GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Powered by Genesis

Yes, Obama did promise to cut the deficit in half in his first term

August 8, 2012 by B. Daniel Blatt

Four days ago, Glenn Reynolds reminded us of another Obama statement hitting its expiration date.  Today, I googled and found this video:

A the one-minute mark in the video, President Obama, having cited the exploding size of federal debt said, “That’s why today I’m pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term.”

This morning, Jennifer Rubin alerted us to a record that that Mr. Obama has succeeded in “smashing“:

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) on Tuesday estimated that the federal budget deficit stands at $975 billion through July. This guarantees that the deficit for fiscal 2012, which ends Sept. 30, will be above $1 trillion. The deficit under each year of the Obama administration will have exceeded $1 trillion, after coming to $459 billion in 2008.

Do wonder if the legacy media will contrast Mr. Obama’s rhetoric with his record.

Filed Under: Big Government Follies, Obama Incompetence

Comments

  1. ILoveCapitalism says

    August 8, 2012 at 8:09 pm - August 8, 2012

    Worth another reminder here to our lefty friends that Obama DOES own 2009’s budget and deficit, not Bush…. because, in a break with tradition, the Dems in Congress deliberately withheld it from Bush’s signature.

    They wanted to hold it open so the Lightworker could add a “stimulus” to its spending levels in early 2009. Which He proceeded to do. He owns it. His signature is on it… not Bush’s.

  2. rusty says

    August 8, 2012 at 8:43 pm - August 8, 2012

    Some minor typos here and there BDB

  3. Kurt says

    August 8, 2012 at 9:21 pm - August 8, 2012

    To reiterate ILC’s comment, the 2009 budget was finally passed and signed in March 2009. That’s the last budget to make it out of Harry Reid’s Democrat-controlled senate. There were a few continuing resolutions signed by Bush before he left office, but not the budget as a whole. Furthermore, one piece of budget expansion that could be blamed on Bush was TARP, which Obama voted for in October 2008; most of the TARP funds loaned to banks were subsequently repaid, but the Obama administration used those funds for other things. Most of the TARP funds that weren’t repaid were those that went to the auto company bailouts.

  4. PeeJ says

    August 8, 2012 at 9:33 pm - August 8, 2012

    Do owner if the legacy media will contrast Mr. Obama’s rhetoric with his record.

    Um, what?

  5. Ted B. (Charging Rhino) says

    August 8, 2012 at 9:59 pm - August 8, 2012

    “But, but, but, …it’s Bush’s fault.”

  6. mixitup says

    August 8, 2012 at 10:37 pm - August 8, 2012

    PeeJ – I think it should be “wonder” – then it makes sense.

    Don’t hold your breath on that one – you will turn blue and die before MSM will question Obama on anything.

  7. Just Me says

    August 9, 2012 at 9:15 am - August 9, 2012

    At some point Obama has got to accept responsibility for the decisions he has made and the things he has signed. 4 years later I have a hard time believing that the current woes are all Bush’s fault and Barry has not hand in them.

  8. heliotrope says

    August 9, 2012 at 11:37 am - August 9, 2012

    “That’s why today I’m pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term.”

    That was then, this is now:

    “Federal spending since I took office has risen at the slowest pace of any president in almost 60 years,”

    This figures don’t lie, but liars can figure exercise has been invented and crafted to bog down the argument in SIN (shifting the topic, ignoring the facts and name calling; H.T./ Herman Cain) and send Obama off on a filibuster rant and bluster about what he didn’t say, didn’t mean and now wants to make clear.

    The deficit charts make things abundantly clear. They should be shown as often as possible as they obscure what the little man behind the curtain is babbling in response.

  9. sonicfrog says

    August 9, 2012 at 1:30 pm - August 9, 2012

    Off Topic.

    NDT Bait!!!! 🙂

  10. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 9, 2012 at 2:08 pm - August 9, 2012

    You expect me to act surprised, Sonic?

    If the LGBT community will endorse and support accusing Mitt Romney of murder for political purposes, this is small potatoes.

    What I think more telling is that he actually thought the gay and lesbian community would support him doing this — and he was right.

  11. sonicfrog says

    August 9, 2012 at 2:45 pm - August 9, 2012

    What, because they knew he was faking it, and decided to support him anyway?

    And no, I didn’t think you would be surprised. I thought you’d use that to jump to some silly conclusion, and I wasn’t disappointed.

    Meanwhile, the dreaded “Gay Community” is also denouncing Bakens hoax:

    This situation is far from funny or mischievous. The ramification could have affected more than Joseph Baken’s life but the lives of others the police could have arrested from a false description given by Baken. What on Earth would possess him to do such a thing? Does he not realized that his actions do not just shame himself but brings dishonor and hardship to the rest of the gay community.

    Denounced by Queerty and the Huff-Poo too.

    But, in your eyes, I’m sure that is not nearly good enough.

  12. The_Livewire says

    August 9, 2012 at 3:08 pm - August 9, 2012

    “Let me be clear. I would have cut the deficit too! If it hadn’t been for those Meddling Tea Partiers and their dog!” – Barrack Obama.

  13. The_Livewire says

    August 9, 2012 at 3:15 pm - August 9, 2012

    @sonic,

    My concern about it was the automatic believing of the guy. Will “Wipe Out Homophobia” apologize to the people of the Missoula Club for assuming that someone there would attack this guy?

    Will the “Downtown Missoula Pub Craw” now ‘raise awareness’ of fake hate crimes and framing innocent people?

  14. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 9, 2012 at 3:43 pm - August 9, 2012

    What, because they knew he was faking it, and decided to support him anyway?

    Comment by sonicfrog — August 9, 2012 @ 2:45 pm – August 9, 2012

    Yup.

    Because, by the standards they want applied to conservative organizations, they are culpable for calling it a hate crime before all the facts were known and publicizing it.

    But, in your eyes, I’m sure that is not nearly good enough.

    Comment by sonicfrog — August 9, 2012 @ 2:45 pm – August 9, 2012

    Nope.

    Because every single gay and lesbian organization, leader, political figure, and person has not condemned it.

    As they demand of Republicans, conservatives, and Christians.

    Their rules, Sonic, and their standards.

    And before you start complaining that we should be better than that, Sonic, simply state that gays and lesbians are inferior and cannot possibly be expected to live up to the same standards that they demand of heterosexuals.

    I will tolerate gays and lesbians being held to inferior standards of behavior if you are willing to admit that gays and lesbians are inferior.

    But as long as you scream “equality”, then you can be held to equal standards — including the ones that you demand.

  15. sonicfrog says

    August 9, 2012 at 3:46 pm - August 9, 2012

    My concern about it was the automatic believing of the guy.

    That is a bit of a double standard. If a straight guy walks in to the police station with obvious wounds to his / her face or body and says “I just got mugged”, I don’t think there would be any reason not to automatically believe that. Most everyone seems to have done the right thing here.

    WOH has posted the update to the story. Wait…

    Will “Wipe Out Homophobia” apologize to the people of the Missoula Club for assuming that someone there would attack this guy?

