Nearly drowning out the sound of mortar shells being lobbed into the Green Zone, Hillary stumbled and slouched her way to the inevitable victory in Pennsylvania this week, saw her shadow, and promised America another 6 weeks of campaign tedium, to be interrupted only by the occasional wincing collective ”WTF?”. Along the way, Senator Clinton lobbed a few stink bombs of her own, including a concocted hypothetical about “obliterating” Iran if 1) the Ayatollahs ever were to produce nuclear weapons, 2) ever were to develope a nuclear weapon delivery system, and 3) decided arbitrarily to launch said hypothetical nukes toward Israel. Hill delivered 3 versions of her doomsday scenario over a 4 day period, each time ratcheting up the rhetoric until she had achieved the poetry of uttering “nuclear weapons”, “Iran”, and “obliterate” in the same taut sentence. See, Senator Clinton is tough, just like a guy, in fact just like that guy McCain who’s already making rosy campaign promises of more and bigger wars forever. And we all know by now that Clinton is able to throw back a straight shot of distilled spirits in the middle of the day, shoot a doe at 50 yards, and swallow her wad of Red Man without without even flinching, all as mere idle pastimes while she’s waiting for that 3 AM phone call from Osama bin Laden.
This new act, of course, is in sharp contrast to her little emotional meltdown in New Hampshire, but more importantly is designed to be in sharper contrast to the latte’ swilling Obama and his legion of effete You Tube babies, tree hugging limousine liberals, vegan Unitarians, and pointy-headed college professors who wouldn’t even know that a doe is a female deer were it not for The Sound of Music.
And were it merely an “act”, it would be tolerable, I suppose, in this day and age of craven say-anything politics. But I fear that it’s not an act. Hillary’s chem trail of toxic rhetoric concerning the Middle East stretches back to the days immediately following 9-11. And she had that little AIPAC gremlin crawling up her butt even as she was campaigning for Senate 8 years ago, obeisance to Israel being the holy grail of New York politics. No, I think Hillary, like McCain, would loooove to kick a little A-Rab ass if one of the towel heads so much as looked cross eyed at her. If this lady ever makes it to the White House, our only hope is to get her going on those whiskey shooters early in the day, have her passed out by dinner, and let someone else take that phone call.
With the doomsday clock now at 5 minutes till the end of the world (it was moved up 2 minutes last January), our only hope of moving back the clock is Obama, now that Clinton has morphed into a hawk like McSame. This assumes, of course, that Bush doesn’t run out the clock before January comes.
Comment by Greg in Bonita — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 8:58 am
Hillary stumbled and slouched her way
Dang, Stacy! What a snotty piece of work. I can’t for the life of me figure out why you need to judge Hillary so harshly. I was able to listen to the show yesterday and enjoyed it greatly. I really did. I wish I had just emailed you instead of logging on and reading this cuz this is a complete buzz-kill for me.
Comment by Virginia M — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 9:43 am
Looks like you shook the Hill tree and out tumbled Va.M. There you go, you must hate our country. I’m here looking down from my sniper position seeing a horrific car wreck and helpless as usual to do anything o stop it.
Comment by knifemaster — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 10:49 am
yup. She’s a rather murderous wackjob…..if you put on a fundraiser/testimonial dinner for Enrique Bermudez, former Samocista General, CIA liason, & hands on leader of a group of torturing, raping, murdering Samocista mercenaries, one is entitled to be repelled. its not like the reality of the Contras was a mystery……
Endless wars, to the point now crackpot scenarios requiring the obliteration of fantasy foes dosnt even elicit a blink from people who, at this bloody point, should know better…..
All the way back at blog entry one, I said the Dems are desperate to loose this, & the path there is named Hillary.
Hilbat or McNuts, its VERY bad for us , never mind who they decide to “take out”.
No, you hit the nail on the head here, Stacy………
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 12:24 pm
Stacy, don’t you know by now that a woman candidate has to prove herself to be tough on “threats” real or imagined, yet feminine, but not emotional at the same time? Men, of course, can be as macho as they wanna be in a tough race. They can even tear up without being called “emotional,” or having MODO saying things like, “will he cry in front of dictators like Kim Jong Il?” (Ms. Dowd really did say that about Hillary the time Hillary teared up the first time a few months back.)
There’s still a double standard and you’re playing right into it.
Comment by Lorelei — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 1:22 pm
Andrew Sullivan wieghs in:
It’s worth recalling what this primary came to be about, because of a self-conscious decision by the Clintons to adopt the tactics and politics of the people who persecuted and hounded them in the 1990s. It was indeed in the end about smearing and labeling Obama as a far-left, atheist, elite, pansy Godless snob fraud. That was almost all it came to be about. It was the Clintons’ core message and core belief. And if anywhere would have proved its salience, it would surely have been beleaguered and depressed central and western Pennsylvania; and it would surely have worked with white ethnic voters over 50.
It did work, it seems to me. It will work, to some extent. It’s valid in the sense that Rove is not stupid. But it works less and less the younger the vote is; and it is obviously losing some of its divisive salience even among the older generation. It is fading as a tool. Used by Democrats, legitimized by Democrats, embraced by Democrats, the Rove-Atwater gambits have been paid the highest compliment by the Clintons these past few weeks. But a single digit win against a young black man in a polarized race suggests that this compliment was past its sell-by date. It was an act of desperation, and one last grab back to the past. It didn’t quite do what it was supposed to do. Nearly, but not quite.
The past is receding; but the future has yet to be born. This is hard labor. Necessary labor. But the direction of this country is clear, it seems to me. And heartening.
