Skip navigation




    • Buzz Bannister
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 7:28 am
    • Permalink

    They’re “enlightened” children of the tools.

  1. Thanks Ken, glad you liked this one. Sometimes a theme is well worth more than one visit; give a listen for example to the many versions of “variations-on-a-theme” by Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, etc.

    Buzz: Indeed. I restrained myself on the title, I have to admit; originally wanted to call this “I See Braindead People.”

  2. Ah ha ha! Great job Zack, they don’t even have to wear a mask and they are all looking for a handout. Excellent Zack! And Ken, maybe you are starting to realize now, it seems like it. I think you are now beginning to see the light.

    Note: Ken was the first to comment, he’s really involved now, anticipating all the time.

  3. Thanks Jose, and you’re right– Ken does appear to be coming around if you read between the lines.

  4. Jose: How long before Ken responds to my earlier response by writing: “Look! Zack compares himself to Beethoven!”

  5. Ken: I knew I could worm a response out of you.

  6. Ah…the kids went for the treat, but got tricked…nice Zach.

    • Steve T
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 8:59 am
    • Permalink

    “Trick or Treating for Obama, Mmm-Mmm-Mmm-!”

    Yep – flash-backs to last November elections,… lotsa zombie-like minions, ready to vote for Mr. ‘hope-e-change’, a free new kitchen, a free new car,…gimmee-gimmee-gimmee-!

    Good job Zack.

    Zack,… certain folks here behave much like an alligator – these reptiles have very tiny, limited brains, they function like simple PLC chips from the ’80s, although sometimes defective – these folks are unable to accept facts of history, important context’s of other events, a total dismissal of common sense.

    Basically, they are much like their reptilian analogy – they lay & wait in festering swamp waters, the slime and excrement of other life forms covers them from end-to-end,…

    Once in a while, their bulbous eyes rise above the waters surface, to get a glimpse of the world… then in a flash, they explode in a furry of violent snapping and thrashing.

    Strong parallels to our little Ken-troll-!?!

  7. Magnificent word-painting, Steve T., though I do hate to disparage excrement-dwelling alligators by comparing them to Ken.

    Pithy and beatifully put, tsc. Wish I’d said that.

  8. Is there any way we can get Ouroboros on the Presidential seal? The White House really needs something to better reflect these “post-patriotic” times…

    • wootabega
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 11:27 am
    • Permalink

    They could also be Glenn Beck’s viewerbase as well.

    Yet another terrible comic.

    • Steve T
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 12:18 pm
    • Permalink

    Why not find a site that has the type of comic’s that suits your values,…
    AND stay there -?!!?

    No one here will miss you-!!

    • MethodistMin
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 1:32 pm
    • Permalink

    LOL, Zack. A good Halloween treat, no doubt, for some of the Obama zombies who inhabit this site. :^)

    Yes, that was quite a word picture, Steve. Nice scary touch for the holiday. :^)

    • Big Money
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 4:07 pm
    • Permalink

    The joke is: Liberals!

    • Big Money
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 7:48 pm
    • Permalink

    Please, keep on thinking that zombies elected Obama. Don’t examine why the Republicans fucked up so badly that they managed to lose an election to a relatively inexperienced black man when they were running a war hero during wartime.

    • Rod Axel
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 8:58 pm
    • Permalink

    “It’s ok, the doctor won’t judge you for your sexual orientation.”

    wootabega has a lot of credibility when it comes to this subject. The kind of credibility that comes from hours of experience in bathhouses and leather clubs.

    • Steve T
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 10:30 pm
    • Permalink

    Big Money-
    True, that is another & parallel subject.
    McCain was in part, selected by cross-over liberal Demorat voters.
    Their tactic was simple, McCain was defeatable.
    Certain conservative election analysts have noted, and I agree, that had Sarah Palin not been on the ticket, and motivated some of the conservative base as much as she did,… McCain would/may have lost in a landside.

    I’m not sure how Zack is going to include that within Obama-zombies who are out ‘trick-or-treating’.

    And,… it appears woot exhibits two central character attributes of leftists – very reactively pronounces his “right[s]”, and immediately delves into his mental swamp slime of homoerotic fixations.

    I suppose being a Neo-Nazi sympathizer was getting old and boring for you woot-?
    (ref: Anita Dunce, posted Oct 24, 09 at 9:47pm:
    ” I love Hitler, and Hitler loves me.
    He’s not so bad. Hitler just needs someone to believe in him.”

    woot is DL’s cute little Nazi-troll-!

    History reveals there were some flaming queers among Hitlers senior ranks – my, my,…another attraction to little woot-!

    • Big Money
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 10:45 pm
    • Permalink

    Steve: What is the basis for your allegation that McCain won the primary thanks to Democrats? The only organized crossover voting I’m aware of was Limbaugh’s “operation chaos”, and I think we’re all aware of how that worked out.

    • Steve T
    • Posted October 31, 2009 at 11:03 pm
    • Permalink

    Big Money-
    To be candid, my recollections are not exact, but certain states and their primary rules permitted party cross-over voting, and I recall these states provided important victories for McCain, whereas in states that did not permit this party cross-over voting, Romney was leading.

    McCain has a record of alienating the conservative sector of the Republicans (accepting the man-made gloBULL warming junk, aligning himself with Ted Kennedy, campaigned finance reform…)

    However, I do vividly recall how much the conservative base was fired-up when Sarah Palin was put on the ticket.

    Conservatives (like me), sometimes said, “…I’m voting[ed] for Palin”, to distinguish themselves from McCains history.

    Yes, Limbaugh had his ‘thing’ to stir the pot between Obama and Hillary…

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 12:07 am
    • Permalink

    Can you tell me the difference between the left’s love of Obama and the right’s love of Palin?

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 12:35 am
    • Permalink

    But this can be a very long topic.
    Palin has a strongly conservative track record;
    – Limited government (ref- the 10th Amendment)
    – Original intent of the Constitution
    – Strong ‘States Rights’
    – Very pro-life
    – She is a God-fearing Christian.
    – Low taxes

    In all respects I see in her, I suspect our Founding Fathers would agree/identify with her more than most any other well-known conservative Republican.

    Obama-? All, and I mean ALL who voted for him have NO appreciation for the Constitution, or have contempt for it, or have been mislead in their beliefs about it, or are totally ignorant about it & do not care.

    And – he is the “first” black president,… which proves how the Democrats and general liberal culture have flushed ML Kings central & key theme, down the toilet;

    “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” MLK

    Obama was NOT judged by the electorate for the content of his character – and anyone asserting he was, is either mislead, or deceitful.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 12:57 am
    • Permalink

    One revision – Obama was not accurately or closely judged by the electorate, much of his support was largely about his image, his “historical significance”, and his good oratory delivery helped much too.

    Further, he was purposely not vetted by the mainstream media.

    And of course -there is always the voting element who reasons no further than, ‘…we’ve had this party in the White House for eight years, time for the other’.

    As Rush Limbaugh has repeatedly asserted, “Ignorance is our most expensive commodity”.

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 1:15 am
    • Permalink

    I would argue that you opinion puts your strongly in the zombie camp. I doubt Palin even knows what the 10th Amendment is, much less the intent of the Constitution. She’s a Pentacostal, a more ignorant, reactionary, anti-intellectual bunch you’ll be hard pressed to find.

    And this:

    “Obama-? All, and I mean ALL who voted for him have NO appreciation for the Constitution, or have contempt for it, or have been mislead in their beliefs about it, or are totally ignorant about it & do not care.”

    This is utterly ridiculous.

    I voted for Obama because Bush was such a colossal fuck-up that the Republicans needed to be given the message that they need to abandon neo-conservatism. I don’t think they’ve gotten the message yet.

    I wasn’t particularly happy with Obama, I would have preferred if he had gotten another 4-8 year more experience before running. But there’s no way I would vote for someone as ignorant and self-centered as Palin, not after 8 years of Bush.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 1:59 am
    • Permalink

    Big Money-
    Like many, you strongly underestimate Sarah Palin.
    You have accepted the media-liberal template that she is ignorant, a twit, etc…

    Your denominational prejudices and anti-Christian bigotry are shallow, at best. This Republic was founded by those who you claim are, “… a more ignorant, reactionary, anti-intellectual bunch you’ll be hard pressed to find.”

