The Supreme Court affirms the right of same sex couples to marry, just like heterosexual couples. Conservatives pitch a hissy fit because they can no longer deny other people the same right that they enjoy. And for good measure, Justice Scalia once again demonstrates what an awful person he is.

The Supreme Court rejects the cynical argument that the Affordable Care Act was written in such a way as to destroy itself. The only reason this case was brought to court was to damage the Obama presidency. The plaintiffs didn’t really care about how it would affect them. As I said, cynical. But that’s conservatism in the twenty-first century.

Bristol Palin, paid abstinence spokesperson, is again pregnant out of wedlock. She doesn’t seem too happy about it, and asks that no one lecture her. If only she had taken her own advice instead of, well, spending years lecturing other people, she might find a more sympathetic audience. Instead, she’s just another conservative hypocrite.

Sarah Palin no longer has a job at Fox News. May we never hear from her again.

Donald Trump refuses to release his birth certificate. Another conservative hypocrite. Oh my God, though, the 2016 Republican presidential contest is going to be fun. Talk about a clown car! I think they all take turns driving it, though The Donald no doubt thinks he’s the only one who can possibly drive it correctly.

A black woman is arrested for removing the Confederate flag from the South Carolina state house grounds.

May was the hottest May on record; 2015 on track to be hottest year on record. But nothing to see here.

Over at B4V, Cluster–our dear friend and former blogging colleague (until he couldn’t tolerate dissenting comments about his posts and retreated to a safe haven in which his views are never challenged)–writes in the comments that he is “FUCKING tired of tired of progressives and their penchant to use every damn issue under the sun to hate on white conservatives and divide this country.” He then uses as his sole example a New York Times article titled “White Terrorism Is as Old as America.” The article’s lede?

My grandmother used to speak of Klansmen riding through Louisiana at night, how she could see their white robes shimmering in the dark, how black people hid in bayous to escape them. Before her time, during Reconstruction, Ku Klux Klan members believed they could scare superstitious black people out of their newly won freedom. They wore terrifying costumes but were not exactly hiding — many former slaves recognized bosses and neighbors under their white sheets. They were haunting in masks, a seen yet unseen terror. In addition to killing and beating black people, they often claimed to be the ghosts of dead Confederate soldiers.

Yes, an article that describes the ugly history of terrorism perpetrated by white Americans–namely the Ku Klux Klan–upon Black Americans is equated by Cluster as “hating on conservatives.” Glad we got that one straight.

Did I miss anything else?

P.S. I have to say, it is a bit sad to see conservatives so unhinged that they can no longer even bring themselves to talk to people with whom they disagree. Oh, also, nothing but 107+ degree weather on Cluster’s porch for the foreseeable future. Better get the golfing in early, my friend!

Advertisements
Comments
  1. he will correct it eventually but how dumb is cluster. There are 3 branches of government and i do not think the supreme court needs two branches of government. No matter how you read it – it is pretty dumb. What a good week for normal america

    • I like the way Cluster says Chief Justice Roberts “ignores the intent of the legislation as expressed by Jonathan Gruber to force State’s to set up exchanges or lose out on Federal subsidies.”

      As though Jonathan Gruber wrote the law and therefore knows its intent. What claptrap, Cluster. If you want to understand the law’s intent, why don’t you ask the people who wrote the law, like the New York Times did.

  2. I see that at least four predominantly black churches were burned while I was away. Apologies to Cluster for even bringing this up, as he will no doubt interpret it as hating on conservatives.

  3. casper says:

    It’s too bad the folks at B4V are so scared of talking to people with other opinions that they have banned anyone they disagree with. I commented on the blog for over 10 years. I never got into name calling and treated everyone with respect, even when they didn’t deserve it, yet I an no longer welcome there. Then they have the gull to insist that liberals are intolerant. They have retreated i not their own little world of fear and anger. By the way, we are all much more likely to be killed by a right wing domestic terrorist than a Islamic one.

    • “By the way, we are all much more likely to be killed by a right wing domestic terrorist than a Islamic one.”