……Here, here, sully, here, here……
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
Having grown up in western Pennsylvania, I have to assume many of those who voted yesterday for Hillary will vote for McCain in November. She can pretend to be a blue collar redneck hawk all she wants, but when the real thing is on the other side of the ticket it’s a no brainer who will get the vote from that demographic. When the choice is white or black, they will choose white. When it’s a white man or a white woman, they will pick the man. MSNBC had statistics showing that more than 25% of those who voted for her will vote for McCain if Obama is the candidate. I think they will vote for McCain regardless of who the candidate is. I know how that sounds, but I grew up with these people in a small town in Pennsylvania.
Comment by Meri Jo — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 2:18 pm
i dunno, Lorelei- I dispise Bill equally as much……..
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 2:55 pm
It was indeed in the end about smearing and labeling Obama as a far-left, atheist, elite, pansy Godless snob fraud.
Some of you people are losing your balance. I would say it is a lot more like “painting” than “smearing”. Yes, Hillary’s campaign is going to paint Obama as too far to the left etc etc.
I am not even going to bother to address those whose hatred of Hillary is as intense as it is irrational. I will say this.
1. Hillary does NOT have to quit.
2. The petty bickering and sniping about minor differences is the farthest thing in the world from all this so called “ruthless attacks” that so many of you are imagining. Good God, they are running against each other they have to disagree and bicker. You seem to have lost all sense of perspective as to what it is that makes a “ruthless attack”
Comment by Virginia M — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 3:06 pm
And she had that little AIPAC gremlin crawling up her butt even as she was campaigning for Senate 8 years ago, obeisance to Israel being the holy grail of New York politics.
Stacy, stereotyping New York is going to get us nowhere. There are rational voicesthere.
Considering what a dick Obsms is turning out to be, we should be cheering Hillary for her victory in PA. This bodes well for victory in November.
In the current political climate, anyone running for president would have to appear tough on Iran. This does not mean that Hillary favors war over diplomatic negotiation.
Comment by Flying Junior — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
Oh yes, and no Obama is not electable in the general election. Furthermore, our country will be in one hell of a lot better shape under a Clinton than under McCain.
DUH!
Comment by Virginia M — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 3:08 pm
And yes, it sucks not being able to preview your comment. It’s like turning in an exam.
Comment by Flying Junior — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 3:09 pm
Arguing over which politician or party is more hypocritical/corrupt/etc. is like arguing over what kind of shit stinks worse.
Comment by Sammy — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 3:26 pm
Oh yes, and no Obama is not electable in the general election.
why? Skin??
glad im allergic to kool aide……….
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 4:37 pm
“Pro Israel Pro Peace”……..so this bunch wants to remove the West Bank settlements, pay reparations to palestinians for dynamited wells, destroyed orchards & groves, and allow a Palestinian right of return? hey, Im on board……
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 4:40 pm
” I would say it is a lot more like “painting” “- hate to see your art collection……..
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 4:42 pm
Seems the buzz word is running AGAINST one another.Vying for a position on a ticket for Prez of the ununited states usually each candidate gives their plan and credentials for the job and if you don’t have ether it’s a good idea to fold your tent and support the better one. Throwing the baby out with the bath water usually doesn’t cut it. Every one, step back and see who is taking the high road, Hill or Obam and realize it’s not the Hill Camp, I was ambivalent as to which of these were best and was a long supporter of Edwards and had to evaluate the remander. As time went on ,Hill was self destructing and the choice became much easier. (Now aren’t those nice and civalized comments?)
Comment by knifemaster — Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 6:12 pm
Geez, when the heck is Hillary going to “gracefully” bow out?!?! She’s already ripped the Democrats apart (perhaps terminally) by sticking around. We ALL know that the Republicans want her to be nominated. They have no chance against Obama. None. They’re scared of him. Hillary has more foes willing to vote against her in the general than Obama and even McCain. She will also galvanize the Congress even more than it is already. Nothing would get done under her tenure.
And this hogwash about Obama being too “leftist”? Give me a break. Yeah, compared to who? Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld? Surrrre. These guys are as right as can be. Fascist is what they are. And the ultra-right wing squawking heads now bowing in front of McCain? Wasn’t he the “threat to the Republican way” last year or so? What happened to that? Hypocrites, all of them. The only way a Democrat will lose this election is if they screw it up for themselves. It appears like it will happen too… Time to get real, America.
Mark my words. Nominate Hillary = President McCain
Why did Edwards quit? Whyyyyy?
Republicans for Clinton
Comment by Pseudo Pion — Thursday, April 24, 2008 @ 12:42 am
Normally I would never do this but I think it is time for a reality check. I will give you a link to what an “attack” on Obama looks like. The petty bickering that Obama and Hillary have engaged in is not even a blip on the radar screen except that the media is so determined to tell you that it is.
Here is what an attack looks like:
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=244
Comment by Virginia M — Thursday, April 24, 2008 @ 9:37 am
If you believe liar Limbaugh that he is a Hillary supporter than what can I tell you? There was a woman who called in to the show the other day who reminded us that the issue of the touch screen voting machines still lies before us.
Limbaugh is laying the ground work for another stolen election with his claims to have persuaded Republicans to change their party affiliations. When the results don’t tally with the numbers of registered voters you will have been long since convinced that Republicans switched party affiliations to vote for Hillary instead of the TRUTH that there are many more registered Democrats than there were four years ago.
Go ahead and let your Hillary hatred blind you.