    Wow. Why would anyone think it couldn’t happen there? I mean, this is a little like when a murder happens in a rich neighborhood, or a terrorist turns out to be a doctor, and everyone acts all shocked — SHOCKED — because, well, that shouldn’t ever happen there, or educated people should never become terrorists…. It happens. !

  16. sonicfrog says

    August 9, 2012 at 5:56 pm - August 9, 2012

    Wait… So you really do think those knew he was faking it????

    Wow. You never cease to amaze.

    BTW…. How does that hook feel in your mouth?

  17. heliotrope says

    August 9, 2012 at 6:22 pm - August 9, 2012

    Sonic,

    1. Nice work of hi-jacking the thread.

    2. “If a straight guy (guy denotes male) walks in to the police station with obvious wounds to his / her face or body and says “I just got mugged” ……

    The straight guy most likely is not playing the victim card by crying “heterophobia”. The number of cases of gays jumping heteros and smacking them around for being straight is not very common, so far as I know.

    3. If the cops “profile” the gay and peg him as gay and the gay somehow implies that he is a victim of homophobia, the cops have two issues on their hands: a) assault and battery, and, b) ye olde hate crime and ACLU heavy breathing.

  18. DaveP. says

    August 9, 2012 at 7:20 pm - August 9, 2012

    Sonic, it wouldn’t be the first time a grievance organization either accepted without questioning a smelly story tha fitted their agenda, or continued to support a story that served their agenda even after the originator was proven to be a liar. Faked “homophobic” and faked “racist” hate crimes (perpetrated by the alleged victim, or completely nonexistant) have happened so frequently before that there is no longer any excuse for jumping blindly onto anyone’s bandwagon.
    the test is “Due DIlligence”: Did anyone do any checking, or wait for the results of any investigation… or were the full-throated blood libel and pleas for donations and political action already well under way when the truth came out?

  19. ILoveCapitalism says

    August 9, 2012 at 7:34 pm - August 9, 2012

    1. Nice work of hi-jacking the thread.

    LOL 🙂 Yes… then again, I have seen worse.

  20. davinci says

    August 9, 2012 at 7:37 pm - August 9, 2012

    Obama didn’t say that in his news conference. The person there is a whitey in black face saying all those racist mutterings. Obama is perfect and wonderful. Keep repeating that mantra.

  21. sonicfrog says

    August 9, 2012 at 8:54 pm - August 9, 2012

    Sonic, it wouldn’t be the first time a grievance organization either accepted without questioning a smelly story tha fitted their agenda

    I haven’t been following this case. Just stumbled upon it today in fact. Was this case “smelly” from the beginning?

    The straight guy most likely is not playing the victim card by crying “heterophobia”.

    If he got beat up by a bunch of fags he certainly would. 🙂

    Faked “homophobic” and faked “racist” hate crimes (perpetrated by the alleged victim, or completely nonexistant) have happened so frequently….

    Not saying it hasn’t happened, but frequently????

    Did anyone do any checking, or wait for the results of any investigation… or were the full-throated blood libel and pleas for donations and political action already well under way when the truth came out?

    Nothing unique to liberal causes here. There are Conservative and Libertarian organizations that will jump in to the fray of their pet causes at the slightest appearance of blood in the water. It’s what they do.

    Anyone of the regular commenters who have not hijacked a thread from time to time please now raise your hand…..

    Thought so. At least I had the courtesy of writing “Of Topic” when i created my diversion.

  22. rusty says

    August 9, 2012 at 8:57 pm - August 9, 2012

    Sonic 🙂

  23. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 9, 2012 at 9:50 pm - August 9, 2012

    Interesting, Sonic.

    Nothing unique to liberal causes here. There are Conservative and Libertarian organizations that will jump in to the fray of their pet causes at the slightest appearance of blood in the water. It’s what they do.

    And what was it I said?

    Because, by the standards they want applied to conservative organizations, they are culpable for calling it a hate crime before all the facts were known and publicizing it.

    Yet, you were quite upset that I would deign to hold liberal organizations to exactly the same standards you are demanding of conservative and libertarian ones.

    And before you start complaining that conservatives and libertarians should be better than that, Sonic, simply state that liberals are inferior and cannot possibly be expected to live up to the same standards that they demand of conservatives and libertarians.

    I will tolerate liberals being held to inferior standards of behavior if you are willing to admit that liberals are inferior.

    But as long as you scream “equality”, then you can be held to equal standards — including the ones that you demand of others.

  24. jman1961 says

    August 9, 2012 at 10:42 pm - August 9, 2012

    There are Conservative and Libertarian organizations that will jump in to the fray of their pet causes at the slightest appearance of blood in the water.

    I can’t think of any off the top of my head……can anyone else recall any?
    Cite three (3) specific cases to a) back up your assertion and b) refresh our memories.

    Hint: this one’s a toughie. Virtually all fake ‘hate crime’ accusations come from the LEFT (i.e. – nooses on trees and dormitory doors, ‘fag’ and ‘nigger’ scrawled on one’s property, etc.).
    Besides, the comment you made that I highlighted has nothing to do with false allegations and imagined crimes, but actual incidents, as ‘blood in the water’ is, at least, some evidence.
    This post deals with incidents where the ONLY thing evident are the allegations made by the accuser.

  25. Cinesnatch says

    August 9, 2012 at 11:19 pm - August 9, 2012

    I read about it when Towleroad first posted on the story earlier this week. I raised an eyebrow, but held my tongue. It wasn’t as outlandish as the college student who set his head on fire (?) last year and claimed homophobia, which set off my sh!t detector immediately. But, still, it played out how I had a dull inkling towards. 1) The guy claimed that he asked about the nearest gay bar and was promptly taken outside and beaten up. Just didn’t sound very plausible. He had to lack any access to the internet, which is possible, but the odds weren’t in his favor. 2) The make-up, though respectable enough to not solidify doubts, just seemed a tad off.

    I only hesitated to comment out of respect to the benefit of the doubt. Guess you can’t always win. It sounds like he was banking on the stereotype of small-town bigotry playing in his favor. Though it exists, it’s no in the preponderance that would back up this kid’s assumptions.

    I wish sites like Towleroad would be more objective. Statements like “A man identified as “Joseph” was targeted in an anti-gay beating” asserts fact. Nothing was proven and it turns out the statement is false. He was decidedly not targeted in an anti-gay beating. In fact, it’s likely that he has mental health issues and no qualms about playing the victim card. not sure how he got to that point in life, but I hope he learns from this lesson and grows up. People like him, and his enablers, do the gay community a huge disservice. But, every group has its share of rotten eggs and he seems to be a product of the times. Hopefully, this kind of behavior is or has crested.

    As its consistent with TR’s content, stories like this should be covered in the future, but a more discerning eye would be appreciated.

    I’m preaching to the choir here.

    On a side-note, might one suggest a career as a make-up artist to the 22-year old? He shows some (marginal) talent.

  26. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 12:20 am - August 10, 2012

    Yet, you were quite upset that I would deign to hold liberal organizations to exactly the same standards you are demanding of conservative and libertarian ones.

