But- but – WHAT ABOUT TEH VEAL PENZ?!?!
It’s beginning, y’all. The inexorable slide towards Ronulism.
Jane has purchased a belt, and she has purchased some onions, but she just can’t decide whether to go with a red onion (you know — for color!) or to stick with the traditional yellow onion. Either way, she’s about to join forces with Ron Paul and His Onion Belt Party:
Parody. Pure unadulterated parody.
And furthermore, WHAT?!
I can’t even decipher this pscyhobabble. ”Dhimmi” (as it’s properly spelled) is, according to Wikipedia:
…is a non-Muslim subject of a state governed in accordance with sharia law. Linguistically, the word means “one whose responsibility has been taken”. This has to be understood in the context of the definition of state in Islam, which is different from the current definition of citizenship of a state. The dhimma is a theoretical contract based on a widely held Islamic doctrine granting special status to adherents of Judaism, Christianity, (“People of the Book”) and certain other non-Muslim religions. Dhimma provides rights of residence in return for taxes. Dhimmi have fewer legal and social rights than Muslims, but more rights than other non-Muslims. They are excused from specifically Muslim duties, and otherwise equal under the laws of property, contract and obligation.
So, um… huh?! What the– what?!
What happened to the veal pen? I was just starting to like “veal pen” and now I’ve got to listen to nonsense about “transpartisanship”?
Is this woman ferreals?
Maybe I’m just too damn tribal, to understand what the hell she’s talking about.
::throws hands up::
Ron Paul 2012: Because he wears an onion on his belt.1
1 h/t @eclecticbrotha
Is this woman ferreals?
===
Did you misspell feral?
HA! I L’d OL.
I can’t lie, that was my first read of it too. Goes to show what I think of the head FDLer.
As someone who has rather extensive dealings with the firebaggers at FDL-until they banned me-transpartisan is one of their preoccupations. What is interesting is that while it is not news that they all have a crush on Ron Paul, it turns out that some even admire Rand Paul.
Indeed there were a couple of hillarious posts about them forming a “transpartisanship” with Alex Jones. In fact the illusion of “transpartisanship” has been around awhile with them, back in 2008 Glenn Greenwald was already driving that bus.
Mike, do they get that that’s kinda the OPPOSITE of liberal?
Exactly! Overall “transpartisanship” has been tried before-like Huey Long-Father Coughlin, not a particularly pretty history.
For a laugh check out my own story of when I got banned this week for no stated reason she just erased my comment and any history other than a few snarky FDLers gloating-they wanted me gone for a long time. For that reason I had to play with them
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2011/08/banned-at-fdl-was-it-something-i-said.html
Okay, my deep, dark secret is that, just after getting out of college, in the early-to-mid 1990s, I was really into anarchism. Bought the magazines, read the books, thought it was all groovy.
What drove me away from it was when all the anarchy movers and shakers — every one of them normally leaning as hard left as they could — started talking about how awesome it would be if anarchists teamed up with the right-wing militias. After all, both groups wanted to get rid of government authority, right?
The total lack of awareness sent me fleeing from them for good.
I just read a comment on another board where a commenter actually said he wants President Obama to tweet the address of a certain Senator, directing people to “jump over his fence”
I kid you not.
The president. Of the United States. Tweeting the address of someone. Directing a mob. To jump over a Senator’s fence.
8-O
Political propensity is a circle and the ‘baggers complete that circle.
There’s a significant flaw here. Bernie Sanders does not “share” a principle with DeMint with regard to the audit. Their goals are entirely different. Bernie wants transparency and a Fed that works to support our growth. DeMint, on the other hand, wants to eliminate the Federal Reserve entirely. Those are not shared principles, that’s a coincidence of a shared desire for accountability. Now, maybe Kucinich shares the principle of eliminating the Federal Reserve. But I don’t recall Alan Grayson calling for a return to the Gold Standard or Commodities standard and having Congress responsible for printing our money or “certificates”.
This is a very important point. I started drifting from that aforementioned place about 2 years ago when all this bonding with the Ron Paul/Grover Norquist nonsense began bubbling up. I used to make this same point that someone like Bernie Sanders and Ron/Rand Paul really share nothing in common whatsoever.
I would then try to use their own reasoning, which is to say they can put aside differences and find points of agreement, to fully support President Barack Hussein Obama, and suggest they apply that same attitude to Stanley Ann’s son, since there’s so much more they can agree with from President Obama than from Grover Norquist for instance. As President Barack Hussein Obama often says, “There’s much more that binds us than divides us.”
When I was essentially laughed out of there for suggesting that, I knew I wasn’t dealing with honest brokers, or frankly, sane people. It doesn’t even really matter what motivates these hypocrites…whatever it is, we want them as far away from us, and any political campaign we’re involved in, as possible. They stubbornly sew discontent and confusion within any group they ever join. Please, oh please “true progressives,” join with Ron/Rand Paulistas as soon as possible. Time is running out, my friends.
