« Church And District | Main | CNN Opinion: Republicans Doomed and Clueless »

Who Do They Think They Are?

There's a trend emerging in American politics. I don't think it's a new one, but it's growth is disturbing to me. And it's the amazing hostility to the common people.

With the explosion of the internet, Andy Warhol's "15 minutes" theory seems to have developed a variant: under the right circumstances, anyone can become a superstar overnight, over the most trivial of reasons -- and fall just as quickly. Even in politics.

But in politics, there is a growing trend to take that nobody, that average person, and treat them just like we do hardened political professionals -- and attempt to destroy them in the process.

Take, for example, this guy named Joe. He's playing with his kids in his front yard one fine fall day a bit over a year ago when this horde descends on his neighborhood. He recognizes the guy at the head of the mob -- it's the Democratic nominee for president, and Joe doesn't particularly like the guy. So he figures he'll ask him a rather pointed question, take what will likely be his only shot in life to make a big shot squirm a little. It's not the greatest of questions, but the big shot bobbles it a little -- and suddenly Joe finds that he's the talk of water coolers across the nation.

Or, if you prefer, this gal named Carrie. She thinks she has this shot at fame and success, trading off her looks. So she enters a beauty pageant, and is doing pretty well. Then a worthless sack of shit masquerading as a human being that -- for some insane reason -- had been tapped as a judge decides to bring politics into the equation. Carrie ain't the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree, so she gives a vaguely-coherent answer that she hopes will please everyone (that's what pageant contestants are supposed to do, after all), saying that she personally opposes gay marriage, but is glad that it's something that we can freely discuss and decide as a society.

For Joe's impertinence of helping Mr. Big Shot make himself look like a fool, he must be punished. No, he must be destroyed. Every aspect of his life must be ripped apart and laid bare for public consumption. Why, did you hear that he's behind on his taxes? That he's not even a fully licensed plumber? Hell, his legal first name isn't even Joe!

And for Carrie, why she must be punished as well for not whole-heartedly endorsing the position of the judge. She, too, must be denounced and exposed and shamed and degraded. The judge (a flamingly-homosexual, plagiarizing, crass beyond belief online gossip columnist whose queenly traits dwarf those of real queens like Elizabeth II) promptly labels her a "cunt" among other things (gee, what a surprise: misogyny from someone like Perez Hilton) and calls her a hate-monger and a homophobe and anything else his diseased little brain can think of.

Naturally, the political left piles on to her, finding out that she has breast implants (paid for by the pageant), might have gay relatives, and -- horror of horrors -- made some very private, very lurid videos for a then-boyfriend who has shown what a scumbag he is by giving them to her enemies.

Remember, this is all in retaliation for her saying this: "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised." A position, once it's translated into proper English, is utterly undistinguishable from the stated belief of President Obama.

In both cases, the question was the same: "who are these people?" As in, "who is it who is daring to challenge us and our beliefs and our positions?" Or, "what is in these people's pasts that we can use to destroy them for questioning us?"

Which is not that far removed from "who the hell do these little people think they are?"

Who they are is simple: they are not the elites. They are not the rich and the powerful and the scions of good breeding and the right schools and the right social circles. They are nobodies who have forgotten their place and dare to question their betters.

And that simply must not be tolerated.

Let's toss one more nobody into the pile. She, like Joe, started from very humble beginnings. She, like Carrie, at one point tried to use her appearance to advance herself. But unlike Joe and Carrie, she achieved a remarkable level of success before gaining national prominence. She dove into politics, starting out at the local level and rising to statewide office. In the process, she stuck to her principles and took on a horrifically corrupt political machine that ruled her state.

And she won. Those who opposed her found that she was not willing to be bought off, not willing to compromise on ethics, and not willing to "go along to get along." Quite a few of them were put out of office, and some even ended up in jail -- for real corruption.

Then she was suddenly in the national spotlight -- and that's when the knives came out.

Again, the attacks all boiled down to the same thing: "who is she?" Or, more honestly, "who does she think she is?"

Who she is is a remarkably simple question, with a remarkably simple answer: she's just what she says she is, just what she seems to be. She doesn't come from the finest breeding, she's not the product of the best schools, she has no great credentials or high contacts who have greased the skids for her. She started out at the bottom and pulled her way up by her own efforts. She has her principles and her beliefs and she has no use for those who are "doing well by doing good." She will not play the games of the corrupt and the venal and the petty. In fact, she's shown that she's willing to walk away from the game when the deck is stacked against her -- and start playing again at another table.

And she does it all with a smile and a kind word, carefully keeping any anger or bitterness or resentment or hostility tightly reined in.

And she's shown she's a hell of a lot stronger than Joe or Carrie.

We all know people like Joe or Carrie or Sarah. Joe, the hard-working guy with the too-simplistic view of politics who doesn't know much, but knows what he likes and doesn't like, who he likes and doesn't like, and will take the chance to speak what he sees as truth to power when given the opportunity -- but won't seek out the opportunity, because he's too busy working. Carrie, the good-hearted (bless her heart) but not exceptionally bright youngster, a bit naive and unaware, but eager to please and be liked while still keeping true to what she believes is right. And Sarah, the exceptionally average American who doesn't ask much for herself, but demands basic civility and honesty from her elected officials -- and a spine of steel that forces her to demand it (always with a smile and a kind word, of course) from those who deem themselves worthy of the public trust.

These are the enemies of the current ruling elite. These are the people who must be opposed, must be oppressed, must be destroyed for daring to question their betters. These are the nails that, for the crime of standing out, must be pounded down.

To me, they're the kind of people I want as my neighbors.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/37343.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Who Do They Think They Are?:

» Wizbang linked with Full Disclosure

» Maggie's Farm linked with A few Weds. morning links

Comments (139)

Don't forget the Tea Party ... (Below threshold)
Wayne:

Don't forget the Tea Party people who dare question their master's. They didn't do it properly by getting their marching orders from a community organizer from a organize group like Acorn. Their talking points varied a good deal since they didn't get talking points handed to them by the great one but spoke from the heart. For this they were called all sorts of names and had accusations thrown at them by the MSM and prominent politicians.

Nice of you to whine for th... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:

Nice of you to whine for them, but both Carrie and Joe chose to go into the spotlight. I can understand how, in each of these two instances, they might now regret their choice, but it was their choice.

In each instance they were held accountable for their positions. In each instance, the right warmly embraced their positions (despite the hypocrisy) and put them both on a pedestal.

Palin is quitter. Someone who ran away from the political office she swore to uphold and maintain. She too will be placed on a pedestal despite her hypocrisy, and she to will pay a price for it.

In each instance - each individual is held accountable for their own actions and words. I'm sure you conservatives wouldn't have it any other way -- after all, isn't personal responsibility and accountability something you guys claim matters - or is that just more hypocrisy too?


Nail on the head. Who do we... (Below threshold)
Alicia:

Nail on the head. Who do we think we are to disagree with them?

Nice of you to whi... (Below threshold)
Nice of you to whine for them, but both Carrie and Joe chose to go into the spotlight.

Bullshit, Steve. Neither chose to go into the political spotlight. Joe didn't go to a political event, it came to him. And Carrie's statement was as apolitical as she could possibly make it.

Your description of them both trying to make the best of their sudden spotlighting is pretty accurate, but your basic premise is completely false.

J.

So, Steve, when you gonna h... (Below threshold)

So, Steve, when you gonna hold Obama accountable for having the exact same position on gay marriage as Ms. Prejean?

Oh, that's right... he's lying, he's really in favor of gay marriage, he just can't say so, so that's OK.

I'm proud that I'm considerably more to "the left" and more "progressive" and "enlightened" and "open-minded" and "tolerant" and whatnot than President Obama when it comes to gay marriage -- as long as it's enacted in the appropriate way, by votes of state legislatures or public referendum, I'm all in favor of it. I've said it countless times before, and I'll continue to say it in the future.

Unlike Obama, who supports the Defense of Marriage Act and publicly opposes gay marriage, citing his religious beliefs.

Does my taking him at his word and believing him make me a racist, or are you the racist for thinking he's a liar?

J.

Bullshit, Steve. N... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:
Bullshit, Steve. Neither chose to go into the political spotlight. Joe didn't go to a political event, it came to him. And Carrie's statement was as apolitical as she could possibly make it.

Your description of them both trying to make the best of their sudden spotlighting is pretty accurate, but your basic premise is completely false.

Joe approached the candidate, the candidate didn't approach Joe. Joe didn't see the TV cameras? Now that's bullshit.

And Carrie entered a beauty contest and KNEW she'd be asked questions on stage in front of cameras.

Simple actions and choices they both made which they later regretted because of the words they chose.

Let them regret their words, but hold them accountable - even when it hurts the right politically. Your hypocrisy is as screamingly obvious as their is.

Comment #5 is so childish it doesn't merit a response, but yes - of course Obaba needs to be held accountable too, even more so given his position.

He chose to President, Joe the Plumber chose to engage a presidential candiate with a pointed, hot question, and Carrie Prejean chose to enter a beauty contest and be prepared to answer a tough question like that.

You guys play the victim card so often - it's just another part of the hypocrisy.

Steve, Joe was in his own n... (Below threshold)

Steve, Joe was in his own neighborhood, minding his own business. Yes, he could have passed, but he saw a chance and jumped on it. There was no premeditation, no planning, no "I'm gonna get myself on national TV for weeks" behind it. And most importantly, it wasn't his question that was the most newsworthy, it was the answer.

For that he must be destroyed.

Carrie was in a beauty pageant, not a political debate. She obviously wasn't expecting gay marriage to come up -- her answer was astonishingly unrehearsed. Nonetheless, it was as inoffensive and bland and generic as she could make it. But the oxygen thief who posed it suddenly made it the centerpiece of his attention-whoring and made it all about HIM and HIS cause.

You've made far more provocative statements than either Joe or Carrie has, Steve. And by doing so publicly on a largely political blog, you've "willingly sought the spotlight." Would YOU like every aspect of your life scrutinized to see just where your biases come from, in an attempt to discredit you and punish you for offering your opinions?

By your own rationale, it would be more than fair to do so.

J.