    Do you have conversations with yourself, then confuse them with things other people say? Because what you wrote just then bares no resemblance to what either of us said. You intimated they knew from the beginning that these groups knew this case was fake BEFORE it was revealed it was a fake.

    What, because they knew he was faking it, and decided to support him anyway?

    Comment by sonicfrog — August 9, 2012 @ 2:45 pm – August 9, 2012

    Yup.

    And that’s your idea of “quite upset”?

    That was amusement at your predictability.

    And one more thing. I do hold those groups, be it Conservative, Libertarian, and Liberal, to the same standards already. Judging by the performance of many of them over the years, my expectations of them are pretty low to begin with. So you fail here too.

  27. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 10, 2012 at 1:30 am - August 10, 2012

    You intimated they knew from the beginning that these groups knew this case was fake BEFORE it was revealed it was a fake.

    “Intimated”?

    Sure, just like linking Romney to a death that occurred seven years later, you can “intimate” a lot of things.

    But here’s the reality:

    Yup.

    Because, by the standards they want applied to conservative organizations, they are culpable for calling it a hate crime before all the facts were known and publicizing it.

    The problem here is clearly that I criticized a liberal group — and worse, did so by applying their own standards of behavior to them.

  28. Cinesnatch says

    August 10, 2012 at 1:41 am - August 10, 2012

    Interesting or not interestingly enough, Joe My God did not report on the Missoula hate crime fabrication. And, Queerty, of all sites, only reported on fabrication, not the initial reporting. Very surprising. I always have Towleroad pegged as the least reactionary of the those three blogs. Guess not this time.

  29. Sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 2:27 am - August 10, 2012

    Intimated.

    The problem here is clearly that I criticized a liberal group….

    Um… O…. K…. If that’s what you think the problem is, I guess I can’t argue with you, because, unlike you, I don’t care much about a liberal group or groups one way or another. They’re going to do what they do, just as Conservative and Libertarian groups do with their pet causes.

  30. The_Livewire says

    August 10, 2012 at 9:02 am - August 10, 2012

    @Vince,

    My concern for this poozer and his actions is a) It does play into stereotypes (small town = ignorant, bigotted rednecks) and b) by automatically supporting it happened it lessens any real ‘hate crimes’ from having weight.

    WoH on facebook is the example I cited. And this ‘pub crawl’ was going to be organized to combat a now proven non-existant incident. Too many people spread vile accusations then say ‘never mind’ when they have egg on their faces.

    That you have to go digging to find instances where ‘man bites dog’ cases shows the bias. Compare Matthew Shepherd to Jessie Dirsking for example. Or Martin/Zimmerman to all the ‘Black on White’ crimes before and after that get buried.

  31. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 11:49 am - August 10, 2012

    Virtually all fake ‘hate crime’ accusations come from the LEFT

    Only The LEFT Does It… Oops.

    And Todd’s actions could be considered worse, because she purposely cut and bruised herself to get publicity, whereas Baken lied and took advantage of his injuries only after he received them.

    It is probably safe to say the left does it more. But if you dig around, you’ll find more than a few conservatives that have done similar things.

    And this ‘pub crawl’ was going to be organized to combat a now proven non-existant incident.

    And when they found out it was fake, they stopped. On the contrary, there were more than a few Conservative groups who continued to defend Carrie Prejean even after her nude photos were revealed, when any sane person would say “why are you still defending her?”. NOM came to her defense,

    “Hollywood will dance its tribal war dance over her body–the hatred generated against her has been extraordinary–but Carrie will be free to define her own mission and message from now on,”

    …

    And only dropped her as a spokesman when her nude video came out six months later. Did I write about NOM being so foolish or accuse them of knowing Prejean was a fake, which, in this case, was not too difficult as there was evidence that she was not the Christian she espoused to be? No, because they didn’t yet know how deeply flawed her character was. But the warning signs were there. In retrospect, there were probably already warning signs about Baken too. This is an example of what I mean by the advocacy groups are going to do what they are going to do. And for all their failings, for a number of silly advocacy positions, for every “Oops” that happens in the form of the Bakens and the Prejeans, I’d rather have them around to advocate for their cause, rather than not exist at all. It’s what free speech is all about.

    Have to go work now.

  32. Tom1729 says

    August 10, 2012 at 12:01 pm - August 10, 2012

    Reagan promised to balance the budget when he campaigned in 1980.

  33. jman1961 says

    August 10, 2012 at 12:13 pm - August 10, 2012

    It is probably safe to say the left does it more.

    Uh huh, and by orders of magnitude.

  34. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 12:53 pm - August 10, 2012

    And I think it’s fair to say, given the amount of airtime Rush, Hannity, Levin, Savage, Humphreys, Ingraham, et. al. have, that Conservatives lead the left in character assassination and ad-hom arguments by a large magnitude.

    Yes, I know, MSNBC (or whatever they are calling it now that MS had jumped ship) has Maddow, Shultz, and Mathews. But they don’t have the audience or overlap broadcast time that the radio guys do. Brian Williams might be a leftist, but he doesn’t use ad-homs when reporting the news, such as it is. So he doesn’t count. I don’t put Brett Baird on the list of Conservatives either. His news broadcast might lean right, but he also doesn’t sink to the gutter when doing his job.

  35. The_Livewire says

    August 10, 2012 at 12:54 pm - August 10, 2012

    @Sonic,

    “And they stopped” This goes back to my comment about “Too many people spread vile accusations then say ‘never mind’ when they have egg on their faces.” Why not carry on with the ‘pub crawl’ to promote the businesses where it didn’t happen? The organizers were quick to arrange this activity to ‘shame’ the community, shouldn’t they be just as quick to bring them business? Both to show that they support areas that don’t assault people and to defy the sterotype of the ‘fake hate crime’? Instead of making amends for being sucked in by this guy, they just move on to suppoorting the next ‘sensationalist’ claim.

    If you really want to encourage behaviour, you not only condemn, you reward.

    Also you need to look up why “Virtually all fake ‘hate crime’ accusations come from the LEFT” != “Only the LEFT does it.”

  36. The_Livewire says

    August 10, 2012 at 12:55 pm - August 10, 2012

    I’m sure you can provide documented examples of ‘character assassination’ (I mean besides your accussing people of doing it w/o proof. Which, now that I think about it, is character assassination.)

  37. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 1:15 pm - August 10, 2012

    Instead of making amends for being sucked in by this guy, they just move on to suppoorting the next ‘sensationalist’ claim.

    But that’s what advocacy groups do, on all sides of the isle.

    Now, unlike some here, I don’t monitor the WOH facebook page. This thread is where I became aware of it. What are they doing now that is so horrible?

    On comment 37… Oh, I don’t know, the Rush vs Michael J Fox comes to mind…. vs Sarah Fluke… vs Chelsea Clinton…. vs. Amy Carter… vs Sherrol Miller (the transexual lesbian who turned out to be neither)….

    I really REALLY have to go work now. Will check in later.

  38. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 10, 2012 at 1:23 pm - August 10, 2012

    Reagan promised to balance the budget when he campaigned in 1980.

    Comment by Tom1729 — August 10, 2012 @ 12:01 pm – August 10, 2012

    Which means what, Tom?

