Why Right Wing Blogs Don't Allow Comments

by Chris Bowers, Fri Jul 08, 2005 at 12:06:21 PM EDT

Little Green Footballs, which is the only of the five most trafficked right-wing blogs that allows comments (Instapundit, Powerline, Michelle Malkin and Hugh Hewitt do not allow comments) showed why yesterday. Via Tbogg and lowkell, here are just a smattering of what has been written at Little Green Footballs since yesterday:
  • "IMHO, they should go house to house interrogating every Muslim about what they know and when they knew it. And then kick every last one of them who is there illegally out of the country. And then decide if any of the rest of them deserve to stay. Now, if only Israel would do the same thing after its terror attacks.... "

  • "Can we eradicate Islam now, please?"

  • "If there are no Arabs there are no attacks. How many more need be sacrificed?"

  • "It is now time to force muslims to make a choice: Live peacefully or die. I prefer the latter."

  • "We need to stop fucking with these people and kill every one involved. I mean anyone with prior knowledge, anyone who payed for it, and anyone who supported it. Regardless of nationality."

  • "If its Islamic it will probably blow up. All Islamic get full body searches with VERY high intensity X-rays ."

  • "The best way to deliver those high intensity x-rays is through some W76 warheads at around 100 kt a piece. It will be easier to give a full body search after that."

  • "Britain should END ALL ISLAMIC IMMIGRATION NOW....Continuing to welcome the enemy into your country is insane."

  • "subhumans, first time on 2 feet...round em all up, every friggin' last one of them...unfortunately, I still think it will take even more violence from the Arabs before the West wakes up and goes savage on em"

  • "Martyring Muslims doesn't seem to make much of a difference to the fanatics. What is needed is to take their human capital out their hands - their children. No more warped children, no more jihadis. "
The calls for genocide and apartheid are flowing freely. There is a reason why blogs like Instapundit and Powerline do not allow comments, and why Time magazine would give its "Blog of the Year" award to Powerline even though Free Republic actually "broke" the CBS story. There is a concerted effort on the part of the right to prevent this sort of overt racism and fascism on the right from being given any sunshine. These, however, are not isolated comments. They are numerous and they are appearing on the second most trafficked right-wing blog in the country, and by far the largest right-wing blog that allows comments.

It's time for the sun to shine in.

Tags: Blogosphere (all tags)

  • 182 Comments
  • 0 recs
  • Share
  • Permalink

Comments

182 Comments

Shadow_head_small
hells yeah!
The right needs to be exposed in all its glory.
by SocialNetworker 2005-07-08 12:23PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
There are idiots
on both right and left wing blogs, welcome to the show. I can go over to kos and put togehter a similar list of equally misguided comments, so what.
by moonbatlover 2005-07-08 12:25PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Really?  You could put together a list of comments from DKos which target a racial group and call for their extinction?  I doubt that.

And, BTW, based on your name and the fact that this is your first comment ever, I'm thinking you're a Right Wing Talking Point Troll, using the old "equivalency" trolling line.

by paperwight 2005-07-08 12:31PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
I concur, he wouldn't be able to find left-wing comments that 'targeted' specific racial or other social groups, because 'lefties' are all about inclusiveness and treating everybody as of equal worth.  Like when they applaud the mass murders that took place on 9/11.  For example, the infamous protestor who held up a sign saying 'I love New York more without the Twin Towers'.

Hey, how come left-wing idiots aren't expected to live this sort of shit down?  How come the MSM doesn't take left-wing idiots to task for their moonbattish statements - if the MSM is so against the left and stands with the right, surely that's what they would be doing all the time?  Is it because they think, like many here think, that 'There might be left posters who are rude, condescending, obnoxious, and even overly angry',  and it's OK for lefties to be like that.  And to run riot, attack people, smash up buildings, when holding one of their so-called 'protests'...but hey, repressed emotion is a bad thing, right?  In fact, anyone who attacks them for that is so obviously a raving RIGHT WING loon and must be ignored and ridiculed.  Yes, according to the left, expecting them to be civil, intelligent, sane, and reasonable is ridiculous.  

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-09 09:02AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
More trolls! Yeah!
Just when I think, "Surely this person has reached and encapsulates the limits of Internet tedium" you go and push the boundary even further. It seems your fingers not only did your typing, but did your thinking too. Have you considered suing your brain for non-support, HappyRampager?

You are a piteously reprehensible mauvais sujet and a malingering, buttock-rimming depraved orgy of subhuman indecency. You are a monstrously primitive dreck and a gluttonous, nostril-offending toll on the nerves of those with good taste and decency. You are an irredeemably gluttonous peon and a frightful, grudge-festering mass of loathsome repulsiveness. You are a deucedly unseemly malefactor and a loathsome, nostril-offending malfunctioning little twerp. You are a dreadfully incompetent loafer and a narcissistic, Internet-addicted deplorable calamity of birth.

The Anti-Moron<sup>TM</sup> software on my PC went crazy when I started to read your post, happyrampager. You wouldn't know a clue if it walked up to you, bit you on the ass, and announced 'I AM A CLUE'. However, I'll consider letting you have the last word if you guarantee it will be your last. I am reminded of something relevant that Benjamin Disraeli said: "He was distinguished for ignorance - for he had only one idea and that was wrong."

by afs 2005-07-09 12:35PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: More trolls! Yeah!
Jesus Christ that was boring reading material.
by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 12:46AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
That's not boredom.
If it doesn't have pictures, TheHappyRampager just can't get through it.

By the way, I know these word things are rough for you, but the proper word for your problem is not boredom. The proper word is illiteracy.

It's never too late to learn to read. Here's a link to a directory for a literacy program near you. You can finally learn to read, get your GED, etc...

http://www.literacydirectory.org/

by afs 2005-07-10 05:33AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: That's not boredom.
Where are you copy-and-pasting your flames from, my unoriginal friend?
by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 06:43AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Wrong. That's called a link.
Use have to hold the mouse still, and press the left mouse button over the text to this...

http://www.literacydirectory.org/

If you keep moving your mouse all over the webpage to watch the arrow move back and forth and keep clicking all the mouse button randomly like you have been doing, you will have the cut and paste commands continue to pop up.

by afs 2005-07-10 06:57AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
I remember once reading a news story in which a 'conservative' protestor was confronted over having been caught on camera kicking a woman during a protest which turned into a melee.  You could see on his face how guilty he felt about it.  He knew he'd done wrong.  Contrast that to the way a 'liberal' protestor would react if they were confronted for performing a similar action, and being caught red-handed...rather than feeling guilty or that they'd done wrong, they'd merely turn on their accuser, not even bothering to make excuses, instead launching into a pure diatribe about the evil of the USA doing this that and the other.  That's how leftists deal with their mistakes.  By shouting down everybody else just so they can carry on pretending they're right.  Even when they do things that no sane person could regard as right.  That seems to be their biggest problem.  That the rules 'don't apply to them' - only to the other guy.

That story was brought to my attention by a 'liberal', who just wanted to gloat over the hated conserative getting caught out, and who also held that a liberal dong the same thing shouldn't be regarded as a reflection on the character of a LIBERAL.  If a conservative kicks a woman, it proves he's a bad guy.  If a liberal kicks a woman, it doesn't prove he's a bad guy, and how stupid of you to even think that.  After all, what would be the point of liberals convincing themselves and each other that being liberal made one a saint, if they had to face up to their mistakes, and the bad things they did?

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-09 09:19AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Over on LGF you may be able to get away with the friend of a friend of cousin once saw this thing and "Liberals Suck!", but not here.

You're going to have to post an link to an actual newstory that states this or you will be troll rated into oblivion.

by stevenlohrenz 2005-07-09 10:23AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
A newsstory?  I'll go you one better.  I'll link to a photo and see if you can deny your own lying eyes.

This guy loves NYC even more without the World Trade Centre.

http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/117-1743_IMG.JPG

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 12:56AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
There's that dependancy on pictures again
It's never too late to learn to read.

http://www.literacydirectory.org/

by afs 2005-07-10 05:36AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There's that dependancy on pictures again
When there's nothing left to cut and paste...get repetitive.  Right, my unoriginal friend?

Keep bumping up that noise, y'hear?

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 06:50AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Still having problems operating that mouse?
Instructions for clicking links are posted upthread.

It's very critical that you contact the good people at...

http://www.literacydirectory.org/

It's really become apparent just how badly you need to work on those literacy skills.

by afs 2005-07-10 07:07AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Then do it. I'd like to see you find any calls for genocide over there at all. Put your links where your mouth is.
by Chris Bowers 2005-07-08 12:31PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
they've probably been banned and deleted already, Chris.  that's you're MO, isn't it?  let the sunshine in?  yeah, right.
by TimRusso 2005-07-09 04:38AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
i see you are a one trick pony

no more responses from me

by goplies 2005-07-09 04:42AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Whatever Russo. I've banned less than 1% of the registered users here.
by Chris Bowers 2005-07-09 06:10AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Chris, I'm serious about this.

How can you write a post about banning comments when this site, and Kos, are both designed to allow users and moderators to ban comments?  How can you write that piece with a straight face?  

Really...I would like to know how you split that hair.

by TimRusso 2005-07-09 06:32AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
And if you think Scoop sites are the only ones that delete comments, you're nuts.
by Chris Bowers 2005-07-09 07:00AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
But if you are interested in "spliting hairs," I have allowed more than 99.5% of the comments on MyDD to stay, which is 99.5% more than sites that do not allow any comments, such as the ones I've listed.

We may ban a few people, but they ban everyone.

by Chris Bowers 2005-07-09 07:02AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Speaking as one of that 0.05% which has been deemed worthy of banning.......

It seems to me that the only two positions on this front that make any sense are either..

(a)  ban all comments...or
(b)  ban no comments.

Your position, and the position of Kos and MyDD generally, is that you have some discretionary power to ban comments you don't like.  This is precisely the worst comment policy anyone interested in free debate could imagine.  

In fact, your criticism of the right wing blogs is just that....they are using their discretionary power to hide the nasty truth about who they really are by banning all comments.

Why are you using your discretionary power to ban?  

by TimRusso 2005-07-09 07:19AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Thinking Like A Robot
The above robot logic ignores tens of millions of years of evolutionary wisdom.  Which is what humans, as social animals have built into them: the ability to gradate human interactions on multiple scales, rather than with a simply, robotic on-off switch.

Here at MyDD and at DKos, we use software to implement some version of evolved social mediation of conversation.  The vast majority of conversation goes on unhindered, with some highlighted much more than others, via recommeneded diaries, and front-paging.  A small fraction is troll-rated into oblivion. An even smaller fraction is outright banned.  

This is done because of previous experience that completely unmoderated forums degenerate into contentless flamewars and the like.  This is the real pragmatic reason that Scoop is used.  And unlike your theory, it actually does produce free debate, with a relative high signal/noise ratio.

This is, of course, quite emblematic.  Liberalism is a fundamentally pragmatic political philosophy of what works.  The principles it has--such as religious tolerance--were orginally pragmatic compromises. It was only over time that they came to be regarded as positive goods, as they bore fruit and it was possible to see their real nature.

So, too, with user-moderated cyber communities.

by Paul Rosenberg 2005-07-09 07:35AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Thinking Like A Robot
All of that is fine.  But the intellectually honest would not then turn around and criticize others for doing precisely the same thing.
by TimRusso 2005-07-09 07:37AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Which Is It?
If "All of that is fine," then you agree that it is not precisely the same thing.  That was the whole point of my post--to point out the difference.

This is a perfect--if subtle--example of doublethink.

Robert's Rules of Order also limits people's right to speak in the service of a more productive discussion overall.  As does virtually every other set of rules, formal or informal, governing democratic deliberations, including rules governing legislative and judicial proceedures, within formal sessions, in adjunct proceedings, and in gathering testimony.

But, of course I would point out such obvious real-world parallels, seeing that I'm a part of the reality-based community.

by Paul Rosenberg 2005-07-09 12:33PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Which Is It?
reality based?  Dems lost in 2004.  

Repeat after me, Paul.

Dems lost in 2004.

by TimRusso 2005-07-09 01:49PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Which Is It?
Gad!  This is every Republican's response when they lose a debate.

Dems lost!  Dems lost!

I'm so sick of that loser non-response that I actually posted my first comment here.  

by LawStudent 2005-07-09 08:06PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Which Is It?
And in 2008 Hillary will bring Bubba back to the white house. Ah the pain of the cons will be delicious indeed!
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 02:54AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
That's a good analogy
The "Robert's Rules of Order" thing. Very nice parallel. I've been looking for just that analogy for quite a while. Thanks!
by rusty 2005-07-09 08:21PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Ummm... but since you are posting here aren't you obviously not part of the .005?

