Friday, May 29, 2015


I know I've posted this before but I'm in a fuck-everything sort of mood
and nothing but the Pride of Syracuse will do.

•   Bernie Sanders wrote this in 1972:
A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused. 
A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously. 
The man and woman get dressed up on Sunday — and go to Church, or maybe to their "revolutionary" political meeting. 
Have you ever looked at Stag, Man, Hero, Tough magazines on the shelf at your local bookstore? Do you know why newspapers with the articles like "Girl 12 raped by 14 men" sell so well? To what in us are they appealing? 
Women, for their own preservation, are trying to pull themselves together. And it's necessary for all of humanity that they do so. Slavishness on one hand breeds pigness on the other hand. Pigness on one hand breeds slavishness on the other. Men and women — both are losers. Women adapt themselves to fill the needs of men, and men adapt themselves to fill the needs of women. In the beginning there were strong men who killed the animals and brought home the food — and the dependent women who cooked it. No More! Only the roles remain — waiting to be shaken off. There are no "human" oppressors. Oppressors have lost their humanity. On one hand "slavishness," on the other hand "pigness." Six of one, half dozen of the other. Who wins?
The rest here. The meaning of this admittedly jejune take on learned helplessness and gender roles will be clear enough to anyone with at least an eighth grade reading level. Wingnuts, though, are pretending it's a bombshell because, derr hurr, libtard said rape. Some of the dumber ones pretend Sanders said "All Men Dream Of Tying Up and Sexually Abusing Women, And All Women Fantasize of Being Raped By Three Men." "'Pretend Todd Akin said this': Where’s media outrage over Bernie Sanders’ pervy old essay?" headlines Twitchy. Akin, you may recall, not only professed to believe that women can use stress to stop a rapist's sperm from impregnating them, but reiterated this belief after his comments blew up his campaign, which I'd say is different from discussing the psychosexual effects of inequality.  Sanders' spokesman says the 1972 article "was intended to attack gender stereotypes of the '70s, but it looks as stupid today as it was then," and while that seems accurate as far as it goes, I'm sorry he felt the need. I yet hope for a candidate who, confronted with this sort of thing, will hand out vouchers for remedial reading classes, or at least demand that his persecutors conjugate a sentence.

•   Hey, Rod Dreher has discovered incivility in an internet comments section! And guess where:
I’m a regular reader of Douthat and Brooks, and am constantly shocked by how hateful so many NYT readers are.
Those vicious, foulmouthed Times readers! They're the nastiest slur-merchant that ever sailed the seven million IPs! Doesn't get around much, does he? (Actually he's seen it before: in his own comments section. ["I have always been puzzled by the people who read this blog, and who seem to hate everything I believe in or say, yet who keep coming back to tell me what an SOB I am."] I envy the state of wide-eyed innocence to which Dreher disingenuously pretends.)

•    At The Federalist, professional culture-victim Mollie Hemingway explains why the New Yorker cover about the GOP Presidential candidates is not funny you guys:
Anyway, how did The New Yorker pick these seven candidates? It certainly wasn’t which seven had the most popular support thus far, at least based on the Real Clear Politics average. That would have included Ben Carson and not Chris Christie. And the magazine already noted that it wasn’t who had actually announced their candidacy. That includes Carly Fiorina, the only female in the GOP race. They didn’t include people who have actually won primaries before, such as Rick Santorum, who finished in second place for the GOP nomination in 2012... 
Maybe they’re just terrified of letting liberal readers know how diversely hued the GOP field is. I don’t know... 
But even if the media wish the GOP field weren’t as diverse as it is, particularly relative to the Democratic field, the media shouldn’t do the artistic equivalent of airbrushing photos to get there.
I hope you stupid libtards realize that by not including the one black and one female candidate from the 342 prospective GOP Presidential candidates, you prove you're the real racist-war-on-womanist for misrepresenting our party's diversity. Now who's laughing -- wait, it's still you! Reverse prejudism!


  1. hellslittlestangel10:59 AM

    And Bernie was this close to being the next US President. The right wing has one wild-looking scalp to hang on its belt.

  2. coozledad11:09 AM

    Where’s media outrage over Bernie Sanders’ pervy old essay?

    Probably because they're trying to figure out a way to spin the latest incident of Le Plaisir Republicain*.

    *Childfuckers. Apparently the lot of them.

  3. whetstone11:12 AM

    Just to prove we're bipartisan, this is the URL from Vox:


    Explainer that, dipshits.

  4. DN Nation11:12 AM

    Also Bill Maher lobbed some sexist hot takes at Sarah Palin, therefore liberals are the REAL etc., etc.

  5. montag211:17 AM

    What this also means is that someone, somewhere, has been putting a lot of overtime into oppo research on a candidate with minimal name recognition and long row to hoe to get within striking distance of Clinton.

    I mean, fuck, 1972? At the height of the new feminist movement, when the merest, vaguest suggestion that the wimmens might be right about this gender stuff was usually met with a line straight out of Don Draper's mouth?

    Whew. What's next? Difficult toilet training in 1943?

  6. Ted the slacker11:19 AM

    I have seen this non-story referred to as Bernie's Freudian Slip. Obviously it was a libtard who came up with this witty framing, such a deft response to these things is way beyond wingnut capabilities.

