"Turns out one of Barack’s earliest supporters is a man who, according to The New York Times, and they are hardly ever wrong, was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol. Wow. These are the same guys who think patriotism is paying higher taxes."
Sarah Palin, talking like... like blogging!
She's got the reference to a story in today's news, a swipe at MSM, implicit snark about recent attacks on her, an expletive ("Wow"), and 2 not entirely fair hard punches to her opponents' guts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
304 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 304 of 304Oh, wow, we have a new suck puppet.
I googled it, you crackhead. That's how I got the link to the HuffPo from where you copied and pasted the passage without attribution.
Michael McNeil - Take your time, jerkoff.
Hahaha, I said suck puppet, a justified freudian slip
German Valise:
You know Beta is a girl and is Alpha's smarter sibling. I think Beta got all the brains in that family.
Alpha ain't been around since I bet him Biden was wrong about his Iraq/ Afghan money metric.
Perhas Alpha has finally seen the light about you dumb lying liberals.
Wait, why are you citing a creationist site? I thought you believed in evolution? Do you even know anymore in what you believe?
Your sock has hole in it "Michael". I can see an unmistakable portion of your real hand.
michael said...
[...]
Dinosaur fossils were once thought to be millions of years old. ... The geologic column dates fossils by the rocks in which they are found, and dates rocks ...
Dinosaur Fossils: Sedimentary Rock
Dinosaur fossils, as with other fossils, are found throughout earth's sedimentary layers.
www.allaboutcreation.org/dinosaur-fossils.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
8:37 PM
OMG! He thinks the dinosaurs existed 6000 years ago! He's a New Earth creationist!
OMG! Obama will expell you from the Party! The scandal!
ElcubanitoKC said..."I googled it, you crackhead. That's how I got the link to the HuffPo from where you copied and pasted the passage without attribution."
The why are you asking?
You can whine all you want, but I know plenty of idiots like you, who could care less about what is true or false, only accepting what they already believe or want to believe.
I think plagiarism is still a crime against intellectual property, and there are plenty of lawyers on this blog. I would tread carefully if I were you, juvie is not pretty.
aj lynch babbled:
Alpha ain't been around since I bet him Biden was wrong about his Iraq/ Afghan money metric.
Biden was right about this. Sorry, to have to break the news to you, loser. (See the analysis here. In case you have trouble reading the analysis, you can skip straight to the verdict: TRUE)
Doofus said: The truth is, if you care about the status of women in our society and in our troubled economy, the best choice by far is Obama-Biden."
Yah, the team that cares sooooo much about the status of women that they declined to select as a running mate a woman who earned 18 million votes in the primaries.
Michael McNeil said...
Once again...maybe you can literally CALL this guy:
Public release date: 12-Oct-2005
Contact: Greg Borzo
gborzo@fieldmuseum.org
312-665-7106
Field Museum
Newly discovered birdlike dinosaur is oldest raptor ever found in South America
Relative of Velociraptor rewrites evolutionary charts
The skeleton of Buitreraptor gonzalezorum in the field. A string of vertebrae and the right shoulder (lower left) and femur are showing. The match-stick shows scale.
"The preservation of Buitreraptor is superb, and the ROCK LAYER it comes from represents the oldest interval of the Late Cretaceous," Apesteguía says.
CHICAGO--The recent discovery of a 90-million-year-old dinosaur in Patagonia demonstrates that dromaeosaurs, a group of carnivorous theropods that includes Velociraptor and is closely related to birds, originated much earlier than previously thought.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-10/fm-ndb101005.php
Hey, village idiot, aren't you proving his point??
Michael McNeil -
Argentina dinosaur fossil find tightens evolutionary link with modern birds...
And GUESS WHERE THEY FOUND THE FOSSILS??
Sereno said the ROCK surrounding the bone was so hard and difficult to work with that he waited until he found a group of preparers in Canada who could remove the rock matrix and do a CT scan of the bones.
Though the fossils Sereno found were 85 million years old, the researchers suspect the species also existed for tens of millions of years before that.
The findings reported Monday began with the expedition team's discovery of two or possibly three individual Aerosteon fossils in Argentina's famed Patagonian dinosaur beds in 1996.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-sereno-dino-websep30,0,6191642.story
betaliberal drooled:
Yah, the team that cares sooooo much about the status of women that they declined to select as a running mate a woman who earned 18 million votes in the primaries.
This is, seemingly, the argument of a mildly retarded child.
In case you've missed the news, Hillary Clinton has endorsed Obama/Biden. If you honestly believe, as your post implies, that Hillary Clinton is uniquely qualified to help improve the "status of women" in society, then it follows that her endorsement of Obama/Biden is significant.