Steve, this article is abou... (Below threshold)
bobdog:

Steve, this article is about you.

I'm sick of everybody piling on Sarah Palin. She's nowhere near as stupid as everybody in the media and blog lefties are so quick to point out at every possible turn. She's at least as qualified to be president as Obama ever will be, and she knows how to speak plain English with none of the Washington bullshit we get fed on a daily basis. The over-the-top reflexive gagging I hear from the left every time her name comes up tells us something. She's somebody you fear.

I'm starting to warm up to a Palin/Bachmann ticket for 2012. Feed that to the little knot in your stomach, Steve.

Most critically why is the ... (Below threshold)
DAve:

Most critically why is the boyfriend not being prosecuted for distributing child pornography for selling the movies of a naked 17-year old???
Same reason David Letterman gets to have sex with his subordinates at work and isn't prosecuted... he even admits it and can't get prosecuted...
How many wonderful lives were cut short in war after war so that THIS could be made of the country they helped create???

Yes, he could have... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:
Yes, he could have passed, but he saw a chance and jumped on it.

Yes, he chose to stand in front of the TV cameras and ask that question.

For that he must be destroyed."

Interesting complex you wear on your sleeve, Mr. Tea. Were you abused as a child?

Destroyed? No, but let's learn more about this person that the GOP wants us to beleive is "EveryMan"....

from the start, the GOP made Joe into a victim, just as you are now. Poor Joe is going to be victim of Obama's policies.

That was fact-checked, and found to be less than truthful.

No, nobody set out to destroy Joe. The GOP made him a spokesman - and apparently Joe didn't tell them to leave him alone - another bad choice on his part, and what followed was the 'vetting' of the new GOP spokesperson.

Where Joe said he was upset because Obama's tax plan would prevent him from buying a business it was discovered that Joe had stood front of the cameras and in front of Obama and lied.

And he was outed for that lie, and because of his hypocrisy.... all of which was brought about because of the choices Joe made.

The choices JOE made.

Carrie was in a beauty pageant, not a political debate. She obviously wasn't expecting gay marriage to come up -- her answer was astonishingly unrehearsed."

Her hypocrisy was equally gross and of her own choosing. She gave an honest answer, and the response to her answer was just as honest. Those who found her answer revolting said so.

What was discovered once Prejean became a spokesperson for the right was brought to light - all because of the choices Prejean made to enter the beauty contest and then play victim when her answer was criticized.

You'll remember that it took days for the nudity to surface - long after Prejean because the right's new saint. That's the choice she made, and she was vetted and found to be grossly hypocritical.

Are we seeing a pattern here?

The GOP didn't vet Joe, and the press did. Joe chose step one, to enter the spotlight, and chose step two - to allow himself to be embraced by the GOP as their model.

What a poor choice that turned out to be, but a choice neither Joe nor the GOP backed down from once Joe's lies and hypocrisy was revealed.

Joe was all for personal responsibility - except when it involved him.

And the same is true for Prejean. She chose to enter the beauty pageant, chose to answer the question in a way that revolting to many, and then chose to stand up and appear on Fox News and otherwise become allow herself to be elevated to top newsworthy status -- and then she was vetted - and oops, turns out the saint is (or was) something of a slut.

But the reason you're bringing this up is to make Palin to be a victim too. You're using the misfortune of Prejean and Joe to paint a picture of victimhood for Palin.

Interesting choice. Hope it works out for you (and them) but I think it's a bad choice. I think you'll find Palin to be a particularly bad candidate.

So the lesson from Steve Gr... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

So the lesson from Steve Green:
Do not question your betters. Do not express an opinion contrary to those of the elite.
If you do, you will be demonized and destroyed AND it will be all of your own doing.

So Steve, tell me, can you produce a list of people that spoke Truth to Power under Bush and were targeted for destruction?

Steve Green:<blockqu... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Steve Green:

That's the choice she made, and she was vetted

If only the media did as thorough a job of vetting Obama's czars as they did Joe the Plumber and Prejean... but I guess with limited resources, you've got to have priorities.

Okay, so Joe and Carrie (an... (Below threshold)
Rich Fader:

Okay, so Joe and Carrie (and Sarah) aren't perfect. Fair enough. I kind of figured that out already. None of us are. I know I'm not. Let us give the lovely Miss Prejean in particular the Colbert Wag of the Finger (no, only one finger, Mr. Olbermann). That doesn't make them wrong on the substantive points they make. And neither does it make the folks who are doing this other stuff anything other than douches who are searching out and trumpeting this stuff because they can't argue those points on the merits. I'm just curious. When did the left start looking at movies like "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington", or "Advise and Consent", or even "The Contender", and start thinking, "Hey, I want to be like the creepy villains!"?

"If only the media did a... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:

"If only the media did as thorough a job of vetting Obama's czars as they did Joe the Plumber and Prejean... but I guess with limited resources, you've got to have priorities."

You're telling me if any of those 'czars' were to make controversial public statements, like Joe and Carrie did, the exact same 'vetting" wouldn't happen with them?

Of course it would.

Obama's czars were vetted just as much as Bush's czars were - of course, mentioning Bush's czars only highlights more of the right's hypocrisy, now doesn't it?

Steve, Joe WAS a victim... ... (Below threshold)

Steve, Joe WAS a victim... among other things, state officials started digging through his confidential financial records for dirt. One of them was fired, and I believe was criminally prosecuted.

And it wasn't Joe's question that got so much attention, it was Obama's too-honest answer:

"It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance at success, too... My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. If you've got a plumbing business, you're gonna be better off [...] if you've got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybody's so pinched that business is bad for everybody and I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

THAT was the most important thing about the Joe The Plumber incident. Naturally, that had to be buried, preferably under Joe himself.

As far as Prejean... I quoted her answer. What the fuck was so "revolting" about it? What in that statement rationalized the flaming douchebag that is "Perez Hilton" (the asswipe formerly known as "Mario Armando Lavandeira") calling her a "cunt?"

You're making my point for me, Steve. By your rationale, Joe should have run and hid once Obama showed up in his neighborhood. Carrie should have simply "voted present" like Obama did so many times, instead of parroting his position. Or maybe she should have lied and denied her own beliefs for the sake of political correctness.

There was nothing "hateful" in Prejean's answer. Your comments here, on the other hand, are dripping with hate.

But that's OK. All that does is show your true nature, and far be it from me from keeping you from exposing yourself as the bigoted, small-minded, hate-monger you are.

Thanks, again, for proving my point so well.

J.

Steve Green, conservatives ... (Below threshold)
Maddox:

Steve Green, conservatives are soon going to be back in charge. You have chosen to use this public forum to express your slanted liberal views.
Will it be equally acceptable if they use the press and government agencies to thoroughly vet and smear everything you have ever done and are associated with too?

What, you say that is different? How?

Conservatives would defend even you if the same tactics were used by anyone in government.

Is Steve saying its okay to... (Below threshold)
JustRuss IT1(SW) USN [reitred]:

Is Steve saying its okay to be opposed to Gay Marriage as long as she doesn't say so? Should she have left her answer at "I'm happy that we live in society where we can openly debate it." ??

If only more on the left would speak their real views on things they would quickly be out of power. But they are more cunning than that, unfortunately.

Liberalism cannot stand up to scrutiny, which is why they wrap themselves in emotion and call to your compassion instead of debating the issues.

Steve,

What EXACTLY was wrong with Prejean's statement?

Frankly, I'm getting tired ... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Frankly, I'm getting tired of the "If you disagree we must destroy you" progressive political methods myself. Why they think this isn't going to create some sort of backlash is beyond me, and I think the Tea Parties are forming partially in response of that.

At this point, if you're on the right, you don't dare say anything remotely critical about anybody - but on the left, you can say anything you damn well please about anyone at all, and nobody will you hold you even the least bit accountable.

It's one hell of a way to cut out any sort of discussion, and doesn't do what used to be the normal give-and-take of politics here in the US any good at all. If we can't discuss and disagree and come to a REAL consensus instead of a manufactured one, we end up with a self-anointed 'aristocracy' making all the decisions - and THAT won't work out well at all. We already see that with Pelosi and Reid - they don't particularly care what people want, they're going to do what they think best and the opinions of the peasants who dare to disagree be damned.

We've got 330 million people here in the US. We elect representatives to serve OUR interests - we do not elect them to be Lords, or Kings, or Dictators, or Presidents For Life, supporting them in every want and desire while taking nothing for ourselves.

We either get back to the model where we can agree to disagree and still respect each other, or we're gonna be in serious shit as a nation - a situation where what disagreements we've got now is nothing in comparison.

Steve Green has proven many... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Steve Green has proven many times over his inability to grasp the meaning of a post and actually proves the point of the post. The left just doesn't recognize their behavior towards conservatives as vile and underhanded. Which is fine with me. It is the lefts piling on Palin and her family that has turned the independent voter against Obama and the left. They simply over did it. The lefts actions are viewed as childish, hurtful and unnecessary. Steve, keep it up.

I also love the fact that JT pens a post to conservatives explaining actual facts and the lefts response immediately: Whining or some other childish name. The left in unable to debate. They simply cannot. ww

No, nobody set out... (Below threshold)
Eric:
No, nobody set out to destroy Joe.

Then why were their 18 searches into his confidential records? Why did the media dig dirt on him immediately after the presidential debate? Joe's finances were inspected, the status of his plumbing license was inspected, his tax status was inspected, even whether or not his name was really Joe.

What does any of that have to do with the question he asked of Obama? Absolutely nothing. It doesn't matter if every word out of Joe's mouth had been a lie and he was an illegal alien. The point was that Obama hurt himself with his answer to "spread the wealth around."

The way to fix it was to spin the questions off of Obama's answer and onto Joe. Joe had to be discredited and marginalized. If Joe was destroyed in the process, then tough noogies.

However, I imagine these sa... (Below threshold)
Ryan:

However, I imagine these same people who say it is perfectly fine to delve into JOe's life and the like are the selfsame people that say that Obama should be 'left alone' and that 'his private life should be private'. .etcetera.

"By your rationale, Joe ... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:

"By your rationale, Joe should have run and hid once Obama showed up in his neighborhood."