  7. Our problem with Pug candidates is that no one pays attention to what they actually say. Today on Morning Edition, Mara Liasson was blatting on about how the current lineup of Pugs has "something for everyone"... senators, governors, former governors, talk show personalities (and who knows how to classify Huckabee any more), and of course, the Fresh New Face Of Conservatism(tm), Marco Rubio... you get the idea. Of course, Liasson missed a glaring point: the same talking points are coming out of all these disparate pie holes. Read a transcript of some candidate's talking points with no name attached, and you could only guess at who said them. Jeez, don't we wish Bernie hadn't written that cringeworthy essay, but I do think his spokesman handled it in the best way possible, with the exception of suggesting that people bone up on their reading comprehension skills. They'll need those skills in parsing the similarities in all the "something for everyone" wingnut campaign speeches.

  8. coozledad11:26 AM

    She's still on Morning Edition?
    Fuck that network.

  9. "Even the liberal NPR..."

  10. tigrismus11:31 AM

    Sure, there's something for everyone, as long as everyone likes white guys who favor cutting taxes and shrinking over-intrusive government to the size of a vaginal wand. Country AND Western!

  11. Hold on...Are you suggesting that the staff of a publication founded by Ezra Klein (He Who Will Lead Us From The Darkness Of Trivia Into A Glorious New Media Age Of True Journalistic Excellence) might be careless or even manipulative in how they tag their material?

  12. Ted the slacker11:34 AM

    Oh indeed. Bill Maher, the guy who the feminists in our liberal tent had pegged as a serial misogynist years before he went after Palin.

    That was yet another classic moment where "Issue raised by Liberals" only counted as legitimate once the wingnut du jour was the victim. Wait till these assholes cotton-on to the fact Maher is, at best, accommodating to anti-vaxxers.

  13. DN Nation11:35 AM

    I wouldn't dare tell them that many of us aren't Lena Dunham fans, either.

  14. Here's the difference between Bernie and Akin: Bernie was spouting slightly loosey-goosey pop psychology, while Akin was spouting a demonstrably false distortion of biology based on studies conducted by Nazi doctors.

  15. Hell, there are tons of liberal critics of mainstream television and film, but that hasn't stopped the refrain of "Those Hollywood-worshipping libs." Once these guys find a slam they like, they don't turn it loose.

  16. whetstone11:43 AM

    Read a transcript of some candidate's talking points with no name attached, and you could only guess at who said them.

    You doubt my abilities. If the quote sounds like it came from a doofus, it's Rubio. If it sounds like it comes from someone desperately casting about for an ideology, it's Bush. If it sounds like someone saying something very aggressively six inches from your face, it's Cruz. If you completely forgot the quote half a second after it was uttered, it's Santorum. If they weren't quoted at all, it was Fiorina.

  17. I bow before you, sensei.

  18. petesh11:49 AM

    Huh, huh, you said conjugate.

  19. Jeez, don't we wish Bernie hadn't written that cringeworthy essay, but I do think his spokesman handled it in the best way possible
    That's my favorite part, that the response from the Sanders people was basically "It was really dumb, it was also forty years ago, who cares." No one's ever tried being that straightforward in response to an attack, and it's only a shame that Sanders didn't have more of a shot because I'd love to see if this tactic might work. What with people smearing their every juvenile belief all over the internet, there's going to be a lot more of this in the future, and wouldn't it be nice to know if "honest and straightforward" was effective?

  20. Well yeah... all the more reason for wingers to give Akin a pass...

  21. If it sounds like it was produced by a text generator, it was Cain.


  23. tigrismus11:53 AM

    Akins also still believes what he said and would still base policy decisions on it.

  24. petesh11:56 AM

    Actually, I think Bernie was a half-step better than spouting pop psych, I think he was extrapolating from p*rn stereotypes to shock people into seeing what kinds of fantasy sell. Crude, yes, but clearly meant in the service of getting past the (not then usually acknowledged) dominant/subservient pattern of social relations. Might have been effective forty-some years ago; seems stupid now.

  25. Hey, wha' hoppen to the "Friday 'Round the ..." that was in my reader?

    Saving it for Mon.?

  26. petesh11:57 AM

    Alas, they do it daily. For a group that supposedly promotes the use of English, many of them are remarkably bad at it.

  27. J Neo Marvin12:00 PM

    Well meaning man writes clumsy think piece on gender relations in nineteen fucking seventy two. Stop the presses.

  28. Blooger is all effed up. Still says my last post was five days ago.

  29. Ted the slacker12:10 PM

    The overall gist of the piece is fairly cogent pro gender-equality argument... there's basically one bad word out of 500-ish, that's all the look-they-totally-do-it-too gang have to hang their hats on.

  30. "Honest and straightforward": The strategy is so crazy, it just might work.

  31. J Neo Marvin12:13 PM

    Huckabee's tone is more bullying while Santorum is more whiny.

  32. Santorum has less Elmer Gantry, more Opus Dei.

  33. J Neo Marvin12:15 PM

    Yes, with an added theme of "have you ever pondered WHY we're all so fucked up?"

  34. Mother Jones dug this up.

  35. John Wesley Hardin12:17 PM

    George W. Bush's military service from 1972 was irrelevant in 2000; Bernie Sander's opinion piece from 1972 has a direct bearing on his fitness for office in 2015. Do I have that right?

  36. JennOfArk12:19 PM

    Go check out the meltdown in progress in NR comments.

    Shorter: "But...but...but...JOSH Duggared his sisters for JESUS! Bernie wrote a few lines about common sexual fantasies over 40 years ago, first discussed by Freud and since borne out as factual by endless internet porn, which is WAY WAY worse! Burn the witch! BURN HIM!!!!"