However, if it's your routine to babble mindlessly on this blog, please ignore my suggestion that in the future you think before posting.
You know Beta is a girl and is Alpha's smarter sibling. I think Beta got all the brains in that family.
Thank you A J Lynch!
I think Michael and Alpha are going to be done pretty soon because Michael still hasn't finished his drawing for art class tomorrow. It's supposed to be Barack Obama on a magic carpet with photon ray phazers on the front and flames coming out the back. I think it looks like a drawing of Sylvester Cat farting.
This is, seemingly, the argument of a mildly retarded child.
I may not be as old and smart as you, Mr. Cyrus Pinkerton, but I am old enough to know that 'being selected' is a lot different than 'endorsing'.
'Being selected' means you get the job. 'Endorsing' means you don't get the job and say a few bland nice things once a week or so. But usually not on TV.
"Since there is no evidence that Obama is "palling around with terrorists who would target their own country," "
That's a flat-out lie, Cyrus.
His name is Ayers.
But you'll soon be playing out your usual tiresome ritual of passive-aggressive and insulting evasiveness, after which you'll leave again for another month or so. Maybe Midol would help.
You usually show up when some liberal nerve has been struck, and deeply. You come to obfuscate the truth, mainly by changing the subject.
But calm down, Cyrus, Obama's associations with radical leftists isn't going to hurt his campaign one bit. Well over 50% of Americans simply aren't bothered by his leftism.
So why do you feel the need to come to his rescue? Say it loud and proud, Cyrus. Obama is a leftist, and so are you. No need to bullshit about it.
ElcubanitoKC - NO, dumbfuck, I'm NOT proving his point.
Are you two dating?
Does Palladian know?
This is what Michael McNeil said..."Ah yes, the guy who fondly imagined that carbon dating could be and is used to date dinosaurs and the Earth."
I made it clear exactly what kind of carbon dating that could be used, and he knows it.
Wikipedia: Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a technique used to date materials, and...It is the principal source of information about the absolute age of rocks and other geological features, including the age of the Earth itself, and can be used to date a wide range of natural and man-made materials.
He also said the fossils couldn't be found in sedimentary rocks, which is wrong, too.
Michael McNeil - I can't help but notice you've suddenly crawled back into your hole...not what I've refuted all of your pseudo-scientific bullshit.
Gutless as usual.
The secessionists in Alaska worry me just about as much as the State of Texas that requires a vote to stay in the Union or not every time their legislative year begins.
Unless they're blowing stuff up? Cyrus, are they blowing stuff up?
If not, it's their right to wonder if becoming a state, which may have happened in their own memory, was the way to go. And I see no real problem at all with respecting that diversity of opinion.
So long as they aren't blowing things or people... up.
Pogo, why not provide any evidence of Obama "palling around" with Ayers.
And proved plenty of links.
synova asks : "Unless they're blowing stuff up? Cyrus, are they blowing stuff up?"
Is Ayers blowing stuff up?
Is anybody Obama palls around with blowint things up?
Because McCain's BFF is sure BLOWING THINGS UP.
Other countries and our own economy.
And dino-bird fossils have what, exactly, to do with the price of tea in China?
ElcubanitoKC - Why not admit you were wrong instead of throwing out bullshit.
Do ANY of you fools have a honest bone in your body?
michael said...
ElcubanitoKC - NO, dumbfuck, I'm NOT proving his point.
Are you two dating?
Does Palladian know?
[...]
9:09 PM
What? You only agree with the people you date?. I know that you "date" yourself, but now I am starting to think that your obsession with The One (PBUH) is sexual attraction. You want to date the guy since you agree with everything and anything he says. Does your mom know?
I was wrong about what, you idiot?
Oh! I was looking at what Michael wrote on the internet and he used the F word! Ugh. All the boys always use the F word at recess on the playground. It's always F this! and F that! And F your momma! And F your sister! And F you!
I don't know why they use it. It's just dumb.
Dad once heard Michael use it when he and Alpha were playing air hockey in the basement. They were all F this! And F that! And had carrot sticks in their mouths like they were smoking.
Anyhow, Dad yelled and told Michael to go home. Michael's mom called Dad and yelled at him. She's this weird fat lady who always wears pink everything and so do most of her friends.
Dad says Michael says the F word because he didn't have a father to raise him right. His mother has other lady friends who use the F word all the time, so Michael gets it from them, I think
synova - it was another conversation with another idiot.
You wouldn't understand.
BetaLiberal - You're such a little girl.
Bite my dick.
I like Mike.
I just wish more people who were on the edge of voting for Obama could read what Mike has to say.