Hmmm?

by Andrew C White 2005-07-09 08:54AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Andrew, I post at the mercy of Chris, Jerome, and the disciples of banning here at MyDD.  When they disagree with a post, it is gone.  

This is fine, if that's the policy.  But to have this policy and criticize precisely the same policy at other blogs is absurd.  That's my point.

(FYI, I was banned completely from here a long time ago, and recently re-registered.  That's why I pay attention to this stuff.)

by TimRusso 2005-07-09 09:53AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
As do we all. It is their site. We are guests. If I invited you into my home and you started spouting what I thought was offensive manure I would insist you left. I would eject you if need be. If you spouted inane stratosphere stuff I'd roll my eyes and start watching the clock waiting for the time when I could politely say it was time to go. If your inane ramblings showed a lack of grip of reality with a potentially unsafe aspect for me and my family I would find a way to show you the door.

I was highly sceptical regarding the comments rating system employed at scoop sites at first. Now I like them very much. I think community policing is the best way to go. I am very much a libertarian in my views on free speech and the like. I do not agree with some of the decisions that have been made regarding banning or deletion of posts/diaries whatever. However, I respect the right of the people that actually run these sites to do so as they see fit. I have no idea why youu may have been banned before so I can say nothing about that. What I can say is that all sorts of people come and go here and say all sorts of things from all sorts of different points of view.

You say you see hypocrisy here and that it is the same as what is happening at right wing sites that don't allow comments at all. Have you stated your complaints over there too? Accused them of hypocrisy as well? Probably not since their sites don't allow you to comment at all.

The fact of the matter is that the right wing doesn't believe in the Bill of Rights (except that part about guns which they believe in a manner different from what is actually written). The fact of the matter is they don't believe in free speech. The fact of the matter is that one of the prime tactics of the far right is the O-Reilly/Limbaugh approach of shouting down and blocking out any and all oppossing views.

Why in the world should we on the left allow our sites to be overrun by the far right wing, Constitution hating, freedom hating, totalitarians by allowing them to freely post and shout and scream and rant and rave their b.s. all over the place? That's wacko all by itself. Some degree of policing is required. Free does not mean anarchy.

The trick is in tredding that fine line between policing, decorum, sanity, and inhibiting free speech. It is not a simple job nor clear cut. And this is why I made the comment about black and white thinking. It simply isn't. It's kind of like the Supreme Court not defining pornography but saying they know it when they see it. Absolutely right. While I may not always agree with the decisions that Jerome and Markos make I applaud them for taking on a tough job and doing the best they can with it.

I also think your criticism, along with that of many others, is an important part of that process. Our free and open society is a balancing act. I don't want people cussing and making sexual comments in public where my granddaughter might be exposed to such things before she is ready. I don't want criminals and terrorists walking free and unimpeded with unrestricted access to weapons. Reasonable limits and reasonable procautions must and ought to be maintained. At the same time I do not want my freedom's limited beyond warrent and I do not want to be treated as a potential criminal or terrorist just because one in one hundred thousand actually is one. It is a balancing act. I disagree strongly with much of the so-called patriot act for this very reason. When in doubt lean in the direction of free and open. Reasonable procautions are neceeary. Giving up our free and open society is not.

This stuff is not simple nor always clear cut. Anyone that says it is and declares black and white answers for all time on such issues has not spent much time thinking it all through.

by Andrew C White 2005-07-09 12:14PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
<<one of the prime tactics of the far right is the O-Reilly/Limbaugh approach of shouting down and blocking out any and all oppossing views.>>

The "O'Reilly/Limbaugh" approach?  Don't you mean, the "Lawrence O'Donnell" approach?  Like when he cynically shouted down a Swift Vet on live television?

When conservatives talk of how liberals accuse them of doing exactly what liberals themselves do, they're not kidding, are they?

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 02:54AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
LOL

Ok... thanks for sharing. LOL

by Andrew C White 2005-07-10 09:04AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Reading this through a second time I see the same black and white, no room for the application of reason, that you folks on the right use all the time. It sounds good at first glance but melts upon the application of logical reasoning.
by Andrew C White 2005-07-09 08:56AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
When it comes to CONS I think in absolutes as well. As in every CON is an absolute waste of good air and carbon. I hate them all and I don't like to hear them utter one goddamn stupid word.
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-09 09:49AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
I hearya and I understand... but... hate is not healthy for you. People of this sort have always been around and they will always been around. Given how strong their media and indoctrination machine is right now... it will be a long time before their type of thought process and hate speech sinks back into the fringe morass from which it sprang. I don't want to hear them either. They make me angry. They make me sad. They scare the begeebbers out of me. Somehow there must be a way to communicate and educate them out of their closed minded ignorance and fear. I don't have that answer. I am hoping smarter people then me can come up with it but I don't hate these folks as much as I pity them.
by Andrew C White 2005-07-09 12:21PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Well I enjoy hating them. It feels good and gets me going every day. Who needs motivation exercises when you can despise the cons?
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 02:56AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Heh heh heh heh heh.  Go Hillary!  Keep embarassing Chris!
by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 03:27AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Beavis, reverse psychology hasn't worked on me since the 5th grade. And I'm sure it hasn't worked on Chris either.

What's embarrassing are all you brainless contard at LGF calling for ethnic cleansing in our nation of immigrants.

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 09:18AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
YOU'RE calling for genocide.  YOU'RE calling for mass-murder and extermination.  Why aren't you embarrassed and ashamed by that?  Explain it.  Explain why it should make sense to a non-psychotic that your coments should not be taken representative of liberals in the same way as you think the comments Chris excerpted should be considered 'embarrassing'.   Go on, give it a try.
by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 09:36AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Oh quit being a drama queen. I could hardly term the extinction of contards "genocide". That implies a negative connotation regarding the systematic removal of you vermin from our society.

Removing contards would result in a society that is more free, smaller government, transparent government, no more liberal nation-building and internationalist pipedreams like democratizing the world in the mold of Wilson, fiscal conservativism, no more American Taliban (christian fundamentalist extremists), and no more sending our troops off to needless wars to find weapons of mass disappearance. A utopia!

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 11:19AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
No, I didn't think you'd be able to, PSYCHOTIC.

So when will you be embarking on a shooting spree, then?

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 11:45AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
That really was a piss poor rebuttal. Are you becoming fatigued in the face of my superior wit?
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 12:13PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
I just want to know if you've got the courage of your psychotic convictions.  C'mon, what's stopping you from being the next Klebold, the next Harris?  What are you, too much of a coward?  Or are you just waiting for the liberal equivalent of the SS to appear for you to join up?  

Am I becoming fatigued by your psychotic idea of what constitutes 'superior wit'...thank you for admitting that all you liberals can do, instead of engaging people rationally with solid arguments that hold water, is to 'fatigue' them by endlessly posting gibberish about 'contards' and being deliberately ignorant and obtuse.

I'd like to thank you and people like you for making that much harder to deny what scary, freaky people liberals are.  When someone is trying to deny that liberals are the nastiest, least sane motherfuckers around, I can pull out your statements and say 'you REALLY think so?  What do you think now?'

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 08:43PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Ah the twisted way a contard's brain works when he infers that a prerequisite quality to be a killer is to have courage. Well, you must really admire our terrorist enemies who blow themselves up to inflict mayhem on the troops. No wonder you support cancerous domestic terrorism from within through the republican agenda.

It's been a day and you've only responded with this lousy post which tells me what I already know about bushbots? Well I can be greatly satisfied that I at least drew a non-denial from you that you are indeed a Wilsonian liberal.

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-11 09:56AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
The purpose of this site is not pure, free debate. It is agitation and analysis leading toward action. Debating plays a role, but debate is not the ultimate purpose of this site. Get used to it.
by Chris Bowers 2005-07-09 09:24AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
I would presume that applies just as equally to the blogs you criticize.  To paraphrase you, the "purpose of (their) site is not pure, free debate" either.  They also ban comments, just like this blog.

So what the hell is the difference?  Quantity of banning?  You really aren't making that argument, are you?  

by TimRusso 2005-07-09 09:40AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
The difference
Is that they are calling for genocide. That was the point of this post. Many top right-wing blogs, whether intentionally or not, hide this sort of right-wing extremism from view by not having comments.

I'm not criticizing anyone for not having comments, but rather offering one possible explanation for they they do not have comments. Paul Rosenberg offered a very clear explination for why we use a moderated Scoop system--I'm offering an explanation for why they don't have comments at all. Thus the title of the post "Why Right-Wing Blogs Do Not Have Comments." I haven't argued here why they should have comments. I am also pointing out what their general lack of comments hides. When a crack in the matrix appears, I'm all for exposing it far and wide.

by Chris Bowers 2005-07-09 09:59AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Makes no sense to me.
Look at freerepublic. Huge traffic and pick any topic you like...you'll find hateful rhetoric posted with abandon. Whether it be anti-islamic, anti-immigrant, etc. As long as it isn't in any way opposing the administration or far right, it is allowed to stand.

They call for the deportation of arabs and gay all the time over there. I don't see this as hidden in the least. Those people are PROUD of it!

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-09 10:05AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The difference
Here's a crack in the matrix for ya......

You defend banning comments like mine, and others, which have gone absolutely nowhere near anything that you cite in your piece, but somehow argue that the right wing blogosphere should allow the incendiary comments you use as examples to appear on their sites?  In order to reveal the true nature of those sites?  What?  

My head is starting to hurt from your logic.

Let me ask you this.  Why are you banning comments?  What is your rationale?

by TimRusso 2005-07-09 10:15AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The difference
Sorry, this should have appeared here.....

Here's a crack in the matrix for ya......

You defend banning comments like mine, and others, which have gone absolutely nowhere near anything that you cite in your piece, but somehow argue that the right wing blogosphere should allow the incendiary comments you use as examples to appear on their sites?  In order to reveal the true nature of those sites?  What?  

My head is starting to hurt from your logic.

Let me ask you this.  Why are you banning comments?  What is your rationale?

by TimRusso 2005-07-09 10:16AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The difference
feel free to ban this moronically double-posted comment.  that would make sense.
by TimRusso 2005-07-09 10:17AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The difference
He should be banning all idiot conservatives period. That's what freerepublic does to liberals. What he shouldn't be doing is deleting comments by people like me who voted for Kerry, Clinton, and are clearly on his side.
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-09 10:23AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The difference
And then we have Vote Hillary and his/her desire to make psycho outbursts...does this reflect or tell us anything about the state of liberalism and it's adherents?  They seem to be complaining about having their psycho outbursts deleted...almost as if you or someone else were trying to hide something.  

Of course, it might strike you as pointless as trying to hide something that is obviously happening in the real world.  Like when liberals were menacing and shooting at Republicans last year:-

http://www.wbir.com/news/news.aspx?storyid=20241
http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110005741

So what we have here is an increasing number of liberals becoming more and more willing to act on their hatred.  Which seems like a bigger and more dangerous problem than LGFers TALKING about what should be done about Islamic terrorists.

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 02:37AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The difference
Nothing psychotic about wanting to rid the world of cons. That would leave a utopia without senseless wars started for the feeding of the military industrial complex.

Pretty lame attempt at trying to use one hawkish dem leaning independent's views against liberals as a whole...as for people committing hate crimes for ideology, take a look at you values nazis bombing abortion clinics and killing doctors. Yes, your words ring empty.

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 02:53AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The difference
I repeat, since you are psychotic, not-psychotic statements do not make sense to you.  Therefore since you are psychotic, you will automatically reject the idea that it is wrong to kill, even though you would assert that killing Islamic terrorists is wrong.  Not because you think killing is a bad thing, but because you just see moral condemnation as a way of bashing and attacking people you hate.

And since you are psychotic, you have no sense of the hypocrisy of asserting that violence committed by liberals doesn't reflect on liberals as a whole(no, it certainly doesn't, but it reflects on liberals who approve of that sort of thing - like you do), while maintaining that conservatives must be castigated in their totality for the actions of a very small number of pro-life bombers, despite (a) the fact that they're condemned by the majority of conservatives - in stark contrast to violent liberals, who can be assured of a huge amount of support and approval of their actions, and (b) when was the last time there was an abortion-related bombing?  The 1990's?  You tell me, Mr. Psychotic, since you're in the US and I'm not.