    Your assertion Palin is “self-centered” is folly – who in the MSM did you buy that pulp from-?

    Perhaps you accept and embrace the never-ending, dripping narcissism of Obama-?

    And – do you assert that you accurately judged Obama’s character, before voting for him-?

    You DID vote for an anti-constitutionalist – a Marxist, someone who wants to systematically take YOUR freedoms away. But, as BO phrases his efforts in soft & comfortably deceitful terms, you likely find my assertions unwelcome.

    ‘Zombie camp’-?
    An obvious indicator that you choose not to engage idea’s on their merits. This is another common technique of your political culture. Boring mental-midget laziness and sadly predictable.

    But, feel encouraged, you are well-practiced in Saul Alinsky’s ‘Rules for Radicals’-!!

    In fact, those “zombie” values happen to be the reason you have the freedoms you have to sit at your computer and criticize them.

    If you do not believe that…
    Try saying something effectively critical against Obama, and like ‘Joe the plumber’, you will be getting your life turned upside down on an examination table.

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 2:35 am
    • Permalink

    I am not anti-Christian, I am anti-Pentecostal. The country was largely founded by Deists, who were nothing like Pentecostals, and would no doubt be appalled at their attempts to inject religion into the government.

    Palin’s self-centeredness was made manifest when she resigned her Governorship. And yet you accuse Obama of narcissism. Go back and watch the Couric interview again. She’s not qualified to run a McDonalds.

    You talk about engaging ideas on their merits, and yet believe that everyone who voted for Obama is anti-constitutionalist and a racist. Your posts are filled with ad hom attacks and strawmen. You are a hypocrite.

    Obama is neither an anti-constitutionalist nor a marxist. He’s also not a fascist, a muslim, or a Kenyan. I wish he was more liberal than he is turning out to be.

    A greater anti-constitutionalist you will not find in recent history than the last adminstration. You were no doubt happy to trade your liberty for the illusion of safety that they provided.

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 6:16 am
    • Permalink

    And I’ll repeat it again, he was probably happy to do it because a Republican was in office. And people would be all for, say, UHC, if a Republican pushed it. But with Democrats in power, anything and everything is communist fascist and evil.

    I wasn’t here to comment yesterday cuz I was at work for 12 hours, then I came home and went to bed. So if I missed anything directed at me, apologies.

    • ikabod
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 12:36 pm
    • Permalink

    I have yet to see a valid Republican running right now. The field is not good at the moment. I voted strictly libertarian this last go around. McCain was/is not a conservative, regardless what neo-libs think. Obama was elected with the look and feel of a moderate. What we got was something much different, and much more to the left.

    • Ken
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 12:41 pm
    • Permalink

    Obama was elected with the look and feel of a moderate Democrat. What we got was something much different, and much more to the right.

    • ikabod
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 12:52 pm
    • Permalink

    Ok, kenny maybe your right, just to the right of Hugo Chavez, but surely left of Clinton.
    Maybe right of Michael Moore.
    Then a sharp left of the 10th hole… I hate it when that happens.

  9. Everybody and their mothers know why the majority of America voted Obama. Because of the Media. They trashed Bush for all of his last term. I did not like Bush that much myself, he screwed up in many ways but the Media really went overboard in discrediting him. So the reason for all here who voted Obama was solely because of that. But that was a real mistake on your part, because you voted for a Socialist. You also have a strong Communist minded Congress passing laws that are anti-US Constitution. So you should start to question the one you voted for because that is your job. As a citizen of the United States, you are entitled to. That’s why we are here. Forget about Bush, you cannot use him as an excuse anymore. Obama’s administration is tainted and you should question it. If you really don’t care, then sit back and watch your freedoms disapear. Again Zack, great job!

  10. they managed to lose an election to a relatively inexperienced black man when they were running a war hero during wartime

    Thanks for injecting base vulgarity into all this. Brilliant. That always helps make the point so much more sternly.

    I guess.

    Anyhow, the Tin Man–John McCain, I presume?

    McCain is a NICE guy.

    Nice guys sometimes fall flat. And the occasional temper flare-up never helped this.

    He compromised on too many issues and caved in on even defending himself, his own notions, past policies, and those of other Republicans. Violating the 11th Commandment does not put you in good standing with the rest of the Republican Party.

    Not that you side is shedding tears over this even compared to the truly inexperience other guy whose main backup is Chicago’s scam-artistry politics and shakedown, but McCain is a case study in how to make sure you can lose an election to Micky Mouse or the Wizard Of Oz, and reeling from an admittedly sour war (at the time) on two fronts did not help the “war hero” status. Certainly not when Americans have little tolerance for such.

    “Bring home the Boys” was the rallying cry then, if you recall, and anything beyond a GI getting a torn fingernail is just too horrific to many in the electoral base for the War Horse to make much headway if all he did was nod his head on illegal immigration being dandy, etc.

    It would have taken New York City getting blown into the strateshere to help McCain against the mood of Changey-Change and schoolkid paeans to the New Dear Leader.

  11. that a..what…a rutabega eaten by Wookies?

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 2:34 pm
    • Permalink

    How was I vulgar?

    A nice guy. With a temper. Do you even read what you write?

    I have to laugh every time I see you guys misuse the term “Chicago Politics”. It has nothing to do with scamming or shakedowns. Educate yourself:

    Anyway, please keep blaming McCain, the media, and indoctrinated Democrats for the failure of the GOP. Please run your messiah, Sarah Palin, in 2012.

  12. Nice guys can have occasional bouts of temper. There is no contradiction.

    Both have been mentioned about McCain, among many others.

    Humans are complex creatures, BM.

    That’s sorta how the world has unfolded for good or ill. And perhaps both.

    Bambi’s education in the Chicago Machine might be something Wiki cannot fathom from its editorial staff of teeny-boppers, but it is well known that scam artistry like ACORN and pressure politics (finding you have no trash service, for example) are part of Obama’s training about how to get things done. It’s all part of the same brew, even if some of the main ingredients and methods have changed since the 1930s.

    If you want something done, you crack a few skulls and maybe inject some race-carding into the mix to boot. Or have some people who’ve been dead for decades vote along side the citizenry.

    It’s just that he’s more sophisticated at pulling the real doozies and fast ones past people. Like tossing people off the ballot.

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 3:09 pm
    • Permalink

    Obama is utterly inexperienced and also a political mastermind. Truly a man of contradictions.

    • Ken
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 3:18 pm
    • Permalink

    Obama is at the same time too strong and too weak.

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 3:44 pm
    • Permalink

    Rush/Palin 2010, or Rush/Hannity, Hannity/Rush, etc. (some people seriously think there will be an election then, and others don’t think a woman would make for good presidential material…yet at least.)

    Wakefield, you are silly and need to learn to condense your comments to one post.

  13. Obama is skilled in local political maneuvering. He THINKS he can get away with this on the national level. But, the only reason this MIGHT turn out true is that the manchild is surrounded by people who have a dog in the same fight and come to his side to explain why, for just one example–unlike all times past–government expenditures and lies about such will do more to soothe us than harm us.

    I among others remain mostly unassured.

    He is NOT skilled in handling, say, the Sons of Allah’s weaponized World Islam ambitions, or (as painfully obvious) the economy. To some, however, this matters not. Why the hell would it? It’s not skin off their personal fortunes or noses at the moment. The intellectuals around him, who ARE more than capable of manipulation and subterfuge, ARE more than able to direct his Hopey-Changemass into tangible damage of the type that only these eggheads are enjoying at the moment as they systematically dismantle the economy with stimulus glop and other handouts under the guise of healing things. All this holds true even if Alfred Nobel’s latest Milli Vanilli award goes unchallenged. The issue was never about helping people, their health, their wealth, or their outlook on things. It is about aggrandizement of government power. That’s his ideology. He IS incompetent at this level, but he’s surrounded by people who wrote the book (like Saul Alinsky’s little red brevities and missives) on how to peddle Marxism Lite and mainline radicalism into the mainstream.

    However, some of the crap is now called to the mat. And the Boy Wonder and his aides err is they think no one is watching.

    The same site, BTW–while not dedicated to Obama per se but just high-jinx expose’ and other government shenanigans–has handy info on other vast claims by Boy Wonder and his minions.

