Whacko Republican gets owned by Markos

[Pardalis]

Rush is fat because he is lazy and self-indulgent. Why am I supposed to have empathy for that?

Or maybe he has a slow metabolism. Should we have a go at Michael Moore?

It's a self-inflicted disability.

His wiki page says it is not.

Rush had no empathy when Jerry Garcia, a far more worthwhile person, died of an O.D., so why should I feel sorry for the pig man?

So?

They should be hospitalized and treated, not buillt up as pundits or elected to public office.

Again, self-nflicted. (This is assuming that Rush was really that much of a man before he drugged himself into impotency. I have reasons to doubt that he was ever much of a role model for the American man.)

But to use this as a way to make character assassination is very low.

Should we talk about Markos' effeminate speech pattern? Is that he level of argument you want to have?

Where did THAT come from?

Your constant use of the words "wussy boy", your constant referring to the male genitalia, and your constant urge for your opponent to be a "real man".

 

[leftysergeant]

Or maybe he has a slow metabolism. Should we have a go at Michael Moore?

I never said I thought Moore was any kind of super stud. I haven't even watched any of his movies. I have no opinion of him.

His wiki page says it is not.

Fans of the pig man have a lot of input into that. Fact is that he damaged his nervous system with the hillbilly heroin.

So?

So he is an insensitive clod and not worthy of my sympathy for his addiction.

But to use this as a way to make character assassination is very low.

Just pointing out that he is not mentally up to the task of leadership, nor a trustworthy source of information.

Then there is the fact that he appears to have personality flaws beyond his illness.

Should we talk about Markos' effeminate speech pattern?

Why?

Your constant use of the words "wussy boy", your constant referring to the male genitalia, and your constant urge for your opponent to be a "real man".

By a real man, I mean mature and responsible. Markos meets that standard. He was tried and proven in an environment that most Republicans in office right now avoid like a hornet's nest.

I use the term "wussy boy" to denote a male who just never grew up and learned to function in a responsible manner or to display any particular virtue or courage. That goes for both the Rushblob and Tancredo. Barney Frank is more of a man than either of them.

The Rushblob brought the referrences to his sexual dysfunction on himself, what with the serial failures at marriage and the bottle of somebody else's puffy pills in his tackle box.

 

[SezMe]

You're getting baited into being a fool here lefty. Why not just shut up?

 

[leftysergeant]

You're getting baited into being a fool here lefty. Why not just shut up?

Kind of like why I do what I do when I run into a really dense twoofer.

 

[GreNME]

So let me get this straight: If I ask one veteran--Markos Moulitsas--about his opinions as a veteran, and Tom Tancredo asks scores of veterans about their opinions as veterans, and then Tom and I compare notes, it's reasonable to assume that I will have a better idea of what veterans' opinions actually are than Tom will?

Considering Tancredo was pulling information from his keister and selling it as objective data, Moulitsas was really just putting the discussion back on topic and decided to stick a jab in there on the "veterans say" shtick Tancredo was trying to pull. The point he makes after Tancredo's drama queen moment was probably the most germane to the discussion that was being attempted as opposed to the one Tancredo kept trying to make it.

That said, LeftySarge, you really should stand down on the venom, dude. Take it from me-- someone who has no problem with not pulling punches sometimes-- you're taking it way over the line.

 

[Cobalt]

By a real man, I mean mature and responsible. Markos meets that standard. He was tried and proven in an environment that most Republicans in office right now avoid like a hornet's nest.

I use the term "wussy boy" to denote a male who just never grew up and learned to function in a responsible manner or to display any particular virtue or courage. That goes for both the Rushblob and Tancredo. Barney Frank is more of a man than either of them.

The Rushblob brought the referrences to his sexual dysfunction on himself, what with the serial failures at marriage and the bottle of somebody else's puffy pills in his tackle box.

