The Night of the SOTU: From the Sublime to the Ridiculous

OK, I lied. Tuesday night’s State of the Union spectacle ranged from the not so sublime to the not as ridiculous as we might have expected. Unfortunately every time Barack Obama speaks the expectations are sky-high. Many hoped for soaring rhetoric that would give a worried nation the security of knowing we have a plan to get us out of this economic slump.  The rhetoric was hardly soaring and the plan was vague at best. Even liberal pundits who avoid criticism of Obama at all costs could not avoid the seeming contradiction of a five-year freeze in discretionary spending coupled with a 1960’s space-race like initiative to increase our global competitiveness. How do we improve our education and technology without investment? How do we invest with a freeze in discretionary spending? MSNBC commentator Lawrence O’Donnell called it a mathematical puzzle with no solution. The other assertion made by the President that was awfully hard to swallow was that any bill with earmarks would be vetoed by him. Senate Leader Harry Reid has already gone on the record calling this notion absurd. I suppose the only highlight from the speech was Obama’s reasonable suggestion that health care reform had room for improvement and that should be pursued. Repeal of course, is not the answer.

Sometimes the annual mandatory drudgery of the State of the Union is at least enlivened by the sports arena atmosphere on the House floor. When Obama says a great lib talking point, the Democrats rise from the seats and cheer. The Republicans sit on their hands. Every once in a while everyone rises. But not this year. This year the ghost of the very much alive but badly wounded Gabby Giffords cast a pall on the whole affair. In a show of “civility” many Republicans and Democrats agreed to sit together, tossing out the unwritten convention of segregated seating. At first, I loved the idea. It meant that each Congressman would have to decide when to clap based on the merits of the speech and not on “peer pressure”. But the bottom line was this reduced the number of standing ovations and applause breaks. At one point, when Obama made a fish joke about Washington bureaucracy, it reminded me of Bill Maher waiting for applause after a stinker joke. I actually liked Obama’s joke but it still went over awkwardly.

After Obama gave us lukewarm confidence in the year ahead, Republican Representative Paul Ryan came along with the GOP response and warned us we’re going to hell in a hand-basket. Do not ever let this man staff a suicide hotline. I will say however, that his performance beat the crap out of Bobby Jindal two years ago and what’s his name last year. One commentator today said the job of the GOP response is to “do no harm” and Ryan achieved that. He sounded reasoned and competent even if you disagree with his politics.

The rank and file GOPhers would love to have left it at that but someone whispered into the echo chamber that is Michele Bachmann’s head, that she should deliver her own State of the Union response geared toward the Tea Party. And so, streamed live on the Tea Party Express web site was Michele Bachmann. Having just said a day or so earlier that our Founding Fathers worked tirelessly until slavery was abolished (I kid you not), one should have expected Bachmann to be totally ridiculous Tuesday night. Well, she was only slightly ridiculous. She came with props, most notably charts telling us what we already knew about spending over the past few years. She joined Ryan’s chorus of how ineffective Obama supposedly was over the past two years. She might have gotten through her completely unnecessary oration clean as a whistle were it not for two things.

First, CNN decided Bachmann’s speech was worth covering live. So, using a Fox camera feed (OMG … CNN in bed with Fox just days after Olbermann leaves MSNBC … be afraid, be very afraid) CNN showed us Bachmann delivering her speech … wait for it … to the Tea Party camera somewhere off stage right. The result was that most of us wondered what imaginary friend Michele was talking to for the entire speech. It was one of the more bizarre errors in optics ever to be witnessed, and indeed toppled the record holder, Mr. Bobby Jindal and his odd look of two years ago.

But the kicker for me on the content side was the way Bachmann concluded the speech, citing the soldiers at Iwo Jima (which she could not pronounce) and somehow suggesting that Japanese tyranny which we defeated in the 1940’s was equivalent to Washington tyranny today. So of course she was calling for us to defeat this tyranny once again. Fortunately, she stopped short of explicitly requesting second amendment remedies.

After sitting through Tuesday night’s display, I longed for the days from Thomas Jefferson through William Howard Taft, when Presidents literally mailed it in. No public speech and no need for opposing rebuttal. Let’s face it, every year the night pretty much amounts to the President setting unachievable goals and the opposition calling him a liar.