Comment by Virginia M — Thursday, April 24, 2008 @ 9:41 am
And speaking of drinking the kool-aid just because the media finds a few dittoheads to brag that they changed party affiliations to please Rush doesn’t make it true that people are doing it in droves.
THere is no more clever propaganda artist than Rush. Republicans are leaving their party in droves over disgust with the Bush Administration. Many of them are centrists who support Hillary not Barrack. If you really want to “drink the kool-aid” go ahead an buy into the idea that thousands of Republicans are doing Rush’s bidding rather than being fed up with Bush.
Comment by Virginia M — Thursday, April 24, 2008 @ 10:13 am
its not irrational hatred, Virginia. Its dislike/disgust, for cause. And Sully once gain sums it up:
24 Apr 2008 03:44 pm
Four random observations to counter the gloom that many of us are now feeling.
1) Even though we are witnessing a historically bitter and nasty and divisive fight for the Democratic nomination, both Clinton and Obama are currently competitive with McCain nationally. That has got to worry the GOP.
2) One explanation for the Clintons’ suicidal behavior (apart from the fact that we have two sociopaths on our hands) is that they believe that the real struggle for the White House is now. They believe that the GOP is doomed this fall and so the prize really is worth risking the implosion of the Democratic party, and alienating an entire generation and most African-Americans for the foreseeable future.
3) I wonder if many in the Rove wing of the GOP (those who supported Romney and Giuliani earlier in this cycle and who want a kind of authoritarian, Christianist conservative politics that McCain actually resists) wouldn’t actually prefer a Clinton presidency to a McCain White House. I mean: consider the two likeliest major legislative initiatives of McCain’s first year: immigration reform on the Bush model and climate change legislation. Both will drive the Limbaugh-Hewitt base nuts. But a Clinton presidency allows the GOP to regroup around Clinton hatred (they’ll get over their temporary love-affair once Obama is destroyed and she’s back in power), and unify around an even more extremist platform.
4) It’s still very hard to see how Obama loses the nomination. In the end, the Clintons, with any luck, will both expose themselves for what they really are and thereby self-destruct. Know hope.
Comment by mutt — Thursday, April 24, 2008 @ 3:18 pm
A bunch of Dr. Strangeloves running around trying to look like their respective demographic composites. I have no idea why we complicate it more than it need be? Why do we even believe in them anymore? Why are we so easily conned into thinking there really will be “change?”
Darren
Comment by Darren — Thursday, April 24, 2008 @ 8:04 pm
There is a bottom, front page story in the local The Espresso April edition worthy of note: “More Mex-American Gang Bangers Get Army Training”.
This is a monthly, alternative newspaper that does not seem to get the kind of attention it deserves. There are usually one of two stories, not found in the mainstream, that are worth reading. But doing a kind of informal poll I found that many in non-reading San Diego were not even familiar with the publication! Amazing how so many can sit in a coffee shop and not be aware of some of the exposes they have printed.
Anyway there is a heads-up on an interesting and provocative story.
Comment by John blues — Thursday, April 24, 2008 @ 8:30 pm
Let’s just go along with the Hillary win–although I do not believe it. I believe that she, like Joe Leiberman are confident enough to know their candidacy can be stolen.
Anyway the right can muster more Hillary Haters than Obama Haters and that will give the media their role of making it seem like a close election–then it can be stolen for McCain.
Naturally McCain will take Leiberman as his vice and then it would not be too surprising if old McCain somehow gets a heart failure or something.
Comment by John blues — Thursday, April 24, 2008 @ 8:34 pm
Here’s another thing I hate is all this identity politics bullshit. Hillary Clinton shooting whiskey in a dive bar to me is about as authentic as Kerry with the dead duck or the Chimp on the Ranch. It’s all pretend and smoke and mirrors meant to appeal to us regular folk. “Hey look Ethel, these dag on politicians are just like us!” But they’re not of course. Whatever happened to supporting a political figure’s ideas? I support Obama because I like his plans, not because I expect him to come walking into the Casbah in a Ramones t-shirt, crack a tall can of PBR, and see an indie rock band with me. The dude doesn’t have to be a part of my crew, running the country with common sense will do just fine.
Comment by Justin — Thursday, April 24, 2008 @ 9:55 pm
Now, thats some common sense, Justin…..
Comment by mutt — Friday, April 25, 2008 @ 8:00 am
Lets play along with the squawking heads. Todays propaganda mills are churning out the Syria Nuke Plant story. Im scared, SAVE ME……..
Now check out this EXCELLANT article, fully sourced. What about a full court press on the Fishwrap to give this actual reporter some play?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larisa-alexandrovna/heads-up-incoming-propaga_b_98338.html
Comment by mutt — Friday, April 25, 2008 @ 8:41 am
I have lots of problems with the Clintons, but lots of admiration too. On the issues, I’m for Obama, but if Clinton wins, she should get all our votes.
Having grown up in western Pennsylvania, I have to assume many of those who voted yesterday for Hillary will vote for McCain in November. — Very depressing indeed. McCain’s voting record is in-line with Strom Thurmond’s. The only chance we have of saving our country is to rid ourselves of the right-wing monsters in Washington.
The idea that the righties are unhappy with McCain is pure fabrication. Same for their characterization of Obama as “far-left” — how absurd.
Comment by goodguy — Friday, April 25, 2008 @ 10:07 am
Why I support Barack Obama by
Larry Lessig.
Take the 20mins to watch this video. Very articulate and concise.