 

[Ladewig]

YOu began by saying

Tancredo was a pro-war activist in college, but managed to get a 1-Y deferrment on the basis of depression. (And he still managed to survive running for public office? Hmmm.......)

To which I replied

Isn't it rather obvious that running for public office is orders of magnitude easier than serving in the military?

And then you said "Not if you do it right." which you then went on to describe as:

Being a good public servant requires imagination and organizational skills and an ability to empathize with the people one serves. It takes courage and self-discipline.

Military service is a good preparation for running for public office. This is one of the reasons I expect to see Democratic gains in Congress in the near term. Lots of veterans are coming back and running as Dems.

First off, we wern't talking about being a good public servant, we were talking about being healthy enough to run for public office. The issue was how could Tancredo be sick enough to not be in the miltary and be well enough to run for office. Secondly, while I agree that military service can be very good preparation for running for office, I still maintain that serving in the military is orders of magnitude harder than running for public office. Making split second decisions that can affect the lives a dozen or more people while under fire is nothing like making speeches, debating one's opponent, and shaking hands.

ETA: Again, I want to say that I am more liberal than conservative, but your hatred for Tancredo is making you say things that are hard to defend.

 

[leftysergeant]

First off, we wern't talking about being a good public servant, we were talking about being healthy enough to run for public office. The issue was how could Tancredo be sick enough to not be in the miltary and be well enough to run for office.

My point is that he sucked as a congress critter and now you know why. He's a lying lunatic, and more people than just I noticed it.

 

[Ladewig]

I think I am done with this thread. Bye, all.

 

[gtc]

And Tancredo is known to have mental issues.

He has no military experience because of a supposed mental defect. So in Tancredo's case, his disagreement with me and with Kos is the result of a defect or several.

They should be hospitalized and treated, not buillt up as pundits or elected to public office.

The man was treated for depression 40 years ago. Confining him to a mental hospital today because you disagree with his politics is straight out of the Stalinists play book.

 

[Whiplash]

Edit: never mind, I suspect I was breaking a rule. I retract what I said.

 

[GreNME]

The man was treated for depression 40 years ago. Confining him to a mental hospital today because you disagree with his politics is straight out of the Stalinists play book.

True, but confining him to a looney bin because he's disconnected from reality and is a bit of a frothing lunatic, thus a danger to himself and to others, is a public service.

Really, Tancredo is probably one of the last individuals you should be defending as having a strong grasp on reality. Lefty does seem to be trying to compete, though.

 

[Donal]

True, but confining him to a looney bin because he's disconnected from reality and is a bit of a frothing lunatic, thus a danger to himself and to others, is a public service.

If we applied that standard around here, the politics section would get real quiet real quick.

 

[gtc]

Really, Tancredo is probably one of the last individuals you should be defending as having a strong grasp on reality.

I look on it as trying to defend the other people that lefty is attacking with his nonsense.

 

[leftysergeant]

I look on it as trying to defend the other people that lefty is attacking with his nonsense.

What other people? The Rushblob? Beck? Hannity?

Threats to human civilization, the lot of them.

 

[Skeptic]

"whacko" (a little projection?)
"shut his pie hole" (colourful, kind of what a old grandfather would say to his grandson)
"sorry excuse for a man" ( I guess that makes you a "Man")
"drooling moron"
"congress critter"
"whackadoodle wing"
"dim bulb" (hey, he wants to conserve energy, I thought you were green?)
"moron"
"cockroaches" (I heard Hutus use that same word to describe the Tutsis)
"chicken hawk"
"a lying cockroach" (cockroaches don't lie)
"creeps"
"wussy boy"
"lunatic"
"bull flops"
"nutbar"
"Yellow-bellied" (is that a new species?)
"anal-retentive wussy boys " (I kind of like this one)
"guanophrenic Koolaid-with-a=dash-of-Sarin-drinking Libertarians"
"snivellling wussy boy"
"mewling punk"
"chicken poo" (I think it's called guano)
"babbler from Colorado"
"fat deaf eunuch" (now that's not nice to fat deaf eunuchs, what have they done to you?)
"Slant-head"
"shrieking little punk"
"No mercy for cowards and liars" (may I call you Rambo from now on?)
"Snivelling Tom"
"moron from colorado" (I thought it was "babbler" from Colorado?)
"sick little wussy boy" (variantions on a theme I guess)
"nutbar" (you already said that one)

