We're going in the mud and it's not going to be pretty. I know nothing of this story but it has a strong whiff of something taken out of context. Not that this would be a problem with ai though.
JJ, JJ, you are being too simplistic for Pepe's tastes. Try throwing in some Derrida and Foucault to explain how Barry is buddy-buddy with those bomb-throwers. Then maybe -- maybe -- he'll understand. Otherwise, it's hopeless.
oh, right. he supports terrorists. and terrorism presumably. what else do you expect with his middle name? i am sure he has also been busy raping and murdering white women in the last few days.
See, Pepe thinks that if he throws in some of his B-movie fantasies about white women we'll go, like, gee: "Hmmm, Obama Hussein Barack has not raped or murdered white women, at least there is no evidence that we know of. That suggestion is in the same piece as to him having befriended or supported terrorists in prior or current days. Hence there is no evidence that we know of that OHB has befriended or supported terrorists"
Am I crazy to think this independent anti-Obama ad (on the William Ayers issue) is really, really effective--just shy of devastating--while Obama's fight-back response ad is only an 80% answer (ignoring the question of why Obama associated with the perpetrator of these "crimes"). ... That's the problem with the constant grassroots demands for aggressive Dem pushback. 1) The pushback is apt to be produced by partisans who think GOP "Swift Boat" attacks are sleazier than the voters think they are; and 2) partly as a consequence of (1), the pushback is apt to leave pregnant gaps; and 3) making a big deal of a GOP attack makes it a big deal. ... Is an 80% response under these circumstances better than no response? I'm not sure. ... But at least you'd think Obama wouldn't start the publicity-generating pushback until he'd defined himself in his big speech. Unless so many Ohioans had already seen the ads, and they were so damaging, that Obama had no choice. ... [via The Corner] 6:40 P.M.
Half-ass? That's generous, JJ. I'd say, 1/8th of an ass. He has rebutted nothing, since he can't renounce Ayers (or Jeremiah Wright, or Tony Rezko, or...) -- they are part and parcel of what defines him. For the price of one, you get the whole package.
Main article: Business Plot On July 23, 2007, the BBC Radio 4 series Document reported on the alleged Business Plot and the archives from the McCormack-Dickstein Committee hearings. The program mentioned Bush's directorship of the Hamburg-America Line, a company that the committee investigated for Nazi propaganda activities, and the alleged 1933 attempt, supposedly led by Gerald MacGuire, to stage a military coup against President Franklin D. Roosevelt aimed at forcing Roosevelt to resign (or, failing that, to assassinate him) and at installing a fascist dictatorship in the United States. [5]
About Hitler, n_a, you tried to sell that LaRouchite shite here a couple years ago, didn't you? Then AI discovered its source.
Now, just because LaRouche says something doesn't mean it's false. Everything he says about the British family is undoubtedly true. I remember seeing the Queen herself selling crack across the street from my high school, the scamp.
Still, it does cast doubt on other things he says when LaRoucheBag claims that global warming is a hoax.
Find a better source and we can discuss this, if it interests anyone other than you where someone's grandpa made his warbucks or whatever.
JJ, I quoted BBC and I have read about this story before LaRouche was on the scene (I was very young). You have but to check congressional records to find out that its true. Disqualify the source is so typical of you when you don't even know the source.
How about the time you criticized Carter's book but did not even know the Title. Talk about judging a book not even by its cover but by the propaganda you subscribe to.
Had you read Carter's book? I recall some strange similarities in the excerpts I read to the lovely works of the esteemed scholars Walt and Meerscheimer. That's enough to know.
On the other hand, if you are suggesting that the Democrats take Jimmy 'Hamas' Carter as their model in this and all coming election years, I can only second your suggestion!
23 comments:
Pretty good. Of course, pinkos overwhelmingly approve of Ayers & Dohrn, so what's the problem, would say Pepe.
Nah. Lunchpail types are going to look at Biden and ask what he's doing with a bombchucker.
We're going in the mud and it's not going to be pretty.
I know nothing of this story but it has a strong whiff of something taken out of context. Not that this would be a problem with ai though.
What context are you blathering about? Ayers and Dohrn were terrorists and Obama hangs out with them now. Clear enough?