No, Nobody sought out Joe - the trust himself into the limelight.

And he should accept responsibility for his choice.

"As far as Prejean... I quoted her answer. What the fuck was so "revolting" about it? What in that statement rationalized the flaming douchebag that is "Perez Hilton" (the asswipe formerly known as "Mario Armando Lavandeira") calling her a "cunt?"

You'd have to ask him, but once she decided to become a spokesperson for the right then -- and only then -- her nudity and slutiness (and boob job) all came to light.

Her choice. her consequences.

"There was nothing "hateful" in Prejean's answer. Your comments here, on the other hand, are dripping with hate."

Said by the guy who wrote "What in that statement rationalized the flaming douchebag that is "Perez Hilton" (the asswipe formerly known as "Mario Armando Lavandeira") calling her a "cunt?"

and who wrote "All that does is show your true nature, and far be it from me from keeping you from exposing yourself as the bigoted, small-minded, hate-monger you are.".

You resorted to personal attacks, not me. You lost.

Joe made his choices, and he was man enough to stand by them. What hurt Joe was having the right embrace him and turn him into another victim that they could parade around.

Bad choice. He had skeletons in his closet. Those skeletons came to light because Joe decided to allow himself to be politicized by the right.

Likewise with Prejean. Ohh, poor Carrie - poor Carrie with the boob job who poses nude with her fake boobs while telling other people how to live their lives.

Oops again. Bad choice. Once she started telling people how to live their lives they became curious how she lived hers... and the results of that curiosity showed her hypocrisy.

Damn, the 'h' word again - amazing how it keeps popping up amongst all of these "victims" you keep parading around, Mr. Tea.

"Then why were their "... (Below threshold)
Eric:

"Then why were their "

Typo: that should be "Then why were there"

Stevie Green, full of bull ... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

Stevie Green, full of bull shit as usual. None dare attack Stevie's Obamassiah. Hey Stevie, FUCK YOU!

And by the way - the remark... (Below threshold)
Steve:

And by the way - the remarks, slurs, cuts, disses and hateful things you all are saying about me is yet another example of your hypocrisy. All of you who are engaging in the Steve bashing as you cry about Prejean's treatment are hypocrites.

Frankly, I'm getting tired of the "If you disagree we must destroy you" progressive political methods myself.

Me too, and that after Tea wrote this at me:

"All that does is show your true nature, and far be it from me from keeping you from exposing yourself as the bigoted, small-minded, hate-monger you are."

...all because I dared disagree with him.

You get what you give - right wing blogosphere - you just can't accept the fact that you lose more then win at this game.

But puuhhhllleeze quit the whining and crying when you lose. It kind of destroys that whole "principled" thing you guys are working on. Bush destroyed the GOP, you're not going to rebuild it by playing the victim card and hoping for sympathy.

Joe the Plumber asked an in... (Below threshold)
jim x:

Joe the Plumber asked an initial question - and then pursued media attention once it was clear it could be lucrative.

If Joe the Plumber doesn't like being asked tough questions about his statements, then he should make statments which are at least factually true and grounded in logic.

Carrie Prejean was treated rudely for a question asked in a beauty pageant - she has then attempted to turn this into a career for herself as a symbol of "good ordinary, right-thinking Christians" who are crucified by the so-called liberal media.

The only problem with this for her, is all the nude photos and porn she completely willingly engaged in before this career path became available to her.

So you can fall for their "victimization" story all you like - but just like Vanessa Williams' losing her Miss America crown because of Playboy nude photos, they are crying all the way to the bank, and hoping to have constantly new rationalizations to cry some more in public.

I'm glad the Steve Greens o... (Below threshold)

I'm glad the Steve Greens of the world drop in to spew their hate-filled comments from time to time. It keeps this from being an echo chamber, and it is a reminder of the deep thinking that many progressives engage in (I know, "Here at Harvard, we do not end a sentence in a preposition."). Thanks, Jay, for an interesting blog entry.

Oh, and for Sarah Palin to ... (Below threshold)
jim x:

Oh, and for Sarah Palin to play the victim card is just absolutely ridiculous. If Obama, Biden, or even McCain gave anything close to the **ridiculous** answers Palin gave to **exceedingly easy** questions, they would have been laughed out of the campaign.

Imagine if Joe Biden thought the Vice President presided over the Senate.

Imagine if Obama claimed he stopped a "bridge to nowhere" when he actually didn't stop it.

Imagine if John McCain was asked what he reads, and he nervously responded "Oh, I read everything!" and gave no actual particular answer.

Come on people.

Steve Green:<blockqu... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Steve Green:

And by the way - the remarks, slurs, cuts, disses and hateful things you all are saying about me is yet another example of your hypocrisy. All of you who are engaging in the Steve bashing as you cry about Prejean's treatment are hypocrites.

Steve, you chose to go into the 'spotlight' here. You chose to put yourself under scrutiny. You, while in the same post complaining that 'you guys play the victim card so often' play the victim card. In the same post, you're complaining about 'hypocrites' - you are being hypocritical. You're simply being held accountable for your words per your own standards. Quit whining.

Steve, I don't think Joe or... (Below threshold)
Eric:

Steve, I don't think Joe or Carrie became embraced by the right until after they were unfairly attacked by the Left.

I didn't know anything about Carrie Prejean until I heard about Perez Hilton calling her a cunt. If he had kept his mouth shut the whole controversy would have died away the next day. But no, Perez and the left kept piling on.

Please, explain to me how her boob job for example has anything to do with gay marriage? The stock answer is hypocrisy.

To me the answer is the same as what was done to Joe. Find any dirt to discredit and marginalize them.

It is the standard playbook for the Left and it comes straight out of Alinsky's Rules for Radicals.

For me I disagree with Carrie Prejean and personally I'm ok with gays getting married. But I find it despicable the way she has been treated simply because of her opinion.

"If Obama, Biden, or eve... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:

"If Obama, Biden, or even McCain gave anything close to the **ridiculous** answers Palin gave to **exceedingly easy** questions, they would have been laughed out of the campaign."

Oh come, on - admit it - "What newspapers and magazines do you read?" was not a fair question!

#2"Palin is quitte... (Below threshold)
914:

#2

"Palin is quitter. Someone who ran away from the political office she swore to uphold and maintain. She too will be placed on a pedestal despite her hypocrisy, and she to will pay a price for it."

You are such a dumbass, dumbass.

Steve -I wrote - "... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Steve -

I wrote - "Frankly, I'm getting tired of the "If you disagree we must destroy you" progressive political methods myself."

Then you replied... "Me too, and that after Tea wrote this at me:" - then you proceeded to make excuses for acting the way you do, and blaming everyone else for what YOU are doing.

Stop it. Look at what you're doing - and stop it.

If you're tired of the crap the left is doing, start being civil. Start being polite. Refrain from cheering for the folks who 'dig up shit' on those you disagree with when it's not relevant. (Did Obama answering Joe the way he did warrant a proctological examination of Joe's background? Wasn't what really mattered the answer to the question Joe asked?)

It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable about it - but you've got to be willing to respect the other party's point of view, not automatically discount it as faulty because it isn't yours and BECAUSE they're so stupid as to disagree with you, they're obviously complete imbeciles and should be euthanized forthwith. That attitude might be fun for you - but it's one hell of a road block to actual dialog.

You want respect? Try respecting those you disagree with.

Steve Green- Let's look int... (Below threshold)
Zaugg:

Steve Green- Let's look into your background to see if there is anything to smear you with. Got any skeletons? When did you stop molesting your daughter?

Steve -I can see y... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Steve -

I can see you're having too much fun - just go ahead and disregard what I posted to you.

Steve Green wrote:... (Below threshold)
Iwogisdead:

Steve Green wrote:

Me too, and that after Tea wrote this at me ... all because I dared disagree with him.

Not really. In # 10 you wrote:

Interesting complex you wear on your sleeve, Mr. Tea. Were you abused as a child?

It's a bit hypocritical to moan about personal attacks after you imply that someone who disagrees with you must be the victim of child abuse.

Here's another gem from the Steve Green Treasury of Insight:

. . . poor Carrie with the boob job who poses nude with her fake boobs while telling other people how to live their lives . . . Once she started telling people how to live their lives they became curious how she lived hers... and the results of that curiosity showed her hypocrisy.

First, she didn't tell anyone how to live her life, she expressed her view on the nature of marriage. Second, having fake boobs has nothing to do with her point of view on marriage. Fake boobs are a personal cosmetic procedure. It's like saying anyone who has had a nose job is hypocritical if she doesn't support gay marriage. It's absurd.

More importantly, you have made Jay Tea's point--agree with the right on anything and the left will destroy your personal privacy and life, if possible.


Steve, I don't think Joe... (Below threshold)
jim x:

Steve, I don't think Joe or Carrie became embraced by the right until after they were unfairly attacked by the Left.

Actually in Joe the Plumber's case, he was picked up the McCain campaign as a symbol of someone who would be hurt by Obama's tax policy.

When it was proven that Joe the Plumber would actually **benefit** from Obama's tax policy, this was somehow counted as "attacking" Joe the Plumber.

And it's not "attacking" someone to point out that they're saying something which simply is not true.

As for Carrie Prejean, yes, she was treated rudely by a jackass who probably considers himself a liberal. However I will point out that Perez also has quite a few problems with other liberals - to the point of being publicly punched out. His real party affiliation is: professional jerk.

It's possible to d... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:
It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable about it - but you've got to be willing to respect the other party's point of view, not automatically discount it as faulty because it isn't yours and BECAUSE they're so stupid as to disagree with you, they're obviously complete imbeciles and should be euthanized forthwith. That attitude might be fun for you - but it's one hell of a road block to actual dialog"

You've described the attacks and smears against me on this comment thread precisely...

and yet you don't see the hypocrisy of those smears made against me in a thread where they whiners are complaining about other smearers...?

I think it's funny the way these hypocrites whine that it isn't fair that someone is thrashed just because they dare disagree with another's viewpoint -- as they proceed to thrash someone who dares disagrees with their viewpoint.

It's hella funny, especially when you point out their hypocrisy and they proceed to then deny it further.