    Whether the issue is the new United States of Emergency on what the Swine Flu is NOT doing this week (the regular flu shall kill more) that in turn justifies more government power, the Laodicean Hellfire and Carbonarian Elite claims on global warming, the stallout in Afghanistan, the high-jinx of the destruction of assets in the latest Cash for Flunkers scam (which has figured actually cost the taxpayer 24,000 per changed-out vehicle, and NOT the putative 4000 limit on vouchers) and the latest lies about health care “reform” (though videos from his past indicate his desire to get RID of private insurers), the lies not only continue unabated, but are vigorously and cleverly defended by numerous eggheads in the bootlick media and the Beltway. I could go on and on. But I’ll not make this another link festival for the moment.

    Suffice it to say that not everyone is buying some of the main cover stories of disaster to help in this aggrandizement of big government. Thus for example “Climate Change” (Global Warming’s Big Makeover for more palatability) is the most ingenious cover story for Big Government ever devised. You float a rumor that George W. Bush was checking up on what library books you’re reading (far from likely), and everyone goes into hysterics. But announce that a government monitoring device has seriously been suggested in some nations (the UK) for every citizen’s trash can in the cause of “saving the planet,” or that population control be forced under threat of law (Obama’s “Science Czar, Holdren) and the world loves you for your compash, and Obama’s intellectuals jump for joy and swoon at the very notions–and have to fan themselves in the excitement. Like old Victorian biddies.

    In any case, it seems The Shining City on a Hill is now Fred Sanford’s junkyard. And this new craze of Dancing With The Czars is making the ghost of Nicholas II turn green with envy for their unelected power.

    As to McCain: He was a rollover for the competition, but often gritted his teeth when it came to his own party. Not a good strategy, to be sure.

    Regarding the other, the only way I could be wrong (and for many other observers who’ve noted this) is if Obama merely surrounds himself with enough nuts and creeps that it merely APPEARS that he’s carried his home town’s tactics to national-level politics.

    Conservatives don’t blame the whole ball of wax regarding the last election on McCain. We understand fully the ideological shift in American politics combined with an unpopular two-fronted war that seemed stalled; injected into all this we had a smooth-talking wind-up manikin and pretender whose “community organizing” farce was so obviously laughable, and painfully ill-prepared to handle national-level politics. We also acknowledge that the charm, however, of the Man-Boy Wonder was all some far more capable people in power needed for the hope that–at long last–government could become sealed in place as the behemoth always some have always desired; the perfect agent for doling out sumptuous goodies, and taking money out of one hide and giving to others on some grand Robin Hood scale.

    Gentlemen, the rest is up to you, and whether fantasy or reality gets the better of you at the end of the day.

    • Wakefield
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 5:28 pm
    • Permalink

    Manuel Calavera,

    Your silly missive with the presumed bumper sticks of 2012 tops anything I have to date, and is not made the better for its condensed format.

    Thanks anyhow.

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 5:42 pm
    • Permalink

    I really would love to see a Rush/Palin 2012 ticket. It would be hilarious in all honesty. Still need to work on condensing those posts tho dood.

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 5:56 pm
    • Permalink

    Manuel: You can pretty much ignore everything up to the last big paragraph: The stalwart Republicans lost due to those tricksy Democrats fooling everyone. He’s switched back to Obama being a figurehead. Ironic, really, after the virtual co-presidency of Bush and Cheney.

  14. As to Sarah Palin, and the claims about Couric’s suddenly earth-shattering, astonishing insights and high-stakes political intrigue, her interview is fairly much a near-duplication of Gibson’s, and based on the same model of vast swatches of omission and context.

    After all, the media don’t get their forte’ from telling the full context of things.

    I would agree that Palin has much room for development, as did the boy Wonder we just placed into office for about a year now, but her situation is not quite so dire as we’re made to think:

    Moreover, you’ll find in the above link also that from the more plain-folks types, and seeing Big Money’s take on the hicks and rednecks who go for Palin, we see far more real lemming-like Coalition of the Cockamamie types voted for Obama. In fact, I had to make an entire category for that. Hmm.

    As to Palin personally, no better précis has been leveled to date than Mark Steyn’s pre-election take on Palin vs. the Creep Brigade in national politics:

    real people don’t define “experience” as appearing on unwatched Sunday-morning talk shows every week for 35 years and having been around long enough to have got both the War on Terror and the Cold War wrong. (On the first point, at the Gun Owners of New Hampshire dinner in the 2000 campaign, I remember Orrin Hatch telling me sadly that he was stunned to discover how few Granite State voters knew who he was.)

    Sarah Palin and Barack Obama are more or less the same age, but Governor Palin has run a state and a town and a commercial fishing operation, whereas (to reprise a famous line on the Rev. Jackson) Senator Obama ain’t run nothin’ but his mouth. She’s done the stuff he’s merely a poseur about. Post-partisan? She took on her own party’s corrupt political culture directly while Obama was sucking up to Wright and Ayers and being just another get-along Chicago Machine pol (see his campaign’s thuggish attempt to throttle Stanley Kurtz and Milt Rosenberg on WGN the other night).
    Governor Palin has what the British Labour Party politician Denis Healy likes to call a “
    hinterland” – a life beyond politics.

    (Wake’s note: Most political animals are creepy if they’re living life vicariously via politics)

    Whenever Senator Obama attempts anything non-political (such as bowling), he comes over like a visiting dignitary to a foreign country getting shanghaied into some impenetrable local folk ritual. Sarah Palin isn’t just on the right side of the issues intellectually. She won’t need the usual stage-managed “hunting” trip to reassure gun owners: she’s lived the Second Amendment all her life. Likewise, on abortion, we’re often told it’s easy to be against it in principle but what if you were a woman facing a difficult birth or a handicapped child? Been there, done that.

    …..She complicates all the laziest Democrat pieties. Energy? Unlike Biden and Obama, she’s been to ANWR and, like most Alaskans, supports drilling there.

    Hmm. Not half-bad for a Pentecostal from Hicksville.

    The world has suffered hundreds of millions of deaths and economic privation in the last 60 years due the courswork and manipulations combined with Peacenick/Complacenik cowardice and highbrow socialism laid out by our alleged superiors.

    Time to turn over the helm at long last, chief.

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 6:23 pm
    • Permalink

    Turn over the helm to an ignorant, bible-thumping quitter? I think not.

  15. All the common slurs we’ve heard a thousand times, and yet astonishingly that’s not what I said.

    Real people would be the better wording, and from her real-world experiences, she’s got that angle handled.

    As to the common slurs against the Bible, perhaps it might be better to go with the alleged thumper than the guy who said “I believe in the power of prayer” but of course plays this cynicism a little too well.

    I seriously doubt you background in history and theology is sufficient, however, to make such judgements.

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 7:00 pm
    • Permalink

    Once again, I am not slurring the Bible, unless your claim is that Evangelicals, particularly Pentecostals, have a monopoly on the Bible. I will direct you to a blogger far more talented than you, who can clarify things far more ably that I can.

    Sarah Palin is undeniably ignorant, undeniably a bible-thumber, and undeniably a quitter. The truth is not a slur.

    • Ken
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 7:41 pm
    • Permalink

    “Real people would be the better wording, and from her real-world experiences, she’s got that angle handled.”

    See, Obama is not a real person. Perhaps he is a computer program that gained sentience and managed to project himself into our world through sheer force of will.

    Or perhaps Wake-boarder just thinks that non-Whites are subhuman.

    What would Occam say?

  16. Occam’s handy Razor would almost certainly say that the Race Card is by now getting a little old and stale on the personal level, though at the national level seems to still be the trump card of choice.

    As to “real people” and Ken’s absurdist context-dropping, even if he does absurdly claim to miss the obvious meaning (not likely), I’ll point out that of course I mean Obama is, as even many of his supporters glowingly acknowledge, a blank slate where one can project anything or any notion or peity.

    So, in the political sense, he’s a phony. He’s only lived and delved into the world of politics. That’s his whole forte’. He’s never run a business or been part of a major non-academic operation, but deigns to tell them how the cookie crumbles.

    And that’s a damn vile thing to see.

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 8:25 pm
    • Permalink

    I hate to break it to you, but the election is over and your guy lost. Better luck next time.

  17. Gee, thanks for the hot tip, BM. That’s not much in the way of revelation one year hence, and certainly dosen’t rehash the real reasons, but thanks anyhow.

    I actually fleshed out a response to the Word document expert over at Slacktivist, but it won’t post.

