May 27, 2017

"The visceral instinct to physically attack a person who has just attacked you is strong; the surge of adrenal hormones makes it feel possible and necessary."

"That circuitry is increasingly vestigial, but overriding it and playing the longer game requires an active decision," writes James Hamblin — in "How a Man Takes a Body Slam/In an assault in Montana, two very different ideas of masculinity" (The Atlantic) — praising the Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs for his "judicious, prescient reaction" to the body-slamming he seems to have received from Greg Gianforte.

Hamblin likes the idea of "redefining strength" by accepting, in the moment, that one has been "physically overpowered" and not getting caught up in "the idea of masculinity as an amalgam of dominance and violence." Instead, Jacobs, speaking "as if narrating for the audio recorder," said “You just body-slammed me and broke my glasses." He also "started asking for names of witnesses to the assault who will be assets to his case as it plays out in courts of law and public opinion," and reported the incident to the police.

Of course, Jacobs's choices were not merely a matter of overcoming physical impulses and meritoriously eschewing violence. I don't know how much of an impulse to retaliate on the spot he may have felt. I don't really know how violently he was hit. I don't even know if he did something first toward Gianforte and Gianforte was doing the old tit for tat retaliation. But narrating the audio, dropping it on line, going to the police, and taking names for litigation purposes is also a form of dominance. Some people would even call it violence. Why, here's an article in The Atlantic from just last June: "Enforcing the Law Is Inherently Violent/A Yale law professor suggests that oft-ignored truth should inform debates about what statutes and regulations to codify."

You know, if somehow I were given the choice between getting body slammed and getting charged with a crime and the question were How hard would the body slam need to be before you'd prefer to get charged with a crime?, I'd say pretty damned hard. And I'm just a little old lady. I'd rather be body-slammed than get sued in tort. If you body-slammed me, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't hit you back.* But I'll tell you one thing: If you sue me, I will defend to the hilt, and —  where ethically appropriate — there will be counterclaims.

___________________

* And I have been body-slammed, at rock concerts, when I was trying to stand out of the range of a mosh pit and some young man came flying out obliviously. And sometimes it was intentional, an effort to provoke non-moshers to listen to the music the properly physical way. But I didn't call the cops or take names or file lawsuits.

IN THE COMMENTS: EDH says:
A "body-slam" is lifting someone completely of the ground and then driving their body to the ground.

It's not the same as "slam-dancing" on the periphery of a mosh pit, where one person slams his body into someone else's.
Wait. Let's get some shared understanding here. Does anybody think Jacobs intended to refer to the professional wrestling move? Here's a careful, precise demonstration of what that is:

524 comments:

1 – 200 of 524   Newer›   Newest»
3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

We're not monkeys folks.

Let's prefrontal cortex a bit more.

Achilles said...

What happens if you deserve to be body slammed...

Kevin said...

Hamblin likes the idea of "redefining strength" by accepting, in the moment, that one has been "physically overpowered" and not getting caught up in "the idea of masculinity as an amalgam of dominance and violence.

That's known as taking a beating. Or as the writing of Quentin Tarantino put it in this classic scene: "Night of the fight you may feel a slight sting. That's pride fuckin' with you. Fuck pride. Pride only hurts. It never helps. You fight through that shit."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHTeq3klVZY

"In the fifth, your ass goes down."

chickelit said...

Release the damn video!

eric said...

I'm still not convinced anyone was body slammed. I remember when Michelle Fields wrote, "Campaign managers aren’t supposed to try to forcefully throw reporters to the ground, no matter the circumstance." and then the video came out and this wasn't even close to the truth, I realized I can no longer trust the media. I mean, Michelle Fields was supposed to, as a writer at Brietbart, in my tribe. And yet here she was making up a fantasy in order to get attention for herself and possibly sue.

In the Michelle Fields case, we at least had video, although if everyone remembers, before we had video, we had audio and we had a corroborating witness.

This time, we don't have video.

So, without video and without any pictures of any sort of damage to this persons body, I call complete and total BS.

David Begley said...

There will be all sorts of body slamming and worse tonight in Montana but I doubt the Sheriff will be called unless it is really bad.

If there is any body slamming at Buck's Bar tonight in Venice, Nebraska I will report back here in this thread.

Michael said...

In the Guardian he says he was wailed on, then he shifts it to he thinks (thinks) he might have been hit. He was definitely not "body slammed" in the sense that any male ever in a fight would understand it. He was forced to the ground. But it is clear that he is post masculine, a woos, a pussy.

Kevin said...

I'm still not convinced anyone was body slammed.

You mean because the person who raised the term is the person filing charges? "Instead, Jacobs, speaking "as if narrating for the audio recorder," said “You just body-slammed me and broke my glasses."

It's like a lawyer saying into the microphone said, "You just committed blah blah blah assault with blah blah blah intent and blah blah blah extenuating circumstances for which the appropriate punishment in this state is blah blah blah."

Can you say, "self-serving" and "meant to be prejudicial"?

JPS said...

"I've always been kind of a pacifist. When I was a kid, my father told me, 'Never hit anyone in anger - unless you're absolutely *sure* you can get away with it.'"

- PVT Russell Zisky (RIP, Harold Ramis)

traditionalguy said...

If someone comes from behind and hits you, it causes anger. But then the mind focuses and thinks moves ahead, instantly...the old malice aforethought thoughts. And one of you is gonna win and the other one will lose. Unfortunately the audience usually condemns the winner, out of their own fear of him.

America's Politico said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
America's Politico said...

Prof,

Tucker Carlson did a great job on reporting this, https://youtu.be/tRFXpgiLg3g.

Re: Ben Jacobs of Guardian, he is a liberal reporter who likes to stereotype GOP. He should not have gone to Montana. I think they all were expecting GOP to lose and so were on the verge of celebrating. This got out of hand. He overreached (i.e., got in the face). So, he got body slammed. But, he will come out ahead. See Tucker's reporting.

Jacobs will be on TV shows. He will re-live this for months. Next Spring, he will have a commencement address to some J-school. He will offer:

Graduates: Do your job. Don't worry if you fall down. Get up and do your duty to report.

buwaya said...

I disagree.
We were not designed to suppress such natural urges.
This suppression can be damaging, I am convinced.
It leads to a tendency to be easily suppressed even in other circumstances, or even auto-suppression just on the bare possibility of a conflict. Entire societies can suffer from a lack of personal initiative resulting from that emotional reaction-control.
And, I think, this constantly bottled-up frustration eventually results in depression and suicide.
In such a case, better to die fighting, no matter the reason.
The US was once known for brashness, for initiative, for natural leadership. But this is dying away very quickly.

sunsong said...