Steve, JT is only in favor ... (Below threshold)
liberal troll:

Steve, JT is only in favor of selective personal choice. For example, he believes everyone should be able to choose whether or not to take their chances without health insurance, but when one of his right-wing idols chooses to embarrass themselves in the national media, that person has no responsibility for their choice.

And bobdog, I'm with you. Please, please, please make Palin/Bachmann happen in 2012. Or, better yet:

Palin/Prejean 2012!!

Its a neo aristocracy. Thes... (Below threshold)
Dark Eden:

Its a neo aristocracy. These people's crime is that they are commoners getting into conflict with someone of higher station. This is simply not done.

Steve Green wrote:... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

Steve Green wrote:

I think it's funny the way these hypocrites whine that it isn't fair that someone is thrashed just because they dare disagree with another's viewpoint -- as they proceed to thrash someone who dares disagrees with their viewpoint.

Actually, there wasn't any "thrashing" of Steve Green until after he said that Jay Tea's post was childish and that Jay Tea was a victim of child abuse. Even since then, the "thrashing" has been awfully mild--lots of disagreement with Steve Green's posts, though. Maybe that's what he means by "thrashing."

In any event, insults on an anonymous internet discussion board are nothing compared to having private records and private communications made public nationally in any effort to embarass a dissenter. Now, that's thrashing. But, we can't have any dissenters.

Ref #9. She made her movie ... (Below threshold)
JC Hammer:

Ref #9. She made her movie when she was 19, not 17. Just saying

I think it's funny the way ... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

I think it's funny the way this hypocrite claims that it is fair that someone is thrashed for their viewpoint because they dare disagree with another's viewpoint -- as they proceed to whine that they're being thrashed for their viewpoint.

It's hella funny, especially when you point out their hypocrisy and they proceed to then deny it further.

Just a quick historical ref... (Below threshold)

Just a quick historical refresher for all y'all. James Carville started this "politics of personal destruction" crap back when he was managing the most despicable and divisive political campaign in the 20th century on behalf of the affable Bill Clinton. It is NEVER acceptable to insult, denigrate and otherwise heap opprobrium upon the heads of those whose opinions differ from your own. It is never acceptable to take someone else's words and use them as a weapon against them in the vicious way that has become the norm over the past few years.

Here's the deal. I do not - and probably never will - like the present occupant of the White House. I think he is incompetent and unprepared. That being said, I want him to succeed in doing good things for our nation. When he succeeds, we all succeed. When he fails, we all fail. And that even-handed and ultimately kind point of view is not shared by the Huffington Post crowd, nor is it a part of the Markos Moulitas or Perez Hilton vocabulary. Snide, vicious and nasty are their watchwords.

Give it up boomers. It's ge... (Below threshold)
glenn:

Give it up boomers. It's generational.

(Heh! Jay Tea tags the aver... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

(Heh! Jay Tea tags the average person as "nobody" while attempting to ameliorate the Culture War's friendly casualties as the victims of snobbery--hee-hee!)

As for Prejean, let it be noted that pretty girls who volunteer to be sliced under the armpits so that plastic bags inserted thereby might enhance their own self-esteem (while destroying the supple aspect of God's handiwork), have acute mental issues which could help explain Carrie's serial beauty contest entrance fixation AND her self-destructive internet exhibitionism.

She's Your Below-Mental-Average Dumb Girl whom the more "special" of those on the Right hailed as Crown Princess of their star wars kingdom. Except fake boobs equals Bimbo. Make it "Crown Bimbo" of Stars Wars Kingdom.

This hostility began with t... (Below threshold)
angellight:

This hostility began with the entrance of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News and has steadily escalated from there into many of the Conservative Congressmen and Senators! Just look at the teabaggers!

It is a fact that the GOP Party of No and Fear are unable to govern and when one does try to Govern and accomplish things for the American people like healthcare, raising the minimum wage or continuing unemployment benefits, they continue to "huff and puff" and spew fear in the air in hopes that people will continue to stay depressed and afraid thereby immobilizing and paralyzing them to do anything at all. Now the GOP are huffing and puffing about the Obama Decesion of having the terrorists being tried in open court in New York. Of course, we should bring these men to Justice, this should have been done a long time ago. GOP are just mad and angry that they could not accomplish this very basic task of holding these terrorists accountable for their acts! I would not even be surprised if Team Obama finds Bin Laden, something Bush & Co. were also incapable of doing. Would this anger the GOP also? Probably!

As far as Obama bowing to the Japanese the Bible teaches us in Matthew 20:26 "It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant." So by bowing, President Obama is showing that he is, indeed, a Great Man!

Very additive Bryan. ... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

Very additive Bryan.

"fake boobs equals Bimbo"

yup, and being a mexican means you steal car parts, being black means you eat watermelon and ribs, being a jew means you're a tight diamond merchant, and listening to country music means you hate everybody but whites.

Have I left out any other insightful observations? Please Bryan, let's experience more of your leftist intelligence.

Oh, and btw, always nice to see the left's inclusiveness and compassion on display.

Steve Green Comment #2 - Ho... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

Steve Green Comment #2 - How would you like for someone to delve into your past just because you put in this comment? How about if we check to see if you have a criminal record. Did you knock up a girl out of wedlock? Did you have a guy-guy sexual relationship that would make good tabloid copy? That type of crap is what happened to Joe. He did not put himself in the spotlight. The left did it for him. As for Carrie, yes she put herself in the spotlight, but you did not see her call Perez vicious and hateful names. As for Ms. Palin, you lefties are so afraid of her you can't attack her on a political level, so you attack her LITTLE KIDS!! You people are beyond contempt. To smear a child because you are afraid of the mother. What does that say about you? I literally feel sorry for anyone within a mile of your vile contempt for human kindness. You make me sick!
Madalyn

"This hostility began with ... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

"This hostility began with the entrance of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News"

Are you delusional? Please research the 1960 presidential race, and then see the 1964 race and the use of television images. How about spending time in the library learning about the state of "hostility" in politics circa 1862.

"I would not even be surprised if Team Obama finds Bin Laden, something Bush & Co. were also incapable of doing"

Yup. I can see Holder and Co. all packed in smartcars running around the middle east waving subpoenas demanding Bin Laden give up for the good of the world.

LOLOLOL. And to think a nitwit like you canceled out a reasonable person's vote. Damn shame.

ODA315 - as opposed to inva... (Below threshold)
jim x:

ODA315 - as opposed to invading a country which even the Bush administration admits had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11?

The problem with Prejean is not her boob jobs - it's her nudie pictures and porn videos, which would seem to conflict with her current wholesome Christian pop-fundamentalism, wouldn't you think?

All of which were taken after she was 18. Not when she was 17, which she attempted to lie and was caught at.

Just saying.

"Steve Green Comment #2 ... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:

"Steve Green Comment #2 - How would you like for someone to delve into your past just because you put in this comment? How about if we check to see if you have a criminal record. Did you knock up a girl out of wedlock? Did you have a guy-guy sexual relationship that would make good tabloid copy? That type of crap is what happened to Joe."

Because of choices Joe made.

"He did not put himself in the spotlight. The left did it for him.

Oops, your train left the "Responsibility" track swith that one.

Joe chose to ask the candidate a tough question.

Joe chose to let the GOP adopt his as their "everyman".

Joe chose to allow the GOP to anoint him as a spokesperson for their cause.

Joe chose the spotlight.

Joe lost out by making that choice.

"As for Carrie, yes she put herself in the spotlight, but you did not see her call Perez vicious and hateful names. As for Ms. Palin, you lefties are so afraid of her you can't attack her on a political level, so you attack her LITTLE KIDS!! You people are beyond contempt. To smear a child because you are afraid of the mother. What does that say about you? I literally feel sorry for anyone within a mile of your vile contempt for human kindness. You make me sick!
Madalyn"

I don't remember attacking Palin's children.

And yet I'm smeared with that lie because I dared to disagree.

Angry, vicious hateful people on the right invented this style of political discourse. Quit crying when you lose.

This hostility began with the entrance of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News and has steadily escalated from there into many of the Conservative Congressmen and Senators! Just look at the teabaggers!

Spot on correct. And yet they whine like little babies when they lose, and then depict their spokespeople as victims after their hypcorisy is exposed.

And don't you dare disagree with the right wing blogosphere - they'll threaten you and smear anyone who dares disagree with them.

"as opposed to invading a c... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

"as opposed to invading a country which even the Bush administration admits had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11?"

Hey genius, see UN Resolution 1441

"it's her nudie pictures and porn videos, which would seem to conflict with her current wholesome Christian pop-fundamentalism, wouldn't you think?"

a) Did she ever push her "christian fundamantalism" on you or anyone else??? NO, she stated an opinion, and god forbid it not match those of important people like Perez Hilton. I though you lefties welcomed "dialog". But I guess her not agreeing with gay marriage is just plain hateful.

b)Porn Movie???? Only in a leftest mind could this (as I've heard described" be considered a "porn movie". I'm sure if it was a done with an NEA grant it'd been "art" LOLOL.

Jay TeaThis articl... (Below threshold)
Jim:

Jay Tea

This article, blog post, call it what you will is without doubt one of the most inane pieces of writing that I have ever had the misfortune to read. It is complete garbage, with no merit whatsoever.

Take a lesson from your erudite colleague, Mr Drummond. I might not always agree with him, but atleast he is capable of coherent and intelligent writing. Whatever you do, please do not give up your day job, unless you are a man of independent means, which I sincerely doubt you are.

"And don't you dare disagre... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

"And don't you dare disagree with the right wing blogosphere - they'll threaten you and smear anyone who dares disagree with them"

Anyone from the state revenue service gone after you Steve?

Has the MSM sent researchers to your hometown to dig up garbage on you?

Has the SEIU came to your house to "influence" you?

Naw, didn't think so. But back to the horrible smear tactics being doled out on this board.

s green "I think it's ... (Below threshold)
Marc:

s green "I think it's funny the way these hypocrites whine that it isn't fair that someone is thrashed just because they dare disagree with another's viewpoint -- as they proceed to thrash someone who dares disagrees with their viewpoint."