    So be it. Maybe some other time.


    As to that other ditty from Ken, our specially-touched boy:

    Maybe Ken is right about the word festival here going a little overboard.

    But only for the dual reasons I shouldn’t have wasted time here on certain individuals who’ve yet to read a damned thing written, or understand the wondrous world of context.

    Fair enough, Ken.

    You win one.

    Three cheers. Hooray.


    –PS to B.M. (the more appropriate moniker for diarrhea considerations and claims)

    Yes, the last I checked some time ago, the iconic “F” word is STILL considered vulgar.

    Perhaps you think it gives you an air of intensity?

  18. Tis to laugh, BM.

    The delivery is the key context. I realize that means little to people like you, but at least’s it’s on record.

    Oh, as to the Kool-Aid Brigade as your latest recommendation, I’m not here for some Harry High School talent contest with bloggers harboring a chip on the shoulder, mocking religion (or some others’ perceptions about such) from his little hovel, or telling the world that since their take on things like government funding of X project is disdained by some or the media editing of Couric and Gibson was breathtaking–therefore she and her flock are hicks. I don’t have all the answers, but I’ve been around long enough to know mockery and hatred when I see it.

    I don’t know Palin’s long-term plans, and she may yet have something cooking. After being hounded with 600 K (after 12 out of the 15 accusations of various office abuses have been tossed out) in legal debt due to the harassment from anonymous allegations that all have to be fought off in the courts, I’m not in a position to claim I’d not need some time off to get some things managed as well under similar circumstances. Now then: This hand-wringing and angst from sluts like Eve Ensler, Naomi Wolf, GE News (MSNBC), and such consternation from that vicious harridan from Pandagon, now making a faux book on Palin, indicates to me and many others that Palin is certainly doing something right. Palin doesn’t have the same level of mentors and benefactors as do some others, and so the bankroll for her fight will be some friends and the book deal.

    I’m not going to get into a major theological dissertation here. Wrong forum.

    I will say here only that there are some points to be made about all faiths falling short both in evidence, and, more importantly, expressed goals. Oddly, only “fundamentalism” is attacked, as it can be a malleable term meaning anything akin to “that which modern liberals hate about conservative values”, or it can mean nasty ugly people with 6 teeth in their head who homeschool their kids, and possibly lock them in cold closets and feed them cold oatmeal, or anyone who opposes gay marriage initiatives, even if the oppose is from the local synagogue. I’ve heard that name-calling regarding issues like, say, global warming.

    Perhaps because name-calling is very easy and actually effective in many cases these days. Sorta like someone pointed out a few weeks back; don’t like ObamaCare?

    (You’re a damned RACIST–and a Fundy!)

    Seems to work for some. Just ask Ken.

    Such broad brushes are effective tools for some people, but are made intentionally difficult to pin down, definitionally.

    Interestingly, there never seems to be a major hit job on Wiccan high priestess gibbers, transcendental crystal farms, or Hollywood faiths requiring one to believe in Thetans zapped from Mars. Presumably this is because while some faiths stand almost alone mocked quite a bit by the Left, this reasoning has more to do with the fears of issues regarding the politics of things like abortion. Other issues revolve around the faux claim that Christians seek to “ban” stem cell research and the like, though, to be fair, the issue is FAR more complicated in this instance than is commonly acknowledged.

    See also:

    (Written by a Christian also, and a guy who, unlike the Slacky kid, has done science and health and economics reportage for decades now)

    If your skills are on par, you can take take up these issues with a REAL historian and theologian and acquaintance of mine who goes by the handle Beastrabban, from the UK.

  19. Perhaps your pal claims MERELY to be mocking only SOME aspects of faith. Fine. Good on him. OK. For our purposes, I’ll buy that crappola for the moment. Though it is interesting that actually “fundamentalism” (or Evangelicalism) is merely the belief in CORE tenants (that’s all it really means), as opposed to the more mainline and somewhat loosey-goosey morals of some modern churches, which as we might guess get more of a free pass on matters of flesh and home. In the end, however, surely your pal understands that a religion that is not somewhat choosey and specific sorta misses the whole point. The point IS a type of separation from what the quotidian masses think on moral issues. If there is only ecumenicalism and PC moral relativism, and Adam and Steve from the Bay Area as the new parental paradigm, and a pick-and-taste ethic about what the Bible says, then the whole point is rendered impotent–as is religion itself, other than the Hollywood variety. And all becomes just the latest fashion for what even “liberal” Christians believe in after all is said and done: Government power, orgasms, political correctness, gay marriage (though I have yet to find THAT in the Scriptures), and fabulous clothing. Liberal theologians always miss this. If religion is impotent for one’s life and certain insights, and the very text is mostly irrelevant and deemed just to be the scribbles of old Jewish misogynists, or Christianity-as-government activism is the apparent meaning of “love they neighbor”, then the whole point of faith is missed.

    Like some other guy mentioned a while back:

    My Kingdom is not of this world, else my servants would fight”
    –Jesus of Nazareth

    The relevant Palinesque issue for me was the service to the community, for which apparently for all the highbrows with such superior knowledge of the cosmos like your link du jour, the hucksterism of Obama is dandy. You voted for him, so that’s apparently par for the course for your insights on things. Your pal is not qualified to walk into the same room as Fumento, and since the latter favors Palin, perhaps there is something to be learned here about real service to the issues and larger community over some punk’s take on Wasilla lifestyle vs. his ideology. Slacktivist is gibberish, and the blogroll of this individual, who, next to Fumento is in that magical category called “unpublished“, also indicates the reasoning is mostly ideological. Just as I suspected.

    Having said that, if I ever need any help on WordPerfect, PageMaker, Excel, your pal be the one of the first to know. Though I really should ask my wife first.

    As to a BA in the social sciences, I got one of those too.

    But the issues this person “digs” in this pajama-blog routine have all been addressed by better people elsewhere regarding context. Fumento stands far above the Kool-Aid Brigade like Greenwald, Pandagon, and Obsidian Wings. He writes actual books. The Kool-Aid Brigade, for the most part, is equipped only for college-bandy bull sessions and hypocrisy.

  20. the more appropriate moniker for diarrhea considerations and claims

    ..and in any case, this is not saying you’re “shit”, it is saying you have the appropriate name for crappy considerations from you claims.

    I try my best to separate the person from the claims.

    Hope that helps.

  21. (message had to break in two)

    Ken used the diarrheal analogy first, and so I just handily picked it up and took it to a more appropriate source.

    • wootabega
    • Posted November 1, 2009 at 11:45 pm
    • Permalink

    Personally, I hope Sarah Palin never gets in any position of elected office at the federal level, for Tina Fey’s sake.

    • Ken
    • Posted November 2, 2009 at 5:35 am
    • Permalink

    Wake-boarder is like a bizarro pinata. Instead of hitting him with a stick and getting a pile of candy, you poke him with a sentence and get a wall of words.

    • Methodistmin
    • Posted November 2, 2009 at 6:38 am
    • Permalink

    Thanks, Wakefield. I am enjoying your posts a good deal.

    • Mark
    • Posted November 2, 2009 at 7:03 am
    • Permalink

    That slacko guy is a waste of space, BM. If you like mostly meaningless rambling, sure give him cred… what I briefly read was just plain worthless – I feel like I wasted what little time I was there. Besides that, blogs purporting to be serious – where people don’t at least publish using real names (at least, not that I could find) automatically render themselves nigh-inconsequential in my view. If you’ve got something decent to say, use your real name. Even better, run a moderated blog where people have to post using their real name, not this anonymous hit and run stuff.

    At least I know Zack’s name! Good cartoon again, Zack, btw. I see some of the zombies ended up here…

    Well done, btw, Wakefield – keep up the entertainment. Facts are pesky to some, hey?

    • Ken
    • Posted November 2, 2009 at 7:12 am
    • Permalink

    “If you like mostly meaningless rambling, sure give him cred… what I briefly read was just plain worthless – I feel like I wasted what little time I was there.”

    “Well done, btw, Wakefield”

    These are not compatible beliefs.

    • ikabod
    • Posted November 2, 2009 at 1:39 pm
    • Permalink

    As usual Kenny you have provided nothing to this discussion except your skilled ability to cut and paste. Then you degrade to the low level high school potty mouth insults. Nice to see you representing your neo-libs so well.