Assault is a crime. I want to see the wannabe Trump spend some time in jail. Violence was not an appropriate response to being angry at having been asked a question by a reporter.

Ain't No Cure for the Body Slam Blues

Jim at said...

Maybe - just maybe - the threat of a violent response will cause the left to think twice the next time they want to get all froggy in someone's face.

But I doubt it.

Jim at said...

"Violence was not an appropriate response to being angry at having been asked a question by a reporter."

Good thing that's not what happened then, huh.

Hagar said...

“You just body-slammed me and broke my glasses."

Makes no sense. If a civilian (not a TV "wrestler") is slammed to the ground, if he has got breath and the ability to think and speak at all, it is not going to be about his glasses.

buwaya said...

Again, I suggest an international Thunderdome. A no-law spot where personal and factional hatreds can be worked out by whatever means, whatever outcomes, without legal consequences.

rcocean said...

"In the Michelle Fields case, we at least had video, although if everyone remembers, before we had video, we had audio and we had a corroborating witness."

Exactly. The audio turned out to be a complete lie. Why should this be any different? The fact that he stayed so calm indicates he wasn't roughed up.

Of course, being a liberal shit he will sue and cry as much as possible.

EDH said...

The monopoly on the use of violence is the defining concept of the state.

Wiki: Monopoly on violence

The monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force, also known as the monopoly on violence (German: Gewaltmonopol des Staates), is a core concept of modern public law, which goes back to Jean Bodin's 1576 work Les Six livres de la République and Thomas Hobbes' 1651 book Leviathan. As the defining conception of the state, it was first described in sociology by Max Weber in his essay Politics as a Vocation (1919). Weber claims that the state is the "only human Gemeinschaft which lays claim to the monopoly on the legitimated use of physical force. However, this monopoly is limited to a certain geographical area, and in fact this limitation to a particular area is one of the things that defines a state." In other words, Weber describes the state as any organization that succeeds in holding the exclusive right to use, threaten, or authorize physical force against residents of its territory. Such a monopoly, according to Weber, must occur via a process of legitimation.

traditionalguy said...

Is this where someone remembers Freud's line about civilization beginning when the first man controlled himself enough to throw horrible cuss words and not rocks and clubs?

We do learn with experience. Patton spent his life studying war and motivating men to fight. And boy could he cuss and blaspheme.

tcrosse said...

Violence is as American as Apple Pie.

Abdul Abulbul Amir said...

Every law suit is an appeal to the state to use its power to coerce behavior of the defendant. Its the violence of the suit and tie.

Fen said...

Well that explains why the "men" of London stood back and stared down at their shoelaces while an Islamic Thug beheaded one of their boys. In the street. In broad daylight.

Anyone want England? Nice climate, pretty women, good wine. And no resistance.

Comanche Voter said...

Or you could say the reporter's reaction was typical wussie. I'm going to tell the teacher on
you!

buwaya said...

"Violence is as American as apple pie"

Yes. The most American short story I can think of is Twain's "Journalism in Tennessee". Making fun of the American Id.

Fen said...

Notice that no one dares file lawsuits against Those That Cannot Be Named. Whatever civilization has become, it's teaching everyone that violence works.

Yancey Ward said...

The very fact of the narration itself suggests to me that it didn't happen the way Jacobs described- it really did sound like he was prepared for this in some way- almost rehearsed ahead of time.

However, as a man, I can tell you that this meme about how it is somehow noble to take a beating without fighting back is one that is only believed by those who take beatings without fighting back, and few of those, too.

buwaya said...

True about lawsuits.
These will turn violent without fail if the target thereof refuses to cooperate with the authorities.

Mid-Life Lawyer said...

"Well that explains why the "men" of London stood back and stared down at their shoelaces while an Islamic Thug beheaded one of their boys. In the street. In broad daylight.

Anyone want England? Nice climate, pretty women, good wine. And no resistance."

Exactly. Pussies are better men these days, at least to other pussies.

Fen said...

Media giving you had coverage? Just lop off a few of their heads. They will get down on their kness.

chickelit said...

Of course there is video of the alleged assault by Gianforte. What was the reporter using to shove in the accused's face? Of course, the reporter may have dropped the camera and that part may or may not be useful. But people want to see what incited Gianforte. The "Court of Public Opinion" has every right to see it.

Release the damn video!

buwaya said...

Some countries even have traditions of non-cooperation and revolt by the fed-up.

The ancient Filipino one is of the "Tulisan", a sort of political banditry. A desperate man, usually one who has hopeless debts, or a landless man with no prospects, runs off to the hills and joins some gang of desperados, who reject the government and society as oppressive, and exist by raiding civilization. This sort of thing keeps the communist guerrilla movement alive, which is to a degree just a receptacle for such men.

Unknown said...

How did the voter respond when Franken body slammed him?

I expect the wee British reporter was mildly hurt at best.

rhhardin said...

My impression was that the reporter was a wimp.

EDH said...

A "body-slam" is lifting someone completely of the ground and then driving their body to the ground.

It's not the same as "slam-dancing" on the periphery of a mosh pit, where one person slams his body into someone else's.

Althouse: I'd rather be body-slammed than get sued in tort... And I have been body-slammed, at rock concerts, when I was trying to stand out of the range of a mosh pit and some young man came flying out obliviously.

The only thing more invigorating than a mosh pit is defending a lawsuit. I eat lawsuits and mosh pits for breakfast.

rhhardin said...

A few choice insults would have served the reporter better. He doesn't have to be stronger, just not relying on others to get his way.

Relying on others is the leftist way. Pajama boys.

chickelit said...

Recall that Althouse published her video of being "assaulted" by that goon at the Capitol protests a few years back. We all agreed that the assailant was a nut job. What is the reporter hiding in this case?

rcocean said...

There are two reason Jacobs didn't fight back (supposedly)

1) He was trying to set the other guy up, and got what he wanted.
2) He weights 125 lbs and couldn't beat up a wet noodle.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

BTW,

In a "stand your ground" state, can a person legally shoot someone who body slams them?

In Montana, if this reporter was armed could he have legally shot the candidate?

Mattman26 said...

I bet Pajama Boy would have shown that level of admirable restraint as well.

Bay Area Guy said...

This is a very funny post and thread.

I doubt my personal experience is unique as a kid growing up in urban public schools in the 70s. But even though I was half bookworm/half jock, we regularly got into fistfights. I'm thinking 3 or 4 a year just me, and 15-20 a year by my boisterous friends. It was more like hockey rules back then. No double-teaming, no weapons, never hit a girl, and most often in front of crowds, who would stop it if the pummeling got too bad.

