John Edwards was right, sort of. There are two Americas.
You have Red America, where people who hang effigies of black presidential candidates get arrested…
…and Blue America, where people who do the same to effigies of uppity women become media minicelebs.
Glad we could clear this up.
That is all.
Load
of
Crap
Blue America – at least this Blue American – thinks either should be allowed to do whatever they want IN EFFIGY, but threatening to assassinate people isn’t a joke. Your protestations of libertarianism aside, I know far more blue Americans who defend liberties holistically, than I do red. Or are you now saying FISA violations and the domestic spying program were violations of liberty? How about Gitmo?
Glad things are now clear.
For anyone who responds to peev/pb/penigma/Don Preciado(our Precious One) :
Keep in mind this is the same stellar intellect who asserts categorically that Richard Nixon was president in 1975, that the Cold War started in the administration of Calvin Coolidge and that Joseph Conrad wrote The Heart of Darkness about the Viet Nam War.
An unrepentant narcissist, intellectually he fancies himself as Gulliver among the Lilliputians when demonstrably he is more aptly described as Gulliver among the Brobdingnagians. Literally an intellectual pygmy among giants.
He is a low brow flamebait troll – nothing more.
I *heart* kel.
Anybody else immediately think of the following any time you encounter a Peev rant?
http://i213.photobucket.com/albums/cc122/smitty7719/whargarbl.jpg
Did you even go to your Blue America Link. There is absolutely nothing there that even hints at Cele status. The where shamed into bring it down after everyone, even neighbors who covered it up, chastised them. What, you didn’t think we would read the link
Oh, and the Red America link, along with Disorderly conduct, the main reason for arrest was they STOLE the materials. “”charged with burglary and theft at a fraternity house where police said the materials came from.””
Sheesh, I know making something out of nithing is your latest forté but at least be close.
Actually, Kel… he’s more like Gilligan amongst the Castaways.
“Anybody else immediately think of the following any time you encounter a Peev rant”
Used to.
Now I think of your “It is made of FAIL and AIDS” graphic.
Flash, the article says nothing about Chad getting shamed into taking down the Palin effigy. In fact, I’m not sure anyone was chastened. The piece mentions a friendly protest.
You might be inadvertantly making something out of nothing.
…also, there is no stating of the “main reason” for the arrest in the UK case.
“…charges of disorderly conduct related to the hanging of the effigy. They were also charged with burglary and theft at a fraternity house where police said the materials came from.”
Again, you might be saying something you don’t mean to say. At least based on the pieces referenced.
I am using the same inference license that mitch is using. Tomato tamato
==
“”neighbors covered up the Palin mannequin with sheets””
“”Later a handful of protesters were joined by an SUV with an effigy labeled “Chad,” after the display’s creator, Chad Morrisette.””
“”Local politicians and city officials, including Supervisor Mike Antonovich, called the images offensive and urged their removal.””
“””My understanding is that the mayor had a long talk with the man and convinced him to bring it down. The homeowner began to realize what they had done caused a little more of a reaction than they had hoped for,” Whitmore said. “”
Oh, so flash is saying what he “feels” the articles said. *snicker*
“”Oh, so flash is saying what he “feels” the articles said. *snicker* “”
Yeap, just like mitch!
And Mitch, just to be clear, they were arrested for burglary and disorderly conduct. I suspect that the disorderly conduct charge may be a crock – that if they’d pursued a permit to protest or assemble, you know, like were required in St. Paul, they’d not have been arrested… your story here is a crock too as this appears to be about overzealous cops in Red States, vs those who respect free speech in blue.
Kel – you’re daft – I’ve never said Nixon was President in 75, nor did I assert the coldwar started under Cooledge, however, our economic ISOLAITON of the Soviet Union certainly DID start then, now didn’t it?
Thanks for that lie — was nice of you.
Well, if you “feel” that’s is what Mitch said, flash … 😉
But let’s play your assinine game a moment.
Who was it who asserted:
1. There is no reason to be concerned about excessive lending out of 401k’s, (in 2004),
2. FISA was never violated
3. Muslims support/embrace terrorism
4. The war in Iraq would be over by November 2006
5. Gitmo is entirely legal – no Constitutional or other violations there.
6. The current economic downturn is just a ‘cycle’.
If you guessed Mitch Berg, you’d be right – so as compared to being PROFOUNDLY wrong on most of the important issues of the day, if you want to twist my words to your pleasure, have at it. It shows how desparate you truly are. Good work on that Kel.
