You have no idea how much pleasure I get from saying "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism!" to liberals and then watching their little pointy heads explode. And then when they try to splutter their pathetic excuses to me, I ask them "Oh, so were you lying for the past eight years about that, or are you lying now? Liar."
That normally gets me called a Nazi. But I'm almost used to that by now. It's the Left's favorite epithet.
So, when Shepard Fairey, the guy who created the iconic Obama poster, also turns out to be the same Shepard Fairey who put out this poster of Bush
, we should think, what, exactly?
Those on the left who are shrieking now about the cutting images of Their Messiah should remember this: They were, at best, silent, and at worst, laughing their heads off when the shoe was on the other foot (sorry about the mixed metaphors).
Personally, although I haven't given up the craft of a well-developed argument against one's political opponent, I have a new-found appreciation for Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, especially Rules 5 and 11, but most, Rule #4.
Ofari Hutchinson is a total nobody - a third-rate Jesse Jackson. He always seems to pop up for the most inane crap, always in an attempt to get face time.
It's OK folks, they've explained the difference now - it's fine to produce the image of Bush, because he is white, whereas doing so with Obama:
"the simple fact of publishing an image of a black president with his face covered in white greasepaint but for the eyes and a red slash of a mouth can't help but evoke a minstrel aesthetic, even if it's in reverse."
(from "The Guardian", the UK's primary socialist rag)
Remember folks, it's not a "double-standard" because mocking Obama is RASCISM.
You folks are going to have to come to the same conclusion that I've come to, this isn't a polite disagreement among us any longer. It's a devolving situation, and at some point, it's going to get really ugly. Step up to the plate and let them know it's time for business.
Mark,
First, go fuck yourself!
Second, we agree, Barry isn't a liberal at all. He's just a god-damned political thug in the truest Chi-town Hustle mold. So, if I'm being honest, he's really a Stalinist, if you want to pinpoint his political orientation. He's super high on the Y-axis of authoritarianism scale, as well as being a commited leftist.
Well, he's not a liberal. Or a Liberal. Sorry to bring the rest of the fucking world into your narrow band of political ideology in which everything to your left is "kiss-the-locomotive."
The fact is that we really don't have liberals in government at all. If you want to see a liberal, go to Europe. Or India. There you will find some liberals. I'd say chances are pretty good that we will never have anything like that here. Nor would I want it.
Maher is way off on many things but he hit the nail on the head with this one so much so that DJ's comment has made me realize that I'm not really a liberal either. Those earlier comments were honestly in error when you compare my views with...say...the views of a member of the Indian government. Or (stand by for rage) France. I'm center left in a country that is center right.
And that, by the way people, is what is commonly known as reflection and growth. You should try it some time. It will make you all much happier.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all." - Lewis Carrol, Through the Looking Glass
Well, "liberal" used to mean "in favor of individual liberty," but it got co-opted by the "Progressive Left" (as I've illustrated here on a number of occasions).
When you get to make up the definitions - and change them at will - then words no longer have any meaning, and you can "win" any argument you like.
An ideology has a particular worldview based on a set of principles and beliefs of the Good. What other people do, in Europe for example, is totally irrelevant to the content of an ideology.
What does "liberal" mean in your usage, that the President is not one?
You suffer from what ails most pathological liars, viz, you cannot remember your lies, even when they are only days apart. We can, and the ink's dry.
So, is it honest error? No, it's just more lies. The truth is that you say whatever you think will put out the fire that's nibbling at your toes, without regard for how much deeper it digs the hole your toes are in. (Ah, mixed metaphors; gotta love 'em ...)
Remember, teacher boy, it's about credibility, and you have demonstrated beyond all doubt that you don't have any.
His argument is, "Someone else's shit, somewhere on the other side of the world, stinks so bad that my shit actually smells good. Not 'relatively' good, mind you, but 'actually' good."
UJ, I skimmed that thread, and you're right. That feller Chuffson has considerably more on the ball than the evidence suggests Slagenhop here ever had.
And therefore, I do offer an apology to the possibly unquiet shade of Protagoras of Abdera, not for advancing a pernicious doctrine*, but for lending his name to a nullity like Slagenhop.
*Pernicious? At the very least: To the extent that Protagoras really was the father of relativism and phenomenalism, he can be held at least partially responsible for a great deal of the woe that plagues humankind to this day. I suppose that if he hadn't invented those particular tools of the darker side of human nature, though, someone else would have.
It's said regularly by teenagers (both physical and mental) who don't want to listen, and would prefer to believe what they want to believe in spite of the facts. Protagoras didn't invent relativism, he was just more creative than the average teenager.
The Bush poster is a work of art, and acknowledges the character at the same time it ridicules the ex-president. The perfect lipstick on the B. Hussein Obama poster seems more predatory.
But then, that seems appropriate, given the differences between the two men.
All corporations are Right Wing Nazi Death Camp Goosestepping Führers Who Enslave!
All of them!
The ones that made his car! RIGHT WING SLAVERY. Made his computer! Seig Heil Mein Boosh!!!
Made the textbooks he uses! RIGHT WING CORPORATION .. OOH! LOOK! A PONY! The corporations selling him internet access? ENSLAVING HIM MAKING HIM CRY DAILY. (That's not to mention what they do to poor Javier.... Poor Javier.)
Bill Maher? Formed a corporation to protect his assets! He's Right Wing! Michael Moore? So right wing not only did he form a corp to shelter his assets and gains, he refuses to use union labor!!!! They're ALL RIGHT WING.
How. Many. Times. Must. He. Explain. This. To. You. Kevin????? How many?
We knew lots of Socialists when we lived in India, or Liberals as they called themselves - it was a point of personal honor made to benefit their own sense of broad-minded self-satisfaction.
"By all means, Mark, define it for us."
"What does "liberal" mean in your usage, that the President is not one?"
"We got...."
And herein lies the problem. Liberal to me means a fully socialistic society. Or perhaps even a communist one. Liberal to most of you means a government that runs anything other than the military. France or India would be two examples of countries that are liberal in my eyes. They each contain a great deal of socialistic structures with France being much more so than India.
Currently, 20+ trillion dollars is in the hands of private organizations in this country. That's 99.77 percent of our nation's wealth. The other .23 percent is owned by the government. Some of that wealth has since been re-privatized by the banks. If President Obama was as liberal as all of you say he is, why would he allow that? And why is having such a tough time passing health care if Democrats are all so liberal? Why was the single payer bill from Conyers DOA?
Compare Obama's foreign policies with that of Dennis Kucinich...one of our perhaps three actual liberals in this country. President Obama has increased troop levels in AfPak and is keeping many Bush policies regarding the military in place. He has also increased veteran's benefits. One problem I have always had with the far left is they are terribly naive about the dangers in the world. That's not to say I agree with my colleagues on the right that we should just start bombing people to "keep us safe." We do need to strike a balance between diplomacy and military force...as Clauswitz has taught us....and as Obama is doing, although I do have criticism of his policies in AfPak but they have no bearing on the liberal vs. conservative meme.
"While you're at it, we're still waiting for you to define "good capitalism," since you pulled that bullshit again in your own little land."
I have. Several times. I guess I will again. Good capitalism would involve corporations that are interested in being competitive, rewarding their employees for hard work, maintaining a reasonable balance between executive pay and worker pay, reasonable government regulation and oversight, and a goal of innovation. We used to have this in our country. And then came the military industrial complex...the Reagan years...the bubbles...and criminals being allowed to essentially destroy the US economy.
I have watched in amazement on this blog (save a few like Bilgeman)...witnessing the textbook definition of denial as hyperbolic screams of government blame have been touted as the reason for our economic meltdown...when it was so plain that is was their negligence and simple human greed that sent us spiraling downward. This is why you lost the election...not because people stayed home...because rational people in the center saw this and voted accordingly. BTW, seven million MORE people voted in the last election. Who were they?
"As a Brit, I can assure you that the Libs over here consider Obama very much one of their own."
Really? Which ones, exactly? Because Blair and Brown both liked Bush and they both like Obama. Sounds pretty down the middle to me. If you are talking about the far left in Britain, then I think they are going to be sadly disappointed.
"Bullshit, douchebag, and you know it!
"But Marky being "center-left"? No. Where he thinks the "center" is and where it actually is are pretty damned far apart."
Well, my biggest hero was Jack Kennedy who many on the right say would've been a Republican were he alive today. I favor a strong defense and intervention in the economy only in dire emergencies (see:now). I think both Friedman and Keynes were brilliant...and correct. I think Carson has some good points about the perils of the welfare state. I don't favor a single payer health care system but do think a government plan should be an option. You want to call me far left? Fine...just because you say it, doesn't mean it's true.
So, this poster really doesn't matter a wit to me...other than I perhaps have failed in my job as an educator. Obama is not a socialist or even a liberal nor or his policies. Neither are the Democrats.
From my local paper....
Farmfest is typically a genial event -- a stop elected and aspiring officials consider an easy political must-do.
But at this year's gathering in rural Redwood Falls, as First District U.S. Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn., put in an appearance, an audience member declared loudly that plans for national health reform were a "step toward communism."
Walz, a veteran, shot back: "I didn't spend 24 years in the military to be called a Communist, I can tell you that."
I hope this is the beginning of the Democrats finding their balls and standing up to psychosis.