    If you’re going to attack Reagan, hold Obama similarly responsible, or be exposed as a bigoted and desperate racist who thinks black people are inferior and shouldn’t be held accountable to the same standards as white people.

    Your attempt to appeal to our morals and sense of fairness blew up the instant you exposed yourself as an Obama pig and hypocrite. Since your desperate lying child Obama is out there screaming that Romney is a tax cheat and a murderer without a shred of evidence, that just shows that leftists like you are desperate, amoral perverts who will say and do anything to get what they want.

  39. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 10, 2012 at 1:30 pm - August 10, 2012

    I love how Sonic makes it clear that he is never going to hold liberals to the same standards that he does conservatives.

    Realize that nothing the left does fazes Sonic in the least. He’s not posting examples of leftist character assassination. He’s not wagging his finger at leftist commenters who say all conservatives are irrational. He’s just sitting here whining and screaming how awful and bad conservatives are, over and over and over again.

    This makes his motivations clear. He’s really nothing more than a wannabe exploitative bigot and abuser who is trying to use the fact that conservatives have values, morals, and a sense of responsibility to shut them up. His goal is power, not principles, and he will abuse and exploit whatever he can to get his way.

  40. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 1:50 pm - August 10, 2012

    POWER!!!!! YEAH!!!!!!!!

    I love how Sonic makes it clear that he is never going to hold liberals to the same standards that he does conservatives.

    Oops.

    Oops.

    Oops.

    Oops.

    Oops.

    I wrote: “And speaking of Rush, there are an awful lot of people who derided him for calling Obama a jackass, but are cheering Joy Behar for calling Sharon Angle a bitch.

    These are prime examples of hypocrisy.”
    .
    .

    NDT… Do you work at failing and looking stupid? Or does it come naturally????

    No.

    NDT…. One Child Left Behind!

    OK. Enough of the fun.

    You should probably do a better job of fact-checking before you reflexively hurl accusations toward someone. This isn’t even your “C” game.

    And no, I’m not going to name the logical fallacy in your comment! 🙂

  41. The_Livewire says

    August 10, 2012 at 1:53 pm - August 10, 2012

    Hmm, off the top of my head.

    Michael J Fox. Well that ‘attack’ was based on Fox’s own admission he went off his meds before testifying to enhance his symptoms.

    Fluke? She lied. He appologized. Thank you for providing proof of a major figure on the right admitting his mistakes.

    Those are the two I recognize off my head. As I expected, no citations given, but hey. Thank you for conceeding that at least someone on the Right appologizes when he oversteps. Puts conservatives ahead of libs.

  42. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 3:43 pm - August 10, 2012

    spam filter…

  43. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 4:38 pm - August 10, 2012

    Nice try at rewriting the Rush / Fox entanglement. This is Rush’s response, specifically, to the stem cell / Claire McCaskle (sp) commercial.

    Rush Limbaugh… Quote:

    “He is exaggerating the effects of the disease, He’s moving all around and shaking and it’s purely an act. . . . This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn’t take his medication or he’s acting.”

    That, along with the video of Rush mimicking Fox, is what got him into trouble.

    Here is what Fox said shortly after this erupted:

    In a CBS Evening News interview with Katie Couric on Thursday, Fox explained that the effects of his medication are hard to predict: “I just take it and it kicks in when it kicks in. Sometimes it kicks in too hard and then you get what’s called dyskinesia, which is that rocking motion.”

    When Couric said Limbaugh had suggested Fox intentionally skipped his medication to increase his symptoms and appear more sympathetic, the actor said, “The irony is that I was too medicated and was dyskinesic. Because the thing about being symptomatic is that it’s not comfortable. No one wants to be symptomatic – it’s like wanting to hit yourself with a hammer.”

    There is no time that he’s not medicated, he said. “At this point now, if I didn’t take medication I wouldn’t be able to speak. I’d have a mask face. I’d lock up and I wouldn’t be able to move.”

    When Fox filmed the commercial, he was actually over-medicated in order to get through it. That is neither “faking it”, “exaggerating it”, or “acting”. Now, Fox has admitted to not taking his meds in the past to show people what the disease is. That also is neither “faking it”, “exaggerating it”, or “acting”.

    Rush rightly apologized, and that apology was for the character assassination of Michael J Fox. And note – You didn’t ask me to provide evidence of the apologies, but just of the character assassinations.

  44. jman1961 says

    August 10, 2012 at 4:54 pm - August 10, 2012

    Now this thread has veered off course twice: once to get to false reports of ‘hate crimes’, and once again to get to media ‘character assassinations’.
    And both of these emanate vastly more from the left than the from the right, and most of the (far fewer) incidences from the right being examples of dosing the douchebags of the left with their own medicine.
    The only reason for anyone to continue to harangue on these is to establish a false equivalence, as (naturally) neither side can claim to possess a perfect record, and this represents a glaring logical fallacy in it’s own right.
    So, other than trying, and failing to goad and bait NDT, what exactly was the point here?

  45. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 5:31 pm - August 10, 2012

    Now this thread has veered off course twice: once to get to false reports of ‘hate crimes’, and once again to get to media ‘character assassinations’.
    And both of these emanate vastly more from the left than the from the right, and most of the (far fewer) incidences from the right being examples of dosing the douchebags of the left with their own medicine. The only reason for anyone to continue to harangue on these is to establish a false equivalence, as (naturally) neither side can claim to possess a perfect record, and this represents a glaring logical fallacy in it’s own right.

    Correction – the former more from the left, the latter more from the right. But, as I said before, and you agree, there is plenty of each from both sides. It’s unfortunately common practice these days. There is no logical fallacy on my part, as I have never claimed that one is exclusive to only one side. If you’re going to pin a logical fallacy on someone, you’ll need to look in a different direction.

    So, other than trying, and failing to goad and bait NDT

    What?

    Off Topic.

    NDT Bait!!!!

    Comment by sonicfrog — August 9, 2012 @ 1:30 pm – August 9, 2012

    You expect me to act surprised, Sonic?

    If the LGBT community will endorse and support accusing Mitt Romney of murder for political purposes, this is small potatoes.

    What I think more telling is that he actually thought the gay and lesbian community would support him doing this — and he was right.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — August 9, 2012 @ 2:08 pm – August 9, 2012

    Bait taken.

    what exactly was the point here?

    The point was to see in which strange direction NDT would take the information in the link. He did surprise me in that he accused certain advocacy of knowing that the accusations were a lie, but supporting Baken anyway. Other than the fact that these organizations are liberal in their politics, which does not automatically make them liars, any more than being a Conservative advocacy would automatically make it either completely truthful or liars, there is not one shred of proof that they knew Baken was lying from the get-go. In hindsight, maybe you could say “They should have known”. But hindsight is a beautiful thing, and quite useless except for teaching one a lesson. When they did find out he was lying, they admitted they had been had and acted responsibly.

  46. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 10, 2012 at 5:55 pm - August 10, 2012

    The only reason for anyone to continue to harangue on these is to establish a false equivalence, as (naturally) neither side can claim to possess a perfect record, and this represents a glaring logical fallacy in it’s own right.