I wonder if you can explain why different sets of rules apply to you and other liberals?  Though you probably won't be able to.  Because you are a brainless ranting psychotic.

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 03:26AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The difference
Please don't tell me you paid for that online diploma in bovine psychology! I hope you get your $20 back so you can donate it to the DNC where it can get some good use.

When did I say killing terrorists are bad? I'm a vet and I'd love to kill terrorists, but we also have our American Taliban right here in the US called "conservatives (retards)", and they are guilty of domestic terrorism of the highest degree. While Al Qaeda attacks from without, you traitors destroy America from within. We lose over 2500 Americans on 9-11 and then you contards think of the bright idea of delivering another 1750 Americans to the terrorists' doorstep...great going morons! Pretty soon you republicans will have beat Osama's high score.

Then again, I'd expect logic from a Wilsonian idealist liberal would be warped. You idiots are too busy nation-building, "making the world safe for democracy!!" ala Wilson, bloating big government while stripping the Constitution, and being fiscally irresponsible.

Your first step to recovery is to admit you are a liberal.

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 09:34AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The difference
My first step to recovery?  You mean I have to come to believe, as you do, that conservatives need to be killed by the thousand, in order for you to consider me sane?  

 

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 11:48AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The difference
Ha! So you don't deny you are a liberal. You have graduated to Step 2 of the 12 point plan to recovery.

What happened to the Goldwater conservatives who actually believed in something? You disenfranchised liberals call yourself "neocons"...so the new conservative is an old Cold War / Wilson liberal. Quite an identity crisis I see.

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 12:11PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Actually I'm starting to believe this guy has a point. You or someone else deleted my comment posted 10 hours ago on this topic -- I'm assuming in order to bolster your argument that no one on your side would make such comments as those on right-wing blogs.

Take a look at my comment history. I am clearly on your side and despise cons, particularly neocons. So don't make some ridiculous assertion that I'm some freeper troll.

But I wrote a comment here that if it were up to me, I would round up every registered republican and cleanse their asses from the US population. I think I used the term: nuke. Unfortunately this isn't possible but that doesn't stop me from wishing it. At the least every single one of those pieces of shit should be castrated to prevent pro-creation and further damage to the population gene pool. If there was a person dying on the side of the road and I found out he voted for Bush, I'd leave him to rot and wouldn't tell anyone.

But my humble words cannot express my hate for those values nazis on the right. You're in denial if you think people like me don't exist on your side. And frankly I don't see what's wrong with it. We're an all-inclusive ideology verses the White-Right.

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-09 09:42AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
And by the way...
Take a look at the hardening bi-polar lines in US politics since 1992. The 2000 election was the most contentious between red and blue until 2004 came along -- so many people voted because everyone hated the candidate on the other side so much. And I expect 2008 to be the worst yet. Someday, maybe not 2008 or 2012, but perhaps 2016 or 2020 this line between Americans will grow so stark and dividing that I expect the possibility of civil unrest, either by secession of a state or a group of states adjoining by their population's ideology, leading to armed conflict.

When this day comes people like me on the left will take the fight to those freeper shits and give them hell to pay. The blue states have most of the resources -- it won't be like the Civil War. It will end quickly and the red states will be subdued. We even have Canada and Mexico who will surely side with us...Canada being liberal and Mexico pissed about anti-immigration policies by the Right.

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-09 09:58AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
You become what you hate.
by rusty 2005-07-09 08:18PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: You become what you hate.
What's wrong with hate? Without it love would cease to have meaning.
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 02:46AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: You become what you hate.
What fine psychotic logic.  Love has no meaning for you, my friend.  You are too damn PSYCHOTIC to 'love' people.  Psychotics typically don't, they can't.  It's not something they're cut out for.

Semantics - love is not defined by comparison to hate.  Love is defined in terms of its own characteristics.  Do you think that because you do not hate X, then you must love X?  

Not that I want you to strain your psychotic mind trying to argue against this little truth.

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 03:14AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: You become what you hate.
Oh my! This yellow elephant has been watching Revenge of the Sith too many times. LOL!

TheHappyRampager, did Obi Wan tell you what really happened to your father?

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 09:11AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Don't worry Vote Hillary.  I've just now saved this thread to my hard drive so that your beautiful sentiments won't vanish like tears in rain.

And I'm not going to let the rest of the posters here forget or ignore it either.  No sirree.

by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 02:10AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
You can't see what's wrong with it because you are psychotic.  Psychotics are not the most self-aware people in the world.  Seek professional help.
by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 02:25AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Ah, such irony coming from a contard who basks in the aura of a party that defines psychosis. Do me a favor and volunteer for Iraq...maybe you'll be number 2000. But you're just another yellow elephant I'm sure.
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 02:48AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
I repeat, since you are psychotic, you lack self-awareness and other-awareness too, and do not realise how psychotic it is to say the things you have said.  All you can do is mindlessly recite your psychotic comments that do not even make sense to other people.  I mean, what the fuck is a contard?
by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 03:08AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
I knew those two syllables would be tricky for you. Conservative-retard = contard. Namely you and your neanderthal vermin.

Listen to your witless rants..."blah blah blah...psychotic...blah...psychotic...blah blah..." YAWN.

Lack self-awareness...sure buddy. Quit picking magic mushrooms on your farm Billy Bob!

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 09:16AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
I'm with Chris on this
I am glad to not have to be subjected to every nonsensical or unconstructive comment, such as the one mentioned below about "nuking" or castrating republicans so they can't reproduce.

How is that productive?  

The quality of the comments and conversation here is why I come here.  There is a role for a moderator to ensure that the conversation stays focused and on topic.  

As long as the hand isn't too heavy, the moderator has an important role.  That is completely appropriate.  The exact same thing would happen if we were having this conversation in person.  

So, thanks Chris for keeping this site healthy.  (At Redstate, I think, right at the top there are some commenter and site guidelines--you might consider something like that here just to let folks know what the site is about).

by Steve Hill 2005-07-09 12:17PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Deleted and banned already? Good. Let genocidal trolls stand out in public so we know who they are, but they don't have to be tolerated on privately run sites.

The whole point here is that there is an atavistic, tribal element to the extreme right wing that demands sucking up to some monolithic, dogmatic mindset. The same rhetoric is used against liberals (Coulter, Savage, etc.) and well tolerated by the Bush Administration and the Republican Party which would love a nation of pod people.

"Think like me or you're a traitor. Think like me or die." There is no parallel rhetoric on the left and PLEASE spare me from pathetic comments about eco-terrorists spiking trees.

Cheers,
Clemsy

by Clemsy 2005-07-09 07:15AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
I am a daily LGF reader and I would defend the idea that 99% of the posts at LGF are in no way over the top. In fact, many of the "calls for genocide" come from lefty trolls planting bombs to try to hurt Charles. I challenge you to post thread discussions where calls for violence against people or racist comments went unchallenged by many posters.

Another thing to take into account is that we are at war right now with an enemy who cuts civilian aid workers heads off and blows up children in the name of Allah. I find it thus not surprising that occasionally somebody looses the handle and says, "Kill them all," in which case of course the others must tell them they are dead wrong, to STFU and to get a grip. Charles also deletes as many of these comments as he can.

Most posters at LGF support differentiation between the guilty and the innocent. Prove otherwise, if you can...

That's my $.02 for your website. Good luck.

by YankintheEU 2005-07-09 07:18AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Another troll! Yeah!
Congratulations, Yank in the EU. You have just proved the theory that there is no limit to human stupidity. You should offer your posting style to hospital operating theatres as a highly-effective alternative to unconsciousness-inducing medications.

You freepers at littlegreenfootballs would be out of your depth in a parking lot puddle. Generally, there is nothing wrong with having nothing worthwhile to say - unless you insist on saying it. Reading your post makes blindness a wonderful thing to look forward to. You bring to mind a quote from Josh Billing: "Doesn't know much, but leads the league in nostril hair."

You have that certain nothing. Truly, you are about as interesting as watching a slug move slowly across a large rock. Genius does what it must, talent does what it can, and you had best do what you're told, you dyslexic lobotomy patient. Maybe you wouldn't be such a Jerk-In-The-Box if you didn't eat all those paint chips and lead pencils when you were a kid; if your weren't so fat that buildings bounce when you haul your Sumo Wrestler mass down the street, or if you didn't have a face that people rub tree branches on to make ugly sticks. Nah, of course you would.

You are a piteously lecherous sycophant and a frightful, enema-addicted festering boil on the butt of humanity. You are an egregiously insufferable plebeian and a gluttonous, nostril-offending mutilation of decency. You are a precociously witless mouth breather and a belligerent, all-defiling deplorable calamity of birth. You are a frightfully obtuse cretin and a vacuous, dandruff-eating pulp of stultifying inanity.

by afs 2005-07-09 12:24PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Another troll! Yeah!
Boy, that debate moderation software Chris uses must be on the blink or something.    
by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 02:12AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Those big words giving you problems again
I know you can't get through those multi-syllable words without help from text to voice software, happyrampager.

It's never too late in life to learn to read.

http://www.literacydirectory.org/

by afs 2005-07-10 05:41AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
A troll... for me?!?
Ahhh... you guys shouldn't have.

It's just what I wanted.

What do you think... BBQed on a grill, or put on a spit and roasted over an open flame?

by afs 2005-07-08 12:39PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
...and you illustrate that fact beautifully.

For the uninformed, please feel free to visit Daily Kos (the site in question) and see for yourself.  I believe you'll find that our right-wing "apologist for racism", above, is full of it.

by jonweasel 2005-07-08 02:05PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Comments from freepers and progressives are mixed up in forums supported by local papers across the entire country. The local freepers hunt in packs like jackels in an attempt to discourage thoughtful discourse by utilizing personal attacks as their primary weapon. These idiots represent the "brownshirt" faction of the new age.  
   
by Seldom Seen Smith 2005-07-08 02:22PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
As Chris says, please do. I'd love to see you what you think are the left wing equivalent of the genocidal thoughts of the far right. We've got our wackos but you won't find genocidal maniac escapees from the KKK wandering in our fields.
by Andrew C White 2005-07-08 03:36PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
Oh so I'm some "genocidal maniac" just because I hate conservatives so much that I'd PREFER it if they didn't exist at all? Damn right I wish there was a way to identify the "stupid gene" in our DNA that allows one to become assimilated into the values nazi doctrine...then maybe we could eliminate this disease from our society altogether.

Are you telling me that if someone somehow developed a biological carrier that could rewire this gene and remove it from the individual it infects and leave them otherwise unharmed, that you would not release it yourself? I damn sure would in a heartbeat.

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-09 10:19AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: There are idiots
I am going to joing the chorus line here. I know in this day and age folks have lost the capacity for understading how actions can differ by degree, but do  you honestly think some guy pontificating about a conspiracy regarding the Bush administration is the same as some guy advocating the wholesale murder of 1 billion people?  I hope for your sake, if you do believe in God, that you can tell the difference.
by bruh21 2005-07-08 03:47PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
The more sunshine the better
Damned good observation about Powerline. I thought Powerline was a pretty weak choice, but I didn't make the connection. I didn't think of it at the time, but now that you mention it, the M$M is covering up for conservatives once again.

CNN did it during a Bork interview last week too. Not a single question about Bork's insane comments:

Could you share with our audience why you think Bill Clinton is a sociopath? And why do you think the left wing radicals in the 60's were the equivalent of Nazis? How are controversial song lyrics the equivalent of selling addictive drugs?

 The M$M almost never criticizes or questions anything a conservative says or does. Conservatives say completely batshit crazy stuff and the M$M pretends not to notice. Has anyone in the M$M criticized the comments of Gibson et. al. at Faux News about the London bombings?  

by Gary Boatwright 2005-07-08 12:28PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Nailed that
Back when Hatewach was in business, they operated on the theory that the more exposure of racist extremists in all their glory, the more their own words would sabotage their cause.