Well at least this year, no one actually yelled “you lie” from the floor.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Advertisements

65 thoughts on “The Night of the SOTU: From the Sublime to the Ridiculous

  1. I really can’ t find much to complain about our liberal’s take, besides Paul Ryan, however stoic, was far more impressive and more effective in his message than Obama. Ryan is simply more capable and intelligent than Obama, but without the rousing charisma.

    Obama held a bad hand. There’s no where to run now and his failures were readily evident last Nov 2nd. The speech was insipid and completely uninspiring, but you’re right Rutherford. How many really are? But that is the problem for Obama because his one claim to fame is to flame the inspiration. In that regard, I give him a ‘D’ – not a disaster, but not passing either. Repeat the class…

    Surprisingly Rutherford, I’m going to agree with you about Bachmann. The speech was unnecessary and overkill. There is no split in the Republican party – what disagreements there are mostly extraneous. The Tea Party and the Republican party are one – the blue blood RINOs have been rendered moot, contrary to what the MSM wants to believe in their heart of hearts.

    I watched about three minutes of Bachmann and turned it off. Bachmann has let the 15 minutes of fame go to her head. I don’t know how or who designated her the Tea Party spokesman, but she is not – not even close.

    Where Bachmann was effective once, she’s now a caricature of oversold bighead. She needs to bow out gracefully and simply represent her district by voting effectively; another right message, wrong person. She’s fine as representative.

    I have almost gotten to the point when I see a politician, either party, who runs to the camera, I know they are not worth the time. Bachmann is one of the right’s worst; Anthony Weiner and Chuck Schumer two of the worst on the Left who come to mind.

  2. They sure have gotten a lot of mileage out of that Iwo Jima photo op. Do you think the Saddam statue topple will ever supercede it in marketing value? Got to have that perfect patriotic look to sell democracy, yanno. The George Washington crossing the Delaware. That one’s etched in memory. Got to establish the image early.

    Bachmann is a total puppet. Scary they can wield such clout over congress with such an airhead. And celebrity status. It sure cheapens the mix. Who can take this stuff serious?

    I must admit I didn’t watch the SOTU speech yet. Don’t know if I will. I’m sure I’ll see bits of clips. How many great speeches does one need? How many mediocre speeches? We love to talk and talk about the talk. Everyone thinks the more we talk the more we accomplish. We are a bunch of whiners. We got plenty of diagnosticians from all the armchair trades, but a real dearth of problem solvers.

  3. Yawn.

    R, with the exception of the first para where you actually discuss substance of the speech, the rest of this post is just, well, unsubstantial.

    We know you don’t like Bauchman, almost as much as you don’t like Palin. OK, got it. Was anything she said inaccurate, or are you content with her lacking in pronounciation? As for Ryan, this is what you guys don’t get- we are at the edge of a cliff. Hard truth is a hell of a lot better than running off the cliff like a bunch of lemmings…

  4. A case in point about you lemmings…

    Social Security now seen to run permanent deficits

    CBO: Social Security to Run $45 Billion Deficit in 2011

    And from a Washington post article:

    Specifically, the trustees’ report predicts that the trust fund from which Social Security payments are made will be unable to pay retirees full benefits by 2037, four years earlier than forecast a year ago. In particular, the trustees single out the financial weakness of the part of the program that subsidizes disabled Americans, saying that fund will run out of money in 2020.

    So tell us R, who would you prefer to have on the suicide hotline:

    The guy who tells you that there’s nothing to worry about that gun to your head?

    OR

    The guy who tells you how bad everything will be and who you’ll impact by ignoring and running away from the problem?

  5. I thought Bachman said that our “forebearers” or “forefathers” who worked tirelessly to end slavery, not our “Founding Fathers.” Followed with the line “men like John Quincy Adams who would not rest until slavery was abolishe.”

    I’m not 100%, but if she did say “forefathers” then you might want to hold back your laughter.

    Reminds me of Rutherford’s hero Bubbles Brzezinski saying her favorite “founding father” was Abraham Lincoln. Ha ha.