I guess I will again. Good capitalism would involve corporations that are interested in being competitive, rewarding their employees for hard work, maintaining a reasonable balance between executive pay and worker pay, reasonable government regulation and oversight, and a goal of innovation.
That's not a definition.
"Interested in..."
"Reasonable balance..."
"reasonable regulation..." are not definitions.
They're opinions. And as an opinion that might be fine, but it's also arguable on every case. You may consider a company to be good or bad based on your self-defined and unpublished criteria but it is utterly unworkable as a definition.
Define it. Such that we can use that definition to see how various entities would compare.
Not "relative" - give an acceptable range. Not "interested in" - give amounts needed. Figures. Percents. Facts.
So no, you still haven't defined it. If you were more aware, it would be time for you to stop talking about our "misuse of words". Ahem. Verbatim.
DJ points to where Mark claims to have defined it.
(from the original link, reposted here for it's ludicrousness.) I call it good capitalism. Socialism? Marxism? And you guys give me crap about words having meanings. You get to make up whatever you want to suit your ideology...especially when it has been thoroughly proved to not work.
(Like, say, government control of the economy? Naw, must not be that.)
While a good reference by DJ, that still isn't a definition of good capitalism.. Mark's prior "definition" was to point to a company no one else here has heard of, and claim that they met the definition. Which isn't a definition. Not until he tells us how and why they are within the limits - which involves setting limits and announcing them.
But for that attempt: Taxation has nothing to do with capitalism.
Capitalism. Noun: An economic system based on private ownership of capital.
So not only is DJ's find still not a usable definition, it conflicts with Mark's other "definition" attempts.
Worried about your arteries?
Go check out the local hospitals and CT scanning clinics.
The one my wife works for has a fair bit of CT scanner time free, so on Fridays they have heart CT's available to check the level of calcification of your arteries.
Mark is a left moderate social libertarian. Mark is also a slight non-interventionalist and culturally liberal. Mark's scores (from 0 to 10):
Economic issues:+3.62 left
Social issues:+3.14 libertarian
Foreign policy:+3.8 non-interventionalist
Cultural identification:+6.19 liberal
Category:political quizzes
They had a chart to show that I was slightly left of center...hmmm....
I'll respond to the latest round of barbs later...
Pointing out your factual failures by using facts (or using your own words to point out you can't keep a consistent definition even in words you're misusing) is hardly a "barb".
The only 'good' type of capitalism provides for the maximum protection of individual rights, with the core emphasis on property rights.
Failure to do so isn't 'good' capitalism, it's something else.
And that something else can only defined by the characteristics of the model.
For example, when the State and it's mouthpieces are advocating State ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and for a society characterized by equal access to resources for all individuals, regardless of socioeconomic strata, there is a name for that: Socialism.
But why go on? The choir is nodding their heads, and the black hole of stupid isn't going to register a dang thing beyond yet another evil Republikkkan* using words and defining meanings.
*= I'm not Republican. Again, the subtleties of difference shall remain obscured to the willfully blind, but others can use this as one more data point in addressing the political makeup of those frequenting Kevin's fine parlor.
Hope whoever was the hack who designed that thing doesn't charge people money for research design.
Question 1: "all or most?" Well? Which is it?
Question 10: Double-barreled (it's really two questions).
Question 15: Two questions, scarcely related. (Also framed such that agreement indicates the respondent is a war for oooooiiiiil ch1ck3nh@wkz0rZ!!11!leven!!).
Question 26: Two questions, scarcely related (also framed such that agreement is raaaaaaacist).
That said, it managed to get into the ballpark, anyway:
My Political Views I am a far-right social libertarian Right: 9.52, Libertarian: 8.62
Oh, and if you do take it, I'd like to see how many of you come out on the authoritarian side
And yet further proof that Marky doesn't have more than one functioning neuron that if after 2+ years of reading Kevin and getting roasted every time he comments, he thinks this statement has merit.
Quizes (with dubious questions, as Ken relates) to supposedly "prove" a significant difference with what you've posted here, in black and white (well, the words are, anyway, even if his meanings are mush), for how many months?
{shakes head}
Mark, you're a failure. Admit it, and get the Hell outta here, forever.
Let's just see how accurately your perceptions of me (and by extension, the rest of us) are. You should have some idea, we've been flinging poo at each other for years.
Hell, I'll give you a spread of 3 points (meaning dead on, +/- 1 from the actual value, rounded according to grade school rules of arithmetic) on the hit/miss determinations.
The quiz plots a point on an orthogonal two-axis graph, and does so to three significant digits on each axis. Pardon me, ladies and gents, but that is pure horseshit. It might locate a point on one side of each axis or the other, but it won't do it to three significant digits.
Economic: 7.44 right (HIT!)
Social Issues: 5.05 libertarian (MISS!)
Foreign Policy: 2.54 "neocon" (MISS!But damned close)
Culture: 1.38 "liberal" (MISS!)
Comment:
Given that libertarianism is every bit as much about economic issues as social, I'm very skeptical the way the axes are aligned in this model, but like all of these maps, you have to take them for what they're worth. (not much)
Bonus Round for Marky:
Name the authoritarians, from among the regular posters here.
Ed, largely due to his religious background...judge/jury/executioner and all.
Kevin, solely based on his views on American corporate imperialism (cough and chuckle) foreign policy.
Yosemite, the tar and feathering comment.
That's a short list off of the top of my head.
As to the quiz, I am surprised by the social liberal answer but I'm happy to be wrong. Also surprised by the libertarian one...less than I thought it would be.
All of you will be happy to know that I marked "Strongly agree" with the right to bear arms. I credit this blog for taking me from agree to strongly agree.
All of you will be happy to know that I marked "Strongly agree" with the right to bear arms. I credit this blog for taking me from agree to strongly agree.
Geek:"Name the authoritarians, from among the regular posters here."
Markadopia:"DJ and Unix no doubt. They love rules."
I took the quiz. The result was:
"You are a far-right social libertarian. Right: 8.49, Libertarian: 3.79."
and
"Foreign policy: ... You scored 1.65"
and
"Culture: ... You scored -1.13"
Note that last minus sign, doofus.
Note also that you're wrong, yet again.
I don't love rules, except the laws of physics, mathematics, logic, and such. I've told you for going on two years that I'm not a conservative and that I lean closer to libertarian than anything else. I think for myself and I don't fit a stereotype.
Did anybody expect Mark to judge anything correctly?
Mark: That's a horrible test with leading questions and quite a few that were totally incorrect. But to humor you, I took it.
You are a centrist social libertarian.
Left: 0.27, Libertarian: 7.35 Culture:
Where are you in the culture war? On the liberal side, or the conservative side? This scale may apply more to the US than other countries. You scored: -7.93
So Mark says I'm an authoritarian....(so there's the graph of their measurement) Seems his predictive abilities are exactly what I've predicted and described in the past.
I saw another blogger that found a similar quiz with almost the exact same questions on facebook and he eviscerated this quiz as a complete joke. A quiz with seriously flawed questions just as some of you have done here. I can't find it now or I would link to it as it was a great fisking.
Authoritarianism is a strong, overbearing state imposing it's will on it's people. Where the he'll did you get the idea that any of the regular posters other than YOU, Mark, are supportive of that? Dude - are we even reading the same blog? You do rememember the title of this blog, right? Maybe you should go look at the header...
But see, DJ and I like rules. Remember, this is Mark we're talking about, so Mark's definition of "rules" doesn't mean the same thing you (or I, but since I'm in the discussion it'll get confusing) would use.
Mark plays under the 3rd grade concept of rules - whatever I want to do, and whatever I did before, doesn't count unless it's in my benefit.
So when he makes something up, calling him on it later is "unfair" and making him "use a different set of rules". Nevermind nobody else *did that*, to call him on it later is *unfair*.
When he misuses words on a regular basis, it's *unfair* to keep bringing that up.
He's not allowed to merely say "point proven" and walk away, that's *unfair*. We're not allowed to talk about the abysmal and decreasing performance in public schools - because we don't know what we're talking about.
So forth and so on. So we keep holding him to the same set of considerations we do anybody else, and that chafes him badly at his immature core. How DARE we only let HIM have THREE STRIKES at bat. That's UNFAIR! The SUN WAS IN HIS EYES!
Mark insists the rules are unfair if he loses. Because we must all be equal in the end. If this does not happen, it can only be due to unfairness. More "rules" must be instituted to create fairness at the end.
He fails to understand that I, and I think DJ and Kevin, insist and demand that there be equal opportunity. Amazingly, there are lot less rules and a lot less problems enforcing them. And the overall result is better. In my opinion. But then, I'm a leftist according to Mark.
The quiz: Please tell us which side of the fence your opinions fall on. But we're not going to tell where the fence actually is. It struck me as being very, very similar to values clarification in its approach. In many cases, whether you chose "agree" or "disagree" depends entirely on your understanding of what the particular phrases mean.
In some cases, it was obvious that the two sides of the political spectrum have entirely different ideas of even what the words mean. For example, the word "rights". Heck, Kevin has grappled with this single concept in a number of posts already, because it's clearly a hard concept to nail down. Yet what the left and the right would call a "right" clearly differs.
If your measuring tools are imprecise (imaging a tape measure made out of spandex), you can't get a good measurement. This test seemed more to be made out of bungee cords. I also noticed that they had changed how the results were calculated, as noted in U-J's post. So what's the point of posting an imprecise measurement?