Little Green Footballs is today's "Exhibit A" for the right wing of today's Republican Party.

by jonweasel 2005-07-08 02:06PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The more sunshine the better
They do themselves proud over there.  
by Jonathan Schwartz 2005-07-09 07:57AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Doomed
These people vote.  Their vote counts just as much as people who can think.  How can we believe there's a chance?  I mean think if somehow Bush really was involved in the prison abuse.  Any other time in this countries history that would be an automatic impeachment, I mean that would make the whole Clinton thing look like jaywalking.  Yet with morons like this they'd probably say 'Yep, good job W too bad you didn't kill them all.'  And they make up more than half the people that actually pay attention to what's going on!
by Gonzaga2000 2005-07-08 12:35PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Doomed
Because these people are a minority.  Remember that.  The vast majority of people are, in opinion and outlook if not in stated political beliefs, liberals (consider the popularity of social security, the continuing popularity of Roe v. Wade, etc.).  So yes, shine the light, and the brighter the better.  The more people who see what the reality really is, the better it is for us.
by bhurtaw 2005-07-08 12:56PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Doomed
Roughly half of all self-identified conservatives hold liberal policy attitudes on core liberal issues--such as social spending, environmentalism, internationalism, gender equality, etc. Ironically, what seems to keep them in line with their hardline bretheren is the demonization of others they believe have too much power--the vast majority of whom they agree with on those issues.  (The conflicted conservatives may be repulsed by too extreme expressions of such attitudes. But, at the same time, they harbor them in more muted form.)

This is one of the deep strangenesses of American politics.

by Paul Rosenberg 2005-07-09 07:22AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
&quot;Any other time&quot;?
80 years of legal slavery.

Jim Crow.

Internment of the Japanese.

Red Scares & McCarthyism.

Genocide against natives, roundeing them up into concentration camps (aka reservations).

The Cold War toppling of democratically elected governments.

Viet Nam.

What causes this belief that human nature magically vanishes with American citizenship?

by Paul Goodman 2005-07-08 04:51PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: &quot;Any other time&quot;?
let's update that:

A "war" over false pretense

Complete dessimation of the EPA

Awarding Federal Positions to Convicted Criminals

F'ing with the Press at every turn possible

Secreive meetings with Energy Officials

Vote tampering

All in all a real trustworthy crew.

by goplies 2005-07-08 10:35PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
I hate to violate Godwin's Law but
like I said on Kos, I know it's not the same magnitude of deaths but with ~100,000 innocent Arabs dead from this war, my fears have been proven that the same way skinheads say "6 million more" a lot of extreme-righties are saying "100,000 more" with that number at the end of the war being adjusted accordingly.
by BlueEngineerInOhio 2005-07-08 01:32PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
chilling
it sent chills down my spine
by dayspring 2005-07-08 01:43PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
The last comment
The last comment in that list upset me so much I wrote this diary about it. I just can't believe that I live in the same universe as these people.
by michael in chicago 2005-07-08 01:51PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The last comment
Yeah... that children thing was tried a few times before. The taking of Native American children in an attempt to kill Native American culture is one example.

It was not good then and it ain't good now.

Bigotry by any person or group of people towards any person or group of people... sucks.

by Andrew C White 2005-07-08 03:39PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
That's the best you can do?
Now I know you copied selectively from the Little Green Footballs posts. If you looked I'm sure you could find many that were much more thoughtful and kind hearted.  Why, I bet some would have written that there was simply no need to kill all Muslims.  If they would shave their beards, get down on their knees, beg forgiveness, give us all their worldly goods  - and their oil -  and become Christians they could find it in their hearts to let them live.  As second class citizens, of course.

Let's be fair.

by mjshep 2005-07-08 02:56PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: That's the best you can do?
Fair? What exactly in life is fair? If these blogs allow such commentary without disputing their statements, please don't come here talking about fairness because you don't understand the word. Fairness would require those people to know what happened to the Jews during WWII, to the people under  Pol Pots rule, to the Rwandans and to the people in former Yugoslavia. If they understood those things, and didn't use words like wiping a whole group of people out, then you can talk about fair. Are there left wing nuts? Sure, but being a conspiracty theorist or any of a number of other out there statements on the left do not compare to advocating genocide. If you want to talk about fairness, you need to understand the difference. Until then, you should reframe from talking about concepts you don't understand.
by bruh21 2005-07-08 03:43PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: That's the best you can do?
I believe he was being ironic.
by kj 2005-07-08 04:00PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: That's the best you can do?
I don't consider genocide ironic
by bruh21 2005-07-08 04:10PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
I'm Afraid You Don't Understand Irony...
From Merriam-Websters Online:
2 a : the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning b : a usually humorous or sardonic literary style or form characterized by irony c : an ironic expression or utterance

Your statement "I don't consider genocide ironic" is, strictly speaking, nonsensical.  Genocide is a subject, irony is a way of expressing something.  The two are different kinds of things that can't logically be compared.

When a US Army spokesman in Vietnam said, "In order to save the village, we had to destroy it," that was an unintentionally ironic statement about genocide.  That's as close as the two can get.

by Paul Rosenberg 2005-07-09 07:05AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: I'm Afraid You Don't Understand Irony...
I am afraid I don't care about the definition of irony. I was having a serious discussion as part of a serious diary. If you want to be literary, this is not necessarily the best place to do it.
by bruh21 2005-07-09 11:30PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Point is...
You wouldn't find comments like these on left wing blogs.  There might be left posters who are rude, condescending, obnoxious, and even overly angry.  But you won't find comments like this.  Certainly not this many.
by Drummond 2005-07-08 05:32PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: That's the best you can do?
Just to be clear, what you are describing is called the dhimmi, and it is the status accorded Christians and Jews in Muslim countries. They pay a tax (which Muslims don't pay) and live a very second-class existence. (non-Muslims who are not Christians or Jews are treated as subhuman). No new churches or synagogues (or only at the suffrage of the government); this exists in Egypt, for instance, where the Copts, 10% of the Egyptian population, cannot repair or build new churches. Whatever the best way of dealing with Islamic terrorism is, the way you outlined was developed by Muslim society.
by Seymour Paine 2005-07-09 04:04AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
If I was a right wing blogger
I'd be every bit as afraid of these people being associated with me as we are horrified that people still think that way.
by Andrew C White 2005-07-08 03:40PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: If I was a right wing blogger
Ah, but you're not a Republican blogger.  And it's pretty clear that a lot of the Republican bloggers are either leading or sympathizing with the genocide crowd.

See, that would be why you are a moral individual (at least in this instance) and not a Republican blogger.

by paperwight 2005-07-08 04:16PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: If I was a right wing blogger
What I want to know is why the "good" right-wingers aren't condeming these comments? Obviously it's becuase they support them. Not only do they support these comments, they send money to these "internet terrorists." Obviously the only solution is to round up all the right wingers and send them back to where they came from.

(did that sound like a right-wing poster, or what?)

by leftwingdialog 2005-07-09 06:54AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: If I was a right wing blogger
This is not only a good point, it's THE point.
by Clemsy 2005-07-09 08:40AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: If I was a right wing blogger
You mean like this?:

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/002964.htm

"Lefty blog MyDD calls attention to inflammatory rhetoric on the right, which I absolutely and unequivocally condemn. It's one thing to try and make a rational case for national security profiling, immigration enforcement, and vigorous prosecution of the war on radical Islam. It's quite another to spew dumb and vile bumper-sticker slogans about wanting to kill all Muslims and take away their children. That is unhinged. Knock it off, people."

by YARP 2005-07-10 12:47PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: If I was a right wing blogger
And the funny thing about that quote? It would get him banned for being a bleeding heart liberal at freerepublic!
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 03:35PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: If I was a right wing blogger
Good for her, if she means it. I am surprised and impressed. Thanks for posting that.
by Rider 2005-07-10 05:44PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
They just say what the rest feel
be honset.
by Paul Goodman 2005-07-08 04:52PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
malkin
malkin doesn't need comments because she says stuff like this herself. that she's even in the top 5 says a lot.
by scottmaui 2005-07-08 04:31PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: malkin
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/002964.htm

"First of all, the reason I shut down my comments was not because of "overt racism and fascism on the right," but because of idiots on the left like http://michellemalkin.com/archives/001417.htm and http://michellemalkin.com/archives/001212.htm and http://michellemalkin.com/archives/000342.htm.

Second, you can't win with an irrational critic like Bowers:

-If your conservative blog doesn't have comments, you're part of a conspiracy to cover up the "overt racism and fascism on the right."

-If you do have comments and you delete the over-the-top stuff, you'll still be accused of engaging in a "concerted effort" to prevent the "sun from shining in" on "overt racism and fascism on the right."

-And if you do "let the sun shine in" and allow such comments to be posted unfiltered, you'll, of course, be accused of endorsing the "overt racism and fascism on the right."

by YARP 2005-07-10 12:50PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Has anyone stopped to consider
what the reaction would be to a nuclear bomb going off in, say, London? Or New York or D.C.? What do you think would happen in the subsequent 72 hours?
by Paul Goodman 2005-07-08 05:15PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
First they'd blame feminists and homosexuals
Then they would call for genocide.  And anybody who even looks swarthy would be shot at within the borders.
by Drummond 2005-07-08 05:34PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
It's time for the sun to shine in
It's time for the hoods and sheets to come off. This is no more part of legitimate political discourse than a cloaked Klansmen coming up on a black man's house and saying "C'mon, boys. Let's burn that damn nigger out!" If there is a difference between what they say and the KKK, tell me what it is. This is the language of terrorists and terrorism.

The ones that are never seen, of course, are the controllers, Klanmasters, the ones who would never risk joining such a "party" but always ready to lend a run or horse, as it were, to such as these. Right wing politicians, pundits, think tank scholars, they are the really invisible hands behind these rabid blogs.

by Rider 2005-07-08 06:32PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: It's time for the sun to shine in
corr: "lend a gun"
sorry
by Rider 2005-07-08 06:33PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: It's time for the sun to shine in
Hey sunshine,
Now that I read back a bit I can see that you truly are in need of medicating.  

As far as I know, the only politician with any power that was a member of the KKK, and who still feels compelled to use the word "nigger", is on your side.  So that dog doesn't hunt.

And unlike your side, thinking folks like Charles Johnson and Glenn Reynolds aren't controlled by anyone - they're the ones setting the course.  Now if you want to talk about leftwing bloggers who are on Soros' payroll, we can get into that.

But don't let me rain on your parade, sunshine.

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-09 09:11AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
It's troll-a-rific
What evil is this, that I must hereby converse with the archdaemon rightwingmedic. Cheese has more drive, more feelings, and quite frankly, a fresher aroma than you can ever aspire to. Upon reading this, you are probably muttering something like "Ho ho, sour grapes." You have a point. But my rejoinder, vinegar face, is what hope did those grapes ever have while you live and breathe? It is politically correct when discussing your faults to use certain words to denote your humanness above your disability. But in your case, there is nothing human. You are just challenged, you are just different. What in God's name gives you any suggestion that you have any right to even exist? I have thought of entreating you to suicide. The problem remains, however, that is so doing I would presume you are some of sentient life in the first place; a proposition which is clearly preposterous. Personal hygiene. They are not words you are terribly familiar with are they? Still, this ignorance can possibly lead to good. Raise your arm and stick your nose in your armpit. Now breathe deeply. Soon you will lose consciousness. I would have suggested somewhere in this epistle that you fornicate elsewhere, but I beg you not to, for to engage in such activity would spell the rapacious ruin of some poor creature who until now might be completely, happily ignorant of even your existence, let alone your ability to engage in intercourse with things in a vertical direction. You are like gangrene, highly infectious, smelly and ultimately lethal. You snot-snivelled slimed sluptitious stool. Do you not have any reckoning of the ugliness you have wrought on the world? You are so depressing that the makers of Prozac have a bounty on your life. Have you ever wondered why you have no friends, only people who do their pathetic best to avoid you?

Thank you! We're all refreshed and challenged by your unique point of view, you ridiculous little carnival freak. Your post is an orgy of stultifying cacophonous verbal depravity; an exercise in literary impotence, and an offense to all of good taste and decency.

I don't know what makes you such a worthless poster, but it really works! Wouldn't clues have more room to fit in your head if you got rid of some of the gobbledygook in there?

by afs 2005-07-09 01:02PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: It's troll-a-rific
Your gibberish is entertaining, in that I can use it to familiarize my students with delusional ideations of a lunatic mind.  But your minor entertainment value notwithstanding, what the blood hell are you talking about?  What part of "radical Islamists want to kill everyone that is not like them" is somehow out of focus to you?  

Please spare me more rambling, I've got plenty saved already.  And, obviously, your personal insults are not effective because I'm still here.

And, troll?  Hardly think so, old chap.  I think of a troll who acts much like you do, just comes in the room and flings crap and insults around.  I'm trying to gain insight into the thinking of those who think that, because I believe that evil people should be killed before they can kill us, I am somehow the cause rather than the solution.