  6. (oh, for the record, I still think Bachman’s a piece of work — but after all of Rutherford’s yammering after Tucson he really should lay off the rock throwing)

  7. Tigre, rather than surmise what she said, just watch the video. “very founders who wrote those documents …”. “John Quincy Adams who would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country”.

    Those very founders had slaves themselves and obviously did not live to see slavery end. John Quincy Adams (as you say, a forbear) died in 1848 almost 20 years before abolition.

    Tigre, this is why folks like you piss me off. You waste valuable brain cells defending the indefensible. Find a smart GOPher and start trumpeting their platform. Then at least you’ll have some credibility.

  8. And for the record, I will keep on “yammering” until the Palins and the Bachmann’s are retired from the national stage and go back to baking pies and running the family business. They have NO business running our country. 👿

  9. You want them back in the kitchen, where you think women belong.

    😆

    Now Huck, you know that’s not right. Only Republicans are capable of sexism, racism and misogyny. Or something like that…

    How dare you challenge Rutherford’s righteousness. He is only following his wife’s lead like all wimpy liberal men do. 😈

  10. Tex, I have a question for you. Do you think part of the “charm” of Margaret and Helen’s is what I call the “Betty White syndrome”? In other words, people love it when the elderly talk about sex or cuss or do anything that seems contrary to the “sweet old lady” stereotype. Could some of this “Bravo Helen” stuff going on there really just be patronizing pats on the head for an old lady who says stuff old ladies typically don’t say?

    I’m just wondering.

    By the way, I never dreamed I’d say this but Margaret and Helen’s comes close to being the liberal “Hostages”. Lots of anger over there …. a nice dash of misandry to boot. I’ve tentatively poked at Alive and Well to see if I get a civil response.

  11. Fair question Brother “R”. I’m not completely convinced Helen Philpot and Margaret Whatshername aren’t fictional characters cleverly crafted by some boomer like us. 🙂

    But if they are for real, do you remember a “lady” and I use that term incredibly loosely, named Molly Ivins? She’s the one that coined the term Shrub. That’s what those posts remind me of – wannabee Molly Ivins. And there are a large passel of those types of old coots down in Texas under the Dimocratic banner – same kind of hateful humor. Ann Richards sisters–in-arms, take no prisoners, hard drinking, hard living, foul mouthed old tarts. I actually can find them kind of humorous. Poolman reminds me of their male counterparts I”ve known and actually befriended a few. They are a different breed of political animal than the coastal liberal elite.

    I posted a good retort to one of the lost over there last night fairly late who masquerades as Christian, and of course in about 10 minutes, it was summarily blown to the wind. To show how twisted these people are, this “christian” was equating over eating with abortion – under the guise of sin. No, I’m not kidding – that’s how sick some of those man hating bitches really are.

    What you’ve got at M&H is a chamber of mouthy cowards – like Graychin – but not nearly as smart as Graychin. They’re such dumb clucks taken as a whole, I can’t help myself but attempt to mock them. You should have seen the first night before they canned me. It sounded like the darkest Africa with all the screeching of the wild animals when I started insulting their intellect. Quite fun while it lasted. 🙂

  12. Well Tex i am quite confounded with how they can make a man’s kidney equivalent to a woman’s fetus.

    As impatient as you, Rabbit and some others are with my lack of pro-life gusto, I do recognize this very thorny boundary between mother and child. The ladies at M&H would have you believe that until birth, the contents of the uterus are part of the mother’s body. I don’t buy that. When they go down that route, they lose their credibility.

    Pop over there to see my comment to J O’C, assuming it’s still there. I’m walking a very fine line so I don’t get banned.

  13. You won’t get banned unless you refer to them like I do: shrews, nags, hags, harpies, etc…

    But what really sets them off is to correct their “facts.” They are the world’s worst liars.

    I destroyed some dodo pretending to be medical doctor day before yesterday. She couldn’t even get the lingo right. 😆 She had translation proteins and zygotes mixed up – she couldn’t even get the basics. Then we she told me it was a “typo”, she screwed it up again.

    And boy, did I have fun making fun of “the doctor” while it lasted before they booted me again.

