Free Markets, Free People


Axlerod on Gingrich

What is it with these guys that they feel they have to come up with stuff like this?

"The higher a monkey climbs on the pole the more you can see his butt."

Good thing no one has said something like this about our black president.  However, Axlerod should know that his man is waaaay up that pole and his posterior has been hanging out there for all to see for years.  And it is not a pretty sight, politically speaking.

~McQ

Twitter: @McQandO

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

49 Responses to Axlerod on Gingrich

  • If it’s Newt than Tomasky could be right, Obama may be headed to a landslide victory: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/13/michael-tomasky-could-obama-be-headed-for-a-landslide.html

      • @Neo_ Is it just tripe if you disagree with it? One of the most successful theories is the “13 Keys to the Presidency” by Allan Lichtman. That also predicts an Obama victory: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/02/972376/-The-13-Keys-to-the-Presidency

        I think if the GOP had a real high quality candidate it would have a good chance, but the ones that are rising to the top look exceptionally weak.

        • @scotterb @Neo_ Seriously, Erb? You’re going to cite a Daily Kos article. Oh yeah, that wouldn’t be completely biased or anything, right? Your political pronouncements are as clueless as your economic ones. It’s no wonder you’re stuck at a backwater college in East BF, Maine.

        • @scotterb @Neo_ Seriously, Erb? You’re going to cite a Daily Kos article. Oh yeah, that wouldn’t be completely biased or anything, right? Your political pronouncements are as clueless as your economic ones. It’s no wonder you’re stuck at a backwater college in East BF, Maine.

        • @scotterb @Neo_ “Is it just tripe if you disagree with it?” Is it not tripe if you do agree with it? It’s so hard to tell. On the on hand you’re telling people to read a broader discourse, but then when quotes from Code Pink or Kucinich or Obama or yourself come up you dismiss them since the quoter is supposedly a right-winger. As far as I can tell the knuckle-draggers should read more widely, but not so widely that they find inconvenient non-right-wing points-of-view. Is that how it works?

        • @jlambert761400 @Neo_ I also wrote my own blog post last summer on the 13 keys, but decided to link to a different source. The thing is that an argument is either false or accurate based on its content, not what the source is. The 13 keys have been around for awhile, and have been extremely accurate, albeit in a small n world (even looking backwards) of Presidential contests. Here was my post: http://scotterb.wordpress.com/2011/08/30/obama-a-sure-thing/

        • @scotterb @jlambert761400 @Neo_ Regrettably (actually, thank God) we do not elect based on popular vote, it’s just happens far more often than not that the two methods coincide. If we elected by popular vote most states could just accept what their masters in California, New York, Texas, Florida, Illinois and Pennsylvania decided for them.

        • @looker @jlambert761400 @Neo_ We find a point of agreement: I am a strong supporter of the electoral college system!

        • It was bound to happen on some issue. Now, on to repealing the 17th Amendment.

          Also, note to my fellow Texans, I didn’t list New York before Texas intentionally, it just flowed out that way into my fingers. I expect if California continues to be California we’ll be #1 before the end of the next decade. But I’m thinking we won’t be happy with what the new comers try to do to our beloved state when we’re #1.

        • @scotterb
          ” 8. Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.

          I don’t think this key has turned since the Vietnam era. No protests seem to be on the horizon, so this key stands.”

          He’d better hope the OWS losers don’t turn the DNC convention clock back to 1968. The Tea Party, for better or for worse, is a protest movement specifically against the big government statism of Obama. The DailyKos is simply in moon pony land here.

          9. Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.

          No Whitewater equivalent has emerged with Obama. Quite frankly I’m somewhat surprised that the right hasn’t filed pointless lawsuits against Obama. But there is no Ken Starr, Paula Jones, or Monica Lewinsky on the horizon. This key stands.
          There is Solyndra. There is Fast and Furious. There is, while not directly attached to the administration, Corzine and MF Global. There are Obama campaign ads for Corzine that are easy fodder for mud slinging.

          ” 10. Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.

          Yes the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq continue unabated. However, there has been no equivalent of Somalia. And had the raid to get OBL failed this key would have almost certainly turned. The wars continue, but there haven’t been any significant setbacks. . So Obama keeps this key.”
          Considering Iran and Pakistan, this is highly speculative and could easily go into the crapper.