Clearly the Logic Train left the station, assuming you had a ticket, long before you attempted to board.

That said would it be fair, given some of the childish invective spewed in this and other threads, if you went under the same type of "joe/sarah/carry" scrutiny?

Say like illegally delve into your tax records by a member of a state government?

Or say a former friend released a long lost tape of you practicing carnal knowledge... with a goat.

Or say you were inundated with numerous lawsuits, none of which with any legal basis, but filed with the single intention to punish you because of differing political/moral issues.

What say you s green, is all that just peachy keen with you?

I aksed Steve for the list ... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

I aksed Steve for the list of people that were attacked in this way for questioning Bush... so far he's been unable.

BryanD wrote:. ... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

BryanD wrote:

. . . pretty girls who volunteer to be sliced under the armpits so that plastic bags inserted thereby might enhance their own self-esteem (while destroying the supple aspect of God's handiwork), have acute mental issues which could help explain Carrie's serial beauty contest entrance fixation AND her self-destructive internet exhibitionism.

Not only that, but those kinds of girls are Nazis and racists. They also kick dogs and abuse children.

This article, blog post,... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

This article, blog post, call it what you will is without doubt one of the most inane pieces of writing that I have ever had the misfortune to read.

Then you haven't read any of Steve Green's comments.

As far as Obama bo... (Below threshold)
Eric:
As far as Obama bowing to the Japanese the Bible teaches us in Matthew 20:26 "It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant." So by bowing, President Obama is showing that he is, indeed, a Great Man!

And to think it is the Right that is always accused of proselytizing.

This hostility began with the entrance of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News and has steadily escalated from there into many of the Conservative Congressmen and Senators! Just look at the teabaggers!

I guess the irony is lost on you when you use a sexually explicit derogatory term to describe people you disagree with.

It is a fact that the GOP Party of No and Fear are unable to govern and when one does try to Govern and accomplish things for the American people like healthcare, raising the minimum wage or continuing unemployment benefits, they continue to "huff and puff" and spew fear in the air in hopes that people will continue to stay depressed and afraid thereby immobilizing and paralyzing them to do anything at all.

That could easily be used to describe the Democrats during the Bush presidency. How did the Democrats behave when Bush tried to reform Social Security? How did the Democrats behave toward Bush's judicial nominees? For years the Democrats called for investigations, claimed he was taking away people's civil rights, claimed he was going to overthrow the government, even claimed he was behind 9/11. A case can be made that they were involved in Rathergate. Look up Operation Fortunate Son.

Get off of your high horse Angelight. The Democrats are all guilty of the politics of personal destruction, they also practice opposition research and yet they claim to be above it all. You want hypocrisy, that's it big time.

angellight "unable to ... (Below threshold)
Marc:

angellight "unable to govern and when one does try to Govern and accomplish things for the American people like healthcare, raising the minimum wage or continuing unemployment benefits,

The American people are AGAINST what obama, reid, pelosi triumvirate are selling, they want reform but not the craptastic bill currently under consideration.

And psssst... the minimum wage law and unemployment bills passed because of repub votes you nitwit. And BTW what good did the minimum wage law do?

If you hadn't noticed teens and others that take low wage jobs have the highest unemployment.

I doubt if you can figure out why.

Steve Green:<blockqu... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Steve Green:

And don't you dare disagree with the right wing blogosphere - they'll threaten you and smear anyone who dares disagree with them.

You know it!

I bet 'they' are busy checking your tax records right now! Why... JayTea's probably checking to see whether your real name is Steve and whether you've even got your plumber's license. (I trust the irony of Steve's comment is lost on him).

Steve -"You've ... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Steve -

"You've described the attacks and smears against me on this comment thread precisely..."

And the attacks and smears you've plastered all over other threads. You've done a lot of 'em. Project much, bubbie?

Then again, you could just be a masochist.

By the way, disagreement isn't an attack. Neither is it hate - it's just disagreement.

Steve Green wrote:... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

Steve Green wrote:

Angry, vicious hateful people on the right invented this style of political discourse.

Did not!! It was invented by weak, parasitic, mean, stupid, impotent people on the left!! Everybody knows that.

"I aksed Steve for the l... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:

"I aksed Steve for the list of people that were attacked in this way for questioning Bush... so far he's been unable."

Apparently you haven't figured out that I routinely ignore your comments. SCSIWuzzy (along with several others like wiwog and 914 and Marc). You're all consistently abusive routinely childish.

Feel free to ignore my comments too. Trust me, I really don't care what you think about any subject whatsoever, really.

This hostility began with the entrance of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News and has steadily escalated from there into many of the Conservative Congressmen and Senators! Just look at the teabaggers!

I guess the irony is lost on you when you use a sexually explicit derogatory term to describe people you disagree with.

No, actually the term "teabagging" was chosen (there's that word again) by teabgger protesters. They chose it!

BAD CHOICE! but live with your choices, people.

Sorry - here's the link to ... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:

Sorry - here's the link to the self-proclaimed teabaggers.

BAD CHOICE OF NAMES, PEOPLE!

Joe chose to ask t... (Below threshold)
Eric:
Joe chose to ask the candidate a tough question.

How is that relevant to justifying the treatment he received by the media? I agree that he eventually jumped on the bandwagon with the GOP. But, the dirt digging on him began before that.

The Ohio Inspector General's investigation showed that people started digging into his personal records the day after the 3rd Presidential Debate. Which was 3 days after he posed his question to Obama.

Do you condone the fact that people dug into his personal records?

Steve #52 - I did not say y... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

Steve #52 - I did not say you attacked her children. I said the left did. Are you suffering from a guilty conscience? You probably laughed yourself silly when Letterman said Ms. Palins's young daughter got knocked up at a Yankee game. That humor is sick. Now as far as crying because we lost, the country lost when you lefties bought the election thru ACORN for the loser-in-office. That is why "we" are crying. Our country is in the process of being demolished by someone who has never held a real job and has no desire to learn and listen, and you idiots are the ones who put him there.
Go ahead and call me names. You lefties are good at that. And yes, you and your ilk do make me sick. It's OK to trash someone, but God forbid, don't say anything about you. You are a hypocrite.
Madalyn

These three Palin, Joe and ... (Below threshold)
Buckeye:

These three Palin, Joe and Prejean probably have more integrity and class in their little fingers than this entire administration in Washington. I would be willing to bet that none of the three would bow down to the Emperor of Japan.

"Apparently you haven't ... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

"Apparently you haven't figured out that I routinely ignore your comments. SCSIWuzzy (along with several others like wiwog and 914 and Marc). You're all consistently abusive routinely childish."

I'll bet you have your hands over your ears and you're chanting something. That'll show 'em!!

LOL, this just proves the ... (Below threshold)
Sue:

LOL, this just proves the point that when you mention Joe the Plumber, Carrie Prejean, or Sarah Palin the left starts seizing and foaming at the mouth.

Mention all three in the same post and they also start howling at the moon.

It's simply knee jerk hatred and the politics of destruction. One thing we know though it that you leftist only do it to divert attention when your "messiahs" mistakenly say something they believe in (like "redistributing the wealth"), or you're scared because it's obvious that a Republican/conservative is going to be a strong contender and you might lose.

And yes I know you won't admit it because you think ridicule works so well. Keep thinking that way because the swing voters are all taking note.

Steve #52 - I did ... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:
Steve #52 - I did not say you attacked her children. I said the left did.

Here's what you wrote, Madalyn.

As for Ms. Palin, you lefties are so afraid of her you can't attack her on a political level, so you attack her LITTLE KIDS!! You people are beyond contempt. To smear a child because you are afraid of the mother. What does that say about you? I literally feel sorry for anyone within a mile of your vile contempt for human kindness. You make me sick! Madalyn

You wrote "I literally feel sorry for anyone within a mile of your vile contempt for human kindness. You make me sick!" Sounds pretty specific to me, but I'll trust that you weren't referring to me specifically, uh huh.

But let's look at what you wrote again, with a little more detail.

Steve #52 - I did not say you attacked her children. I said the left did. Are you suffering from a guilty conscience? You probably laughed yourself silly when Letterman said Ms. Palins's young daughter got knocked up at a Yankee game.

You addressed that comment directly at me, Madalyn. It was specific.

I don't think you're aware of it, but you can't stop yourself. Maybe you just hate us libbies too much.

You can't seem to control it, and apparently aren't aware that you do it.

Comes from listening to Rush Limbaugh all of those years, probably.

Steve Green wrote:... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

Steve Green wrote:

Sorry - here's the link to the self-proclaimed teabaggers.
BAD CHOICE OF NAMES, PEOPLE!

Predictably, the site found at the link provided by Steve Green does not use the term "teabaggers." It does nothing to support his claim. His claim, thus, like all of his arguments, is unfounded. I say this without fear of rebuttal, since he's stated that he refuses to acknowledge my comments.

I'm sorry, Mr. Green, did y... (Below threshold)

I'm sorry, Mr. Green, did you say something? It's hard to understand you with that scrotum in your mouth.

J.

Sorry - here's the link ... (Below threshold)
Sue:

Sorry - here's the link to the self-proclaimed teabaggers.

BAD CHOICE OF NAMES, PEOPLE!

OK, Steve Green. You show me where on that website the word "teabagger" is used? As you very well know only the words "tea party" is used.

It was the liberal media and then the liberal politicians that twisted it into "teabaggers" and then giggled with school girl glee at how funny and cute they were being as they insulted every day concerned citizens.

Steve, are you really that ... (Below threshold)
Eric:

Steve, are you really that stupid?

Do you really think that ONE webpage is responsible for the name of the movement?

The Tea Party movement originated with Rick Santelli's rant on February 19 on CNBC in which he said, "We're thinking of having a Chicago Tea Party in July. All you capitalists that want to show up to Lake Michigan, I'm gonna start organizing."

That's the origin of the term. It was assholes on the left like David Shuster, Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, and Jeneane Garofalo who twisted the name into an intentional slur.