The dino stuff.
The gay stuff.
The Ayers and his group never blew stuff up, stuff, so he's just like some group that is politically organized and favors voting themselves out of the federal land grabs that came with statehood.
Because everyone has their political careers launched in the homes of people to whom they seldom if ever speak.
Michael McNeil - Where are you big mouth?
Talk, talk, talk.
Not guts.
Time for bed. Hope all you grown-ups have fun talking to the 12 year olds.
Just remember, Jesus loves you even if you don't love him. Like Mom says, Jesus made liberals in order to teach smart people how to be patient and tolerant.
If memory serves me right, what Mr McNeil said is that you cannot use radiometric on dinosaur bones (as you said one could) because radiometric can only be used on igneous rocks, and dinosaur fossils are not found in them. So, yes, you are proving his point.
Here, look it up
From that link:
Michael McNeil said...
(The other) Michael continues flailing…
Michael McNeil: You're close enough - Carbon-14 dating cannot be used for materials older than about 70,000 years.
You mean you just frantically looked it up. It happens that the reference I chose (for convenience, Encyclopædia Britannica) states that it's 50,000 years. But you're close enough — now.
Continuing with Michael's attempt to bail out his sinking boat….
But…
Radiometric dating can give good dates for rocks of any age.
Once again, totally wrong. “Radiometric dating” (why don't you identify what kind of radiometric dating? answer: because you don't know) cannot “give good dates for rocks of any age.”
Radiometric dating (methods such as Argon-Argon, for your information) can only give dates to rocks that are igneous (volcanic) in origin. Sedimentary and metamorphic rocks cannot be dated by radiometric dating techniques.
Continuing….
So can I assume you also believe humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time? You know… since carbon dating can't specifically assure us they did or did not?
Of course not — idioticos. But you still don't know why we know that.
1:26 PM
ElcubanitoKC - No, you're wrong...again.
Are you two doing the nasty together?
Who's catching?
I think the hardest thing Ayers ever did was not respond to the NYT's request for an interview. He and the wife love the camera, love the publicity, and he must be dying that someone told him to shut up.
Of course not — idioticos. But you still don't know why we know that. ... that humans and dinosaurs didn't live together.
It's faith.
The "scientists" said so, and no one need bother understanding how they actually reached those conclusions before accusing everyone else of being scientifically illiterate.
Sort of like global warming.
If you have the right opinion understanding the science isn't important.
michael said...
ElcubanitoKC - No, you're wrong...again.
Are you two doing the nasty together?
Who's catching?
9:35 PM
What is it with this gay innuendo? I thought you liked older female family members. Does talking about this arouse you? Come on, michael, share it, I am sure it is an amusing thing to read.
And how exactly is this supposed to offend me? The part I find offensive is that you think everyone is like you. I don't need a virtual lover or to troll the internet for a cheap obscure sexual thrill. I have a real, flesh and bones, beautiful, drop-dead-gorgeous, intelligent, multi-lingual, multi-talented boyfriend.
Synova, that quote was from Michael McNeil, not the village idiot. Just FYI.
Plagiarist Michael digs his hole deeper:
They find dinosaur follis INSIDE rocks all the time, come up with an approximate age of the rock...and well, what do you know?
Yet again, troll Michael is completely wrong (he doesn't even remember what he apparently learned during his last lesson in this regard).
The subject is carbon-14 dating (a particular type of radiometric dating) — and the aforementioned plagiarist explicitly declared on multiple occasions (while ridiculing others' supposed ignorance) that carbon dating can be and is used to date both dinosaurs and ancient rocks.
As the troll put it in just one of those instances:
Which part isn't “real??”
That humans did not live at the same time as dinosaurs?
Or that carbon dating effectively establishes the age of fossils and other elements of the planet's age?
You are as dumb as a stump.
Carbon-14 dating, however, cannot be used to date anything that a) doesn't contain carbon, such as many rocks and even fossils (as minerals oftentimes replace the carbon in old fossils) do not — or b), even if a rock or fossil does contain carbon, is more than ∼50,000 years old. To date dinosaurs or rocks that are a significant fraction of the age of the Earth, one must go back many (even hundreds of) millions of years — which carbon dating is utterly incapable of.
Quoting a creationist site under the circumstances, as idiotic plagiarist does, adds a further highly risible element.
The troll is a crack-up, in multiple senses of the word.
ElcubanitoKC - When you say...
"Radiometric dating (methods such as Argon-Argon, for your information) can only give dates to rocks that are igneous (volcanic) in origin. Sedimentary and metamorphic rocks cannot be dated by radiometric dating techniques."
Uh...