    Comment by jman1961 — August 10, 2012 @ 4:54 pm – August 10, 2012

    Case in point:

    Democrats are as big a bunch of liars as Republicans! There. I said it! I am SOOOOO sick of this crap!!!! God I really despise these people!

    The entire point of the post: acknowledge that Obama supporters lied, but then insist that Republicans lie too so everything’s OK.

  47. jman1961 says

    August 10, 2012 at 6:01 pm - August 10, 2012

    But, as I said before, and you agree, there is plenty of each from both sides.

    I do NOT agree; either you’re in too big a hurry to score a ‘win’, or you’re confusing me with someone else.

    the latter more from the right

    Pure, unadulterated (as well as unsourced, uncited, and unsubtantiated) BULLSHIT, you’re assertion notwithstanding.
    You only bothered to get to details on the Michael J. Fox thing, and you’re ‘proof’ was shaky. Care to try ‘Fluke’?

    Lastly, since you like to start, and then prolong, these pointless ”everybody does it, so what’s the problem?” marathons (with a side of ‘lemme get under NDT’s skin’) from time to time….with intermittent declarations on how you ”have to go to work”, followed up 90 minutes later with ”really have to go to work….really”, exactly what kind of work do you do?
    I think you said sometime in the recent past that you were a teacher(academic), correct?

  48. jman1961 says

    August 10, 2012 at 6:03 pm - August 10, 2012

    Correction! (@48)
    …..your you’re assertion….

  49. jman1961 says

    August 10, 2012 at 6:24 pm - August 10, 2012

    There is no logical fallacy on my part, as I have never claimed that one is exclusive to only one side.

    I never said you did (although you tried to put those words in MY mouth back upthread abit – cheap stunt on your part, btw; I reckoned you to be above that kind of shit…..guess not).
    Your flawed reasoning is that because it happens on both sides, regardless of intent, intensity or degree, that the ‘guilt’ is equal.
    You know, that “both sides do it” rationale that you’re apparently very fond of.

  50. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 6:40 pm - August 10, 2012

    You only bothered to get to details on the Michael J. Fox thing, and you’re ‘proof’ was shaky

    Nice pun, even if unintentional. How was that “shaky”? Rush was clearly wrong, as I documented.

    As for work. I own my own business. Sole proprietorship. Pool service and spa repair. I’m my own boss, so my hours are flexable. Just got done servicing my neighbors pool. Thought i’d check in an cool off before i go back out again. I have two teaching cred, but no teaching job. California, need I say more.

    ”everybody does it, so what’s the problem?”. No. That is not the point. In NDT’s world, only the dreaded liberals are wrong, and Conservatives are always right. That is just absurd. Each are sometimes right, and sometimes wrong.

    Yes, I mostly get on NDT’s case. I think it’s because he reminds me too much of my little brother. Thing is, none of you are brave enough to challenge him when he says something so outlandish like saying these advocacy groups knew Baken was lying from the beginning. There is not one scrap of evidence offered to support that, but all the sycophants just let it slide right along. This is typical of a lot of things said on the GP comments section. It takes something really hideous for anyone of you to call out your own for saying something stupid. Jman, you’ve been reasonable, as has ILC, Live, Helio, V… But you all grant such a pass to anything NDT says. I can’t count how many times he’s thrown me in with Levi and Obama supporters and falsely labeled me as a liberal or slandered me in any way possible, facts and the truth be damned.

    I love how Sonic makes it clear that he is never going to hold liberals to the same standards that he does conservatives.

    Realize that nothing the left does fazes Sonic in the least. He’s not posting examples of leftist character assassination. He’s not wagging his finger at leftist commenters who say all conservatives are irrational. He’s just sitting here whining and screaming how awful and bad conservatives are, over and over and over again.

    This makes his motivations clear. He’s really nothing more than a wannabe exploitative bigot and abuser who is trying to use the fact that conservatives have values, morals, and a sense of responsibility to shut them up. His goal is power, not principles, and he will abuse and exploit whatever he can to get his way.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — August 10, 2012 @ 1:30 pm – August 10, 2012

    I used to provide evidence that things he accuses me of are not true. But it becomes pointless after a while. So, in a nut shell, he’s earned my enmity.

    Spent enough time on this. Going back to work now. 😉

    PS. Jman, you called me on hijacking this thread, which I fully admit to doing. Do you ever call anyone else out for the same thing when the thread gets hijacked by one of the Conservative GP regulars? If you look at the conversations both above post, you’ll see that it’s not on topic any more. I mean, really. What does:

    Certainly you shall.

    And then you’ll wet your pants when it’s pointed out that, by your own rules, you and your Obama Party are ignorant, insecure, and fundamentally un-American.

    Not to mention that you’re so insecure and ignorant that you have to take the fundamentally un-American step of using government to punish freedom of speech.

    Try again, pansy boy. You and your fellow piss-pants like Richard Rush talk real big and all, but you seem to be absolutely terrified of walking up to your Obama Party base like Farrakhan and calling them names, or staging your “kiss-in” and protests in this restaurant, or calling out your Obama Party for supporting and endorsing such behavior. Indeed, your only response is to use governmental power to openly discriminate against religious belief and speech that you don’t like.

    You’re a fascist totalitarian bigot, Levi. Moreover, you’re like your socialist forbears — a lying hypocritical coward.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — August 9, 2012 @ 11:46 pm – August 9, 2012

    or

    Know what, Cinesnatch?

    You’re an Obama supporter, which means you endorse and support calling Mitt Romney a felon, a criminal, and a murderer.

    And both you and your pansy boy Levi seem to have all sorts of excuses for why you won’t hold a “kiss-in” in Louis Farrakhan’s restaurant.

    That translates to two things:

    1) You have no sense of or respect for decency

    2) The only thing that will make you curb your behavior is the threat of having the sh*t beaten out of you.

    So the lesson you’re making clear to the rest of America is this; either they sit still and let you and your pansy boy Levi sh*t all over them, ban their businesses, have their property vandalized, and namecall and harass them……or they have to deal with you like the Nation of Islam does.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — August 10, 2012 @ 1:47 am – August 10, 2012

    … really have to do with opposition to gay marriage = hate? Where are you in denouncing that?

  51. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 6:43 pm - August 10, 2012

    48…. Point taken.

  52. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 10, 2012 at 7:09 pm - August 10, 2012

    Thing is, none of you are brave enough to challenge him when he says something so outlandish like saying these advocacy groups knew Baken was lying from the beginning. There is not one scrap of evidence offered to support that, but all the sycophants just let it slide right along. This is typical of a lot of things said on the GP comments section. It takes something really hideous for anyone of you to call out your own for saying something stupid.

    Comment by sonicfrog — August 10, 2012 @ 6:40 pm – August 10, 2012

    LOL.

    And what was it that I said about Sonic before?

    Realize that nothing the left does fazes Sonic in the least. He’s not posting examples of leftist character assassination. He’s not wagging his finger at leftist commenters who say all conservatives are irrational. He’s just sitting here whining and screaming how awful and bad conservatives are, over and over and over again.