I’ll happily be Precious, Mitch can continue to be Malicious, and we’ll all get along fine, but I wasn’t aware you found me so physically attractive Kel.
Peev,
Ooh. Now you’ve done it:
1. There is no reason to be concerned about excessive lending out of 401k’s, (in 2004),
Please show me where I ever had an opinion about that.
Hint: You can’t.
2. FISA was never violated
Never said any such thing. Merely that many of what the left called “violations” were not.
. Muslims support/embrace terrorism
Yawn. Never said it. Produce the evidence, or admit you’re a liar.
4. The war in Iraq would be over by November 2006
So? I got a prediction wrong – one made more for hyperbole than out of any real sense that I knew what was going on.
If that’s the best you can do – and given that everything else on your list is completely wrong, it is – it’s pretty thin gruel for you.
Gitmo is entirely legal – no Constitutional or other violations there.
Please show where I said anything of the sort.
6. The current economic downturn is just a ‘cycle’.
Oh, really?
So in addition to knowing more about law than Scott Johnson, you’re also clairvoyant?
You have no idea what’s going to happen in the future (not that your arrogance will allow you to believe anything but). And the only thing non-cyclical about the current troubles are the effects of government intervention in the markets – which may change the rhythms of the market cycle, but don’t abolish it.
But believe me – when the upturn comes – whether it’s in two weeks or four years – I’ll be there to laugh at you.
As usual.
Nice over simplification of the case, – one case violated school ethics rules, and WAS done on public (school) property. The other was done on a person’s private residence. One violated the law, the other didn’t. That said, do you or do you NOT support the right of people to put up offensive images? Blue staters do, red staters, it seems, not so much.
Mitch- good lord, you need me to PROVE to you that you said the cases before SCOTUS were going to fall out in your (meaning Bush’s) favor? OMG – LOL.
No Mitch, I won’t go back and do the research you doubtless know isn’t needed. You didn’t listen then, you’d dissemble now. If you want to refute it, go find your own evidence, but you have, time and again, denied people in Gitmo deserved representation in courts.
BZZT, try again.
And Mitch, you damned well DID say that you didn’t think there was anything to worry about in 2004 – BTW Mitch hiding behind obscurity does you little credit. YOU denied there was any problem then – just as you said the down cycle now is just a cycle.
Save me the faux indignation – you’ve been wrong time and again – as I said.. bzzz. try again.- if you can’t beat em – deny it and make em go prove it from posts 4 years ago.. not bloody likely to be done now is it Mitch?
And gee, how did I know you’d bring up Scott Johnson Mitch.. if you want that issue left dead, then leave it. I e-mailed you repeatedly about it, you ducked the conversation because you didn’t want to admit that lawyers on both sides felt what both you and I said, was true.
You are as predicatable as cold days in January, and about as original.
1. There is no reason to be concerned about excessive lending out of 401k’s, (in 2004),
Could you elaborate on that (as well as why it might have been a bigger problem than coerced subprime lending)?
2. FISA was never violated
Good for you for being concerned, but you might want to tell Obama and company to stop retroactively legalizing Bush’s domestic wiretapping
3. Muslims support/embrace terrorism
Got a LOT of friends in the Somali community, but you know what? There are actually more than a few Muslims (especially in Europe) who do indeed support jihadism.
OF COURSE not every Muslim is a terrorist, but when Iran has a “Death to America” day, I usually don’t say “Aw, shucks-they’re just kidding”.
4. The war in Iraq would be over by November 2006
“…and in the year 2000, . . .”
5. Gitmo is entirely legal – no Constitutional or other violations there.
“Constitutional or other”?? No one should be abused there, but the constitution is pretty much for American citizens and the Geneva Conventions pertain to uniformed soldiers fighting for a nation-state.
I agree that it should be closed, but you’re not exactly helping your case much with the “Guantanamo Bay equals the Killing Fields of the Khmer Rouge and worse than any Stalinist slave labor camp!!!!!!”
6. The current economic downturn is just a ‘cycle’.
I can only assume that you made that up out of thin air (and no, it’s not a “cycle”).
And Mitch, I’m sure you’ll laugh, because being churlish is your nature. Good on ya’, adult behavioral bloviating pattern holding true to form. Mitch, you’ve been wrong so often it’s increadible to me anyone takes your comments seriously when it comes to those uttered from a political standpoint. You’ve been advised this by better people than me – get over it.