Steve #72 -I have never lis... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

Steve #72 -I have never listened to Rush. Never. As far as not being able to control myself, let me put it this way: I am an old lady. I am in the age group of Obama's death panel. I am scared witless of what the left has in store for any of us older conservative people. I have every right to be scared. Sometimes my fingers work faster than my brain. Old age will do that to you. If you were in my shoes you would do the same. I can't help it if you do not grasp what this administration has in store for us. This is my opinion and I am entitled to it. Agree or not, but don't condemn me because I will not jump on the left bandwagon and close my eyes to what is going on.
Madalyn

More to Steve Green - When ... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

More to Steve Green - When I say YOU, I am referring to the liberal left. If you personally are not smart enough to differentiate it, that is your problem. When I said you probably laughed at Letterman, I did mean YOU PERSONALLY. That is the kind of sick humor lefties appreciate. Get my drift? Now, stop trying to pick apart every word someone posts that you do not agree with. Leave normal people alone!
Madalyn

ODA313: "as opp... (Below threshold)
jim x:

ODA313:

"as opposed to invading a country which even the Bush administration admits had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11?"

Hey genius, see UN Resolution 1441

Hey genius, you were referring to the proper way to go after and catch Bin Laden.

Are you suggesting that invading Iraq was the proper way to capture Bin Laden? Yes or no?

Well then.

As for Carrie:

"a) Did she ever push her "christian fundamantalism" on you or anyone else??? "

As soon as she had a handle on making a career out of how she was "victimized" by being made famous, yes she did.

Hey, it's a free country and I'm glad she can speak. The flip side to that is, other people have a right to speak too, and point out when she is being a complete hypocrite.

Such as when she presents herself as a martyr for conservative Christianity, when she has shown herself quite interested in selling her form in ways all conservative Christians say is destroying America.

"b)Porn Movie???? Only in a leftest mind could this (as I've heard described" be considered a "porn movie"."

Nude pix and porn MOVIES. Plural.

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/11/13/2009-11-13_former_miss_california_carrie_prejean_made_7_other_sex_tapes_dozens_of_nude_pics.html

Read up.

Now wonder, why haven't you heard this from your conservative news sources? Wouldn't that mean that they aren't giving you the facts?

Yes or no?

"I'm sure if it was a done with an NEA grant it'd been "art" LOLOL."

Right - and if it didn't have a would-be conservative icon in it, you'd be saying how it's corrupting our nation's values ROTFLMAO.

Bravo JT, bravo. You do kno... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Bravo JT, bravo. You do know how to stir up the septic liberal tank. The hatred right out of the chute by our usual subject Stevie actually proves your point. They are a vile lot. I will say they are even more vile since the momentum of the electorate is quickly moving away from center left. I smell desperation in the comments. Deep down, they know it. They are starting to use "projection" techniques. I.Am.Loving.It. 2010. ww

Kind of ironic, isn't it? A... (Below threshold)
klrtz1:

Kind of ironic, isn't it? A bare majority of liberal supreme court justices legalized abortion because they found a "right to privacy" in the U.S. Constitution and yet if you're a conservative you have no right to any privacy. None.

Steve Green's point (besides chanting hypocrisy as many times as he can) is that this is a war and if we conservatives stick our heads up, we will get a bullet to the brain. Plain and simple fascist intimidation, nothing more and nothing less.

Message received, Steve. Loud and clear.

So, Steve, when you gonn... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

So, Steve, when you gonna hold Obama accountable for having the exact same position on gay marriage as Ms. Prejean?

Jay Tea, stop making things up.

Are you saying that Ms. Prejean agrees with Obama on these points.

1. Obama supports civil unions that would carry equal legal standing to that of marriage for same-sex couples

2. Obama is against a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Jim Jim Jim Jim,Ye... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

Jim Jim Jim Jim,

Yeah, boy if the NYDaily news says it's a porn movie it must be.

I didn't mention catching Bin Laden or the Iraq war, but only responding sarcastically to that liberal tower of intelligence, Angellight.

Before you open you yap and shove your keyboard in do yourself a favor and look back at the previous posts. More productive than ROTFLYAO

Hey Tina, nice see ya. How'... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

Hey Tina, nice see ya. How's things on Planet Yurkus?

tina s "Are you saying ... (Below threshold)
Marc:

tina s "Are you saying that Ms. Prejean agrees with Obama on these points."

Show me where she has said otherwise.

Until you do, dare I say it, you're just making shit up.

Tina S wrote:1.... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

Tina S wrote:

1. Obama supports civil unions that would carry equal legal standing to that of marriage for same-sex couples

The question asked of Prejean was not about civil unions, it was about marriage.

2. Obama is against a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Maybe you're right about this one. It's a little hard to tell with the Waffleman. He was before gay marriage before he was against it. Plus, he was against it before he was for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Barack_Obama#LGBT_issues

iwogisdead,If some... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

iwogisdead,

If someone has never stated there position on something, is it fair to say that they have the same position as someone (Obama) who has stated a position? That is precisely what Jay Tea did.

Obama did waffle on it throughout his career, that is a fair criticism.

Who are you talking about? ... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

Who are you talking about? Obama? In the Saddleback Church debate (August, 2008) he said this:

"[A marriage is] a union between a man and a woman."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/16/warren.forum/

That's awfully close to what Prejean said.


ODA315, ODA315, ODA315. ODA... (Below threshold)
jim x:

ODA315, ODA315, ODA315. ODA315.

Do you simply lack the ability to scroll back up and see what you wrote? Or do you just think others won't do the same?

You claim you didn't mention Bin Laden.

But in your post - # 50, at 4:28 pm, go and read it - you responded to angellight with exactly this, quoting angellight in your response:

"I would not even be surprised if Team Obama finds Bin Laden, something Bush & Co. were also incapable of doing"

Yup. I can see Holder and Co. all packed in smartcars running around the middle east waving subpoenas demanding Bin Laden give up for the good of the world.

Are you going to say that doesn't mention catching Bin Laden??? Seriously?

And you say ***I*** should go back and read what I wrote??

I mean, wow. Just...wow.

If you care about facts, you are clearly wrong and will now admit it. If you don't, I know exactly where you stand.

Oh and ODA315, I would sugg... (Below threshold)
jim x:

Oh and ODA315, I would suggest it's fair to call a nude woman masturbating in front of a camera and moaning porn. Wouldn't you?

iwogisdead,Jay Tea... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

iwogisdead,

Jay Tea said Obama and Prejean have the "exact same position on gay marriage". Jay can not know that because Prejean has not stated her position on constitutional amendments, state's right to decide and civil unions.

iwogisdead,Prejean... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

iwogisdead,

Prejean has also been paling around with a lot of people/organizations that have extreme anti-gay positions that go beyond the right to marry.

If a marriage is "a union b... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

If a marriage is "a union between a man and a woman," then there is no such thing as a "gay marriage." Both Prejean and Obama said that marriage is between a man and a woman. Hence, they both agree that, whatever a gay union is, it is not a marriage. I'm using Obama's statements from August, 2008, so this all may have changed. "Civil unions" are by defintion not "marriages." Obama didn't condition or preface his statement about marriage at Saddleback on the status of the Constitution, so the Constitution has nothing to do with his August, 2008, defintion of marriage.

All we are left with is that Obama (circa August, 2008) and Prejean had the exact same position on gay marriage, ie., that no such thing existed.

Prejean has also been pa... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

Prejean has also been paling around with a lot of people/organizations that have extreme anti-gay positions that go beyond the right to marry.

And those people/organizations therefore, by definition, have nothing to do with "gay marriage," an issue about which Prejean and Obama (August, 2008) are in whole-hearted agreement.

Wow, Steve really mopped th... (Below threshold)
jp2:

Wow, Steve really mopped this place up. Anytime an author's retort is "you suck balls" you know you have outclassed him.

So, Steve, basically Joe an... (Below threshold)

So, Steve, basically Joe and Carrie were "asking for it?" The brutalizing they received at the hands of liberals was basically justified, because they asked or answered a single question?

Thanks for clearing that up.

J.

iwogisdead & Jay Tea,... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

iwogisdead & Jay Tea,

There are 3 positions on gay marriage.

1. Liberal - All states should be forced to
allow gays to marry.

2. Moderate - States should have the right to
decide if gay people can marry.

3. Conservative - There should be a
constitutional amendment outlawing gay
marriage.

Obama has expressed a moderate position.

Unless Jay Tea knows that Prejean supports a states right to decide he should not be stating they have the "exact same position on gay marriage"

I am still loving it JayTea... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

I am still loving it JayTea. You even cranked up the old Tina (splitting hairs) S. You exposed, again, what the left is: Pure hate. They spew it then defend it with basically: "Well, you asked for it". ww

oh yeahhhh!... (Below threshold)
epador:

oh yeahhhh!

Tina, please categorize my ... (Below threshold)

Tina, please categorize my beliefs on gay marriage: it should be left to the individual states, to be decided upon by either the legislative or referendum process -- not by judicial or executive fiat.

And I am deeply troubled by the implications of the Full Faith and Credit Clause in this case, where a state that chooses to not recognize gay marriage might be forced because another state did so. In that context, I support the Defense of Marriage Act in the parts that specifically exclude gay marriage from that clause.

So, I oppose gay marriage as it was done in Massachusetts and California, but support it in New Hamsphire, Vermont, and Maine. To me, while I support gay marriage, I more strongly believe in the process and the established systems and that it be done right.

Remember, before you answer, I reserve the Perez Hilton precedent of calling you a cunt for disagreeing with me, and should I get a picture of you, I may choose to cover it with obscene graffiti. I wouldn't do it, because I have the slightest smidgen of propriety and respect and dignity, but I do choose to declare my right to do so.

J.

So "spliting hairs" means p... (Below threshold)
Jim:

So "spliting hairs" means proving someone wrong?

That's not how I've ever seen it used.. Then again, I guess using a rrernce book to prove it means something else would be "splitting hairs" too.

BTW nitwit "Palin is q... (Below threshold)
Marc:

BTW nitwit "Palin is quitter. Someone who ran away from the political office she swore to uphold and maintain.

The same can be said of obama.

Dear JimXIt was a ... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

Dear JimX

It was a JOKE dumbass. Holder....in a Smartcar.....ahh, forget it.