In fact, there were numerous times when my close friend DW told me he would whip my butt, if I didn't fight some kid, who we deemed a problem. (I hated it though)

For me, this stopped by age 15, because the kids were too big, and strong and weapons started emerging.

But it certainly was a way of life, and if you hit someone and had a good reason for doing it (self-defense or other guy mouthing off), you never got in trouble with parents, teachers or even older brothers.

Back then, we were expected to defend ourselves and defend others, and it was a pretty good system I'd say

Mattman26 said...

"You body slammed me and made me spill my cocoa!"

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Say the candidate was also armed, and we're talking about "stand your ground:"

legally, can the candidate shoot back at the journalist who's shooting at him post-slam? Or, does the initial instigator gots to get what's comin', i.e. a slug between the eyes.

buwaya said...

This would all be neatly solved by restoring dueling.
The long social experiment in eliminating the practice of sanctioned personal combat is showing that its had long term unanticipated consequences.

vicari valdez said...

Achilles said...
What happens if you deserve to be body slammed...

5/27/17, 4:59 PM


i'm ok with this compromise. some people deserve to be body slammed. others punched in the face.

rhhardin said...

Duelling would involve a lot of agreement about rules and seconds and doctors and the guest list, which would all get overplayed in the media, making all the problems bigger.

It's a pre-MSM possibility only.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"This would all be neatly solved by restoring dueling."

It seems like some sorta hand to hand death match would be a better system for evaluating relative manliness re two dudes.

Also, it's only fair to allow gals to fight each other to the death, too. But, trans dudes can't be allowed. Some a them coulda been Olympians, that's not fair for the lady's that started as such.

Michael K said...

The US was once known for brashness, for initiative, for natural leadership. But this is dying away very quickly.

Yes. We now see the beta males standing together and awarding each other prizes.

A desperate man, usually one who has hopeless debts, or a landless man with no prospects, runs off to the hills and joins some gang of desperados, who reject the government and society as oppressive, and exist by raiding civilization.

Randy Weaver just wanted to be left alone but the Clinton DoJ would not do that. They entrapped him by offering to buy a sawed off shotgun (all he had to do was saw off the barrel and he wasn't smart enough to see the trap).

Then they "lost" the notice to appear.

Then they invaded his land and killed his son and the son's dog.

Then they killed his wife.

Why ? Because they wanted to make him a witness and go to "White Supremacy" meetings and testify. He had never done so before but they just wanted to use him.

The Idaho Grand Jury indicted the FBI sniper who killed Weaver's wife.Weaver was acquitted.

This is how you get Tim McVeighs.

readering said...

How does this site attract such a high proportion of knuckledraggers as commenters?

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

BTW,

If dueling or death matches or whatever are allowed, how long does it take for successful capitalists to realize that they can legally pay some merc to kill the leadership of competing companies?

As soon as such a law looked like it'd pass there'd be a sprint offshore. And, a bunch of legal hits re any competitors left.

Also, I'd assume that all US pols would never step foot in the country again either. Otherwise they'd be merced.

The mrec biz would be booming. The nocked up some dudes daughter biz would be terminal.

Achilles said...

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...
We're not monkeys folks.

Let's prefrontal cortex a bit more.


If not for double standards, leftists would have one at all.

Earnest Prole said...

Indisputable: 1. There were independent witnesses to the assault (in other words, it's not a he-said, he-said case), 2. The perpetrator's account of the incident conflicted fundamentally with the audio (in other words, his statement provided strong inculpatory evidence of a crime), and 3. The sheriff, a Gianforte supporter, concluded all elements of assault were present and charged him accordingly (as the sheriff noted, he investigates this kind of stuff all the time and it's quite straightforward).

Children know it's wrong to use your hands instead of your words. To rationalize it based on whether the perpetrator has a D or an R following his name, you have to be a certain kind of adult.

Michael K said...

"How does this site attract such a high proportion of knuckledraggers as commenters?"

Thanks for the attempt at humor,.

buwaya said...

On the contrary, I think this resolution by merc has possibilities. It offers the advantages, vs the modern legal system, of being prompt, clear and decisive, as well as, most likely, much cheaper.

It not a new idea at all, note, its been used quite often in science fiction, notably by Mack Reynolds (look for the Joe Mauser series).

Lucien said...

Bay Area Guy nails it.

I remember in high school there was one kid, a grade lower than me, who just wanted to start shit with me. I couldn't figure it out. One day me and this kid were walking down the hall near each other and a friend of mine shoves me, hard, into the kid. The kid thinks I'm starting the rumble and hits me in the face.

I wasn't intending to start a fight, but when I got hit a red mist descended over me. I didn't even feel it when he punched me, I was just conscious of my head being turned to the side by the pressure and then it turned back. I can't imagine what my expression must have been, but the kid took off running. A punch full in the face didn't even slow me down.

I made a flying tackle on the guy, wrestled him down, got on top of him and pinned his arms to the ground with my knees. I could have just whaled on him then, but somehow the fact he was helpless made the red mist go away. I slapped him in the face a couple of times, letting him know I could break his nose, break his eye sockets, break his cheek bones if I wanted. Then I got off him and let him up. The principal, who knew he'd been trying to start shit with me, later made him shake my hand and thank me for not whaling on him.

Why do I tell that story? Because it's clear to me the reporter is either full of shit or a complete pussy. Another guy "body-slams" you - that shit's war to the knife. Red in tooth and claw. If you're narrating the attack you're either lying and looking to create a story or you lost your testicles long ago.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Of course, Jacobs's choices were not merely a matter of overcoming physical impulses and meritoriously eschewing violence. I don't know how much of an impulse to retaliate on the spot he may have felt. I don't really know how violently he was hit. I don't even know if he did something first toward Gianforte and Gianforte was doing the old tit for tat retaliation.

Oh come on. It was totally the wrong time and place for any of that shit - regardless of instigating or retaliating. The psychopath congress critter was supposed to be a public servant. You don't do that nor do you retaliate against it. It would be like asking what to do if the president punched you. (Well, we know you'd give him a pass but let's consider the sane response). It's too unexpected and out of place to even consider. It's just not done, unless you want anarchy and mob rule. But this is still a civilized country, except for the Repuppetkins - who are obviously just a bunch of animals.

Fen said...

"not getting caught up in the idea of masclinity- "

LOL. Dude, you were on the floor paralyzed by fear and voiding your bladder. You couldn't have gotten caught up anything.

This is typical of twats like him:

"I would have back, but I was worried I might reflexively kill him with my Ranger Seal Commando training"

"Yes dear, you are so brave and honorible. Now try to roll over so I can wipe your ass"

Lucien said...