    Disagree provide no substance to your disagreement. Drop the F bomb, claim victory.

    As far as the Election is concerned we got what the media, the democrats wanted us to have. A less than honest community organizer from chi-town. Somehow the out-of-the box thought process that Obama displays is supposed to be qualities of a true leader. Its not if you can’t lead.

    Stand by for “Well Bush sucked because…….”

    I liked Palin until she quit. Had she hung in there I would have had more hope for a 2012 run. Don’t think for one second the dems will do what ever they can for the next 3 years to label her as a quitter, idiot and bible thumping buffoon. Same play book, same agenda. At the same time, I have yet to figure out the lefts fear of this gal. If she is so stupid, so utter lame why the hell wouldn’t want her as the GOP candidate? I mean you guys want another for years of socialism lite right?

    “You were no doubt happy to trade your liberty for the illusion of safety that they provided.”

    Somehow I missed the Bush stormtroopers kicking in my door demanding I show them my papers, and voter registration card.
    Selling out our eastern European allies to grease the wheels with Russia. Is not my idea of safety.

    better to just sit back wait and see what Iran does with those “peaceful” nukes. Then if all else fails, build memorials and apologize.

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 2, 2009 at 2:40 pm
    • Permalink

    ikabod, no doubt you have no problems with the government listening in on your cell phone calls. after all, you have nothing to hide.

    • ikabod
    • Posted November 2, 2009 at 3:51 pm
    • Permalink

    BM, Did you raise hell when the Clintons came clean on their Echelon project? Back then it was for the good of national security, right? Bush does it? Goddamn Nazi!

    I have no faith in the Obama supporting, defending liberty nor the constitution for that matter. As far as the neo-libs are concerned that document (constitution) has been such a constraint to their agenda for the last 40 years!

    Thats right Kenny your one bad-ass mo-fo! Your lack of knowledge is again glaring! The missile defense that the O canceled was kinetic based idiot. The so-called “Star Wars” element was years away. Better to cancel now and develop green jobs. That’ll show those wascally Iwanians!

    Its not like its actually worked or anything:


  22. poke him with a sentence and get a wall of words.

    That’s right, Ken.

    A Halloween treat for all the little goblins and trolls out there..

    But, unlike the Excel and Word boy, at least I make honest attempts at paragraph separation.

    Let’s hope the Ghost of Bush is not planning to bring on the return of the Dark Rovian Conspiracy by next listening to my wife’s secret pumpkin pie recipes.

    • ikabod
    • Posted November 2, 2009 at 4:37 pm
    • Permalink

    I love pumpkin pie! I’ll take a slice if there’s any left.

    All’s I need now is the cool whip!

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 2, 2009 at 7:53 pm
    • Permalink

    ikabod: You seem to be operating under a serious misunderstanding. I voted for Bush in 2000 as the result of a number of Clinton policies. I’m not wedded to (D) or (R). But after the utter disaster of the last 8 years, pulling that (R) lever is gonna be hard as hell.

    In any event, you answered my question with a phony equivalence fallacy. Was everything cool in your book with Bush’s warrantless wiretapping?

    • ikabod
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 12:52 am
    • Permalink

    I have to say that I was not pleased with the wiretapping. So with that out of the way, your suggestion then of methods that should have and would have been more effective?

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 1:39 am
    • Permalink

    Wiretapping with warrants? It’s still depressingly easy to do, but Bush didn’t even bother. Is it too much to ask for a little due process?

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 7:11 am
    • Permalink

    Hey BM-
    Is your Bush-derangement syndrome flaring up without your medication-?

    I have a friend at the Legion who takes so many ‘happy pills’ for his PTSD (he is a Vietnam combat Vet) that he self medicates with Miller Lite long-necks, and skips some of his meds – would it help you if I mailed you some of them-?

    FACT – telephone calls between the US and select FOREIGN countries are/were subject to being monitored, PER the Homeland Security Act, passed by Congress.

    “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
    -John Adams, ‘Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials,’ December 1770

    So, why do you not wet your diapers over ALL the congress-critters and Senators who voted for it-?

    Chances are, a Senator and several Representatives from YOUR state voted for it,… or is that too inconvenient for you to wrap your small-minded rhetoric around-?
    Is it too inconvenient to include all those other names in your lisping-lefty political slogans-?

    Or do those facts interrupt the MSM template guiding your mind-numb diatribes-?

    Your knee-jerk parroting of the moveon.bed-wetter talking-points, from their fever swamp septic tank of anti-Bush rants, is boring and unoriginal.

    NEWS FLASH for B.M. -!!! – ‘G.W.’ is a private citizen living in T-E-X-A-S.
    He is NOT living at 1600 Pennsylvania ANYMORE-!!
    (is this coming at you too fast -?)

    Your ‘Man-Child Messiah’ is there, maintaining the SAME telephone monitoring policy… so why are you not spewing your self-righteous effluvia onto him-?
    YOU voted for him-!

    If you sincerely attempt to answer these questions, that painful sensation you experience is the rare process of you learning something useful-!

    • Wakefield
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 8:40 am
    • Permalink


    Well I have to say that would be a novel piece of work to hear at one of those homegrown Townhall Terror meetings that Janet N. is pulling her hair out over…

    (what IS it about gals named Janet? Having the Duchess of Waco grace us with her charm seemed good enough to me at the time…)

    New commecial to air on TV this week:

    “Ask your doctor about BDS–and remember, *CRAMIDOL is only available in prescription form so far under most health plans”


    ***Warning, side effect of prescribed meds include dizzyness, paranoia, thoughts and notions of hyperbolic granduer, conspiracy theory, and a propsensity to make sure everyone who opposes Pelosi’s astonishingly verbose health plan is deemed a pure racist”

    Elsewhere, as far as wiretapping, I suppose the way around this thorny issue is to have stacks of warrants ready to go in court. But then, I’m not sure of timing issues here. You’ll need an open-ended allowance on some of these cats, unless you REALLY DO know when they’re about to make a call days in advance.

    It is unlikely the Feds under Bush were listing in on someone’s discussion about choice of paint for the baby’s room.

    Though to be sure, lately in Europe they are monitoring your food and garbage issues, something not yet here but certainly being eyed by Obama’s enviro-czar with approval.

    I suppose we could always just find out where the bad guys are hiding out in the interstate Motel 6s, get the guys in dark glasses to get an adjoining room, and put a glass against the wall.

    Old school trick. Though sometimes you hear things a lot more fun than jihad planning sessions…

    Thanks for all the comments, gang.

    I have been seeing, just busy this week.

    Will check in some time later on to check out the latest Zack Toon that gets people going yet again!

    • Big Money
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 10:52 am
    • Permalink

    Just keep pretending that the last 8 years didn’t happen. Keep that head in the sand.

    • thesecolorsdontrun
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 11:26 am
    • Permalink


    “Ok, kenny maybe your right, just to the right of Hugo Chavez, but surely left of Clinton.
    Maybe right of Michael Moore.
    Then a sharp left of the 10th hole… I hate it when that happens.”

    holy cow, an actual funny joke!

    • Ken
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 11:34 am
    • Permalink

    *your logic

    • thesecolorsdontrun
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 11:39 am
    • Permalink

    I also will state for the record that steve T has never actually seen combat duty, despite whatever claims he makes. His incessant fervor is exactly indicative of someone who could not pass evaluation to go into basic. His ceaseless fetishization of the military and his constant homophobic attitude indicate that.

    Steve, to paraphrase Mr. Kristofferson “you have never murdered another man, and cashed the check your country has given you for it.” And on the high outside chance that i’m incorrect and you actually have faithfully served your country, you have my profound thanks, and my enduring pity that the military cannot afford to give proper care to it’s mentally ill veterans. Perhaps Obama won’t be so quick to abandon you, what with the UHC he’s pushing.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 1:01 pm
    • Permalink

    Well ‘colors’-

    Want to get a public notary – sign a $5000 wager in Vegas, then see my DD214-?
    [ e a s y $$$ ]

    Your fantasy-analysis is pathetic – and says plenty about wishful thinking.
    However, your Saul Alyinsky skills are developing.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 2:30 pm
    • Permalink

    Your arrogant presumptions are bizarre, wildly over-reaching, and over-flowing with deceitful premises’.

    I never once claimed I have gone to war – I served as an NCO & Commissioned Officer during the ‘Cold War’.
    (can you identify when that ended-?)

