牛皮癣的治疗 治疗牛皮癣 治疗牛皮癣 牛皮癣治疗 治疗牛皮癣 牛皮癣的治疗 牛皮癣治疗 治疗牛皮癣 牛皮癣的治疗 牛皮癣治疗 治疗牛皮癣 牛皮癣治疗 牛皮癣治疗 牛皮癣的治疗 牛皮癣治疗 牛皮癣的治疗

斑秃的治疗方法 治疗斑秃的药物 斑秃表现 如何治疗斑秃 治疗斑秃脱发 治疗斑秃方法 治疗斑秃 斑秃治疗方法 婴儿斑秃 治疗斑秃脱发 治疗斑秃的药物 斑秃的治疗方法 女性斑秃 治疗斑秃脱发 治疗头发斑秃

小儿疱疹 生殖性疱疹 病毒性疱疹 带状疱疹后遗症 疱疹病毒 疱疹症状 汗疱疹的治疗 带状疱疹图片 单纯疱疹治疗方法 带状疱疹治疗

脂溢性皮炎的治疗 脂溢性皮肤 什么是脂溢性皮炎 治疗面部脂溢性皮炎 脂溢性皮炎症状 脂溢性皮炎症状图片 如何治疗脂溢性皮炎 脂溢性角化病 脂溢性皮炎的治疗方法 治疗脂溢性皮炎

Finally a liberal comment that makes sense!!!
Gracias, pifu!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will not be attending. My mission is to eviserate Isaiah.

Kermit-
Look how many times the characters 牛 皮 were repeated! I think this means 'boot licking right-wing nutjob' in English. This may be PB trying to work around his banishment.

Something I've learned over the years -- when liberals see a lot of conservatives in anger over something, they think they are on something. The "they're screaming, so we're doing something right" mentality is driving them more and more leftward and bitter, so I'm all for it. Just go on thinking we're all enraged because of your politics. We're just laughing as you sabotage your next election.

Good God Mitch. Let it go.

Mitch said: "Smartie is young and liberal, so I don't expect much in the way of discernment from the lad - but there was no "howling" whatsoever."

Definitely no howling. More like the errant wonkery of a laid-off tax accountant who really needs a hobby. Or a date. (Want to see my 9,837-page spreadsheet?)

Watch out, Smartie from Powerliberal. Mitch and his minions are on to you. Soon they will be publishing reams of pie charts, spread sheets and bar graphs to prove beyond a doubt that you're...liberal.

If:
1) Smartie has the power to raise my taxes (to pay for plans that essentially aggrandize him) and
2) he proclaims himself "really nonpartisan" (see Lori Sturdevant) then yes, count on a bigass spreadsheet.

Let it go, Clown.

Doug: It's my blog. I write what I want to. *You* let it go.

Mommy, Mommy! The angry clown tried to show me his spreadsheet!

It's becoming rote for me , but I'll say it again as mitch has before. If G&J wants taxes raised for liberal causes A, B, & C all well and good.

We just want to pull the curtain back and remove the fig leaf that they are "bi-partisan"

Pay no attention to that liberal behind the curtain!

"Elitist , Hard-left patricians who just plain know whats best for us proles"

Indeed

"Doug: It's my blog. I write what I want to. *You* let it go."

Well Okie Dokie then. I stand corrected. It actually is pretty funny watching you desperately trying to have your own Killian document moment.

Carry on.

You think the research is bogus? Mitch is making things up? Doug, please explain in further detail why you feel those people are in fact "bi-partisan" and Mitch is making all this up.

We (the participants in the blogswarm) certainly could have been as intellectually lazy as bitchie-clown or fake-but-poll-watcher Dougie-boy...and simply looked at the list of DFL fat-cats...and simply called them all liberals, doing no work to back up our assertion.

Instead of making baseless assertions, we did a bit of investigating. And we backed up our words with fact.

I was going to do a whole riff on AC and Mary Mapes, but thought better of it.

Your exercise is akin to looking at the Twins Roster and determining that all twins employees are millionaires. While those that signed onto, and apparently paid for the ad were largely those on the left side of the spectrum, did you analyze the political affiliation of all the G&J's members?

"Your exercise is akin to looking at the Twins Roster and determining that all twins employees are millionaires. "

No, 'crum. It's akin to publishing the Twins salaries after their front office declared that they were all a bunch of blue-collar working stiffs.

I don't know what it is about this point that's so hard for all of you lefties - 'crum, Clown, Doug, Cucking Tool, Smartie, Flash, angrysponge, the whole lot of you - to follow; the whole exercise was designed to make it impossible to claim that G'nJ is "bipartisan". It succeeded.

It doesn't seem that complicated. But then, I'm not a liberal, so I'm no good at obfuscation...