      Sorry Casper, but bullshit. That bogus study conveniently began it’s measure after 9/11, when 3,000 Americans were killed by Islamic extremists, and ignores the fact that whites make up 77% of the U.S. population while Muslims come in at under 1%, meaning that Muslims are actually WILDLY over represented on the domestic terrorist front. The “study” you refer to reminds me of the way global warming denialists cherry pick data to make their specious claims. Also reminds me that for all of the wailing and caterwauling going on over the massacre at the black church whites are substantially more likely to die at the hands of blacks in this country than the other way around. You wouldn’t think that by the agenda driven narrative screamed at us 24-7.

      We should all be capable of deploring the horrific violence of racist white fucktards like Roof while remembering where our actual threats are coming from, no?

      • casper says:

        Rusty,
        There are far more right wing nut cases in this country than Islamic ones. I’m not saying that they are more inclined to violence, just that that because of the numbers, we are more likely to die at the hands of one of them.

      • Casper,

        Well, I suppose that’s true. Since whites vastly outnumber Muslims in this country we are more likely to be killed by a white person on our soil. I just don’t understand why anyone would make that very obvious and mundane point unless they were trying to imply that whites were REPRESENTATIONALLY committing more deadly terrorist acts than Muslims, which is certainly not true. The opposite is true.

      • One interesting note comes from this New York Times article:

        A survey to be published this week asked 382 police and sheriff’s departments nationwide to rank the three biggest threats from violent extremism in their jurisdiction. About 74 percent listed antigovernment violence, while 39 percent listed “Al Qaeda-inspired” violence, according to the researchers, Charles Kurzman of the University of North Carolina and David Schanzer of Duke University.

      • Watson,
        Of course, but so what? It’s a numbers game. We live in America and thus far a cops day to day challenges are typically dealing with violence from Americans. What’s the point? In other news, people who live next to rivers are more likely to drown than those who live in the dessert.

        But let’s not forget, in this country, counting 9/11, Muslim extremists are far more deadly than white terrorists.

      • The point Casper was making, and that the NYT backs, is that homegrown anti-government nut jobs are considered more of a threat than outside terrorists, despite the fact that 3,000 Americans died on 9/11. I’m not claiming to make some sort of crucial insight here.

        To me, given that since 911, 48 people have been killed in the US by non-Muslim extremists, and 26 killed by self-proclaimed jihadists, the threat that you or I will be killed by any kind of terrorists is almost non-existent. Of course, if we go to Frozen Pond, Indiana, we are likely to find an old guy on his front porch pointing a gun with a hair trigger at us.

      • “The point Casper was making, and that the NYT backs, is that homegrown anti-government nut jobs are considered more of a threat than outside terrorists, despite the fact that 3,000 Americans died on 9/11”

        The point that I’m making is that while that opinion is perhaps understandable it’s nevertheless somewhat myopic given that Muslims have been responsible for far more terrorist fatalities on US soil than white extremists have been and proportionate to their population are much more likely to commit terrorist acts. My other point is that this biased study seems tailored to give the public an impression that is the exact opposite from reality. Perhaps misleading narratives like this are at least partly responsible for the above mentioned myopia.

      • Casper, earlier:

        “There are far more right wing nut cases in this country than Islamic ones. I’m not saying that they are more inclined to violence, just that that because of the numbers, we are more likely to die at the hands of one of them.”

        Actually, scratch my last response to this, here’s a better one: More right wing nut cases in this country than Islamic ones? Says who? White extremists may be more visible, that’s often part of their shtick, but you can’t say with any certainty that white extremists who are actively plotting terrorist action in this country outnumber Islamic ones. Are you forgetting about the numerous foiled Islamic plots, many of them quite recent?

        We’re more likely to die at the hands of right wing nut cases, eh? Not if you count an obscure little event referred to as “9/11”.

      • Biased study? So the researchers from the University of North Carolina were biased in asking 382 police and sheriff’s departments nationwide to rank the three biggest threats? Just wondering, on what basis do you claim it was biased? Anyway, it was just a small point I brought up that was of minor interest and hardly worth arguing about, at least to me. I’ll just grant that you are right. Casper can speak for himself.