    You obviously have some innate issues against the military.
    Cite where, once, I have ‘…champion[ed] the military as an inerrant force ‘.
    Go fetch – find it… (we are waiting)

    Your shameless & phony assertions reveal plenty about you – none of it is complimentary.

    As you presume so much analytical abilities, enlighten all of us about what your obsession with my background has to do with Zack’s ‘GRAVE SITUATION’-?

    Perhaps you are one of those libs who has little to show for your life, other than bitterness and reverting to vitriolic projections-?

    Hhmmm – could be close to that analogy someone described earlier about a slim-covered alligator-?

    • Ken
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 2:53 pm
    • Permalink

    “can you identify when that ended-?”

    Ick-a-Dick seems to believe that it never ended.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 3, 2009 at 3:33 pm
    • Permalink

    What is commonly referred to as the “end” of the cold war is the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Soviet pull back from Eastern Europe, and the subsequent rapid decline of the large Soviet military.

    I do not contend that there are still strong East vs. Western adversarial statures – there is, and these are still serious.

    The massive Soviet forces that were poised to blitz into Germany fell rapidly into disrepair shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall – as did their massive navy, air forces, and ICBM capabilities.

    I do not doubt the threats present now, posed by what they now have, especially as there are signs of a resurgence of old-school ‘Soviet-militarism’.

    • ikabod
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 12:02 am
    • Permalink

    “Ick-a-Dick seems to believe that it never ended.”

    Since your cut and paste skills are no match for mine. I would then ask you to prove my assertion that the cold is still continuing.

    Steve T.! Come on my friend! Remember the Russians are now our buds! Except, uh when it comes to helpin’ a brother out with regards to the peaceful Ahmadinejad/Iran. Oh well, perhaps another hand out or maybe even Michelle’s gooooood cookies will warm their harts. Its just gotta work, Its just gotta!

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 12:40 am
    • Permalink

    Sure,… I still recall parts of the (formerly classified) briefings on how the Soviets were to fight & advance through W. Germany and into Europe.
    Their former plans made Hitlers 3rd Reich look like snarky Girl Scouts selling cookies.

    Our vodka-swilling ‘friends’ were willing to systematically drop tactical nukes on population centers, if it suited their tactical schedule of advancement.
    Putin grew up under this tutelage.
    Charming, eh-?

    That little 2″ Kenis – he likes to make up fantasy quotes…
    Sooner or later, he might change his posting name,… trolls like him often do.

    • ikabod
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 1:15 am
    • Permalink

    Ah yes, it seems like only yesterday. When the leftist where demanding the US try unilateral nuclear disarmament.

    • Ken
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 5:21 am
    • Permalink

    Apparently neither of you think it ever ended. Some much for your stupid narrative about Reagan’s heroics, eh?

  23. “Cuz, ya know, you can’t hug children with nuclear arms”, and all that bumper sticker rot.

    As far as Reagan, one can imagine, Ken, that while some tensions are still around with the Russians, we no longer have the Stalinist model of economics over there, and millions of Eastern Europeans are now gettin’ around to being freer in their outlook than many in the West.

    Disappointing for the West? Sure.

    A light of hope, due in larger part from Reagan’s missives about walls and tear-downs?

    You bet.

    Contrary to what you might see on MSNBC or taught in the public schools these days, it was not all due to “Gorby-baby, dude!”

    As to those Colors Ain’t Mixing Well’s antics; a fascinating look in the Alinsky Methodology for marginalization and smear.

    I’ll have to ponder this and get back later.

    • ikabod
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 9:32 am
    • Permalink

    “Apparently neither of you think it ever ended. Some much for your stupid narrative about Reagan’s heroics, eh?” Again, can you show me the quote that I have made here that alludes to this continuation of the cold war? Or is this just the longing for the so-called unfinished presidency of Carter? I like the paradigm shift your trying though. Very Joseph Goebbels-ish of you! “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” The destruction of Reagan has been a top priority of the left since he left office. Just like the other lefty LIE.: Che Guevera was a great man! A peaceful revolutionary!

    Stand by for:
    Oh yeah well Regan killed___________ (input assorted peoples of color/victim here)
    Oh yeah well Che Helped____________ (input assorted Bolivian, Cuban here)
    Oh yeah well if Carter had another term we would have be better off because________________

    • ikabod
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 10:03 am
    • Permalink

    Stand by for the Goebbels quote to be applied to the Bush administration as well….. Wait for it…….

  24. I believe it was a third grader who once said, “WE RULE, YOU DROOL” and clearly he was referring to the superiority of the Democratic Party, not the Republic Party.

    I can’t wait for you CONS to try to flip that around and claim he was talking about how DEMOCRATS drool… sigh…

    In all seriousness, has anyone here actually read Alinsky, or is he just the latest amorphous boogeyman to rise out of the ether to frighten Glenn Beck?

  25. I have not parused through all Alinsky’s crap. But when it comes to radicals, sometimes a little goes a damn long way.

    The NEA, which WE USED to think merely meant the National EDUCATION Associate, but apparently means the National EVERYTHING Association (as their “issues” list demonstrates, it’s hardly about education) certainly thinks Alinsky is worth a read, and not doubt some of their nags and busybodies think he’s just a damn good read.

    For radicals (and as Joe Sobran said, the public schools are now the uterus breeding grounds of liberalism more so than true education)….well, I’m sure Alinsky is right on par. He’s crazy as a ship rat, but he’s got a cult following in among bureacrats and other tax glompers and people who disdain America and capitalism. That’s for certain.

    Straight from the NEA website :

    Reveille for Radicals
    by Saul Alinsky
    Vintage; Reissue edition (October 23, 1989)
    Buy It

    Rules for Radicals
    by Saul Alinsky
    Vintage; Reissue edition (October 23, 1989)
    Buy It

    An inspiration to anyone contemplating action in their community! And to every organizer!

    Saul Alinsky wrote the book on American radicalism – two books, in fact: a 1945 best-seller, “Reveille for Radicals” and “Rules for Radicals” in 1971. The “Reveille” title page quotes Thomas Paine… “Let them call me rebel and welcome, I feel no concern from it; but I should suffer the misery of devils, were I to make a whore of my soul.”

    Saul Alinsky, who was a labor and civil-rights activist from the 1910’s until he died in 1972, has written here a guidebook for those who are out to change things. He sets down what the goal is: a society where people are free to live, and also aren’t starving in the streets. A society where there is legal and economic justice. Then he sets out to say how to get there.

    Alinsky spends a lot of time critiquing the idea that “The end does not justify the means.” What end? What means? He feels that there are circumstances where one can and should use means that in other circumstances would be unethical. I am not sure I agree, but Alinsky certainly speaks with the voice of experience.

    Alinsky’s goal seems to be to encourage positive social change by equipping activists with a realistic view of the world, a kind of preemptive disillusionment.

    If a person already knows what evil the world is capable of, then perhaps the surprise factor can be eliminated, making the person a more effective activist. Alinsky further seems to be encouraging the budding activist not to worry to much about getting his or her hands dirty. It’s all a part of the job, he seems to say.

    Alinsky, the master political agitator, tactical planner and social organizer didn’t mince words…

    “Liberals in their meetings utter bold works; they strut, grimace belligerently, and then issue a weasel-worded statement ‘which has tremendous implications, if read between the lines.’ They sit calmly, dispassionately, studying the issue; judging both sides; they sit and still sit.

    “The Radical does not sit frozen by cold objectivity. He sees injustice and strikes at it with hot passion. He is a man of decision and action. There is a saying that the Liberal is one who walks out of the room when the argument turns into a fight.

    “Society has good reason to fear the Radical. Every shaking advance of mankind toward equality and justice has come from the Radical. He hits, he hurts, he is dangerous. Conservative interests know that while Liberals are most adept at breaking their own necks with their tongues, Radicals are most adept at breaking the necks of Conservatives.

    “Radicals precipitate the social crisis by action – by using power. Liberals may then timidly follow along or else, as in most cases, be swept forward along the course set by Radicals, but all because of forces unloosed by Radical action. They are forced to positive action only in spite of their desires …

    “The American Radical will fight privilege and power whether it be inherited or acquired by any small group, whether it be political or financial or organized creed.

    “He curses a caste system which he recognizes despite all patriotic denials.