    This makes his motivations clear. He’s really nothing more than a wannabe exploitative bigot and abuser who is trying to use the fact that conservatives have values, morals, and a sense of responsibility to shut them up. His goal is power, not principles, and he will abuse and exploit whatever he can to get his way.

    You see, Sonic, what everyone else realizes that you don’t is what was being said in the posts to which the ones you quoted are responses.

    Regardless, there are dozens of things that opposing gay marriage does say about you, and none of them are complimentary. Shall we go with ignorant? Shall we go with insecure? Shall we go with fundamentally un-American? All of these things are true of people who oppose gay marriage, and despite your protests, hatred remains a significant motivator.

    Comment by Levi — August 9, 2012 @ 11:13 pm – August 9, 2012

    That’s the basic problem. You don’t see anything wrong with what Levi or Cinesnatch are saying.

    And because you don’t see anything wrong with what they are saying, you can’t understand why no one else is reacting similarly.

    And because you are always right, their failure to act proves that they are wrong.

    In short, Sonic, what people are doing is laughing their asses off at you. They know very well that you can babble things like, “Jman, you’ve been reasonable, as has ILC, Live, Helio, V…”, then say nothing as Levi, Cinesnatch, and Pomposity call these same people selfish, ignorant, irrational bigots who support murder and suicide and abuse — and then have an aneurysm when someone dares criticize or hit back at Levi, Cinesnatch, or Pomposity.

    This is not a blog of Meggie Mac/MSNBC “conservatives” who will agree with you how awful conservatives are and how the world would be so much better without them. This is a blog of people who actually have thought through and believe in their principles, and are sick and tired of little piss-ants like yourself, Levi, Cinesnatch, and Serenity trying to abuse them and their politeness.

    And now you’ve really gone and done it by throwing the middle-school girl, “Either you attack him like I want you to do or you’re a bad person!” drama queen routine. You’ve made it clear that this is not at all about principles, values, or consistency; this is about you pulling a power trip.

  53. The_Livewire says

    August 10, 2012 at 7:16 pm - August 10, 2012

    As quoted here

    Actor Michael J. Fox who has Parkinson’s wrote a book in 1999 that said before he testified in a congressional hearing for embryonic stem cell research legislation, he voluntarily went off his medicine so as to appear pathetically shaky and discordant. He justified it by writing that he wanted to show the congressmen how tortured a person could really be from the illness. In doing so, he was playing a cruel trick on the Congress…was duplicitous..

    So you’re 0 for 2. Nice try sonic. Care to continue the character assassination?

  54. The_Livewire says

    August 10, 2012 at 7:20 pm - August 10, 2012

    And because I wanted to document.
    Rush Limbaugh’s apology

    Now that we’ve a) Proved that sonic doesn’t know what he’s talking about and b) he can’t defend the Obama deficit, let’s get back on topic, eh?

  55. jman1961 says

    August 10, 2012 at 7:29 pm - August 10, 2012

    Nice pun, even if unintentional.

    Too bad they don’t have a ‘facepalm smiley’; I’d use it here. Completely unintentional. Sorry.

    In NDT’s world, only the dreaded liberals are wrong, and Conservatives are always right.

    Well, the tilt isn’t quite that absolute from my vantage point, but it’s certainly far from the 50-50 ‘wash’ that you frequently cast it as being.

    Yes, I mostly get on NDT’s case. I think it’s because he reminds me too much of my little brother.

    No psychology from me, but since you put it like that, maybe you’ve made it more personal than it really is, or needs to be. You don’t know the man (i.e. – been in each other’s company), do you?

    Thing is, none of you are brave enough to challenge him when he says something so outlandish like saying…..

    It doesn’t take bravery, Sonic. I’m not interested in doing it. It’s been explained in numerous threads on this blog by NDT himself why he does it, and I both understand his reasoning (from the style sheet: the ‘Reverse Alinsky’) and I employ it myself. I disagree with you here, but I’ve not addressed you anywhere on this blog in the ’20-30 mph over the speed limit’ (Hey ILC!) manner that I’ve served up for unrepentant a-holes like Stupidity and Levi. And why is that? You don’t deserve it, as far as my give-and-take with you goes.
    As for the examples of NDT’s comments that you believe I (and others) should denounce: I won’t. That’s a ‘table-turning’ of a game the LEFT plays almost exclusively. I won’t, as well, because I agree with his point: it’s the mark of a coward (and a fraud) to call out someone who either can’t or won’t strike back. All NDT is pointing out is that any claim to ‘principle’ in supporting gay ‘marriage’ is pure horseshit if it’s standard bearers won’t stage their ‘kiss-in’ in front of the bowtied boys of the Nation of Islam. And they WON’T EVER do that because those SOBs who adhere to the ‘religion of peace’ are very likely to kick the shit out of each and every one of them (and the gay ‘marriage’ girls know this), so they don’y dare do it. And it casts in amber the cowardice and hyprocrisy of these people, which NDT does better than anyone here, as I see it.
    As I believe that this country is at an existential crossroads, I endorse returning any cheap tactic that they employ ten-fold, and if that’s not enough to make them heel and quell their fascist tendencies and restructure their ‘totalitarian DNA’ (ht: Dennis Prager) , then something(s) more effective will be brought to bear. I’m long since fed up with these c—suckers and their relentless march to control every single solitary aspect of my life. In brief, it ain’t gonna go with me and I’m gonna serve up a lot of hurt for them if they don’t back the f–k off.
    Sonic, I’m not suggesting that YOU have to endorse what NDT says, and how he says it: you don’t. But it seems to me that in your occasional zeal to bait him, that you end up getting caught on your own hook.

  56. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 8:12 pm - August 10, 2012

    # 54. Live.

    That is a nice bit of FAIL.

    Look at the date; October 25, 2006. Tom Roesser wrote this before all the facts came out about the filming of of the commercial, before Fox explained the circumstances on the 27th. And again, the controversy was NOT that Rush said he was off his meds during that Congressional hearing, it was about Fox faking it specifically on the commercial, which was shown to not be the case.

    Mr Roesser writes:

    For one thing, there is not a single case on record where embryonic stem cells have worked

    OK. But that is flawed logic. There was not a case where open heart surgery or heart transplants or blood transfusions were successful… Until they were. Plenty of people also said John Elway, Ellie Manning, and especially Trent Dilfer would never win a Superbowl… Until they did. Just because it hasn’t yielded results as of yet does not mean it doesn’t hold promise.

    And again. The original challenge was to list character assassinations by Limbaugh, not apologies….

    So…..

    Score: Sonic 2 live 0.

    But agreed. I’m done here. Get back on topic.

    ——————————–

    Jman. Are you kidding? That was an AWESOME pun, even if unintentional! I hate it when I write something, and only realize there was a great pun I didn’t think of after the fact.

  57. heliotrope says

    August 10, 2012 at 8:43 pm - August 10, 2012

    Sonic,

    I will join the hi-jacked portion of this thread and refer to your #35 post:

    And I think it’s fair to say, given the amount of airtime Rush, Hannity, Levin, Savage, Humphreys, Ingraham, et. al. have, that Conservatives lead the left in character assassination and ad-hom arguments by a large magnitude.