Dinosaur Fossils: Sedimentary Rock
Dinosaur fossils, as with other fossils, are found throughout earth's sedimentary layers.
www.allaboutcreation.org/dinosaur-fossils.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Where's your bunkmate, Dude?
Why isn't HE fighting the fight?
Dude, you keep quoting a creationist site. Have you even noticed the URL?
Michael McNeil You can "spin" this any way you want, but you're wrong and know it, too.
"Radiometric dating (methods such as Argon-Argon, for your information) can only give dates to rocks that are igneous (volcanic) in origin. Sedimentary and metamorphic rocks cannot be dated by radiometric dating techniques."
Uh...
Dinosaur Fossils: Sedimentary Rock
Dinosaur fossils, as with other fossils, are found throughout earth's sedimentary layers.
www.allaboutcreation.org/dinosaur-fossils.htm -
Which one of you is the catcher?
And does Palladian know about this?
This is the least amusing comments thread of the year.
What a funny and disjointed argument you girls make.
And remember, this all started with your V.P. nominee saying she saw human footprints inside dinosaur tracks.
Which I think you two idiots actually believe to be true.
Oh, yeah, and I was quoting Mr McNeil, and correctly so.
I think it rocks.
I am sorry, Professor Althouse.
Michael McNeil - Take your time, jerkoff.
Oh, I will. I only check in every now and then — I don't follow your every idiocy with bated breath.
Michael McNeil You can "spin" this any way you want, but you're wrong and know it, too.
I'm not at all wrong. I know this subject very well.
Michael McNeil - "Radiometric dating (methods such as Argon-Argon, for your information) can only give dates to rocks that are igneous (volcanic) in origin. Sedimentary and metamorphic rocks cannot be dated by radiometric dating techniques."
Uh...
Dinosaur Fossils: Sedimentary Rock
Dinosaur fossils, as with other fossils, are found throughout earth's sedimentary layers.
It's not your fault, ElcubanitoKC.
To date a sedimentary rock, it is necessary to isolate a few unusual minerals (if present) which formed on the seafloor as the rock was cemented. Glauconite is a good example. Glauconite contains potassium, so it can be dated using the potassium-argon technique.
ElcubanitoKC...awwwwwwww, that was so sweet.
Idiotic troll Michael sez:
Michael McNeil - “Radiometric dating (methods such as Argon-Argon, for your information) can only give dates to rocks that are igneous (volcanic) in origin. Sedimentary and metamorphic rocks cannot be dated by radiometric dating techniques.”
Uh…
Dinosaur Fossils: Sedimentary Rock
Dinosaur fossils, as with other fossils, are found throughout earth's sedimentary layers.
Wow! The troll has learned how to cut and paste!
Moreover, those words are mine — and they're correct.
However, Idioticos fondly imagines that there's a point in his favor to be found amongst them.
In the first place, Argon-Argon dating isn't Carbon-14 dating, the latter of which is the method he confidently asserted would do the job before.
Second, as noted above, even Argon-Argon can't date sedimentary rocks, which is where fossils hang out.
As a result, as I noted before on that other thread, Troll doesn't even yet know how we do date ancient fossils not to speak of (non-igneous) rocks.
If folks are interested (it is a fascinating subject), I will explicate that as some point — but not for Ol' Troll.
Troll continues his frantic research, but still doesn't get it:
To date a sedimentary rock, it is necessary to isolate a few unusual minerals (if present) which formed on the seafloor as the rock was cemented. Glauconite is a good example. Glauconite contains potassium, so it can be dated using the potassium-argon technique.
Wrong. Moreover, the Potassium-Argon method is basically (40 years) obsolete — which is why I referred to Argon-Argon.
If folks are interested (it is a fascinating subject), I will explicate that as some point...
I'll bet everybody is waiting with bated breath.
Troll sez:
“If folks are interested (it is a fascinating subject), I will explicate that as some point…”
I'll bet everybody is waiting with bated breath.
There may not be many, but I'll bet there are more than want to hear further from you.
Althouse said: This is the least amusing comments thread of the year.
What do you expect? Michael is posting. Michael hates humor.
Albania had a “cult of the ugly” under Hoxha.
If Michael were a ruler we’d have a “cult of the dour.”
I see Troll's plagiarizing again.
Moreover, that piece isn't strictly speaking incorrect, it's just misapplied by the plagiarizer to imply that that's how we typically date fossils and sedimentary rocks. It's not.
I would love to read more on the subject, Michael McNeil. Very intersting.
Ms. Althouse, your comments secton has descended to the level of the Craigslist political forum. Pity
Oh, Michael.
No one will defend themselves against the charge of believing that dinosaurs and men walked the earth together or answer your incessant demands about the choice to be gay because no one but you is insecure over either matter.
And neither has anything to do with whether or not Sarah Palin, in one short paragraph, was making deliberate fun of Katie Couric and slamming the New York Times, all while pointing out that Obama has some alarming anti-American friends... or, if not friends, at least long-term acquaintances, and his VP views taxation as patriotic.
I mean, maybe it wasn't snark at all.
BTW, I agree with Ann that the last, at least, isn't entirely fair. I don't think that Biden can be attached to Ayers with any legitimacy. But I don't think that Obama has done anything to separate himself from, if nothing else, the communism of Ayers.
I don't think people actually *care* where Obama himself is on the continuum between communism and capitalism. They don't care at all. I suppose it's not important to them. Maybe Obama is right next to McCain. Who knows?
Michael McNeil said..."There may not be many, but I'll bet there are more than want to hear further from you."
I'm not running for office.
I post here for one single reason: SOMEBODY has to refute the lies, distortions and smears these wingnuts (you included, of course) throw out.
Like I said before: It's basically a right wing suckfest.
Synova said..."Oh, Michael. No one will defend themselves against the charge of believing that dinosaurs and men walked the earth together or answer your incessant demands about the choice to be gay because no one but you is insecure over either matter."
You man, except for Sarah Palin and many here?
I'm a liberal and believe everybody has equal rights, gay or straight, and no, I'm afraid I do not believe humans and dinosaurs romped together.
All of this inane argumentation while he thrashes from topic to topic is just complete obfuscation on Troll's part — to try to arm-wave everybody's awareness away from the fact that he sought on numerous occasions before to assure us of carbon dating's (false) efficacy in this regard. But nothing he says can erase that.
Darcy: Thanks! I'll see what I can do, but probably not tonight.
And as his last posting above makes plain, Troll doesn't “believe” that humans and dinosaurs “romped” together — but doesn't know why not.
In other words, it's his religion.
Michael the plagarist said: I post here for one single reason: SOMEBODY has to refute the lies, distortions and smears these wingnuts (you included, of course) throw out.
A certain rabid Palin-hater also likes to string together the words "lies, smears, and distortions":
Yes, the man who has orchestrated some of the most disgusting and dishonest campaigns in American history thinks John McCain's series of massive lies, smears and distortions is too much.
C-fudd - what "people" notice it beside you? I got plenty more links to prove what I say than you do to prove your nitwit blather.
Ah! Overlooked this one….
Troll sez:
Once again… maybe you can literally CALL this guy… [snip]
Why would I want to? There's nothing wrong with it — except in your imagining that it supports any position you've explicated.
Argentina dinosaur fossil find tightens evolutionary link with modern birds…
And GUESS WHERE THEY FOUND THE FOSSILS??
Nothing wrong with that either — except ditto.
Troll still seems to fondly imagine that I'm a Creationist. Wrong — big time.
Troll sez:
This is what Michael McNeil said… “Ah yes, the guy who fondly imagined that carbon dating could be and is used to date dinosaurs and the Earth.”
I made it clear exactly what kind of carbon dating that could be used, and he knows it.
Bullshit; you did not. Moreover, no kind of carbon dating can be used to date the deep past.
Wikipedia: Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a technique used to date materials, and… It is the principal source of information about the absolute age of rocks and other geological features, including the age of the Earth itself, and can be used to date a wide range of natural and man-made materials.
True, but irrelevant to carbon dating, and furthermore doesn't explain how we date sedimentary rocks and the fossils within them — since radiometric dating doesn't directly work with them.
He also said the fossils couldn't be found in sedimentary rocks, which is wrong, too.
I never said that — rather, I claimed the exact opposite.
John McCain associated with, and abetted, a financial confidence man convicted of fraud, racketeering, and conspiracy. Bailing out the investors in Keating's company cost U.S. Taxpayers billions of dollars.
This, however, is directly relevant to our current events and lives, unlike the Ayers opposition research attack.
Let's talk about Charles Keating and John McCain and the the Savings and Loan scandal. Why should a Senator reprimanded for his involvement with convicted financial felons be trusted with this financial scandal?
A. Quoting Albright was a joke, That's easy to see.
B. Going to parties at a guy's house and serving on Boards with him constitutes "pal-ing' around with him, I'd say. It doesn't matter how old Obama was when Ayres was actively bombing, as much as it matters that he is obfuscating the truth, and not coming clean about pissing away 110 Million Dollars in grant money to activist causes...
C. Oxbay's link IS devastating. Fire in the Night
The Weathermen tried to kill my family. And tells quite clearly why it matters.