          “I think if the GOP had a real high quality candidate it would have a good chance, but the ones that are rising to the top look exceptionally weak.”

          Ummm, from my vantage point, Obama looks exceptionally weak. Especially on the economy which will probably be a big factor.

        • @tkc882 @scotterb The keys work! dammit! How dare you inject reality into this discussion! If it were newsworthy that Senators and Congressmen are calling for the resignation of the Attorney General over Fast and Furious, ABC and NBC would report it! As it is, they’ve been focusing on important national stories, like Tiger Wood’s comeback, or how too much sitting isn’t healthy or the Green Bay Packers are for sale, or my personal favorite, how a duck hunting dog shot his owner in the butt. THOSE ARE IMPORTANT. There are NO, I repeat NO SCANDALS worthy of reporting. This administration is SCANDAL FREE I tell you, SCANDAL FREE!

        • @looker @tkc882 @scotterb
          “There are NO, I repeat NO SCANDALS worthy of reporting”

          These are not the droids you are looking for.

        • @looker @tkc882 @scotterb
          “The keys work!”

          Well they work until they don’t. The nice thing about inductive models like that is that you can tune them to hindcast pretty well, and even get a few forecasts correct. But since they have no grounding in a theory of reality you can’t even begin to determine under what circumstances they will fail . Like, we know pretty well that the sun will come up at very certain and predictable times every day for thousands of years with very good confidence unless something extreme happens because the general and special theories of relativity make precise predictions and do not appear to have failed yet (and chaos isn’t significant in the system on that time scale). However the keys “model” is inducted from past observations without reference to a theory of why it should be true, so is not able to make precise predictions, so really we can’t with any confidence give it more than a 50-50 shot of getting its next prediction correct.

          But “dog shoots man”, well I’m pretty sure that is a sign from above!

        • @DocD @tkc882 @scotterb “Dog shoots man” – and in the butt no less. I mean, comedy gold and certainly more important than any silly Congressional investigative committee.

          The ‘keys’ as enumerated in Obama’s favor in the Kossy link are all based on hard scientific fact, not feeling. So, the whole not technically a recession thingie, and the no scandal thingie, and the per capita growth thingie, and no foreign policy failure thingie are all solid science and not opinion, and anyone who can’t see that is a knuckledragger in the first place and if possible would be forbidden to vote because even though voting IS sacred, some people, mostly right wingers, shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

          Actually, this whole election thing would be easier if we just allowed the President to assume dictator powers until he’s fixed all our problems.

        • @DocD @tkc882 @scotterb “These are not the droids you are looking for” – precisely! Is that what the networks are doing?
          “We don’t need to see his birth certificate.”
          “These aren’t the scandals you’re looking for.”
          “He go on about his socialist business”
          “Move along…move along”

    • @scotterb except for the country is largely in Anybody BUT Obama mode, to the point where (gulp) Newt Gingrich looks like a viable choice to conservative voters.

      You really need to get off campus to someplace besides your house and the wine and cheesers. Or, don’t. Then it’ll be so much more fun over the course of the coming year when you periodically stop by with your various and sundry often wrong headed pronouncements.

      • @looker You need to get away from right wing blogs and read a broader discourse (not that I didn’t make a pronouncement, I offered a link). On my own blog today (responding to Time’s “Person of the Year”), 2011 has seen a real shift of discourse both in the US and world wide. The times, they are a-changing!

        • @scotterb @looker Errrmmm not to rain on your parade but…

          For the wheel’s still in spin
          And there’s no tellin’ who
          That it’s namin’
          For the loser now
          Will be later to win
          For the times they are a-changin’.

        • @scotterb Uh huh – Arab Spring and the Euro Zone and all that. Yes, they are a changin.

        • @scotterb Yes, the times are changing. Just not for the better. The OWS crowd are a rag-tag bunch of people mostly pushing the failed extreme left ideologies of the 20th century. The ‘Arab spring’ is giving way to theocracy.
          This simply reminds of the sort of nonsense that makes Che Guevera out to be a romantic freedom fighter when everything he stood for resulted in misery, tyranny, and death.
          This not the sort of change you want.