Talk about obfuscation...you didn't even address the question: "Did you analyze the political affiliation of all the G&J's members?" The answer is no, so how can you determine that G&J is not bipartisan?

So you use your analogy, you can prove that the twins players are not working class stiffs based upon their published salaries, but you would then agrue that all employees of the twins are millionaires.

If they give 95+% of their political donations to DFL/Democrat candidates (and most of the "GOP" donations were to moderate/liberal GOP campaigns/lobbies, to boot), then what difference does their *stated* affiliation make, even *if* it differs from the obvious conclusion?

You're parsing, 'crum.

Mitch, I think you are misunderstanding what I am trying to say. Your analysis shows the political affiliation of the signers of the ad, but how can you assume that those signers are representative of the whole membership of G&J?

"Doug, please explain in further detail why you feel those people are in fact "bi-partisan" and Mitch is making all this up."

They're bi-partisan for the same reason the Tazpayers League of Minnesota calls themselves non-partisan.

Would it make you all happy if these guys changed their marketing material to say, "non-partisan"?

I never said Mitch was making anything up. I said Mitch was desperately trying to create an event - a blogswarm - please... but it all fizzled out.

Blogswarm. Reminds me of the early days when I worked in the development world and my managers and sales guys threw out terms like "Doug's our Director guru", "Burn some ROMS" and my personal favorite... "Re-purposing your digital assets..."

"but it all fizzled out. "

Wrong, Doug.

I proved my point. And the next time Lori Sturdevant or Doug Grow calls G'nJ a "non-partisan group", we'll have the wherewithal to jam the claim down their throats.

Fizzle my ass. It was a blast.

Aye, if it were a bust , I don't think Doug and AC and Fulcrum and the Rest would bother quite so much.

"The lady she doth protest too much"

they want to argue definitions , but never quite address the point

"like a poor marksman, you keep missing the target"

Chaosfish, what exactly is your point then? I have asked this question...but all i get are chirping crickets.

"Did you analyze the political affiliation of all the G&J's members?"

Aye, if it were a bust , I don't think Doug and AC and Fulcrum and the Rest would bother quite so much.

Bother with what? A few snarky comments about how pointless the whole excercise is? Wow. I'm exhausted. How about you AC? Fulcrum?

It's like you guys just figured out that "Made with real fruit juice" actually means 98% corn syrup and sugar water. Stop the presses and call out your minions...

The Taxpayers League gets away with claiming to be non-partisan for years. Crickets. These guys claim to be bi-partisan - because they have Democrats and Republicans as signatories and you guys go apoplectic.

Sorry but it's funny in a sad, pathetic, get a life kinda way.

I just wish you guys would have been as ambitious and motivated when the administration was making claims that were clearly slanted to fit an agenda.

Mitch put on a brave face: "Fizzle my ass. It was a blast."

A... blast? You're about as convincing as the week when Cheney shot that old lawyer in the face and you guys were all We Don't See What's So Amusing.

Thanks for the concern, but Angryclown and Doug, et al., are not nearly as worn out as if we'd, say, spent a week on a geeky hey-kids-let's-put-on-a-blogswarm spreadsheetfest.

Sure, we're laughing at you cause we don't get the true importance of the project - probably didn't read the crucial cell, ZZ-59. Or maybe it's cause you all set out with the best wingnut intentions to slime people who disagree with you and you ended up spinning your wheels.

We think that's funny. So we'll probably be laughing till it gets old. For us, I mean. Sounds like you guys are crying uncle already.

HA! Doug had his digital assests re-purposed.
Did it hurt?

"slime people who disagree with you"

Where's the slime? We published public records. Presumably they stand behind their beliefs.

" and you ended up spinning your wheels...Sounds like you guys are crying uncle already."

Wow. You should work in fiction!

or have you been making little trips to Marsha's special little world?

Fulcrum asks

"Did you analyze the political affiliation of all the G&J's members?"

No, they (the blogswarmers) did one better, they analyzed the actions ( i.e. the contribution habits ) of the 203 signatories from G& Js Star Tribune kick off. And again 95% of their contributions were to Democratic or left leaning groups. Actions and dollars speak louder than words. A person may call themselves a Republican,
but proofs in the pudding.

Doug said
"The Taxpayers League gets away with claiming to be non-partisan for years. Crickets."

And you can criticize them for that rightfully ( though I would point out that the League has been equally hard on folks with a R next to their name who don't hold the line on taxes) But does that change the fact that G& J is Democractic behind the curtain of bi-partisan.

And AC, is it slime to respecfully poimnt out that the figleaf that G&J is hiding behind is a group of RINO's whose contribution patterns belie their stated party affiliation ?