    How, exactly is it fair to arrive at the conclusion that conservatives beat out liberals at character assassination and ad-hominem arguments by a large magnitude simply because conservatives have significantly more talk radio air time?

    You apparently take it as a given that political talk show hosts automatically engage in character assassination and ad-hominem arguments. From that assumption, you make your case based on a simple mathematic calculation based on total airtime.

    Then at #37 you backed your case concerning character assassination and ad-hominem argument on the part of Rush Limbaugh as follows:

    Oh, I don’t know, the Rush vs Michael J Fox comes to mind…. vs Sarah Fluke… vs Chelsea Clinton…. vs. Amy Carter… vs Sherrol Miller (the transexual lesbian who turned out to be neither)….

    I take exception to these blots on Rush from having listened to the man for his entire run on national radio. I have subscribed to his transcript service and have received every single one of his broadcasts by podcast since he began that service years ago.

    Allow me to explain that Rush is one of the most maligned individuals by people on the left who largely get their information from talking points, not by listening to him and studying his transcripts. He is no dummy and he has long made it his careful practice to make every word he utters available for review for accuracy and context. The country is full of people misquoting him and taking him out of context for their political purposes, and relying on the numb-minds who follow them to take their word as gospel.

    Why is it that Rush is never actually pilloried by the MSM as the Big Fat Liar as Al Franken would have it? Do you suppose they fear the power of his checkbook if and when they “get it wrong”?

    Now, then, let us move on to Hannity, Ingraham, and Levin, shall we? (H.T./Levin.) Levin and Ingraham are brilliant, top-notch lawyers with incredible research skills and minds which absorb the collected smarts in any room they enter. Hannity would have been an incredible Jesuit, but veered into radio with his basic value system in tact. You can have Savage, who is essentially a stranger to me and Humphreys who is unknown to me altogether.

    Now, if you care to make your case on Rush vs. Michael J. Fox, Sarah Sandra Fluke, Chelsea Clinton, Amy Carter, et. al. I will take up the game. I will search what Rush actually said and give you the option of educating me and every reader on this site who cares to participate.

    For reasons of his own, NDT takes the shortcut of “stereotyping” the knee jerk reaction of typical libs. I believe he has characterized his method as illustrating absurdity with absurdity. I take his point, but I also think that too often he ends up communicating on two levels which is to those who see the game and those who take the bait.

    Since you hi-jacked the thread, I suppose it is yours to finish or extend. But, your street theater with NDT might not be exactly as you perceive it.

  58. Cinesnatch says

    August 10, 2012 at 9:15 pm - August 10, 2012

    Now, if you care to make your case on Rush vs. Michael J. Fox

    He already made his case.

  59. jman1961 says

    August 10, 2012 at 9:31 pm - August 10, 2012

    He already made his case.

    And it dismissed for lack of evidence.

  60. jman1961 says

    August 10, 2012 at 9:45 pm - August 10, 2012

    For one thing, there is not a single case on record where embryonic stem cells have worked

    OK. But that is flawed logic

    No, it’s not flawed.
    Try this: there isn’t a single case of deck boards being secured with nails driven by a rubber mallet……..
    Does it hold that if we just keep trying to drive nails with rubber mallets that some day we’ll be successful? Ahhhhhhh, no.
    The FACT is that there still hasn’t been any research to show that treating ANY disease by use of embryonic stem cells has been effective, while adult stem cells have been shown to be effective in certain treatment regimens.
    But even if embryonic stem cells had been shown to be useful….so what? That leads directly to the case of medical and social ethics that were in play when Fox decided to withhold his own (effective) medication and play ‘Rubber Band Man’ before a congressional committee.
    I’m not interested in creating a market in fetus farms for the purpose of taking a few more shakes and jiggles from Fox’s dyskinesia dance.

  61. sonicfrog says

    August 10, 2012 at 10:04 pm - August 10, 2012

    Helio, thanks for the thoughtful reply.

    I have one last comment to say concerning NDT.

    I’ve known him as long as I’ve been blogging. He was one of the first of a group of gay conservatives I found when I started blogging over seven years ago. That group includes Cake or Death, and Robbie, even before he posted at the Malcontent (miss that guy). We both gravitated to GP at the same time I think. I have met him once. He was in town and we had a brief visit. He seemed nice enough in person for the brief time.

    When we first crossed paths, he was quite acerbic even then. It’s only gotten worse since he’s been here. Now, you can say:

    “t’s been explained in numerous threads on this blog by NDT himself why he does it, and I both understand his reasoning (from the style sheet: the ‘Reverse Alinsky’) and I employ it myself.”

    But, having been familiar with his writings long before Saul Alinsky, I can see how this has degenerated. He hasn’t changed all that much. By claiming he’s pulling a reverse Alinsky, it’s just a nice way to cover being rude, nonfactual, and foul. And you guys cover for it.

    Here is the big problem as I see it. GP was launched as a blog for gay conservatives, and seemed to have as a goal to show not only that we were here (some are still shocked that such a thing exists), but also to show that we were better than some of the liberal counterparts that were also blogging at the time. Bruce has done a very good job of making sound arguments for his positions, and Dan often ups the ante. I have great respect for both men.

    We’re not doing that anymore. NDT, if indeed he’s “faking it” as Rush would say, is killing the Gay Patriot brand. NDT isn’t the only one who has brought the brand down, but he can arguably be classified as the loudest. There is no way any moderate with an open mind would stick around here and bother to discuss or maybe try and understand the gay conservative POV after reading some of the drek that has been written in the last few years. You guys don’t care about the reputation of this blog. I do.

    And it is on that note that I announce my retirement from Gay Patriot. I can no longer justify spending time here writing to an audience that has no room for a differing point of view. I never post there, but it’s become no different than most of the drek at Joe My God, where the gay left can do no wrong. I’m just sick of reading the same crap in the comments over and over and over and over again. I mean really, how many times does one need to bring up Cinesnatch and Breitbart – It’s done. That ship has sailed. That horse was dead months ago.

    I suspect I’ll still stop by from time to time. But I won’t likely comment, or rag on NDT anymore. It’s just not worth my time.

    See Y’all around

    Mike Alexander.

    PS. NDT love to try and goad me into raging against Levi. Why don’t I? I don’t comment much about Levi when he’s in troll because you guys always have that handled. My comments wouldn’t add much, and I don’t like writing stuff that others are already saying. That is also a waste of time..

  62. jman1961 says

    August 10, 2012 at 10:30 pm - August 10, 2012

    You guys don’t care about the reputation of this blog. I do.

    Wow. That’s a boatload of conceit right there.
    Much like liberals and leftists who claim that everything they do is because they CARE about the poor, the uninsured, minorities, gays, the environment, this blog, etc. etc., and anyone who disagrees with them is just a cold heartless SOB that doesn’t care about blah, blah, blah.
    It sounds more like a chastised and disheartened teenager who wanted to zero in on NDT (and Livewire, in this thread) and keep score and play ‘gotcha’ games that boomeranged on them, and now they’re all butthurt and leaving and never coming back.
    And while the writer might self-identify as ‘moderate’, the bowlful of self pity served up has the unmistakable aroma of something much further to the left than the writer is willing to own up to.
    It has me wondering what exactly the writer was referring to when @52 he said “point taken” to my #48.
    You’d never know it from the swan song @62.