I admit that I'm more socially conservative than most of you. That's not necessarily the same thing as "authoritarian". Nor are those positions held randomly. I've posted evidence for why I hold those positions in the past and I don't see any reason to waste time on them now. I don't see any reason to be ashamed of positions based on evidence.
My biggest difference with Marky is actually quite simple: I'm convinced that Words Mean Things and that it's illegitimate to twist someone's words to say something other than what the author/speaker intended. Marky seems to think it's absolutely fine to redefine words and change meanings whenever you want.
"Liberal" is only the latest target. There's also "verbatim", "fascism", and more that I can't remember off the top of my head.
So that leads me to my final questions for the night:
"judge/jury/executioner"
What do these words mean this week?
Where have I ever claimed anything beyond the common judgement of a thinking man? (Or what should be the common judgment of any thinking man. Thinking carefully seems to be far too uncommon.)
The questions really were quite bad. There were several where I didn't even agree with the question as stated. Still, it placed me in the general area that I would put myself.
So, I'm a HEAVY anti-authoritarian, who supposed leans RIGHT. Remember this.
The quiz is all bullshit.
I can prove that the chart and graphs DO NOT align with one another, and that the results don't mean anything.
My bulls-eye (red 'X') on the graph falls to the far right edge, far down to the lower corner. Fine. I suppose that in the context of the first two numbers given, this makes sense. I don't really care, because, as I said, I know it's all bullshit.
Here's where my bulls-eye on the cultural scale, that is below the graph, comes in; how is it that I'm FARTHER to the LEFT of the average on the cultural scale, but the average graph shows that the bulls-eye is slightly to the left of center - meaning that the average on the cultural scale SHOULD be much farther to the left of me (again, because I'm supposedly far-right).
HOW.
IS.
THAT.
POSSIBLE?
Answer: The quiz maker has a predetermined outcome with regard to each question. He/she has already input what he/she thinks the "liberal vs. conservative" will answer, skewing the results. This is easily observed if one is awake, but that's surely asking too much from you, Marky. It' NOT AT ALL keeping with ANY sort of philosophical directive, which comes as no surprise to me, considering the way the questions were worded, and that few people who claim to be interested in "politics" know nor care anything about principles.
I also don't buy into the non-interventionalist average on the graph, either. It should be WAY north of the zero line. It's not aligning with what almost everyone in this nation blathers at the top of their fucking lungs, "ZMOG, WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE, DO SOMETHING!!! SAVE US, O BIG BROTHER, FOR WE DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO!" They simply CRY for intervention, and constant complain, even when "help" arrives. It's never the right help, or enough, or fast enough. Fucking Goldilocks needs to be silenced, for sure.
Fucking loser quiz with erroneous results.
Mark, you've stated your opinions here, over and over again. Despite your continued mush-mouth double-speak, waffling, sophistry and outright lying about "what you are", combined with not being able to use any logic, at all, WE ALL KNOW YOU ARE A COMMITTED COMMUNIST AUTHORITARIAN. GET OVER IT AND ADMIT IT TO YOURSELF.
Aha. You "appear", and fail to engage a single point brought up, lie about your activies, and misdirect. I'm not surprised.
I guess you and I have a different definition of "disappear." Mine does not include posting a minimum of 8 responses.
That is the first response in this thread since you made your predictions on me, DJ, Kevin, and didn't address your failures or the results of the stupid exam you introduced into the discussion.
Your "definition" of anything is suspect, as we've well-proved over the past 2 years here, and this is again, par for the course.
You disappeared.
Well, now you are in good company...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aud...ews/3679438940/
And doesn't Goldberg say that liberals are like Hitler?
You moronic dipshit, that's Lyndon LaRouche's outfit.
He's run for President as a Democrat 7 times, you idiot.
(Quick edit: After I Googled, (something else you can't do successfully, it turns out that wasn't aware of 2 attempts (I only remembered 5), and one as a "Labor Party" candidate.)
I'm not sure which is more on display here, your dishonesty, your inability to use English, or your historical and cultural illiteracy.
"I guess you and I have a different definition of "disappear.""
In this context, mine is that someone posts a comment which skewers you on the horns of reality like a wild boar in a punji pit, thus forcing you to confront the reality that you are wrong, but since you cannot admit to such, you just stay silent.
But it doesn't last, does it? You reappear later, exhibiting yet again your Standard Response #1, viz., that nothing ever happened, you weren't shown to be wrong, and Oh, look! A pony!
"So, last, does Lander's column apply here as well?"
(Thanks Unix) The guy LaRouche ran for pres on the dem ticket 7 times, campaigned for Kerry in 2004, tried to get Cheney off the gop ticket in 2002, was against privatizing social security, said the models he advocates come straight from FDR, he was endorsed by 2 dem state reps for president, he warned that the incoming Bush administration would attempt to govern by crisis management "just like the Reichstag fire in Germany", and During the Monica Lewinsky scandal he mobilized his supporters in defense of Clinton.
Hell he sounds just like you. Yep, my link applies. Boo-ya.
Yes, I did...and I know he didn't call liberals Hitler but he did call them fascists which is very not-so-clever way of saying they are like Hitler. Jeez...
Who *is* a doppleganger for Wile E. Coyote, granted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOSuhxFo76o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njMJmYnOS0I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAYkGZrFxa4
"Morning, Guys."
"Morning, Mark."
"Nice day, huh?" "*punches in timecard*
"Yep" *punch in timecards*
*wait*
*FFFFFFEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPP*
"Regulators don't regulate! Unfettered access! Republicans are AL QUEDA!!!! BUSH LIED! There's something suspicious about the collapse in NY! You're just SAYING that about do it again only harder, but if you'll just DO IT AGAIN, ONLY HARDER! LOOK! A PONY! STOP SAYING I SAID 'LOOK, A PONY!' - and HEY! LOOK, A PONY!"
*Guys repeatedly pummel Mark with facts, history, logic*
*FFFFFFEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPP*
"Night, Mark"
"g...Night... guys..." *Birds and stars spin around head as he walks home*
Possibly. There's also a certain resemblance to Pepe Le Pew.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEdBndu0YUM
He thinks he's all that, but totally oblivious to the fact that everyone just wants to get away from him, especially the girl he's pursuing. He always thinks the girl is something she isn't.
Mark: "Hey! Look! A Pony [political quiz]" ....
Days pass...
*crickets*
*crickets*
Mark: "I HAVE A LIFE! YOU CAN'T EXPECT ME TO COME BACK TO A THREAD WHERE I STARTED A TOPIC, WAS PROVEN WRONG! I HAVE A LIFE! I CAN'T HEAAARD YOU!!! NAAAAAA NAAAAA NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!"
Mark: "Hey! Look! A Pony [political quiz]" ....
Days pass...
*crickets*
*crickets*
Hey, I just took this quiz.
http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics...t=119058& ref=nf
Any of you take it yet?
Oh, and if you do take it, I'd like to see how many of you come out on the authoritarian side
geekWithA.45; Bonus Round for Marky:
Name the authoritarians, from among the regular posters here.
DJ and Unix no doubt. They love rules.
Ed, largely due to his religious background...judge/jury/executioner and all.
Kevin, solely based on his views on American corporate imperialism (cough and chuckle) foreign policy.
Yosemite, the tar and feathering comment.
Actually, this is the point where I'd expect the loserboy to show his ass, again.
Why? Since he thinks no one is paying any attention to the situation any longer, and can, ya know, get the last word, or something.
Maybe that's what he's after. I've missed the point, he doesn't show up any longer, because the post is off the main page. He's just an attention whore, just like his idol, Barry.
When Mark throws "something out there" (like, say a political quiz) and he's thrashed like this, he usually disappears for a week to three, then pops back up as if nothing happened, and he'll refuse to refer back to his loss.
But you understand, he's *kicking our ass in debate*. Forcing *us* to confront ugly truths!
The guy who created the Jokerized picture of Obama has been found, and he's a leftist!
He modified a scan of a Time magazine cover for fun, but all he modified was Obama's face. Someone else removed the Time magazine art and added the socialism tag. Here's what he had to say about the changes:
Regardless, Alkhateeb does agree with the Obama "Hope" artist about "socialism" being the wrong caption for the Joker image. "It really doesn't make any sense to me at all," he said. "To accuse him of being a socialist is really ... immature. First of all, who said being a socialist is evil?"
Care to stop smearing those on the "right", and address their concerns honestly?
You are a centrist social libertarian.
Left: 0.27, Libertarian: 7.35
Culture:
Where are you in the culture war? On the liberal side, or the conservative side? This scale may apply more to the US than other countries. You scored: -7.93
You should be able to have guns; all the guns you want. Guns guns guns and more guns. Guns out the ying, yang, and zen. No restriction on guns, their caliber, or even use of antimatter as projectile warheads. Is that your position?
It's been ..... two weeks since Mark posted here
Tossed off a comment about Hitler and ran away
18 days since he laughed and called us fascists
Take this test, come back and tell me
20 days since the original post
He realized he's wrong, but couldn't tell us
Yesterday he gave up
But it'll still be forever til he admits he's wrong...
"Hey, Look! Over there! A PONY!
...
AND YOU PEOPLE FILLED WITH RAGE AND HATE AND RACISM I WILL UTTERLY DESTROY YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES AND EVERYTHING YOU LOVE BECAUSE YOU ARE EEEEEVIL!!!!!!!"
