Comments on: … and Chunk love Sloth, too!

By: D-Day

D-Day — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:45:02 +0000

ugh I have just thrown up in my mouth a little.

By: nedib

nedib — Mon, 04 May 2009 12:34:14 +0000

mmm-kay. I will study history, the “real” history. Where does one find the “real” history? Over the airwaves?

By: nedib

nedib — Mon, 04 May 2009 12:20:40 +0000

hahaha–like when Jon Stewart went on Crossfire and they gave him shit for not asking hard hitting questions. He had to remind them that the show that leads into his is puppets making crank phone calls.

By: Cliff

Cliff — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 16:06:07 +0000

Sweet! Pretty soon we’ll be producing production quality server
operating systems and high quality cell phones.

By: Smartz

Smartz — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 05:47:26 +0000

I think Lewis Black said it best, and I am not sure of the exact quote, but here goes:

Republicans have nothing but bad ideas and Democrats have no ideas.” A republican stands up in congress and says ‘I GOT A REALLY BAD IDEA!!’ and the democrat stands up after him and says ‘AND I CAN MAKE IT SHITTIER!!’”

By: rhorho

rhorho — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:54:51 +0000

I *KNEW* he looked familiar!

Wasn’t ema a right winger, too? I could have
sworn so. If not, I caught her in a lot of
rightwardly moods, and not just about her
love of torture.

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:56:58 +0000

The use of the sock puppet… strange how it’s the bulk of the right wingers who use them… other than Ema, who was a Democrat fruit loop with a fetish for torture that made Neocons wince….
Seems they don’t have the courage to stick with one id, probably due to the fact they keep getting handed their arse by parroting the party line… as eastablished by their great and noble prophet, Rush [link]

By: rhorho

rhorho — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:24:16 +0000

And more entertainment from Anniee, who
needs a sock puppet to feel secure enough
to tell everyone else what’s wrong with them,
because the mirror is her own worst enemy.

By: Yer a hypocrite

Yer a hypocrite — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:21:05 +0000

Another person who defines him/herself with laser-like precision.
Kudos to you, too, for your ability to honestly assess yourself.

By: rhorho

rhorho — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 06:48:44 +0000

Nugatory (adj.)

1. Trivial, trifling or of little importance.

2. Ineffective, invalid or futile.

3. (law) Having no force, inoperative, ineffectual.

4. (computing) Removable from a computer program with safety, but harmless if retained.

By: Yer a hypocrite

Yer a hypocrite — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 05:38:20 +0000

My, my, Uncle Fester, you’re sure confident in your assumptions of my identity. I think I now know who you think I am, and sadly, you are mistaken.
You may want to purchase a tinfoil hat to go along with that HEPA filter, as obviously some of those naughty contaminants are getting through to your brain.

By: Seth

Seth — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 01:09:15 +0000

Breadfruit is a tropical fruit, although not very sweet. It’s about the size of a large eggplant, yellow to yellowish green in color, and white inside. It has a texture reminiscent of bread, kind of fibrous and bland. It’s very good sauteed in butter, which is how I usually enjoyed it in Hawaii. Breadfruit fun fact: The HMS Bounty was delivering breadfruit seedlings from Tahiti to the West Indies for use as anew staple food when the mutiny occurred.

By: eddiepscetti

eddiepscetti — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:34:41 +0000

And as long as were saying that, his name is spelled Bush (with a capital B), even though he has acted a lot like a shrub over the last 8 years.

By: froofrou

froofrou — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:29:07 +0000

I just mean that the wording of the question was bad, and tended to imply a certain answer. Or rather, tended to weight the answer against an honest one. If someone had asked the question ‘On a scale of one to ten, with ten being the happiest, how happy are you that Obama is president?’ then went on to ask a follow up question ‘On a scale of one to ten, ten being the happiest, how happy are you that Bush is leaving?’, that might have gotten a better, or at least a more accurate answer.
-
There is a lot of blind hatred for Bush, as evidenced by you refusing to write his full name. I know you have reasons for hating him, but you have to admit that you’re rather consumed with contempt and hatred for the man to not even writing his name in full and at least giving him the respect of being a fellow human. (this is not confrontational, I swear! I’m just pointing something out)
-
I just think that Hughley could have worded the question a LOT better, and gotten a truer result.