Have you seen the "porn" video? Was it pretty hot? Or just parroting what your pals tell ya.

Are you and Tina wearing matching Che shirts tonight???? Just wondering.

Jay TeaYour post, ... (Below threshold)
Jim2:

Jay Tea

Your post, number 100 is base, and classless.

As for having the "slightest smidgen of propriety and respect and dignity, but I do choose to declare my right to do so" is complete cobblers.

You remind me of an empty vessel and all that! Empty vessels make the most noise.....

A couple of observations:</... (Below threshold)

A couple of observations:

jimx: "Imagine if Joe Biden thought the Vice President presided over the Senate." (http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/11/16/who-do-they-think-they-are.php#comment-960485)

Well, imagine if he did! Wow! That would make him nearly as literate in Constitutional law as Palin.

Article I Section 3:

"The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided."

Let's see... what does a president do? Oh, that's right; he _presides_. Hmm, that's kinda like being in charge of senate sessions, isn't it? jim x: demonstrably an illiterate fumbduck. (Or, possibly, someone who believes the Constitution is good only for wiping feces from his lips--a result of his profound asshattery.)

Of course, one would never catch Crazy Uncle Joe Biden actually saying anything that is congruent with the Constitution... unless he'd read it somewhere else and thought it would sound good when he plagiarized it.

As for the "Steve Green troll"--why give it so much attention? After all, it's adequately demonstrated its modus operandi by now, to wit: "I routinely ignore your comments... " (that is whenever it isn't deliberately, disingenuously strewing outright lies and distortions of fact, linking to non-existent "facts" and otherwise earning a torch to his pants). AnyTHING that's unable to actually answer critics with reasonable argument backed by fact is simply not worth reading. I've read enough of the "Steve Green troll" comments to know that feeding the cute lil venomous bugger will simply encourage it.

(Oh. Did I "dehumanize" the "Steve Green troll"? Nope. It's done that all by itself.)

There. That's all the attention the lil critter will get from me. (And yes, I embrace the irony.)

ah, the irony<blockqu... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

ah, the irony

SCSIWuzzy (along with several others like wiwog and 914 and Marc). You're all consistently abusive routinely childish

Except for when you do :)

I would actually enjoy seeing the evidence of my abuse. Might be an even more amusing thread than this has turned out to be.

ODA315 - poopyhead,<p... (Below threshold)
jim x:

ODA315 - poopyhead,

You referred to the capture of Bin Laden.

You then claimed you didn't.

I then showed you where you did.

Sure it's a joke. Also, you're still wrong.

Best hopes for your therapy,

~jim x

Dear David:a) curs... (Below threshold)
jim x:

Dear David:

a) cursing is not a substitute for logic.

b) oh, come on! Yes, "Preside" is the root of the word "President". Yes the Constitution says the Vice President will "preside" over the Senate. But the only actually power it gives the Veep is a tie-breaking vote.

Preside was *my* word, not Palin's.

Since we're going into 3rd-grader nitpicky land, here's Sarah Palin's actual quote:

Q: What does the Vice President do?

Palin: .."[T]hey're in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom."

Do I have to make it clear to you?

Vice Presidents are not given the power to make policy changes!

Vice Presidents are not Constitutionally "In charge" of the Senate in any way! The MOST they can Constitutionally do is cast a tie-breaking vote. That's IT.

This woman's shocking ignorance of the job she was **applying** for has no parallel. Sorry. You don't like it, not my problem.

And, "jim x" your amazing i... (Below threshold)

And, "jim x" your amazing ignorance of language, the Constitution and what the VP can and cannot do in the Senate is irrefutable. But subliterate buffoons like you are always amusing in small doses.

BTW, learn the difference between vulgarity and profanity (if you can find someone to use very short words and speak v e r y s l o w l y). Nothing in my comment was "cursing" unless your ass is holy and/or now cursed because of my notation that you speak out of it.

Asshat.

As Schiller said, "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." And as my granddad used to say, "You can't talk to a fence post and do any good."

Either would seem to apply to you.

"Now, go away or I shall taunt you a second time."

"And, "jim x" your amazi... (Below threshold)
jim x:

"And, "jim x" your amazing ignorance of language, the Constitution and what the VP can and cannot do in the Senate is irrefutable."

Sure - if by ignorance you mean "being correct".

Otherwise, great - refute me. Which means "Prove me wrong". Which means, show how Sarah Palin was actually correct in her statements about the role of the Vice President.

Since, to be totally clear, she said the VP was **in charge** of the Senate and could **change policy**. Which the Constitution does not say the VP can do.

Any part of that not clear? If so, let me know.

But subliterate buffoons like you are always amusing in small doses.

Whereas unliterate poltroons such as yourself are continuously amusing.

BTW, learn the difference between vulgarity and profanity...Nothing in my comment was "cursing" unless your ass is holy...

Wrong again!

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profanity

"Profanity is the act of using rude words."

"...Common examples of profanity

Several of these words come from Anglo-Saxon or Norse names for body parts, and bodily functions. They came to be thought of as profanity mostly after the Normans brought French and Latin words for them to England.

Ass or Arse"

Anything else you'd love to be proven wrong about, in a public forum?

As Schiller said, "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." And as my granddad used to say, "You can't talk to a fence post and do any good."

Perhaps you should have listened to him.

"Now, go away or I shall taunt you a second time."

Oh please, "taunt" me again! : ) Proving you so completely wrong every time is tremendously entertaining.

Oh, wonderful, jim x thi... (Below threshold)

Oh, wonderful, jim x thinks (at least, I assume he can think a little, but he keeps attempting to prove me wrong about that) he knows how to use the laughable reference, Wikipedia.

Oh, and I did refute you, clearly, succinctly and irrefutably: I cited the Founders' own words, found in the Constitution. That you do not understand them and that some VPs upheld neither their Constitutional duties nor their oaths of office is beside the point. That you are an unassailably ignorant lout who cannot understand plain English and a subliterate loon who thinks Wikipedia is an authoritative reference is also proven by your own words.

Now, does that count as a second taunt, or shall I waste yet more electrons proving Schiller correct?

*feh* I have no further use for someone as demonstrably self-enstupiated as yourself. Now go back in your corner and perform another auto-lobotomy. Practice doesn't make perfect, but if you keep working at it, you might make it permanent.

Asshat.

Oh, for fun, jim x, your ow... (Below threshold)

Oh, for fun, jim x, your own "reference"--Wikipedia--impeaches your view of "Predient of the Senate". While it's a pathetically limp article with a paucity of historical references, it does at least tell such as you, who think it authoritative,

"While vice presidents used to regularly preside over the Senate, modern vice presidents have done so only rarely--vice presidents usually only preside to swear in new senators, during joint sessions, and when casting a tie-breaking vote. The Senate chooses a president pro tempore to preside in the vice president's absence. Modern presidents pro tempore, too, rarely preside over the Senate.... "

Again, that "modern vice presidents" have eschewed the authority--and duty--of their office is no measure of what the office can do and be, within genuine Constitutional grounds. That you have even less historical awareness than the Wikipedia article's author(s) is no surprise, however. Try taking this lil quiz and bring your score back. Even if you cheated, you'd probably use Wikipedia to do it, so there's little doubt youd fail, along with 71% of the respondants:

http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/resources/quiz.aspx

Oh, and if you had someone read this comment to you very slowly, you may have noticed that I didn't link to the Wikipedia article I "cited" (what a nasty taste: citing a Wikipedia *LOL* article! Oh, well, it's better than casting pearls before you). If you get some serious help, perhaps you can find that article on your own.

Presiding over the senate was once a serious exercise of power by the vice president. It can be so again, provided a person is elected to the position who takes the position and its duties seriously. Oh. Wait. That's right. 21st Century politicians *spit*. Taking Constitutional duties seruiously. What was I thinking. Obviously you are correct on all points. No one in Washington will take the COnstitution any more seriously than you do (which is to say, not at all).

Asshat.

Hmm, some time to kill, why... (Below threshold)

Hmm, some time to kill, why not beat a dead horse named jim x using a real reference (not the "fanbois of asshattery" pseudo-reference, Wikipedia)?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/PROFANITY

profanity:

1 a : the quality or state of being profane b : the use of profane language
2 a : profane language b : an utterance of profane language

profane:

1 : to treat (something sacred) with abuse, irreverence, or contempt : desecrate
2 : to debase by a wrong, unworthy, or vulgar use

Once again, jimx=asshat. Now, is my use of "asshat" profanity? Only in his lil dimwitted, ill-informed mind.

When jimx's understanding of the English language reaches literacy, then his reading of the Constitutional duties and powers of the vice president might be worth reading.

Steve Green is wrong, they ... (Below threshold)
Bob Wright:

Steve Green is wrong, they did not ask for ad hominem attacks and had no sane reason to expect them. If one is required to have a spotless moral, financial and personal history in order to enter public debate, democracy in dead in this country.

Imagine if Joe Bid... (Below threshold)
Rob Crawford:
Imagine if Joe Biden thought the Vice President presided over the Senate.

He'd be correct.

Read the Constitution.

Sorry - here's the link ... (Below threshold)
Bill:

Sorry - here's the link to the self-proclaimed teabaggers.

BAD CHOICE OF NAMES, PEOPLE!

Posted by Steve Green

You dopey twits do realize that to teabag someone means we're the pitcher and you're the catcher, right?

We're dominant, you're submissive. Conqueror, conquered. My balls, your mouth. You do get that, right? So you're cool with this act? You wish it to occur? You like to describe your foes in positions of dominance to you? That's an interesting psychological tactic, there.

I laugh like hell every time one of you uses the phrase since you're too stupid to realize how you're denegrating yourselves. Just keep sqwaking and pretending you're intellectually superior while illustrating the lack of awareness a cabbage posesses.

I've studied the Bolshevik ... (Below threshold)
jerry:

I've studied the Bolshevik revolution when bullies, thugs and murderers took control of Krezinki's fledgling government. Those Bolsheviks remind me a lot of today's liberals.

Thanks for that Jay Tea. Se... (Below threshold)
tyree:

Thanks for that Jay Tea. Sections of the left wing have over the years morphed into a full blown hate group. They are every bit as worthy of scorn as you suggest. Their hate is changing America and we cannot hope to conserve what is good without having the audacity to face them.