That is an excellent point. They are tauting transpartisanship without having given intrapartisanship a go. I mean, if you’re going to “lower” yourself and work with people with whom you do not entirely agree, then why the hell go with the folks who are Known Assholes? I mean, what is it about this president?
Gee whiz, it’s a real head-scratcher.
I said it about Sarah Palin, and now I’m saying it about the far left. No. Mas. They’re sapping the indignation right out of me. I am a Dem through and through, but they are really testing my patience with their trifling bullshit. I never realized that a portion of the Democratic Party harbored such antipathy towards POC. Well, it’s better to know than to be ignorant.
My only disagreement with what you said is that virtually none of these sideshow geeks is or ever has been a Democrat. The actual Democrats I know — the meeting-going, door-knocking, phone-banking Democrats — are almost entirely united behind President Obama.
True dat, Allan. I would do well to keep that in mine. Many of them are ex-Republicans, too.
No question a lot of them aren’t Democrats. Almost the only thing they seem to want is to harm Obama politically. Every time a new poll comes out that could possible be interpreted negatively someone writes a post with the big news that Obama is in trouble.
Before they were excited when he trailed “generic Republican” but now that he’s come back in that poll their on to the next poll that supposedly spells doom.
And this was true in 2008 as well, from my perspective as an Obama volunteer in 2008 and someone who has done subsequent work through OFA (phone banking in the MA special senate election — try retail politicking next time, Ms. Coakley!), canvassing/phone banking in IL for the 2010 midterms, canvassing last weekend in WI for Sandy Pasch, etc. There are people who follow blogs to some extent, but the real shoe-leather Dems don’t give a shit about HuffPo or FDL except as a distraction from the real work. My fondest hope is that Obama wins big enough in 2012 to put the final coffin-nail in the suggestion that firebaggers and PUMAs like Hamquist, CatoWald, and Joan “Obamalovers, Bullies, and Black Folks, Oh My!’ Walsh can never lay claim to being “the base” again. Then they can devote themselves to building a “transpartisan” third party all they want. Except, of course,that would involve real work and not just pimping themselves as Obama-bashers on media for attention and profit, so it will just be another epic fail for them.
It’s true that you have to question their relevance. The hatched that NPA group that’s supposedly gonna primary O. They gave us the famous “Obama is a Republican” bus ads, but Anthony Noel who sort of leads the effort needed 25 to sign on to start and it took them 2 months to get that.
For all their talk it never seems to lead to action. Some have them have been talking about “Dump Obama” since 2009 and nothing. There’s no groundswell for this among real liberals.
Just correcting my grammar in this sentence, which should of course read: “My fondest hope is that Obama wins big enough in 2012 to put the final coffin-nail in the suggestion that firebaggers and PUMAs like Hamquist, CatoWald, and Joan ‘Obamalovers, Bullies, and Black Folks, Oh My!’ Walsh can EVER lay claim to being ‘the base’ again.”
The fact that political opponents have some common interests/goals does not make trans partisan a practical idea. Your opponent reamains your opponent.
Obama has 100 times the wit and wisdom of Hamsher.
Here’s another definition for you:
Transpartisanship – because those black folks don’t know what’s REALLY good for them and are too tribal to spot the manipulation of the elites.
And don’t forget:
Transpartisanship: Because that black guy won’t listen to us even though we have really good ideas like killing a bill that provides coverage for 30 million people, including people with preexisting conditions like me, and also sticking it to the rich even though we would be sticking it to the middle class simultaneously, but I don’t care because i have health insurance and I have a job so I don’t need no stinkin’ unemployment checks so neener neener.
(or something more succinct.)
So let me get this straight: I should work with a group of racists to empower the right wing, throwing the next set of Supreme Court appointments to a true believer in Reaganomics and radical right wing social theories (rather than work my butt off to keep the guy who gave us two brilliant liberal women on the court). And I should do this because some group of drooling idiots on the Internet are too stupid to advocate for their own best interests. Well gee, tough choice, but I think I’ll take a pass on “transpartisanship” or whatever current iteration of “please empower the GOP even though you are sure to suffer for it” is being peddled by Hamster and Co., Rove, Norquist, etc. I’m sticking with the really smart skinny guy who has gotten the ball rolling on some much needed progressive reforms.
I’m on your team. And I don’t mind playing rough.
Well, gee, when you put it like that!
gn, I don’t know who you are, but I sure like the way you think!
This sounds like the same kind of BS that had my younger self fooled into thinking John McCain was some kind of centrist. Luckily, I said something to that effect and someone called me out on it, so I’m a bit smarter now.