"Wait, where's the pony?"
"DIDN'T YOU HEAR ME YOU RACIST SEXIST HATER WHO WOULD VOTE FOR CONDI RICE OR SARAH PALIN IN A HEARTBEAT I AM GOING TO DESTROY YOU BECAUSE I AM SICK AND TIRED OF YOUR HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE I HATE YOU I HATE YOU I HATE YOU BECAUSE YOU HATE EVERYTHING YOU HATE AMERICA YOU HATE PUPPIES!!!!!"
"Gee, I still don't see a pony - where were you looking? And maybe, you should cut back on the caffeine a bit, seems to be giving you some blood pressure problems?"
"THAT'S BECAUSE YOU'RE HATERS!! YOUR HATE!! AND I CAN'T GET FREE BLOOD PRESSURE MEDICINE BECAUSE OF YOUR HATE! I CAN'T FORCE DOCTORS AND COMPANIES TO WORK FOR FREE, BECAUSE OF YOU!!! WHAT IN THE FUCK IS THE MATTER WITH YOU?!??!?! DON'T YOU KNOW OBAMA LOVES YOU AND HAS SACRIFICED HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON SO SAVE YOU FROM YOURSELVES?!?!?! "
Have you - *gasp* - ABANDONED JAVIER? You did! Didn't you?!! I bet his boss was disciplined and you threw his now worthless-to-you-brown-butt under the bus!
Damn, but that's cold, Mark. I don't think we leftists like people who do that, do we?
How many threads must Markadelphia ignore
Before you call his thoughts schlocked?
Yes, how many stories must Javier tell
Before he's in chains locked?
Yes, how many times must the logical fallacies fly
Before they're forever mocked?
The answer, my friend, is blowin in the wind,
The answer is blowin in the wind.
How many times must Mark fuck up
Before he can admit he's wrong?
Yes, how many words must one man mangle
Before he uses a dictionary that's long?
Yes, how many comments will it take till he knows
That I am mocking him with this song?
The answer, my friend, is blowin in the wind,
The answer is blowin in the wind.
How many years can an ACORN exist
Before its caught helping enslave?
Yes, how many years can some people project
Before they admit they are deprave'?
Yes, how many times can a man point and yell,
Pretending neocons want to hang Obama in a tree?
The answer, my friend, is blowin in the wind,
The answer is blowin in the wind.
Note:
All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost;
references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>
JS-Kit/Echo comments for article at http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2009/08/mean-spirited-and-dangerous-vs.html (131 comments)
Tentative mapping of comments to original article, corrections solicited.
I am Spartacus.
You have no idea how much pleasure I get from saying "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism!" to liberals and then watching their little pointy heads explode. And then when they try to splutter their pathetic excuses to me, I ask them "Oh, so were you lying for the past eight years about that, or are you lying now? Liar."
That normally gets me called a Nazi. But I'm almost used to that by now. It's the Left's favorite epithet.
The liberals and kool aid drinkers have no standards.
"Dissent is Patriotic" is sooo last year...
Pot, meet kettle!
Dave, hit em with this...
http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/06/25/winner-4/
Absolute classic.
So, when Shepard Fairey, the guy who created the iconic Obama poster, also turns out to be the same Shepard Fairey who put out this poster of Bush
, we should think, what, exactly?Those on the left who are shrieking now about the cutting images of Their Messiah should remember this: They were, at best, silent, and at worst, laughing their heads off when the shoe was on the other foot (sorry about the mixed metaphors).
Personally, although I haven't given up the craft of a well-developed argument against one's political opponent, I have a new-found appreciation for Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, especially Rules 5 and 11, but most, Rule #4.
Goose meet gander... The sauce? How about reality... :-)
Ofari Hutchinson is a total nobody - a third-rate Jesse Jackson. He always seems to pop up for the most inane crap, always in an attempt to get face time.
"Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable"?
On second thought let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place.
It's doubleplus ungood to question the Minitruth.
It's OK folks, they've explained the difference now - it's fine to produce the image of Bush, because he is white, whereas doing so with Obama:
"the simple fact of publishing an image of a black president with his face covered in white greasepaint but for the eyes and a red slash of a mouth can't help but evoke a minstrel aesthetic, even if it's in reverse."
(from "The Guardian", the UK's primary socialist rag)
Remember folks, it's not a "double-standard" because mocking Obama is RASCISM.
Yeah.
Clearly, it's reference to the joker, and not to the minstrel aesthetic.
I thought those people where supposed to be nuanced in their understanding of reality.
I thought those people where supposed to be nuanced in their understanding of reality.
They are. Isn't "nuanced" the same as "spun", which is the same as "twisted"?
Clearly, it's reference to the joker, and not to the minstrel aesthetic.
Yes - clearly, but that's not a reality that it's easy for them to attack, so it's better to manufacture one.
[...] Mean-Spirited and Dangerous [...]
I don't have any problem with the photo. People can say whatever they want.
It's also amusing considering the fact that President Obama is not even a liberal.
Let's also remember that New Yorker cover as well:)
It's getting good out there!
No Mark. President Obama is a Liberal. (Note the case).
Jefferson was a liberal freedom of the individual was the guiding principle.
Markadelphia,
If you chase the opiates with a quart of whiskey, it'll make you feel better. I promise.
Or you could just go play kiss-the-locomotive. That'd be cool, too.
Little hint, Protagoras: When everyone knows it's sophistry, it works even less well than it did when it was merely orthogonal to the evidence.
"That normally gets me called a Nazi"
So, bunch the douchebag in the face next time.
He'll stop doing that Nazi routine, I promise.
You folks are going to have to come to the same conclusion that I've come to, this isn't a polite disagreement among us any longer. It's a devolving situation, and at some point, it's going to get really ugly. Step up to the plate and let them know it's time for business.
Mark,
First, go fuck yourself!
Second, we agree, Barry isn't a liberal at all. He's just a god-damned political thug in the truest Chi-town Hustle mold. So, if I'm being honest, he's really a Stalinist, if you want to pinpoint his political orientation. He's super high on the Y-axis of authoritarianism scale, as well as being a commited leftist.
Just so we're straight on the matter.
punch, punch the douchebag!
Dangerous to whom? The artist, when the commie leftists find out who he is, and send their hitman out to get him?
It's also amusing considering the fact that President Obama is not even a liberal.
And you are not really a blithering idiot.
Oh wait...
It's also amusing considering the fact that President Obama is not even a liberal.
It's true! Bill Maher said so!
Teacher boy, you have variously stated that "I am probably the most moderate person I know", that "I am liberal on many issues", and (in a comment that you addressed specifically to me) that "I am about as liberal as they come on many issues".
What you are is a liar who cannot remember his lies.
The man with THE most liberal voting record in the Senate, isn't, a, liberal.
I see. Blind is one thing. Eyes wide stupid is another.
Well, he's not a liberal. Or a Liberal. Sorry to bring the rest of the fucking world into your narrow band of political ideology in which everything to your left is "kiss-the-locomotive."
The fact is that we really don't have liberals in government at all. If you want to see a liberal, go to Europe. Or India. There you will find some liberals. I'd say chances are pretty good that we will never have anything like that here. Nor would I want it.
Maher is way off on many things but he hit the nail on the head with this one so much so that DJ's comment has made me realize that I'm not really a liberal either. Those earlier comments were honestly in error when you compare my views with...say...the views of a member of the Indian government. Or (stand by for rage) France. I'm center left in a country that is center right.
And that, by the way people, is what is commonly known as reflection and growth. You should try it some time. It will make you all much happier.
Well, see, apparently Mark's definition is the "official" one.
By all means, Mark, define it for us.
While you're at it, we're still waiting for you to define "good capitalism," since you pulled that bullshit again in your own little land.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all." - Lewis Carrol, Through the Looking Glass
Well, "liberal" used to mean "in favor of individual liberty," but it got co-opted by the "Progressive Left" (as I've illustrated here on a number of occasions).
When you get to make up the definitions - and change them at will - then words no longer have any meaning, and you can "win" any argument you like.
Mark,
You cannot define an ideology in relative terms.
An ideology has a particular worldview based on a set of principles and beliefs of the Good. What other people do, in Europe for example, is totally irrelevant to the content of an ideology.
What does "liberal" mean in your usage, that the President is not one?
"... honestly in error ..."
Look a bit more closely at those statements of yours that I cited. Read again your own question, posted on 04/15/07, "... when did I admit that I was a liberal?" Now read again your first statement, posted on 03/22/07, "I am liberal on many issues". Finally, read again your second statement, posted on 03/24/07: "I am about as liberal as they come on many issues".
You suffer from what ails most pathological liars, viz, you cannot remember your lies, even when they are only days apart. We can, and the ink's dry.
So, is it honest error? No, it's just more lies. The truth is that you say whatever you think will put out the fire that's nibbling at your toes, without regard for how much deeper it digs the hole your toes are in. (Ah, mixed metaphors; gotta love 'em ...)
Remember, teacher boy, it's about credibility, and you have demonstrated beyond all doubt that you don't have any.
Markadelphia.
As a Brit, I can assure you that the Libs over here consider Obama very much one of their own.
"... and you can "win" any argument you like."
Except with himself.
Hah. I crack me up.
At least the Obama poster looks like Obama. I wouldn't have guessed that the Bush poster was Bush.
"What you are is a liar who cannot remember his lies."