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-09 01:25PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Little troll thinks he can smack, huh?
(repost from response I just posted a min. ago to rightwingmedic below)

First of all, rightwingmedic, even if whoever "they" is it trying to kill you/me/whoever else with a US social security number, they are doing a piss-poor job of it. Even after 9/11, Madrid, and London, there is still a better chance of being stuck by lightning... twice, than dying in a terrorist attack. I didn't hear any "War on Lightning" from the Smirking Chimp (although he is thinking about sending a carrier task force to attack that Scottish rain cloud that made "Little Lance" get tossed over the handlebars of his bike for the third time in a year, this time breaking Scottish cop's ankle as he bounced whatever brains monkey-boy has off another tree in the process).

Next item... whoever attacked us on 9/11 and attacked Madrid, and London? THEY ARE NOT IN FUCKING IRAQ. You want to stop terrorism? FIND THE PEOPLE WHO ARE REALLY BLOWING SHIT UP. It shouldn't be that hard. How hard is it to find a 6'8" tall Arab that is dragging a kidney dialysis machine with him to TV Studios to film Arab Al-Queda Anarchy videos for broadcast around the whole fuckin' world?

You revolting, miserable excuse for a human being. Yes, I'm talking to you, right wing medic. You are the human equivalent of a broken lava-lamp. Repulsive, doesn't work, 30 years behind the times, and full of oily slime. Your post is the world's greatest proof of reincarnation; no one could get that dumb in just one lifetime.

Now... get away you pug-fugly, mule-groping, money-molesting schmuck before I get warmed up and really try to insult you.

by afs 2005-07-09 02:07PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
GOP Ire
                                     The commentary on Little Green Footballs is hardly suprising. It is well known to most of the regulars at this blog that a sizeable component of the GOP block has a number of prejudices against minorities and people from other cultures, if they are not out right racists.
                                      The problem for the right wing though is that they have no subtle cues which they can use in order to be racist and intolerant under the radar. When Reagan went to Philadelphia Mississippi in the 1980 election, and spoke of "States Rights", everyone in the audience knew what he was talking about; rolling back the gains of the Civil Rights Movement, namely by failing to uphold federal law. However, because Reagan used Orwellian language, using states rights rhetoric in place of talking about keeping African Americans in their place, most people did not notice.
                                      Since 9/11 the far right has been unable to come up with a narrative by which they can denounce Arabs and Muslims in general without it being patently obvious to the public. This is probably because total unfamiliarity with the situation; whereas segregationists had been talking in code for decades in order to appear more genteel than they were in reality (since many Americans outside the South, including whites, opposed segregation) and to obfuscate what was going on, with the current complexity of the so-called War on Terror, many of the paranoid members of the far right conjure up visions of a coming crusade by the West, a war of civilizations by which there can be only one winner (it can be taken for granted that they assume this will be the West; USA! USA!). I also suspect that the anti Muslim immigrant theme is tied up in the wider right wing anti-immigration theme, along with fears about the falling apart of "Western values" as well.
by alexsycara 2005-07-08 07:22PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Fame Is Fleeting
It would appear that LittleGreenFootballs rancid life might be drawing to a close.  Just try accessing the site right now.  I've tried it with four different browsers and none of them can find it.  Might the Lords of the Internet decided that such bigotry has no place on the web?  I guess we'll find out when LittleGreenFootballs reincarnates sans comments.
by VizierVic 2005-07-08 07:29PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Fame Is Fleeting
Maybe their provider caught up with them:

Go Daddy may also cancel Your use of the Services, after thirty (30) days, if You are using the Services in association with spam or morally objectionable activities. Morally objectionable activities will include, but not be limited to: activities designed to defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties; activities prohibited by the laws of the United States and/or foreign territories in which You conduct business; activities designed to encourage unlawful behavior by others, such as hate crimes, terrorism and child pornography; activities that are tortuous, vulgar, obscene, invasive of the privacy of a third party, racially, ethnically, or otherwise objectionable; activities designed to impersonate the identity of a third party; illegal access to other computers or networks (i.e., hacking); distribution of Internet viruses or similar destructive activities; and activities designed to harm minors in any way.
by Craig 2005-07-08 08:33PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Fame Is Fleeting
The owner of GoDaddy was found to be spouting this kind of hatefull crap a while back, so I doubt that clause will kick in on LGF.
by stevenlohrenz 2005-07-09 10:17AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Oh, How Far We've Come
Reading these comments brought immediately to mind one of my favorite songs of yesteryear, released in 1965 by Tom Lehrer.  It's so refreshing to see how far as a country we've come in the last 40 years ... and here I was thinking my generation had actually learned from our peace-loving parents.

For those not familiar with the song National Brotherhood Week (from the album That Was the Year That Was), here are the lyrics ... still chillingly relevant ...

One week of every year is designated National Brotherhood Week. This is just one of many such weeks honoring various worthy causes. One of my favorites is National Make-fun-of-the-handicapped Week which Frank Fontaine and Jerry Lewis are in charge of as you know. During National Brotherhood Week various special events are arranged to drive home the message of brotherhood. This year, for example, on the first day of the week Malcolm X was killed which gives you an idea of how effective the whole thing is. I'm sure we all agree that we ought to love one another and I know there are people in the world that do not love their fellow human beings and I hate people like that. Here's a song about National Brotherhood Week.

Oh, the white folks hate the black folks,
And the black folks hate the white folks.
To hate all but the right folks
Is an old established rule.

But during National Brotherhood Week, National Brotherhood Week,
Lena Horne and Sheriff Clarke are dancing cheek to cheek.
It's fun to eulogize
The people you despise,
As long as you don't let 'em in your school.

Oh, the poor folks hate the rich folks,
And the rich folks hate the poor folks.
All of my folks hate all of your folks,
It's American as apple pie.

But during National Brotherhood Week, National Brotherhood Week,
New Yorkers love the Puerto Ricans 'cause it's very chic.
Step up and shake the hand
Of someone you can't stand.
You can tolerate him if you try.

Oh, the Protestants hate the Catholics,
And the Catholics hate the Protestants,
And the Hindus hate the Moslems,
And everybody hates the Jews.

But during National Brotherhood Week, National Brotherhood Week,
It's National Everyone-smile-at-one-another-hood Week.
Be nice to people who
Are inferior to you.
It's only for a week, so have no fear.
Be grateful that it doesn't last all year!

by HyppieGrrl 2005-07-08 08:27PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
the purpose
The rabid fear-biters who make these comments would not be making the comments nor would the hate blogs and hate radio exist if more gentile controlling interests did not approve or want this stuff to be out there. What purpose or purposes does hate speech like this serve? Intimidation? Divide-and-conquer politics? Control? Or what?
by Rider 2005-07-08 08:42PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: the purpose
should read "genteel" not "gentile"
sorry
by Rider 2005-07-09 03:40AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
If it were up to me...
I'd round up every last republican, lock them up in one massive prison, then drop a nuke on them. That would correct our domestic problems as well as the cause of our major international ones. I would only spare republican children under 5 because at that age they can still be de-programmed.

One can dream.

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-08 11:11PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
We are doing it to ourselves
I just did a quick research check on the amount of times the word Democrat is used to the amount of times Republican is used via BlogPulse

http://www.blogpulse.com/trend?query1=democrat&label1=Democrat&query2=republican&label2= Republican&query3=&label3=&days=30&x=21&y=8

We have to speak more about our own party and not so much about the other side.  We are simply giving them dominance by the mentions.

by goplies 2005-07-08 11:29PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Genocide
"The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group."  Dictionary.com

I didn't scan through every LGF comment thread regarding the bombing, only the first one, titled "London Attacked".  I counted exactly zero comments about rounding "them" all up and killing them.  You factually cannot find more than one or two ABSOLUTE NUTCAKES per thread that advocate anything remotely resembling genocide.  

And I absolutely stand with those that say we should aggresively root out the perpetrators, planners, backers and providers of shelter and transport and give them a speedy trial followed by a quick execution.  If they resist, shoot them on the spot.  

There is no reasoning with the radical sect of Islam.  They want to kill you because you are (pick one: an infidel, a Christian, a Jew, a non-believer, a member of the decadent west, wear blue jeans, don't cover your woman's face, send your girls to school, ...)

There are whackjobs in every society, every religion, every sect, every race and creed.  I don't want to kill all followers of Islam, any more than I want to convert every atheist (although they certainly want to prevent me from publicly expressing my faith.)  

It's not the fact that they're whackjobs - it's that they want to kill me and my family for who I am.  That said, I'll kill them first without regard for who and why.  It's self-defense.

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-09 07:40AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Genocide
"I'll kill them first without regard for who and why."

"There are whackjobs in every society..."

Umm...yeah.

by Rider 2005-07-09 08:39AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Genocide
Rider,
Do you have a point, or are you prone to just snipping parts of posts and muttering about it.  There are medications for folks like you.

What part of my post would you like to debate?  The self-defense part, or the fact that broad brush and slippery slope arguments don't add up when analyzed by factual people?

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-09 08:46AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Genocide
And what part of mine did you not understand?

There's nothing to debate, sir. Your own words identified you as a whackjob and made the point better than I could. I'll hold you coat for you if you'd care to continue.

by Rider 2005-07-09 11:37AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Genocide
OK, so I have this straight.  My saying that any religious (or non-religious) nutball who threatens me or my family should die is... controversial?  

You see, ummm yeah isn't so much a reply or comment as a muttering one hears from someone who sleeps under a bridge.

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-09 12:02PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
It's a Troll all-you-can smack-buffet!
Git mah gun, thar's buck-toothed white trash to throw outta my yard.

I'll throw you under the outhouse, you tobacco spittin' redneck. You is uglier than a lard bucket full of armpits. You is like a booger that you can't thump off! I banged yer mom, you cross-eyed cracker... Gooder than grits!

I shudder to write this name; this pox, this word from hell, this utterence this rightwingmedic. You squat-brained mentally challenged puffball. I'm sorry if this letter appears to ramble. To make a cogent case as to why you are so repulsive presupposes some master design on your part, some inkling of purpose, some evil intent. And yet clearly, you have as much intent, as much purpose, as much reason for being, as a peanut. I have seen yeasts with more pizzazz, more culture, and a better understanding of the world around them than you will ever possess. I have seen maggots which have evoked greater pity in me than your voluptuously vile visage. Single-handedly, you have wrenched all meaning out of life. Congratulations. Have you any idea how agonisingly juvenile you are? I am truly staggered by your crass insensitivity to all that surrounds you. Humankind, I know, has no future. There is no justice, no reason, no hope. Just blank despair, and teeth gnashing hopelessness. If you were to remember the first time your mother set eyes upon you and the first words she ever spoke at you, you would find remarkable similarities. You are so depressing I have seen calculators stop working in your presence. Although you are soon to finish reading this letter, I suggest you go back to the beginning and read it again and again. Perhaps by some osmotic principle, some inkling of where you stand with the world might then permeate your callused hide.  

by afs 2005-07-09 12:52PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: It's a Troll all-you-can smack-buffet!
Wow, what a measured and reasoned response.  I'm sure the proprietor of this blog is very happy to have such a high intellect as yourself spending time here.  

Of course, because of your high intellect, you have figured out all of the answers to how to cure the evils of the world, so please enlighten me.  Your attacks are as infantile as they are illogical.

What part of "they want to kill you and I" is unclear to you?  You are not them, so you must die.  If that is not correct, please tell me radical Islamists have been attacking the USA since the early 90's?

I reiterate, I'm not talking about all Muslims.  It's as small a percentage as cross-burners or gangbangers are to the general population, or marriages outside your bloodline are to your family.

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-09 01:13PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Little troll thinks he can smack?
As far as me and myDD.com, Jerome keeps me caged in a basement of his vacation house for occasions just like this. He unchains me and hands me a keyboard whenever crab-infested, fascist, mule-fucking, boils-on-the-ass-of-humanity like you come calling.

First of all, rightwingmedic, even if whoever "they" is it trying to kill you/me/whoever else with a US social security number, they are doing a piss-poor job of it. Even after 9/11, Madrid, and London, there is still a better chance of being stuck by lightning... twice, than dying in a terrorist attack. I didn't hear any "War on Lightning" from the Smirking Chimp (although he is thinking about sending a carrier task force to attack that Scottish rain cloud that made "Little Lance" get tossed over the handlebars of his bike for the third time in a year, this time breaking Scottish cop's ankle as he bounced whatever brains monkey-boy has off another tree in the process).

Next item... whoever attacked us on 9/11 and attacked Madrid, and London? THEY ARE NOT IN FUCKING IRAQ. You want to stop terrorism? FIND THE PEOPLE WHO ARE REALLY BLOWING SHIT UP. It shouldn't be that hard. How hard is it to find a 6'8" tall Arab that is dragging a kidney dialysis machine with him to TV Studios to film Arab Al-Queda Anarchy videos for broadcast around the whole fuckin' world?