Comment by pseudo pion — Friday, April 25, 2008 @ 3:45 pm
For those of you who try and pay attention to the difference between truth and fiction I was struck by the shear honesty of what I watched last night on Bill Moyers Journal featuring the Dr. Rev. Wright of the Obama church fame and of how the media and the smear campaign of politics takes an intellegent man’s thoughts and speech totaly out of context just to try and smeer a presidential candidate. Believe me I am no one who spouts or believes anything said by the church or bible quotes. This man lives by the morality all men should live by and should not be mocked, scorned or belittled. If you’ve not seen this interview, make all attempts to do so
Comment by knifemaster — Saturday, April 26, 2008 @ 11:33 am
more on this more-of-the-same Syrian “nuke” hysteria….
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/04/25/5_comments_on_the_syriaisraeln/
Comment by mutt — Saturday, April 26, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
IDF choppers in service of drug cartel
Published on Sunday, April 27, 2008.
http://www.blacklistednews.com/view.asp?ID=6379
Source: YNetNews
American officials demand Israel provide explanations for how U.S.-made choppers sold to Israel ended up in service of Columbian drug cartel. Incident may cloud relations between countriesa
Comment by Jesse east county — Sunday, April 27, 2008 @ 7:22 pm
Not so fast there Stacy. In one of the first few debates, I saw Edwards, Obama and Clinton all agree that the U.S. will be hit with some sort of nuke (full on or dirty bomb) within the next 10 years. We need a president who will retailiate, not try to reason with the people who want to kill us.
Comment by Lorelei — Tuesday, April 29, 2008 @ 11:17 am
Stacy - Thanks for talking about Obama’s recent interview on Fox yesterday. I was mighty disappointed with what I thought was a pretty weak response when the Fox guy attacked him about Rev. Wright. I expected Obama to fight back in a measured way, using a “there you go again” Reagan-like approach. He should’ve had a better response, since he would have known that the Fox guy would be attacking him about it.
Wright is a pretty stand-up fellow, and righty/MSM demonizing of him should be actively fought. Wishy-washiness and repudiation are not what I expect to be seeing.
Comment by goodguy — Tuesday, April 29, 2008 @ 11:39 am
“We need a president who will retailiate, not try to reason with the people who want to kill us.”
No, we needa president who wont go around makin it easy to see the entire US as a military target. We are way overdue for a president with enough guts to deal with, in a very concrete way, and that means open lines of communications-hostile forces. if you haveto retaliate, its ALREADY TOO GODDAM LATE! it means recognizing the fact hostility that can be defused by not targeting people with legit beefs. It means realizin people GOT legit beefs.
Personally, Id like a pres who dosnt run around invoking boogums to scare the rubes.
And if the next big bang originates with a Ok. City type homegrown nut who hails from, say, Chattanooga, should we retaliate against Tennessee, or just Chattanooga?
jesis progs baffle the crap outta me……
Comment by mutt — Tuesday, April 29, 2008 @ 12:38 pm
i>I expected Obama to fight back in a measured way, using a “there you go again” Reagan-like approach.
Goodguy, you really are a good guy and that would have been a great idea. On the other hand both of our candidates have been participating for months and years in the longest toughest job interview in the world.
I really feel for Obama as he tries to fight this attack by the MSM. If he takes the high road like Kerry tried to do with the Swift Boaters he will be wrong. He can’t very well agree with the comments and he is just put in a very tough situation.
Comment by Virginia M — Tuesday, April 29, 2008 @ 2:47 pm
The Right Reverend Wright is right, so why is Obama so busy distancing himself? He should be a man and stand by Wright. After all, Obama must have heard some of that language in his sermons over the years and he still saw fit to be married by the man and have him baptize his children. The longer this election cycle goes on, the more disappointed I am in both of the democratic candidates.
Comment by Lorelei — Tuesday, April 29, 2008 @ 3:08 pm
Not the worst ad I’ve seen.
http://www.democrats.org/IraqAd
Comment by Virginia M — Tuesday, April 29, 2008 @ 3:15 pm
Mutt, you are smart, and I agree with you whole heartedly, but I should have been more specific. If it’s too late and we were nuked or gassed or whatever, i want someone who will retailiate. When we were hit on September 11, I was so pissed I wanted to join the military and go find Osama, (fortunately I didn’t or I’d probably be in Iraq). We don’t need another president with a short attention span and we don’t need a president who is willing to negotiate with people who attack us. However, prior to an attack, negotiate away.
Did you see the part where I said Edward, Clinton and Obama agreed that there’s a good chance we’ll be hit in the next 10 years? It would be nice if it could be stopped before anything like that happens, but what if it happens again, just like 9/11? The Bushies were warned and they ignored it. I don’t think Clinton will ignore that type of thing.
I’ve also discovered there are degrees of progressiveness and I’m not the most progressive progressive when it comes to the military.
Comment by Lorelei — Wednesday, April 30, 2008 @ 8:12 am
Maybe I should restate that last sentence. I’m not the most progressive when it comes to protecting our citizens.
Comment by Lorelei — Wednesday, April 30, 2008 @ 8:27 am
so why is Obama so busy distancing himself?
I agree with you but I feel some sympathy for him in making a false step. There is so much pressure at this point. It is like when Stacy pointed out on the show that he would have gained some respect for Hillary if she had been woman enough to resist the chance to snipe over the nonsense. I agree she would have looked much better if she had refrained but I can also sympathixe with both of our candidates for the pressure.
What infuriates me is listening to the MSM harp on this and harp on this. I don’t often listen to the TV news but I have been in the last day or two and I am shocked again at the way they echo each other. They are determined that Wright will be the story.