    • @scotterb “But today’s poll suggests that a wipeout is not unimaginable”

      That is setting the bar pretty low even in politics nearly a year away from an election. “Not unimaginable”? Color me impressed.

      “OK. Realistically, South Carolina is a reach. But nobody cares about South Carolina, really”

      So the result is meaningful except that it isn’t in case we don’t want it to be.

      “The only thing that might bring back sanity and civility is the destruction of the current GOP. ”

      Not wanting to point out any bias or anything but…

      • @DocD At this early point bias will color anyone’s view. There is the famous consensus fallacy that people tend to believe a lot more people think like themselves than actually do. So now predictions are probably more reflective of what people want than what will happen. It’s still too early to know, and in fact a lot depends on the economy in 2012.

        • @scotterb No. Shit. Sherlock.

        • @scotterb @DocD “consensus fallacy that people tend to believe a lot more people think like themselves than actually do.”

          Oh, you mean, like your belief in Global Warming for example? (hey, did ya hear the Hurricane predicting dudes in Colorady have admitted they’ve done a lousy job and have given up, and Canada is dropping Kyoto because, shock! it’ll crater their economy).

          You hopin for Obama’s economic miracle, his hope and change to sweep in in 2012? Will that be before or after Congress finally stops screwing around with the antics of intelligence insulting Eric Holder and impeaches him? Or when the Euro marks the landscape at the bottom of it’s flat stall and the PIIGS go into riot mode? Or when Iran finally cuts loose and does something silly and drastic?

          If it were a number of other Presidents besides Lead-from-Behind Obama it might mean a reelection swept in on decisive action for a foreign policy victory, but the clown prince isn’t likely to do anything useful if his last three years are any indication. So when the fecal matter contacts the whirling blade, don’t look for this President to handle it effectively enough to ride it back in to the White House.

          Meanwhile, over here on the ranch –
          “Obama may be headed to a landslide victory:”
          but
          “It’s still too early to know”

          way to be decisive yourself there Hoss.

        • @looker @scotterb @DocD
          Erb can only be decisive if his Democratic masters let him. Don’t forget to submit that voucher for your daily 30 pieces of silver there Erb!!!

  • Well Chimpy Bushitler managed to last 8 years up his pole, so I am not sure that having your ass on display is such a negative thing. After all, if everyone has seen it and is used to it, it kind of lacks shock value.

    And remember this when Obama was newly elected? Kind of caused outrage if I remember correctly:
    http://scienceblogs.com/authority/2009/02/new_york_post_editorial_cartoo.php

  • Speaking of monkey butts…
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/republicans-plan-to-push-payroll-tax-cut-bill-through-house-despite-white-house-veto-threat/2011/12/13/gIQAZJRYsO_print.html

    The GOP passes the payroll tax bill and tacks on a job measure and the Democrats, lead from the rear, by Obama, threatens to block it. This from the people who said something needed to be done now. The Dems just flashed their asses.

  • Heh – you read my mind – if Axelrod is all that smart he’d not have made that observation because it points as much to his bozo boss as it does to Newt.

  • I haven’t posted here in a while. I see Erb is back.

    On the the 13 keys, I read that one last week and was unimpressed. Even if the keys did have validity (and that I doubt), the real trick is in the analysis. One of the the keys was “scandal free”. However, between the crony capitalism that abounds with this administration, “Fast and Furious”, and what looks like money laundering for Mexican drug cartels, the scandal factor is rising quickly. Second, the keys gave Obama credit for killing Bin Laden as a demonstration of Obama being strong militarily. That is doubtful. Most of the country understands that was a 10 year effort started by Bush and no one, but no one, thinks Bush would have been even quicker to authorize the mission. In addition, there is the small matter of the drone and Obama “asking nicely for Iran to give it back”. Cheney pretty well demolished that with the idea of three other options on Obama’s desk. Obama is not strong militarily. So, now we have flipped two of the Obama “positives” and that is just off the top of my head.