You revolting, miserable excuse for a human being. Yes, I'm talking to you, right wing medic. You are the human equivalent of a broken lava-lamp. Repulsive, doesn't work, 30 years behind the times, and full of oily slime. Your post is the world's greatest proof of reincarnation; no one could get that dumb in just one lifetime.

Now... get away you pug-fugly, mule-groping, money-molesting schmuck before I get warmed up and really try to insult you.

by afs 2005-07-09 01:59PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Little troll thinks he can smack?
AFS, you are pathetic.  You have no answers, you have no rational arguments, just vitriol.  You are the very embodiment of the type of person that this thread was supposed to be about.  Angry, argumentitive, irrational people.  Except even the least rational person at LGF can at least have a conversation with someone, without resorting to your level of schoolyard bullyism.

Now, your items.

  1.  More chance of getting struck by lightning.  Factually true.  Tell that to 3K New Yorkers - oh, sorry, they're dead.  Tell that to several hundred Londoners.  Oh, sorry, a bunch of them are dead and hundreds are injured.  Loser.

  2. Can't find any reference anywhere reputable to a broken ankle on the cop.  Minor ankle injury.  Loser.

  3. You refer to radical Islam as if it's a Kentucky Fried franchise.  Just call the number, pick up your chicken.  Do some research before you engage me on this, loser.

  4. Your point about the 6'8" Arab is interesting.  I'll pass it along to Karl Rove - that might help him find ol OBL.  Since it's so easy, maybe you could get off your urine stained lawnchair you have at your trailerpark kitchen table and lend the military some help.  Since you're both the human bloodhound and the center of reason and logic all wrapped up into one neat little spittle-covered package.

If you'd like to get into insults, I'll have to go out to my garage and whack myself in the head with a 2x4 for a few minutes so I can get to your level of intellect.  I might be able to respond in kind.

 

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-09 02:18PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Little troll thinks he can smack?
"1) More chance of being hit by lightning twice. Factually true"

Factually true is what matters, DUMBASS. I know facts don't matter in the endless hurricane of lies that is littlegreenfootballs, but to the rest of the world, facts are what counts.

2) Broken ankle,  sprained ankle, whatever. The smirking chimp bowls a cop over trying to be Little Lance Armstrong, and your strongest smack back is quibbling over whether the cop's ankle was broken or sprained? BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA...

3)Radical Islam...Kentucky Fried Chicken franchise

Again, Mr.Walking-talking-proof-of-negative-IQ scores, the people attacking US and Europe ARE NOT IN IRAQ. Never were. A cute line that has no facts or evidence supporting it that came to mind because KFC is where you've been mopping toilets for minimum wage for 17 years is not a response. A claim that terrorist came from Iraq to attack the WTC on 9/11 requires evidence. You have none. Why? BECAUSE IT DIDN'T FUCKING HAPPEN, rightwingtoiletmopper.

4) Bin Laden. Another attempt at pretending a not-so-cute line replaces EVIDENCE. BIN LADEN is the one who is responsible for all this shit. Bin Laden is not in Iraq. Why the fuck would want to go to Iraq to fight when Bin Laden and the rest of the people who did attack us ARE NOT IN FUCKING Iraq, you clueless, preposterously incompetent,  bantering cause of wailing and gnashing of teeth.

by afs 2005-07-09 02:47PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Little troll thinks he can smack?
Strap yourself in, General Simplissimo, because this may take some concentration on your part.

  1. You contradict yourself between #1 and #2.  Lightning strikes is a fact, but a broken ankle vs a scratch is not big deal.  See, I've never worked at a KFC, having been a paramedic for 23 years, so I'm aware that there is a tiny itsy bitsy difference.  

  2. I'm sure you didn't read the 911 Commission report, you just sat there and mopped up whatever Katie Couric said as you tried hard to focus your bloodshot eyes on your 9" B&W TV with the rabbit ears on it, but there were clearly associations between global terrorists like binLaden and Saddam and other Iraqi luminaries.  I never said that the guys who were responsible for 911 were in Iraq, because they are dead, having flown large airplanes into even larger buildings, you pompous windbiscuit.

I'd be happy to e-mail you a link so you can read the relevant parts, if you'd like.

But since you still view Al Qaeda as some sort of franchise like your favorite, Chick-Fil-A, and if you just go ring the doorbell on some cave in Giveafuckistan, OBL will answer and we can put a net over him, you don't see the reasons for engaging the enemy where he lies.  The reasons for mopping up the swamp in Iraq are numerous, but I won't waste logic you.

But obviously, if we kill or capture binLaden, all the righteous little fighters will lay down their arms and go back to flying carpet repair or running the 7-11, right?  It all stems from binLaden, so if he's out of the picture, all global terror will cease.  Other than the terror of you running out of Pabst Blue Ribbon and having to go back to drinking antifreeze, which is what has your brain in the shrunken condition it is.

Your simplistic mind is what almost elected Kerry, at which point we would have not even engaged Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, freeing up loads of their little innocents to be blowing shit up here on the 4th of July, rather than the nice fireworks we had.

I have news for you, the WOT won't be over until we kill enough of these zealots to convince the others that it's a losing proposition.  We'll never get them all, but we need to convince the younger ones that 72 raisins aren't tasty enough to blow themselves up or take on the USMC with an AK.  We didn't start this war, but I sure hope we have the spine to finish it.

Since you're all full of answers, give me the quick and dirty afs five step plan to cleaning up global terror.  Educate me, bright one!

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-09 05:42PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Little lying troll thinks he can smack?
This is going to be fun.

  1. There is nothing to contadict in #1 What's actually true is still what matters, DUMBASS. I know facts don't matter in the endless hurricane of lies that is littlegreenfootballs, but to the rest of the world, facts are what counts.

  2. Still trying to whine about the difference between a broken ankle and a sprained ankle, and still pretending anyone give a flying fuck the insignificance of the point. My answer is still... BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA...

  3. Iraq  rightwingtoiletmopper (who can't even fucking count, either) said: "I'm sure you didn't read the 911 Commission report, you just sat there and mopped up whatever Katie Couric said as you tried hard to focus your bloodshot eyes on your 9" B&W TV with the rabbit ears on it, but there were clearly associations between global terrorists like binLaden and Saddam and other Iraqi luminaries."

You're a LIAR, too, rightwingtoiletmopper...

"Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed

By Walter Pincus and Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, June 17, 2004; Page A01

The Sept. 11 commission reported yesterday that it has found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda, challenging one of the Bush administration's main justifications for the war in Iraq.

 Along with the contention that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, President Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top administration officials have often asserted that there were extensive ties between Hussein's government and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network; earlier this year, Cheney said evidence of a link was "overwhelming."

But the report of the commission's staff, based on its access to all relevant classified information, said that there had been contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda but no cooperation. In yesterday's hearing of the panel, formally known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, a senior FBI official and a senior CIA analyst concurred with the finding...."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html

There are NO REASONS for being in Iraq. There are NO TERRORISTS that have attacked the US or Europe in Iraq.

4) Bin Laden - How do you beat the terrorist that attacked us. You take the Army out of where there is nobody that has attacked the US/Europe... Iraq... and you send the troops where the TERRORISTS THAT DID ATTACK US are.

I realize that the logic of sending the soldiers where the people who are attacking us actally are is hard for a frightfully insufferable half-wit and a revolting, nostril-offending tainted spawn of a syphilitic swamp hog like you to link together. I don't care whether you get it. To be honest, you probably won't get it. You're just like a crab on a pier that continues to try to use it's pincers long after it's brain has been smashed to pulp on a creosote-soaked piling.

by afs 2005-07-09 07:25PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Little lying troll thinks he can smack?
My little friend, who ignores my request for you to educate me rather than insult me, try this one on for size.  It's from your lord and master, Bill Clinton's Justice Department original indictment of Osama binLaden in 1998:

"Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq."

So Bill Clinton says they were working together.  You say nay.  OK.

From Staff Statement #15 from the 9/11 Commission report:
"With al Qaeda as its foundation, Bin Ladin sought to build a broader Islamic army that also included terrorist groups from Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Oman, Tunisia, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Somalia and Eritrea. Not all groups from these states agreed to join, but at least one from each did. With a multinational council intended to promote common goals, coordinate targeting and authorize asset sharing for terrorist operations, this Islamic force represented a new level of collaboration among diverse terrorist groups."

See the word Iraq in there?  Ever seen that before?  No, you haven't and it's because you watch Katie Couric and read the WaPo rather than objective sources for news.

At any rate, my little human football, apparently you think it'll take Sherman's March to the Sea with 100,000 men to take OBL.  The folks we pay big bucks to, like Rummy, say nay.  The military leaders are doing what they think is right, politically and militarily, in Afghanistan and I'm sure if they thought you had any good ideas your phone would ring.

Once again, my little Simplissimo, you view this as a law enforcement problem.  Get binLaden, trouble over, problem solved, nothing to see here, return to your homes.  Never mind that there are a hundred other Wahhabists and Qutbee waiting to take his place, cut off your head and rape your women.  

You are every bit the simpleton you accuse me of being.

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-09 08:19PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Little lying troll thinks he can smack?
You can't even read a calendar, you yeast-infected, brainstem-less, unwanted snowflake.

What's the difference in the 1998 Bin Laden indictment Clinton supported, and the 2004 9/11 Commission findings? SIX YEARS OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE GATHERING, you low-bandwidth, functionally-illiterate neanderthal.

The 9/11 Commission said no collaborative relationship between Al-Queda and Iraq. Not the Washington Post. The 9/11 Commission. What part of  "no collaborative relationship" do you not understand? That "Staff Statement #15 rubbish you just put up is written by something that is so stupid, if I took its tiny brain and rolled it down the edge of a razor blade, it would be like a lone car going down a six lane highway. How many times do you need to read that the 9/11 Commission found no collaborative relationship betwen Iraq and Al-Queda before it finally sinks through your granite-filled brain cavity. Rumor has it that you are almost incomprehensible in person (as revealed by your desperate urge to babble nonsensically on message boards.) No doubt, this rumor is true.

Here's a tip: no one will ever know that you've had a lobotomy if you wear a wig to hide to the scars; stop posting your drivel on message boards, and learn to control the slobbering. You couldn't get a clue during clue mating season in a field of clues if you smeared your body in musk and did the clue mating dance.

Rummy? Fuck what Rumsfeld thinks. The trained military professionals have said Rummy was dead wrong since long before the invasion started. Rumsfeld is an unutterably backward sycophant.

It's this simple send the troops to where the terrorists that attacked the US and Europe are. They are NOT in Iraq.

by afs 2005-07-09 09:08PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Little lying troll thinks he can smack?
  1. "Six years of additional evidence gathering"?  But but but, four of those six years were overseen by the evil BusHitlerChimpyMcHaliburton.  I thought there was no evidence being gathered; that all "intelligence" left the building on Jan 20 of 2000?  Can't have it both ways, bub.  Either there is or isn't competence at the governmental level.

  2. How many times do I have to say this to get it past your mullet into what passes for a functional brain of yours (which is admittedly atrophied from years of dormancy)?  Al Qaeda doesn't have an ad in the Yellow Pages or an 800 number for you to call to arrange a skyscraper-knocking-down.  It's global, it's covert, the leadership is (allegedly) in Afghanistan and it's tentacles are everywhere.  Too early to say if the London attacks are part of a globally-designed plan, or the product of a related or non-related group.  But since you alternatively have no confidence (the tall guy with the dialysis machine shouldn't be that hard to find) and supreme confidence (the 9/11 Commission report says...) in our intelligence community, I'm sure none of this means anything to you.  

  3. You ignore the obvious link between ObL (radical Qutbee) and other American/West/non-Islamic hate sects like the Wahhabi.  I ask again, what part of "they want to kill you" is unfocused?  Closing your eyes won't keep your head on your shoulders.

In your simple little world, it's all very clear.  ObL is a guest at one of our military facilities in Afghanistan, he's just being hidden so Chimpy can bring him to Condi's inauguration.  Maybe Rummy can come along, because as we all know from a 20+ year old photograph, Rummy is great friends with terrorists.

But it's not so simple, my amoebic little friend.  You see, the WOT isn't about avenging the WTC attack, a grand global law enforcement exercise which will end with the bearded head on a stick.  It's about identifying and eliminating strategic threats to the US.  Since Saddam is in the can and ObL and AQ haven't launched another successful attack on the US, I'd say the war is going pretty well.  It doesn't mean there can't and won't be a successful US attack, even on a more grand scale than the last.  