    Why do you think I’m trying to bait them into coming over here. I want to give my buddies the same laughs I’ve had at the hatemonger’s expense.

  14. I’m 99% sure that I know exactly who “H” is, and if I’m right it’s not who she claims to be at all. I believe that if you subtract 47-49 years from her purported age – you’d have the real “H’s” age. Located nowhere near where she claims to live, she isn’t now and never has been – and more importantly never would be – married to a man named Harold (or any other name). Again if I’m right, she also has another blog under her real identity, and the timing of “H’s” periodic disappearances and reappearances coincide eerily at times with the comings and goings of the owner of this other blog.

    It’s been my personal and long-held opinion that “H” is nothing more than the product of a wishful writer’s imagination using creative non-fiction and early on employing blog readership-increasing techniques like dropping kudos on other popular sites urging people to check out this hilarious, feisty old cussing liberal granny who called Sarah Palin a bitch.

    Again if I’m right, she wouldn’t have had to post many fake props either, as “H” (a composite character mostly resembling someone easily identified from her real life) caught on. They used to sell T-shirts on the blog in the beginning, but interestingly enough that didn’t last long. She has also in the last year begun attempting to boost her credibility as “H” by conjuring up past employment and friendship ties beyond the equally fictitious “M.”

    But I digress

    The best thing I can say about that blog is that I happened to be catching up over there a while back and stumbled upon a link to this place and became an instant loyal reader. Your most recent remarks, Rutherford, have sealed me in as a fan of this spirited and rowdy group of commentors, and I very much enjoy your blog posts, and agree with some your opinions, and appreciate hearing all of them.

    Editor’s note: comment edited by request of commenter.

  15. LOL … welcome to the blog Muffy. By the way, for the future, to close off your italics use the forward slash before the “i” in other words “/i”

    The Hostages is a conservative site that can be quite unkind to dissenters. I ventured in there a couple of times but finally tired of the exercise in masochism. One of the Hostages, Blackiswhite Imperial Consigliere comments here and has a blog of his own that is far more tolerable.

    In any case, I’m glad you’ve stopped by and I hope you stick around. To say my gang is spirited and rowdy is to put it mildly. 🙂

  16. Rutherford,

    There is NO WAY you could be banned over there. The only reason Tex HAS so many times is because he very early established an overtly vile reputation. He has a way with words, as you know. Scroll down the “Ask M&H” thread to get a flavor, if you want. He actually got worse than that on one of the other threads before he got banned. You know the gist (thanks Tigre) of his commentary. He doesn’t know how to debate without debasing his opponent. Some call it “flavorful” speech. Of course shit has a flavor. It just isn’t one I relish.

    You however, have been congenial. I have never seen anyone banned if they are sincere and respectful of the others there, no matter the ideology. Heck, there are some comments still there that are more vile than Tex, if you can imagine. Most of them however are of the hit and run category. The only ones that I have seen banned are the ones that constantly bait and demean.

    Some of the comments are not those that regularly hang out and continue to add comments. They will show up after a new post, but rarely return to read the rest of the comments. That may be the case with J O’C. That is not a person I have seen comment there before this posting.

    Some will also use several aliases in the same thread. Jackson caught up with one, though I will let him try to figure out who, if he is so able. We have also lost many of the regulars who used to comment there years ago. Some were driven off by rude comments. Others got tired of the long wait between some of Helen’s posts. Occasionally someone who has been lurking joins the commentary.

  17. Poolman, can I talk to you seriously for a minute? One minute of reading this so that this might alleviate the confusion? I’d email and spare everyone else from having to read this unnecessary drivel (skip this guys), but I have no idea your address and I’m too lazy to go searching.

    ————–

    You take me too seriously. This is not life changing or important. Rabbit’s wife is important. Rutherford’s wife is important. Your job situation is important. But not this. This is a food fight.

    You overestimate the entire M&H experience for me. That is as far from serious as me shooting baskets in my driveway. And I’m sorry if I have had some fun at your naivety, your expense, but sometimes you’re a royal pain in the ass. Not a miserable human being like I generally witness at M&H – just a pain in the ass.