    “He will fight conservatives whether they are business or labor leaders.

    “He will fight any concentration of power hostile to a broad, popular democracy, whether he finds it in financial circles or in politics.

    “The Radical recognizes that constant dissension and conflict is and has been the fire under the boiler of democracy. He firmly believes in that brave saying of a brave people, “Better to die on your feet than to live on your knees!”

    “The Radical may resort to the sword but when he does he is not filled with hatred against those individuals whom he attacks. He hates these individuals not as persons but as symbols representing ideas or interests which he believes to be inimical to the welfare of the people.

    “That is the reason why Radicals, although frequently embarking upon revolutions, have rarely resorted to personal terrorism.”

    Alinsky practiced what he preached. He said, “Tactics means doing what you can with what you have … tactics is the art of how to take and how to give.”

    He uses eyes, ears and nose for examples…

    “If you have a vast organization, parade it before the enemy, openly show your power.”

    “If your organization is small, do what Gideon did: conceal the members in the dark but raise a clamor that will make the listener believe that your organization numbers many more that it does.”

    “If your organization is too tiny even for noise, stink up the place.”

    Alinsky devised and proved thirteen tactical rules for use against opponents vastly superior in power and wealth.

    1. “Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.

    2. “Never go outside the experience of your people.

    3. “Wherever possible go outside of the experience of the enemy.

    4. “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.

    5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.
    6. “A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.

    7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.

    8. “Keep the pressure on.

    9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.

    10. “Major premise for tactics is development of operations that will maintain constant pressure upon the opposition.

    11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.

    12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.

    13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

    “The real action is in the enemy’s reaction. The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength. Tactics, like life, require that you move with the action.”

    Alinsky was hated and defamed by powerful enemies, proof that his tactics worked. His simple formula for success…

    “Agitate + Aggravate + Educate + Organize”

  26. As to the singy-songs to the New Dear Leader, it WAS in point of fact little miss Mao, AKA Anita Dunn, who praised Mousy Tongue, err, Mao Tse-Tung, the killer of 60 million human beings, as her inspiration in politics and tactics.

    The MSM glossed this over, but it’s still there nontheless.

    And the brownshirts?

    Well, the “changy-change” personality cult being fostered in the public schools with allegedly “impromptu” songs about Obama (IE–organized by hippy parents and Hollywood types) is actually called the Blue Shirt Brigade.

    The ARE real, and they can be very creepy.

    Any time kids get shanghaied into this kind of crap, things get creepy.

    In fact, all things surrounding this guy are getting rather creepy.

  27. Thanks for the effort, Wakefield. Still using childish nicknames, but that was as good a copy and paste as the ones everyone calls Ken a small-dicked homo for making!

  28. Well, Chris, thanks for the continuing saga and effort of what amounts to non-commentary here by you and your ilk.

    I merely posted the NEA drip for convenience, and to demonstrate something far more serious than who here has read this crap; rather, who in POWER of influence praises such.

    As it happens, I am familiar with Alinsky dribble in both form and specifics.

    More important than ANY of that personally, however, is the question of is this influence an undue one for what should be a moderate learning voice rather than ideology.

    The answer to that is yes also.

    Not sure what you mean by nicknames.

    Mine is real, and so is Alinsky’s.

    The Blue Shirts?

    Well, there’s a reason for that convenience: I don’t investigate the names of minors who got shanghaid into all this.

    Anita Dunn? That’s real too.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 4, 2009 at 11:57 am
    • Permalink

    Excellent contribution about Saul Alinsky however, you did offer too much useful information, hidden in plain sight, for the infestation of our pusillanimous, left-bent priapisms, to process & learn.

    Whenever you post such good insight, their eye’s glaze over (they snivel & complain about the length), perhaps they reach for their bong,… the foaming between their ears drools out their mouths, they excrete one of their favorite gutter subjects in a poorly constructed sentence fragment, and “feel good” about their contribution.

    Other than from a 1st grade reading book, Billy Goats Gruff, I had never heard the name “troll”, until one of the afore mentioned accused me of being one. And upon looking it up, what a shocker – those pointing their finger have three pointing at themselves.

  29. Actually I’ve stopped putting forth the effort of trying to engage either of you in debate, because anything substantial I write will be ignored so people can claim I am illiterate, on drugs, a closet homosexual, etc. The “Mao” thing (or as Wakefield put it, Little Miss Mao and her alleged adoration of Mousy Tongue, which some people might call a “nickname”)is something I have addressed before, but pointing out the context of her comments or providing examples of a bunch of conservatives citing him as a significant thinker (up to and including that rotten pit of American-hating pinko puke, the United States Army) was glossed over because hey, how is discussing facts any fun when you can call Ken a tiny-dicked homosexual?

    If any of you showed the slightest interest in polite debate, I might actually respond. Until then, go ahead and just call me stupid and illiterate. It’s all easier that way.

  30. because anything substantial I write will be ignored so people can claim I am illiterate, on drugs, a closet homosexual

    I don’t recall implying or saying any such thing. I have called some people to the mat for oddball ideologies.

    Perhaps some have done this, but I have not seen that on this particular thread and I don’t have time to pour over all of DL to tweeze out something like that.

    As far as Anita Dunn et al, I’d certainly find it troubling that even where there can be found direct attribution to her quotes and adoration of said Mao, this is still not enough.

    But what else can we do then?

    Aint’ NUTHIN’ alleged about it, even if the major media once again missed the boat or thought this was all some inside joke among such eggheads who piddle with that kind of thing. The fact that schoolkids were forced to hear it made it somewhat less funny to some parents in any event…

    As far as the name Miss Mao, that’s more than fair in her case.

  31. I might be splitting hairs here, but I always thought of a nickname (as opposed to a “moniker” or label) as a term of endearment between close people. Perhaps that’s wrong. But in any case I could have done a hell of a lot worse than Miss Mao. Many other things flashed through the mind before I settled on the kinder, gentler assertion of state power over the lives of individuals.

    Yes yes yes, Chris, we’re all fairly well familiar with the fact that many in and out of government and to make some point have quoted Chairman Mao.

    A free-market radical libertarian named Robert J. Ringer quoted him as well on the issue of political power ultimately being backed up the power of a gun.

    Yes indeed. No doubt the military has taken a gander too at Mao’s military and political strategy when he finally rallied the people to, after a long, protracted and bloody conflict, got rid of his moral enemy Change Kai Sheck, whom the US supported in those dreary days.

    But it’s funny you mentioned the word “context”–and bully for you. Much is missing here regarding that these days and so I appreciate that.

    The problem with Anita’s context is that looking at it we see not some narrow point or funny quip, but the admiration of strategy, and of course the uncomfortable fact that the CONTEXT of this was that she said he was on the short list of her favorite philosophers.

    There is little joking there unless/until the claim is made that her other favorites are Mickey Mouse and Wiley Coyote.

    One can imagine how fast any pol or appointee would lose a job if they glowingly quoted Hitler back in those halcyon days of “strategization” in the German beer halls, etc.

    Your tail would be on the street so fast and you’d be attacked so viciously there’d be a warp in the fabric of space-time.

    It would take all of 30 minutes. Notice that for the left, only the “H” name is toxic. All others can get a free pass, because liberals are intoxicated with a certain brand of state-power ideology.
    Thus likewise Tom Friedman has gotten into the act regarding climate change and an admiration of how the Red Chinese do the deed of popping heads to make the change if necessary.

    I’d venture that as with Anita, that’s not really some joke he pulled out of his arse at the last minute in a Comedy Central warm-up routine.

    And while we’re on this handy topic of context, remember that the major media blew this one, but thought it just dandy to parrot some faux-quotes that had been circulating for some time about Rush Limbaugh.

  32. Steve T. is more than capable of handling all this back-n’-forth, but a few observations from the peanut gallery just the same from These Colors Ain’t Blendin’ Just Right:

    The reason these wild assumptions about both Steve T.–as well as the military in general–seem overreaching is not just because they are (boy, are they) but also because there is a formula in all this I’ve seen many times elsewhere: The Magical Radical Default Mechanism.

    We have truly fascinating missives from TCDR–on several fronts, because he illustrates the Left/Alinsky methodology of using both (or all, in some cases) of one’s targets of hatred as counterbalances to play off one another. Marginalization and scold are only part of the picture here!