Earnest Prole, for avoidance of doubt the sheriff charged him with a misdemeanor. Which tells you just how much of a "body-slam" this was.

Fen said...

Ritmo: " pyscopath congressman"

See how dishonest the Left is? And they wonder why we laugh at them when they clutch their pearls.

Go with option C,
Your own team format want you anymore. Every one of your tomorrows will be worse than the day before. Just And it already.

Lucien said...

Huh: There's someone else now posting as Lucien, too. Wonder how hard it will be to tell us apart by our posts.

Lucien said...

I suppose the sheriff could have been playing Hillary Clinton rules - since the perpetrator is a politician in the midst of a campaign we'll exercise discretion (wink, wink).

Ann Althouse said...

"A "body-slam" is lifting someone completely of the ground and then driving their body to the ground."

Does anybody think that's what Jacobs meant?

I think he just meant a body slammed into his, not that a professional wrestling move was executed.

And the Al Franken thing (several posts down) was called "body-slamming" by someone (Franken) who'd been an amateur wrestler and who bragged that it was a wrestling move, but I don't think he lifted the guy completely up and slammed him down like a pro wrestler. He said he went for the legs (just seems like he took him down).

Do we have a shared understanding of what this ridiculous word means? Does it give Jacobs room to exaggerate?

I really cannot picture what happened.

Lucien said...

Other Lucien, you're freaking me out dude.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Alsthouse's pondering of the possibility of physically retaliating against the congress critter shows just what kind of mental back flips the right wing have to do to rationalize their shortcomings. How much wiser is physical retaliation against a congress critter than retaliating against a cop? Cops violate citizens regularly daily and still it's the height of idiocy to react to it in the moment. But I guess Althouse doesn't pick up on this. Extra security aside, I'd assume there's a good chance that there are extra penalties against assaulting a congress critter.

He's a journalist. Pitting him into a physical fight and then giving him a hard time for not "retaliating" is like giving a librarian a hard time for not retaliating. It's like blaming a raped woman for not resisting sufficiently.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Ritmo: " pyscopath congressman"

See how dishonest the Left is?


See how incoherent the right is?

I'd like to see a left-wing congress critter deck fen in the face and then hear fenster defend the congress critter's honor and state of mind. It wouldn't even matter if it was unprovoked, as this instance was. fenster is a partisan, not a patriot.

And the right is good with treason, as Trump's administration shows.

Lucien said...

Yes Althouse, many people think that's what Jacobs (should have) meant. That's the definition of a body slam, which after 30 years of WWE is known by pretty much everyone (except perhaps retired Michigan academics).

What happened to you in the mosh-pit is that you got grazed by a "slam-dance". Alternate words might be "body check" or "shove".

Franken correctly describes a body slam - you don't have to do a full six foot in the air vertical extension for it to count. Franken's move almost certainly brought the guy completely off his feet and landed him on the ground, most likely on his back or side.

Earnest Prole said...

I think he just meant a body slammed into his, not that a professional wrestling move was executed.

The independent witnesses described exactly what they saw, but maybe you don't have that new Google software installed on your mainframe yet.

n.n said...

Jacobs should have demonstrated common courtesy and retreated from occupying another person's personal space. He shouldn't have been there in the first place unless there were defensible or mitigating circumstances for the intrusion. This is a teachable moment for journalists who routinely violate people's privacy and occupy their personal space.

As for what happened, while Pro-Choice is the established religion, legal and ethical standard in many situations (e.g. the right to life, clinical cannibalism, elective wars, extrajudicial trials, forced immigration, judicial activism, [class] diversity), the standard in America is still innocent until proven guilty.

The emerging consensus seems to be that Jacob's advances were unwelcome, rejected, and deflected, which caused him to stumble under his own power. An investigation may reveal an alternative scenario. Perhaps the one promoted by journalists.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"It's like blaming a raped woman for not resisting sufficiently."

Speaking of which, if he takes a break from extolling legal murder, presumably Buw can explain Pilipino rape jokes:

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/philippines-duterte-makes-rape-joke-for-martial-law-troops-8887494

buwaya said...

Not resisting an injustice by the police in the moment is a bad idea. It perpetuates a general social sense of injustice, it drags out the controversy, and it enables the police to continue their unjust practices through bureaucratic and legal manipulation.
And, personally, it creates psychological damage that will not be cured by some political movement or bloodless process that provides no cathartic release. Again, all that frustration builds up.
Sure, you can get killed or injured, but that is physical death and injury. The alternative is psychological death and injury. On the whole, often enough, the second is worse.

Inga said...

"See how incoherent the right is?"

And getting more so every day.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

F not P

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

"See how incoherent the right is?"

And getting more so every day.


The denounce mob reaction to this most unpopular of presidents while taking strength from his threats to physically assault others, do mental backflips/gymnastics to defend an out-of-control congress critter under the guise of some totally feasible "right" of a citizen to retaliate by assaulting him back, and just basically believe that anything Trump or one of his minions does is completely above board and defensible.

They seem not to realize that, while they hate reason (and always have), they are increasingly motivated by nothing more than a sense of overpowering partisan vengeance. They have nothing at all positive to offer and have backed themselves into a corner where everything they do requires a cue or reference to or blame on the left.

This is the endgame of an ideology of political nihilism. This is how it ends. When the party of political nihilism has everything it wants - or allowable in a constitutional republic with separation of powers, what does it do? What can it do?

Answer: Blame the other side for everything and claim that they're responsible for your lower than pond muck standards.

bgates said...

Hamblin likes the idea of "redefining strength" by accepting, in the moment, that one has been "physically overpowered" and not getting caught up in "the idea of masculinity as an amalgam of dominance and violence.

Puts a new light on that "Stronger Together" slogan from last year.

Inga said...

“The conservative mind, in some very visible cases, has become diseased. The movement has been seized by a kind of discrediting madness, in which conspiracy delusions figure prominently. Institutions and individuals that once served an important ideological role, providing a balance to media bias, are discrediting themselves in crucial ways. With the blessings of a president, they have abandoned the normal constraints of reason and compassion. They have allowed political polarization to reach their hearts, and harden them. They have allowed polarization to dominate their minds, and empty them.”

Michael Gerson

traditionalguy said...

Notice the pro wrestler stunt man allows himself to be carefully thrown. He is picked up and slowly turned around for all to
see and landed exactly flat. In reality wrestling the standing height of the opponent is all
The height you get, and the intent is to land on top as fast as possible while he twists in the air to turn out of the coming hold.

Larry Day said...

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...
BTW,

In a "stand your ground" state, can a person legally shoot someone who body slams them?

In Montana, if this reporter was armed could he have legally shot the candidate?