Still waiting for your plan, General Simplissimo.  You can hurl insults all you want, but since this is (or was before the mouth-breathing, knuckledragging brainstem joined the fray), I'm looking for persuasive reasons why I should jump over to your side and buy some of those magnetic bumper stickers I see in the left panel.

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-10 05:49AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Little lying troll thinks he can smack?
1) Yes, six additional years of evidence gathering by hard-working civil servants, you simpleton. Thank God most of the people that work in the US Gov't are career professionals, and not political appointees. Good investigative work from people like Coleen Rowley who sent warnings up the chain of command that could have stopped 9/11 from happening if Bush/Rove single-minded tunnelvision focusing on getting Star Wars passed hadn't precluded the possibilty of actually doing the rest of their job of securing this coutry against threats to the country.

http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020603/memo.html

2)What part of "no terrorists that attacked the US or Europe is in Iraq" do you not understand. The troops are not where are the REAL threats to US or European security are.

3)The troops need to be out of Iraq and sent to where the enemies to US and European security REALLY ARE.

The secret to "identifying and eliminating strategic threats" is to GO AFTER THE BASTARDS THAT ARE REALLY ATTACKING THE US AND EUROPE. THOSE BASTARDS ARE NOT IN IRAQ.

The brain-dead crab is still flailing the pincers long after it's brain was pulped on that pier piling and now begins to stink and rot in the hot sun.

by afs 2005-07-10 06:40AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Little lying troll thinks he can smack?
Well, little chum, this has been fun but since you keep repeating the same things, like the delusional paranoic that you are, I guess we'll have to agree that you are an imbecile and this conversation is pointless.  I, and your precious 9/11 Commission, say that the terrorists aren't a handful of sherpas in Afghanistan who are ripe for the picking, you ignore it.  Fine.  

Your type of thinking, that terrorism is a law enforcement problem that is linear and simple, is what got us in to this mess.  The Clinton just-drop-a-subpoena-on-them mentality got over 3,000 New Yorkers killed.  The Gorelick "wall of separation" keeping intelligence services from sharing (but don't worry, she's an objective Commission member), and eight years of bumbling by Clinton and refusing binLaden's head on a platter, were much more responsible for 9/11 than anything Bush did in his eight months in office.

I most certainly don't goose-step in support of Bush (as you do in your reflexive opposition), but I happen to think they're making the best of a bag of shit they were handed.  We can disagree on the priority, or whether a simple or global solution is the answer.

If you put as much energy into objective research as you do in creative insults (although I've obviously stretched you to your catalog limit, since you're repeating yourself), you might be worthy of conversation.

Thanks for what little effort you did put into this, actually cutting and pasting a couple of things amongst your florid descriptions of the death of sealife.

by RightWingMedic 2005-07-10 07:13AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Little lying troll thinks he can smack?
Those things we keep repeating are called FACTS. You made your distaste of factual evidence clear upthread. We think facts and evidence matter. You guys at littlegreenfootballs do not. That means there's little hope there is going to be much chance you guys at LGF will ever stand much of a chance of being able to conduct a rational dicussion about issues. A rational discussion is impossible when we stick to discussion of well-researched factual evidence, and you guys at LGF thing it's appropriate to rant emotional rubbish and make whatever shit up you need to say as you go along.

Clinton had the infrastructure in place to stop 9/11 from happening. As the Crowley memo showed, the FBI was on the job, and found the evidence necessary to warn Bush to raise airport security levels as Clinton had done several times during his presidency. Bushignored doing everything but trying to get Star Wars passed, and did not listen  to the trained professionals when they warned him of increased Al-Queda activity. If Bush had followed the same steps Clinton did in making decisions to increase airport security levels, the 9/11 hijackers probably would have been caught. There is no way 19 Arab profile single males traveling alone on one way tickets bought with cash would have made it through the security risk software the FAA ordered used to check airline passengers when airport security levels were raised. The 9/11 hijackers would have been stopped at the check-in areas under Clinton. The responsibilty for failure to protect the US from 9/11 is directly on Bush's shoulders for that reason.

You just go back to that hurricane of lies that is littlegreenfootballs.com. I'm sure you are secure in your beliefs there. Beliefs is the key word. Right-wing extremists groups like littlegreenfootballs, freerepublic.com, and off-line organizations like them are cults. Their members are cult memebrs. Only the approved dogma is allowed. The approved dogma has no relationship to factual evidence/data. Threats of excommunication from those cults are ever-present for those who dare to dispute the approved cult dogma.

You probably need to read this...

"HOW TO DETERMINE IF A GROUP IS A DESTRUCTIVE CULT"

http://www.factnet.org/rancho5.htm?FACTNet

Good luck with your eventual deprogramming.

by afs 2005-07-10 07:44AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
numpties
i was one of the first people to break the news of the bombings in London.  I challenge you to find a single post of mine advocating genocide.  You won't find any, but I guess that wouldn't suit your world view.  

In fact when I went to work I told my muslem friend to be careful when she was walking home just in case of nutters.  She laughed and told me not to be daft.  

And as for being right wing.  I'm a Scots Nationalist pal.  Apart from that the only other party I have voted for is Labour.  

I just happen to think that Islamic terrorrism is the most important issue to sort out in the world today.  

So please don't tar me with the same brush as the 10 posts out of 5'000 you have at the top of the page.  

by calanthe 2005-07-09 08:29AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
reaction
To the writer of this blog and all who support it:

Get a grip on reality.

Dozens of dead and hundreds of casualties in London - and you attack people who are angry about it?

Have you noticed that Muslim extremists killed and maimed hundreds of people?  It was in the news over the last few days, you might want to look into it.

You say that right wing blogs do not allow comments while lifting comments from a right wing blog?  A blog that has literally hundreds of comments?  Did you mean to say that right wing blogs do not allow thousands of comments?

by axel 2005-07-09 09:41AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: reaction
hang on, axel!  this sounds like a ban-worthy comment to me!!!
by TimRusso 2005-07-09 09:49AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: reaction
"Dozens of dead and hundreds of casualties in London - and you attack people who are angry about it?"

There you go again, dividing the world up like a Manichean into good (those who agree with you) and evil (those who don't). We either have to be be rabid Islamophobes like the little green fascists, or we are with the terrorists, right? You are either with Bush or you are a terrorist. You are either a Hutu or a Tutsi. You are either a bug-squasher or a cockroach.

Where did you get that idea? Did you think that up by yourself, or did someone tell you that?

LGF allows comments. The other four of the top five rightwing blogs don't. Can we blame them?
Look at the hateful stuff posted at LGF. And it's ALL the time; not just now. No different than low-life riff-raff in virtual hoods and sheets. A highly in-bred community, btw, because unregistered comment is blocked and new registration is closed.

by Rider 2005-07-09 12:19PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: reaction
Yeah, fuck this Manichean divisive shit!  I can't understand why one would even want to discriminate between those who want to kill you and those who just want to live healthy, productive lives.  How arrogant of us to say that there's a difference between terrorists and normal people, and that terrorists have to be dealt with.  That's just bad black and white thinking!
by TheHappyRampager 2005-07-10 03:05AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: reaction
So, are you a Hutu or a Tutsi?
by Rider 2005-07-10 06:45AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: reaction
And that's exactly why I advocate the eradication of all contards and their offspring from American society. Domestic terrorists deserve no mercy.
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 03:38PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
LGF @ inculcation of hatred.com
Ahh yes...LGF with its hate-mongering mob and  Charles picking stories like a real MSM manipulator. That site seeks for qualitative argument like Slick Willy downs soya bean alternative foods (never).  

I recall raising the issue on that site ( a few times) of the worth of U.S. service men and women that are Muslim; not one of the snakes on that site could even utter a praiseworthy word for those brave Americans serving their country.

And why is that?

Because it doesnt fit in with the LGF position of fostering hate against Islam- I mean seriously, the mob can't call for the death of Muslims on one hand while acknowledging the tremendous role U.S. armed forces personel (that happen to be Muslims) are making now can they?

So how do Charlies {`The Little MSM Tramp'} fear-mongers deal with such a threat to their simplistic view of Islam?

Why, they ignore it of course...pretending that moderation cannot exist within Islam.

I think for the most part the old timers on that site can't recant their calls for the death of Islam/Muslims/Outlawing of Islam because they've put their names to it~ essentially making that stance a part of their own character.

According to LGF snakes they justify intollerance because the spreading of hatred disguised as `warnings' oftener and oftener is gonna make things better!  

Most of the comments posted on that site are about 5 words in length and usually relate to beer. Vitriolic `writers' there aim for mediocrity and achieve it with the certain knowledge that their inconsequential posts will be forgotten tomorrow- afterall, who would bother with learning how to hate!?

There are far better sites around to write real blogs on and there are really interesting bloggers around that have a deft understanding and appreciation of four dimensional social space that doesnt include for a fear-mongering dimension.

Alex in Seoul

"It happened oftener and oftener and there was no mistake about it."
 Isaac Asimov

by stalwart 2005-07-09 09:51AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Look up the word Liberal...
Some of the comments on this thread are really crazy. Like the one advocating the death of all Republicans. About LGF...some of the people who comment on that site are indeed off the wall, but this was right after a terrorist attack and they were emotional, when they cool down most of them will probably return to normal. Anyway, you should all be more open to entertaining ideas that are different than your own, that is the very definition of being a liberal, a fact that I think few "liberals" consider anymore. The readers of this blog should check out LGF sometimes, read the stories that are up there, just to get a more complete picture of world events. Charles only links to news stories, if you don't want to read what the comments of the few insane people then don't, but dont miss out on some good information that is up there. For example, maybe this will give you another angle on whats happening in London:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/10329634?version=1

Maybe investigating Muslims in London can be beneficial afterall....

by Yasam 2005-07-09 11:00AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
I have seen far, far more vitriolic.....
irrational, hatred in examples of posts from Kos's comments and other left wingers recently than I have ever seen on LGF.  The other difference is that the hatred there was directed at fellow Americans and other Westerners, who committed the seemingly horrendous crime of speaking out against those who commit violent acts of murder and terror.

The cognitive dissonance which is being dramatically illustrated in this very thread is stunning. I speak of the "logic" of posting comments from a blog which alledgedly doesn't allow comments, the hatred which is voiced in statements like several of those above which purport to show the "other side's" hatred, etc.
[Examples:  "It's time for the hoods and sheets to come off."  "The rabid fear-biters who make these comments would not be making the comments nor would the hate blogs and hate radio exist if more gentile controlling interests did not approve or want this stuff to be out there." (Interesting Freudian slip, that one....) "It is well known to most of the regulars at this blog that a sizeable component of the GOP block has a number of prejudices against minorities and people from other cultures", etc]

I aim this comment at BOTH sides of the aisle, but primarily at the left (since we're here):

GROW UP PEOPLE.  While you are pontificating on the evil of those who hold opposing political views, truly evil men are plotting your death - your real death - or at least subjugation; not the decline in your party's seats in congress.  You don't get a do-over on this one.

Those who hold the honest-to-God designs on your demise smile and chortle when you expend your energies attacking each other over political rhetoric.  They don't see this ugly discourse as political freedom; they see it as weakness, and schism.  Every photo in the press of an anti-war protester emboldens them.  Every "essay" (I use the word loosely...) like this one convinces them they are winning.  Every time we advocate physical violence against one another (as has been the recent standard of posts at Kos, for example), our enemies perceive that they gain ground.  

You want to protect your way of life?  Then stop sniping at each other, and come together to defeat them.

You want to know what they fear, above all else?  That we will do just that.  They win when we fight among ourselves; they lose when we cooperate.  Every devisive comment adds one more gram of explosives to the next bomb.

The defeat of our enemies takes a two-pronged approach.  Both sides need to understand that.  First, we must do everything in our power to prevent future recruitment of terrorists to the jihad.  This is done by building democracies, increasing opportunities, and destroying despotic, parasitic regimes.  (Clue: our current administration isn't one of them, whatever your distorted vision tells you).  Second, we must remove the threat of existing jihadists.  We do this by killing them, wherever they reside, cutting off their sources of support (hmmm, the same parasitic, despotic regimes, perhaps?), and punishing those who provide said recruiting and support.

Techniques for accomplishing these things can vary, and the healthy, civilised debate over which is best is a strength.  The childish squabbling over left vs. right politics is NOT a strength - it's worse than a weakness.

by YARP 2005-07-09 12:01PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: I have seen far, far more vitriolic.....
"The childish squabbling over left vs. right politics is NOT a strength - it's worse than a weakness."