  37. JennOfArk12:21 PM

    Floor wax AND dessert topping!

  38. John Wesley Hardin12:27 PM

    I remember Ezra from the old Pandagon days when it was just him and Jesse Taylor. I always thought that the wrong guy from that duo got famous. Jesse was a much better writer but he didn't have the ambition, I guess.

  39. Sparafucile12:27 PM

    You mean where you moronically asserted that Bernie Sanders isn't a Socialist because he doesn't support industrial nationalization?

    You mean where you were pounded with Sanders quotes showing he advocates and advocated for years the full nationalization of US banks, utilities, and healthcare?

    You mean where you got laughed at for offering logical fallacy after logical fallacy (from tu quoque to false equivalence to non sequiturs), and then getting booted for non-contributory trolling?

    That "meltdown"?

  40. JennOfArk12:28 PM

    Hey look everyone....I got a piece of toilet paper stuck on my shoe over at NR.

  41. JennOfArk12:30 PM

    Booted? Are you referring to the brave freedom-loving NR moderators removing a comment noting that the same people who defend Josh Duggar fingering his sisters are the ones outraged by Bernie's Sanders' thought crime of 43 years ago?

    LOL, grasshopper.

  42. JennOfArk12:31 PM

    Jesse wasn't....flexible enough for MSM tastes.

  43. glennisw12:32 PM

    "Where’s media outrage over Bernie Sanders’ pervy old essay?" headlines Twitchy.

    On the very day the story hits. You can't say Twitchy doesn't get out ahead of a story.

  44. Sparafucile12:34 PM

    Look more closely -- your trolling has earned you auto-delete. Every one of your comments is henceforth removed within moments after you post it. You won't see a "blocked" reply when you hit post, but if you check your Disqus profile, you'll see all your comments have been removed, as will new ones.

    If you hadn't been so troll-worthy, and merely offered an intelligent opposing viewpoint (if you could find one), even a pointed one, you'd be as welcome there as @Demosthenes .

    But no.

  45. Cato the Censor12:35 PM


  46. JennOfArk12:37 PM

    We realize that in conservative circles, opposing viewpoints - even worse, those backed by fact - constitute "trolling." FWIW, noting that Reagan was a Democrat before he was a Republic is exactly on point with your foolishness about "40 years ago Bernie was a Socialist which proves he still favors nationalizing everything." So I can understand why you would delete such upsetting comments - they get in the way of the group think and cause problems inside the bubble.

  47. ColBatGuano12:44 PM

    If you repeat "Socialist" enough does it summon Trotsky from the dead?

  48. JennOfArk12:45 PM

    If only we could summon RedScareBot from twitter....

  49. montag212:45 PM

    This "something for everyone" business is really just-barely-disguised propaganda. First, slightly less than a third of the country's voters are registered Republicans, which means the clown bus actually has something for a giant 30% of "everyone." And it's Repug voters who are going to have to decide which one of these moral misfits they want to be their standard-bearer.

    Second, a genuine analysis of that field would have to include several minutes of barely-contained derisive snickering, because, taken in total, this is biggest and broadest collection of pindicks, panhandlers, pumpkin heads, preachers and pus-dribblers ever assembled by one party, and the field will likely be even larger by the time the mental stragglers decide they, too, can be the nation's savior.

    Moreover, it's not even something for everyone in the GOP base. Joe Arpaio and David Duke haven't yet thrown their silly hats in the ring yet.

  50. Sparafucile12:46 PM

    You might like to believe that, but it's mostly untrue. Now -- when those "liberals" degenerate into namecalling, talking-points repetition, or the posting of abject falsehoods, NRO puts them on auto-delete, as such posts are both non-contributory and disruptive.

    Believe me -- I have some very hot disagreements with many regulars at NRO (over abortion, religion, police militarization & tactics, etc).

  51. Sparafucile12:50 PM

    When I was referring to the "posting of falsehoods", in the posting in quotes the comments of others, while fabricating the content of the quote, you just offered a stellar example of why your comments are now on auto-delete at NRO. We don't even need to get to your juvenile personal attack....

    (Speaking of Freud, though, is that lashing-out due to your inability to relate to others? Or to your frustration with being bested again?)

  52. Huckabee has that old-school televangelical con artist thing going on, while Santorum reminds me more of some kids from my high school who spent all day calling people sinners.

  53. Sparafucile12:51 PM

    Back to your tu quoque assertions?


  54. coozledad12:51 PM

    Believe me-- I have some very hot disagreements with many regulars at NRO.

    I believe you. But you should still get a room.

  55. montag212:53 PM

    At this very moment, I'd like to summon Billmon.

  56. Sparafucile12:54 PM

    What's past is prologue.

    Remember Mitt Romney's supposed "bullying" in high school? That predated Sanders's adult writings and activities. (both in age, and in date)

  57. JennOfArk12:55 PM

    You keep bringing up this NRO auto-delete things as if it's double secret probation or something. FWIW, I hadn't noticed because I had already grown bored with your moronic "hurr hurr hurr liberal feminist derp derp" and left. That's right - I left before you put me on auto-delete because really, wading into NRO comments, which I have only done occasionally, is like trying to teach a pig to sing. It accomplishes nothing more than to annoy the pig (that would be - you) while wasting my time and getting pigshit all over my shoes...which got tracked in here when you stalked me after putting me on auto delete. In short sir, with regard to you, your moronic cohorts, and the NRO:

  58. montag212:55 PM

    Indeed, you do. IAOKIYAR.