I live in Montana. I closely followed one case where a rather flimsily supported "castle doctrine" defense was claimed. The shooter was rightfully convicted of murder. It's not the wild west. It is my understanding of the pertinent law that the reporter would have to have been in "reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm", otherwise he'd better not pull the trigger.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Not resisting an injustice by the police in the moment is a bad idea.

It also regularly gets people killed.

Your ideas must be a real hoot in the black American community. Have you ever considered preaching them, there?

So, what's the fair standard/level of retaliation? The same one used by cops to shoot unarmed individuals?

You know, there are a lot of armed Americans these days. If they went after cops with the same regularity and sense of impunity as the cops do the citizenry, we'd be left a lot of dead cops. A mightily reduced police force.

Any other wonderful ideas you had lately?

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Earnest Prole said...

Sorry for the sarcasm, but facts should precede judgment:

1. Read the independent witnesses’ statements, including the clarification of how Gianforte put his hands on the journalist

2. Read Gianforte’s statement

3. Listen to the audio

4. Identify the statements contradicted by the audio

5. Read the sheriff's statement on the charge

bgates said...

The movement has been seized by a kind of discrediting madness, in which conspiracy delusions figure prominently.

And if that weren't bad enough, we're all secretly working for the Russians.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

“The conservative mind, in some very visible cases, has become diseased. The movement has been seized by a kind of discrediting madness, in which conspiracy delusions figure prominently. Institutions and individuals that once served an important ideological role, providing a balance to media bias, are discrediting themselves in crucial ways. With the blessings of a president, they have abandoned the normal constraints of reason and compassion. They have allowed political polarization to reach their hearts, and harden them. They have allowed polarization to dominate their minds, and empty them.”

They're basically a party of no responsibility, no accountability, and no standards.

They look at politics, like everything in life, as a game.

And like the computer in Wargames, they don't see a point to there being any constraints or rules to what they do. As long as they can get away with it, they're good with it - seems to be the prevailing mindset among them.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Advice from Obama: "Get in their face..." (see what happens)

That's nice. Is there a law against that?

Or is this just more desperate attempts at rationalization from a member of The Party of No Standards?

EMyrt said...

buwaya said...

This would all be neatly solved by restoring dueling.
The long social experiment in eliminating the practice of sanctioned personal combat is showing that its had long term unanticipated consequences.
5/27/17, 5:59 PM

Damn, buwaya, you beat me to it.
Dueling would certainly make Twitter a much more interesting place!

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...


"1. Read the independent witnesses’ statements, including the clarification of how Gianforte put his hands on the journalist

2. Read Gianforte’s statement

3. Listen to the audio

4. Identify the statements contradicted by the audio

5. Read the sheriff's statement on the charge"

This makes too much sense. They don't want to hear that nowadays. It's all emotion. And they think we are deranged? I think there is some anxiety among Trumpists as of late and it's really thrown them off their feet... so to speak.

Sebastian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sebastian said...

"Does anybody think Jacobs intended to refer to the professional wrestling move?" Nah. Just another "journalist" attempting to body-slam a GOPer, figuratively speaking. Of course, the "journalist" probably knows nothing about professional wrestling--only deplorables do.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bay Area Guy said...

Clearly, Putin has Russian agents in Montana!!

Humperdink said...

Well this thread was entertaining while it lasted.

Inga said...

"Well this thread was entertaining while it lasted."

It's entertaining to Trumpists to speak about members of the Press being assaulted. Gotcha.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Well this thread was entertaining while it lasted.

Everything's more entertaining when you have no standards: Food fights, orgies, anarchy, Lord of the Flies, patricide, treachery, gang rape...

You know. The kind of society that Republicans would be happier with.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

It's entertaining to Trumpists to speak about members of the Press being assaulted. Gotcha.

My theory on Repuppetkins and Trumpists is that they're people with a very acute sense of powerlessness in their lives. Very psychologically impotent.

This makes sense, as they're naturally inclined to authoritarianism and bootlicking the strongest individual on the block.

But it also means that they lack internal controls. They don't have boundaries and figure that whatever the tyrannical leader they feel inspired by does, they should be able to do.

They lack a sense of purpose. So without institutions (many of which they actively destroyed, themselves), this is what they devolve into.

buwaya said...

Indeed, a man can die.
But what is the point of living, other than to die well?
If circumstances have it that one cannot die honored in old age, surrounded by seven strong sons, then one must accept the death that does come.

As in Macauley's poem,

To every man upon this earth
Death cometh soon or late.
And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods.

Ambrose said...

Visceral and vestigial in the same post. Is there a V tag?

Fen said...

Hey guys, new Russian decoder rings are in. Hotspot MeAgain Kelly. Hotspot MeAgain Kelly. Alpha. One. Six. Niner. Romeo. Tango. Novembet. Fenris Actual, out.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
buwaya said...

"orgies, anarchy, Lord of the Flies, patricide, treachery, gang rape.."

That does sound like a very good start for an HBO miniseries.
Have you thought of trying screenwriting?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Assaulting others is what those who feel their own words to be powerless do.

The rage felt by congress critter gianfranco, and the cheerleading/rationalization done by his partisan traitors, is basically a mass proclamation of: "Why can't we stop the press from asking questions and reporting on what we do!!!!!!"

They hate that they can't control the press. So they assault a member of it, instead.

It makes perfect sense if you're someone who lacks any persuasive ability, or even just power in some related capacity.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I'm basically waiting for the next Republican to run on a slogan of: No responsibility and no standards!

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
buwaya said...

As it happens, we are off tomorrow to have a look in on Mr. Duterte, a man who does not do prior restraint on himself, even less so than Trump.
A very interesting fellow.
We may call at Malacanang, but I think he is quite busy right now. We shall evaluate the temperature of the place.

chuck said...

"Body slam" may have a British meaning, but my guess is that Jacobs hasn't a clue what he is talking about and the two just got tangled up and Jacobs fell. However, "Body slam" is wonderfully dramatic. Too dramatic.

I agree with whoever above mentioned the missing pictures of injuries. If Gianforte "whaled" on Jacobs I would expect bruises, possibly a bloody nose or black eye.

Lucien said...

Yay!

Ritmo's here.

Sigh.

Kevin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

Problem here is that Jacobs controlled the audio. "You just body slammed me and broke my glasses!"

Next time Gianforte should say "Get your hand out of my crotch, you pervert!" before making his move, then "You're the same Wanker Brit did that last time, aren't you!"

Kevin said...

"Assault is a crime. I want to see the wannabe Trump spend some time in jail. Violence was not an appropriate response to being angry at having been asked a question by a reporter."