No. It is in the nature of democracy and is a strength; not a weakness.

Your idea seems to be that there is only one side (yours) and that everyone needs to quickly come to agreement with your view. No doubt, God is on your side too, and anyone who doesn't share your views (the people you plan to kill wherever they reside) is aligned with the devil. One or the other. No in-between. The end justifies the means. This is jihadism. Your tactics haven't descended to the level of Osama's, but your ideology is the same.

YARP, this is nonsense. It's a bizarre and atavistic view of the world, more at home in the middle ages than now. Where does this come from?
Who drew the line that divides the world? Who is calling me an infidel, a kafir? Is it OBL? Or is it you? Who says that either you or OBL get to draw the line?

by Rider 2005-07-09 12:56PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: I have seen far, far more vitriolic.....
Thank you for proving my point.

As soon as I dare to call you on your generalities and stereotyping, I am assigned to a stereotyped belief system.

I said nothing about God, or the devil, or anything even remotely resembling your world view of who I must be - that's purely your construct.

As I pointed out in examples above, if I believe that terrorists are beyond redemption and should be killed (NOTICE: I did not say Muslims, or Arabs, or any other nationality or creed), I am automatically a racist bigot KKK member.  I advocated no deaths except for the perpetrators of terroristic violence, and you label me a jihadist (and presumeably as being in favor of genocide). In truth, you know nothing about me, or my background, or my religion or lack thereof.  

This stereotyping and knee-jerk reactionism which you so clearly illustrated is what I classify as destructive, and worse than weakness.  If you don't see the difference between (little d) democratic debate, and closed-minded squabbling, I pity you.  And if you represent more than a small minority on "your side" of political ideology (which I don't believe you do), I fear for my country.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/7/5/05142/91447  Here's a little example of the kind of hatred I see spewed in the name of your "nature of democracy and a strength".  Want to tell me what's positive about these comments?

"I'd like to meet them all together in a dark alley, just me & my brick.  Prolly wouldn't take much to knock their stupid drunk asses down.  Hell, I bet just looking at them sideways would make them lose bowel control."

"Ive NEVER had one question my patriotism to my face. Ever. Thats the one thing i honestly think would land me in jail.. because i dont think i could stop once i started."

"Shit, I'm ready to snap back into old form and whale on a few of them.  They're fucking asking for it.  

What will it solve?  Not sure.  Maybe nothing.

But it'll sure shut their fucking mouths while I'm pummelling them, and that'll be enough for the time being."

"Man, do I hanker to re-arrange some smug wingnut's face.  

Sometimes I think we liberals try too hard to be good people.  Maybe it's time to go a little beserker for a while.  It would be very fucking satisfying."

It goes on and on.  Read the comments.  You may begin to understand what I'm talking about.

by YARP 2005-07-09 02:07PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: I have seen far, far more vitriolic.....
Please. Spare us the feigned indignity. Your claim of not mentioning the word "Arab" or "Muslim" is disingenuous in a context where you are defending the Islamophobes at LGF. What you said was, "...we must do everything in our power to prevent future recruitment of terrorists to the jihad...we must remove the threat of existing jihadists. We do this by killing them, wherever they reside..." So, please be honest enough to admit that it's Muslim terrorists you are talking about. The Tamil Tigers do not recruit to jihad. The Shining Path do not recruit to jihad. The IRA does not recruit to jihad. The Basque Separatists do not recruit to jihad. None of these terrorists refer to themselves as jihadists and none, to my knowledge, are supported by "despotic and parasitic regimes."

I used "God" and "the devil" as metaphors to explain the world-view implied by your statements. You seem to see the world divided into the people that agree with you on the one hand, and the terrorists plus the people who disagree with you on the other.

That is the theme that runs through the LGF posts and those here in support: one is either on the side of the LGF Islamophobes and Muslim-baiters, or one is on the side of the terrorists. No discussion. YARP, that is a false dichotomy. It's complete nonsense. I don't accept it.

If that is not your position, it is the one you are communicating. If I have misunderstood and you want to distance yourself from that position, please clarify and accept my apologies.

by Rider 2005-07-09 03:44PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: I have seen far, far more vitriolic.....
[sigh]

You really don't get it, do you?  I'm not feigning indignation, I'm well and truly disgusted with the level of discussion that passes for "debate" in these venues.  It wouldn't be that bad if it was only on anonymous blogs that this occurred, but it has made its way into the mainstream.  One only has to listen to Howard "I hate Republicans and everything they stand for" Dean to see that. That doesn't really make for a good starting point for dialog, does it?

I really didn't come here to discuss the fundamental politics of the war.  Once again, I will reiterate my main point - that as soon as someone posts an opinion contrary to yours (and I use the word "yours" in a generic sense), they become labeled.  They are no longer someone who is working toward the same goals, who happens to have alternate ideas about how to accomplish those goals; suddenly they are racists, or "Islamophobes", or KKK members, or WingNuts, or whatever disparaging word-of-the-day pops to your fingers.  As soon as this happens, value evaporates from the debate, and it's just another Pee-Wee Herman style "I know you are, what am I?" urination competition.

by YARP 2005-07-10 04:21AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Troll-burgers!
The number of the beast may well be 666. But it's name is YARP. Before I start, let me tell you that within this epistle is one small lie, one mistruth, one falsity, one deliberate slur on your character. It was put there because I believe, nay, know, no-one, including yourself, can ever spot it. Indeed, I write this as a letter so that I would not have to endure the sight of your demented droolings, your spiteful slobberings and your pathetic attempts at some form of communication were I to relay my feelings through discourse. Even at an elemental level, I know atoms, electrons, nuclei go screaming in horror from your mere presence. Given a choice of stepping in something nasty on the sidewalk, or bidding you good morning, I would happily choose the former. Single-handedly, you have wrenched all meaning out of life. Congratulations. The worst insult that can be hurled at you in some cultures is to signify that your mother was a pig. But I only feel an immense, overwhelming sorrow for the sad sow that begat you. I have had fantasies about attacking you with a machete, but I dare not. I once cut up a starfish, which was so neurologically simple that each piece grew into a clone of the original. Your coleopteron brain no doubt shares certain appalling similarities with such creatures. Physically, mentally, socially, even aesthetically, you are quite simply disgusting. You probably think that when you utter one of your nonsenses, people turn their head in deep thought at the wisdom of your philosophies. Has it even remotely occurred to you that perhaps they turn their heads because your breath reeks like a camel's groin? You are so depressing that the makers of Prozac have a bounty on your life. You are so ugly the last time you got a piece of ass was when your hand slipped through the toilet paper. Have you ever wondered why you have no friends, only people who do their pathetic best to avoid you? Doesn't it disturb you that you are such a social anathema, such a repulsive unnatural force that the only forum left open to you, possibly, is littlegreenfootballs?

YARP, do us all a favor, and please shut that gaping, tartar-encrusted, snot receptacle that you call a mouth; you are a puss-filled cyst in the colon of society.

by afs 2005-07-09 01:20PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Wow Yarp
Congradulations, you're the antichrist. You personally have sucked the meaning out of life for all of us. Or at least Afs. I guess Afs has something against well thought out posts. He never explains how you took his meaning of life away. I'm curious.

Afs, can I be the antichrist too, suck all the meaning out of your life. I wanna be a puss filled cyst. Can I? Can I? Huh? Huh? Please!?!?!?

by rufas2000 2005-07-09 02:07PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Best evidence of self-fulfilling prophesy ever
You decided you were going to be a pus-filled cyst, and you became one.
by afs 2005-07-09 02:11PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Best evidence of self-fulfilling prophesy ever
Yeah! I'm a pus filled cyst. (Does the pus filled cyst dance).

But why can't I be a puss filled cyst?

I must work harder to be worthy of the double s.

Thank you afs for deeming me worthy of being at least a pus filled cysy.

by rufas2000 2005-07-09 02:44PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Wow Yarp
I must admit, I'm amazed myself!  I didn't realize the sheer power of my words!  

I'm not sure who afs believes I am, but since this is the first post I've ever placed on this forum, I'm not sure where the "one of your posts" thing comes from....

Oh, and thanks, afs, for yet another example of what seems to pass for the afore-mentioned "(small d) democratic strength" of discourse here.

by YARP 2005-07-09 02:19PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
See ya.
Don't let the porch door hit you in the ass as you leave.
by afs 2005-07-09 02:49PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: See ya.
Ah yes.  You wouldn't want anyone with different ideas to interrupt your circle jerk, would you?  That might cause you to think.  It's much easier just to label, insult, and move on.
by YARP 2005-07-10 04:23AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
That's a plot, not an idea
What you guys scheme at LGF are not called "ideas." They call those "plots." When a group of people do that, it's called a "criminal conspiracy,' and Congress passed RICO laws to interdict such criminal activity.
by afs 2005-07-10 07:12AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: That's a plot, not an idea
Ah, we are closer to your diagnosis.

We can difinitively add paranoia to the earlier evidence of schizophrenia.

Never mind!  nothing to see here!  Go back to your self-gratification!

by YARP 2005-07-10 11:36AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: That's a plot, not an idea
Oh, by the way, genius...

I don't have an account at LGF, if that's what you have been trying to say.  You can stop lumping me into whatever category you think I fit based on some delusion that I'm someone I'm not.

by YARP 2005-07-10 11:45AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
I'll shove your rifle up your donkey-fucked ass.
Take your toy pea shooter and go back to the farm before you hurt yourself, whitebread.  We have real weapons in the hood.
by afs 2005-07-09 04:26PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
So clueless you can't even respond to post right
Damn, you're so fuckin' stupid you even screwed up responding to my post.

You rode on the short bus to school, didn't you Mr. Nuk-u-lar?

I'll remind everyone what I said, Mr Nuk-u-lar.

afs said, "I'll shove your rifle up your donkey-fucked ass.

Take your toy pea shooter and go back to the farm before you hurt yourself, whitebread.  We have real weapons in the hood."

You think you're gonna get within 200 yards? DUMBASS. That's what the autofire setting on all these gansta' guns is for.   You just keep emptying clips until Mr. Nuk-u-lar falls down and can't get up.

by afs 2005-07-09 07:38PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
dismayed
After seeing this story, I read through a many comments on Free Republic and LGF.  I was shocked at the hate, vitriol and repeated calls for genocide.  I'm still struggling to figure out what is means.  Are these comments from a small group of nutjobs that post alot?  or Are these hateful ideas really widespread in Republican voters?  I live in the San Francisco area so it's hard for me to know how much hate there is the Red States.

The reason I'm dismayed is if this hate of Islam is not just a few isolated nutjobs what's going to happen after the next terrorist attack in the US (which I believe is basically inevitable given the poor job the Bush Administration has protecting us)?

On another note of concern, the comments on this story have shown how pointless it is to engage the right wing trolls.  Getting into a screaming match with them isn't productive or good for the site as whole.  If their wing-nuttery doesn't get deleted, we should probably all ignore it.

by pyewacket1 2005-07-09 10:24PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Good Blog!!
Bwahaha! You redneck honkies wouldn't survive a day in the urban streets. Which is probably why we're suffering so many casualties in Iraq from you inbred ingrates who can't shoot shit after 15 years of practicing on your barn doors.

Ah to have another civil war and kick the South's ass once again. Once we cut you people off from our revenue streams that sustain your poor welfare states you'll be voting democrat in no time!

by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 02:43AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Look at all these dumbass freeper trolls above
And I'm getting flak for hating these people?? They deserve it.
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 03:01AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Look at all these dumbass freeper trolls above
I agree that they are dumbasses.  They will get bored and return to LGF if we ignore them.
by pyewacket1 2005-07-10 09:41AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Hey look! The Daily Kos speaks out!
His comments on the original subject:

"And the idea of picking out rather lame comments from site users and posting them as reflections of what the entire site "thinks" -- meh. It's a fun game, but it doesn't have much currency except as parlor trick."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/7/9/203420/2318

by YARP 2005-07-10 12:57PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Hey look! The Daily Kos speaks out!
Perhaps it would be of use to inform your pal HappyButtRanger above so he can follow this advice?
by Vote Hillary 2008 2005-07-10 03:40PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Let the sunshine in
For what it's worth, Little Green Footballs is not really "open" for comment either. Unregistered comments are disallowed, and new registration is closed. Containment. They have locked the echo chamber and thrown away the key.
by Rider 2005-07-11 07:18AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------