By: Tessie

Tessie — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:27:31 +0000

THANK you!! Here I was, trying to figure out who was meant by the initial “M”, and all I could come up with on the spur of the moment was, “You’re kidding! Somebody actually said Michelle Obama is fat???”

By: Tessie

Tessie — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:23:45 +0000

“The fact of the blind hatred for Bush is enough to offset what could have been blind worship of Obama.”
`
I realize these kinds of questions are reminiscent of one’s most annoying grade-school teacher, but I’m puzzled: Are you sure “offset” is what you meant to say? If I (or anyone) sort-of likes Candidate A, but vehemently DIS-likes his opponent, I would think that the dislike would enhance, rather than offset (mitigate), my original lukewarm liking.
Also, I don’t know D.L. Hughley’s political leanings, or intent, but I think he does pose a valid question when he suggests in a veiled way that at least some people’s positive feelings about Obama could be attributed to the fact that he is not b*sh. I can’t speak for the feelings of anyone but myself, but that’s certainly crossed my mind a time or two.

By: froofrou

froofrou — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:06:36 +0000

I can 100% agree with that. Like I’ve said before, the GOP HAS to stop eating its own before it will ever reform into something usable. I’m sure my chances to see another GOP president in the next four years are completely blown, but that’s ok. If the GOP does this right, they will come out stronger and better than they ever have been.
-
As far as Rove, yes, yes you’re right And I can say that coming from my side, the same as I can say that Clinton is probably the best politician I have ever seen in my life, bar none. I don’t like the guy, never have, but when you hear him speak you can’t help but believe him. I imagine Rove is like that.

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:03:19 +0000

I think your assessment is fair enough, as long as you
understand that, until very recently, the GAME of it was
handled expertly by Rove, who is possibly the best
strategist (not saying ethical) there ever has been.

The GOP is suffering these days from gross finger pointing,
no clear message, and no head. The situation is tempo-
rary, but don’t think that “those mean Dems” are the only
ones playing. The GOP has been winning the game for a
long time, but their quarterback is injured, and they don’t
have a good Plan B.

By: froofrou

froofrou — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:56:59 +0000

*snerk*
*keeps comments to self*

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:56:04 +0000

Thank you, but, considering that Rho (P) is the symbol for
density in physics, “twice as dense” might be the way to
go there.

By: froofrou

froofrou — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:37:33 +0000

(and before you flame, that second paragraph is broad brush, and I know it. There is plenty of dissent with other stuff, but for someone like Rush, it’s difficult to get actual dissent rather than simple disagreement. That speaks to his influence as a commentator)

By: froofrou

froofrou — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:35:39 +0000

Steele is headed for the chopping block because he’s ineffective. As it should be.
-
As far as challenging Rush, of course no GOPer has done so. Can you think of any Dems who have challenged, say, Jon Stewart (since we’re calling Rush an entertainer)? If you agree (even in some ways) with what is being said, you’re not going to disagree.
-
And I agree with you that ‘imposing’ Rush as the DeFacto head of the GOP was easy because of the disarray. But, it was not something done BY the GOP. It was in rumors started on the left, Obama actually coming out and saying not to listen to Rush for whatever reason, and the campaign that has been waging against Rush by the Left (big L) since he got started big in radio.
-
I need to check out the CPAC stuff, but I believe he’s been the keynote speaker in years past. Also, there have been other keynote speakers who have not been set up as the leader of the GOP.
-
I agree that the Dems played the situation. They played it handily and beautifully. They have also been gunning for Rush for a very long time, and this was prime real estate, as it were, to set up shop. The GOP being in ruins, no actual leader emerging, Oh look, here’s someone we can rumor to the top. When you’ve got Rahm, Carville, and Begala making daily strategy phone calls to one another, and knowing Rahm’s past history with Rush and the Clintons, it’s easy to see that a rumor campaign with Obama as the ‘accidental’ mouthpiece would be extremely effective. He’s made many inflammatory statements about Hannity as well, but Hannity isn’t as well known or as controversial, so it didn’t stick.