JJ, JJ, you are being too simplistic for Pepe's tastes. Try throwing in some Derrida and Foucault to explain how Barry is buddy-buddy with those bomb-throwers. Then maybe -- maybe -- he'll understand. Otherwise, it's hopeless.
Help me?
oh, right. he supports terrorists. and terrorism presumably. what else do you expect with his middle name?
i am sure he has also been busy raping and murdering white women in the last few days.
See, Pepe thinks that if he throws in some of his B-movie fantasies about white women we'll go, like, gee:
"Hmmm, Obama Hussein Barack has not raped or murdered white women, at least there is no evidence that we know of. That suggestion is in the same piece as to him having befriended or supported terrorists in prior or current days. Hence there is no evidence that we know of that OHB has befriended or supported terrorists"
Go back to the Kayla front, Vichy.
The genius Kaus on Obama's Failed Fight-Back:
Am I crazy to think this independent anti-Obama ad (on the William Ayers issue) is really, really effective--just shy of devastating--while Obama's fight-back response ad is only an 80% answer (ignoring the question of why Obama associated with the perpetrator of these "crimes"). ... That's the problem with the constant grassroots demands for aggressive Dem pushback. 1) The pushback is apt to be produced by partisans who think GOP "Swift Boat" attacks are sleazier than the voters think they are; and 2) partly as a consequence of (1), the pushback is apt to leave pregnant gaps; and 3) making a big deal of a GOP attack makes it a big deal. ... Is an 80% response under these circumstances better than no response? I'm not sure. ... But at least you'd think Obama wouldn't start the publicity-generating pushback until he'd defined himself in his big speech. Unless so many Ohioans had already seen the ads, and they were so damaging, that Obama had no choice. ... [via The Corner] 6:40 P.M.
Here's Obama's half-ass rebuttal.
Half-ass? That's generous, JJ. I'd say, 1/8th of an ass. He has rebutted nothing, since he can't renounce Ayers (or Jeremiah Wright, or Tony Rezko, or...) -- they are part and parcel of what defines him. For the price of one, you get the whole package.
We southrons is generous
See, Pepe thinks that...
See, RWNs think that if they make ridiculous allegations, people are going to think there is no smoke without a fire.
when it comes to pinkos there's no smoke without fire
exactly. driving while pinko.
http://www.georgewalkerbush.net/bushfamilyfundedhitler.htm
Alleged plot to overthrow FDR
Main article: Business Plot
On July 23, 2007, the BBC Radio 4 series Document reported on the alleged Business Plot and the archives from the McCormack-Dickstein Committee hearings. The program mentioned Bush's directorship of the Hamburg-America Line, a company that the committee investigated for Nazi propaganda activities, and the alleged 1933 attempt, supposedly led by Gerald MacGuire, to stage a military coup against President Franklin D. Roosevelt aimed at forcing Roosevelt to resign (or, failing that, to assassinate him) and at installing a fascist dictatorship in the United States. [5]
Substitute Bush for Obama and watch fcp-ers flock to this story like diptera on feces.
The Deeper Kayla is into Le Pew, the more he knows his scheit.
About Hitler, n_a, you tried to sell that LaRouchite shite here a couple years ago, didn't you? Then AI discovered its source.
Now, just because LaRouche says something doesn't mean it's false. Everything he says about the British family is undoubtedly true. I remember seeing the Queen herself selling crack across the street from my high school, the scamp.
Still, it does cast doubt on other things he says when LaRoucheBag claims that global warming is a hoax.
Find a better source and we can discuss this, if it interests anyone other than you where someone's grandpa made his warbucks or whatever.
JJ, I quoted BBC and I have read about this story before LaRouche was on the scene (I was very young). You have but to check congressional records to find out that its true.
Disqualify the source is so typical of you when you don't even know the source.
How about the time you criticized Carter's book but did not even know the Title. Talk about judging a book not even by its cover but by the propaganda you subscribe to.
Had you read Carter's book? I recall some strange similarities in the excerpts I read to the lovely works of the esteemed scholars Walt and Meerscheimer. That's enough to know.
On the other hand, if you are suggesting that the Democrats take Jimmy 'Hamas' Carter as their model in this and all coming election years, I can only second your suggestion!
Post a Comment