      • Watson,
        The biased study I was referring to was the one I initially mentioned. It was also headlined and linked to in the article you provided. It was the one that curiously excluded 9/11 in it’s assessment of terrorist risk and failed to mention the relative populations of the groups it was discussing, omissions which lead me to believe it was biased.

        http://securitydata.newamerica.net/extremists/deadly-attacks.html

      • rustybrown2014 says:

        Casper:

        “By the way, we are all much more likely to be killed by a right wing domestic terrorist than a Islamic one.”

        Care to rethink your views on this? Recent events, as well as past ones, contradict this PC line of reasoning.

  4. casper says:

    From Cluster: “Considering the financial melt down in the entitlement based society of Greece, don’t you think this would be a good time for a POTUS candidate to campaign on increased entitlements here at home?

    ……much of his (Bernie Sanders) message focused on improving the lot of the lower and middle classes — by providing free college; guaranteeing workers vacation time, sick leave and family leave; and raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour.”

    Once again he articulates the conservatives true position. I’ve got mine. Fuck you.

  5. So much tilting at windmills from Cluster today. I guess there isn’t much else to do when outside it’s hot as blazes.

  6. meursault1942 says:

    It was a great week indeed. It’s unfortunate conservatives are so opposed to America moving forward. But they did give us some hilarious quotes, so yay for that. In fact, as the schadenfreude started to wane, I visited our favorite insane asylum for a fresh batch, and it did not disappoint–so much wailing and gnashing of teeth! But I think my absolute favorite has to be this incredible paragraph from dbschmidt:

    Between the decisions of the SCotUS on ObamaCare and SSM it has become apparent–this is affront not seen since the Civil War. To those LIV that haunt places like this—I will use small words for your small minds. The Civil War, aka. the War of Northern Aggression had little, if nothing, to do with slavery. It was about States’ Rights to be, basically, left alone by the Federal Government.

    Hahaha! I love that paragraph so much, I want the Supreme Court to gay marry it to Obamacare. There’s a lot to enjoy:

    1) “Equal rights for gays? Lower health care costs and increased availability for poor and working-class people? That is an affront to mah honah, suh!

    2) Unironic use of “The War of Northern Aggression”

    3) “The War of Northern Aggression was about ‘States Rights'”

    4) The insistence that the people who actually know what the hell they’re talking about are “low-information,” whereas he is a fabulously well-informed genius–despite the fact that all available evidence shows he’s got it precisely backward.

    Poor, poor schimdtty has spent too much time reading embarrassing crackpot David Barton and various wingnut “education” websites and not enough time reading, you know, the actual historical documents. Because The Civil War was TOTALLY NOT ABOUT SLAVERY, YOU GUYS! Even though the second freaking sentence of Mississippi’s declaration of secession says:

    Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery– the greatest material interest of the world.

    See? Not slavery. “States rights,” you idiots!

    Meanwhile, Texas’ letter of secession says:

    We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

    “States rights!” “Heritage, not hate!”

    And on and on it goes in letter after letter. Boy, it must suck to be an unreconstructed Confederate in 2015, but that’s the life ol’ schimdtty has chosen for himself. And lest you think he didn’t go full Retired Spook* with the Civil War War of Northern Aggression II talk…he did:

    As much as I would not like to see another Civil War—it may be necessary; nevertheless, this time it would not be North v. South but rather the informed v. the LIV based on knowledge of how far we have been bent over the table not of our making.

    And as with the previous Civil War War of Northern Aggression, you and your ignorant ilk will get pounded into the dirt, schmidtty. Poor you. Bless your little heart.

    *Speaking of Spook, here’s the final punchline: Spook and schmidtty were Noonan’s researchers for that little pamphlet of discredited talking points he calls a “book” that “proves Obama is the worst president ever.” Two ignorant, paranoid suckers providing “research” for another ignorant, paranoid sucker? I’d say that’s the blind leading the blind, but given the unreconstructed nature of our boy schmidtty, it’s more apt to call them a confederacy of dunces.

    • dbschmidt certainly has the smallest of the small minds over there. It’s so small that he thinks he actually sounds intelligent.

      Spook and schmidt were Noonan’s researchers?! Seriously?! Good God. That explains a lot.

      • meursault1942 says:

        “Spook and schmidt were Noonan’s researchers?! Seriously?! Good God. That explains a lot.”

        They seriously were. Really puts that thing into perspective, doesn’t it?