    Second, Scott, the idea that Time and the “protestors” indicates some kine of fundamental change is, well, idiotic. Take Egypt first. The idea of a representative democracy is pretty much dead. What they ended up with is an even more repressive government. As John Bolton says: “one man, one vote, one time”. Then there is Libya where Obama took it upon himself to go to war for 6 months and we still don’t know what the final result is. Couple that with complete inaction from the US on Iranian and Syrian protests, and there is not much there, there. Second, the OWS is a nightmare for the Democrats. They are now being advised to steer clear of the movement. And, OWS is making no friends by shutting down west coast ports and throwing people out of work. OWS, in spite of you lefties thinking it is some kind of long term movement, is actually a disaster. It has turned out to be just like the anarchists ( who are not really anarchists) at the world trade and economic meetings.

    In essence, Scott, your analyses are as flawed as ever.

    • @rickcaird Well, clearly my analysis does not correspond to your ideological bias. Dismissing Obama’s foreign policy success, the importance of the change sweeping the Arab world (quoting Bolton — that guy’s been totally discredited!), dismissing the OWS impact on the political discourse (and the death of the tea party), bringing up minor stories and pretending they’re major scandals…you keep telling yourself that I’m wrong and you’re right. You’re response is a bit over the top and way overstated. You’re trying too hard — which suggests you know your argument is weak.

      • @Now, Scott, what foreign policy successes? I would love to hear your list.

        The change sweeping the Arab world is more likely than not to be negative. It has all the characteristics of Iran when Carter abandoned the Shah. There are now reports that Al Quada has acquired some of Gahdafi’s weapons. Libya was done with no idea who we were supporting and no national interest. You have complained mightily about Bush and Iraq, but Libya has a much more tenuous justification. In fact, the only one given by Obama was “days not weeks” at the request of France and Germany.

        In what way has Bolton been discredited? Are you disputing his comment. How did that first election work out in Iran, again.

        It is easy to dismiss the OWS rhetoric. They had no focus. As I said, the Democrats are running away from them, so it is hard to see what impact they have had. Perhaps you can summarize the effect for us. The TEA party has not died. It is still quite active and will show up in the voting. The TEA party has learned that the action starts at the local level.

        If you think “Fast and Furious” is a minor story when the US Attorney is lying under oath and the implications for relations with Mexico are negative, I question your judgement. Holder will end up resigning over this if he is not impeached first.

        Me thinks you doth protest too much, Scott.

        • @rickcaird @Now Seriously — you haven’t been following the positive coverage of Obama’s foreign policy. Leaving Iraq, disengaging from Afghanistan, bringing regime change to Libya and reaffirming the US can have influence in that part of the world. After Iraq most people wrote the US off — a major foreign policy debacle, the US public turned against foreign policy action abroad. We had been humiliated — now we’re back. And of course there’s Osama Bin Laden and a very effective counter-terrorism effort. In the Arab world he’s on the right side of history. After the Bush disasters, Obama’s been a foreign policy breath of fresh air – the US is respected again.

          Don’t worry about the Arab world. It’ll take time but these changes were necessary. Given demographic change (half the population is under 23) and globalization the old dictators could not hang on, their regimes were obsolete. Don’t worry about Islam — most Muslims reject al qaeda and extremism, and ultimately groups like the Muslim Brotherhood have to be part of the transition. It’s the start of what will be a long process for them, but modernism is on the rise.

          OWS has higher support than the Tea Party in polls, and its lack of focus is its strength. The focus is that the 30 years of free market deregulation and tax cuts have lead to major economic diasters, high debt, and the wealthiest stacking the game in their own favor. Most people agree with that, that is the focus of the conversation now, the Tea Party was a reactionary effort to try to turn back cultural change. Still, the distrust of Wall Street does unite the Tea Party and OWS. To be sure, the lack of clear focus for OWS allows the right wing media to cherry pick particular quotes and make it seem like it’s a radical leftist group, but the reality is that the message resonates and they’ve changed the political discourse. Frank Luntz, GOP strategist, admitted it scares him to death. So the operatives don’t share your dismissive attitude.

          I don’t think ‘fast and furious’ amounts to much, though I really don’t know anything about it (what I do know is what I just googled, and it appears to be a lot of right wing blogs and media making noise). The right wing contrived a scandal against Clinton on Whitewater (even accused him of killing someone named David Foster, I think) and it had no impact; this isn’t even about Obama, it’s pretty obscure. I don’t know if Holder will resign, but outside of right wing media it’s pretty much a non-story.

          Meanwhile the economy shows some signs of life, the Republican candidates appear weak, and, well, time will tell. I’m comfortable with that.