Because - In the first place, if you are to be President of the United States, you have to be prepared to order the pursuit of, the capture of, the prosecution of, the imprisoning of, and even the KILLING of people who would bomb our cities, and police stations and kill our people. You do not go to Barbeques at their house, sit on Boards with them, piss away $110 million in Foundation Grant Money with them and launch your campaign at their house. And then pretend he's just a guy who lives in your neighborhood.
Garage Mahal asked:
Why is Sarah Plain giving a speech in front of a 49 star flag in 2008? Doesn't seem very American to me.
Well, Garage, she tried, but she just couldn't find one with FIFTY SEVEN stars.
Lots of info on Obama and his terrorist buddies can be found here:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6808
The KGB tie in part-1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNtn6_0ZWmU
The KGB tie in part-2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rkc0yqJulWg
Enjoy...
Our dear comical friend Michael here cares to dispute Ayers' background. Ayers admits what he was, and he's hardly moved to the center since then.
And we come back to the central point - we know as a matter of public record that Obama and Ayers and other Ayers - dare I say, fellow-travelers? - had repeated contacts over period of more than a decade, that Obama magically ended up in positions of responsibility at Ayers-backed operations, yet Obama and his campaign FELT IT NECESSARY TO LIE to try to minimize the nature of their relationship.
WHY?
It's not the crime, it's the coverup.
As for Palin, she pulled in $2M at one luncheon in the hardcore-blue SF Bay Area today. But for certain scheduling issues I might have pulled out the checkbook and gone myself.
She's doing just fine, though I think she could be throwing more than one punch a day, there's certainly enough material for it.
Here's another good link - I'd post the "resume" - but the list is too long... really shocking to see it all in one place... this wasn't just one or two incidents...
The Post Chronicle - Resume Of A Terrorist: Obama's Buddy Ayers
by Jim Kouri
Pogo, is there no limit to your stupidity?
That's a flat-out lie, Cyrus.
His name is Ayers.
To begin, although it's a small point to be sure, Palin accuses Obama of "palling around with terrorists." Please note use of the plural (meaning more than one). Yet you name only one person. Who are the other "terrorists" with whom Obama is "palling around?" Names, please.
Second, Obama is "palling around" with a "terrorist" in the same sense that Reagan hosted and praised a "terrorist." If you insist that Ayers is still a "terrorist," then by your definition, Menachem Begin was still a terrorist when Reagan praised him thusly:
His statesmanship and leadership have been a source of inspiration.
So Reagan was inspired by a terrorist? You must find that frightening, Pogo.
Of course anyone with even the slightest bit of education will understand the difference between past and present activities. Menachem Begin was no longer a terrorist when Reagan praised him and Ayers was no longer a terrorist when Obama met him.
Most people, even those of limited intelligence, will understand this distinction. I fear that you, Pogo, will not. Therefore I will provide you with some examples:
President Bush is not a druggie--he's a former druggie.
John McCain is not an adulterer--he's a former adulterer.
If you try, Pogo, even you can understand this distinction. The problem, however, is that you long ago gave up trying.
Pogo, I notice that you didn't comment on Palin's close association with secessionists. That surprises me frankly, as you've never been shy about embracing your hypocrisy. If you actually believed this nonsense about Obama "palling around with terrorists," then presumably you'd be troubled by Palin's strong connection to secessionists in Alaska. Presumably you'd also be troubled by McCain's close association with felons. (I'd call them ex-felons, but you'd make no such distinction.) Presumably you'd also be worried about the fact that McCain shared military information with the North Vietnamese during the war.
Presumably, but apparently not. Although I accept that you rarely engage in reality-based commentary, it would be nice to see some consistency in the application of your dim-witted notions. However, that's not a desirable characteristic for a dishonest, hypocritical partisan hack so we are instead treated to your painful double standards, your distortion of historical fact, your logical fallacies and your intellectually dishonest debate tactics.
Regurgitate those talking points, Pogo! You've had nothing intelligent to offer in the year or so that I've been reading the comments at Althouse and I see no reason to expect anything other than more hysterical, dishonest partisan gibberish from you in the future.
"This is the least amusing comments thread of the year."
Ann speaking truth to impotence.
You should ban Michael--he is not behaving in good faith. Occam's barbershop quartet suggests (in 4 part harmony, of course) that his entire purpose is to ruin your comment section.
One important factor: McCain repented for Keating, and staunch Dem Bennett (intimately involded with the proceedings) confirms that McCain got lopped in with the others (albeit with lesser condemnation) mainly b/c the Dems in charge wanted to avoid a Dems only scandal. OTOH, Obama has lied about his involvement with Ayers and obviously, therefore, does not regret it--it's no different than were McCain to pal around with Eric Rudolph.
Synova wrote:
Unless they're blowing stuff up? Cyrus, are they blowing stuff up?
I'm certain that if the United States government had any reason whatsoever to suspect that Bill Ayers posed any real risk of violence to society, he would not enjoy his current freedom.
In other words, your argument makes no sense.
Sarah talks like a blogger?
Perhaps we can look forward to her talking like a pirate next year, right?
Anyone have video of Sarah from this past Sept. 19th?
Cyrus-
The second terrorist would be Bernardine Dohrn. Ayers' wife. And a former Weather Underground bomber.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. Except for the dead and wounded.
"Greg Toombs said...
Cyrus-
The second terrorist would be Bernardine Dohrn. "
I know, Greg.
And, in fact, Cyrus knows this as well.
but he will never admit it. (And seriously, isn't palling around with one avowed, admitted, and unrepentant terrorist enough, or rather too much for a President?)
It's his schtick, whenever a painful nerve is struck by The Enemy, which compels him to visit Althouse. He's unable to answer a direct question, but eludes it.
He imagines himself to be smart. He is intelligent, I'll grant, and quite so, but lacks wisdom and honsety, so his posts are like talking to a 15 year old with "oppositional disorder". Responding is useful if only to poke fun and expose the lies and half-truths.
How do you deal with a Palin hater?
Menachem Begin was no longer a terrorist when Reagan praised him and Ayers was no longer a terrorist when Obama met him.
Ah yes, nothing like a little moral equivalency to make one's point.
One man's freedom fighter and all that....
Michael wrote: This isn't a NEW story. The press has been covering and reporting on this for two years.
Two points:
First, timeliness is important. Once Obama became the Democrat nominee for president, a deeper look was warranted. This is how we treat presidential candidates. Obama should not be an exception.
Second, the New York Times is important. They are the most influential paper in the country and much of what they report gets picked up by smaller papers and television talking heads.
So I did a search on the New York Times. Every story I found on Obama and Ayers this year was a campaign report or opinion piece. None of them were framed as reporter-driven investigative journalism. In the primaries, the Times reported the issue as driven by the Clinton campaign. Now, the paper reports the issue as driven by the McCain/Palin campaign.
As I wrote above, when a story is framed in campaign terms -- "This is what the other campaign is saying about Obama" -- it makes the facts less important than the messenger. It gives Obama an easy out.
In contrast, the Times did an exhaustive profile on McCain on decades-old news that front-paged the "scandal" that he once was friends with a female lobbyist.
The Times' big profile on Palin turns over a compost heap of petty political gossip and comes up with nothing other than random accusations referenced to anonymous sources and quotes from political enemies passed through as fact.
Obama couldn't survive a profile like that. But it will never happen.
* * *
Frankly, Obama's Ayers connection makes no difference to me. It's inane to think that Obama was supposed to sniff out and shun a man who was as connected into the neighborhood political network as Ayers. And there is no evidence that Ayers had any influence on Obama (or vice versa).
But my opinion of the media is affected.
greg toombs wrote:
The second terrorist would be Bernardine Dohrn. Ayers' wife. And a former Weather Underground bomber.
Obama hasn't been "palling around with" Bernadine Dohrn. This must be a rightwing talking point that you're regurgitating, but it's simply untrue.
In the future, you might want to fact check your talking points before repeating them mindlessly on your favorite blogs.
hoosier wrote:
Ah yes, nothing like a little moral equivalency to make one's point.
Poor Hoosier, your ability to read and comprehend continues to decline.
I've drawn no moral equivalency. Indeed, you've made quite a foolish error in your reading.
The example of Menachem Begin is to show that past activity, and in particular, past crimes are not equivalent to current activities.
Perhaps a different example will clarify this for you. Did you know that until July 2008, Nelson Mandela was officially listed by the United States government as a terrorist? In June 2008, the United States government considered Mandela a terrorist. In July 2008, the US government no longer regarded him as a terrorist. What changed, Hoosier? Do you accept Palin's "once a terrorist, always a terrorist" position? If so, Mandela is still a terrorist. Fortunately, rational people and the US government disagrees with that point of view.
One man's freedom fighter and all that....
Iraqi insurgents consider themselves freedom fighters. The same applies to the Taliban. Where do you want to go with this line of argument, Hoosier?
"But remember, 1jpb is a 'Republican for Obama', which sounds like but makes slightly less sense than Jews For Jesus."
I'd say it's closer to "Vegans for Cannibalism," personally.
Pogo babbled:
I know, Greg.
Translation: Pogo and Greg are both ignorant. Obama has not been hanging out with Bernadine Dohrn.
And, in fact, Cyrus knows this as well.
Your bluff has been called, Pogo. Obama doesn't "pal around" with Bernadine Dohrn. Repeating an idiotic, unfounded accusation like that ad nauseam doesn't make it true.
(And seriously, isn't palling around with one avowed, admitted, and unrepentant terrorist enough, or rather too much for a President?)
I have to assume, Pogo, that as a matter of consistency, you're quite concerned about McCain's associations with felons and his sharing of military information with the enemy during the Vietnam War. Does any of that trouble you as much as Obama's tangential relationship with Ayers?
I suspect not. The only consistency I see from you is that you're consistently hypocritical.
Ayers put to rest...at least with thinking people:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-k-wilson/30-lies-refuted-about-aye_b_132109.html
Or this...
Fact Check: Is Obama 'palling around with terrorists'?
Verdict: False.
*clap**clap**clap* the troll gets the last word. That makes him feel all important and grown up.
Okay, fair enough. We all forgot the word "unrepentant" in there.
And since our justice system doesn't (or at least shouldn't) care about repentance, the fact that they haven't done any bombing since they got found out doesn't mean that people can't care that they are unrepentant. And since our justice system doesn't (and shouldn't) confine people because they are a threat, even if Ayers was a current threat, but has to (and ought to) wait until after a crime is committed before someone is locked up... the "proof" that Ayers is all wonderful now (even without being repentant) because he'd be locked up otherwise... it's not proof at all.
What kind of police state do you think this is, Cyrus?
Maybe the sort where one campaign threatens to use the police and courts to punish those who engage in political speech that isn't quite truthy enough?
That campaign, of course, doesn't have to be truthy... it just has to attribute the "facts" in the ads to some other agency. *WE* didn't say that McCain did this... we're only saying that the New York Times said this about McCain and it's the TRUTH because the New York Times DID say this about McCain.
"I would feel better if Palin would stay within arm's reach of the truth."
Lessee...Obama associated with Ayers -- a known terrorist -- for more than 20 years, through the educational board they served on together in Chicago...launched his political career with a fundraiser in Ayer's livingroom...
I'd say that's within arm's reach. Feel better now?
synova wrote:
...even if Ayers was a current threat, but has to (and ought to) wait until after a crime is committed before someone is locked up... the "proof" that Ayers is all wonderful now (even without being repentant) because he'd be locked up otherwise... it's not proof at all.
What kind of police state do you think this is, Cyrus?
This comment shows a genuine lack of understanding about how law enforcement works.
First, people can be legally under surveillance, investigation and questioned by the state without proof of wrongdoing. Second, law enforcement has broad powers to prevent violent crime. For example, the Anti-Arson Act of 1982 gave ATF jurisdiction in enforcement efforts to prevent arson. (In case you've forgotten, ATF used these powers to obtain search warrants for the Branch Davidian ranch near Waco.)
What evidence is there that Ayers is currently involved in terrorist activities? What evidence is there that you are currently involved in terrorist activities? In both cases, I strongly suspect the answer is none. In other words, it's unreasonable to imply that Ayers is a terrorist. If you want to refer to him as an ex-terrorist, that's fine, at least it's accurate. But then again, if you were concerned with accuracy, you wouldn't suggest that Obama is hanging around with Ayers. He's not, and the GOP knows it. But rightwingers will run with it anyway because it's a good smear and Team McCain is desperate.
jblog drooled:
I'd say that's within arm's reach. Feel better now?
No. Your admission of idiocy is not something that comforts me or should be a source of pride for you.
As I've indicated in numerous posts already, your smear fails on several key points. Ayers hasn't been involved in terrorist activities since the 70s. He is an ex-terrorist. Furthermore, Obama's connection to Ayers is tangential; they are not "pals."
Your accusation has been fact checked by an independent group and was judged to be false. I realize that you'll continue to repeat the false accusation, however, as that is what partisan hacks like you do. Dittoing requires no intelligence--in fact, intelligence is generally a disqualifying trait for dittoheads. That's probably why you show real talent for regurgitating these talking points.
Lucy said,
Ayers put to rest...at least with thinking people:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-k-wilson/30-lies-refuted-about-aye_b_132109.html
Yes, but what do you think?
Me, I say thank God we have Huffpo to give us the unvarnished truth.
I've posted within another thread my follow-up piece laying out how fossils and sedimentary rocks are dated, so it can appear on a primary Althouse page having more reasonable margins than Blogger provides on its comment-posting pages (required for >200 comments).
Post a Comment