  59. Jay B.12:55 PM

    No it's not untrue. Not even mostly. They won't even let me post anything at all. Ever. But that's your conservatism for you. You faint over namecalling (which the good people at NR, their readers and followers NEVER EVER EVER DO), why, I've rarely even READ a conservative talking point and abject falsehoods? Why, I've never heard of the WMDs of Iraq.

    Face it. Hypocrisy is only for the self-aware. Conservatives aren't and don't even understand the concept. So you shut out those who point it out. Pretty simple.

  60. Jay B.12:56 PM

    If only his candidacy didn't flounder on such a scandal! Wait, you really don't have any idea, do you?

  61. Sparafucile12:56 PM

    I adore Bernie Sanders.

    He is the American Left, but without any filters or pretense or "messaging".

    He's what you get when nearly any modern Democrat is elected. But Sanders is honor bound, it seems, to admit it. (He surely cannot run from it.)

  62. JennOfArk12:57 PM

    Yeah, you're a regular Bill Buckley with all your dime store Latin.


  63. Jay B.12:58 PM

    I thought you were JUST whining about 'abject falsehoods' and yet here you are, mouthing witless talking points and abject falsehoods! Conservative intellectuals. Amazing people.

  64. Some of the dumber ones
    pretend Sanders said "All Men Dream Of Tying Up and Sexually Abusing
    Women, And All Women Fantasize of Being Raped By Three Men."

    And they're pissed because fucked up beliefs about gender roles is their schtick. Stick to your own lane, commie!

  65. Ted the slacker12:59 PM

    Sounds like you took a hellacious dump over there.

  66. Sparafucile12:59 PM

    What are you claiming? Is it

    a) The Sanders campaign, once thriving, is now faltering because of this "revelation"?
    b) The Romney campaign was devastated by this high-school-vintage story?
    c) Something entirely different?

  67. You can find him on twitter.

    By the way, I was banned from NRO for disagreeing, and after only a couple of comments.

  68. JennOfArk12:59 PM

    You'd think so, but no. They get their feelings hurt much more easily than your average toddler.

  69. J Neo Marvin1:00 PM

    Nationalizing the US health care system? Oooooohhhh, scary!

  70. Jay B.1:00 PM

    I'm claiming that when YOU point out some other useless trivia that was stupid -- Romney -- it's ALSO stupid to point out this useless trivia. It's not that hard to understand.

  71. montag21:01 PM

    Well, they printed it. Did someone hand it to them? I dunno.

  72. J Neo Marvin1:03 PM

    This is what happens when you forget to wipe your feet after a walk in the derpfield.

  73. Sparafucile1:03 PM

    Based on how your wrote it, your point was virtually incomprehensible.

    Otherwise, I would have noticed that I basically agree with you.

  74. coozledad1:03 PM

    But slightly more of a goyische prick.

  75. montag21:04 PM

    Hmm, I see now that there's absolutely equivalency between writing bad Freudian analysis and knocking someone down and shearing off their hair by force.

    Did you know that Sparafucile rhymes with "sorta futile."

  76. Jay B.1:06 PM

    Upthread, you said that Sanders was a normal Democrat, which he isn't and is an obvious lie -- but I say this because he DOES support National Healthcare and very few other Democrats do, including the one running against him in the primary and the ones WHO JUST PASSED THE FUCKING ACA -- and since you seem to agree that he supports such things, surely you can actually acknowledge basic reality, that the Democrats you have in your head don't actually exist in reality.

  77. Sparafucile1:06 PM

    Well, one's Catholic, and one's some kind of Evangelical Protestant (Baptist, I think).

    Other than that, nearly all their bleatings are pretty much the same -- from their social/morals preaching to their nanny-state tendencies, to their big government (basically Leftist) leanings.

  78. coozledad1:08 PM

    Don't do it! He comes back as Jonah Goldberg, and the ectoplasm smells like a rug fart.

  79. I saw your valiant but ultimately doomed attempt to talk some sense into those nimrods in the comments. You'd have better luck trying to convince 8 year old boys not to laugh at fart jokes. Even eight years olds can sometimes be reasoned with.

  80. Sparafucile1:08 PM

    I love when somebody whines about the postings of others, yet does not (and probably can not) provide any basis for the complaint. It's like yelling "LIAR!", without providing any hint of either what the falsehood is, or what the actual facts are (let alone providing an unbiased source for them).

    But by your comment, it's pretty clear you have no idea what a "talking point" is. Hint: it's not an independently-formed opinion or assessment.

  81. Jay B.1:09 PM

    Which is why I said I agreed with you (read). My point is that you brought up some breathless equivalence instead of pointing out that it was a stupid story, and that even though you disagree with him, Sanders is getting a trivial smear job. That's what an honest person would do, instead of whining that Romney was also a victim and what about that, libs?

  82. Sparafucile1:10 PM

    It's cute how much you completely missed the point -- of both the original comment, and the additional information I added with mine.

  83. Sparafucile1:13 PM

    "Breathless equivalence"?

    Geez. I'll be clear for the scatterbrained here: Raising this issue with Sanders is (although mildly entertaining) irrelevant. Worse, it demonstrates a devolution of "journalism" that (perhaps deliberately) prevents robust discussion of pressing issues of policy & character. Another example of this was the "Mitt Romney High School Hair" thing, which was even more irrelevant than this Sanders "expose".