I don't think so. The leftist is being perfectly consistent, but you're confusing Left-Speak with English.
Let's see...we got Maxine Waters, who has threatened in so many words to nationalize the oil companies.
We got Henry Waxman, who speculates openly about price controls.
We got Dennis Kucinich, whose Department of Peace legislation makes for interesting (for given values of interesting) reading.
We got Bernie Sanders, who is an avowed socialist.
And that's just two minutes off the top of my head
We got somewhere north of 70 members in the Congressional Progressive Caucus; you can count 'em at http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/
But what we ain't got, according to Protagoras here, is liberals.
I'm beginning to think I owe an apology to the historical Protagoras, who at least appears to have been a skilled sophist.
You, Sparky, will be henceforth considered for the role of Claude Slagenhop, but even that might be beyond your gifts.
I'm beginning to think I owe an apology to the historical Protagoras, who at least appears to have been a skilled sophist.
Yes, you do.
As I noted here:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/khbaker/8360198871396776142/?src=hsn#610068 , Mark's behind a skateboarder in ability.
Let's also remember that New Yorker cover as well
Why, Mark?
What are we supposed to remember?
How about rather than say "How about", or, "Let's remember", you actually compose and present your argument.
That is, if you can.
Me: ""What you are is a liar who cannot remember his lies."
Lyle: "I don't think so."
I do think so.
His argument is, "Someone else's shit, somewhere on the other side of the world, stinks so bad that my shit actually smells good. Not 'relatively' good, mind you, but 'actually' good."
UJ, I skimmed that thread, and you're right. That feller Chuffson has considerably more on the ball than the evidence suggests Slagenhop here ever had.
And therefore, I do offer an apology to the possibly unquiet shade of Protagoras of Abdera, not for advancing a pernicious doctrine*, but for lending his name to a nullity like Slagenhop.
*Pernicious? At the very least: To the extent that Protagoras really was the father of relativism and phenomenalism, he can be held at least partially responsible for a great deal of the woe that plagues humankind to this day. I suppose that if he hadn't invented those particular tools of the darker side of human nature, though, someone else would have.
Ken,
Whatever = Relativism in a single word.
It's said regularly by teenagers (both physical and mental) who don't want to listen, and would prefer to believe what they want to believe in spite of the facts. Protagoras didn't invent relativism, he was just more creative than the average teenager.
The Bush poster is a work of art, and acknowledges the character at the same time it ridicules the ex-president. The perfect lipstick on the B. Hussein Obama poster seems more predatory.
But then, that seems appropriate, given the differences between the two men.
"I'm center left in a country that is center right."
Bullshit, douchebag, and you know it!
HOW ELSE could BARRY get elected, winning both the popular vote, and the electoral colleges, by considerable margins.
HOW THE FUCK DO YOU COME UP WITH TRIPE LIKE THAT, IN SPITE OF THE OVERWHELMING, AND WIDELY KNOWN FACTS THAT PROVE OTHERWISE?
Actually, I'm going to go with Marky-mark on the country being "center-right."
The Center-Right stayed HOME. They had no one to vote for, so they didn't bother.
Remember - McCain was just "the least repulsive Democrat running."
But Marky being "center-left"? No. Where he thinks the "center" is and where it actually is are pretty damned far apart.
Marky thinks that the media is "center-right."
Depicting the president as demonic and a socialist goes beyond political spoofery," says Hutchinson,
"It goes straight into accuracy. Now stop that!"
Marky thinks that the media is "center-right."
They're CORPORATIONS.
All corporations are Right Wing Nazi Death Camp Goosestepping Führers Who Enslave!
All of them!
The ones that made his car! RIGHT WING SLAVERY. Made his computer! Seig Heil Mein Boosh!!!
Made the textbooks he uses! RIGHT WING CORPORATION .. OOH! LOOK! A PONY! The corporations selling him internet access? ENSLAVING HIM MAKING HIM CRY DAILY. (That's not to mention what they do to poor Javier.... Poor Javier.)
Bill Maher? Formed a corporation to protect his assets! He's Right Wing! Michael Moore? So right wing not only did he form a corp to shelter his assets and gains, he refuses to use union labor!!!! They're ALL RIGHT WING.
How. Many. Times. Must. He. Explain. This. To. You. Kevin????? How many?
How. Many. Times. Must. He. Explain. This. To. You. Kevin????? How many?
It depends on what the meaning of "this" is...today.
We knew lots of Socialists when we lived in India, or Liberals as they called themselves - it was a point of personal honor made to benefit their own sense of broad-minded self-satisfaction.
'Marky thinks that the media is "center-right."'
Yeah, like Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann. They sure are right of center, aren't they.
Alright....here we go.
"By all means, Mark, define it for us."
"What does "liberal" mean in your usage, that the President is not one?"
"We got...."
And herein lies the problem. Liberal to me means a fully socialistic society. Or perhaps even a communist one. Liberal to most of you means a government that runs anything other than the military. France or India would be two examples of countries that are liberal in my eyes. They each contain a great deal of socialistic structures with France being much more so than India.
Currently, 20+ trillion dollars is in the hands of private organizations in this country. That's 99.77 percent of our nation's wealth. The other .23 percent is owned by the government. Some of that wealth has since been re-privatized by the banks. If President Obama was as liberal as all of you say he is, why would he allow that? And why is having such a tough time passing health care if Democrats are all so liberal? Why was the single payer bill from Conyers DOA?
Compare Obama's foreign policies with that of Dennis Kucinich...one of our perhaps three actual liberals in this country. President Obama has increased troop levels in AfPak and is keeping many Bush policies regarding the military in place. He has also increased veteran's benefits. One problem I have always had with the far left is they are terribly naive about the dangers in the world. That's not to say I agree with my colleagues on the right that we should just start bombing people to "keep us safe." We do need to strike a balance between diplomacy and military force...as Clauswitz has taught us....and as Obama is doing, although I do have criticism of his policies in AfPak but they have no bearing on the liberal vs. conservative meme.
"While you're at it, we're still waiting for you to define "good capitalism," since you pulled that bullshit again in your own little land."
I have. Several times. I guess I will again. Good capitalism would involve corporations that are interested in being competitive, rewarding their employees for hard work, maintaining a reasonable balance between executive pay and worker pay, reasonable government regulation and oversight, and a goal of innovation. We used to have this in our country. And then came the military industrial complex...the Reagan years...the bubbles...and criminals being allowed to essentially destroy the US economy.
I have watched in amazement on this blog (save a few like Bilgeman)...witnessing the textbook definition of denial as hyperbolic screams of government blame have been touted as the reason for our economic meltdown...when it was so plain that is was their negligence and simple human greed that sent us spiraling downward. This is why you lost the election...not because people stayed home...because rational people in the center saw this and voted accordingly. BTW, seven million MORE people voted in the last election. Who were they?
"As a Brit, I can assure you that the Libs over here consider Obama very much one of their own."
Really? Which ones, exactly? Because Blair and Brown both liked Bush and they both like Obama. Sounds pretty down the middle to me. If you are talking about the far left in Britain, then I think they are going to be sadly disappointed.
"Bullshit, douchebag, and you know it!
"But Marky being "center-left"? No. Where he thinks the "center" is and where it actually is are pretty damned far apart."
Well, my biggest hero was Jack Kennedy who many on the right say would've been a Republican were he alive today. I favor a strong defense and intervention in the economy only in dire emergencies (see:now). I think both Friedman and Keynes were brilliant...and correct. I think Carson has some good points about the perils of the welfare state. I don't favor a single payer health care system but do think a government plan should be an option. You want to call me far left? Fine...just because you say it, doesn't mean it's true.
So, this poster really doesn't matter a wit to me...other than I perhaps have failed in my job as an educator. Obama is not a socialist or even a liberal nor or his policies. Neither are the Democrats.
From my local paper....
Farmfest is typically a genial event -- a stop elected and aspiring officials consider an easy political must-do.
But at this year's gathering in rural Redwood Falls, as First District U.S. Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn., put in an appearance, an audience member declared loudly that plans for national health reform were a "step toward communism."
Walz, a veteran, shot back: "I didn't spend 24 years in the military to be called a Communist, I can tell you that."
I hope this is the beginning of the Democrats finding their balls and standing up to psychosis.
"...Obama is not a socialist or even a liberal nor or his policies. Neither are the Democrats..."
Which PROVES you do not know what you are talking about, teacherboy.
STFU, already!
"Liberal to me means a fully socialistic society. Or perhaps even a communist one."
Thus, by your definitions, the label "liberal" applies to a society, not to an individual.
But, I digress. That is no more than your usual and casual misuse of language.
The core redefinitional stupidity that you exhibit here is that, by your definition of liberal, liberals cannot exist in this country.
Still can't consider the logical consequences of your blatherings, can you?
"I favor a strong defense and intervention in the economy only in dire emergencies (see:now)."
In all your blather, this stands out like a neon sign on a deer blind.
Doofus boy, the current "dire emergency" was caused but the gubmint intervention in the economy. It is not, and will not be, the cure.
Finally, we see this, regarding your concept of "good capitalism":
"I have. Several times. I guess I will again."
Long ago, on 09/21/08, you originally defined "good capitalism" as taxation in the name of fairness.
Yet again, the ink's dry, teacher boy. Yet again, you're just making shit up as you go and trying to redefine yourself out of stupidity, aren't you?
I have. Several times.