By: Nick

Nick — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:29:22 +0000

Is it just me or have we once again degraded to senseless insults? I’m not a conservative, I voted for Obama, but do we really have to continually insult the people we disagree with. And if you have any comments regarding my voting decision and my philoso-speak, can it. I’d love to hear someone refute my arguments (the only way they’ll get better, or i’ll be convinced otherwise.) but I fear more internet aficionados would merely make some base comments about my state of mind.

By: froofrou

froofrou — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:28:09 +0000

Because, she’s twice as nice!

By: The Ghost of Hunter Thompson

The Ghost of Hunter Thompson — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 20:39:04 +0000

While there are and have been a number of thoughtful conservative-leaning commenters in the PK posting threads, the more conservative-leaning trolls that pop up in threads like this have less in common with actual trolls than with malignant teratomas, those odd, frequently malignant growths which share the occasional odd resemblance to a human body part and are oft mistaken for cases of foetus in fetu…mouths, teeth and scrabbly, vestigial fingers and eyes growing off some other more useful organ

By: The Ghost of Hunter Thompson

The Ghost of Hunter Thompson — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 20:09:22 +0000

although he has never exerted anywhere near the sway over Democrats as Rush does over Republicans, i remember that being fat seems to have been enough of a “substantial” right-wing criticism of Michael Moore over the years…but again, i don’t recall any Democratic congressmen or members of the Democratic party organization tripping over themselves to tongue-wash Moore’s asscrack over the fear that they may have offended his audience. And I’ll give Moore credit for not going to the Dominican Republic with a valise full of viagra….I have to wonder, when Rush described that particular trip to the DR where he was caught with the viagra as a “boys only trip”, was he talking about his traveling companions or his itinerary?

By: Kelto

Kelto — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 20:03:45 +0000

Well said.

By: Kelto

Kelto — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:59:49 +0000

Too true, Rho.

By: The Ghost of Hunter Thompson

The Ghost of Hunter Thompson — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:49:39 +0000

wait a minute…Rush is right about EVERYTHING? So are you telling me that Rush is, in essence, JESUS?!…Well that would explain how and why i lost my religion.

By: froofrou

froofrou — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:22:50 +0000

I disagree. That is a poorly worded, weighted question, and it speaks to a certain response. The fact of the blind hatred for Bush is enough to offset what could have been blind worship of Obama.

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:07:49 +0000

I totally agree that no one should be trusted entirely,
even if only for the simple reason that opinions can be
mistaken for facts, and facts can be spun. Frequency
on the one side doesn’t imply absence on the other.

By: SpartanCanuck

SpartanCanuck — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:05:43 +0000

*bows*

So. Why do you call yourself ‘rhorho’ anyways?

By: Kelto

Kelto — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:01:34 +0000

I agree, there are different uses of info between the shows, and I find Olbermann more agreeable in his arguements. But I won’t say he’s right about *everything* because, like Limbaugh, his income/success depends on his viewers. That’s what I meant by “from the same cloth”.

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:55:05 +0000

LMAO!! Thank you for the laugh of the day!

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:52:09 +0000

It took Rachel forever to get a conservative/GOP person to agree to do her
show at first. I like her, because she’s a total geek, and isn’t afraid to
*squee* on air. IIRC, her first GOP guest was a governor. (Sorry, can’t
remember his name.) Her line of questioning was designed to draw out his
opinions, and nothing more. Her toughest question was something like,
“What would you say to critics who say X?”

Since that first interview, other GOPers have been on her show, but it took
a courageous person to break the ice. She begged on air for GOP guests
before he came on. She used to list how many GOP members declined her
producers’ invitations, even.

By: SpartanCanuck

SpartanCanuck — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:51:48 +0000

By this logic, Butch, you must now love me, or call yourself a hypocrite.

LOVE ME!!!!!

By: n8

n8 — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:40:09 +0000

That’s quite an achievement, Unc! Well done!

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:35:08 +0000

There are similarities, but read the two transcripts side by side
for any given day, or watch the shows together. There is a
substantive difference in the use of facts between the two.

