Powered by TypePad

« The Self-Refuting Expert Witness The Orlando Sentinel Is Touting | Main | And I Thought It Was Just The Viewers »

April 02, 2012



The only thing new, Sara, is the Sheriff of the fourth largest county( by population) is now getting treated like pond scum.

Hannity used enjoy spooning America's Top Cop at the drop of a sombrero. No mas gusta.

With his "Vetting Obama" front and center, why won't Hannity call Ole Joe?

What a slit.


So a Ron Paul supporter, he of the eponymous often racist newsletters, takes issue with long revised Mormon doctrine, from 30 years ago, seriously.


At this point nothing about Obama surprises me. He seems to still want to morph into whatever people want or expect him to be. There is no there there.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

Just read you refer to women as "slits."

No he didn't, he referred to 3 women who already call themselves "chicks" by that play on their name. And Podesta, there are several examples of the tee shirts re: Palin slur available at Google Images.

James Taranto

I went to college, but did not graduate.


Sara. Someone saying that your father molested you is not civil conversation. Tom runs a decent site here. I'm not that sensitive but such statements are awful and uncalled for and Tom should not allow it. It's not your blog, Sara.

Shakes Mespear

"Someone saying that your father molested you is not civil conversation."

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.


--Hey Danube. Tripling down on the molestation statement? Good for you. You reading this, Tom?--

Are we sure it wasn't podesta heard whining for help on the Zimmerman tape?


Fuck you Shakes. You are just a perverted and mean person. Hey Tom, you reading this?


Except Maher trafficks in that type of slur, on a weekly basis and he contributed a million
dollars to the President's PAC, Louis CK was rewarded with a White House visit last July,
Larry Flynt had an 'inkind contribution' during the last campaign, all things Sasha and Malia would probably find objectionable.


Sorry, for the error, James. I feel you are one of the brightest pundits of the lot and consider that your escape from academia kept your brains intact.I just thought it came earlier.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

Nor yours either, Podesta. And if you had been around here the 6, 7, 8 years that most of us have been, you'd know that it is rare for Tom to get involved at all with his comment section. And even more rarely that he would step in when history shows that the regulars here are more than capable of policing themselves.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

For a change of pace, there are now 2 cute chicks visiable in the Eagle Cam nest.


Captain Hate thinks he's a warrior, but he's just lonely and stupid.

Captain Hate will never be lonely while he is here. He is among friends. And he doesn't have a stupid bone in his body.

Get lost podesta. You offer nothing and we are sick of you shitting on the living room rug.


A new scream tape has emerged:


At 1:45 could be podesta. We need an expert.


Sara. Did you read the original statement? It's repulsive that a person can make a statement that I have been molested by my father and Tom just doesn't give a shit that this passes as dialogue on his blog. Whatever, it's his site and you guys are happy with that kind of talk then go for it.

Jack is Back!

Obama is only mouthing the precursor position I noted last week that after Vermilli's performance the walk back was "how dare these unelected judges" decide on what Congress has wrought. This is more of the crazy you get with Dems and Progs. If the SCOTUS is irrelevant to Congress and the Executive then why did Obama go through the trouble of nominating the Wise Latina and the Pearl Wearing Professor?

Ball game starts in 5 minutes. I am going out on a limb and pick Kansas. I have no idea why but as an AF brat I lived in Salinas for a year.


Jane. Clean that rug. Scrub it up good, girl. I know you can do it. I have faith in your abilities.

Jack is Back!

::Salina:: :Salinas is Steinbeck country::

Jack is Back!

Well you can tell there is no ACC team in the finals. Billy Packer is not doing the color:)


"Jane. Clean that rug. Scrub it up good, girl."

Tom, are you reading this?!?


How dare you!!


--Fuck you Shakes. You are just a perverted and mean person. Hey Tom, you reading this?--

Many people find the 'f' word offensive, pod. Maybe you should start scrubbing your own rug.
And must you insist on being so easily manipulated?



Elena Kagan helped craft the bill and should have recused herself. Whaddaya think she's the leak?

Me, I'm hoping Jayhawks but UK is very tough. No radio here so will have to get home.

Jack is Back!


Who do you think podesta is? And why is he calling out Tom to do something? Only one person and one reason. Changed computers and ISP but its the same syntax and rhethoric. Ben. No other.


A guy I used to know just got busted as president of Hungary. He plagiarized his doctoral thesis on Olympic Sports.LUN.

When I knew him he was president of the Hungarian Olympic Association back during the years leading up to the Salt Lake Olympic scandal. The rats are still in control of the wheels of power and move about interchangeably.


Jane thinks she did leak, matt. I think that with everyone from Toobin to Mother Jones sayinf the govt had lost its case, he was operating on a fair assumption .


I'm out of this shit hole and back to balloon juice. You all are purposely obtuse and nasty.

Jack is Back!

If you could play basketball using rugby rules you would have tonight's game.

Matt, I have to agree that there was a leak on the first vote. And I think your candidate the most likely. She's a plant and we all know it - even Derrick Bell knows it and he is 6 feet deep. Why else would the President of the United States pre-empt a decision with a derogatory attack on an equal branch of our government? I feel like I am back living in Argentina where this was common place.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

JiB: I don't think Ben is as naive as Podesta appears to be. It reminds me of an early poster years ago. I want to say Sam, but I'm not sure and I hope I didn't slime someone who doesn't deserve it.


So, from this part of his wiki, he had to have some low level apparatchik to swing that post.

Between 1983 and 1988, Schmitt was the general secretary of the Hungarian Olympic Committee and under-secretary of sports between 1981–1990

Jane (Bad says Obama sucks)


The Drudge Headline read my mind.

Jack is Back!


You're probably right. podesta doesn't seem to cut and paste like Ben. Plus he at least has an opinion on issues not parroting some prog or media outlet.

BTW, you know Romney is in and Obama is worried when they start to target Ann and her family. This won't take long, ask Palin.



Just in from a training exercise where it was demonstrated to us the power and difficulty of stopping Lithium Battery fires.

Computers containing Lithium batteries were ignited, and then methods were used to squelch the flames. Halon worked well on the flames, and then the remedy was to pour as much water as possible over the computer to try to cool it down and put it out. What I found surprising, was that pouring ice over the top of the computer, which intuitively one would think would help, actually did exactly the opposite and trapped the heat beneath it, resulting in a secondary ignition of Lithium batteries in the computer. Eye opening.

Apologies for the interruption. Haven't read a word. ObamaCare delenda est.

Off with two impatient dogs dying for their daily walk. Bye.

Jane (Bad says Obama sucks)

TM's forte is a bit of a mixed blessing isn't it? Some great new posters and some real jerks. Hopefully the jerks won't last.

Captain Hate

It seems to be standard troll protocol (STP) to crave attention from the blog owner. Not sure why but since most of them tend to be quislings to perceived authority it kind of makes sense.


When the brain slugs finally chew through the medulla oblongatta, it's a sad sight;



Perhaps jimmyk or DoT can explain how a Supreme Court decision preventing the government from dictating women's reproductive health care isn't limiting government power. Or how and why conservatives were up in arms about the Supremes knocking down the government's right to hold suspects indefinitely without trial.
As I said, identity conservatives oppose the court whenever its decisions don't conform to their narrow, shallow ideological template and support it when they do. Limiting government powers or inventing them has absolutely nothing to do with it, other than as a threadbare political marketing slogan.

Eric in Boise

And in a rather jarring display of what true diversity looks like, we see "podesta" and James Taranto posting not only on the same blog, but on the same thread.

I love this place.

Rick Ballard


I bet putting out those computer battery fires doesn't give nearly the thrill that first responders to a Volt fire must feel.

“There is a yellow First Responder cable “cut” tag wrapped around the low volt positive battery cable behind the fuse panel door, located on the left side of the rear compartment (see diagram on next page). This cable should be cut first to disable the vehicle safely before beginning any extrication. The cable should be cut on both sides of the label to ensure the cut cable ends do not inadvertently touch and re-energize the vehicle.”

General Motors also warns that “cutting these cables can result in serious injury or death.”


back to balloon juice

Actually that explains it to the T. A looney liberal site. I think Sylvia came from Balloon Juice once upon a time.

Jim Ryan

And I'd just remind conservative commentators that, for years, what we have heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law," Obama said.

When I was a prof at any of the four rank-and-file universities at which I taught, I would have given an undergraduate student a C for this. The language and concepts are mushy. To get a B the student would have had to provide an argument. The president mumbled something about conservative legal minds believing that the law was constitutional. That's thin gruel, not enough to get above a C. The idea that it's activism for a court to rule against certain other legal opinions is stupid.

To conceive of this as the quality of a Harvard Law graduate's work is very difficult, especially a graduate who has had years to prepare this statement. To imagine that this graduate was promoted to POTUS partially on the grounds of his intellect is painful. Obama just isn't very smart.

Jack is Back!


Charles Johnson belongs in an insane asylum. The 180 he has done is unlike anything I have ever seen on the net or anywhere. What a turd.

Captain Hate

When the brain slugs finally chew through the medulla oblongatta, it's a sad sight

Mother H told me never to make fun of the afflicted but I'm positive she would've made an exception for Cahrlse Shnoonj.


Well John Cole, of the aforementioned Balloon Juice, really preceded Johnson's meltdown, into the Labrea Tarpits of the nutroots

Yes, Jim she should have at least cribbed by Fried's argument, which is all bollocks, but sounds respectable.

Andy Sullivan

unlike anything I have ever seen on the net


Melinda Romanoff


Selrahc nosnhoJ has a very familiar narcissistic pattern. Can't remember whom the other is, but it'll come to me....


How pathetic. Intellectually dishonest and desperate. Podestard. It's going to really hurt when your boy Obama gets shitcanned. And he's getting shitcanned in November.
Write it down loser.


I heard snippets today. The man is a maroon. "The court would be setting a dangerous precedent in judicial activism by overturning a law that passed by wide margins." Really? This is the best they could come up with? The Court doing it's job is dangerous?

Jack is Back!

God, Obama is on at half-time at the final.

He is everywhere. Orwell would be so proud.

Captain Hate

I commented about that on the other thread, JiB. Look at it this way: This is his last go-round and he's snagging every perq available.

Jack is Back!

Switched to Greta (no Obama for me) and she had on the Lt. Gov of Wisconsin. She has 4 or 5 oppenents for her recall. She seems positive but the 800K petiton sigs has her a little worried. Wisconsin in June could be a reality of what November looks like especially if the SCOTUS comes out to rule against ObamaCare. The unions have to go all out regardless of its future fiscal health. It will be now or never.


a law that passed by wide margins

Oh, I thought he was talking about ObamaCare (219-212 in the House, 60-39 on Christmas Eve in the Senate).

Jane (Bad says Obama sucks)

Yup Eric!


Perhaps jimmyk or DoT can explain how a Supreme Court decision preventing the government from dictating women's reproductive health care isn't limiting government power.

Of course it limited government power, but in a way that had nothing to do with how the Constitution limits government power. Judicial restraint isn't about limiting government arbitrarily, it's about limiting it according to what the Constitution says.


Well to explain to him, that Roe v, Wade is based on an ephemeral 'emanations of penumbras, whereas the Hamdan cases reversed
a hundred years of precedents on 'unlawful
enemy combatants' is too deep jimmy ,


Womens health care???
What about men?


One hopes as a "newby" I'm more in the good column rather than sitting next to Podesta in the "dickhead" column.


Obama just could rehabilitate Nixon, the Imperial President. Nixon seems almost modest these days. UK is overwhelming.



Schmitt was a member of the IOC and had a very desirable position. He was a potentate in any bidding city and could walk into almost any environment within the Olympic bubble and money and women and stuff would rain down on him like the enlightened one.

I was a nudnik and had piles of swag and medium grift at my doorstep every am during a Games. Guys like Schmitt had Chesterfields full of cash and other graft on theirs. It was gravy training on a global scale.

That he then became a member of a proto-fascist government is not at all surprising as many of the Olympiascenti were the same.

My greatest moment was calling BS on a bunch of the most graft driven IOC members in 1998-1999.

Rick Ballard

I have you in the 'so far, so good' column, x. You've added to the discussion and I have no fear of losing neurotransmitters from reading your comments. That's a lot more than I can say about several other newbies, all of whom fall between white clay and sandy loam on the bell curve.


xbradtc, you are welcome here, as are all newbies who want to contribute to the discussion, as opposed to the drive-by trolls who just want to disrupt things with what they think are clever jabs. And unlike a certain white Hispanic, innocent until proven guilty.


So was the previous story, true or not;




I always remember Salina, KS as the corporate home of Blue Beacon Truck Wash Inc. One franchise of which I spent many long hours as a teen.

Oh, and I can still wield a high pressure wand like a frickin' Samurai :)

Potential KY blowout at this point.


THey really do take 1984, as a guide book;



I'm a Board Certified Moron (I've got the keys to Ace's blog), so I'm obviously not that bright.

Which means, I'm struggling to explain to a couple libs why there's no hypocrisy when conservatives (what's an "identity conservative?) feel the SCOTUS should indeed strike down PPACA in its entirety. Especially in its entirety, since only striking down the mandate would in fact create an entirely different health insurance environment than what the law as passed provides.

Jim Ryan

what's an "identity conservative?

Put it this way. People who use that term a lot are at risk of going blind or growing hair on their palms.


Usually, the Congress includes a severability provision which provides if one section of the Act is judicially overturned the rest stands. This time they didn't do that. Failure to have such a clause is not always fatal but it's so difficult in a statute of 2700 pp with interlocking provisions to decide what should remain that some Justices indicated that to pick and choose what lives and what dies really would be judicial interference with the legislative process. And Scalia went further and said it would be so tedious a job as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment itself prohibited by the constitution. In truth without the mandate, there's no way to fund this juggernaut which depends on young, healthy people subsidizing us old geezers.


Clarice, I understand that. But I'm dealing with libs. I need something that will fit on a bumper sticker.


Hey, I skipped halftime of the game, and I just realized where they're playing - did they have a moment of silence for all those victims of cannibalism in the dome from a few years ago?


xBRAD. The law does not exist without the mandate. The hamburger does not exist without the BEEF. The ROCK n ROLL band CANNOT (TRUST ME) EXIST without the GUITAR.


xbradtc, what are the libs calling hypocritical?


BTW, via Powerline, here's one part of the relevant statute on use of force:

776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

So even if Zimmermann DID provoke a confrontation with Martin, if Martin was on top of him, it would seem Zimmermann met the requirements to justify use of deadly force.

Jim Ryan

xbradtc, if those libs think "activism" means "striking down a law," then point out to them that activism does not mean that.

You might suggest that they consider activism to be ruling without basis in the constitution or precedent or even against constitution and precedent. This can involve either striking down or upholding a law. If Congress passes a law that says that blacks can be enslaved - unconstitutional on its face - it would be judicial activism for the SCOTUS to uphold this law.


bgates, that's half the challenge. They seem to think that any overturning of a law on Constitutional grounds is suddenly judicial activism. Marbury v. Madison is apparently an NBA matchup to them.

Jim Ryan

They seem to think that any overturning of a law on Constitutional grounds is suddenly judicial activism.

Check for brain damage.


Judicial Activism is simple. It's when a COURT can and does SUBSTITUTE it's MAJORITY OPINION of a law, for the LEGISLATURES WRITTEN LAW................without regard to the CONSTITUTIONALITY of the law. LIBS do it, because they are GENERALLY NOT HONEST.
Conservatives don't do it, because they are generally HONEST.
The WAY in which OBAMACARE CAME TO BE......indicates how HONEST LIBTARDS are.


Car B Que time!


x, earlier in the thread, I tried:

Judicial activism is making up laws or constitutional provisions out of whole cloth (like the penumbras and emanations to find a right to abortion) to produce a desired result. Acting to prevent the government from overstepping its powers is precisely what the courts are supposed to do.

Maybe a shorter version for your lib friends:
Judicial activism is making s**t up.

Publius from Idaho

Today's WSJ ediltorial describes "improper activism is when the Court itself strays beyond the founding document to find new rights or enhance its own authority without proper constitutional grounding".

That works for me.


I like that, Publius. And it sounds so much more erudite than "shut your piehole, that's why!"

Publius from Idaho


Your response has a better chance of being understood by our lib friends, however. :)

Danube of Thought

"The only thing new, Sara, is the Sheriff of the fourth largest county( by population) is now getting treated like pond scum."

Quick: name the Sheriffs of the three largest counties (by population).

Danube of Thought

Does anyone know what the plainly disturbed Podesta is talking about when he speaks of someone being molested as a child?

He seems to be focusing his deranged attacks on me, only because I confused him with one of his colleagues who had had a DUI and had gotten mixed up in some scandalous thing about wife-beating.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

Which means, I'm struggling to explain to a couple libs why there's no hypocrisy when conservatives (what's an "identity conservative?) feel the SCOTUS should indeed strike down PPACA in its entirety.

Grab the clip of Greta interviewing Romney. She asked him about judicial activism and conservatives and he handled it extremely well with a good explanation of the difference between judicial activism and the duty of the court to rule on constitutionality.


Danube, I saw the libtard feeding frenzy on you, and I attempted to give the TARD a diversion, so as to have another TARGET.

Take dare DoT, I've found you to be a solid and rational man.


x-in both healthcare and education the goal is to reject piecemeal alterations that could be monitored for good or bad effects. You are replacing systems with problems that evolved over time with completely new schemes. Supposedly every aspect covered.

That's why there's no severability clause. Obamacare was supposed to be all-encompassing.

If the approach is "All or nothing" and the core, essential component is based on insisting individuals must take unprecedented actions that shift the focus to citizens as subjects to be commanded in a way that leaves the Constitution in tatters, it all goes down.

Remember the mandate was a politically passable (just barely) means of getting to national healthcare. The Constitutional methods couldn't get passed.

There's another message here. The supposed lesson post-1989 is that markets won. But the bureaucrats do not really believe that. They keep wanting to use the language of free markets to mask centralized, planned, and dictated economic and social policy.

A better way to describe what I hope is the SCOTUS decision is that Congress does not get to command individual behavior in order to pretend that the commandments have anything to do with markets and free decisions. It's not just the feds. I am looking at several state statutes on education right now. When you parse through the Orwellian Edspeak to the term glossary I have created with cites, we have government officials at every level assuming dictatorial powers over what should be private decisions within an impenetrable zone of individual autonomy.

The critical aspect of Obamacare is if this is OK, almost anything that can be coached in economic terms is sanctioned. We have people in power now who have totalitarian aspirations. They may not know enough history to recognize the implications and past use of the policies and practices they are mandating but they are perfectly clear.

From healthcare to education to land use under Agenda 21 to how we feed our children, we have to start a shift back to respect for that zone of individual autonomy.

Sorry. I spend a lot of time looking at statutes or regs put in place over the last year or two where the only response after horror is that this means we are no longer free as individuals to any meaningful degree. I want to have this conversation on this side of the abyss while the vehicle remains intact and can be turned.


I need something that will fit on a bumper sticker.


In order to get it passed, Dems said the law was unworkable without the mandate.

So were they lying then, or are they lying now?

The comments to this entry are closed.