You have not.
Nor have you here.
I guess I will again. Good capitalism would involve corporations that are interested in being competitive, rewarding their employees for hard work, maintaining a reasonable balance between executive pay and worker pay, reasonable government regulation and oversight, and a goal of innovation.
That's not a definition.
"Interested in..."
"Reasonable balance..."
"reasonable regulation..." are not definitions.
They're opinions. And as an opinion that might be fine, but it's also arguable on every case. You may consider a company to be good or bad based on your self-defined and unpublished criteria but it is utterly unworkable as a definition.
Define it. Such that we can use that definition to see how various entities would compare.
Not "relative" - give an acceptable range. Not "interested in" - give amounts needed. Figures. Percents. Facts.
So no, you still haven't defined it. If you were more aware, it would be time for you to stop talking about our "misuse of words". Ahem. Verbatim.
DJ points to where Mark claims to have defined it.
(from the original link, reposted here for it's ludicrousness.) I call it good capitalism. Socialism? Marxism? And you guys give me crap about words having meanings. You get to make up whatever you want to suit your ideology...especially when it has been thoroughly proved to not work.
(Like, say, government control of the economy? Naw, must not be that.)
While a good reference by DJ, that still isn't a definition of good capitalism.. Mark's prior "definition" was to point to a company no one else here has heard of, and claim that they met the definition. Which isn't a definition. Not until he tells us how and why they are within the limits - which involves setting limits and announcing them.
But for that attempt: Taxation has nothing to do with capitalism.
Capitalism. Noun: An economic system based on private ownership of capital.
So not only is DJ's find still not a usable definition, it conflicts with Mark's other "definition" attempts.
Oh, and Mark?
Worried about your arteries?
Go check out the local hospitals and CT scanning clinics.
The one my wife works for has a fair bit of CT scanner time free, so on Fridays they have heart CT's available to check the level of calcification of your arteries.
Costs $150.
Now, that is what I call good capitalism.
Hey, I just took this quiz.
http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html?fbqt=119058&ref=nf
Any of you take it yet?
Here were my results...
Mark is a left moderate social libertarian. Mark is also a slight non-interventionalist and culturally liberal. Mark's scores (from 0 to 10):
Economic issues:+3.62 left
Social issues:+3.14 libertarian
Foreign policy:+3.8 non-interventionalist
Cultural identification:+6.19 liberal
Category:political quizzes
They had a chart to show that I was slightly left of center...hmmm....
I'll respond to the latest round of barbs later...
Oh, and if you do take it, I'd like to see how many of you come out on the authoritarian side:)
the latest round of barbs
Pointing out your factual failures by using facts (or using your own words to point out you can't keep a consistent definition even in words you're misusing) is hardly a "barb".
I'll respond
But not answer.
The only 'good' type of capitalism provides for the maximum protection of individual rights, with the core emphasis on property rights.
Failure to do so isn't 'good' capitalism, it's something else.
And that something else can only defined by the characteristics of the model.
For example, when the State and it's mouthpieces are advocating State ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and for a society characterized by equal access to resources for all individuals, regardless of socioeconomic strata, there is a name for that: Socialism.
But why go on? The choir is nodding their heads, and the black hole of stupid isn't going to register a dang thing beyond yet another evil Republikkkan* using words and defining meanings.
*= I'm not Republican. Again, the subtleties of difference shall remain obscured to the willfully blind, but others can use this as one more data point in addressing the political makeup of those frequenting Kevin's fine parlor.
Hope whoever was the hack who designed that thing doesn't charge people money for research design.
Question 1: "all or most?" Well? Which is it?
Question 10: Double-barreled (it's really two questions).
Question 15: Two questions, scarcely related. (Also framed such that agreement indicates the respondent is a war for oooooiiiiil ch1ck3nh@wkz0rZ!!11!leven!!).
Question 26: Two questions, scarcely related (also framed such that agreement is raaaaaaacist).
That said, it managed to get into the ballpark, anyway:
My Political Views
I am a far-right social libertarian
Right: 9.52, Libertarian: 8.62
The only 'good' type of capitalism provides for the maximum protection of individual rights, with the core emphasis on property rights.
Frakkin A-men. Preach it, brother.
Oh, and if you do take it, I'd like to see how many of you come out on the authoritarian side
And yet further proof that Marky doesn't have more than one functioning neuron that if after 2+ years of reading Kevin and getting roasted every time he comments, he thinks this statement has merit.
Then again, we're just like Al queda.
Quizes (with dubious questions, as Ken relates) to supposedly "prove" a significant difference with what you've posted here, in black and white (well, the words are, anyway, even if his meanings are mush), for how many months?
{shakes head}
Mark, you're a failure. Admit it, and get the Hell outta here, forever.
theirritablearchitect: That would require a modicum of self-awareness and intellectual honesty on the part of Marky.
I haven't see it yet.
Mmmmkay, Marky.
I've taken the quiz, and archived the results.
Let's just see how accurately your perceptions of me (and by extension, the rest of us) are. You should have some idea, we've been flinging poo at each other for years.
Fill in the blanks:
The geekWithA.45 scored:
Economic: _____ Right/Left
Social: ____ libertarian/ authoritarian
Foreign Policy: ___ non-interventionist/neocon
Culture: ___ liberal/conservative.
Hell, I'll give you a spread of 3 points (meaning dead on, +/- 1 from the actual value, rounded according to grade school rules of arithmetic) on the hit/miss determinations.
Wanna play?
Oh jeeze, an internet *quiz-off* by Dorkaflagella - is that what education has come to these days? Mark fail.
The quiz plots a point on an orthogonal two-axis graph, and does so to three significant digits on each axis. Pardon me, ladies and gents, but that is pure horseshit. It might locate a point on one side of each axis or the other, but it won't do it to three significant digits.
Alright, geek...here is where I think you are at..
Economic Issues...+7 right
Social...+9 libertarian
Foreign Policy....+1 neocon
Culture....+4 conservative.
How did I do?
According to this,
the geekWithA.45 a right social libertarian.
Economic: 7.44 right (HIT!)
Social Issues: 5.05 libertarian (MISS!)
Foreign Policy: 2.54 "neocon" (MISS!But damned close)
Culture: 1.38 "liberal" (MISS!)
Comment:
Given that libertarianism is every bit as much about economic issues as social, I'm very skeptical the way the axes are aligned in this model, but like all of these maps, you have to take them for what they're worth. (not much)
Bonus Round for Marky:
Name the authoritarians, from among the regular posters here.
DJ and Unix no doubt. They love rules.
Ed, largely due to his religious background...judge/jury/executioner and all.
Kevin, solely based on his views on American corporate imperialism (cough and chuckle) foreign policy.
Yosemite, the tar and feathering comment.
That's a short list off of the top of my head.
As to the quiz, I am surprised by the social liberal answer but I'm happy to be wrong. Also surprised by the libertarian one...less than I thought it would be.
All of you will be happy to know that I marked "Strongly agree" with the right to bear arms. I credit this blog for taking me from agree to strongly agree.
All of you will be happy to know that I marked "Strongly agree" with the right to bear arms. I credit this blog for taking me from agree to strongly agree.
Yet you don't think supporting a ban on "assault weapons" makes you a "gun banner".
Nice to know you believe I'm an authoritarian, given the fact that your quiz says I'm not.
Hmmm, let's see, my guesses on where our host's numbers would fall... Basically +/- 1...
Economic: 7.5 right
Social Issues: 5.5 libertarian
Foreign Policy: 1.0 neo-con
Culture: 0.5 conservative
Interesting test. Oddly skewed as has been noted... but interesting nonetheless.
Geek: "Name the authoritarians, from among the regular posters here."
Markadopia: "DJ and Unix no doubt. They love rules."
I took the quiz. The result was:
"You are a far-right social libertarian. Right: 8.49, Libertarian: 3.79."
and
"Foreign policy: ... You scored 1.65"
and
"Culture: ... You scored -1.13"
Note that last minus sign, doofus.
Note also that you're wrong, yet again.
I don't love rules, except the laws of physics, mathematics, logic, and such. I've told you for going on two years that I'm not a conservative and that I lean closer to libertarian than anything else. I think for myself and I don't fit a stereotype.
You just will not learn, will you, teacher boy?
"Right social libertarian"
Right: 4.67
Libertarian: 4.62
Foreign Policy: 1.3
Culture -2.25
Poor questions.
Did anybody expect Mark to judge anything correctly?
Mark: That's a horrible test with leading questions and quite a few that were totally incorrect. But to humor you, I took it.
You are a centrist social libertarian.
Left: 0.27, Libertarian: 7.35
Culture:
Where are you in the culture war? On the liberal side, or the conservative side? This scale may apply more to the US than other countries. You scored: -7.93
So Mark says I'm an authoritarian....(so there's the graph of their measurement) Seems his predictive abilities are exactly what I've predicted and described in the past.
I saw another blogger that found a similar quiz with almost the exact same questions on facebook and he eviscerated this quiz as a complete joke. A quiz with seriously flawed questions just as some of you have done here. I can't find it now or I would link to it as it was a great fisking.
Authoritarianism is a strong, overbearing state imposing it's will on it's people. Where the he'll did you get the idea that any of the regular posters other than YOU, Mark, are supportive of that? Dude - are we even reading the same blog? You do rememember the title of this blog, right? Maybe you should go look at the header...