Thus would have meant something had you included your desire to also see Franken punished. You know, if it's the crime of assault you're really worried about.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fen said...

Jacob's grabbed his wrist first.

I eagerly await the condemnation from our Lefties of this "psycopath" journalist who committed such a "heinous" act of violence.

(...jeapordy theme)

Watch now as the Left turns on a dime without an ounce of shame. Don't blink!

Fen said...

"Assault is a crime I want to see this Trump -"

Jacob's grabbed his wrist first. That's assault. Time for you to pretzel those "principles".

Don't be embarrassed. We already knew you would.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...

“Jacobs was putting mic/phone in Greg’s face Jacobs grabbed Greg’s wrist and they both fell over,” Christie reported. “Yes, he was angry bc of the aggression, but they both fell to the ground…no body slam.”

They both just fell over? What was there an earthquake that made both of them lose their balance? Yeah, that's believable.

Fen said...

Blue Veil. Blue Veil. Echo.
One. Niner. Natasha please advise.

Inga said...

What did Gianforte apologize for? Falling over?

Fen said...

I eagerly await Inga's outrage over this assault by Jacobs.

(standby, the excuses should be amusing)

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

Unexpected to find that in The Atlantic. Whoda thunk a Yale law prof could think like a Libertarian?

Fen said...

(libtards quietly pick up and move to next fake scandal)

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Angel-Dyne said...

Comanche Voter: Or you could say the reporter's reaction was typical wussie. I'm going to tell the teacher on you!

Beat me to it. Estrogens in the water supply. I don't know how else to explain how we've come to the point where a grown man, alleging to be a "reporter", makes a huge wrist-flapping deal out of something like this, and an entire media guild minces in to write dumb thumb-sucking articles like this one, in publications like The Atlantic (which used to be a serious journal), for days on end. About masculinity, lol.

wildswan said...

A similar thing happened in Wisconsin to Judge Prosser except his encounter was with a liberal female Wisconsin Supreme Court justice. He stepped back from the justice who was coming at him and put up his hands to protect his face and she then accused him of a choke-hold.

" In one report, witnesses alleged that after Bradley told Prosser to leave her office, Prosser grabbed Bradley around the neck in what was described as a chokehold. A contradictory report said that Bradley charged Prosser with her fist raised, and that in attempting to block her, he made contact with her neck. Capitol Police Chief Charles Tubbs was notified of the incident, and met with the entire Supreme Court. Investigations into the matter were opened by the Wisconsin Judicial Commission and the Dane County Sheriff's office. After initially saying he would refrain from comment until a proper investigation was completed, Prosser denied he choked Bradley saying, "claims made to the media will be proven false." Bradley then made a public statement saying that Prosser, "put his hands around my neck in anger in a chokehold", as she was asking him to leave her office."

This happened because Prosser was an important vote on the Supreme Court during the dispute over Governor Walker's reforms. The minority on the Court went crazy trying to get him thrown off the Court when they saw they were a minority. Similarly the left is going crazy because their strategy of turning out energized Democrats in primaries or special elections in Republican areas where the Democrats think the Republican voters will not notice what is happening and will not show up at the polls is not working. Republicans still win. The Dems tell their people that they are a virtuous majority opposing an extremist minority. Then the Dems lose because they are not the majority. They could try to find out what the majority wants and why. It's a system some countries use; it's called democracy. But, for whatever reason, the Dems prefer trying to sneak into office and when that fails they try to discredit the representatives of the majority. That was what happened to Prosser and that is what is happening to Gianforte.

bgates said...

They both just fell over? What was there an earthquake that made both of them lose their balance? Yeah, that's believable.

Maybe they were dehydrated.

Inga said...


"What did Gianforte apologize for? Falling over?"

"He apologized for raising his voice and frightening the reporter."

So did his big voice knock the reporter off his feet and the sonic boom from Gianforte's voice shatter the reporter's glasses?

Bay Area Guy said...

When is the next Special election for a House seat? We need to be ever vigilant about Putin's meddling Russian agents in these important races, where Republicans keep on winning.

sunsong said...

"They seem not to realize that, while they hate reason (and always have), they are increasingly motivated by nothing more than a sense of overpowering partisan vengeance. They have nothing at all positive to offer and have backed themselves into a corner where everything they do requires a cue or reference to or blame on the left. "

This

buwaya said...

One reason Duterte is interesting is because of his personality, as a role model. I admit, there is reason to believe I am flirting with insanity here. But it does tie in to the broader and deeper matter of the effect of culture on individual personality.

He is popular precisely because he is such an unconstrained man.

The culture there is communal, vastly bound by prior restraint and an extremely deep habit of politeness, compassion and consideration. This makes Filipinos very easy to get along with, everyones "starter" truly exotic foreigners. However, the cultural cost is considerable, in the loss of initiative, lack of leadership (a perennial problem), inability to take risks, to be the first to do x - they are happy enough to be the 567th, but never the first.

But now the boss is unlike any other boss ever, a wild man that throws all Filipino norms out the window - if he seems bizarre to you all, over there its much more so, you have no idea. This seems to have broken a sort of emotional dam, quietly for the most part, but something is going to happen. What, I don't know.

readering said...

Like I said the night it happened. Criminal investigation will be interesting.

Lucien said...

So the assertion that the reporter was actually body-slammed is almost certainly false; and in order to rehabilitate his spontaneous exclamation, we must assume that when he said "body-slam" he meant something else, but we can't know what, except that it presumably involved some sort of bodily contact. Is that where we are?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Yay!

Ritmo's here.

Sigh.


Stop getting in my face like that!

I'm going to take you OUT! NOW!

Sick and tired of you guys! The last guy that came here you did the same thing!

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brookzene said...

"Next time Gianforte should say "Get your hand out of my crotch, you pervert!" before making his move, then "You're the same Wanker Brit did that last time, aren't you!" "

Lying means nothing to them anymore.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Jacob's grabbed his wrist first. That's assault.

How demented does someone have to be to believe this? Let alone to believe that it was justifiably sufficient to prompt gianfranco's WWE impersonation?

Someone's not living in reality. But when you're touched as infrequently and with as many mixed signals as feninine fenster is, I guess this is the kind of thing you fantasize about.

Earnest Prole said...

I really cannot picture what happened.

It was a judo-style body slam, not a professional wrestling–style body slam.

Inga said...

"Lying means nothing to them anymore."

The fish rots from the head.

Rene Saunce said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rene Saunce said...

What do the leftists here think of Tim Kaine's son?

When you show up to a rally and you bring mace, tasers, and masks - what is the endgame? Peace?

Rene Saunce said...

I want to know what the D-hack media person said that made G so mad.

I want to see the tape.

buwaya said...