Mitch – here’s one for you – how about that WONDERFUL Clarence Thomas – you know your favorite member of the Supremes. I claimed he’s pretty worthless as a justice, you like him tons. He’s authored 1 opinion in nearly 20 years on the bench, he almost NEVER asks a question. On the HELLER case, he didn’t as ONE question, on THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE OF THE YEAR (I think most of you righties would say). How competent does that make him??
And bluntly, Mitch, YOU said it would be over in a year, I told you the issue was about the Sunni Shiite divide, and it STILL IS, 3 years later. You weren’t just wrong about the prediction, you were wrong about the nature of the war, you were WRONG about what it took to get things moving in the right direcion, you didn’t advocate for respect (until much later) – though I will give you credit that you did advocate for it before the President. When I talked about accountability, meaning a timeline for accomplishments, you said it was wrong to do so, and then, voila’ no more than three months later, there was President Bush talking about a timeline for measurable accomplishments (in early 2006) – of course I was talking about it in 2005.
Lordy.
Peevee is back again tryin’
his lies no one here is a-buying
“CEO’s are my friends”
if you believe that depends
on whether you’re brains have been fryin’
Nice over simplification of the case, – one case violated school ethics rules, and WAS done on public (school) property. The other was done on a person’s private residence.
OH, so there IS a case for hanging someone in effigy where it’s really all just OK?
Glad to know where your moral compass points
That said, do you or do you NOT support the right of people to put up offensive images?
I let you keep posting here, don’t I?
Mitch- good lord, you need me to PROVE to you that you said the cases before SCOTUS were going to fall out in your
No, Peev, I need you to show where I said any such thing. I do not recall it, and you have been known to make things up from whole cloth. I do not trust your version of ANY issue, event or factoid.
If you want to refute it, go find your own evidence, but you have, time and again, denied people in Gitmo deserved representation in courts.
Right – Prisoners of War by legal definition are not criminals, ergo do not go to court.
The exact status of the Guantanomo prisoners has been – legitimately – a major legal contention for quite some time. THAT is what I’ve pretty consistently said.
And Mitch, you damned well DID say that you didn’t think there was anything to worry about in 2004 – BTW Mitch hiding behind obscurity does you little credit.
“Hiding behind obscurity”? WTF?
I DO NOT RECALL EVER HAVING HAD AN OPINION ABOUT “borrowing against 401Ks”. I do not recall ever even thinking about the issue, except as re my own 401K. Ever.
Which implies to me that either I misspoke/miswrote (it happens), or that you took something I said(or mis-said) out of context (it happens) or that you’re makign stuff up from whole cloth (the vastly more likely possibility).
And the fun part…:
just as you said the down cycle now is just a cycle.
Again, please explain the nature of this clairvoyance of yours. You’re saying the credit market will never recover? That it is going to be an eternal downward slope?
Please elaborate – both on your claims to clairvoyance and your expertise on this issue, which would seem to surpass most of the world’s economists.
And please do it without making up more fictional neighbors. We’re on to you.
Save me the faux indignation – you’ve been wrong time and again – as I said.. bzzz. try again.- if you can’t beat em – deny it and make em go prove it from posts 4 years ago.. not bloody likely to be done now is it Mitch?
penigma Says:
October 31st, 2008 at 3:51 pm e
And gee, how did I know you’d bring up Scott Johnson Mitch.. if you want that issue left dead, then leave it. I e-mailed you repeatedly about it, you ducked the conversation because you didn’t want to admit that lawyers on both sides felt what both you and I said, was true.
You are as predicatable as cold days in January, and about as original.
Our peevee thinks he’s quite the wit
(of course we all know he’s a twit)
His BS is so shamless
You’d be judged rightly blameless
If you chewed his ass up and out sh*t.
Mitch, pithy comebacks arent’ argumentation, they are just pithy.
Do you support allowing people to hang people in effigy if it is within the law, yes/no? It’s a siimple answer, try it out. I support it as offensive, crude, but legal free speech, you?
BTW Mitch, let me jog your memory from 2004 – I asserted that the economy was fundamentally in a weak position, that much of the growth was based on home equity. You denied that, saying the economy was strong, and we were seeing the benefits of Bush’ tax cuts. It was a discussion about Bush’s performance leading up to the election. Do you want to deny that thread now?
how did I know you’d bring up Scott Johnson Mitch.
Because the issue was a serious, permanent indictment of your “credibility”. You lied. You made shit up as you went along, and people deserve to know the nature of your style of argument.