    You followed me over here like I was hoping that reprehensible echo chamber from M&H would – but not you. I hold no dislike or ill will toward you. My intent was more than just lowering the boom on bleating sheep who continually parrot the lib meme. Rutherford allows me that opportunity.

    Surely you aren’t so naive to not recognize that my sole intention was to drop as many bombs as possible at that shithole before I got booted? Do you really think I’m so deaf, dumb and blind, I don’t recognize exactly what I am doing and what I’m saying? And the reason I was booted is I don’t goosestep to their band’s message, and I’m better at the bullying than they are. Period. None of this has come as a surprise to me.

    ———–

    Now, most of those nags you hang with at M&H are burned scabs who hate men. If you haven’t figured that out by now as much time as you spend there, you’re blind as a bat and dumb as a stump.

    But it is a delight to light a sack of dog shit on fire on their front porch and hide in the bushes while they stomp the sack. It gives me a chuckle. So what?

    Yesterday, just for grins and sheer boredom, I took a couple of the most vile and vacuous abortion proponent’s names, and within minutes knew a lot more about them than I should. And I’m 99% sure I’m right about their identity. It isn’t difficult. Each of us provide just enough information to hint at who we are. One of them had her own shared blog.

    Here’s the real story of a couple of your pals, just in case you didn’t know. One was bipolar, suffering from severe bouts of depression throughout her life, as she perceived herself as mistreated and wanted the world to know her as victim. She had made it her life’s mission to tell the world of her malady in writing and was Full Monty nuts. The other Planned Parenthood butcher was a lesbian activist, still strung out about the Prop 8 vote, hadn’t missed dessert three times a day for at least 20 years – a classic basket case ten orders of magnitude. They were screaming for help. They won’t find it at M&H.

    And I “almost” felt guilty for riding them. If they weren’t so damn despicable, dishonest and reprehensible in word and deed, I would have felt guilty. But I don’t like people who lend themselves to killing the unborn.

    —————

    He doesn’t know how to debate without debasing his opponent. Some call it “flavorful” speech. Of course shit has a flavor. It just isn’t one I relish.

    I don’t debate you because you’re a kook. I rag on you – my attempt is not to debate with you because I don’t take you of a serious nature. I mistook your ability to take a punch and give one back. It happens.

    There’s not a person on this board at one time or another that I haven’t gigged. All the regulars here are just as capable of dishing it out and have. You seriously need to toughen up brother if you’re going to stick. If Rutherford was as wimpy as you’ve been the last five days, he would have melted and run away by now. Because we’ve dogpiled “R” so many times, he’s got permanent bruises. And he’s still quarterbacking the team.

    But if you really think I can’t debate without “debasing” my opponent, then I suggest you and I attend a professional blog, in a professional environment, with professional journalists, where I will happily debate you in a debate of more serious material and serious nature. But you’re going to have to bring more game to do so if you want a give and take with that crowd. Linking to propaganda won’t cut it.

    ———

    Rutherford’s writing is beautiful – he’s not making a living off it. He could if he set his mind to it. BIC once called The Rutherford Lawson Blog the neighborhood driveway keg party, and he was right. This isn’t a school room – it’s the original Star Wars bar scene

    If you want me to leave you alone or ignore you, I will be glad to. I ask you in return to do the same if that is your wish. I was here first and have no intentions of leaving just yet. Just say so – but quit whining and making tacit threats about “outing” me. There wouldn’t be much to “out.” Really. And I have no desire to hurt you – just tweak your sensitivities. 🙂

  18. Poolman, I have nothing more to say and am sitting here watching some dull movie with the Mrs. When mom comes home, I take a secondary position to ruling the roost. You’re a married man – you get my drift.

    I take that back – she changed it to the original True Grit. 🙂

    If there something you want to tell me you can’t tell me here?

    I’m not averse to doing so or communicating with you elsewhere, but then, I don’t necessarily trust you either. And I hope you can understand that after the other evening.

    I’ll set up some anonymous one-time account, if need be.

    Let me know.

  19. As of right now, Mrs. Rabbit is blind in one eye. She could easily remain this way for the rest of her life. Retina is scratched. Iris torn. Choroid broken.

    Looks like Mike Tyson kicked her ass. Of course, everyone gives me the evil stare.