  7. i am sorry that i know this but the “low information voters” is a limbaugh quote which is hilarious because conservatives always speak their own mind and never parrot anything. These people are just so out of the norm of regular people it is almost a parody

  8. meursault1942 says:

    And the good news just keeps coming: LOLTrump!

    This must be that “business acumen” some of our more dimwitted Americans insist that Trump has and that we must respect. I look forward to those same dimwitted Americans using this bit of great news as a platform to express their utter lack of ignorance of what the word “fascism” means and/or what the First Amendment actually says.

  9. casper says:

    As far as I know, the B4V people can still post here. So come on cluster, tired, etc. Try posting where you can’t hide behind Ama and your little protected blog. If your ideas are so great defend them.

    • They can and they have. The only one that is blocked from posting here is NeoClown, for obvious reasons.

      • Cluster:
        “Don’t like dissent?? That’s putting it mildly. (Liberals) despise dissent.”

        This coming from the guy who posts at a blog that censors ALL dissent, while we here at LIR welcome all comers. Self awareness is not Clusters strong suit.

      • Let’s all remember that Cluster started a blog for the sole purpose of inviting a variety of opinion. Somehow it must not have dawned on him that some people might disagree with him. As soon as that happened, he shut it down and ran back to the safe haven of uniform thinking.

  10. A plank in Noonan’s platform for America:

    “End tax exempt organizations which don’t provide direct, tangible, food, housing, healthcare and clothing to actual people. In other words, if you aren’t a charity, you don’t get a tax exemption. Pony up, liberals – you’ve been using tax exempt laws to organize your political actions for a long time. Comes to an end. No more using taxpayer subsidies to pay for lawyers to sue us into doing your bidding.”

    Finally, a point of view Mark and I have in common! Under the rules he lays out churches should lose their tax exempt status. About time those lavish safe havens for pedophiles stop mooching of the public dole.

  11. casper says:

    From Mark’s latest post:

    “We need to have a national argument about this – not a national conversation. A national conversation is just a means whereby the left decides what we converse about and provides us the pre-approved result of the conversation. We need an argument – vigorous but polite – about just what we, the people of the United State of America, believe.”

    That’s great Mark, but you don’t allow debate or argument on your blog anymore. You don’t allow anyone who disagrees with you to post.

  12. Did Rusty just bait Little Amy into a thousand-word screed just by engaging with Noonan on the topic of Noonan’s post? I always find it hilarious how little it takes to wind her up.

    • rustybrown2014 says:

      Pretty amazing, right? Now that they’re back to deleting my posts again I think we have another clear example of how allergic to genuine debate these people really are. I mean, I was nothing but respectful and they (with the exception of Mark) came flying out of the gate with accusations, aspersions, insults and profanity. Remarkable. You know, I actually think that my politeness and sincerity makes them MORE mad than when they’re dealing with trolling behavior – it’s much easier to demonize ridiculous straw men or rude trolls than it is to respond to somebody calmly presenting clear-headed opinions. In their defense, their ideas are retarded and impossible to actually defend, and it must be terribly frustrating dealing with me, not only am I more intelligent than they are I don’t get flustered as they do and am able to present my point of view with cool-headed logic, if I do say so myself.

      Once again, I must marvel at the projection and the utter lack of self awareness at that blog. A few instances:

      People who are first to spew profanity-laced insults insist they’re being attacked.
      People who routinely pontificate about going to war with their fellow Americans accuse others of being unfit Americans for merely disagreeing with them.
      People who censor all contrary opinions think they are being open and tolerant; call others “fascists”.
      People who are incapable of defending their ideas think their logic is self-evident, and somehow preaching to others who think exactly the way you do is constructive in any way.
      People who do nothing but post insults and aspersions intended to derail conversation accuse their targets of doing the same.
      It goes on and on. Remarkable.

      Finally, kudos to Mark for standing above the fray; we actually had a few civil exchanges (that is something the other nut cases will not tolerate). He may be crazy, but he doesn’t exhibit the same loathsome pathologies as the rest of them.

      • Completely agree.It’s amazing how the things they accuse others of doing are exactly what they themselves do. I don’t think it matters what you say or how you say it. Amy and Cluster are pathological. It’s sad because we keep hearing that in real life Cluster is a swell guy.

      • rustybrown2014 says:

        I remember Mitch saying that in the past and I find it very hard to believe. Over the years I’ve had zero evidence that he’s anything but a massively insecure creep. And an idiot.

      • mitchethekid says:

        I still can’t stand the pompous, arrogant jerk and the way he pretends to speak for everyone. I find it especially galling the way he uses the word “nonsense” to dismiss out of hand any subject he can’t debate. At least now their craziness has been distilled down to just 5 people.

      • rustybrown2014 says:

        Are you talking about Mark there, Mitch. Sounds like Mark. He certainly has substantial faults, but I give him credit for having the stones to attempt to debate his ideas, that’s more than you can say about the rest of those fragile flowers.

  13. casper says:

    Happy 4th everyone. It’s nice to see the nation going in the right direction in spite of the actions of conservatives who want to drag us back to a time that only exists in their heads.

  14. Oh, and Cluster, the answer to rising insurance rates–it’s just capitalism at work, you know!–is single payer health care. In the meantime, we’re stuck with insurance companies–go capitalism! And we have yet to hear a coherent alternative to the Affordable Care Act from Republicans. Deep down they were happy that King vs. Burwell was decided in the government’s favor because it saves them from having to actually do some governing, while at the same time allowing them to continue to mouth off about it. That’s pretty much all conservatives are good for anymore, sadly.

  15. mitchethekid says:

    Yes Rusty, I was talking about Mark. But I disagree about his openness to debate.

    • rustybrown2014 says:

      Well, yeah. I’ve known him to be just about obtuse at times as the rest of them and he certainly has no objections to their cowardly censorship, I was just referring to a couple recent conversations with him where he wasn’t quite so bad. Low bar.

  16. rustybrown2014 says:

    Hilarious. Noonan has a post up about how fantastic religion is in relation to atheism. The entire tone of the piece reads like a haughty challenge for atheists to present their case but when I try to post, guess what? All opinions censored. I guess there must be some kind of perverse satisfaction in presenting your ideas as infallible while deleting every counter opinion that blows elephantine holes through your arguments, but it sure escapes me. Seems like a game for retarded children to engage in, and I thank GOD I don’t find myself in such debased circumstances.

    Anyway, here is my post which shall not see the light of day over there; I kept it pithy in suspicion that it would never post, but nevertheless feel it’s a decent volley for whomever might want to sincerely debate the issue (as opposed to those who just pretend they’re debating):

    “I’ll give you a damning science vs. faith dilemma: contraception. Science tells us that sex education and greater access to contraceptives are good for public health, yet the church denies this. Take Sub-Saharan Africa for example; what exactly is the churches “rationality” behind the objection to distributing condoms to fight the spread of aids when science tells us that it would save countless lives? This is a clear example of science advocating for greater well-being and compassion while the church remains negligently obstinate, shackled by its own superstition.”

  17. rustybrown2014 says:

    Just a couple of short weeks ago when Mark bestirred himself to briefly engage in an actual dialog with someone who actually knew what he was talking about (me) he was boldly exclaiming:

    “the further we go along towards the future, the more backwards-looking and old-fashioned you on the left become. Your vaunted science was created by my Catholic Church – and the further you go away from the rationalism of Catholicism, the more un-scientific you on the left become…”

    and:

    “…it is we of the Christian community, and especially Catholics, who are the rationalists…the people of science.”

    Now that sane opinions and fair debaters are censored, this is what Mark has to say today:

    “Does the United States need an exorcism? I’m no theologian – but, what the heck: give it a try.”

    I think that would make an excellent bumper sticker. Way to to be forward thinking and scientific, Noonan!

    • That thread is one of the funniest ever on B4V. I especially like Spook’s comments. The “mess” we have in American isn’t his fault–it’s his kids’ fault, so they can live with it! According to Spook, “very little of the mess is the result of anything I or people who share my views did.” Yeah, Spook, you and your people have been innocent bystanders your entire life. What a crock.Then he tells us that although he loves his children, they’re pretty much getting what they deserve. What a charming father he must be, don’t you think, tiredoflibbs?

      Then there is Little Amy prattling on about how the left “is brilliant at the Long Game. They play chess, while the rest of the world doesn’t know there is even a game going.” Dang, these must be the smartest people in the history of the world. What, prey tell, does that say about conservatives if they don’t even know there is a game going on?! Quick, someone tell them, for Pete’s sakes!

      Meanwhile, Cluster is looking at several consecutive days of 110 degree weather. Kinda puts a damper on the golf game.

      • rustybrown2014 says:

        Yeah, Spook’s a peach, ain’t he? Not only does he comport himself in public in a way that garners people flipping him the bird on a DAILY basis (remember that?), he also has barely concealed resentment and contempt towards his own children and grandchildren. What a delight it must be to wake up to see his stubbled face scowling at the computer screen every morning!

        But don’t worry about Cluster! He’s still backing the 1% of scientists who claim the earth is cooling. Hey Cluster, you’ve been touting global cooling predictions for years while hoping we stick around so you can gloat in your parka. Well, I’m right here, and I can read a thermometer. Where are you? Oh yeah, hiding under Ama’s skirt. Hope it’s air conditioned under there!

      • rustybrown2014 says:

        And another thing! Cluster says:

        “The Confederate flag issue is a good example of how ignorant the legions of progressives are. Here is a flag that was designed by a Democrat, defended by Democrats, and raised over the SC State Capital by a Democrat, and when a Republican woman Governor of Indian heritage fights to bring the flag down supported by the countries only black Senator, Republican Tim Scott from SC, the media scorns the Republicans for being racist. And the collective progressives fall right in line.”

        Cluster, are you really this fuckin’ stupid? The issue isn’t over who created or supported the Confederate flag 150 years ago; the issue is who’s defending it NOW, and that seems to be only the old, white, conservative racist asshole wing of the Republican party.

      • meursault1942 says:

        That’s the perfect image of modern conservatism: Spook sitting in his doom bunker, fuming that all these nefarious other people put him there.

        Also, this Noonan quote is absolutely glorious:

        I have had visions of me dying in a roadside ditch as I’m acting the part of refugee during some disastrous war in my 80’s [sic]

        Live the dream!

        But seriously, is Noonan a test case for what happens when one isolates oneself from reality and goes all-in on conservatism? As he’s gone to greater and greater lengths to wall himself off from the real world, he falls deeper and deeper into paranoia. Conservatism is not only bad for society, it’s bad for the individual, apparently.

  18. rustybrown2014 says:

    Is this interactive chart simple enough for a retarded wing nut to understand? Apparently not, they’ve deleted it without comment at bfv:

    http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/

  19. rustybrown2014 says:

    Hey, anybody else find it hilarious that a blowhard like Donald Trump finds purchase with nutbags like the idiots at bfv? Over the past several weeks I’ve noticed comments over there that commend him for ushering in a refreshing brand of “truth talk”, while normal Americans regard him as the ridiculous, unserious attention whore that he is. It’s like a sad, pathetic reboot of their reverence for the highly esteemed esteemed Sarah Palin. Remember the self-righteous defending that went on there? What rubes.

    Ever see Andy Griffith in “A Face in a Crowd”? Great movie.

  20. meursault1942 says:

    Slacktivist has a recurring theme/quip: “I am shocked to learn that pro-life Christians are lying about Planned Parenthood again!” And it’s time for him to trot it out again, as pro-life* Christians are lying about Planned Parenthood again. Shocking but true!

    LGM has the necessary links, but the nutshell is this: A group run by a friend of notable serial liar/convicted criminal/ongoing calamity James O’Keefe has followed in O’Keefe’s footsteps by using the time-honored conservative tradition of manufacturing lies, releasing a heavily edited video that appears to show a Planned Parenthood exec talking about making money from cutting up aborted fetuses and selling the parts.

    Is any of that true? Hahahaha! What a hilarious question. Of course it isn’t true! The outfit even admitted as such with the release of the unedited tape. Do conservatives care that it isn’t true? Hahahaha! What a hilarious question. Of course they don’t. In fact, they love it precisely because it isn’t true. Remember: There are no conservative positions that aren’t based on lies.

    In actual fact, the Planned Parenthood exec repeatedly corrects the lies the wingnut operative tries to push. In actual fact, the Planned Parenthood exec simply discusses the mechanics of voluntary tissue donation. I know conservatives are absolutely flummoxed by the concept of consent (just look at their “what’s next, a man marrying a horse?” rhetoric opposing gay marriage–or, even worse, pretty much all their rhetoric about rape), but do they oppose tissue donation as well? I suppose it doesn’t really matter because again, conservatism requires lies.

    Needless to say. this whole thing is pure fapbait for Noonan, so I had to see if he’d picked up on it, and he doesn’t disappoint, immediately uncorking a fantastic paranoid rant about Moloch and “liberals are going to murder your grandma and harvest her organs! It’s gonna happen! Seriously!” and the horror–the HORROR!–of eating a meal and drinking wine while talking about any of this stuff. THAT’S WHAT NAZIS DO!!!111!3!1TWELVE!

    But this is all in keeping with my recent note that Noonan is increasingly deranged and paranoid and that the isolation from reality that his conservatism demands is having deleterious effects on his mental acuity. He’s not quite Spook And His Doom Bunker, but he’s certainly on that path. Not only is he unequipped to interface with reality, his ability to correctly discern reality is much worse than chance–he falls for pretty much every lie the right wing shovels at him. In fact, “falls for” is probably too kind a phrase to use: He actively seeks out those lies and is quite enthusiastic about adopting them. It’s not that he’s being tricked, it’s that he lacks the basic framework of honesty and perception to even understand the difference between truth and lies.

    To sum up: Conservatives lie. Conservatives are increasingly deranged. Water is wet.

    *I know, I know, they aren’t pro-life, they’re just pro-forced birth. If they were pro-life, their default stance to poor people–especially poor mothers in need of assistance–would be something other than, “Tough shit, loser.” But that is their stance. In the conservative world, life begins at conception, is diminished at birth, and is fully restored upon incorporation.

    • 02casper says:

      Of course Mark took the story and ran with it. It’s what he does. All of the B4Vers hae put themselves into a tiny box and only allow themselves to read information they agree with that reinforces their world outlook.
      Meanwhile, I’m loving the Trump campaign. Every time he speaks, Democrats pick up a couple of thousand or more votes.

    • rustybrown2014 says:

      Thanks for the links, M. I knew that PP story was full of shit at a glance, but couldn’t muster myself to do the fact checking. I’m sure the honest scholars at bfv will be issuing retractions soon.

      You also say: “I know, I know, they aren’t pro-life, they’re just pro-forced birth. If they were pro-life, their default stance to poor people–especially poor mothers in need of assistance–would be something other than, “Tough shit, loser.” But that is their stance.”

      I’ll take that a step further and remind you that they’re actually PRO ABORTION in that they subscribe to policies and positions which demonstrably increase the abortion rate. Sex education? No. Greater access to effective means of birth control? No. Those stances lead to more abortions, case closed. To be against both contraceptives and abortions is to maintain two mutually exclusive positions, which is nonsensical, but that’s when they begin to delete my comments. This overwhelming contradiction is either not apparent to them (which would be incredible, given the evidence) or simply of no concern to them. In any case, it’s very sad.

  21. rustybrown2014 says:

    Cluster says:

    “Let’s all take a moment and reflect on the timeless stupidity of Democrats. I present to you Bill Clinton 1994:

    I’d like to say just a word about the framework with North Korea that Ambassador Gallucci signed this morning. This is a good deal for the United States,” Clinton said at the press conference. “North Korea will freeze and then dismantle its nuclear program. South Korea and our other allies will be better protected. The entire world will be safer as we slow the spread of nuclear weapons.

    Now we all know that this agreement Clinton negotiated resulted in a peaceful and prosperous North Korea, who no longer have nuclear ambitions and are just wanting to be a part of the world community ……… oh wait.

    But surely Obama’s deal with Iran will turn out differently. Right?”

    Uh, Cluster? Idiot?….North Korea got the bomb under the Bush administration, who terminated the Clinton deal. But thanks for reminding us of yet another of Bush’s foreign policy fuck ups. Talk about timeless stupidity…

  22. rustybrown2014 says:

    More deep thoughts from the pointy heads at bfv.

    Cluster:
    Ironic how PP uses ultra sound to locate which part of the body to “crush”, yet screams in horror when ultra sound is a suggested procedure prior to “crushing”.”

    Mark:
    “Pre-abortion ultrasounds are invasive…ultrasounds during abortion are ok…these people are complete hypocrites.”

    No, it’s not ironic nor hypocritical. It’s the difference between consenting to a medical procedure and having one imposed on you by the state. Under their logic, if the state decreed that all people must submit to a mandatory colonoscopy at age 50, that would be the exact same thing as someone who consents to a routine, voluntary colonoscopy as part of their general health care maintenance. Kinda different things, right?

    Just like my last post, nobody should have to point this out. This is a case of faulty logic so rudimentary you might expect to see in an early grade schooler, no later. Yet here are two adults babbling it out like it’s astute political commentary. What’s wrong with these people? Similar to their warped, wing nut worldview being responsible for the growing paranoia that M. pointed out, there also seems to be an atrophying of their most basic reasoning skills. I mean, they were never the brightest bulbs, but this is getting ridiculous. Weird.

  23. 02casper says:

    http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/davidbadash/_louisiana_shooter_was_a_fan_of_the_tea_party_westboro_baptist_church_hitler_iran_racism

    “Care to rethink your views on this? Recent events, as well as past ones, contradict this PC line of reasoning.”

    Sadly, no.

    • rustybrown2014 says:

      Sadly, Casper, your head is up your ass. Your statement, as clear as clear can be, was:

      “By the way, we are all much more likely to be killed by a right wing domestic terrorist than a Islamic one.”

      Yet since 1999, here are the actual numbers of terrorist fatalities committed on American soil by radical Islamists v. right wing nut jobs:

      Radical Islamists: 3,246

      Right wing nut jobs: 31

      Hmmm. One of those numbers is quite a bit bigger than the other, but don’t let that get in the way of your entrenched worldview.

      http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/wrjp255a.html

      • rustybrown2014 says:

        But I’ll grant you this: as of a few days ago you are 2 deaths closer to proving your thesis. Only 3,216 to go and you’ll have a valid point.

    • I see Cluster read your comment and the article you linked to–er, well, at least part of it. Good ol’ Cluster, always afraid to engage anyone who might challenge his beliefs. BTW, I’d be in the mountains too. 110+ degree weather every day for the foreseeable future on Cluster’s porch.

    • I think that article is overblown and simplistic. For one thing, the racial narrative in this country is quite the opposite of what the author contends; these “why don’t we blame white culture for the latest white shooting” articles are sprouting up like weeds, while just about every news item I’ve run across has stressed the theater shooter’s right wing views. From the article:

      “And yet when white men shoot up movie theaters or black churches, they’re given the benefit of individuality. We don’t automatically assume that they represent some disease within all, or even a subset of, other white men. Even in the face of evidence such as espoused racist, misogynistic views and participation in organized hate groups, we still resist drawing any broader conclusions about any white men other than the shooter.”

      Are you freakin’ kidding me? How did this author miss the volumes of white self-flagellation that followed the black church shooting? That lone racist psychopath was promoted as the face of white America and all of our “undressed” racial issues. That single crazy twat was supposed to somehow shame every pink face in America. Bullshit.

      So why do we give the “benefit of individuality” to loons like Dylann Roof and the Lafayette gunman? Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that those types of shootings are rare and do appear to be committed by crazed, isolated individuals. While I agree that right wing rhetoric can often be extreme and provocative, there’s really no larger theme to be seen there. We simply don’t have an epidemic of caucasian nutbirds running rampant, despite the media hype.

      So what actually is our epidemic? Why is the black community allegedly in the spotlight when black violence occurs? Perhaps because blacks commit far more crimes than do whites, especially violent crimes. Blacks make up just 13% of our population yet commit more than HALF our murders. IMO, the media grants far too much attention to discrimination against blacks and far too little on the overwhelmingly disproportionate problem of black violence.

  24. 02casper says:

    One of the best (and longest) articles I’ve read. Very well sourced. Cluster I dare you to read it and try to respond to the many points made. This is why you will lose in 2016.

    http://shorensteincenter.org/conservative-media-influence-on-republican-party-jackie-calmes/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s