  84. JennOfArk1:15 PM

    Yes, even more irrelevant because it only involved an actual physical assault, rather than some hippy-dippy words.

  85. Jay B.1:15 PM

    You haven't voiced an independently formed opinion yet. I did respond below to your assertion that he's in favor of a national health system (YAY!), but of course that DOESN'T at all make him 'any modern Democrat'. Do you know why? BECAUSE THE DEMOCRATS JUST PASSED THE ACA. It's NOT national health care. You honestly are regurgitating a really, really stupid talking point (socialist = average democrat) that shows no relationship to socialism, reality, the truth or anything but the made up straw Democrat other people have put in your head. I WISH Obama proposed national health care, or that Clinton did back in 1994, but they don't. And didn't.

  86. Sparafucile1:16 PM

    Work on your reading comprehension.

    I indicated that most modern Democrats are more like Sanders than they publicly admit (for their own good).

    That doesn't mean, at all, that I suggest "Sanders was a normal Democrat", as you incorrectly claim.

  87. Gromet1:17 PM

    Yes, plus Sanders was what, 31 when he wrote it? That is young enough to still be trying on shocking ways of talking and formulating dubious takes on human psychology. Akin was in his 60s and espousing as fact something science disproved a decade (I'll guess) before he was born.

    (On a related note, ever read one of those old 1970s or even 1980s romance novels? They are stuffed with rape fantasies. Sanders was not speaking out of a void, here.)

  88. Sparafucile1:18 PM

    By that standard, you are ready to absolve Todd Akin?

  89. Quoting William F. Buckley's comments on race from 40 years ago will get you banned at NRO. I know because it happened to me.

  90. J Neo Marvin1:19 PM

    There's a point other than "what about Romney, libs? Huh?"?

  91. JennOfArk1:19 PM

    Bettie Page preceded Bernie Sanders by 20 - 30 years. And as internet porn proves, no one has ever, ever, EVAR fantasized about women on their knees, bound women, or women having sex with multiple men simultaneously.

  92. If that was the standard, all the regulars would be deleted.

  93. JennOfArk1:20 PM

    We could play a game here of what WON'T get you banned at NRO. Hint: there's only one correct answer.

  94. Sparafucile1:21 PM

    Wow -- you are a dumb one.

    Between claiming I wrote all kinds of things I never wrote, you just YELL LOUDER that my thinking isn't my own, without any basis to support the assertion.

    As I wrote downthread to you, and will say here again: Work on your reading comprehension. I never claimed Sanders is "any modern Democrat".

  95. Sparafucile1:22 PM

    genius: the comment was about the press

  96. JennOfArk1:23 PM

    Absolve? Has he been prosecuted or punished? I mean, other than not getting to be a Senator where he could pass laws based on his grossly flawed understanding of human biology?

  97. Jay B.1:23 PM

    So, no matter how they legislate and what they say they believe, they are more like Sanders. Makes sense. Don't pay attention to what they say or do, make up shit about what's in their heart.

  98. JennOfArk1:24 PM



  99. Sparafucile1:25 PM

    That's a "No"?

    OK -- I'll just note your hypocrisy and move on.

  100. J Neo Marvin1:25 PM

    NRO IS the press.

  101. Jay B.1:25 PM

    Direct quote: "He's what you get when nearly any modern Democrat is elected."

    Seriously man. Either you can't write or you are so far up your own ass you don't know what words mean.

  102. coozledad1:26 PM

    no one has ever, ever, EVAR fantasized about women on their knees, bound women, or women having sex with multiple men simultaneously.

    Are you trying to tell me the Republican Party...DOES NOT EXIST?

  103. JennOfArk1:26 PM

    I don't live in his state, dipshit. I wouldn't have ever voted for that trogladyte if I did, but you again exhibit the lack of understanding of context that allows conservatives to continue being conservative.

  104. coozledad1:27 PM

    You're deaf to your own language. You're dying here.

  105. JennOfArk1:28 PM

    Thus you see the need for the auto-delete function he employs at NRO. Without it, he'd get perma-owned.

  106. Sparafucile1:28 PM

    I'm sorry you are unable to recognize the difference between campaign rhetoric, and private statements and actual political action.

    The facts align with my assertion. The overwhelming majority of Congressional Democrats would presently vote for full healthcare nationalization. Though it hasn't come up, most would probably vote for full energy-generation nationalization, too. Yet, practically none of them mention these intentions in their general-election campaigns.

  107. Sparafucile1:31 PM

    I can't complain about them, too?
    MoJo, NRO, DC, RS, all have occasions of idiotic "reporting". Some happen to be more flagrant about it than others. (UVA anybody?)

  108. Sparafucile1:33 PM

    Again, work on your reading comprehension.

    All orchids are plants. But not all plants are orchids.

  109. It's more in the line of here's some interesting trivia about Bernie's early years in politics.

    We're ignoring the real scandal here, the voice that would make Dylan wince.

  110. JennOfArk1:34 PM

    Similarly, not all conservatives are stupid people. But all stupid people are conservative.

  111. Jimcima1:34 PM

    Well, then the overwhelming majority of Congressional Republicans are child diddlers, indicated by the bills and amendments sponsored.

    Prove me wrong.

  112. Sparafucile1:35 PM

    Sorry, Homework Troll. You can examine the public record yourself.

  113. Sparafucile1:35 PM

    No need -- it's not in the public record, what you moronically assert.

