialist Paul is most entertaining.

Again… good luck with that pro-socialism stance. Sincerely… say it loud and proud.

FearMonger said:
bipolar

Ah, my ability to compartmentalize confuses you and causes you to offer up a bit of pop psychology, which is just a more polite way of calling me a “libtard.” You got nothing in the tank, FM.

The Real Royal King said:
You hideous human, vile trash, permeating stench. It is never acceptable to assault anyone, and it is particularly inappropriate to assault our President, whoever he or she may be. America is a far worse place because of the likes of you.

If memory serves, I believe you were telling us how Mr. Bush deserved the assault. Is there a dual standard here?

I have 3 guesses as to what the “book” might have been that was allegedly hurled at the current occupant of the White House:

1. The Constitution.

2. “Dreams From My Commie Daddy”

3. “Rules for Rat-icals.”

Paul Westlake said:
Enough.

Paul Westlake said:
You got nothing in the tank, FM.

Paul Westlake said:
I really don’t care any more.

again you prove yourself wrong.

You and your desperate party are throwing everything including the kitchen sink at the electorate and they aren’t buying your BS.

Like you said Paul…. reap it.

Paul Westlake said:
Oh, you can dish it out but can’t take it, eh? When have I seen that before? Oh, right last time I spoke with you!
LOL

Translation: “When I make my points, it’s rational critique based on civic pride, but when a leftie makes his points, it’s just ego and selfishness and nobody cares so go away.”

Wow, schooled once again, thanks for the education. Narcissus doesn’t hold a candle to you.
Translation? Is that in the world according to paul? Dish it out but can’t take it? Take what? That’s not even close to coherent. What was your “leftie” point with the clown punch? I have my ideas…nevermind.
Hey, how about this? Hope the Yankees win. Ciao. I’m engaging my own ignore feature.

Penguin60 said:
Hey, how about this? Hope the Yankees win.

I don’t.

Penguin60 said:
Ciao. I’m engaging my own ignore feature.

Bye.