. if you want that issue left dead, then leave it.
I do not! I want it to live! I want to invoke it every time you try to declare yourself an expert on ANY issue! I want the comment section to know what you’re about!
I e-mailed you repeatedly about it, you ducked the conversation because you didn’t want to admit that lawyers on both sides felt what both you and I said, was true.
IT WAS A LIE!
THERE ARE NO LAWYERS, ANYWHERE WHO FELT WHAT YOU SAID WAS TRUE. You were, and are, utterly unable to produce a REAL lawyer, on the record, who would defend the premise that…:
a) a lawyer, could
b) read a statute, and
c) write about it, and
d) be guilty of “legal malpractice” – YOUR TERM – if it’s outside their “area of practice” – also your term, and a meaningless one in terms of legal practice.
I will not “Admit” that lawyers said “both sides” of the issue, because IT IS NOT TRUE.
You are as predicatable as cold days in January, and about as original.
And your writing flows about as well as syrup on the sidewalk on one of those days.
And now on peev’s hook Mitch does bite
(You’d think he’d know that’s not right)
But the temptation to mock
is hard to keep blocked
Lest you limrick with all of your might.
I’ll be happy to explain my clairvoyance – you know, the fun part.
We’ve offshored 5 million tech jobs, we’re 40Trillion (or so) in debt, the middle class cannot pay this bill, yet it MUST be paid. 74% of the ‘new jobs’ you touted to Flash a couple of years ago, pay less than those which were lost.
That is more than just a CYCLE Mitch, it’s an ecnomic crisis, a crisis which has NOW developed… and it doesn’t take clairvoyance to see that what you demured about as not really a big worry in the summer, in fact WAS a VERY big worry. That’s not predicting the future, it’s pointing out you didn’t understand the nature of it even 4 months ago, and it has now materialized.
Ah. Now, we’re getting somewhere.
You’re not clairvoyant. You just write in non-sequiturs.
We’ve offshored 5 million tech jobs, we’re 40Trillion (or so) in debt, the middle class cannot pay this bill, yet it MUST be paid. 74% of the ‘new jobs’ you touted to Flash a couple of years ago, pay less than those which were lost.
Ah. So there are factors in the economy that change the way capitol flows. OK, we’re on to something…
…but none of the above repeals or invalidates the notion of the market cycle at all, much less this one. They may change the timing, they may alter how long and how far it rotates, but nothing about it breaks the notion that the economy is cyclical.
That is more than just a CYCLE Mitch, it’s an ecnomic crisis, a crisis which has NOW developed…
Not “more”, just different.
That’s not predicting the future, it’s pointing out you didn’t understand the nature of it even 4 months ago, and it has now materialized.
Unlike you, I’ve never had a problem admitting I don’t fully understand something. Goodness knows I’ve never made up fictional neighbors to make up for my gaps.
And now, I’m going to feed the kids. Adieu.
So, Flash, why not just ask Mitch why he thinks Chad in Hollywood is a mini media celebrity?
(I don’t ask Peev because he’ll simply drivel all over me.)
Mitch, please stop trying the ‘professorial’ role, it requires that you actually knew more… you didn’t
Either way, I agree, it’s time for both of us to move on. And as I said, observing you under predicted the impact didn’t require clairvoyance, only observation. I advised it was MUCH worse than you thought, you responded by commenting on up and down cycles.. in what was pretty clearly something being deminimous of the situation. And Mitch, not once have I made up a neighbor, but thanks for calling me a liar – once again, you show what an adult you truly can be. How does it go again Mitch, we’re not allowed to call you a liar, but you are free to call us ones? Nice double standard there fella, really nice.
And Mitch, you didn’t deny you downplayed the risks in 2004, now that I clarified them enough for you to remember. As I recall the convesation it went something like, Mitch, the buying power right now mostly comes from home equity, not tax cuts or job creation – 401ks and IRAs are being raided. Your reply, “nonsense” or something damned close to it.
You only twist stories out of nothing, you don’t have to pretend to have deluded friends, you cover all of it by yourself.
Say hi to the kids.. and don’t take any of this too seriously, I sure as hell don’t.
peev/pb/penigma/Don Preciado(our Precious One)
“Kel – you’re daft – I’ve never said Nixon was President in 75,”
Peev you Damnable Liar its right there on your own website do you want me to post you a link?
nor did I assert the coldwar started under Cooledge,
peev you Damnable Liar a few weeks back in response to a post by Mitch you claimed that Reagan was a recipient of Cold War Policies began 60 year earlier – do you want me link you to that quote as well or do you have enough computer skills to find it yourself?