  114. JennOfArk1:37 PM

    It's not up to me to wild-goose chase your bullshit claims. You can't disprove that what doesn't exist. Proof in the affirmative is on you - you're the one that made the patently dumbass and unsupportable claim.

  115. montag21:39 PM

    Well, we can be pretty sure he's not Bob Roberts, then.

  116. Jay B.1:40 PM

    Conservatives are thin-skinned ninnies? She didn't make a corresponding Obummer joke? Why aren't you banned here? Because we'd rather read what you have to say - even if it's as nonsensical as "I never said Sanders was a Democrat, he's just exactly what you'd get from a Democrat" - and respond.

  117. JennOfArk1:40 PM

    No, I really don't wonder that at all. You're demonstrating why right here and now.

  118. zencomix1:41 PM

    They'll be reading and rereading the rapey parts to themselves behind closed doors at the Republican Caucus in Iowa all the way to the Republican National convention, long after Bernie's campaign has been buried in a shallow grave next to the ghost of Vince Foster. They might even have some of the prostitutes working the convention read it to them whilst dressed in the ol' wet suit dildo configuration.

    #santorump # Huckabeever #AquaBoody

  119. montag21:42 PM

    Well, that and Underwood murdering people.

  120. Jay B.1:46 PM

    I promise I won't bring it up in 40 years. Or if, you know, he decides to vote in favor of expanded access to abortions, trusted the mother to make the right decision and said "it was stupid when I said that and I will work for the rest of my career to erase that stain".

  121. J Neo Marvin1:50 PM

    You know that the Right reads something like that and all they see is SEX SEX A LIBERAL WROTE SOMETHING ABOUT SEX HA HA SCANDAL GAFFE SHOCK HOORAY.

  122. witlesschum1:52 PM

    Actually, I think the difference is that Akin professes to support a political program (mandatory ultrasounds, banning legal abortion) that's not better than "Yay, rape!" and Bernie Sanders does.

  123. Sparafucile1:52 PM

    I see -- but you think the accusations about High-Schooler Romney in the 60s, by your own admission, are significant?

    WHen does your 40-year standard apply, and when does it not? Good luck explaining....

  124. JennOfArk1:54 PM

    Shorter Sparafail: "Pointing out that what I said is what I said means you can't do logic good."

    You continue to underscore the reason NRO needs to silence opposing voices.

  125. Sparafucile1:56 PM

    Then don't. See how easy that is?

  126. Sparafucile1:57 PM

    Poor troll -- feeling frustrated? Now I know why you're so familiar with Freud.

  127. Sparafucile1:58 PM

    All straight from the Clinton Playbook

  128. I think what Liasson did wasn't exactly missing it. She doesn't think that weird policy shit is part of her beat and doesn't understand why anybody would want to think about it, eww. The important question is who's winning?

  129. montag21:58 PM

    Definitely an hour wasted. I so often read how the conservatives have been aces at debating, ever since Buckley lent his resources to the YAF, but all I seem to see from them is, 1) "I'm rubber and you're glue, nyah," and 2) A Nelson Muntz, "ha-ha, now you have to prove a negative, gotcha."

    If it weren't for rhetorical fallacies, most of would be speechless.

  130. coozledad1:58 PM

    I'll see your Bernie Sanders and Raise you Starner Jones.

    "Her buttocks were as hard as a green apple." Heeee.

  131. Sparafucile1:59 PM

    I see -- the difference is .... Godwin.

  132. JennOfArk2:01 PM

    Then stop telling other people to try to provide proof to support your lies. You make up bullshit then claim it's up to others to disprove it. When they refuse to waste their time on your bullshit, you claim that as a "win" as if your original lie is now a proven fact because others refuse to waste their time disproving it.

    Which of course is why you employ auto-delete with such abandon at NRO. Because you also believe it's a "win" when no one can point out how full of shit you are.

  133. It's the professional assassin in Verdi's Rigoletto. Strange character to identify with, even for a troll.

  134. Sparafucile2:03 PM

    "telling other people to try to provide proof"

    Did you forget that it was you who asked for "proof"? If you don't want to search the public record for a topic so-intriguing that you demand further evidence for it, then that's YOUR problem, not mine.

  135. JennOfArk2:05 PM

    Why would I be frustrated? Who cares if you perma-ban me at NRO when you so slavishly follow me here where I can cuff you about the ears with abandon? I get to watch other people kick your ass too! Thanks, trollie! Dance, troll, dance!

  136. coozledad2:05 PM

    all their bleatings are pretty much the same -- from their social/morals preaching to their nanny-state tendencies, to their big government (basically Leftist) leanings.

    Don't drag the Bush Administration into this, or Reagan's prion riddled corpse, for that matter.

  137. JennOfArk2:06 PM

    You made the unsupportable claim, dipshit. Said it was in Dem introduced and supported bills. Great. Cite it - it's public record, should be easy.

  138. Jay B.2:07 PM

    So...Your argument is: Sanders is what you get when you vote for Democrats. But he's ALSO not like any modern Democrats, despite voting how all Democrats truly think (no matter how they vote or what they say). These are all things you've written.

    My counterpoint is simple: He is in favor of things most modern Democrats wouldn't touch, so what you say is false -- Eisenhower era tax rates included. He far outflanks most Democrats on what he would do economically to combat inequality, he would push for a national living wage, and he would push hard for national health care. IF more Democrats would be in favor of those things, you would be right -- but they aren't. At all.