I recall Joe the Plumber as... (Below threshold)
jP:

I recall Joe the Plumber asking a question of a candidate, and then the media and the Democratic machine going through his personal affairs and trying to ruin him. It was clear the establishment didn't like being questioned, and the establishment press did their dirty work.

Then after that, Joe decided to make a buck out of it, which I cannot blame him for. At that point, if he was attacked by pols and the press, then he's fair game.

But not for asking a question in his driveway.

The only thing I'd say abou... (Below threshold)
Mike:

The only thing I'd say about this essay is that you seem to denigrate Carrie and Joe a bit too much yourself, considering this is a piece about the evils of denigrating the common people.

Anyone want to chip in on a... (Below threshold)
mishu:

Anyone want to chip in on a private investigator to "vet" this "Steve Green". After all, he has to be held accountable for his statements -- the little fascist.

1) Steve Green is just anot... (Below threshold)
Fen:

1) Steve Green is just another Obama Filcher. Ignore him.

2) Remember which "sections of the leftwing have morphed into a full blown hate group." We've been operating under a handicap: I may disagree with what you say but will fight to the death to defend your right to say it. That concept should be allowed to die. We're living next door to TWANLOCs who no longer deserve to be treated fairly.

Study their tactics, study their Alinsky. Use it against them, take them down without mercy. We are at war, and have been for some time now.

There is a window of opportunity before the Bolsheviks secure power. Either act before it closes or prepare to spend the rest of your life telling your grandkids about the "good old days" and why you failed to stand up for Liberty.

Joe the Plumber had the nat... (Below threshold)
Rob S.:

Joe the Plumber had the national media and Democratic state officials coordinating his 'vetting'. Can you imagine if some anti-war protester or ACORN person had their tax records released by a Rebuplican offical? This would be a front page story for weeks and cries of fascism would be everywhere!

I've been reading all of St... (Below threshold)
MarkJ:

I've been reading all of Steve Green's posts and, I must say, everything he says is true...

...on Planet Rigel IV where he currently resides.

Sarah Palin wants your vote... (Below threshold)
Carol Herman:

Sarah Palin wants your vote. So, yes, she's entered the ring. I expect when you get seated you'll know something about the ring. And, how blood flies. No offense, but if she doesn't get 'elite' coverage she doesn't travel very far on any political route.

And, here? Gee. The press gives her every advantage. It's like seeing Palin getting a bone, while in DC, it's woman after woman with congressional powers lining up to get their best suited moments onto TV screens. A BLITZ OF WOMEN, shaking health care reform out of the bag; and Sarah getting the vipes going "for the other side." HELLO, the real problem is that we're losing health care as we know it. And, our government is changing the rules right before our eyes. Sarah Palin, by the way, is not the solution.

And, Carrie Prejean IS responsible for that horrendous video! What was she thinking? That's a boyfriend when you have her looks? She used her Holy Bible for her prop! Yeah, in a way, it stops conversation COLD.

Lots of times people just shake their heads as they walk away. "Pass the popcorn" should not become our country's motto. Honest debate, however? Plenty of room for that. Maybe, the next generation will learn something about why Carrie Prejean picked the wrong guy. And, why having a retarded child, Sarah, is such a painful disaster, people allow amniocentesis, a needle into the belly, just to find out. No sainthood is involved. Just choices. And, to each his own.

People people, let's be nic... (Below threshold)
Jupiter:

People people, let's be nice here. I find it very disturbing that SO many of you would go after Steve Green aka THE Sock Puppet knowing very well that with each post the hole in this heal gets bigger and bigger. The only thing this Sock Puppet has done is to parrot liberal talking points, better known as BULLSHIT. The same bullshit that makes this Sock stink and full of holes. However let's be fair and judge Steve Green by his own character, The Sock Puppet
http://www.google.com/search?q=steve+green+%2Bsock+puppet&btnG=Search

Jimx incorrectly asserted a... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Jimx incorrectly asserted against Ms. Palin a statement concerning the Vice President's duties in the Senate--the statement she made is correct.
The VP is the president of the Senate, you moron. If you're going to attack the woman, at least get basic facts correct--nice lack of understanding of the Constitution you got going there.

And, yes, Steve is a fool, about as self-aware as Chris Dodd. He illustrates something I've often noticed about debating the Left--they always create false premises, strawmen, or change meaning of terms to "fit" their particular poorly considered opinions. What is "public" versus private, who "sought" the spotlight, and of course, the meaning of "is."

Steve can rationalize anything to come up with a liberal talking point. The question is, does it profit us to engage in debate with someone so unprincipled, or unwise?

One of the great ironies of... (Below threshold)
CatoRenasci:

One of the great ironies of Sarah Palin not being considered part of the elite is that she's descended from at least 8 Mayflower passengers.

She represents the original English stock that made this country great, and many of the "elite" who disdain her are johnnies- and johannas-come lately, who have come here after all the hard work taming the continent was done, slavery ended in a bitter war, etc., and have taken advantage of all of the work done by the earlier immigrants and look down their noses on those who serve in the military and do the work of America.

Shame on them. They have only become elite because the WASP elite let them into their schools and circles, and they have gradually, over three of four generations, corrupted everything.

Pitchforks. Tar. Feathers.

Study their tactics, stu... (Below threshold)
John Skookum:

Study their tactics, study their Alinsky. Use it against them, take them down without mercy. We are at war, and have been for some time now.

I completely agree. Every day, do your best to think how you can undermine the Obama agenda and the Left in general. Be bold, aggressive and ruthless. Use all of their own rules against them. Leftist teachers who indoctrinate in class should get reported to the school board. If you're at work and some lefty tells an off color joke, go to HR and get him fired. If you're a business owner, and layoffs are coming, make sure you get rid of the lefties first. They usuallyare the lousiest workers anyway. Swamp the bureaucracies with minor complaints and FOIA requests. The Left is the enemy of humanity and no measures to excise this cancer from society are too extreme.

Good writing Jay! Finally s... (Below threshold)
Gareeth:

Good writing Jay! Finally someone has put together what we all have been thinking. After hearing the President of the United States call his own people, his own fellow citizens, the people whom he is supposed to be representing, 'tea baggers' - I say enough! As Oprah has always said, 'When someone tells you who they are, believe them'. Well, he has shown all of us who he truly is. This is a statesman living in the White House and talking like this about American Citizens! Speaking Truth to Power is now speaking smut to the people.

In the UK resentment or hat... (Below threshold)

In the UK resentment or hatred of the people you may call the working classes by the left is well documented. Nick Cohen's book 'What's Left?' presents a very good case for the origins of this, identifying streams coming from literature (Virginia Woolf), political ideology (the Fabian Society) and the failure of socialism to improve the lot of poor non-working and working people.

"And most importantly, it w... (Below threshold)
Gareeth:

"And most importantly, it wasn't his question that was the most newsworthy, it was the answer."
-Jay Tea

I never saw it like this! Right on Jay! Excellent point. I am sure Steve Green will edit it for his own internal reality though.

I got here through a Pajamas Media link. Glad I did!

And boy, you must have touched a really big liberal nerve. Haven't seen this much bile spewed out since the last Matthews/Olbermann/Maddow rant I managed to sit through.

There's a lot of wasted buf... (Below threshold)
Insufficiently Sensitive Author Profile Page:

There's a lot of wasted buffoonery above, questioning the three persons that Jay Tea has pointed out as examples of the elite's "who do you think you are" syndrome.

I'd like to suggest a different perspective, in which the elite are represented by the 535 members of the U.S. Congress, and their scorn is poured forth on the mere 300 million or so inhabitants of the United States.

Those Congresscritters are insisting on forcing a health "plan" (and a lot of taxes) on said citizens, while refusing to accept its dictates for themselves.

I think that pretty well trumps the three individual examples from above, by a factor of 100 million.

How come it's always the le... (Below threshold)
Marty:

How come it's always the left trying to destroy the right or center?

This destructiveness is not a national trait, it's a trait of the left.

The Steve Green posts were ... (Below threshold)

The Steve Green posts were hilarious and make the point so well.

How dare those little people question their betters ? So what if the beauty contest rules barred political questions ? So what if Joe the Plumber was approached by Obama and not the other way around ? Don't they know their place ?

I would be interested in a ... (Below threshold)
Sexypig:

I would be interested in a timeline of Joe the Plumber. I would bet that the state officials who checked his records illegally did so right after he questioned Obama, not after the GOP picked up on his 15 minutes of fame.

Keep in mind, these records were illegally checked, not by the media, concerned citizens, etc., but by GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS. That is a big difference.

I think the progressives are really missing that a lot of people are getting very angry by the double standard the media has shown especially since Bush and 2008 for Obama. This will bite them in the rear end at some point.

Oh, and "Dissent is the greatest form of patriotism" is now shown to be an empty slogan the Left uses when convenient. How evil.

Jay, you have touched a ner... (Below threshold)
xyz:

Jay, you have touched a nerve here. The left wants to insult and denigrate and provoke, right up to the point where their targets are ready to use violence. Then they want to say "It's only words!"

Those words have meanings. We're headed into some real tough times with a bitterly divided country. No one with any financial sense has a bit of confidence in this government. Obama is going to leave office as the most hated POTUS in American history, at one of the lowest ebbs in American history. Payback for the lefties, when it comes, is going to be a real bitch. If there isn't blood, and lots of it, I'll be absolutely amazed. We can't go on like this, so we won't.

I've been saying for decade... (Below threshold)
Bilwick1:

I've been saying for decades that "liberals" (i.e., State-fellators) are the New Tories, but the reaction to the tea party certainly underscores that. You can imagine some of them standing near the Boston wharf while the original tea party was taking place, and peering down through their lorgnettes while saying, "Who ARE these upstarts? Why don't these peasants simply shut up and submit to the rule of their betters?"

Dood...it's not hostility t... (Below threshold)
Larry:

Dood...it's not hostility to common people. It's hostility to ignorant assholes who act like they actually have something of value to contribute, but in reality are vacuous douchebags. Much like yourself.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy