Althouse: "That's what they love. That's what they get off on. That's their orgasm."

April 14, 2011

"That's what they love. That's what they get off on. That's their orgasm."

"They" = the "walking human debris... those savages that make up the Obama base."

"What they get off on" = Obama's attack on conservatives.

According to Rush Limbaugh.

167 comments:

Sprezzatura said...: Kenyian savages?

wv: toxid The toxic id.; 4/14/11, 2:16 PM
Scott M said...: My...that's rather Stark, isn't it?; 4/14/11, 2:19 PM
Methadras said...: Leftards are nothing but. Their ideology kills, maims, and destroys. Destroys peoples lives, destroys liberty, freedom, standards of living, and individuality. I don't think the word 'savage' comes close to what I would describe this cadre as being.; 4/14/11, 2:23 PM
Dustin said...: Rush is right.

It's a very ugly thing to say, but Obama kept on piling on empty, but attacking, points. Ryan isn't serious, and his plan is unamerican! That is obviously an attempt to delight people who need to hear Ryan trashed, even though they didn't pay attention to his plan (for example, the tax points Obama made are hilariously inaccurate, and he knows it).

Obama is shoring up his base, which shouldn't make Rush mad because that's a sign he's a political failure.

The GOP has very little to be inspired by today. We have lost the battle because we are not willing to play hardball with a shutdown. Politically, the Democrats wouldn't be lying if Ryan's plan was a political loser.

Obama has to answer for his promise to cut the deficit in half. And the far left needs to consider what happens to welfare when the government's finances ultimately collapse.; 4/14/11, 2:24 PM
chickelit said...: A strong elected majority in both Houses could help neuter the POTUS. That's what he fears most: castigation anxiety.; 4/14/11, 2:28 PM
Steve Koch said...: Personally, I hate this kind of talk. It just drives us farther apart. We shouldn't be dehumanizing each other.

How does that expression go, hate the sin but love the sinner?; 4/14/11, 2:28 PM
Dose of Sanity said...: I'm afraid of using this expression here, but "qq moar" please.; 4/14/11, 2:32 PM
Sofa King said...: Bush was a decider, Obama is a divider.; 4/14/11, 2:34 PM
Scott M said...: 'm afraid of using this expression here, but "qq moar" please.

What...did someone nerfbat ur l33t mage?

The best quote ever along those lines is the immortal,

Nerf paper. Scissors are fine. Signed, Stone.; 4/14/11, 2:37 PM
Anonymous said...: These rich SOB's really go to the mat when there's talk of ending the Bush tax breaks. If they expire, Rush may not be able to afford his 600th Bentley next year, god forbid.; 4/14/11, 2:40 PM
Alex said...: The GOP has very little to be inspired by today. We have lost the battle because we are not willing to play hardball with a shutdown.

Ah yes, let's commit political suicide just because. Bayonet charge everyone! General Pickett was a hero!; 4/14/11, 2:41 PM
Alex said...: franglo - Rush buys Maybachs, not Bentleys.; 4/14/11, 2:41 PM
Joe said...: (The Crypto Jew)
These rich SOB's really go to the mat when there's talk of ending the Bush tax breaks. If they expire, Rush may not be able to afford his 600th Bentley next year, god forbid.

And if he buys that 600th Bentley or not, your life is affected, how?

Of course SOME Rich SOB’s, Edie Falcon, Stephen King, beg for Obama to tax them more…of course they never VOLUNTARILY pay more in taxes, but they do beg for it….kind of like those “guys” apologizing for men, not for anything they did, but for all men, so they look good to the Hippie chics.; 4/14/11, 2:43 PM
Dustin said...: "Ah yes, let's commit political suicide just because. Bayonet charge everyone! General Pickett was a hero!"

All I said was that we have little to celebrate. I didn't say we should shut down the government or commit suicide. I meant it like it is: we have not accomplished what is needed, and there's no indication we ever will.

By all means, make the tactical argument that it isn't possible to win a better budget via a huge dramatic shutdown. I think that's true. But at the same time, let's admit that we lost the battle. Sometimes you lose a battle because you just can't win.

Our one card to play is refusal to sign off on Democrat spending, and we aren't willing to play it. Many in the GOP are pretending there has been a compromise that is a first step down paying off the debt, and why lie?

Hell, Ryan's plan is extremely tame compared to the problem it faces, and that's 3 exponents more powerful than what we've won today.

Don't shoot the messenger, dude.; 4/14/11, 2:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Rush is right.

Obama, instead of leading, used the speech to try and shore up his sagging rabid base. He only attacked, never offered any substantive solutions of his own, and will now demagogue the GOP that has offered a plan, all the way to election day.

This, is all that he is.; 4/14/11, 2:46 PM
Carol_Herman said...: Obama won because of McCain's ineptitude!

If Obama wins again, I'd blame the republicans for being lame.

As to Obama's "attitude" ... we've been on this page ... since he stepped out from behind his "Oz" curtain; and went after Sargent Crowley, on the Cambridge police force. Yup. "Acting stupidly."

And, it tore into the "O's" popularity numbers, even then!

He's NOT Kenyan! Not that his mom, sans marriage, wasn't screwing some off-beat characters!

Maybe, Israel handles it right? The just ignore him.

So, whom would I vote for? Well, I hope Donald Trump gives me the chance!; 4/14/11, 2:47 PM
Anonymous said...: I think there should be a fail safe that states that our military spending can only be double the next FIVE largest armies combined, rather than the current FOURTEEN.

Deficit troubles solved.; 4/14/11, 2:49 PM
Alex said...: All I said was that we have little to celebrate. I didn't say we should shut down the government or commit suicide. I meant it like it is: we have not accomplished what is needed, and there's no indication we ever will.

By all means, make the tactical argument that it isn't possible to win a better budget via a huge dramatic shutdown. I think that's true. But at the same time, let's admit that we lost the battle. Sometimes you lose a battle because you just can't win.

Yeah let's pretend the GOP can be ahead of the American public on entitlement reform. You do realize that most people do NOT want benefits cut? A combination of recipients + do-gooders.; 4/14/11, 2:52 PM
Alex said...: franglo - even if you eliminated the military that's only 40% of the deficit.; 4/14/11, 2:52 PM
Joe said...: (The Crypto Jew)
I think there should be a fail safe that states that our military spending can only be double the next FIVE largest armies combined, rather than the current FOURTEEN.

Even though 60% of the Budget is Entitlement Spending?; 4/14/11, 2:52 PM
Dustin said...: "
Yeah let's pretend the GOP can be ahead of the American public on entitlement reform. You do realize that most people do NOT want benefits cut? A combination of recipients + do-gooders."

touche

But that is what I am pretending, actually.

The truth is that if you want to continue getting benefits, or have some kind of morality that requires people to get benefits, you should adopt Ryan's plan. The alternative is to keep benefit spending so high that we collapse, and then... no benefits.

It's like telling a 16 year old that if he loves driving fast, he still needs to keep it under 100 mph before he dies in a firey crash.

You seem to note this is a loser, politically. You're probably right.; 4/14/11, 2:57 PM
DADvocate said...: walking human debris

I view them more as zombies mindlessly following the leftie mantras while mindlessly eating their own brains.; 4/14/11, 2:57 PM
Roger J. said...: Franglo--eliminating the entire defense department would not come anywhere near reducing the deficit.

Come on--you can run these numbers yourself--unless of course you are a liberal who failed basic math as most liberals appear to have.; 4/14/11, 2:57 PM
Anonymous said...: You guys seem to think the budget and the deficit are the same thing. Exhibit A of the financial wizardry of conservatives, who gifted the nation its current deficit woes with 1)the Bush tax breaks for the rich and 2) Medicare part D.; 4/14/11, 2:58 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Obama is such a gonif.; 4/14/11, 3:01 PM
Joe said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/14/11, 3:04 PM
Scott M said...: You guys seem to think the budget and the deficit are the same thing. Exhibit A of the financial wizardry of conservatives, who gifted the nation its current deficit woes with 1)the Bush tax breaks for the rich and 2) Medicare part D.

You're misunderstanding of the word conservative speaks volumes. Besides, I'm far from rich, but I got a tax break. I would venture to guess that the amount I got means more to me than it does to someone who's actually rich. Secondly, I don't know many conservatives that were happy with D.; 4/14/11, 3:04 PM
coketown said...: Count me as a skeptic. I don't think Obama's base gets sexual gratification from Obama attacking conservatives. What would that even be called? Sadism is getting off on humiliating others; masochism is getting off on humiliating yourself. Is there a word for vicariously getting off when one person humiliates another?; 4/14/11, 3:04 PM
Joe said...: (The Crypto Jew)
You guys seem to think the budget and the deficit are the same thing. Exhibit A of the financial wizardry of conservatives, who gifted the nation its current deficit woes with 1)the Bush tax breaks for the rich and 2) Medicare part D..

That was fairly incoherent…budgets have DEFICITS or they don’t what are you trying to say? Did you mean to say “deficit” v. “debt”? Yes, Bush had both…Bush’s largest DEFICIT ~190 Billion, as compared to the current 1 TRILLION deficit, Bush had and increased the National Debt, HOWEVER under Obama the debt will hit 100% of GDP rather soon, IIRC…so please try again in explaining “your point.”

Lastly, the “surpluses” Bush inherited were predicated upon their being NO Recession…in short they were illusory…and Medicare part D is bad, so I guess you REALLY hate ObamaCare which will DWARF Medicare Part D?

Try to be coherent in your answers and show all your work.; 4/14/11, 3:05 PM
Alex said...: That was fairly incoherent…budgets have DEFICITS or they don
T what are you trying to say?

Actually the GOVERNMENT is running a deficit. The budget is just outlays, what it spends.

Outlays - revenues = deficit; 4/14/11, 3:05 PM
PaulV said...: Franglo, the Bush tax cut have expired. I think you are angry at the more expensive Obama tax cut.
Would you support a limitation on the charitable gift exclusion of the federal death tax that allow Gates and Buffet to avoid the death tax?; 4/14/11, 3:05 PM
Scott M said...: Is there a word for vicariously getting off when one person humiliates another?

Yes. It's called comedy.; 4/14/11, 3:06 PM
coketown said...: Let's not forget that the ten-year cost of extending Bush's top-bracket tax cuts is $815 billion. That's one-half of Obama's average annual deficits. In ten years. Taxing the rich isn't going to close the deficit.

Let's not also forget that the only complaint Democrats had of Part D was that it didn't spend enough.; 4/14/11, 3:09 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: I wouldn't call Garage part of a "walking human debris" cabal, nor a "savage".

But Rush is right ;); 4/14/11, 3:10 PM
Roger J. said...: franglo--you're flailing here--it isnt pretty

get some facts, some figures and get back to us; 4/14/11, 3:12 PM
Sigivald said...: Once the rhetorical "meanness" is stripped off, there is sadly a lot of truth in it.

I say this from observation of the left/Democrat/Progressive-identifying people I know, and what they choose to repeat on venues like Facebook.

The real energy and "joy" in the things posted always seems to be Attacking The Other.

(In fairness, there is at very least a strain of that on the right, too. And equally, it's not universal on the Left.

But it sure seems prevalent among the modern "base".); 4/14/11, 3:12 PM
PaulV said...: franglo, Obama has replace Bush medicare D with his own plan which is more expensive. Do you approve of the bigger Obama tax cuts and the more expensive Obama medicare D?; 4/14/11, 3:12 PM
coketown said...: @Scott: I can't recall the last time I heard a joke or saw a skit so funny that I actually got off. I came close during the Attack of the Clones Rifftrax.; 4/14/11, 3:13 PM
PaulV said...: franglo, have you given back to the federal government your share of the Bush tax cuts?; 4/14/11, 3:15 PM
Scott M said...: Call me old fashioned, but I've yet to laugh as hard and long as I did the very first time I saw the Bigus Dickus scene in Python's "Life Of Brian".

The guy dropping the spear at the end of the scene just makes you laugh louder and harder long after the scene is over.

Micheal Palin's Pontius Pilate is brilliant.; 4/14/11, 3:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Joe-- for intellectual honesty's sake, you might want to acknowledge the effect of the financial collapse that began before Obama took office, dwarfing the recessions that marked the beginning of the Bush administration, on the relative deficits of the 2 administrations' budgets. Since you insist on one you have to concede the other.; 4/14/11, 3:17 PM
Terrye said...: I am not an Obama supporter, I am certainly not part of his base..however, I do think Rush is being just a tad over the top here. A lot of people in Obama's base are just life long Democrats who have a knee jerk affinity for the guy with the D behind his name. They are no more hateful than Rush himself, they are like him, partisan.

There are exceptions of course, such as Olbermann and Moore and other life time lefties, but not every Obama supporter is like that.; 4/14/11, 3:18 PM
Scott M said...: Joe-- for intellectual honesty's sake, you might want to...

For intellectual honesty's sake, you might want to answer the challenges set to you before proposing more to others.; 4/14/11, 3:19 PM
traditionalguy said...: Rush's analysis is spot on. A slow motion armed robbery has always excited the gang of thieves that conspire under the name Democrats. It's for the blacks, and for the children, and for the elderly, and for the Palestinians, and for the Indians, and for the women. But armed robbery is mostly for the fun of those getting away with it.; 4/14/11, 3:19 PM
Joe said...: (The Crypto Jew)
Joe-- for intellectual honesty's sake, you might want to acknowledge the effect of the financial collapse that began before Obama took office, dwarfing the recessions that marked the beginning of the Bush administration, on the relative deficits of the 2 administrations' budgets. Since you insist on one you have to concede the other.

No sorry Franglo the fact that spending has INCREASED by 38% since Obama came to office suggests the Recession isn’t the leading cause of deficits or the debt…..; 4/14/11, 3:20 PM
Alex said...: I am not an Obama supporter, I am certainly not part of his base..however, I do think Rush is being just a tad over the top here. A lot of people in Obama's base are just life long Democrats who have a knee jerk affinity for the guy with the D behind his name.

Sorry but by MY definition that's human debris.; 4/14/11, 3:20 PM
Terrye said...: franglo:

For intellectual honesty's sake you might want to consider the fact that Obama and much of his party not only did nothing to stop that meltdown but did in fact actively support the sort of borrowing that lead to it. As a community organizer Obama used to sue banks for not lending money to people who were too poor too borrow. Apparently he felt that not being able to pay the money back was simply no reason for someone to be denied credit.; 4/14/11, 3:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Taxing the rich isn't going to close the deficit

No, not BY ITSELF, which no one proposes to do, except the bugaboo of conservative fever dreams-- the Kenyan Socialist Marxist America Destroyer, Obama.

Hey, you know what else won't close the deficit? NOT taxing the rich.

You know what else? MORE tax cuts for the rich.; 4/14/11, 3:21 PM
Tank said...: I don't know about his base, but it's what he, Mr. Zero, gets off on. It's difficult to overstate his lack of class. He invites Ryan et al to his speech and lulls them into thinking he will be extending an olive branch, moving to work with them, saying they have a challenge they must all face together.

Instead, he s**** on them.

Let's face it, the President is a prick.; 4/14/11, 3:22 PM
Joe said...: (The Crypto Jew)
but I've yet to laugh as hard and long as I did the very first time I saw the Bigus Dickus scene in Python's "Life Of Brian".

As a fan of Theatre of the Absurd, for me it’s the following scene(?) where Brian falls off the tower and the alien space craft scoops him up. It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the movie! It is just an absurd insertion…I couldn’t breathe during that scene I was laughing so hard. And then the end when he walks away from the wreck and the beggars says, “Looky B@stard.”; 4/14/11, 3:23 PM
Roger J. said...: Franglo--what went before is at this point academic--Mr Obama was elected to prevent the oceans from rising etc etc--oour jug eared president is an empty suit bereft of ideas and with the remotest idea of how to fix it--he owns the whole thing now and is manifestly incapable of rising to the task--thats what happens when we elect jug eared idiots to the office (well except for lincoln and bush 43); 4/14/11, 3:23 PM
Terrye said...: Alex:

Well then some of those human debris are going to be tax paying Americans who served in the military and paid their taxes and probably grew up in a family where Democrats were the people who helped the working folks and Republicans were the people who helped the rich people.

There are a lot of people like that in this country, to simply call them all human debris is stupid.; 4/14/11, 3:24 PM
Dustin said...: "Let's not forget that the ten-year cost of extending Bush's top-bracket tax cuts is $815 billion."

It's even worse, Coketown.

Obama doesn't want to raise taxes on the middle class, but rather wants to raise them only on the "rich". By his own definition, that's $477 billion over ten years, which is radially short of the north of $10,000 billion he's spending over ten years.

Dems keep switching between the 'cost' of the Bush tax cuts in total and the 'cost' of the ones Obama is actually proposing undoing, depending on which way that works for him at any moment.

Either way, it's shameless. Excess taxation can hurt the recovery, and it can't pay more than a little of the deficit.; 4/14/11, 3:24 PM
Joe said...: (The Crypto Jew)
No, not BY ITSELF, which no one proposes to do, except the bugaboo of conservative fever dreams-- the Kenyan Socialist Marxist America Destroyer, Obama.

Now let’s see Franglo, Obama has NO “plan.” The only counter-proposal, the Progressive Caucus’ “People’s Budget” really only RAISES TAXES and INCREASES SPENDING…so yes, I’d say that pretty much the centre point of any Democratic “plan” right now.; 4/14/11, 3:25 PM
Terrye said...: As a matter of fact, Ann Althouse, along with 64 million other Americans voted for Obama..I certainly don't think that makes her human debris.; 4/14/11, 3:26 PM
Alex said...: As a matter of fact, Ann Althouse, along with 64 million other Americans voted for Obama..I certainly don't think that makes her human debris.

Ann isn't a knee-jerk Democrat. So I fail to see what the fuck your point is asswad.; 4/14/11, 3:28 PM
Sigivald said...: Uh, Franglo?

If we took 100% of "the rich"'s taxable income, confiscated every cent of it ...

That wouldn't cover the deficit. It'd barely cover over a THIRD of it.

1.42 trillion dollars is the deficit we're talking about - and the total taxable income of everyone making over $200,000 appears to have been... $562 billion.

(Source: IRS statistics, but you'll have to look at the AGI spreadsheet and do the aggregation yourself.); 4/14/11, 3:29 PM
Roger J. said...: jug ear's speech was just his opening speech in his reelection campagin--slogans and bull shit bereft of ideas--file it under bullshit and lets move on; 4/14/11, 3:31 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: "Walking human debris"? Maybe Rush was referring to Garbage.; 4/14/11, 3:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Uh, Sigivald? Read what I wrote again.

Do MORE tax breaks for the rich reduce the deficit? Wouldn't increasing revenue be part of any rational plan to reduce the deficit?

Can you show me one single way in which the economy, the growth rate, the unemployment rate, or any possible metric of civic health has improved as a result of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans?; 4/14/11, 3:36 PM
Roger J. said...: franglo--to your questions I can only answer this--first your assumption that somehow bush tax rates affect the variables you mentioned show you to a fool--for example american health indicators and life expectancy have rise for decades--and unless you, you idiot, can demonstrate how tax rates affect life expectancy, I might listen to your argument

but you cant and there is no causal relationship--you continue to be a fucking idiot son--really--a fucking idiot; 4/14/11, 3:53 PM
Anonymous said...: Republicans insist that not repealing the Bush tax cuts will create jobs and growth. Yet implementing them did neither.

Flawless logic.; 4/14/11, 4:00 PM
traditionalguy said...: Obama loves coming into a disaster and settling down the angry folks and ruling over them. But first he needs to create angry folks by class warfare, hopeless poverty and food priced out of reach of the holders of near worthless dollars. That is going on in the middle east now and will soon show up here. Obama will say it is all so unexpected and he will wish us well, but in fact he is doing everything he can to sabotage the USA.; 4/14/11, 4:03 PM
Scott M said...: Republicans insist that not repealing the Bush tax cuts will create jobs and growth. Yet implementing them did neither.

So you disagree with the administration and it's touting of the recent couple of months reduction in the unemployment rate?; 4/14/11, 4:03 PM
Roger J. said...: Ah franglo--since life expactancy figures have continued to rise indepenent of tax rates for the last 60 years, how are the bush tax rates involved at all/

Please tell me what the causal variable is for the bush rates and how it affects life expectancy

you are and continue to be an idiot. Really, son, a fucking idiot; 4/14/11, 4:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Scott M-- you make no sense. The unemployment has gone up and down during a period where the Bush tax breaks were in effect. Therefore you can uncouple them from causality regarding the unemployment rate. You prove my point: Republicans are lying when they defend the Bush tax breaks on the basis of jobs.

You know what problem would be addressed (not SOLVED) by reverting to pre-Bush tax rates? The deficit.; 4/14/11, 4:08 PM
Scott M said...: You prove my point: Republicans are lying when they defend the Bush tax breaks on the basis of jobs.

How is that possible when I asked you a question? Unless, of course, you have an ideological axe to grind. But that couldn't be the case, could it? Because you're driven by facts and not ideology...right?; 4/14/11, 4:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Scott-- I answered your question. let he without the ideological hatchet in his hand accuse others of holding ideological axes. You're grinding so much there's sparks flying out of the comments.

Roger-- lovely talking to you, you old coot. Too bad you'll be long dead before there's any problem with medicare, or else you could jump up and down and call me a fucking idiot then. Much more satisfying. Oh well.; 4/14/11, 4:15 PM
Dustin said...: "Therefore you can uncouple them from causality regarding the unemployment rate. You prove my point: Republicans are lying when they defend the Bush tax breaks on the basis of jobs."

This this serious?

Good Lord, you're a shill. No, it's not a lie. The Bush tax cuts are earnestly supported because of an interest in helping those who invest in new jobs. This isn't some grand conspiracy. The Republicans aren't actually trying to screw poor people, with evil hearts... they actually want to make America better.

It's one thing to disagree with their views, but another to be so crazy you think they don't really want more jobs when they argue for low taxes on employers.

Crybaby.; 4/14/11, 4:17 PM
Dose of Sanity said...: Hey, I hate being an, um, dose of sanity...but why can't everyone admit we need more tax AND spending cuts to get out of this mess? It makes a lot of sense to do both. Obama, for all his mighty liberal-ness, had a pretty good idea in the 3-to-1 cut v. tax ratio, I think.

Also, @ Scott. Bonus for being a nerd earlier. That is, and will continue to be, the quote of every gamer whose whined.; 4/14/11, 4:20 PM
Anonymous said...: Grand Inquisitor-- if you're right then the Bush tax cuts would have created jobs when they were implemented. Hey, it's a matter of record: they didn't!

So if Republicans are not lying, then they are living in a delusion. Either way, they're not fit to set tax policy.; 4/14/11, 4:21 PM
chickelit said...: Franglo said it's a matter of record that the Bush tax did not create jobs when they were implemented.

I'll call your bluff. I'm curious because it generally doesn't square with my own anecdotal evidence. There may have even been a mini-boom (followed of course by a bust). Just look at the employment trends in California-legal and illegal.

Perhaps what you're miffed about is Clinton not getting credit for his boom (which requires some blame too because the dot com bubble burst on his watch).

No, Obama is become dearth, destroyer of wealth.; 4/14/11, 4:40 PM
Dustin said...: "Hey, it's a matter of record: they didn't! "

No, it's not. That's absurd. That's like saying you have proof that exercise doesn't make you fit because you see exercise and you see fat people. It's utterly irrational to claim you've proven anything.

It's a simple fact that employers do not have infinite money and are near the top of the tax brackets, so they have less funds for investments of any kind, including jobs, if they are overtaxed. Sorry, but this argument is over, and you lost. I realize you know this, which is why you aren't putting any effort into it beyond announcing how everyone you disagree with is an evil liar, lol.

BTW, Obama promised me his recovery would lead to 6.5 unemployment today. I can prove his claims were incorrect.; 4/14/11, 4:41 PM
Sofa King said...: Hey, I hate being an, um, dose of sanity...but why can't everyone admit we need more tax AND spending cuts to get out of this mess? It makes a lot of sense to do both. Obama, for all his mighty liberal-ness, had a pretty good idea in the 3-to-1 cut v. tax ratio, I think.

You think so? I wonder why that wasn't part of his budget then?; 4/14/11, 4:42 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Franglo:
I seen to remember that 911 caused quite an economic dip. Bush enacted the tax cuts to help us us recover which we did until 2008 bank debacle.

And unemployment was about 5-6% thru most of his term.; 4/14/11, 4:43 PM
Anonymous said...: chicklit. when you say Obama destroys wealth, do you relate it to a particular policy of Obamas? Or just the idea that he's out to destroy America in general? Because 1) he kept the Bush tax cuts so far and 2) nothing in health care reform actually came into effect yet and 3) TARP made a profit and 4) HALF of the stimulus package was tax breaks.; 4/14/11, 4:44 PM
Dustin said...: "why can't everyone admit we need more tax AND spending cuts to get out of this mess?"

That's Paul Ryan's plan, isn't it? you do realize that the only thing it does for taxes is remove some tax breaks, right? To claim it renews some Bush tax cuts is just shilling, but it does actually increase tax.

I don't see a problem with a tax increase, but it would be quite stupid to limit it to a percent or two of taxpayers who happen to be the ones who also invest the most. If you're going to concentrate the taxes that way, not only do you do almost nothing for the deficit (40 billion a year in revenue) but you maximize the damage to the economy.

A tax hike on the middle class would make a much bigger dent in the deficit, and wouldn't be aimed directly at harming employment, but it's politically stupid, and we have very few patriots.

http://patterico.com/2011/04/14/president-obama-on-senator-obama-i-was-being-a-hack-when-i-voted-against-the-debt-limit/

Watch the video here: Obama admits he puts his own political needs ahead of America in surprisingly frank terms. So tax hike proposals will either by unserious, or they will be bashed like Paul Ryan's plans are (again, he proposes more tax revenue).; 4/14/11, 4:45 PM
Terrye said...: Alex,

My name is not asswad.

And my point is that not all Obama supporters are human debris. I did not vote for the man, but I do know some relatively decent people who did.

Maybe you should read what I write before you make a fool of yourself.; 4/14/11, 4:48 PM
chickelit said...: franglo said: chicklit. when you say Obama destroys wealth, do you relate it to a particular policy of Obamas?

His energy policy to be blunt. I think Steven Chu is a brilliant physicist, but he should not have been put in charge of DoE. But that's another topic.; 4/14/11, 4:54 PM
Unknown said...: Little Zero's base in rush's view is the true, hard-core Left and, yes, they do climax attacking Conservatives.

Remember how they got going after Dubya?

franglo said...

I think there should be a fail safe that states that our military spending can only be double the next FIVE largest armies combined, rather than the current FOURTEEN.

Deficit troubles solved

Yes, your Commie friends in the Kremlin pushed that one for how many decades?

Just unilaterally disarm and there will be World Peace. Glorious Soviet Union will take piece of Europe, piece of Middle East, piece of America...

Just disarm because the barbarians will love us then...

We ought to have a failsafe that, when Lefties lose touch with all reality, a lobotomy kicks in for them.; 4/14/11, 4:55 PM
Dose of Sanity said...: @ Sofa - Votes. Votes. Votes. See Walter Mondale.

@ Grand Inquistor - Ryan's plan does indeed tax and cut. As you correctly pointed out, increasing base or increasing rates - both increase revenue. I'm not entirely opposed to Ryan's plan either. It's a crisis people. We all need to do things we don't want. Yes. Medicare is on the table. Yes. Returning tax rates to pre-bush era are on the table. Yes. Defense...ya you get it.

Let's be reasonable. I'm mostly certain we can.; 4/14/11, 4:55 PM
Lombardi Chick said...: As a matter of fact, Ann Althouse, along with 64 million other Americans voted for Obama..I certainly don't think that makes her human debris.

I also wouldn't consider her Obama's "base". That's not who Rush is talking about, Terrye.; 4/14/11, 4:56 PM
Dustin said...: "
Let's be reasonable. I'm mostly certain we can."

Sure, we can. That's the tragedy. The answer is not even that painful. America will still be a great place if we put a bit of austerity on the federal government. Properous, even. We are headed into a serious crisis over a relatively easy to handle solution.

Ryan's plan doesn't have to be the plan we use, though it is a serious plan for which there aren't many competing alternatives (I will grant Bowles's is also a serious plan).

We are the worst generation if we face this minor challenge with high stakes and fail. The masses used to be willing to die for this Republic, and now we can't reform Medicare?; 4/14/11, 4:59 PM
Dustin said...: "

Maybe you should read what I write before you make a fool of yourself."

Maybe terrye should read Althouse's endorsement before she pretends Rush was criticizing her as human debris.

There are people worthy of that insult, so Terrye's defense that some people don't deserve it doesn't make any sense.

Not that I think terrye needs to be called asswad (nor do I think she should care that she was called one). I just think her argument was lazy, and she knows she goofed, and should just admit Rush is right.

Of course a lot of people do not delight in Obama's recent rhetoric, but some do, and they suck.; 4/14/11, 5:02 PM
Dose of Sanity said...: @ Grand - No doubt. I like Obama's plan (such as it is), I like bowles-simpson plan, and hell I even like Ryan's plan. (I can't go along with the Paul plan though)

Too many people hear "Republican plan" and go 'no i dont like that' and vice versa. It's a pity the media has incentive to fuel that, and politicians have incentive to attack the other side.

Aw well - have faith, I guess.; 4/14/11, 5:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Grand Inquisitor-- Rush is right??! Obama's base is "human debris"?

OK, the only fitting response is...

Go fawk yuhsself!! From the bottom of my heart. Dick.

calling other people you disagree with human debris = not a recipe for a reasonable conversation; 4/14/11, 5:08 PM
Dose of Sanity said...: Human Debris is a strange phrase anyway. Does it mean we are what's left when you break humanity down? Are we a pile of rocks?

Too vague to be insulting, really.; 4/14/11, 5:14 PM
chickelit said...: Dose of Sanity said...
Human Debris is a strange phrase anyway. Does it mean we are what's left when you break humanity down? Are we a pile of rocks?

Too vague to be insulting, really.

Perhaps he should have said "human detritus" but even that's weak. All the best curse words are anglo-saxon. For good reason; 4/14/11, 5:25 PM
Lombardi Chick said...: calling other people you disagree with human debris = not a recipe for a reasonable conversation

Certainly not - but you should see what people on the left call conservatives.

Oh wait. You probably have.; 4/14/11, 5:35 PM
Dustin said...: "
calling other people you disagree with human debris = not a recipe for a reasonable conversation"

Ha!

And yet I'm allowing that many people who supported Obama are not in this category.

If you were one of targets of Obama's speech's demagoguery or lying or fear mongering or unserious counter-proposal, yes, you're trash.

Why? Because that rhetoric won't work for honest people who have bothered to pay attention to Ryan's plan or America's problem, or especially Obama's own record on this specific issue. It just won't work. It only works with bitter shills who ignore the facts and enjoy a good bashing of the Republican bad-guy.

Of course you're cussing at me. You're trash. I don't care that yet another loser on the internet has something ugly to say when faced with an actual argument.

Obama has already condemned himself, BTW. "And so that was just a example of a new Senator, you know, making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country."

No serious democrats who have paid attention to Obama support him more for the way that speech was argued. Only the trash who could care less.

Rush is right! Attempting to shut down a reasonable analysis of the hard left is not going to work.; 4/14/11, 5:37 PM
mesquito said...: Spend more that two minutes at a hate site like Daily Kos and then tell me Rush is wrong.; 4/14/11, 5:38 PM
Dose of Sanity said...: I am throughly enjoying hearing Obama called a fear-mongerer and liar, while lauding Rush.

Carry on.; 4/14/11, 5:42 PM
Dustin said...: "Spend more that two minutes at a hate site like Daily Kos and then tell me Rush is wrong."

Or just look at the absolutely insane reaction I got here, in place of an argument, from someone who has no idea what Rush was saying in the first place.

Of course Obama can motivate these people with brainless attacks and fear. They welcome the opportunity to turn their brains off, and everyone who isn't condemning Obama's spending today is fundamentally failing our country.

Sure, some might say they prefer Obama for other reasons, and don't trust the GOP anyway, but it's not possible to support Obama's spending policy. Even Obama has condemned his own POV. It's sheer politics.; 4/14/11, 5:47 PM
Unknown said...: franglo said...

Grand Inquisitor-- Rush is right??! Obama's base is "human debris"?

OK, the only fitting response is...

Go fawk yuhsself!! From the bottom of my heart. Dick.

calling other people you disagree with human debris = not a recipe for a reasonable conversation

And, out of his own foul mouth, franglo vindicates Rush and GI.; 4/14/11, 5:52 PM
Anonymous said...: "If Obama wins again, I'd blame the republicans for being lame."

What people don't realzie is that Barack Obama has been the best Republican President since Ronald Reagan.

Jesus Christ ... short of actually fucking shooting Nancy Pelosi in the forehead, Barack Obama has been a Republican wet dream.

He's launched yet a third war.
He's re-upped the Patriot Act.
He's thrown gays in the military under the tanks.
He's extended the lease on the gulag at Gitmo.
He's restarted the show trials there.
He's killed more Muslims that Osama bin Laden.
He's refloated Wall Street with HUGE bonuses and salaries.
He's fucked over homeowners and let the banks skip their haircuts.
He's Exxon's BFF by refusing to let anyone drill for oil.
He's torturing terrorists (only you don't know it yet because the media is hiding that from you until after the 2012 election).
He extended the Bush tax cuts and is now calling for tax increases on the middle class.

My God. I mean, he'd have to fucking hang Harry Reid from the Senate rafters to be a better Republican.; 4/14/11, 5:53 PM
Dose of Sanity said...: Everyone ignores the fact I'm clearly part of Obama's base.

Shame!; 4/14/11, 5:53 PM
Dose of Sanity said...: @ Ut

Hey, it's okay to step off the crazy-train every once and awhile.; 4/14/11, 5:54 PM
Phil 314 said...: A prime example of why I don't listen to Limbaugh

(good for rating though); 4/14/11, 5:56 PM
Brian Brown said...: franglo said...

These rich SOB's really go to the mat when there's talk of ending the Bush tax breaks

The Obama tax cuts do not have any effect on someone like Rush.

The fact that you believe they do demonstrates an economic ignorance that is astounding.; 4/14/11, 6:03 PM
Brian Brown said...: franglo said...

You guys seem to think the budget and the deficit are the same thing.

Uh, not really, but you're rather incoherent.

Exhibit A of the financial wizardry of conservatives, who gifted the nation its current deficit woes with 1)the Bush tax breaks

Actually, after the Bush tax cuts were enacted, the deficit declined.

Further, Obama now owns those tax cuts, clown.; 4/14/11, 6:06 PM
Scott M said...: 4) HALF of the stimulus package was tax breaks.

Now we know you are regurgitating talking points. This exact same claim has been made here by our resident left-leaners before. Only Garage had the decency to admit it's wrong. It's right around 37%.

Get your facts straight.; 4/14/11, 6:07 PM
Phil 314 said...: DOS;
but why can't everyone admit we need more tax AND spending cuts to get out of this mess?

I'd consider that once congress and the administration demonstrate a consistent ability to reduce expenses. Not targets; not task forces; not reductions on rate of increases but honest to God decreases. And not just one but several.

Once they've mastered that then we can talk. Otherwise we're back into the "Pay as you Go" morass. I want us to stop "going" for away before I have to "pay".; 4/14/11, 6:08 PM
Dustin said...: Dose of Sanity, you don't seem like the people Rush is condemning in the harshest terms to me, and I'm pretty sure he'd agree. I'm sure he'd have some other, more clever, insult for you, since you want to help the budget but call yourself Obama's base (and indeed, you support his fairly detail free plan).

But still, you're willing to give Ryan's plan a fair look, so there's no way you're the hardcore left that Obama targeted with his partisan demagoguery, in my opinion.

Rush is only insulting Obama's target as an avenue of illustrating what was wrong with Obama's speech. It's an attempt to rally a core, rather than win the middle, or by no means win over the other side. It's so far from Bush levels of political success, IMO.

It tells us what to expect in the future, which to people like you and me, who are more interested in a solution than either side 'winning' is pretty important.; 4/14/11, 7:23 PM
roesch-voltaire said...: This must be another example of what Althouse calls Rush's deep, pushing the edge thought about political issues-- more like pushing them into the gutter.; 4/14/11, 7:24 PM
Dustin said...: "This must be another example of what Althouse calls Rush's deep, pushing the edge thought about political issues"

It was insightful, even if the shoe fits a little too well for your tastes.

Knowing why Obama said the crazy stuff he did helps. It's pretty clear that Obama wasn't talking to the moderates... he was talking about the moderates to try to prove himself to the hard left. We can use this information to better gauge his political strength, and how far we can go in future political battles. Frankly, this shows that the GOP made a mistake not pushing for a shutdown, if Obama is this politically weak.

I guess Rush has to lay it all out more plainly, but the thing is that he usually does.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2011/04/president-barack-obama-exclusive-concedes-senate-vote-against-raising-debt-limit-political.html

Just read it and weep. Obama places politics first, country second.; 4/14/11, 7:41 PM
Michael said...: UT: You have it mostly right but a Republican would have gotten the drilling going. Also the government doesn't pay bonuses to Wall Street. Other than that you have it mostly correct. By the way, any president of any party would have done most of these things excluding starting the Libyan war. Because once in place most of these things had to be done. Anyone not swayed by Obama's bullshit at the outset had the opinion that if he won he would not quit Gitmo, would not cease torture, would not cease rendition, would vote to bail out the banks and so on. Thanks for the list.; 4/14/11, 7:49 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: Before I read even one of the 106 comments that precede this one, let me just say that my experience is that progressives do seem to revel in attacking anyone who is not a dedicated progressive, and not just conservatives.; 4/14/11, 8:01 PM
bagoh20 said...: This realignment - and I hope it's much more than that - depends entirely on us, not some Republican politicians. They only do what they are forced to. Easy compromise is their natural condition. They will not overachieve, never have, never will. This is our challenge - they are just the board markers. Keep pushing - it's gonna be a long game.; 4/14/11, 8:22 PM
DADvocate said...: ...short of actually fucking shooting Nancy Pelosi in the forehead, Barack Obama has been a Republican wet dream.

Whether you agree with it or not, this is the best line I've heard in a long time.; 4/14/11, 8:23 PM
DADvocate said...: A lot of people in Obama's base are just life long Democrats who have a knee jerk affinity for the guy with the D behind his name.

In other words, mindless zombies.; 4/14/11, 8:26 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: That's about as intelligent a comment as I expect from the raving fatass.; 4/14/11, 8:46 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Leftards are nothing but. Their ideology kills, maims, and destroys. Destroys peoples lives, destroys liberty, freedom, standards of living, and individuality. I don't think the word 'savage' comes close to what I would describe this cadre as being.

And yet, the raving fuckface of a lunatic who wrote this can't seem to get his ass to move from the leftest of coasts into a "red state".; 4/14/11, 8:47 PM
bagoh20 said...: "but why can't everyone admit we need more tax AND spending cuts to get out of this mess? "

Because the problem is entirely one of overspending.

It has outstripped everything else: peoples income, federal revenues at any tax rate, GDP and every fantasy of growth ever imagined by wishful thinkers over the decades.

Are these some new breed of politicians with the purse this time.

If you lived with a compulsive spender and were going broke because you only make 29% more than you used to, but they are spending 242% more than they used to, would you get a second job or cut them off.

Chart: Federal Spending versus Median Income; 4/14/11, 8:47 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: "As a matter of fact, Ann Althouse, along with 64 million other Americans voted for Obama..I certainly don't think that makes her human debris."

I also wouldn't consider her Obama's "base". That's not who Rush is talking about, Terrye.

Lol. Althouse is just easily swayed by superstardom. (Here's a less charitable choice of word). But then, who on the right-wing isn't these days? The difference is that she tell a real superstar from the phony superstars.; 4/14/11, 8:53 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: but why can't everyone admit we need more tax AND spending cuts to get out of this mess?

From my perspective, it is because:
(1) I really cannot afford to pay more than I am now,
(2) And history has shown that whenever we do a combined approach of cutting spending while raising taxes, we get real tax hikes and fake spending cuts.

I'd prefer us to leave taxes completely alone (other than simplifying the tax code), get spending fixed, and then we can revisit taxes. Prove to me the spending side, the 3 side in your equation, can happen before we do the tax side, the 1 side in your equation. Hell, we do this, and in a few years I might even go for the 1 side being a 1 1/2 side or a 2 side.

Or, we might not even need it to be 1.; 4/14/11, 9:01 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: And yet, the raving fuckface of a lunatic

You just had the orgasm Rush predicted, didn't you?; 4/14/11, 9:03 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Enough of the bullshit. Bush wanted deficits. Republicans wanted deficits. When they found out how bad the shortfall would be, just in 2001, they remarked how wonderful it is. The Republican strategy (not that they can differentiate tactics from strategy, but bear with me) was to "kill the beast". Once deficits got bad enough to put us into a fiscal crisis, then they could take out their saber and kill off every social program required to keep the elderly and poor from dying in the streets.

Problem is, they got the fiscal crisis they so sorely desired, and now Obama's finally figuring out that the elderly don't want to give up their SSI and Medicare so that rich people can have as big a tax break.

These cons here are either too stupid or too disingenuous to know it or admit it, but that was the plan and now -- they think -- is their moment. That's really what they think and it's why Seven Machos and a few others shamelessly rejoiced in winning the midterms on nothing but the timing of The Great Republican't Recession. It's important for every dissenter to know that this REALLY IS what they want.

I think they will painfully find out that it will not lead them to their fantasy of what the structure of government and society should look like. In their tiny hearts they think and dream of Diff'rent Strokes or Leave it to Beaver but look out their windows to find The Road Warrior.; 4/14/11, 9:04 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: You just had the orgasm Rush predicted, didn't you?

Do you jerk yourself off with moistened hundred dollar bills? Do you listen to Rush when you do it?; 4/14/11, 9:07 PM
Sprezzatura said...: "I think they will painfully find out that it will not lead them to their fantasy of what the structure of government and society should look like."

I listened to a bunch of the professional conservatives, and they all seemed extremely defensive, they're scared. IMHO, they're worried that BHO is going to be able to shred the Ryan plan (and anyone who votes to support it.) [The BHO plan and the Debt Commission Plan may be more popular solutions than the lame Ryan plan which takes twenty six years (according to Rand P, who I heard on the radio) to balance the budget.]

It's not so much fun when the death panel shoe is on the other foot.; 4/14/11, 9:23 PM
bagoh20 said...: "The Great Republican't Recession"

Hey if you need to see it that way, fine. Let's stop those fucking Republicans and their Democrat toadies from spending us into disaster. Are you with us Ritmo? We'll get them. We'll get them all, unless they cut cut cut! Hell we'll get them after they cut, just as payback. Right on dude. Welcome aboard.; 4/14/11, 9:33 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: I listened to a bunch of the professional conservatives, and they all seemed extremely defensive, they're scared. IMHO, they're worried that BHO is going to be able to shred the Ryan plan (and anyone who votes to support it.)

It's hard to understand why more of this wasn't done consistently from the start, but I'll leave it to others and the eventual outcome to judge.

OTOH, as much as he praised Ryan years back for at least being serious (as opposed to the Rs who for years shut up about their real intentions), it was interesting to see him seated front and center for the conference while he derided the plan as immoral and un-American.

Some people said this was intentional, to get back at these Republicans for always finding a way to talk shit about Obama behind his back while never having the courage to say to his face the insulting trash talk that they have been paying and egging on others to say for them.; 4/14/11, 9:34 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Right Bag. Just like the Republican'ts, I was really "pro-deficit" until now. Whatever.

This whole deficit stuff is your guys' thing. Just admit it. The left never had an agenda to bankrupt the government. Clinton didn't turn surpluses into deficits.; 4/14/11, 9:37 PM
Fen said...: Libtard: I think there should be a fail safe that states that our military spending can only be double the next FIVE largest armies combined, rather than the current FOURTEEN. Deficit troubles solved.

Uh-huh. Please stay away from all matters defense and foreign policy related. You don't have the first clue and you'll get good people killed.; 4/14/11, 9:41 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/14/11, 9:45 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: Do you jerk yourself off with moistened hundred dollar bills? Do you listen to Rush when you do it?

And, you just followed it with the orgasm I predicted.

Predictably boring progressive pissant is predictable and boring.

Would certainly love to hear you try to guess my politics. I'll spot you part of it-- I reject Marx. Since that puts me square with 90% of the country, I am not giving much away. And I have already said that I reject the acidic and moronic progressivism of hate that some, like you, possess, so that helps narrow it down...practically not at all, since the overlap between the two exclusions is nearly 100%.

But go ahead, tell me the rest. Let's see how clever you are.; 4/14/11, 9:49 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Yep. That's why (not Saddam margins like 90%, but) such a large percentage of the country will tell you to take a flying fuck for trying to destroy their Social Security and Medicare. Because they're "Marxists"! Lol.

But at least you've got your enemies list narrowed down. All evil in the world for all time for ever more and since before The Good Lord created the Heavens and Earth is attributed to Marx.

And Muslims.

And Jews (except if their name isn't GEORGE SOROS... and, oh yeah KARL MARX).

The elderly and poor must be thrown under the bus as a burnt offering to prevent The Lord from sending us his anti-Christ: Karl Marx.

Thank you for explicating the derivation of your loving Gospel of Hate for the elderly and poor. It was most edifying.

An orgy of hatred you nest in.; 4/14/11, 9:53 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Of course, it isn't "predictable" and "boring" to attribute everything you don't like about politics to KARL MARX, but ENIGMATIC, and MYSTIFYING.

So ENIGMATIC. I COULDN'T HAVE PREDICTED IT FROM MILES AWAY...; 4/14/11, 9:56 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: So let's cut to the chase, enigmatic guy. You follow the right-wing, starve the beast ideology and yet you're not rich or fixated on wealth for its own sake, but middle class or poor!?!?

Hahahhhahahhhahahahaaaahahahahaaaaa.; 4/14/11, 9:59 PM
bagoh20 said...: "This whole deficit stuff is your guys' thing."