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:24:41 +0000

Froo, I understand the inter-party political play concerning Limbaugh,
but think you may be missing a key element here. According to Fox
News [LINK], Steele is headed for the chopping block, possibly by
the end of this month. (I would prefer that he stay, but I’m not
usually that lucky.)

About Limbaugh, you may want to think back and try to remember
whether *any* GOP member has *ever* challenged Rush, even
slightly, prior to Steele’s gaffe. Your memory would be better than
mine (shut up), but I’m thinking not.

The next exercise is to name another GOP and/or conservative
figure with more bankable, unblinking support than Limbaugh.

The point I’m going for here is to say that the effort to “impose” (if
you will) Limbaugh on the GOP was easy because of the disrupted
state of the party. The GOP could not convincingly cry foul, because
there is no one else who has a convincing place at the helm: Not
McCain, Palin, Steele, Romney, Jindal, Gingrich, Huckabee, etc.

Like it or not, the divisive, controversial, high-negative Limbaugh
seems to be hard to beat for top billing at this point. The Democrat
strategists had no hand in selecting him to deliver the keynote
address at CPAC 2009, and have not been forcing GOP members
to treat Limbaugh with undue (imo) reverence.

The Democrats played the situation, but they didn’t create it.

By: Kelto

Kelto — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:45:37 +0000

Thanks Rho. It just seems whenever someone says they hate Limbaugh, some people pull the “Well Olbermann is junk, too (assuming everyone hates Limbaugh loves Olbermann)” when they’re actually both from the same cloth.

By: Kelto

Kelto — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:42:15 +0000

No where did I say I fear conservatives. I just happen to despise a man who just happens to be conservative. Therefore, your Sigmund Freud theory is bunk.

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:13:16 +0000

Wang Alert! We have a need for Wanging on Aisle 11!

I repeat, WANG…Aisle 11…STAT!!

By: Nick

Nick — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:59:24 +0000

Then I was wrong, forgive my ignorance. (Not being sarcastic actually.)

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:55:09 +0000

Your mom has at least one stupid child.

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:51:27 +0000

What Steve said…
…and please, come back on 16 March, 2013, and not a
moment before, okay?

By: Nick

Nick — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:50:43 +0000

My point being that in the end, truth is subjective unless you are a god with absolute knowledge. Your not. If you think something is right present your opinions on why it is right and see if you can’t make the other side see you way. If you can’t, you can’t. There is a right and wrong because we as a society have accepted standards that religions/belief systems pass on to us. And why does everyone think I was defending Limbaugh? I don’t support or detract him, he has a right to free speech and you don’t have to listen, the fact that he gets to people like this means they are to stubborn to stop listening, or, well there shouldn’t be much more excuse for it. If you don’t like it don’t listen.

By: Nick

Nick — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:44:14 +0000

What I was saying is that you can’t claim absolute knowledge about anything which you seem to be doing. I’m in no way defending Limbaugh but I don’t say he’s wrong about everything. I CAN’T KNOW. Neither can you. Both of us see things through our own tinted glasses so to speak so while you see him smearing soldiers someone else may see something different. You can’t pass it off as fact because it is your view of an event which is affected by you expieriences and upbringing. There are a few facts known in life and everything else can be seen from many directions, Hitler thought he was right. I’m not comparing you to HItler but like that example, you see the “facts” differently than other people, truth is something I and everyone else have yet to see, time will tell because it is, so to speak, a river that washes away damn near everything.

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:44:14 +0000

But fact checking is like Polonium injestion to you, But(thurt)ch

By: The Steve

The Steve — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:29:59 +0000

You haven’t uttered a single fact yet. All you do is flame. You’re saying that we are all wrong and you are right, “Just Because”. Cite your sources. Where are all of your ‘facts’?

By: The Steve

The Steve — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:28:39 +0000

Translation: Waaaaah, waaaaaah, YOU ALL ARE WRONG AND I AM RIGHT! Waaaaaah!

In 4 years you won’t care what ‘us idiots’ think, because even if the country is in a better position than it was under the Bush administration, you won’t admit that you were wrong. You won’t learn anything, and your opinions will remain the same.