This is modern US politics.
Both truth and lies serve the same purpose, as ammunition.
And they are entirely interchangeable. It does not matter which is which, and any judgement about any one bit, one way or another, by anyone, is too tainted to trust.
This is the result of the wartime atmosphere of propaganda thats been building in the MSM since, at least, the election of 2000.

Earnest Prole said...

Earnest Prole, for avoidance of doubt the sheriff charged him with a misdemeanor. Which tells you just how much of a "body-slam" this was.

The felony charge requires significant bodily injury.

Rene Saunce said...

All I know is that this is a CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS!

Good thing Mr. G didn't drive his date off a bridge and leave her there to die.

n.n said...

Prosser grabbed Bradley around the neck in what was described as a chokehold. A contradictory report said that Bradley charged Prosser with her fist raised

There's that. Also, the proactive assault by Franken on a random member of the audience, because Franken felt the man had violated a freedom of speech space. There was also the nationwide baby hunt targeting a White Hispanic American and anyone with a glimmer of a relation, no matter how dubious.

In light of theses incidents and numerous baby hunts in the last decade or so conducted by journalists and activists that exposed witches with a sincerely leftist prejudice, it would be irrational to accept a report from the press without independent confirmation, let alone adopt a Pro-Choice policy and carry out a baby trial by press (or activist business).

Brookzene said...

"I disagree.
We were not designed to suppress such natural urges.
This suppression can be damaging, I am convinced.
It leads to a tendency to be easily suppressed even in other circumstances, or even auto-suppression just on the bare possibility of a conflict. Entire societies can suffer from a lack of personal initiative resulting from that emotional reaction-control.
And, I think, this constantly bottled-up frustration eventually results in depression and suicide.
In such a case, better to die fighting, no matter the reason.
The US was once known for brashness, for initiative, for natural leadership. But this is dying away very quickly."

If only we could grab a pussy whenever we felt like it.

And indeed I remember well what the US was known for, by friend and enemies alike, and it wasn't this bullshit the GOP is serving up.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Rene Saunce said...
What do the leftists here think of Tim Kaine's son?

When you show up to a rally and you bring mace, tasers, and masks - what is the endgame? Peace?"

Ah, yes, the son of the Democratic VP candidate.

Remember Timmy? Who almost became a priest?

He's such a good Catholic, just like Pelosi and Biden and Ted Kennedy.

And the son he sired is clearly like St. Francis of Assisi.

Rene Saunce said...

Leftwing liars who lie - and vote for liars who lie - would never lie.

Fullmoon @ 7:24 Oh no! Narrative ... must save the narrative!

n.n said...

any judgement about any one bit, one way or another, by anyone, is too tainted to trust

Exactly. We have a he said/he said scenario. Let's wait for independent confirmation that can establish events beyond a reasonable doubt. The baby hunts are known to force a miscarriage of justice and it's premature to hold a baby trial.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brookzene said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...

The first rule of social liberalism is privacy. Trump will never be forgiven for speaking of the weirdness and depravity of liberal club in private no less.

Inga said...

Dennis Hastert

Earnest Prole said...

I really cannot picture what happened.

Fox News reporter’s statement:

”Gianforte grabbed him by the neck — both hands — slid him to the side, body-slammed him and then got on top of him and started punching and then yelling at him.”

She later clarified the grab was not a strangle.

Rene Saunce said...

Exiled - Media reports on Antifa mask-wearing beat-downs of anyone pro-Trump = peachy and peaceful. Honorable and justified. Resistance! or we hear nothing... Media too busy looking for Russians under Trump's bed.

Oh the son of the former VP candidate is in trouble? shhhhhhhhhh.



Alan Dershowitz: Russia Probe Sounds Like Stalin's Secret Police

What is really sick is that leftists are now turning Memorial Day into their selfish non-stop "I hate Trump" party.



Brookzene said...

Whataboutism. That's all these guys have! Whatever the topic it's, "What about what about what about???" I guess they've been debating the same way since fourth or fifth grade.

Brookzene said...

It's the vaunted "thinking and logic" skills of the conservatives and rightists.

Brookzene said...

I think they believe it's a legitimate form of argumentation to change the topic.

exiledonmainstreet said...


"If only we could grab a pussy whenever we felt like it."

I'd rather have my pussy grabbed than be left submerged in a car to slowly suffocate to death.

However, Teddy managed to do both. The old swimmer both killed women AND grabbed lots of pussy in his day. Not to mention forming one side of a "waitress sandwich" with fellow distinguished liberal Chris Dodd as the other side. Unwilling waitress in the middle.

The Lion of the Senate!

That's why we just laugh and sneer at your silly wailing over Trump and the Montana incident.

buwaya puti said...

"And indeed I remember well what the US was known for, by friend and enemies alike"

No, you don't.
Think about it.
Put yourself in others shoes, and see through their eyes.
And that's not what the GOP is serving up, its what I am serving up, I am not the GOP.

Inga said...

"Look! That squirrel is humping the neighbors cat!"

exiledonmainstreet said...

Brookzene said...
I think they believe it's a legitimate form of argumentation to change the topic."

No, we're rubbing your nose in your own hypocrisy and lies.

It's like housebreaking an exceptionally stupid puppy.

Brookzene said...

"I'd rather have my pussy grabbed than be left submerged in a car to slowly suffocate to death."

Again, you can't talk about anything without having them change the topic. And they think they scored some debating point against you. Like 9 year olds.

Bruce Hayden said...

"BTW,

In a "stand your ground" state, can a person legally shoot someone who body slams them?"

"Stand your ground" is irrelevant - what it means is that the common law Retreat Doctrine (which is that self-dense can be lost by the prosecutor showing that an avenue of retreat was available) has been statutorily abrogated. This is, BTW, the case in a plurality of the states. Also, see below - if the aggressor isn't using deadly force, then the other party mostly can't either. Andrew Branca (author of "The Law of Self Defense") calls this "proportionality". And moving from non-deadly to deadly force is termed "scalation", which turns the one escalating into the aggressor (and the aggressor cannot claim self-defense, only the non-aggressor can use that defense).

"In Montana, if this reporter was armed could he have legally shot the candidate?"

No - standard is a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily injury. Prosecution would have to show that Gianforte's was continuing the altercation after he had "body slammed" the reporter, which doesn't appear to have happened.

Brookzene said...

"No, we're rubbing your nose in your own hypocrisy and lies"

You're just too stupid to argue with. Shrug. Find me someone who can give a decent argument around here.

exiledonmainstreet said...