    You are factually wrong and the way you are trying to weasel out of what you actually wrote, which isn't at all complicated in context or intent, by claiming it's MY deficiency to understand the knotted mess of your point is truly a hallmark of what I've found in conservative argumentation.

  139. montag22:07 PM

    Wrong, fuckwit. You make the assertion, you back it up.

    In the real world, that's called showing your work.

  140. montag22:11 PM

    Not an opera buff, so that one would've gotten past me.

    So, he's one of NRO's many Walter Mittys, eh?

  141. God I hated those novels! Horrible horrible things,often written by men, as a backlash to 70s feminism. Ug.

    Bernie's essay is a bit Sophomoric, but not stupid, especially for its time. He was trying to understand.

  142. ColBatGuano2:14 PM

    Did you just reply to your own assertion?

  143. Cato the Censor2:17 PM


  144. HKatz2:17 PM

    Yes but why focus on present-day opinions that can result in harmful policies, when you can try to define someone by what they clumsily wrote decades ago and that has no current bearing on their political platform? You need to get your priorities straight.

  145. Cato the Censor2:17 PM

    Double troll.

  146. Cato the Censor2:18 PM

    Triple troll.

  147. ColBatGuano2:18 PM

    Ohhhh, more evidence-free assertions! Goody.

  148. Cato the Censor2:18 PM

    Quadruple troll.

  149. Cato the Censor2:18 PM

    Quintuple troll.

  150. Jay B.2:19 PM

    No, I said it was a stupid story for Romney too. By my own admission. Literally, right above, I said it was stupid.

    Other people disagree -- but I think Romney's sociopathy was more important from the votes he cast or what he said he'd do than from an anecdote from long past. Sanders' votes would be, I assume, in favor of the rape victim and surely for equal pay and equal rights. Which makes his idiotic piece from 1972 truly irrelevant, when you can rightfully judge him on what he says and does now. Again, this isn't that hard.

  151. Getting government out of the boardroom and into the bedroom!

    Now THAT is freedom and liberty!

  152. Cato the Censor2:19 PM

    Troll ad infinitum.

  153. Cato the Censor2:19 PM

    Still a troll.

  154. Cato the Censor2:20 PM

    I smell troll.

  155. Cato the Censor2:20 PM

    The troll should wash his feet.

  156. Cato the Censor2:21 PM

    Troll alert.

  157. Cato the Censor2:21 PM

    Troll snark afoot.

  158. Cato the Censor2:21 PM

    Troller trash.

  159. Gromet2:22 PM

    The ones I read (I read one, and parts of others) were by women and filled whole sections of mainstream bookstores, with approximately zero mail readership. They can't be dismissed as backlash written by men.

  160. coozledad2:23 PM

    Fuck you.

  161. Democrat sez teh stupid--is disqualified from public discourse forever after quote is dug up 45 years later.

    Republican espouses insanely racist policy yesterday--is considered "serious" candidate raising issues that "need to be discussed."

  162. Jay B.2:24 PM

    No they wouldn't -- because they didn't when they had the chance. This isn't hard to suss out. And energy-generation nationalization? Again, I WISH it were true, but there is literally no chance of that. Zero. They should though.

    When they had the chance to nationalize the banks during the worst crisis since the Great Depression, they passed. As a democratic socialist, I know what the Democrats do and stand for. I don't have to make shit up about them because I've seen it happen for 40 years.

  163. So it would seem.

    "What's past is prologue." So, just as Romney could easily bully again, Bernie may write like a sophomore once more?

  164. Jay B.2:26 PM

    Clearly, the Clintons were the first political couple in history to do opposition research.

  165. Jimcima2:26 PM

    The overwhelming majority of Congressional Republicans are child diddlers, indicated by the bills and amendments sponsored. Go look it up yourself if you don't believe me.

    Now this is clearly true, clearly. But if you want "proof" and you don't want to search the public record for a topic so-intriguing that you demand further evidence for it, then that's YOUR problem, not mine.


    Do you see how objectively stupid your our own words are when applied to your side? Why do we have to play this childish game? And why are you people always such giant gaping assholes?

  166. J Neo Marvin2:27 PM

    See? Both Sides Do It!

  167. montag22:31 PM

    Whereas, as with Carter's debate briefing book, Republicans just find it easier to steal stuff.

  168. montag22:37 PM

    Or, equally, pulls something out of ass and then declares, "it's out there! Now, then, you disprove what I claimed! It's on you!"

    I think I know why conservatives instinctively hate education.

  169. It doesn't count if you wear a toupee.

  170. montag22:43 PM

    Umm, I vaguely remember conservatives saying, "oh, pooh, nothing to see here, move along" when Lynne Cheney's lesbian titillations were revealed, and much the same thing being said when ol' Scooter's book was critiqued... umm, something about bears, and sticks and caged female sex slaves, was it?

  171. DN Nation2:52 PM

    "The overwhelming majority of Congressional Democrats would presently vote for full healthcare nationalization."

    Yeah, well, so would I, and also the NRO sucks and the cruise is pathetic.

  172. DN Nation2:54 PM

    So any guesses as to who the NRO troll is?

  173. Sparafucile2:54 PM

    I love that the rest of your compatriots here deny what you so-freely admit -- that most of the American Left supports healthcare nationalization.

  174. Sparafucile2:55 PM

    Logic isn't your strong suit, is it?