Comment by Virginia M — Wednesday, April 30, 2008 @ 9:10 am
Love your blogs, Stacy — and more of them would be great!
Onto the show, which is great — but (and please, folks, understand me here) must Tim from Normal Heights call in EVERY show?
Comment by Vriendje — Wednesday, April 30, 2008 @ 3:31 pm
But let me say that there are a lot of great posts here — maybe Tim can use his voice more often on this forum …
(Don’t get me wrong, fellow progressives: He is an intelligent person and very witty, but hearing him on EVERY show is tiresome. No disrespect Tim, honestly, but give a rest at least once a week!) ; )
Comment by Vriendje — Wednesday, April 30, 2008 @ 3:34 pm
tim from Normal Hieghts adds class to my radio day. Ive met him & dont mind hearing what he has to say at all, & iys hardly every day.
In fact, I think Tim from NH should chime in on the serious need of a Listener Party, perhaps he can pick just the right gin mill…..
lorelei, I have zero idea what you are talking about. The “retaliation” after 9/11 has been a disaster from jump- as soon as we used B52’s, we lost. Indiscriminate bombing from 5-7 miles up on “suspected” enemy positions is pin headed thuggery.
I gather you see this scenario: a nuke goes off in , say something quite deserving….DC. (except for all legions of impoverished non politicians) So- President Obama will……what? “negotiate”? Really? I dont think so.
Hillary will certainly lob bombs, missiles& unleash the Buffs, certainly. If a lot of death & destruction is what you want, she’s proven to be your girl. McC, ditto.
I think Obama will play it smarter, & have our military assets go after THOSE ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE, rather than obliterate “suspected” towns, valleys, cities, etc.
Im not into group punishment, mass death, or the like. Call me old fashioned.
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, April 30, 2008 @ 4:24 pm
Stacy the more I listen to your show the more obvious it becomes that you are a real sexist jackass. Either that or you are picking up bad habits through osmosis from the other bozos on this radio station. Your show is strictly amateur hour and seriously lacking any real feminine view points (and Jorge doesn’t count, I dont’ care how gay he is). I guess your new format is that when you run out of material ATTACK HILLARY, yeah that will make people like you right? I mean nobody likes her right? WRONG my friend. We are out here and let me tell you, we will not forget all the nasty things people like you have said.
I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!!!
Comment by Cindy — Wednesday, April 30, 2008 @ 4:36 pm
Ladies & gentlemen…..I present to you……the Republican of the Week!!!!!!!
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/04/stupid_is_as_stupid_does.php
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, April 30, 2008 @ 8:14 pm
lorelei — mutt is great, but I’d bet most had no trouble understanding what you were talking about
That said, how great is “Indiscriminate bombing from 5-7 miles up on “suspected” enemy positions is pin-headed thuggery”? Purely spot-on. mutt’s perspective (also be sure to regularly visit the IVAW web-site) is invaluable.
Comment by goodguy — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 8:15 am
I wanted to provide feedback to 1700 about how smart they would be to get more liberal talkers on. For example, they should replace that nitwit Larson who is on in the morning with someone reasonable, like they used to have on KLSD. I listen for a few minutes once in a while to Larson on my way to work, which is all it takes to make me want to vomit my guts.
But then I went to the 1700 web-site and discover — ARGHH — that Larson is the station’s program director!!
I think that says a ton about a lot of things regarding what I hear on the station.
Comment by goodguy — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 8:37 am
Hey mutt, I heard Stacy and Jorge talking about happy hour one Friday afternoon. How about we try for a happy hour instead of a listener party?
Comment by Lorelei — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 8:56 am
Happy hour makes me happy….Larsen is indeed acertifiable wackjob, but he is a good radio man & gave Stacy a lot. Im sure he grinds his teeth about it, but i wont knock his….fairness? Business sense? Im sure he gets TONS of crap from the battalions of wingnuts who lisen to him for havin devil worshippin commalnits like Stacy &Jorge…who’s on loan??
Comment by mutt — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 10:36 am
I listen for a few minutes once in a while to Larson on my way to work,
Ihave thought about this too. They say you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. What I wonder is does Larson really have strongly held dittohead beliefs or is he pandering to an audience. Maybe he could be convinced to come to the middle where almost everyone else is.
I have a crush on Moe Ansorro (SP?) just kidding but I do listen to him before switching over to coast to coast on am 600.
Comment by Virginia M — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 12:54 pm
Well, since no nonsense Cindy outed Jorge, and Tim from Normal Hieghts is the shows unofficial Cruise Director, maybe he can look into that newish “gay” bar- Rumors?? Is that it? Its in NH I believe…
I know the desperate, savage & thirsty throttle jockeys of the San Diego Ton Up M/C had a meeting there & gave it rave reviews, ownership quite happy to arrange for a pack of brit biker cafe racer loons to decend upon it. We cant be as raucous as that lot….
And, yes, I actually understood what Lor was saying I just couldnt believe she thought that way– (massive violence isnt ALWAYS the equivalent of justice. the two things seem to get conflated.) not the first time ive been so caught. - under her smiling demeanor beats the heart of a Stern Gang gunsel……
Does Jorge’s girl friend know he’s gay? well, SHE’LL need a few drinks…..win/win
Comment by mutt — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 1:08 pm
food for thought. The actual person casting those no votes was Jeanne Kirkpatrick, the only woman to have a Contra battalion named after her…..
http://members.aol.com/bblum6/aer57.htm
Comment by mutt — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 1:35 pm
OK, so maybe I’m a big talker. If we get nuked or chemicaled, I’d prefer to find the culprits, give them a fair trial and then sentence them to the general population in the worst prison we have. Talking sense always brings me back down to earth.