        • @scotterb @rickcaird
          “I don’t think ‘fast and furious’ amounts to much, though I really don’t know anything about it (what I do know is what I just googled, and it appears to be a lot of right wing blogs and media making noise). The right wing contrived a scandal against Clinton on Whitewater (even accused him of killing someone named David Foster, I think) and it had no impact; this isn’t even about Obama, it’s pretty obscure. I don’t know if Holder will resign, but outside of right wing media it’s pretty much a non-story.”

          Ah scholarship how we mourn your passing.
          I don’t know anything about this apart from my Google search just now but my meaty non-ideological analysis says this is a non-issue.

          I guess this is inevitable when one is schooled in Frankfurt.

          Scott Erb, scholar, child of the Enlightenment and closet self-Fisker.

        • @scotterb @rickcaird @Now Even ABC and NBC covered White Water, and poof, people actually went to jail for White Water. But….manufactured.

          Welcome to your daily beclowning ceremony.

        • @looker @scotterb @rickcaird Ahh you are missing the essential Erbiness of his comment (or maybe not)! The fact that the right wing contrived a scandal, accused him of killing someone (he thinks) and it had no impact does not mean the events did not occur. All it means is that Erb agrees that if you can get away with it then it is a non-story. Circular? Yes. Flattering of his POV? No.

        • @DocD @scotterb @rickcaird Fast and Furious – “it appears to be a lot of right wing blogs and media making noise”

          From this we can conclude Scott is a headline reader – in this case he (may have) checked the by-line of several sites, and concluded merely based on their location, that it was junk. Rather than read some of the information about the lies, poor judgement, prevaricating detailed by the sites that might be considered more mainstream he observes the overall nature, and draws his conclusion of the facts from there.

          Never mind an actual, and last week very heated Congressional interrogation session with the Attorney General of the United States, never mind the, let me use the term ‘mis-remembered’ information provided by Holder, the guy who thinks there’s no real discernible or even meaningful distinction between the terms “a few days”, “a few weeks” or “a few months” when giving testimony to Congress.

          But, there’s that advanced degree of his, so, must be so, no story here. After all, NBC and ABC haven’t covered it, and screw CBS, what do they know anyway, they’re just part of the right wing media.

          If this goes where it ought Scott will wake up one Monday morning to find that the Attorney General of the United States was done in the previous Friday evening by the Administration’s bus and wondering what happened that could have caused such a thing.

          Nixon didn’t actually try to cover up a killing of an American LEO with a weapon sold with the express blessing of the Justice Department and the ATF.

          But, as Scott says, doesn’t amount to much. You know though, considering the other stuff this administration has done, maybe he’s right.

        • @DocD @scotterb

          CBS has been covering this:

          http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-57338546-10391695/documents-atf-used-fast-and-furious-to-make-the-case-for-gun-regulations/

          The basics are Justice and ATF authorized the sale of 2000 guns to the Mexican dug cartels in violation of US law and over the objections of gun dealers and ATF field agents. This not only undercuts the Mexican government, but also resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Mexicans and at least one US border agent. In addition, CBS has uncovered documents showing this was part of an administration plan to increase gun control in the US. You may remember the claims from last year that 90% of the guns in Mexico were traceable to the US. Tat was untrue, but now the 2000 sales begin to make more sense. Also, you may remember Obama saying there was “under the radar ” efforts to increase gun control. It is hard to believe Obama was unaware of these illegal gun sales.

          Last week Issa held hearing with Holder under oath. It now appears Holder lied under oath and Sensenbrenner threatened impeachment hearing which would get around privilege and stonewalling.

          This is far more than “right wing blogs”. This is a major government conspiracy in violation of US laws and Mexican sovereignty.

        • @looker @scotterb @rickcaird @Now

          Scott never knows where he is, never pays attention, never knows who he is talking to, never has the facts, makes stuff up to compensate for all that and, as a bonus, doesn’t know his own field. The icing on the cake is his smugness about being a nothing. One would like to think that this is but harmless narcissism, until it repetitively emerges as psychopathy, featuring huge glandular pathological lying, shallow affect, indicative glibness, deceit, and absence of conscience.

          It’s quite a package.