    Back to Eye Institute at Detroit Receiving tomorrow. Spent all day there today.

    The doctors have been amazing.

    God help us all if their incentive to do this amazing work declines. She saw the top eye doctor in Michigan, maybe the nation today.

    She’s not allowed to pick up the baby.

    When it happened, she thought her eye was out of her skull. Had it hit a centimeter lower, it would have been.

    Doctors say she has a chance to see out of it again. Alot depends on the next few weeks. So our fingers are crossed.

  20. Meribeth, thanks.

    After spending a good 12 hours in the Detroit Receiving ER, you start to feel lucky to have a one eyed wife.

  21. I can only imagine. And she was very lucky to have you there. I think few things are sadder than the people who have to go through things like this alone. I know that it’s ” in sickness and in health” but I hope she will be restored to health soon.

  22. Rabbit, I’ll believe for recovery of her sight. It seriously sucks to have an eye injury. I have had nasty things happen to my eyes twice in my lifetime. The first time I was 14. I blew up a D cell battery a foot from my face trying to recharge it with an AC cord. Stupid. My brother was wearing glasses and they protected his eyes. Funny as hell, looking back. That shit was EVERYWHERE in our room. The last time was arc welding with a shitty mask. Don’t EVER do that. I do still have decent vision. The good thing is that the eye is supposedly very fast at healing.

    God bless her. No one needs that kind of excitement. Hopefully your young one’s fever subsided.
    Peace. You need it…

    P.S. You got eclectic musical tastes, maaaaan. 😎

  23. Rabbit, she tore the choroid? That must have been some kind of impact. You don’t usually see something like that except in boxing or a high speed car accident.

    I guess I don’t know what these rubber band exercise things are – all I know is, we won’t be owning one.

    I been thinking about you, your wife, and your little boy all day. I told my wife the story at lunch like you were some kind of family member, and about Rutherford’s wife – grateful my love was safely across the table from me.

    For what it is worth, you, your wife, Rutherford, and his wife were included in our prayers at lunch and dinner.

    Please keep us informed

  24. Rabbit, I know you have better things to think about right now but it seems to me that damn exercise contraption should be taken off the market if it can do that much damage in an accident.

    Your boy is about 2 now or close to 3? 103 is damn high for a child that young so keep your focus there.

    With any luck the doctors can restore at least partial vision in the injured eye. Our families thoughts are with you. My wife described the exercise device as kind of a bungee cord cos I think she owns one. She has some idea how an accident like that could happen.

    Hang in there dude. Like I said earlier, don’t be a hero and try to go this alone. Rely on friends and family to the extent necessary.

  25. Meribeth, thanks. She had a bit of a chest pain scare last week and stayed overnight in the ER. She’s undergoing out-patient testing as we speak so we can get to the bottom of it.

  26. Before I go to bed, this might be a good time for some medical comic relief.

    On Monday, my wife went to the cardiologist and got a box about the size of a Walkman tape player attached to her with about six electrodes and was told to wear the thing for 24 hours and return the box the following morning. She was also given a diary and was asked to press a button on the box any time she felt any discomfort and then write in the diary what she was doing when she felt the discomfort.

    Well the diary came with examples of things she might be doing when discomfort hit … and one of them was “sexual activity”. When I read that, we both cracked up. You’ve got to be pretty damn horny to want to have sex with six electrodes attached to your chest and a box strapped to your waist. I told her she should’ve told the staff at the doctor’s office, “you’ve gotta be kidding!” 😆

  27. “R”,

    I’ll give you some more comic relief along the same lines as your wife’s monitor…your wife’s the size of a walkman – mine the size of a backpack. Remember, this was 1987.

    When I wore mine, you were also supposed to list “bowel movements” as “excitable activity.” 😆

  28. I notice R doesn’t even bother refuting my comments anymore. What’s the matter R, is denial that much easier?

  29. G, from what I’ve seen, if you’re referring to some of the links you posted to your blog’s comment area, what is there for me to refute? That liberals can be violent? Who said otherwise?