Chaosfish asked: "And AC, is it slime to respecfully poimnt out that the figleaf that G&J is hiding behind is a group of RINO's whose contribution patterns belie their stated party affiliation ?"

Your question sums up the bias underlying the whole misbegotten blogswarm project. For the extreme partisans gathered around this blog, there's no such thing as a Republican who favors choice, higher taxes, gay marriage or gun control. Donation of a single dollar to a Democratic candidate or to an organization that fails to follow party orthodoxy on any significant issue gets them labeled RINOs - DFLers in disguise - regardless of their registration or whether or not they consider themselves Republicans.

In other words, it was clear the swarmers had reached their conclusion before assembling their sad little spreadsheets. The fact that the project fell flat is why the non-swarmers think it's so funny.

And as for your contention that you're "respectfully" pointing out anything, Angryclown doesn't need any spreadsheets to know that Mitch's followers aren't anything close to respectful of political adversaries. You tell me who's pretending to be something they're not.

"there's no such thing as a Republican who favors choice, higher taxes, gay marriage or gun control."

There should not be. For all the kvetching about "the parties are the same", it WOULD be nice if the GOP were consistently different from the DFL.

"Donation of a single dollar to a Democratic candidate or to an organization that fails to follow party orthodoxy on any significant issue gets them labeled RINOs - DFLers in disguise - regardless of their registration or whether or not they consider themselves Republicans."

For starters, as we showed, almost everyone who donated to "GOP" candidates/causes also donated - usually more - to DFL/Dems.

As to what they consider themselves - bully! But I wanted to look beneath the surface of what they "consider themselves" for public consumption. At this, I succeeded.

I mean, if I say "I'm a liberal" - who is pro-gun, anti-tax, pro-welfare-reform, anti-big-government and pro-life - and made a sweeping public policy initiative, would my underlying true beliefs maybe be useful to actual "liberals" to know? (I'm asking people other than 'clown, who is not in this to make serious ansewrs...)

"In other words, it was clear the swarmers had reached their conclusion before assembling their sad little spreadsheets."

To the extent that about half of the names on the list (including all the leadership) are well-known DFLers, it'd be fair to say that we had a hunch.

" The fact that the project fell flat is why the non-swarmers think it's so funny."

Let 'em think what they want. It was a success.

"You tell me who's pretending to be something they're not."

Heh. Heh heh heh. Heh.

Well I know you'll find this funny, but there are actually people who think that the polarization of the two parties, intense partisan squabbling and the increasing insularity of the country's governing party are bad things.

Hey, if you don't want the votes of gay fiscal conservatives, pro-life moms who don't think they should sell AK-47s at K-Mart and all, by all means, continue with the purges. Just don't expect Spreadsheetfest '06 to have any credibility.

Mitch: "I mean, if I say "I'm a liberal" - who is pro-gun, anti-tax, pro-welfare-reform, anti-big-government and pro-life - and made a sweeping public policy initiative, would my underlying true beliefs maybe be useful to actual "liberals" to know? (I'm asking people other than 'clown, who is not in this to make serious ansewrs...)"

You stack the deck, as always. "Liberals" are not the same thing as Democrats. And they're not the same thing as non-Republicans. And you misstate Angryclown's point.

But who cares? You expose the futility of the project yourself. If a Republican who publicly advocates higher taxes can't logically be a real Republican, what's the purpose of your who geeky little exercise? But once you embark on the sad project, your bias puts everybody on the DFL side anyway. Your methodology is screwed up by your bias.

In short, the project was a waste of time, incompetently executed. There's an upside, though. It has provided much entertainment to Angryclown, Doug and Fulcrum.

AC, I respect the efforts but you should know by now that Mitch is always right - in his own mind - and like a faithful idealogue, he never would admit that his efforts amounted to a fart in a Boeing Transonic Wind Tunnel.

It was pretty entertaining though...

Chaosfish, what i am trying to get at is you showed that the signers of the ad lean left - and we can all agree to that, as i stated in every post. however, your leap in logic that your sample size of 203 is representative of G&J without knowing your total population lacks statistical integrity - worse integrity than the star tribune polls that the conservatives in this state loathe.

Doug,

Ok now I see where you are coming from. I'm not stating that that folks who may be working with or have signed up with G&J are all liberal, but, as you have stated, the 'public face' is very left leaning and I object to their characterization as a bi-partisan group (the 203 not the whole of G&J)

Can someone agree with G& J and not be a Democrat? Certainly. Just as one agree with President Bush on the GWoT and find his fiscal policies mind boggling.

Just don't try and sell me a donkey and represent it as a quarter horse

Fulcrum rather

I thoroughly enjoyed it and it's related to some of my research on communities.