  175. Sparafucile2:57 PM

    Did you see me suggest they'd start by nationalizing the banks?

    No, you didn't. But I suppose that shouldn't stop you from taking that nonexistent element and running with it...

  176. Sparafucile2:57 PM

    I win. :-D

  177. mortimer20002:59 PM

    The facts align with my assertion.
    This is not a fact: The overwhelming majority of Congressional Democrats would presently vote for full healthcare nationalization.
    This is also not a fact: Though it hasn't come up, most would probably vote for full energy-generation nationalization, too.
    This, too, not a fact: Yet, practically none of them mention these intentions in their general-election campaigns.

    In other words, your claim is about as unsupported as an assertion could possibly be. As much as if I were to say "the overwhelming majority of Congressional Republicans would presently vote for the total elimination of Social Security."
    You do realize that, don't you?

  178. JennOfArk2:59 PM

    One of their moderators.

  179. J Neo Marvin3:00 PM

    Could we be graced by the presence of Jonah himself?

  180. Sparafucile3:01 PM

    In one regard, with "He is in favor of things most modern Democrats wouldn't touch", you're close. Modifying your statement to reach reality, I'd add the words indicated in boldface:

    "He is in favor of things most modern Democrats wouldn't say in a general-election campaign they'd touch"

  181. montag23:01 PM

    No. It's the way scholarship works, something about which you obviously know fuck-all.

  182. Calls Santorum and Huckabee "big-government leftists", so he's a libertarian.

  183. Sparafucile3:01 PM

    Asked and answered, homework troll.

  184. DN Nation3:01 PM

    There's a familiar twinge to these farts, but there's not a damn chance Jonah has the energy to troll this hard.

  185. JennOfArk3:02 PM

    In much the same way that advocating for a robust social safety net is "socialism."

    Which is to say, not at all.

  186. coozledad3:02 PM

    They want to downplay Romney's bullying incident, as well as his impersonation of a police officer, Jeb Bush's bizarre marijuana fueled hazing of underclassmen, George Bush's putting cigarettes out on the asses of pledges and the damage he did to his folk's friend's homes while AWOL, Dick Nixon's ransacking of his con law professor's office looking to preview an exam, Huckabee's kid torturing dogs, The Republican party and the governor of Arkansas shielding and abetting a pedo ring, Prescott Bush selling tetraethyl lead to the U-Boat fleet, Rand Paul's association with racist militias, their entire party's ass-crawling to the Duggars, Denny Hastert fucking one of his high school wrestlers, covering for Mark Foley, getting kickbacks from the Turkish government for being their man in DC.....

  187. Sparafucile3:03 PM

    Yawn. Your lies and mischaracterizations are pathetic.

  188. JennOfArk3:03 PM

    And again, you know their private thoughts because you're psychic?

  189. Jimcima3:03 PM

    How is my comment illogical? I took your own standards and applied them to your own words.

    What could be more logical than that?

  190. Sparafucile3:03 PM

    When you show an interest in scholarship, I'm happy to assist in your education.

  191. !!!

    Never heard that Nixon story. Classic.

  192. Sparafucile3:05 PM

    That's right -- they're not facts; they're declared and demonstrated intentions. The facts are the bills, amendments, and speeches that demonstrate those intentions.

    That's a nice Straw Man attempt, though. Well, not really.

  193. coozledad3:07 PM

    Heard it from a Duke Law prof. The boy could do his own plumbing when he had a mind to.

  194. JennOfArk3:07 PM

    And your continual deflection, topic-shifting, and assertion of claims unsupported by any evidence whatsoever is transparently pathetic, which is why you need the safe cocoon of NRO comment sections to shield you.

  195. montag23:07 PM

    Ladies and gents, I believe we have just witnessed the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.

  196. Sparafucile3:10 PM

    There is no conceivable path that the second half of your statement "the bills and amendments sponsored" could lead to (or indicate) the first, "majority of Congressional Republicans are child diddlers".

    Now I know this is just an attempt at offering something analogous to a description of how the bills & amendments sponsored by Democrats are indicative of their intentions -- but it fails on every level, starting with that of basic logic.

    Now, please continue with your expected set of profanity-laced ad homina...

  197. Sparafucile3:10 PM

    Ahhh, the modern retreat of the defeated troll. Because Godwin is so overused.

  198. Sparafucile3:12 PM

    Cite one of each of your claims, using my own statements. Good luck -- none of the three is demonstrable without further mischaracterization and fabrication.

    Your mental illness provides endless entertainment. But that's cruel of me.

  199. JennOfArk3:14 PM

    Sparafail in school:

    Teacher: you wrote down "164" as the answer to the math problem, but you didn't show your work.

    Sparafail: I got that answer by using some numbers and math operations out of the universe of all numbers and math operations.

    Teacher: I'm sorry but I have to give you an F on your test, because you got the answer wrong. I'd be happy to try to help you figure out how you got the wrong answer, but you haven't showed how you arrived at it.

    Sparafail: it's not my JOB to tell you how I came up with that answer, Homework Troll!

    Teacher: I know you conservatives like to bitch and moan about our failing schools promoting kids from grade level to grade level, and you've not learned enough to go on to the 6th grade, but I'm going to pass you anyway because you're a tiresome punkass shitweasel and I can't bear the idea of having to see you again next year.

    Sparafail: I WIN! I MADE THE HONOR ROLL!


  200. Nailed it. Charles Constant Wanker Cooke. "Sparafucile" also means "rifle shooter".