Happy Hour tomorrow? What’s the name of the gay bar in Normal Heights?
Comment by Lorelei — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 3:26 pm
http://abumuqawama.blogspot.com/
scroll down to Sadr City Blues, & read the comments, too, if you follow the war…..
Comment by mutt — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 5:48 pm
Stacy Taylor:
Although it seems to me that you do not value postings to your website (id est emails) after hours—for seldom do they make your “share with your listener audience” agenda—one will attempt to comment—assuming it is for a greater collective awareness.
Also, not everyone is comfortable calling to talk live, and not everyone is comfortable using real I.Ds. (given this surveillance society) or even real email addresses—but does that denigrate the quality of the message? I do not think so. What do you think?
Sam Shade
Comment by Sam Shade — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 7:52 pm
What do some women have against jackasses? I mean it is seldom a term referred to another woman is it? But apparently it means someone stubborn and stupid? But then what is so enlightening about about a gynocentricity of presuming that just because a woman runs the white house automatically means that things will be better–unless one equally assumes that women, in general, are morally, intellectually, socially, and politically superior to men?
Granted there are a lot of stupid and stubborn men–as history well proves–but the very idea that what is the most importmant issue in this election is that a female gets elected, irrespective of the many apsects of the particular woman, is gynocentricty to the highest degree.
So maybe people ought bray less and consider their own inadequate analyses?
Sam Shade
Comment by Sam Shade — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 8:02 pm
Stacy Taylor:
Why do you legitimize that the recently released poll about Obama loosing all these percentage points lead over Clinton as reality-based? Why do talk as if this is indeed fact?
You, yourself, said a while back that people have already pretty much made up their minds about who they are going to vote for—but now you counteract your own convictions by being willing to accept on face value that these latest media hits on Obama has ruined his likely hood of being elected.
Why don’t you just tell the truth—the polls are manipulated. The elections are stolen. And the powers-that-be will decide who will be president while naïve America goes through the motions of another fairy-tale soap opera of believing they actually have a say?
But apparently we as a country are so stupid and whimsical that we actually would shift that dramatically.
Furthermore Rev. Wright doesn’t have to say: “Damn America” because 4 billion people around the globe have probably already said something to the affect.
Thomas Talks
Comment by Thomas Talks — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 8:21 pm
Stacy Taylor:
In respect to former fugitive Susan LeFevre being re-arrested after 32 years because of drug deals, we should remind ourselves who are drug dealers in America.
Personally I do not have a problem with people having a right to choose to drink or smoke tobacco. Still we should not forget that one major reason why these addictive substances are legal is because moral highbrow puritans and other hypocrite fanatics can “tax” these substances. Hence it is both government – locally and federally—and common citizens of the country that are the biggest drug dealers in America—because it subsidizes their treasuries.
No it is not wise to make all drugs legal—however there is something seriously wrong with the prison state this country has become.
Bullet Blues Bulldog
Comment by Bullet Blues — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 8:36 pm
Hey Mutt I like that republican of the week. Let’s put this bigoted nutjob in a steel cage death match with Rev. Wright…
And that reminds me, Wright said something I agree wholeheartedly with the other night, even if he is otherwise batshit. Something like “I served six years in the military, does that make me unpatriotic? How many years did Cheney serve?” Ding, ding, ding! On behalf of lefty vets everywhere I say thanks Rev.
Comment by Justin — Thursday, May 1, 2008 @ 9:24 pm
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050208K.shtml
Comment by Virginia M — Friday, May 2, 2008 @ 9:31 am
I listened a bit to KPBS Editor’s Roundtable this morning on my way in. They were AGAIN endlessly dissecting the Revererend Wright non-issue. As caller after caller phoned in to point out to them that this “scandal” is entirely media created (to hear the media talk you would think that Barrack himself had said those things) Terry and the Editors went back to chewing their bone of choice.
The moderator at one point said, “well, maybe we should instead be discussing the fact that Obama is not jumping on the gas tax vacation ploy” but like that Steve Martin Cave Man character on Saturday Night Live she quickly decided “NAH!” and back they went to their obsession with Wright.
It is baffling and it is a real phenomenon. There is no way this is orchestrated but it happens all the time and us lesser mortals who are not media pundits need to be aware of.
Comment by Virginia M — Friday, May 2, 2008 @ 9:43 am
WOW Sam Shade, gynocentricty is a pretty big word for a jackass! Ha ha just kidding. No jackass is not a word normally aimed at women, but bitch is. I rarely hear anyone call a man a bitch.
So what is it exactly that you are trying to tell us?
Comment by Lorelei — Friday, May 2, 2008 @ 10:15 am
“Also, not everyone is comfortable calling to talk live, and not everyone is comfortable using real I.Ds. (given this surveillance society) or even real email addresses—but does that denigrate the quality of the message? I do not think so. What do you think?” posits shade/talks/bulldog.
a good point. ive worked under various aliases my own self over the years on the political front. but that was in person, & the anonymity (to most but the State) the net afforded requires recognition. how about considering how well things are thought out, ie, no glaring contraditions- coupled with verifyable references- sources, etc. If you want to make a statement, back it up, or be prepared to respond.
however there are things that removes peoples opinion from serious consideration. Complex conspiracy theory vendors, Viet vets who act like THE biggest outrage of the Viet War is Jane Fonda- complete dealbreakers for me. using any holy book, translations of translations of translations of now long dead language to establish you argument- nah. Dont care if you post as Warren T Wilmit, of Santee, or Moses, you get zero traction with me. And everyone has such dealbreakers.