Sounds like the transcript of the old Monty Python sketch about a game show called "Prejudice" (prizes for the most insulting way to describe the Belgians, the host explaining that Syrians are smelly and dirty to a caller, and the special weekly segment "shoot the poof".)

Of course, Monty Python were being absurd on purpose.

 

[Skeptic]

First off, we wern't talking about being a good public servant, we were talking about being healthy enough to run for public office. The issue was how could Tancredo be sick enough to not be in the miltary and be well enough to run for office. Secondly, while I agree that military service can be very good preparation for running for office, I still maintain that serving in the military is orders of magnitude harder than running for public office. Making split second decisions that can affect the lives a dozen or more people while under fire is nothing like making speeches, debating one's opponent, and shaking hands.

(Sigh)

In many "leftist activists" views, serving one's country in the army is more or less despicable -- and the only really worthwhile career as a public servant is to "emphatise", "show concern for the people", etc. -- in short, be the usual far-far-left "community activist" writ large. (Needless to say, this "empathy" only applies if one's voters are left-wingers: if one's community has any concerns about the latest social-engineering scheme, they are racists who must be forced to see the light and support whatever it is Nancy Pelosi is supporting this week.)

The claim it is harder to be such an activist than to dodge bullets is just an attempt to paint their own narcissistic self-important "activism" as more or less the highest possible calling for human beings on the face of the planet, something so difficult and nobel only the chosen few can "do it right", while those who actually serve in the military are stupid chumps.

But... did you ever see such an "activist" actually confront a soldier in uniform who asks them, "well, then, am I a stupid chump who is killing innocent babies for fun because Bush said I should"?

They crumble.

They start apologizing and whining: "nononono, I don't mean you, I mean in general..." ; "Look, I don't mean to insult, I am just protesting...", etc.

Why? Because they know, deep down, it is nonsense on stilts, and that their "activism" is a big fat self-important living out of a fantasy worldview, while what the soldiers do is infinitely harder and more important.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

Want to make Tancredo looks stupid?{snip}

Actually, he does a pretty good job of that on his own.

 

[fishbob]

And such name calling was and is counterproductive to political debate.

Not if you do it right.

 

[fishbob]

In many "leftist activists" views, serving one's country in the army is more or less despicable -- and the only really worthwhile career as a public servant is to "emphatise", "show concern for the people", etc. -- in short, be the usual far-far-left "community activist" writ large. (Needless to say, this "empathy" only applies if one's voters are left-wingers: if one's community has any concerns about the latest social-engineering scheme, they are racists who must be forced to see the light and support whatever it is Nancy Pelosi is supporting this week.)

The claim it is harder to be such an activist than to dodge bullets is just an attempt to paint their own narcissistic self-important "activism" as more or less the highest possible calling for human beings on the face of the planet, something so difficult and nobel only the chosen few can "do it right", while those who actually serve in the military are stupid chumps.

But... did you ever see such an "activist" actually confront a soldier in uniform who asks them, "well, then, am I a stupid chump who is killing innocent babies for fun because Bush said I should"?

They crumble.

They start apologizing and whining: "nononono, I don't mean you, I mean in general..." ; "Look, I don't mean to insult, I am just protesting...", etc.

Why? Because they know, deep down, it is nonsense on stilts, and that their "activism" is a big fat self-important living out of a fantasy worldview, while what the soldiers do is infinitely harder and more important.

Source?

Your keister?? Again????