Hell. Effing iphone autocorrect.
Kevin S:
But see, DJ and I like rules. Remember, this is Mark we're talking about, so Mark's definition of "rules" doesn't mean the same thing you (or I, but since I'm in the discussion it'll get confusing) would use.
Mark plays under the 3rd grade concept of rules - whatever I want to do, and whatever I did before, doesn't count unless it's in my benefit.
So when he makes something up, calling him on it later is "unfair" and making him "use a different set of rules". Nevermind nobody else *did that*, to call him on it later is *unfair*.
When he misuses words on a regular basis, it's *unfair* to keep bringing that up.
He's not allowed to merely say "point proven" and walk away, that's *unfair*. We're not allowed to talk about the abysmal and decreasing performance in public schools - because we don't know what we're talking about.
So forth and so on. So we keep holding him to the same set of considerations we do anybody else, and that chafes him badly at his immature core. How DARE we only let HIM have THREE STRIKES at bat. That's UNFAIR! The SUN WAS IN HIS EYES!
Mark insists the rules are unfair if he loses. Because we must all be equal in the end. If this does not happen, it can only be due to unfairness. More "rules" must be instituted to create fairness at the end.
He fails to understand that I, and I think DJ and Kevin, insist and demand that there be equal opportunity. Amazingly, there are lot less rules and a lot less problems enforcing them. And the overall result is better. In my opinion. But then, I'm a leftist according to Mark.
The quiz: Please tell us which side of the fence your opinions fall on. But we're not going to tell where the fence actually is. It struck me as being very, very similar to values clarification in its approach. In many cases, whether you chose "agree" or "disagree" depends entirely on your understanding of what the particular phrases mean.
In some cases, it was obvious that the two sides of the political spectrum have entirely different ideas of even what the words mean. For example, the word "rights". Heck, Kevin has grappled with this single concept in a number of posts already, because it's clearly a hard concept to nail down. Yet what the left and the right would call a "right" clearly differs.
If your measuring tools are imprecise (imaging a tape measure made out of spandex), you can't get a good measurement. This test seemed more to be made out of bungee cords. I also noticed that they had changed how the results were calculated, as noted in U-J's post. So what's the point of posting an imprecise measurement?
I admit that I'm more socially conservative than most of you. That's not necessarily the same thing as "authoritarian". Nor are those positions held randomly. I've posted evidence for why I hold those positions in the past and I don't see any reason to waste time on them now. I don't see any reason to be ashamed of positions based on evidence.
My biggest difference with Marky is actually quite simple: I'm convinced that Words Mean Things and that it's illegitimate to twist someone's words to say something other than what the author/speaker intended. Marky seems to think it's absolutely fine to redefine words and change meanings whenever you want.
"Liberal" is only the latest target. There's also "verbatim", "fascism", and more that I can't remember off the top of my head.
So that leads me to my final questions for the night:
"judge/jury/executioner"
What do these words mean this week?
Where have I ever claimed anything beyond the common judgement of a thinking man? (Or what should be the common judgment of any thinking man. Thinking carefully seems to be far too uncommon.)
Wrong again Mark.
I am a right social libertarian
Right: 5.34, Libertarian: 5.83
Foreign Policy: -0.37
Culture: -2.2
You really need to learn about hyperbole.
The questions really were quite bad. There were several where I didn't even agree with the question as stated. Still, it placed me in the general area that I would put myself.
For what it's worth...
My Political Views
I am a right social libertarian
Right: 4.76, Libertarian: 4.6
Political Spectrum Quiz
You are a right social moderate.
Right: 5.67, Libertarian: 0.86
FP: 4.07 Culture 4.05
Compared to average quiz takers, I am an outlier :)
Took your little bogus test, Marky.
Results:
far-right social libertarian (whatever that means)
Right: 10, Libertarian: 7.95
Foreign Policy: -3.03
Culture: -3.97
So, I'm a HEAVY anti-authoritarian, who supposed leans RIGHT. Remember this.
The quiz is all bullshit.
I can prove that the chart and graphs DO NOT align with one another, and that the results don't mean anything.
My bulls-eye (red 'X') on the graph falls to the far right edge, far down to the lower corner. Fine. I suppose that in the context of the first two numbers given, this makes sense. I don't really care, because, as I said, I know it's all bullshit.
Here's where my bulls-eye on the cultural scale, that is below the graph, comes in; how is it that I'm FARTHER to the LEFT of the average on the cultural scale, but the average graph shows that the bulls-eye is slightly to the left of center - meaning that the average on the cultural scale SHOULD be much farther to the left of me (again, because I'm supposedly far-right).
HOW.
IS.
THAT.
POSSIBLE?
Answer: The quiz maker has a predetermined outcome with regard to each question. He/she has already input what he/she thinks the "liberal vs. conservative" will answer, skewing the results. This is easily observed if one is awake, but that's surely asking too much from you, Marky. It' NOT AT ALL keeping with ANY sort of philosophical directive, which comes as no surprise to me, considering the way the questions were worded, and that few people who claim to be interested in "politics" know nor care anything about principles.
I also don't buy into the non-interventionalist average on the graph, either. It should be WAY north of the zero line. It's not aligning with what almost everyone in this nation blathers at the top of their fucking lungs, "ZMOG, WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE, DO SOMETHING!!! SAVE US, O BIG BROTHER, FOR WE DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO!" They simply CRY for intervention, and constant complain, even when "help" arrives. It's never the right help, or enough, or fast enough. Fucking Goldilocks needs to be silenced, for sure.
Fucking loser quiz with erroneous results.
Mark, you've stated your opinions here, over and over again. Despite your continued mush-mouth double-speak, waffling, sophistry and outright lying about "what you are", combined with not being able to use any logic, at all, WE ALL KNOW YOU ARE A COMMITTED COMMUNIST AUTHORITARIAN. GET OVER IT AND ADMIT IT TO YOURSELF.
Mark, having posed a test of his own choice, and having predicted results...
Now disappears.
I'm going to predict that nobody here will be surprised.
I'm still around, Unix. I guess you and I have a different definition of "disappear." Mine does not include posting a minimum of 8 responses.
"That normally gets me called a Nazi. But I'm almost used to that by now. It's the Left's favorite epithet."
Well, now you are in good company...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/audaxnews/3679438940/
And doesn't Goldberg say that liberals are like Hitler?
So, last, does Lander's column apply here as well?:)
And doesn't Goldberg say that liberals are like Hitler?
You never read the book, did you?
The answer is "no."
Mark:
Aha. You "appear", and fail to engage a single point brought up, lie about your activies, and misdirect. I'm not surprised.
I guess you and I have a different definition of "disappear." Mine does not include posting a minimum of 8 responses.
That is the first response in this thread since you made your predictions on me, DJ, Kevin, and didn't address your failures or the results of the stupid exam you introduced into the discussion.
Your "definition" of anything is suspect, as we've well-proved over the past 2 years here, and this is again, par for the course.
You disappeared.
Well, now you are in good company...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aud...ews/3679438940/
And doesn't Goldberg say that liberals are like Hitler?
You moronic dipshit, that's Lyndon LaRouche's outfit.
He's run for President as a Democrat 7 times, you idiot.
(Quick edit: After I Googled, (something else you can't do successfully, it turns out that wasn't aware of 2 attempts (I only remembered 5), and one as a "Labor Party" candidate.)
I'm not sure which is more on display here, your dishonesty, your inability to use English, or your historical and cultural illiteracy.
I'll call it a 3-way tie.
"I guess you and I have a different definition of "disappear.""
In this context, mine is that someone posts a comment which skewers you on the horns of reality like a wild boar in a punji pit, thus forcing you to confront the reality that you are wrong, but since you cannot admit to such, you just stay silent.
But it doesn't last, does it? You reappear later, exhibiting yet again your Standard Response #1, viz., that nothing ever happened, you weren't shown to be wrong, and Oh, look! A pony!
"So, last, does Lander's column apply here as well?"
(Thanks Unix) The guy LaRouche ran for pres on the dem ticket 7 times, campaigned for Kerry in 2004, tried to get Cheney off the gop ticket in 2002, was against privatizing social security, said the models he advocates come straight from FDR, he was endorsed by 2 dem state reps for president, he warned that the incoming Bush administration would attempt to govern by crisis management "just like the Reichstag fire in Germany", and During the Monica Lewinsky scandal he mobilized his supporters in defense of Clinton.
Hell he sounds just like you. Yep, my link applies. Boo-ya.
"You never read the book, did you?"
Yes, I did...and I know he didn't call liberals Hitler but he did call them fascists which is very not-so-clever way of saying they are like Hitler. Jeez...
Mark spins, dodges and weaves!
Thomething amiss here... Oh, right!
It's supposed to be:
HO! HA! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! HA! Spin! Thrust!
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5ey5n_merrie-melodies-robin-hood-daffy-19_shortfilms
Mark,
You are an idiot. You prove it every time you write something here, including that last bit.
STFU.
Move along.
Or drop dead.
Goddamn - if that goalpost moved any faster it'd be eligible for Nascar.
Yikes!....and away!! Haha, it is to laugh.
Mark: "Hey! Look! A Pony [political quiz]" ....
Days pass...
*crickets*
Mark: What? I didn't disappear! Hey! Look! A Pony! (And you guys are idiots!)
*crickets*
Mark [Daffy]: "I am Robin Hood! [a smart, thoughtful commentator]"
Us [Porky]: "Why, I don't know how I could have doubted you."