So, I figure a message is accorded credibility by its contents, not the name scrawled across the bottom…..
. And nom de guerres are fine by me….Mutt, AKA Nick Velvet, AKA Citizen Nick AKA, AKA Asshole.
Comment by mutt — Friday, May 2, 2008 @ 10:27 am
I guess your new format is that when you run out of material ATTACK HILLARY,
Ha ha! There is so much material out there! I think Republican of the Week is a great idea. There is a wealth of information on Republican Hypocrisy and Perversion.
Truthout interviewed Donna Frye, anyone see that? What is going on with the mayor’s race. Hey Stacy, did you know there was a mayor’s race and the right wing candidate is posing himself as the environmentalist and the union backer?
There is so much going on but we have to hear Hillary attacks and Reverend Wright.
Comment by Virginia M — Friday, May 2, 2008 @ 10:48 am
Blog, Stacy! Blog!
Comment by Virginia M — Friday, May 2, 2008 @ 12:28 pm
oh, yeah: dipfish. he sure puts a lot of effort into being a nitwit…….
and Happy Hour! Huh? Huh??
Your humble correspondant might have some screen time on the KUSI 6pm news. Im the dashing one……
Comment by mutt — Friday, May 2, 2008 @ 4:49 pm
Stacy Taylor:
In response to the woman who called in Friday referring to white men as “white boys” in reference to your comments about white wing agitators referring to Hispanics as a bane to society (the woman caller sounded like a white woman—you can often get fairly accurate perception of ethnicity by voice), I as a white male respond:
For decades too many white women have taken cheap shots at white men—as if all or most white men could be grouped with some kind of stereotypical knee-jerk prejudice. Well, I happen to be one of those white males whose hands get dirty and whose back occasionally gets sore and who is not afraid of physical labor. Quite frankly I prefer working with nature, even if the work is hot, sweaty and dirty—compared with the office politics of stupid people and their petty issues—of which there are many such people (including plenty of spoiled “white girls”).
Quite frankly, I’m more than a little tire of white women who are so willing to see themselves as “progressive” in relationship to white men they have learned to hate. The fact is that it has been white “girls” that would only have time and tolerance for those status object males who drove nice cars and could afford expensive homes—or would have different standards if the man was a minority. It was white “girls” who had to have the fricken air-conditioning, dishwashers, garage door openers, TVs, and every other gadget this sophisticated, if degenerated, economy wanted to offer.
It was the white “girl” who learned to whine about how tough it was being a Caucasian woman in America (never caring a whit about the people in other cultures who had living standards materially lower). It was the white “girl” who constantly bitched about white male supremacy while their daddies paid for their college degrees, and while their daddies shared the bacon with the rest of the family, etc.
How long is it going to be before some of those snide white women can look in the mirror and see more truth about themselves as a class of people—who are not so empathetic and humane as they like to think themselves—because they too are always looking for an outsider to blame—even if that outsider happens to be the other gender?
Furthermore, if you are a white male in this society who did not climb very high up the socioeconomic ladder—guaranteed most women don’t want to have a damn thing to do with you. In their eyes you a looser and a threat. They don’t even look at you as a human being. They walk by you like you do not even exist. But apparently, although they think themselves hip to the failings of white men—they are not nearly so hip to their own snobby inferiorities and projected prejudices.
I’m sick of prejudice against men in this society. I would suggest if such people want to get snide and talk about spoiled white men they preface their phrases with something like the “class of men who are spoiled” (recognizing that there are some white men who are not as spoiled).
P.S. Two years ago when I was working on a landscaping job it was a black woman who complained the most about the illegals taking jobs and making snide remarks—and of course never has a black man every refused to work a labor job because it was beneath his class.
Also, when I worked for example, hospitality dishwashing jobs, it was the physically attractive waitresses, that didn’t need to have much upstairs, that would only do work, and interact with those, that directly effected their tips—they didn’t hang around to pitch in any extra for the sake of the team. And these companies were not hiring Hispanic women to be waitresses, secretaries, or hostesses.
Flake off self-righteous America—I’m sick of this culture. “Damn America!! and their pseudo-liberals”.
Randy Resents.
Comment by Randy Resents — Saturday, May 3, 2008 @ 9:50 am
Hey Lorelei
I thought I was relatively clear.
Let me try again:
Premise 1) People are sometimes referred as jackasses if they exhibit traits of being stubborn and or stupid.
Premise 2) The sub-group of supposed feminists who feel any woman running for president ought to be elected simply because she is a woman–irrespective of her overt and convert politics and backing is the group that exemplifies acting stubborn and stupid.
Conclusion: Hence the real jackasses are those who can not see the broader picture by braying in their bitchy sort of way.
San Shade
Comment by Sam Shade — Saturday, May 3, 2008 @ 11:17 pm
Blog, Stacy! Blog!
Comment by Virginia M — Monday, May 5, 2008 @ 9:29 am
Hey Sam: I think the term “jackass” should be a term normally used for the “he-man-woman-haters club members” like Randy Resents above. (btw, I happen to love men)
I don’t believe any of us believe Hillary should be president because she has a vagina, but I think she’s the most qualified. Anyhow, it’s no longer up to us. We have already voted in the primary, so now it’s up to us, in my case anyway, to support the democratic nominee. What you’re saying is no different that a black person saying he/she is voting for Obama because he’s black. I think most people are smarter than that.