    The problem is that you are as wrong to paint liberals as more violent than conservatives as I am to do the opposite. And we also must discuss time frame. Libs were violent in the 60’s and early 70’s. The predominant aggressive rhetoric of the early 21st century is right wing. Does that mean libs never blow stuff up anymore? No.

  30. Muffy,

    I’m 99% sure that I know exactly who “H” is, and if I’m right it’s not who she claims to be at all. I believe that if you subtract 47-49 years from her purported age – you’d have the real “H’s” age. Located roughly 1500 miles from where she claims to live, she isn’t now and never has been – and more importantly never would be – married to a man named Harold (or any other name). Again if I’m right, she also has another blog under her real identity, and the timing of “H’s” periodic disappearances and reappearances coincide eerily at times with the comings and goings of the owner of this other blog.

    As I suspected. For grins, I read their commentary again this morning, and the theme never changes. Mostly, M&H an echo chamber of liberal cohorts, most not terribly bright, some saying they won’t come here because in reading the commentary, we would shout them down. And yet, that is exactly what they do there on a daily basis.

    Poolman points to my faults about being the only one booted, and yet my game was to simply the M&H game with the diametrically opposed view, while being just as nasty in the process. It was purposely done.. If it is true I’m the only one ever “booted”, then what it says is I’m the only one who has made the attempt to give them a taste of their own medicine. They claim my content is not informative, yet most of the repies have been a combination of refuting their argument with fact, mixed with the ad hominem to multiply the effect. It’s a game. For me, Poolman is more an object of curiosity than debate. And I’m not sure I would put him in the category of ‘typical’ from M&H.

    The truth is, the arguments from the M&H board couldn’t stand up to the scrutiny here, with or without the pejoratives. Most comments are without fact or education. Unlike Rutherford, the typical comments there are not just simply incorrect – they are amateurish and inane, illogical and irrational.

  31. Tex,

    I never said you were the only one to ever be booted, though you may have been the one most booted. 😆 AFA the rest of your comment it is mere opinion. I think I have told this board what opinion is like. 😉

  32. Poolman,

    I have never seen anyone banned if they are sincere and respectful of the others there, no matter the ideology.

    And yet you said yourself that there are more vile comments than my own. You’re consistently inconsistent in your arguments – like I said, a matter of morbid curiosity from your Simpson conspiracies, to your lack of depth, to your lame attempts at humor.

    the rest of your comment it is mere opinion

    Of course it is. But what an ueducated meathead like you has never understood is, all opinions are not of equal value. Over there, you’re a treasure house of wisdom (snicker).

    Here, your an object of ridicule and amusement. 😉

  33. Tex at 47…

    I don’t get your inference. It might be the grammar or abuse of italics clouding my comprehension, so I will surmise you think that by me saying that there are more vile commentary than you offer that my statement of why you were banned is inconsistent.

    If that is the point, let me explain. The viler (?) commentary was of the “hit and run” type. You always remain, commenting over and over, attacking every response to your “bombs”, in an attempt to annihilate any said responses to your comments, instead of the habits of those “others” that “drop and run.”

    That is why, I believe, you get banned. Clearer?

    And yes, God takes very good care of me. 😀

  34. And yes, God takes very good care of me.

    That’s because God has been forced to compensate you for your inanity and lunacy. 😛

    There is a blatant lack of consistency in judgment an application at M&H. Predictable, because it is for the most part a blog of losers and a ship of fools.

    The only worse hypocrisy I have witnessed in advertising on a WordPress blog is “The Two Useful Idiots” blog of Graychin fame. One and the same, except Graychin is such a pompous ass, he can’t generate any traffic. Graychin couldn’t dry flies to a dump, his most useful purpose playing dart board. But at least he’s not stupid.

    I understood you completely…it’s still inconsistent in application. Do you see Rutherford banning for the number of harsh comments? One should be sufficient, if there is really any offensive.

    I give you credit for making the attempt to fight here, as you’re not the coward your brother and sister libs are. But let’s face it Poolman – your abilities are limited. You vacillate between goober, goon and loon.

  35. Hey G, are you willing or able to say anything regarding Egypt?

    Oh what a wicked web we weave. Talk about timing. Egypt is a great example of a state that has been failing for decades, but has been successful in misdirecting the popular rage on the street towards Israel. Tunisia has destroyed that illusion and now the Arab street is en fuego.