Oh you misspelled Coolidge you maroon.
Come on you Damnable Liar aren’t you going to prove to me that Joseph Conrad wrote the Heart of Darkness about the Viet Nam War?
“I told you the issue was about the Sunni Shiite divide”
Sure, like the Irish potato famine was exacerbated by a simple Catholic/Protestant “divide”.
And Darfur’s “cycle of violence” is the result of that ever-pesky Arab/African “divide”.
And what, oh what, are we to do with this seemingly irreconcilable Russian/Georgian “divide”?
p.s. Mitch, you really need to start responding to my e-mails- I mean, this neglect is simply intolerable . . .
“And Mitch, not once have I made up a neighbor, but thanks for calling me a liar – once again..”
Say, Peevee? Don’t you have Rupert Murdock on speed dial? C’mon now…if you’re going to make an ass of yourself, give us a real whopper!
*laughing*
Peev, the insufferable liar
Has pants that are clearly on fire
With neighbors galore
An an I.Q. of four,
His comments should be read as satire.
He snarks about Mitch on his blog, he says that he and Mitch should indeed move on, then blathers on with additional smarmy comments and wading back in the conversation…
…only to follow up with the doubtful claim: “don’t take any of this too seriously, I sure as hell don’t.”
lol!
Whom are you trying to convince, Pernicious Peev… everyone else, or yourself?
“Denied people in Gitmo deserved represention in courts.” False again. Either way, they would have eventually recieved represention in military courts. Libs just didn`t like the fact that, like criminals, they could make bail,and, you know, just hang out till their trial.
“don’t take any of this too seriously, I sure as hell don’t.”
Whew. I’m not the only one.
jmf – as always – you righties sure do have some substantive arguments behind you..
Hey Mitch, if it appeared, and it sure did, like I was trying to say you were flawed/wrong, whatever, sorry – I was making the point that like most sychophants, Kel is a tool.
I accept fully I make mistakes, I said it before, I’ll say it again – I was wrong, Johnson didn’t commit malpractice, just a pretty profound lack of professional due dilligence and proper conduct. He also was prettymuch lawyering out his ass to talk about a ‘constitutional violation’ when he complained about how the state subscribed to, or didn’t, the law around it’s handling of TIZA.
Anyway, I don’t hold you to a standard of infalibility, or require you to be without error. You’ve made them, as have I.
Have a day.
Peev, Mitch may have made some poor prognostications, butyou have been wrong on testable facts. Over, and over, and over again. And these facts, which you get wrong, always work to enforce some stupid leftist point. You don’t learn and you never reconsider your position when it has been shown to depend on facts which have been demonstrated to be wrong.
You, son, have made yourself a laughing stock.
I’ve been waiting for a blog post on the North Hollywood effigy. First off, we can look at the “Joe the Plumber” standard. Barak Obama asked Joe the Plumber if he had a question so Joe asked one. Every detail of Joe’s life has been detailed. The silence is deafening here when it comes to “Chad the lynchers” work and background. Apparently Chad designs window displays (hmm! maybe better not to detail!)
Chad had a male “partner” living with him. There are a lot of theories out there that some males of this “persuasion” out there have deep seated conflicts with mother figures. Could there be some deep seated subconscious conflict that motivated Chad and his male “partner” to express hatred by lynching in effigy a successful example of motherhood?
We have a lot of gays in my Longfellow neighborhood. They are good neighbors and good people. Also, especially in college I found that some of the most misogynistic people were a minority of gay males, usually the “flamers”. The “flamers” lacked a sense of boundaries and limits.
Well anyway, the limericks were as entertaining as ever!
Let’s look at “Joe the Plumber”. Barak Obama asked Joe if he had a question so he asked one. Since then, every facet of his life is being scrutinized by the liberal, lefty illuminatis of the Democrat party. The silence is deafening, though, when it comes to Chad and his lynching of Sarah Palin. It was done on purpose and he should have gotten a jail term instead of the mayor asking him to just take it down!
Peev in “Blue America” if you hang an effigy of someone who was of a protected class, I think you would quickly have it taken down by force. Possibly the force of government, but nearly as likely vigilante force.
And No I do not advocate the hanging of any effigy. At the very least it is poor taste, and it may cross the line into a threat.