        • @scotterb @Now

          Leaving Iraq was a continuation of the Bush policy and plan. However, you can be sure that Bush would not have failed to talk to Al Maliki for 9 months as Obama did. It is not a foreign policy “success” to simply abandon an effort. The good news, though, is our withdrawal will leave Iraq with no air support making it easier for Israel to attack Iran.

          You mention “successes” in Afghanistan and Libya. But no one, not even you, can call those successes because they have not played out. If the Taliban retake Afghanistan or if Iran gets control of Iraq because of a premature withdrawal, those are not a success. You are confusing action with success.

          It is the same with Libya. No one knows what these rebels are and if, like Egypt, the countries are leaping from the frying pan into the fire.

          The humiliation is being propagated by Obama. At this point, US commitments are not to be trusted. Obama has been reduced to asking nicely for our drone back. No one thinks we are back. In fact, they think we are the weak sister who is afraid to do anything. We are not respected Scott. We are becoming a non entity.

          Ask the citizens of Iran and Syria if they are better off now than before. Go to Egypt and ask the Copts and the women how they feel about the Muslim Brotherhood. Scott, like so many liberals, you have the ability to confuse your hopes and good wishes for the facts on the ground. Islamic regimes, always reduce freedom. Watch Turkey as the government goes after the military as part of the Islamic takeover.

          I have never heard anyone before, even a liberal, argue that lack of focus is a strength. That is such a poor argument it merits no response. “We have a movement” but we don’t know what it stands for. Sure, That is a strong selling point. How about a new motto for University of Maine: “We provide and education, but we don’t know what it is”. Positively absurd.

          As I recall (and I am right), Whitewater resulted in indictment and convictions of Clinton confederates. Hillary Clinton was a lawyer for the Rose law firm and was involved in WhiteWater. In fact, she lost the billing records until they mysteriously showed up on her nightstand years later. No one accused Hillary or Bill of killing Foster. There were, however, questions about whether it was a suicide and why his office was stripped before the cops were called.

          Scott, you used to be able to provide a coherent. even if incorrect, argument. You seem to be losing that ability. It must be too much liberal thinking.

          To DocD: I responded to the fast and furious comment first before realizing you we quoting Erb.

        • @rickcaird @Now Your long response can be summarized as “things might get worse.” But that’s the case with any President at any time. Most pundits see foreign policy as an Obama strength, you disagree, in large part because of your perspective on foreign policy. That’s fine. I simply find your case unpersausive. Iraq may be a divided society and not a true democracy, but that would have been unrealistic. We got about as good as we could hope for given the errors of the previous administration (though again, to Bush’s credit he did change course). Iran is not about take over Iraq, and much of what’s happening there is either beyond our control or we have limited means in part because of the cost of the Iraqi operation. Your comment about coherent arguments should be directed to yourself — saying ‘things could go bad’ isn’t an argument, it’s a truism about just about anything!

        • @scotterb @Now

          No Scott, the idea here is that you are claiming “foreign policy successes” for actions that have not occured yet or whose results are not known. Taking Mubarak and Ghadafi out is meaningless unless you know what the follow on is and if that follow on is better than what it replaced. It is akin to one of your student claiming success on a test before it is scored. That is mere empty rhetoric.

          Second, I doubt any ratonal pundit claims foreign policy is an Obama strength. In fact, it is clear Obama has little to no interest in foreign policy and wishes he did not need to be bothered with it. The only place he has spent any capital is with Israel/Palestine and not only has that failed, he is now walking it back because he wants Jewish campaign money. In addition to even that, Hamas is now setting up missiles in Gaza. Lovely, just lovely. Does that not increase the likelihood of war between Egypt and Israel?

          Iran does not have to take over Iraq. It only has to increase its influence in Iraq and without the US as a counterweight that will be much easier. Speaking of Iran, Obama has had no success with Iran at all. In fact, as Obama’s weaknesses become apparant, Iran has ratcheted up the rhetoric.

          Finally, your claiming success where none is apparant is, in fact, incoherent argument. Again, you are substituting your wishes and hopes for the facts on the ground.

        • @scotterb @rickcaird @Now “…even accused him of killing someone named David Foster, I think…”

          David? Your attempt to pretend you don’t remember the name of Vince Foster is transparent. It’s a common tactic of yours. Instead of simply discussing matters in an honest, straightforward way, you have the propagandist switch set to full tilt, 24/7.