    I find it hilarious to listen to Biden say that Mubarrak is not a dictator. Yeah, Egyptian elections are just as fair as Saddam’s Iraqi elections. What scares me is that the Muslim Brotherhood is in a very good position to capitalize on this, and a more Islamic Egypt is NOT what the world needs. Likewise, Tunisia is in a very similar position, and it will not surprise me to see a more Islamic state emerge from this.

    Watch Jordan- they’re rioting there too- and keep an eye on Algeria, where they are also rioting. This could potentially go very bad as all of North Africa goes Islamic…

  36. Gorilla,

    I think this uprising in Tunisia is only the start. I think several of these tin pots are going to fall – perhaps even the Sauds.

    Then we’ll get our question whether most Muslims are really “moderate” like we’ve been told, or not. Do we get U.A.E, or do we get Iran and Yemen?

    A very, very dangerous time.

  37. I give you credit for making the attempt to fight here, as you’re not the coward your brother and sister libs are. But let’s face it Poolman – your abilities are limited. You vacillate between goober, goon and loon.

    All you have is character assassination, Tex. You haven’t debated 75 percent of what I have introduced. But go ahead and pat yourself on the back. Good boy. Now go have a snack.

    Maybe I’ll send you bouquet or candygram. You prefer carnations or chocolate?

  38. Well Mr. Poolman, you seem overly agitated. Where’s that good, old country sense of humor?

    If you wish to debate something worthwhile, something that might require critical thought and something original, I will be happy to debate. So far, you’ve come across the crazed uncle hidden in the attic.

    But if we are going to debate Building 7, if we landed on the moon or not, the sweet nature and your undying love of M&H, or the validity of hidden messages in Simpson cartoons, I am not interested.

    But character assassination? From a blog? 😯 You’ve been watching too much TV.

    Carnations…I’ll tell me wife I bought them.

  39. Red or white?

    Yeah, probably a little agitated. Not overly so, though. I generally stay pretty even-keeled. Just trying to penetrate some stubborn fundamentalists on another blog I frequent. One that I was actually banned on at one time, believe it or not.

    I don’t watch much TV. Blogs do have impact. I have even seen news programs on TV quote blog comments. Always thought that was kind of ridiculous.

    MIL was with us in church this evening. She sometimes grates on my mild mannered demeanor. Sometimes I bite my tongue, sometimes not. Just wish folks would get it, sometimes. Here she sits with back pain. Pastor calls folks to come to the front for prayer needs at the end of service. Says he senses from Holy Spirit someone in the congregation needs prayer for back pain. Looks right at her. 50 people go the front for prayer for various needs. She doesn’t budge. Walking out she can’t hardly stand up straight as her back is killing her. How can people expect help if they don’t step out? Yeah, a bit frustrating. This too will pass.

  40. LOL Poolman, all I need to know about conservative hypocrisy is summed up when the “please don’t tread on me Uncle Sam” folks say in the next breath “don’t touch my Medicare”.

    We’re an opinionated and selfish lot, we Americans. We’re full of contradictions. And perhaps we built the machine too complicated to control it anymore.

  41. I thought I remembered Poolman’s author, but I couldn’t remember where. Then it hit me…

    Nine Conservative Lies… on Alternet 😆

    Daily KOS not available? You author was discredit about two years ago as a rank propagandist. But he’s such small potatoes, he’s hardly worth mentioning.

    http://bluecollarmuse.com/2010/12/27/on-joshua-hollands-9-conservative-lies/

    But if you doubt me, simply see the report on Social Security released this week. Don’t much care about Ayn one way, or the other. But she was right for sure right about one thing…a Ponzi Scheme.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/26/politics/main7286861.shtml

  42. Alright Rutherford. Bachman’s comments do seem idiotic. The problem, however, is your delight and response by exaggerating their significance is more so.

  43. “I will keep on “yammering” until the Palins and the Bachmann’s. . .”

    Well hopefully another tragedy will come along for you to blame on them. Maybe it’ll have something to do with baking pies or whatever mysogensitic crap you’ve given yourself license to spew.

What's on your mind?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s