Comment by Lorelei — Monday, May 5, 2008 @ 1:39 pm
Post 69 wrote “…I as a white male respond”,
Re: Post 69 — I, as a white male respond back atcha:
What a load of creepy garbage!! Just like the junk that right-wing radio hosts spew.
Randy Resents - Your rant is straight outta Rush Bimbo’s mouth. So pathetic - right-wing whackos are such sad-sacks, to be pitied.
This web-site should have a “fish-tank” (in honor of guess who) — A place where posts by evil-doers, creeps, and other righty whackadoodles can be moved to. That way they wouldn’t pollute the normal post areas, but would be available when things get boring.
Of course, if a righty put up a decent, non-whacko post, they wouldn’t need to be moved. Haven’t seen too many of those, though…
Comment by goodguy — Monday, May 5, 2008 @ 2:26 pm
Post 66 wrote “There is so much going on but we have to hear Hillary attacks and Reverend Wright.”
Right On, Virginia M.
As an example, I was up in OC the other day and picked up a copy of the OC Register, which is the most awful right-wing whacko rag one could imagine — It puts the Fishwrap to shame.
Anyway there was reference to an article they had from April 11, about a school where kids are protesting the Iraq War!
What an incredible bunch of kids. And they’re in Junior High! Information about them is almost non-existent, not even via Google.
Just an example of how the MSM, including KPBS, seems to be suppressing anti-Iraq War news, in favor endless anti-Democrat and anti-Liberal propaganda.
Similarly, the Fishwrap had an article about a huge dockworker protest against the war, on May 1 I think, and where do they put it? In the Business Section!! This is a major story, and not only don’t they place it on the Front Page, it doesn’t even show up on the Last Page where they normally relegate Iraq war news!
Comment by goodguy — Monday, May 5, 2008 @ 2:49 pm
somebody has is-sues……….
kinda gals I like are the kinda gals who form Roller Derby teams……we went up to LA to see the Dago Derby Dolls go up against the tres formidable LA team.
Now heres a bunch of women who really dont care WHAT you think, however, if you appreciate who they are- well, you clearly aint one of the myriad mysogynists runnin around, claimin to be proggy or redneck.
You wanna support self-actualized wimmins? You think wayward women should be supported in thier endeavors? Well, go to the next Derby Doll bout.
http://www.derbydolls.com/sd/meetthedolls/index.html
its the only sport worth the time to follow…….
Blog, Stacy, Blog………..
Comment by mutt — Monday, May 5, 2008 @ 3:47 pm
I can not make out how the heck to navigate or use your San Diego Talks web site. Twice I was going to blog there and it is totally a mess to me—get your techie to leave some fricken clues–pleasse.
nummy narrow
Comment by Nummy Narrow — Monday, May 5, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
I agree with you on Hillary. When it comes to foreign policy, there really isn’t that much of a difference between Hillary and McWarmongercain. She needs to sound tough & appease to the warmongering chickenhawk voting constituency in this country. But yes, I was disturbed also when she said a few weeks ago that she’s willing to wipe Iran off the map if the government didn’t comply with the “NuKelar” Regulatory Commission or whatever agency that deals with nuclear weapons policies.
Comment by Paul — Tuesday, May 6, 2008 @ 2:09 pm
But yes, I was disturbed also when she said a few weeks ago that she’s willing to wipe Iran off the map if the government didn’t comply with the “NuKelar” Regulatory Commission or whatever agency that deals with nuclear weapons policies.
Paul,
Let’s be fair, that’s not what she said. It wasn’t whether or not Iran would comply with UN directives to stop enriching uranium. She was talking about a nuclear attack on Israel by Iran. (If Iran were to launch a nuclear attack,) “We will attack. … We would be able to totally obliterate them.”
You can hate Hillary and compare her to McCain all you want, but please get the facts straight. There’s enough false information out there already.
Comment by Flying Junior — Tuesday, May 6, 2008 @ 7:05 pm
She does sound like a little war piggy, and I’m not really comfortable with that. I doubt she would be able to defeat JFK in a poker game. What would Kenny Rogers think? I said last summer that she was a little bit late to the anti-war crowd. I’m glad that Stacy quoted McCain pointing out that she was on record supporting the occupation of Iraq in 2005. People need to know this stuff. Honestly, some of the things I have heard her say this year are bringing me down. The same “obliterate Iran” interview hints that she may not be that serious about ending the war. This hurts. The problem is, I don’t think Obama can win in November.
If anybody wants to see it, here is the YouTube link.
Comment by Flying Junior — Tuesday, May 6, 2008 @ 7:25 pm
obama will walk away with the win in november, if the clintoids dont go on to completely smear him, which is the path theyve been on.
The thing about clintons blustering about nuking iran isnt that its in the context of a supposed attack on israel, its that she’ll invent such a scenario to make her look “tough”.
Its FAR more likely Mccain would end our involvement militarily in iraq than the clintoids: he has nothing to “prove”, Obama knows, and has known, its a fools errand.
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, May 7, 2008 @ 8:02 am
An excellant summing up of the various Shia militias & local realities. Note at the same time this is going on, the US is stopping/cutting back/late with the bribes to the Sunni “Awakening” councils…….and we listen night &day to blather about the problem being Iran , & the solution bombing it.
http://abumuqawama.blogspot.com/2008/05/not-so-special-groups.html
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, May 7, 2008 @ 9:26 am
FJ, I think she’s serious about ending the war. She may have come late to the party, but she’s there now and she doesn’t want to go after Iran, but she will if necessary.
Comment by Lorelei — Wednesday, May 7, 2008 @ 9:32 am