You guys is being awfully tough on Daffy Duck, ain't you?
I say Slagenhop is more like Wile E. Coyote, Super Genius (sorry, Wile E.):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXU9SntbatE&NR=1
Ken: Not while he's dodging and HA! and HO! ing and whacking himself in the face with his buck-and-a-quarter-quarterstaff.
Plus, Wile E. Coyote, Genius, could admit defeat.
Now this coyote on the other hand...
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=911314
U-J, you've GOT to watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyEgxyH2LJk
Damn, Kevin, there's tea on my screen again. I never saw it coming.
HAH! ROFL!
You can't ever go wrong with Foghorn Leghorn. "Doo-Dah! Doo-Dah! I said Hey Boy!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rvwh9_HsUmU
I always liked The Ant and the Aardvark. "Hey Ant!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w07dKi9fRFU
Mark: "Hey! Look! A Pony [political quiz]" ....
Days pass...
*crickets*
I think I've found a better parallel to Mark.
Ralph Wolf.
Who *is* a doppleganger for Wile E. Coyote, granted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOSuhxFo76o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njMJmYnOS0I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAYkGZrFxa4
"Morning, Guys."
"Morning, Mark."
"Nice day, huh?" "*punches in timecard*
"Yep" *punch in timecards*
*wait*
*FFFFFFEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPP*
"Regulators don't regulate! Unfettered access! Republicans are AL QUEDA!!!! BUSH LIED! There's something suspicious about the collapse in NY! You're just SAYING that about do it again only harder, but if you'll just DO IT AGAIN, ONLY HARDER! LOOK! A PONY! STOP SAYING I SAID 'LOOK, A PONY!' - and HEY! LOOK, A PONY!"
*Guys repeatedly pummel Mark with facts, history, logic*
*FFFFFFEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPP*
"Night, Mark"
"g...Night... guys..." *Birds and stars spin around head as he walks home*
"Ralph Wolf"
Possibly. There's also a certain resemblance to Pepe Le Pew.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEdBndu0YUM
He thinks he's all that, but totally oblivious to the fact that everyone just wants to get away from him, especially the girl he's pursuing. He always thinks the girl is something she isn't.
Mark: "Hey! Look! A Pony [political quiz]" ....
Days pass...
*crickets*
*crickets*
Ha. I love those Sam and Ralph cartoon with the sheepdog. Thanks.
Looks like Marky may be back in "wait for my beatings to leave the front page" mode.
Mark: "Hey! Look! A Pony [political quiz]" ....
Days pass...
*crickets*
*crickets*
Mark: "I HAVE A LIFE! YOU CAN'T EXPECT ME TO COME BACK TO A THREAD WHERE I STARTED A TOPIC, WAS PROVEN WRONG! I HAVE A LIFE! I CAN'T HEAAARD YOU!!! NAAAAAA NAAAAA NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!"
Days pass...
*crickets*
*crickets*
Mmm... crickets...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKJgwLPjmlw&feature=related
I may start referring to Mark as "El Grillo".
Mark: "Hey! Look! A Pony [political quiz]" ....
Days pass...
*crickets*
*crickets*
Hey, I just took this quiz.
http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics...t=119058& ref=nf
Any of you take it yet?
Oh, and if you do take it, I'd like to see how many of you come out on the authoritarian side
geekWithA.45; Bonus Round for Marky:
Name the authoritarians, from among the regular posters here.
DJ and Unix no doubt. They love rules.
Ed, largely due to his religious background...judge/jury/executioner and all.
Kevin, solely based on his views on American corporate imperialism (cough and chuckle) foreign policy.
Yosemite, the tar and feathering comment.
*crickets*
*crickets*
*crickets*
*crickets*
Gee, where was that pony?
*clucks*
HERE, PONY PONY PONY.
PONY! IS THERE A PONY ANYWHERE?
I've got CARRROOOTS! C'mere, good pony, good pony.
Actually, this is the point where I'd expect the loserboy to show his ass, again.
Why? Since he thinks no one is paying any attention to the situation any longer, and can, ya know, get the last word, or something.
Maybe that's what he's after. I've missed the point, he doesn't show up any longer, because the post is off the main page. He's just an attention whore, just like his idol, Barry.
IRA:
It's possible.
But I think he's gone for a while.
When Mark throws "something out there" (like, say a political quiz) and he's thrashed like this, he usually disappears for a week to three, then pops back up as if nothing happened, and he'll refuse to refer back to his loss.
But you understand, he's *kicking our ass in debate*. Forcing *us* to confront ugly truths!
Oh, he's lurking.
The guy who created the Jokerized picture of Obama has been found, and he's a leftist!
He modified a scan of a Time magazine cover for fun, but all he modified was Obama's face. Someone else removed the Time magazine art and added the socialism tag. Here's what he had to say about the changes:
Regardless, Alkhateeb does agree with the Obama "Hope" artist about "socialism" being the wrong caption for the Joker image. "It really doesn't make any sense to me at all," he said. "To accuse him of being a socialist is really ... immature. First of all, who said being a socialist is evil?"
*crickets*
*crickets*
Guess "life" just happened again.
Who'da thunk it?
Who could have predicted it?
It must be magic!
Another day, another day in "the life"...
Hey, Mark, my fellow "leftist"...
Care to stop smearing those on the "right", and address their concerns honestly?
You are a centrist social libertarian.
Left: 0.27, Libertarian: 7.35
Culture:
Where are you in the culture war? On the liberal side, or the conservative side? This scale may apply more to the US than other countries. You scored: -7.93
Mah fellow leftist!
Would you guys agree with this:
You should be able to have guns; all the guns you want. Guns guns guns and more guns. Guns out the ying, yang, and zen. No restriction on guns, their caliber, or even use of antimatter as projectile warheads. Is that your position?
*crickets*
*crickets*
It's not that Mark is ignoring this thread, he's just not paying attention to it intentionally!
I guess Life got to callin'.
What's life?
A board game.
How much does it cost?
$15.
I've only got $10.
That's life.
What's life?
A board game.
How much does it cost?
$15.
I've only got $10.
That's life.
What's life?
...
Is there anybody left who didn't take the test? Everybody done?
You there in the back! What's the holdup?
Mark will be back soonish, and will want to discuss the test he asked us to take!
(to the tune of The Bare Naked Ladies "One Week")
It's been ..... two weeks since Mark posted here
Tossed off a comment about Hitler and ran away
18 days since he laughed and called us fascists
Take this test, come back and tell me
20 days since the original post
He realized he's wrong, but couldn't tell us
Yesterday he gave up
But it'll still be forever til he admits he's wrong...
"Hey, Look! Over there! A PONY!
...
AND YOU PEOPLE FILLED WITH RAGE AND HATE AND RACISM I WILL UTTERLY DESTROY YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES AND EVERYTHING YOU LOVE BECAUSE YOU ARE EEEEEVIL!!!!!!!"
"Wait, where's the pony?"
"DIDN'T YOU HEAR ME YOU RACIST SEXIST HATER WHO WOULD VOTE FOR CONDI RICE OR SARAH PALIN IN A HEARTBEAT I AM GOING TO DESTROY YOU BECAUSE I AM SICK AND TIRED OF YOUR HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE I HATE YOU I HATE YOU I HATE YOU BECAUSE YOU HATE EVERYTHING YOU HATE AMERICA YOU HATE PUPPIES!!!!!"
"Gee, I still don't see a pony - where were you looking? And maybe, you should cut back on the caffeine a bit, seems to be giving you some blood pressure problems?"
"THAT'S BECAUSE YOU'RE HATERS!! YOUR HATE!! AND I CAN'T GET FREE BLOOD PRESSURE MEDICINE BECAUSE OF YOUR HATE! I CAN'T FORCE DOCTORS AND COMPANIES TO WORK FOR FREE, BECAUSE OF YOU!!! WHAT IN THE FUCK IS THE MATTER WITH YOU?!??!?! DON'T YOU KNOW OBAMA LOVES YOU AND HAS SACRIFICED HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON SO SAVE YOU FROM YOURSELVES?!?!?! "
I'm still waiting to hear about Javier!
Is he still crying?
Why won't you tell us about Javier?
Have you - *gasp* - ABANDONED JAVIER? You did! Didn't you?!! I bet his boss was disciplined and you threw his now worthless-to-you-brown-butt under the bus!
Damn, but that's cold, Mark. I don't think we leftists like people who do that, do we?
How many threads must Markadelphia ignore
Before you call his thoughts schlocked?
Yes, how many stories must Javier tell
Before he's in chains locked?
Yes, how many times must the logical fallacies fly
Before they're forever mocked?
The answer, my friend, is blowin in the wind,
The answer is blowin in the wind.
How many times must Mark fuck up
Before he can admit he's wrong?
Yes, how many words must one man mangle
Before he uses a dictionary that's long?
Yes, how many comments will it take till he knows
That I am mocking him with this song?
The answer, my friend, is blowin in the wind,
The answer is blowin in the wind.
How many years can an ACORN exist
Before its caught helping enslave?
Yes, how many years can some people project
Before they admit they are deprave'?
Yes, how many times can a man point and yell,
Pretending neocons want to hang Obama in a tree?
The answer, my friend, is blowin in the wind,
The answer is blowin in the wind.
Note: All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost; references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>