    For example, in TCDR’s case, you can diss the military–standard liberal fare, yes–but be sure in the process to play one of your targets (libs hate the military with a passion that’s unbridled) against another target (in this case, a conservative individual targeted for his traditionalist values and love of country) and then make sure both get smashed with allegations of incompetence and societal misanthropy. Make sure all aspects that are considered the pillars of traditionalism get nailed in the end, or at least scolded, mocked, and marginalized. Make sure the final gloss gives a good dissing of military values, all the while claiming that you REALLY do appreciate their service to the nation. BUT, then claim that a love of the military or such is indicative of….anti-military sentiment(!), and/or socially unacceptable. Make sure elsewhere to make commentary that (when protesting in the streets near your hairy pals) amounts to “We support the troops when they frag their officers” or the soft-core approach (when interviewed by MSNBC) of “We support the troops, too, only we need them to stay home and make sure they don’t break their fingernails or get their hair mussed, or at worst, are used only to hand out UN food packages in Biafra or Sudan. If under fire from the local sultans of swagger or the Allah Knows Best crowd, they need to just come on home to loved ones. Then we’ll hold a parade. Cuz, unlike the Meanie-Boy Republicans, we CARE!

    The Alinsky/Left method all begins with making sure that–by default–some things should just be accepted.

    So, first we have a rather creative if questionable automatic assumption–hardly warranted by reality from what I’ve seen–that the requisite mental status to join the military is a palpable NON-excitement about all things military-related, and a profound acceptance of the new age of multi-culti PC pieties, even if traditionally the military had gone far beyond “don’t ask, don’t tell” revisions (in the past, they may very well have asked, even if you didn’t tell–or do the obvious flippy flop fun in the barracks). Steve T. does not fall in line with this semi-Soviet-esque line of thinking that “politically insane” is an actual psychiatric category (they used to inject people by force who doubted the wonders of Lenin) and so must be nuts. Illogical, but granted, very easy.

    Of course worked in here is the statement that Steve T. declared himself to be a combat veteran, something he’s not actually claimed, but Living Color Man claims and crows about in pyrrhic victory gloat that has the same effect of “Let me state for the record the sky is blue after all! SO take THAT, kids–HUAAH!

    No evidence that anyone claimed otherwise, however.

    Then, in another missive, we see TCDR’s odd and unexamined notion that Steve T. assumes the “inerrancy” of the military. But doubtful Steve T. confuses military doctrine with the Papal Doctrine of Infallibility. The claim was dumb, but admittedly bold, and perhaps works in some contexts with some people.

    However, let’s DO contrast the closure of the Iraq War, or at least the “wind-down” mode that has things relatively stabilized compared to the glory days of Hussein’s 80s-Vegas Splendor and bloody mattress rooms, to the truly “nebulous” circumstances for the Afghan mission at hand (or lack of mission, rather) which funny enough actually more closely resembles the term “nebulous”, where that exact sentiment is often heard from the men on the Afghan front lines (off-camera) in greater numbers than ever. Funny he brought up the term of “nebulous”, because regarding Afghan war strategy, we now have a Prez who’s as confused about all this “Afghan stuff” as some poor droopy eunuch on his laughably unlikely (but somehow he got voted into the spot) honeymoon night regarding where to stick what–and how to get the most of the moment. Merry Changemass.

    (I.E.–In fighting the sons of Allah effectively, at least Bush had balls to boot.)

    Next, we have the assumption from TCDR, courtesy tough guy Mr. Kristofferson, that killing in international conflict must always be akin to murder. Though, this seems a rather primitive, ignorant, or certainly contextless ethical stance; most societies and their appendages, like the military, understand the moral lines of distinction that not all killing is murder, and that context of death is key. Just as not all sex is rape: Even if the appearance is the same, the motives, goal, and assumptions are NOT. Eve Ensler and her Vagina Warrior dweebs among the males might think marital expression is rape, but most sane people don’t make such frowsy equivocations.

    Perhaps we need less of Kris, and more of the moralizing of C.S. Lewis to correct such cornball cheapjack analysis. TCDR did not want to really make the lousy line-to-line connection here that killing is always murder, so he let an agent of Hollywood do it for him. This move is probably intentional. If not, we can only suppose that TCDR thinks his own confused take on this, or his allusions to the silly preachments of dopey actors like Kris Kristofferson (who once said he was ashamed of being in patriotic movies that had the sin of showing America on the right side of history) makes him a far more ample prize worthy for military recruitment than Steve T.

    (Yes, I know–odder things have happened. “And remember–YOU TOO could win 300 million smackers in the Powerball Lotto.”)

    Then, as always, we’re handed the obligatory neo-Stalinist Lite/Alinsky assumption (and this is always so heartwarming for their concern for others) that all who don’t fall in line on ideology are mentally ill, and then at that, the proximate cure for these social ills (and so much more!) will be the care and compassion of socialist healthcare modeled no doubt on some variation of what our Eurotrash brethren do, who, other than the Brits on occasion, have not done so much warring as screwing and sucking down wine on the beach. No question that life is grand when the fun times is on someone else’s dime. Champagne from someone’s else bottle is always easy to pour.

    In any event, the charm is always there from the Stalin-Lite crowd fretting over the mental attributes and stability/suffering of others. That’s hilarious, as the desire for obfuscation and torment is their ideological specialty.

    I’ll give credit to TCDR’s final coup de grace from the first missive, where in parting shot and faux pity for Steve T.’s supposed horrific suffering and maltreatment under the Dark Night of Chenian/Rovian Abandonment, he manages to mix in that we’re to take our health care cues from those mamby-pamby pauper pits of Europe where adult men gave up their freedoms decades ago for free dentures: Those magical locales, who for the last 60 years or so were rebuilt on Yankee dollars and defended from Soviet/East Bloc interlopers by Yankee military know-how. Thus giving them the ability to defer such costs to all their crappola and socialist glop they hand out to passive citizens who care for little beyond how government can help them continue to achieve sucking down wine on the beach, orgasms with someone else’s spouse, and exotic vacations to the Riviera wearing the latest naked-ass Parisian fashions. Social advice, that is, from the lands of trampy tarts and loud-mouth Muslim imams who show gory decapitation vids right on the street while the little bobbies armed only with nightsticks just stand there looking like they need a stiff dose of Ex-lax.

    Great. I’ll pass.

    Like my poor mother-in-law once said, “Damn boy, the things I see when I ain’t got my .38!”

  33. More along the lines of SEEING, Ken.

    But thanks for your valued input here.

    • Ken
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 2:23 pm
    • Permalink

    I was referring to your proclivities beyond this website, hence “hear”.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 3:07 pm
    • Permalink

    I sincerely enjoy reading your feedback.
    As I finished reading your last very insightful posting, and the flea-brained reply from Ken, I could not help but picture someone reading some classic literature out loud, or similarly well-written material, and upon finishing, the only audience was a 400lb hog, reacting with a simple belch, bowel movement, and promptly rolling over into the mud & his own excrement.

    Where does that expression come from, “…throwing pearls before swine”-?

    Oh-!… the benefits of staying upwind from certain folks-!

  34. Pearls before swine” comes from the Bible (actually the words of Christ, about ministry to the stubborn), and I should probably take heed of that handy advice at some point. Though since the bible is deemed misogynist hate speech by some, the effect of even THAT recognition is very limited in some quarters.

    Even if I enjoy teaching the little piggies that the swill bucket is located on more places on the farm that the Government Revenuers General Feed Store.

    But your comments make it worth the efforts.

    • Steve T
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 3:41 pm
    • Permalink


  35. Ken, you know, bud, the most common critique is that this kind of thing is too dry.

    But interestingly, you’ve found the best of your imagination in all this, haven’t you?

    My oh my…

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted November 5, 2009 at 9:01 pm
    • Permalink

    He does have a point though. You’re to busy giving each other internet high fives.

  36. Maneul, the issue for me was not “high-fives” across the Net merely because of general agreement with someone I barely know, but the methodology of attack used–unfairly and capriciously–by someone who perfectly exhibited all the Alinsky/Radical tactics of marginalization and mockey, topped off with the dessert dressing of faux moral outrage and pretentious concern, which also gives the strong and uncourth appearance of condescension.

    But then, for many if not most libs, that kind of thing is really not ALL Alinskyish. It’s par for the course in their style of argumentation.

    Alinsky just made it into codified artform.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: