Disqus - Latest Comments for JMP42

Re: Thank God It's Them Instead of You Wins at Bards

JMP42 — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:58:17 -0000

Long time without an answer. Anyway, How the Grinch Stole Christmas

Re: Will This Ever Stop Being Funny?

JMP42 — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 17:43:11 -0000

Yeah, like if someone had shouted "Kill him!" when the VP candidate mentioned Obama in a speech during the presidential campaign, there'd be huge outrage... oh wait, no, that happened, and it was roundly ignored.

Re: Will This Ever Stop Being Funny?

JMP42 — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 17:39:08 -0000

Bob, please stop lying. EVERYTHING JOE WILSON SAID HAS BEEN PROVEN TRUE! Stop slandering this good man & patriot just because he told the truth about your Dear Leader. And it has been proven that there was no attempt to purchase uranium from Niger! Stop repeating these zombie lies, you liar.

No, an administration contemplating military action should not attempt to sell it to the American people. If there's a good reason for such action, it doesn't need selling; if the administration has to sell it, then there is no reason for that action!

Re: Question of the Week

JMP42 — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:25:26 -0000

Leif Erickson!

Re: Will This Ever Stop Being Funny?

JMP42 — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:08:51 -0000

And how, exactly, did Iraq present a threat? What, were they going to fart in our general direction? They had no capabilities to hurt us - none. Just because Clinton was wrong about that too doesn't make that true. Not to mention that calling for regime change is not the same as invadind and conquering another country to achieve it.

And BTW, it's weird how conservatives often trot out "Clinton did it!" as a catch-all rebuttal to liberals when, you know, Clinton was a conservative Democrat whose actions pissed a lot of us off.

There was also not widespread agreement that Iraq provided a threat. Outside of the US, most of the world was against the invasion. The inspectors went in and found no evidence of WMD development. Inside the US, it only seemed that way, if you only paid attention to the traditional, complicit media, since anyone who was against the war was marginalized, ridiculed and labeled unpatriotic.

And now, you suggest that we just stay in Iraq until the war is a success. First, when will that be? How do you even decide success? Plus, the Iraqi people want us out of there - how does ignoring their wishes and continuing to occupy their country make us 'liberators'? We need to learn the lessons of history. In Vietnam, people said the same thing, and because of them many more Americans and Vietnamese dies than would have if we had pulled out earlier; and hell, even when we left some idiots still argued for continuing the war - it would not be over yet if they had won the argument!

And, really, Bush never lied? They lied constantly! Do we need to list everything that the Bush administration lied about? Let's see, they continually stated that Hussein was in league with Al Queada, and specifially claimed that Hussein's agent met with Mohammed Atta - a lie. Not true. Bush said in the State of the Union that they had learned that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium from Niger; when they knew that claim was based on a forged memo. Again, a lie. The Downing Street Memo stated - in 2002 - that they were cherrypicking the intelligence to support the claim that Iraq had WMDs. Then, afterwards, Bush claimed that we wouldn't have invaded Iraq if Hussein had let the weapons inspectors in - even though, you know, he did. And that's just a few of Bush and his administration's lies on Iraq. He's also lied about just about every other issue. You dead-enders who still try to defend Bush will not look good in the court of history.

Re: Will This Ever Stop Being Funny?

JMP42 — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:52:20 -0000

What the hell are you talking about?

Re: Will This Ever Stop Being Funny?

JMP42 — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:51:48 -0000

There was not a general agreement - some of us knew that Saddam Hussein was no threat, but we were marginalized and called anti-Americans by the idiots in charge and their willing lapdogs in the press. And yeah, I was against it from the beginning, and insulted for it, as was Obama. Just because a number of Democrats in congress were spineless wimps who voted for Bush's dirty, illegal war doesn't taint the whole party; and remember, a lot of Democrats voted against it. And when did the Democratic party support the abdication of defense? That is total right-wing bullshit; attacking another country that has done nothing to you and is not even a threat is called OFFENSE.

But hey, we liberated Iraq! Hey, we even liberated hundreds of thousands of Iraqis of having to live!

Re: Out of the Office

JMP42 — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:05:18 -0000

Die Hard is close, but I'd put Batman Returns on top.
Funnies would be Santa Clause Conquers the Martians, though not intentionally so.

Re: Obama Frees Me to Be a Total Asshole: In Your Face, Liberals!

JMP42 — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 15:06:38 -0000

"that I can't quite wrap my head around how it got published anywhere outside the Free Republic"

Delurking to explain my hometown paper. The Inquirer, even more so than most traditional media outlets, has really taken the 'liberal media' accusations to heart, and their op-ed page tends to get filled with far-right wingnut screeds to balance against the alleged liberal bias of the editorials; which in actuality tend to be only slightly to left of center, and not stray from Broderite conventional wisdom.
This has gotten even worse since the paper was sold in 2006 to the newly-formed Philadelphia Media Holdings, and the far-right Brian Tierney became publisher, although he claimed that he would be politically neutral; for example, shortly after we Pennsylvania voters resoundingly kicked him out of the Senate, the Inquirer hired the embarrassment Santorum as a regular contributor.

Re: Sarah Palin's Mongoloid Children Win at Good Dog

JMP42 — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 14:44:36 -0000

Dolph Lundgren. The live-action Masters of the Universe movie was also the first big-screen appearance of Courtney Cox, and starred Frank Langella in a very poorly-designed mask as Skeletor.

Re: Sofa Kingdom Wins Again

JMP42 — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:47:37 -0000

Delicious, especially with Old Bay seasoning.

Re: Jams Win (Repped by Tommy Udoe)

JMP42 — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:44:38 -0000

Simple math says it must be Jamestown.

Re: You Make the Call

JMP42 — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 12:06:58 -0000

Abbreviations aren't a whole name. Did they put down NYC as less than six letters too?

Re: Question of the Week

JMP42 — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 14:18:08 -0000

You are completely misrepresenting intelligent design here to make it seem more reasonable. It's just stealth creationism. Go read Dover - the board members who pushed ID had been recorded saying as much several times. If intelligent design was what you say it is, it wouldn't be offered as an alternative to evolution, since it would be compatible.

And once again, here - http://www.boston.com/news/... - is direct quote of Palin from the Alaska governor's debate supporting the teaching of creationism in public schools:

"Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information....Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject -- creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides."

So yeah, she does support teaching creationism.

And then you bring up the Ayers crap again! Nobody cares. They were not particularly close, and even if they had been, how was that a problem? Ayers had become a respected professor and community activist, his involvement with the Weathermen was when Obama was a child, and Obama wouldn't have known about it. This is nothing but guilt by association, and there's not even an allegation of Obama doing anything wrong.

Re: Question of the Week

JMP42 — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 14:01:02 -0000

Uh, there is no such thing as a secular religion. You are really stretching here - a political philosophy is the same as a religion? That's bullshit.

And, as mentioned before, yes, all religious beliefs are kooky when examined rationally. But I don't care what people believe, it's what they do that matters. In this country, there are plenty of christian who try to force their beliefs on everyone - that's what I object to. Not their beliefs. Transubstantiation is silly, but I don't care what the Catholic church says about that; their push for forced childbirth, and spreading lies to discourage the use of condoms and spread AIDS further in Africa, on the other hand, I have a big problem with.

Re: Question of the Week

JMP42 — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:55:16 -0000

There's nothing stealth about it - Palin is openly a candidate of the religious right. She has pushed for teaching intelligent design in Alaska; and yeah, ID is the same as creationism. As Jon mentioned, here's the opinion in Dover:

http://en.wikisource.org/wi...

Legally, they are the same thing. And the judge was appointed by Bush Jr., so no whining about judicial activism.

Re: Question of the Week

JMP42 — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:37:28 -0000

I like how you flat-out lie while accusing me of lying. Intelligent design is creationism, just with the serial numbers filed off to try and get around the first amendment. Please, stop lying; OK?

"And by your logic"

No, did you even read my post? I was using Palin's logic. And Wright is hardly anti-American, except by the idiotic rightwing standard which equates criticism of the government with being anti-American.

"Some people have a problem with the pro-sodomite lobby ramming their agenda down everybody's throat and insisting on putting their propaganda in the schools."

What the fuck is this even supposed to mean?!?! You are making no sense whatsoever.

"You lefties constantly try to remake the culture, force people to conform to your religiously held beliefs, stifle dissent, and endlessly shove propaganda at the American people."

No, that's what rightwingers do. Dissent is good, and people should not be forced to believe anything. That's the point. But a lot of Christians scream about anti-Christian prejudice whenever people try to remove prejudice against non-Christians, and that seems to be what you are doing here.

Also, as I've said before I am an atheist. I do not have any religiously held beliefs, so stop talking about by 'religion'. I DON'T HAVE ONE!

Re: Question of the Week

JMP42 — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:57:36 -0000

"And for every seemingly crazy thing you cite about her religious beliefs, I guarantee can throw two equally zany Catholic things right back at you"

And the point would be... what? The Catholic church teaches some crazy things, and some things which are just plain immoral - but not every Catholic follows them. Palin, on the other hand, is a member of a fringe church and has given every indication that she believes in their crazy teachings, and that it would influence how she governs.