OK, we're sorry. Now let's fix it. We'll submit to your firing squad after. Right now, we can't afford the bullets. I feel so close to you now that you have identified yourself clearly as a deficit hawk, or do I misunderstand you?; 4/14/11, 10:00 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Why guess? I'm sure whatever your feelings about politics, you didn't put much of any thought or understanding into them.; 4/14/11, 10:01 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Waterbag Guy:

I am disappointed. You seem like a genial, well-meaning guy, and yet for as much time as you spend talking your feelings regarding the political economy, you don't seem to have picked up on the fact that Obama's plan reduces the deficit and debt more quickly than anything the Republicans presented.

Was it the part about not throwing the elderly and poor under the bus that threw you off?

I'm just not understanding why you assume that this isn't in-line with what you say you want. Not only in-line, but does it better. And quicker.

Were you holding out for harder?; 4/14/11, 10:05 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: Hmm. So I see you picked up on the fact that I said that 90% of the country rejects Marx, and extrapolated that out into total incoherence, combined with red herrings and utter nonsense.

Let's see your guesses on the following:

What are my views on government spending?
What are my views on prison reform?
What are my views on drug legalization?
What are my views on taxes?
What are my views in regards to euthanasia?
What are my views about flaming douchebags, such as yourself (ok, this one is easy)?
Who did I support in the last Presidential race (including primaries)?
Who, that is currently running for President, do I support?
Who, that ran for President last time and is likely to do so again, am I opposed to the most?

I bet you get no more than 2 of the questions above correct.

Yet, I was able to predict accurately that people of the mode Limbaugh was talking about, such as yourself, don't get off on attacking conservatives, but rather on attacking anyone who is insufficiently progressive.

Fuck you very much, predictable jerkwad.; 4/14/11, 10:05 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/14/11, 10:15 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Anyone who refuses to see that Limblown is as irrelevant, unserious and unhelpful to discussions on politics as is Karl Marx (a guy who died over a hundred years ago) is not worth addressing further.

I'm sure your views on any one of those topics is just as boring and predictable as an editorial in USA Today.

It's not that I don't appreciate the tight rope that you milquetoasts of stripes determined or undetermined walk. It's that you define the poles you pretend to navigate based on what other people, usually insanely partisan people have erected.

It would be nice if self-described political independents had not only thoughts of their own, but a coherent set of ideas. Unfortunately, they tend not to.

That's not to say partisans do, either. But it's bullshit to say that just because someone calls himself independent, that he's any more independent-minded than the partisans. The difference is that his ideas are too watered-down, inoffensive, and bland to make much of a difference. No leadership required.; 4/14/11, 10:17 PM
Roger J. said...: I think Ritmo has quite effectively defined "independents."; 4/14/11, 10:28 PM
Trooper York said...: I don't know but sometimes I feel like the President is Lashonda Armstrong and we are all strapped into the car seat.; 4/14/11, 10:34 PM
bagoh20 said...: "Obama's plan reduces the deficit and debt more quickly than anything the Republicans presented. "

So you are in favor of cutting the deficit. Good. I don't care whose plan you think is gonna cut it more, neither cuts it enough to reverse what our deficit cutting President has manged to rack up in two years and lock in forever. The house in on fire and you are arguing that the jigger of water you like is better than the shot glass the GOP brought.

I know you aren't really serious about cutting anything, except conservative influence, and none of your posturing, or that of your Chief Poseur is convincing anyone. Just like him, you had no interest in cutting until forced to, and now it's all about jumping in the driver's seat of that car as it gets pulled out of the ditch so you can slow it down and later steer it right back in. For you guys, It's about being the driver more than where it goes.; 4/14/11, 10:34 PM
Trooper York said...: Wait was that too soon?

Sorry.; 4/14/11, 10:34 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: Anyone who refuses to see that Limblown is as irrelevant, unserious and unhelpful to discussions on politics as is Karl Marx

Who would this anyone be? Have I expressed an opinion on Limbaugh, other than commenting that the idea of his that Althouse posted here, that progressives get off on their hate of conservatives, is correct yet insufficiently broad?

I'm sure your views on any one of those topics is just as boring and predictable as an editorial in USA Today.

So sure, that you are positive that you disagree with them, despite having no clue with what they are. Your own views must be really the fuck out there for you to have that kind of perspective.

It's not that I don't appreciate the tight rope that you milquetoasts of stripes determined or undetermined walk.

I am an educated man, but I am not familiar with the tight rope walking qualities of undetermined milquetoasts. I am confident you can edify us all, in a typically entertaining fashion? So far, it has been highly amusing watching your performance so far.

It's that you define the poles you pretend to navigate based on what other people, usually insanely partisan people have erected.

If I pretend to navigate, I assure you it will be in part based on what insanely partisan people like you have erected.

It would be nice if self-described political independents had not only thoughts of their own, but a coherent set of ideas.

I do. You couldn't care less to find out about them. You are too busy attacking, and I am too disdainful of your types to spoon feed them to you.

Unfortunately, they tend not to.

I can see how you would think that about "they". How would you ever know if they actually are possibly as smart, or *gasp* smarter than you, unless you tried to hear them out?

That's not to say partisans do, either. But it's bullshit to say that just because someone calls himself independent, that he's any more independent-minded than the partisans.

You jump to a lot of assumptions, by the way. Am I independent?

You get one point though. I am pretty certain I am more independent-minded than you, just based on the partisan attack-dog style you have on these threads. So you got at least one inference correct! Good for you!

The difference is that his ideas are too watered-down, inoffensive, and bland to make much of a difference. No leadership required.

To make a difference, an idea must be offensive, in your eyes?

Watered-down ideas never can make a difference?

Bland ideas never can make a difference?

You say a whole lot, based on assumptions and generalizations which you cannot substantiate. Do you think this helps, or hurts, the progressive cause? Stipulate, for a second, that it hurts the progressive cause. Who would be more likely to get pissed at you? Your enemies, or those who think your approach is counter-productive to the cause?; 4/14/11, 10:38 PM
Roger J. said...: Trooper--please dont make me google lashonda whats her name

I am an old guy--fill me in; 4/14/11, 10:38 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Thanks for trying to turn it around and make it about me and Obama personally (I called him up earlier in fact just to talk strategy) and the left generally, Waterbag. I'll take that as a sign of guilt on your part for not doing more when it counted to call out fellow Republicans for believing that intentionally precipitating a crisis (before Obama did anything) was the best way to cut social programs (their over-riding goal).

Roger (10:28): Thanks. I'll assume you meant that sincerely and bookmark this thread as containing another one of my golden oldies.; 4/14/11, 10:39 PM
Roger J. said...: Ritmo--credit where credit is due--meant sincerely, no need to assume; 4/14/11, 10:41 PM
bagoh20 said...: Ritmo, anyone who thinks that neither Rush or Marx is important in all this must have been on a hell of bender for some time. I don't subscribe to either of them, but a hell of a lot of important people do, and they are making our decisions. But you really just want to say you don't like Rush. Just say that. You know what? He is really really rich, has a hot wife, loves his job and has the ear and admiration of millions. That has got to just kill you inside. Of course, Marx does have the admiration of millions too. So you got that.; 4/14/11, 10:44 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Have I expressed an opinion on Limbaugh, other than commenting that the idea of his that Althouse posted here, that progressives get off on their hate of conservatives, is correct yet insufficiently broad?

To take him seriously enough to try to find the needle of supposed truth in his haystack of melodramatic bullshit means that you have at least as much respect for this modern-day Marx of the Right as anyone nowadays has for the real thing. The fact that he is mostly about excess doesn't concern you enough.

The rest of what you say is just predictable deflection and still manages to take a stand on nothing. But at least you're trying to play along and fisk it bit by bit.

But why do even that? If the whole point is to recuse yourself of having a discernible opinion (or at least hide what it is on anything of consequence), you are ultimately agreeing with exactly everything I said, to which you responded, on "independents", earlier in the thread.