On Friday, the Post said that court documents stated that Jacob Schwartz allegedly kept thousands of photos and nearly one hundred videos on a laptop depicting horrifying acts with “young nude females between the approximate ages of 6 months and 16, engaging in sexual conduct… on an adult male.”


Well, you can't say Schwartz exploited women. He exploits pre-women.

Rene Saunce said...

Hastert's problems were uncovered late and after his career in congress was over. They came as a huge shock to many who served with him including Dick Durbin.

On May 30, 2015, Illinois's other senator, Dick Durbin, a Democrat, stated: "It seems so out of character for Denny. I just never could imagine that he'd be involved in anything like this ... We had our political differences, as you might expect, but I respected him as a colleague in the Illinois delegation and as Speaker."[154]

On May 29, 2015, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest stated in response to a reporter's question that "there is nobody here" at the White House "who derives any pleasure from reading about the former Speaker's legal troubles at this point."


We all knew Teddy K was a drunk who committed vehicular manslaughter early in his career. His punishment was a Senate seat for life. Because D.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fen said...

As expected, the Left dials up projection to 11.

It's really quite pathetic. All you had to do to regain (i)some (/i) semblance of credibility was stick to your principles and denounce the violence initiated by a foreign British twat.

Is it any wonder we don't take you seriously?

eric said...

Blogger buwaya said...
This would all be neatly solved by restoring dueling.
The long social experiment in eliminating the practice of sanctioned personal combat is showing that its had long term unanticipated consequences.


This.

Guildofcannonballs said...

"Who ya gonna believe, a reporter known for tall tales, or a congressman and an impartial dentist witness?"

And Gram sang:

"Hope you know a lot more, than you're believing.
Hope the sun don't hurt you, when you cry.

Paint a different color,
On your front door,
And tomorrow,
We will still be there."

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Cook said...

"We're not monkeys folks."

Yes,we are.

exiledonmainstreet said...

The party of murderers, rapists, deviants, and thugs now wants us to feel bad because some twink of a low T reporter got his glasses broke.

Nope. Don't care.

Your side started the political violence. You tossed the rule book aside.

May you reap the consequences.

Perhaps the media should start asking themselves "why do they hate us?" They do that when terrorists attack America.

C'mon, look at the root causes, folks.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...

They know that Gianforte assaulted the guy. They revel in it, but then some of the less nutty ones become ashamed and try to spin a fanciful yarn about it, deflecting blame onto the victim. This is an example of how "the conservative mind has become diseased" as Michael Gerson has said.

Fen said...

And of course, after their fake scandal falls apart, they behave like sore losers. As usual.

Not even a mea culpa.

Oh I know! This was a false flag by those damn Russians again! LOL. Go with that one, Sore Loserman! Hahaha

Rene Saunce said...

Exiled @ 8:32.

This.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brookzene said...

"Put yourself in others shoes, and see through their eyes."

Whose eyes do you mean? Obviously you aren't talking about our European allies, you aren't talking about Russia. Those are the friends and enemies who don't see us standing for what we used to stand for imo.

Who do you mean?

Robert Cook said...

"The US was once known for brashness, for initiative, for natural leadership. But this is dying away very quickly."

In other words, aggressive takers of what we want.

That's not dying away in the least. Why do you think we keep increasing our already obscenely-too-huge-by-many-times war budget?

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fen said...

The chad is hanging. The chad is hanging. Victor Lima Alpha Delta Romeo Uniform Lima Echo Sierra!

exiledonmainstreet said...

Fen said...
And of course, after their fake scandal falls apart, they behave like sore losers. As usual.

Not even a mea culpa.

If they could ever admit they were wrong, they wouldn't be leftists.

They have a body count of 100 million in the 20th century and they're still trying to create their shitty government run Utopia.

buwaya puti said...

"We're not monkeys folks."

"Yes,we are."

I agree. Best to stare the truth in the face, and be humble before it.
We are monkeys that have managed to change our own environment to a degree that our nature wars with our creation. This is what human culture has addressed, a long-term communal creation based on a vast if implicit store of experience, as opposed to human invention, which has proceeded from a narrow base with limited data.
Cultures were not perfect, but it kept some sort of lid on the negative consequences.
But we have messed with it.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brookzene said...

"Louis C.K. on 05/21/2010*:
“one rum and coke and im ready to shit in sarah palin’s mouth seriously.”"

I had no idea Louis C.K. said that. No wonder you guys can't stay on topic, or think straight.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Whataboutism. That's all these guys have! Whatever the topic it's, "What about what about what about???" I guess they've been debating the same way since fourth or fifth grade.

Exactly. The I-Know-You-Are-But-What-Am-I? party.

Republicans: Unadulterated Negativity for Your Partisan Pleasure.

Standing for nothing ever since there were parties willing to stand for something.

Have no purpose in life? Do you like it?

Perhaps the Republican party is right for you.

Talk to your local graft-mongering state/local GOP party chief for more details.

Offer only good in the U.S. Order now while supplies last. May cause: narcissism, impotence, rage at >60% of the country, treason, and a hatred of the post-enlightenment values that founded the country. Offer void if not sponsored by a Russian agent.

Brookzene said...

"Lefty Bill Maher. “A lot of us thought: Ivanka is gonna be our saving grace. When he’s about to nuke Finland or something, she’s gonna walk into the bedroom and—‘Daddy, Daddy…’” he said, mimicking Ivanka giving her father a handjob. “‘Don’t do it, Daddy.’”"

The horror. I wouldn't be able to have another rational argument or discussion for as long as I lived.

exiledonmainstreet said...

I fail to see why Michael Gerson should be held up to us as anybody worth listening to.

Perhaps because nobody was impressed by Charlie Sykes?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

The party of murderers, rapists, deviants, and thugs -

It's really not nice to refer to the party of Hastert, Foley, Vitters, Craig and Trump that way.

Also, don't forget the pedophiles. Former House speakers would feel really left out if you forgot them.

The Party of Pedophilia.

Keep up that negativity. At least the other side has something positive to offer.

bgates said...

I think they believe it's a legitimate form of argumentation to change the topic.

Says the guy who brings up something Trump said twelve years ago in a discussion of last week's special election.

AJ Lynch said...

What are you desperate libruls going to do when Pajama Boy Ossoff loses the House race in Georgia in a few weeks? Mass suicide I hope.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Regarding I Know You Are but What Am I, wasn't that Pee-Wee Herman's catchphrase, also?

I knew the Republicans had something in common with him.

I mean, something aside from masturbating in public.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I mean, I know they do that too.

I'm just saying it's not the only thing they have in common with Pee Wee Herman.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Republicans: The Party of Self-Gratification.

Rene Saunce said...

Jail survey: 7 in 10 felons register as Democrats

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 524   Newer› Newest»