Anyway, why not judge Palin on her own standards? In attacking Obama over the Rev. Wright non-issue, she said that he must have condoned everything Wright said because he didn't get up and leave the church. Palin stayed at her church when the director of the anti-semetic Jews for Jesus preached there, just this year, and said that attacks on Israel were god's punishment for rejecting Jesus. So, by her own standards, Palin must be an anti-semite.

She also accepts creationism - which, as I've said is not just crazy but a rejection of proven fact, and a rejection of the very idea of rationality and logic. Her pastor also regularly preaches the rapture, which begs the question of if she would, as president, act to bring about these crazy interpretations of the end of the world.

The problem is not someone's beliefs, but how they would act on it - and Palin's record in Alaska shows that she would try to force her beliefs on others. She already tried to get creationism taught in the Alaska schools, and fired the Wasilla librarian for refusing to censor childrens' books that acknowledge that some people have two fathers.

Re: Question of the Week

JMP42 — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:35:33 -0000

"She gives no indication that she believes she's on some mission from God to transform the world any more than John Kerry did or Joe Biden does."

Yes she fucking does. That's what makes her so scary. And while all religion has dumb beliefs, there is a big difference when people believe in something that has been proven wrong; rejecting the truth because it conflicts with their faith. That is what Palin does - she is an admitted creationist. And someone who believes in creationism, which we know is not true, is too stupid to be president.

Re: Question of the Week

JMP42 — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:30:29 -0000

It is a tenet of the Catholic church - that most actual Catholics realize is insane and don't believe. As I pointed out before, it's incredibly disingenuous for you to claim that because people like Biden and Pelosi are Catholic they must believe in transubstantiation, when as you have pointed out both do not go along with the church's evil belief in forced childbirth.

Re: Question of the Week

JMP42 — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:12:23 -0000

While there have been a number of flashbacks showing previous Black Panthers throughout history, I don't think the very first one has ever been shown, or had his name mentioned. Logically, it would be the founder of the Wakandan royal line. T'Challa, son of T'Chaka, is the current Black Panther, with his wife Ororo Monroe (AKA Storm) as Queen of Wakanda, but there have been many other BPs before.

Re: Invincible Ignorance Wins at Good Dog

JMP42 — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:40:19 -0000

Sammy Hagar

Re: Going off the Rails is this Crazy McCain

JMP42 — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:37:43 -0000

Uh, yes I did - read my response in 'Political 'talk'.

Re: Going off the Rails is this Crazy McCain

JMP42 — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:00:45 -0000

Letting the markets run with minimum interference is not much different or better than no regulation at all. There needs to be a lot of regulation of the markets, in part to protect the investors but much more importantly than them are employees, consumers and the public at large.

And now, you are not only trying to dodge Republican responsibilities but also denying credit to the man who was indisputably the greatest president of the 20th Century - just because he was a Democrat I guess? FDR's programs may not have ended the Depression, but he certainly alleviated it, and his programs did have a big effect in lowering unemployment and making the public's lives easier.

Bob, your & the other conservatives' blame deflection game here is exactly like this headline from the Onion's Our Dumb Century for 1929, except that that was satirical and you actually are being serious:
Stock market crashes; Debacle linked to Jews, Negroes, Catholics, anarchists, foreigners, women voters
Millions thrust into desperate poverty. Wall street fat cats blameless, say
financial experts

Re: Going off the Rails is this Crazy McCain

JMP42 — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:54:40 -0000

"that there were no problems at Fannie and Freddie"

Um, once again, why is that an issue? Fannie and Freddie are a side problem, not the main issue. Stop being deliberately obtuse, OK? The main problem is loans given by commercial banks. And where Democrats are to blame, it's because they were acting like Republicans. We would probably be better off if we had had an actual liberal president instead of the center-right Clinton from 1992-2000. Deregulation is to blame, and that is a hideous philosophy supported by the Republican party and opposed by the Democrats.

Hint: what moron said, in opposition to facts, "government is not the solution, it's the problem"? It was that giant, reeking pile of shit, Ronald Reagan; someone who makes me wish I could believe in a hell. It was pure, laissez-faire capitalism that caused the Great Depression, and liberal spending and regulation that ended it. After, there emerged a consensus that government regulation was necessary for the economy - even Nixon supported normal regulation, signing the clean air and water acts for example - until that flaming douchebag Reagan came in and brought pure free markets back into vogue, despite the fact that that philosophy caused the worst economic catastrophe in American history. So now, after 30 of the disaster of Reaganomics, the chickens come home to roost, and the economic policy brought back by that immense turdstain ruin America's economy once again.