          You argued about Vince Foster for months with people like Beck and Robertson. You even went so low as to exploit the suicide of Robertson’s father to sneer that “insanity runs in the family” as a way to portray his arguments about Vince Foster’s death as the ravings of a crazy conspiracy nut. But then, that’s the sort of guy you are. Scumbag.

          “David Foster”? How lame.

        • @scotterb @rickcaird “I simply find your case unpersausive.”

          As if any Republican, libertarian, or other opponent of your “leftist” ideology *CARES* if you pretend to be persuaded.

        • @myweeklycrime @rickcaird @Now Ah, “David Foster” was an Al Stewart song character, that’s why it was in my head. I didn’t talk about anyone’s suicide, but I remember a few of you mocking a guy who lost a young child. That was sick.

        • @scotterb @rickcaird @Now “…that’s why it was in my head.”

          I don’t believe you for a second. You knew it was Vince Foster but you intentionally changed the name like a good little propagandist to give the illusion that the death of a White House counsel which you debated for months was so minor as to be forgettable. (If you’re not lying, you’re showing signs of dementia.)

          “I didn’t talk about anyone’s suicide…” http://bit.ly/uo1Z4A (that was your sockpuppet)

          “…I remember a few of you mocking a guy who lost a young child.”

          No you don’t. You and that guy *LIED* about that, because it never happened.

          “That was sick.”

          Pretending that debate opponents were mocking someone over the death of a child as a deliberate method of character assassination was indeed sick. You and “Gandalf” were loathsome for that and even your ideological ally, “SemiScholar” called you on it. http://bit.ly/taLShr

        • @myweeklycrime @rickcaird @Now Sockpuppet conspiracies? Sheesh. In other words, not me. And accusing someone of lying about a loss is pathetic. Scummy. Sick. Perverted. Even if you think someone is lying about something like that, you just don’t go there. I realized then how low some of you would go, and I was appalled.

          Otherwise I don’t recall much from flame wars about 15 or so years ago except at one I point I realized I was just playing around and some of you were getting obsessive and taking things insanely seriously. That was a little scary, and to tell you the truth, it still is.

        • @scotterb “Sockpuppet conspiracies?”

          Look up the word “conspiracy”. A sockpuppet doesn’t qualify. It’s one guy (you) attempting to give the illusion of multiple opinions in sync, not actual multiple people with opinions in sync.

          “In other words, not me.”

          A cheap dialup in your area, posting on the same topics, attacking the same people, even using a few of the same phrases and misspellings. You even so much as admitted it once, saying “even if” you did it, it was no big deal. Except you forgot about mocking Robertson over his father’s suicide.

          “And accusing someone of lying about a loss is pathetic. Scummy. Sick. Perverted.”

          I’d like to see you cite *ME* doing that, since you did accuse *ME* of “mocking” that guy over the alleged death of his son. No, instead you and the other weasels claimed that my use of the word “alleged” was tantamount to “mocking” and using the death of a child “as a weapon.” Remember now?

          As for others you falsely accused of same, like Beck, they simply stated they didn’t believe “Gandalf” about *ANYTHING* because he constantly lied. That is far removed from anything “Scummy. Sick. Perverted.”

          “Even if you think someone is lying about something like that, you just don’t go there.”

          So you’re actually taking the position that a person who lies about such a sensitive thing is a victim and people who point out his dishonesty are horrible? The truth means nothing to you.

          “I realized then how low some of you would go, and I was appalled.”

          Except you didn’t make any effort to actually make any factual distinctions between people who wrote completely different things. You lied about what I wrote and you continue to lie about it. It’s part of your modus operandi to tell such lies as a calculated attempt at character assassination.

          “…about 15 or so years ago…”

          Why do you keep changing from 6 years or 10 years to 15? Get out a calculator and do: 2011 – 2005, 2011 – 2003, 2011 – 2001. None of those will get you 15. Ever.

          “…I was just playing around and some of you were getting obsessive and taking things insanely seriously.”

          Yeah, it’s “insane” to be “serious” when you make jokes about another person’s father’s suicide or falsely accuse people of mocking a grieving parent. What kind of lunatic would ever think you were doing anything but having a fun little prank?