Pointless. Yes, you are one of the masses and you vote and yet you bravely, miraculously refuse to be defined. I get it. Thanks for the marketing research backgrounder.; 4/14/11, 10:47 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: But you really just want to say you don't like Rush. Just say that. You know what? He is really really rich, has a hot wife, loves his job and has the ear and admiration of millions. That has got to just kill you inside.

Please quit projecting your envy and love of class warfare onto me, Waterbag. Just stop it.; 4/14/11, 10:50 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Have I expressed an opinion on Limbaugh, other than commenting that the idea of his that Althouse posted here, that progressives get off on their hate of conservatives, is correct yet insufficiently broad?

To take him seriously enough to try to find the needle of supposed truth in his haystack of melodramatic bullshit means that you have at least as much respect for this modern-day Marx of the Right as anyone nowadays has for the real thing. The fact that he is mostly about excess doesn't concern you enough.

The rest of what you say is just predictable deflection and still manages to take a stand on nothing. But at least you're trying to play along and fisk it bit by bit.

But why do even that? If the whole point is to recuse yourself of having a discernible opinion (or at least hide what it is on anything of consequence), you are ultimately agreeing with exactly everything I said, to which you responded, on "independents", earlier in the thread.

Pointless. Yes, you are one of the masses and you vote and yet you bravely, miraculously refuse to be defined. I get it. Thanks for the marketing research backgrounder.; 4/14/11, 10:52 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: For some reason, Blogger keeps eating this comment:

Have I expressed an opinion on Limbaugh, other than commenting that the idea of his that Althouse posted here, that progressives get off on their hate of conservatives, is correct yet insufficiently broad?

To take him seriously enough to try to find the needle of supposed truth in his haystack of melodramatic bullshit means that you have at least as much respect for this modern-day Marx of the Right as anyone nowadays has for the real thing. The fact that he is mostly about excess doesn't concern you enough.

The rest of what you say is just predictable deflection and still manages to take a stand on nothing. But at least you're trying to play along and fisk it bit by bit.

But why do even that? If the whole point is to recuse yourself of having a discernible opinion (or at least hide what it is on anything of consequence), you are ultimately agreeing with exactly everything I said, to which you responded, on "independents", earlier in the thread.

Pointless. Yes, you are one of the masses and you vote and yet you bravely, miraculously refuse to be defined. I get it. Thanks for the marketing research backgrounder.; 4/14/11, 10:53 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/14/11, 10:54 PM
Trooper York said...: Trust me you don't want to know Roger.; 4/14/11, 11:01 PM
bagoh20 said...: Oh, I do envy - and I can admit it, because when it comes to warfare, "it's good to be the king" and Rush is King.; 4/14/11, 11:02 PM
Roger J. said...: Troop: will take you at your word; 4/14/11, 11:02 PM
Michael K said...: These rich SOB's really go to the mat when there's talk of ending the Bush tax breaks. If they expire, Rush may not be able to afford his 600th Bentley next year, god forbid.

Perfect example. I can leave now.; 4/14/11, 11:09 PM
AlanKH said...: A leftist is someone who blames vampire menaces on the insufficiently bitten.; 4/15/11, 12:11 AM
sarge said...: sarge here obama has a base?
har har har...you althouse denizens is obamas base; 4/15/11, 5:00 AM
sarge said...: 'Leftards are nothing but. Their ideology kills, maims, and destroys. Destroys peoples lives, destroys liberty, freedom, standards of living, and individuality. I don't think the word 'savage' comes close to what I would describe this cadre as being"

sarge here good lord man yer idiocy is of thar highest order sarge has decided yar must be a libtard workin the so called reverse phycholgy on these here liliputians...er althousians; 4/15/11, 5:05 AM
Brian Brown said...: Conservatives 4 Better Dental Hygiene said...

Enough of the bullshit. Bush wanted deficits. Republicans wanted deficits. When they found out how bad the shortfall would be, just in 2001, they remarked how wonderful it is.

Actually, you're entirely incorrect.

But hey, it isn't the first time, clown.; 4/15/11, 5:53 AM
Brian Brown said...: Obama's plan reduces the deficit and debt more quickly than anything the Republicans presented.

Laugh out loud funny.

You really have gone off the deep end. I guess the mere mention of Rush does that to you silly, delicate, bozos...; 4/15/11, 5:55 AM
Brian Brown said...: This whole deficit stuff is your guys' thing. Just admit it. The left never had an agenda to bankrupt the government

Is that why the Democrats, led by Obama, presided over the largest deficits in the history of America?

Watching your silly poo flinging is boring.

Do you enjoy being so stupid?; 4/15/11, 5:56 AM
Brian Brown said...: Obama's plan reduces the deficit and debt more quickly than anything the Republicans presented.

Actually, Obama's plan doesn't reduce the debt at all.

But hey, facts really aren't your strong suit are they?; 4/15/11, 5:57 AM
Brian Brown said...: This whole deficit stuff is your guys' thing. Just admit it. The left never had an agenda to bankrupt the government

Here is the news from 10/12/2006:

Federal deficit now lowest in 4 years
The administration said the deficit dropped to $247.7 billion.
The deficit narrowed sharply because revenues climbed by 11.8%

Note that under the Obama regime, the federal government is spending$4.63 billion per week just to finance the debt.

You have beclowned yourself yet again.; 4/15/11, 6:06 AM
Brian Brown said...: FY 2006 Deficit under Bush:
$247.7 billion

Under Obama:
$240.6 billion per year just to finance the debt.

But go on pretending the deficits are some sort of Republican thing, bozo.; 4/15/11, 6:07 AM
EnigmatiCore said...: You follow the right-wing, starve the beast ideology

I do?

Not trusting cuts to happen is wanting to starve the beast? I am more concerned with preventing the beast from eating me and my family.

You are a whack job.; 4/15/11, 6:21 AM
EnigmatiCore said...: In summary:
* A fairly substantial portion of progressives attack anyone who is not in lock-step with them
* The overwhelming majority of remaining progressives remain silent whenever it happens
* The rabid, hateful progressives believe that anyone who thinks spending must be constrained, and is tired of being asked to pay more in taxes while spending explodes, is an evil tea-bagging racist right-wing monster.

Is it any surprise, given this, that people like me are finding themselves more likely to vote Republican next time?

But don't lose faith, progressives. I've been around the block a few times. I have no doubt the Republicans will do something silly like nominate a complete and utter phony like Trump, Huckabee, or Romney or the sincere (and sincerely misguided) Santorum, and will put my vote up in the air again...; 4/15/11, 6:38 AM
master cylinder said...: Hey! what happened to "deficits don"t matter"?
Weird.; 4/15/11, 8:48 AM
Roger J. said...: ummmm--Mr Obama doesnt have a plan--unless you count platitudinous bull shit and yet another commission--all he did was deliver his opening stump speech--please please some lefty show me the details of his plan

Jug ears is a loser; 4/15/11, 9:12 AM
Toad Trend said...: Looks like there was a good row to be had last nite/this a.m. on this thread. Jay again does an outstanding job of setting the record straight and administering verbal justice.

"That's what they love. That's what they get off on. That's their orgasm."

Well, OK. The frequent use of the 'class envy' card by the left would naturally be translated as red meat for the base.

Lather, rinse, repeat.; 4/15/11, 11:42 AM
riceroni said...: Lush Limpbaugh is an entertainer who pander to his mentally deficient base of far-right troglodytes. Most of these fucking morons who spew their bullshit talking point insults like "socialism" "Marxist" "Communism" haven't a clue what any of them are. The plutocratic corporatist have mindfucked these idiotic drones into thinking that funneling more to the top 2% at the expense of further impoverishing the middle/working class and working poor is actually good for them. Any working person who punch a clock everyday and vote Republican thus committing self induced financial suicide should just fucking do the world a favor and kill themselves. Fucktarded neocon morons.; 8/5/11, 7:17 PM