  63. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 10, 2012 at 10:42 pm - August 10, 2012

    Well, we got Drama Queen Message #1 above, so now it seems we’ve moved on to #2.

    We’re not doing that anymore. NDT, if indeed he’s “faking it” as Rush would say, is killing the Gay Patriot brand. NDT isn’t the only one who has brought the brand down, but he can arguably be classified as the loudest. There is no way any moderate with an open mind would stick around here and bother to discuss or maybe try and understand the gay conservative POV after reading some of the drek that has been written in the last few years. You guys don’t care about the reputation of this blog. I do.

    Comment by sonicfrog — August 10, 2012 @ 10:04 pm – August 10, 2012

    Thus, the message becomes, “If you don’t do what I want, you don’t care about the blog!”.

    Of course, what is supposedly “good” and “caring” for the blog is a) defined solely by Sonic, b) includes unlimited license by liberals like Levi, Cinesnatch, Pomposity, Richard Rush, and others to come here and opine about how stupid, ignorant, and irrational conservatives are, and c) exactly in line with Sonic’s expressed desire for conservatives to shut up and agree with him about how awful and mean conservatives are.

    Isn’t that convenient? What is defined as good, wonderful, perfect, and what everyone should aspire to is exactly what Sonic wants, and what is bad, evil, awful, brand-destroying, close-minded, and anti-“moderate” is exactly what Sonic opposes.

    And now, having not gotten his way, Sonic is going to stomp off in a shower of self-righteous glitter, screaming about how mean and close-minded conservatives are because we don’t take his every word as gospel and agree with him about how awful and mean all conservatives are, and punishing us with his disdain and — horrors! — absence.

    And it’s not because of his convenience, mind you. Oh no, he’s just doing it as a protest. For the blog, of course. Hoping that we’ll all come to our senses and self-censor or, even better, self-exile, so that he and his fellow Brahmins can come back and drag us kicking and screaming into the path of enlightenment.

    And we’re all laughing, because we’ve seen this play before.

    As ILC put it then, and, with correction, even more appropriately now:

    Second, Pomposity Sonic applies the standard that all liberals apply to most conservatives: “How dare you actually believe your conservative principles! How dare you uphold them, most of the time! How dare you be yourself, independently of me and what I want! I’m the only important thing! How dare you not stab yourself in the back, as I think you should!” Pathetic, Pomposity Sonic.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 20, 2012 @ 10:35 am – July 20, 2012

  64. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 10, 2012 at 10:53 pm - August 10, 2012

    Wow. That’s a boatload of conceit right there.
    Much like liberals and leftists who claim that everything they do is because they CARE about the poor, the uninsured, minorities, gays, the environment, this blog, etc. etc., and anyone who disagrees with them is just a cold heartless SOB that doesn’t care about blah, blah, blah.

    Comment by jman1961 — August 10, 2012 @ 10:30 pm – August 10, 2012

    As Ayn Rand aptly put it:

    It only stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master.

    The Fountainhead

    Or, even more succintly put:

    Observe, in politics, that the term extremism has become a synonym of “evil,” regardless of the content of the issue (the evil is not what you are extreme about, but that you are “extreme”—i.e., consistent).

    The Virtue of Selfishness

  65. The_Livewire says

    August 10, 2012 at 10:57 pm - August 10, 2012

    So let me see if I have this straight…

    Michael J Fox ADMITTED he didn’t take his meds for congressional testimony, and yet Rush was lying when he said that he didn’t take his meds for his congressional testimony. Then Fox admitted fetal stem cell research won’t cure Parkensons.

    Really. Epic fail on Sonic’s part. Kind of like his epic fail on fetal stem cell research. I’m sure he’s also a big fan of using LSD in psychology and Trepanning to cure headaches, and government spending to bring down the deficit.

  66. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 10, 2012 at 11:06 pm - August 10, 2012

    PS. NDT love to try and goad me into raging against Levi. Why don’t I? I don’t comment much about Levi when he’s in troll because you guys always have that handled. My comments wouldn’t add much, and I don’t like writing stuff that others are already saying. That is also a waste of time..

    Comment by sonicfrog — August 10, 2012 @ 10:04 pm – August 10, 2012

    Of course.

    Most importantly, if you never wrote it, you can never be held accountable for it, and if you never take a moral stance, it can never be used against you.

    You’ve learned well from Levi, Pomposity, Richard Rush, Cinesnatch, and others, Sonic. You now view a written statement as anathema, a judgment of right and wrong on a person’s actions as equivalent to murder, and a stand on principle to be only an opportunity to be relentlessly browbeaten when you fail.

    In the presence of liberals like these committed to their ideology, absolutely secure in their belief that you are wrong, and convinced with the fanaticism of Jim Jones that you are evil, only two routes are possible; you either keep your principles and reject the abuse, or reject your principles and embrace the abuse.

    You chose the latter. Good luck with that.

  67. Cinesnatch says

    August 10, 2012 at 11:14 pm - August 10, 2012

    ND30, your name-grouping is always so random.

    As Heidi Klum would say, “One day you’re in, the next day you are OUT.”

    But, they’re one and the same to you, so it makes sense.

  68. heliotrope says

    August 11, 2012 at 2:12 pm - August 11, 2012

    Sonic,

    I hope you stay engaged here.

    The “open mind” business always transports me to Ayn Rand:

    “Open Mind” and “Closed Mind”

    [There is a] dangerous little catch phrase which advises you to keep an “open mind.” This is a very ambiguous term—as demonstrated by a man who once accused a famous politician of having “a wide open mind.” That term is an anti-concept: it is usually taken to mean an objective, unbiased approach to ideas, but it is used as a call for perpetual skepticism, for holding no firm convictions and granting plausibility to anything. A “closed mind” is usually taken to mean the attitude of a man impervious to ideas, arguments, facts and logic, who clings stubbornly to some mixture of unwarranted assumptions, fashionable catch phrases, tribal prejudices—and emotions. But this is not a “closed” mind, it is a passive one. It is a mind that has dispensed with (or never acquired) the practice of thinking or judging, and feels threatened by any request to consider anything.

    What objectivity and the study of philosophy require is not an “open mind,” but an active mind—a mind able and eagerly willing to examine ideas, but to examine them critically. An active mind does not grant equal status to truth and falsehood; it does not remain floating forever in a stagnant vacuum of neutrality and uncertainty; by assuming the responsibility of judgment, it reaches firm convictions and holds to them. Since it is able to prove its convictions, an active mind achieves an unassailable certainty in confrontations with assailants—a certainty untainted by spots of blind faith, approximation, evasion and fear.

  69. Kevin says

    August 11, 2012 at 9:41 pm - August 11, 2012

    Funny how you always ignore that at least the defect has grown at a much lower rate than under the last president.

    Also, I think the President’s idea to lower the deficit actually came with an expectation of a congress who would be willing to negotiate and compromise to get this done for the good of all Americans. Too bad that the leaders in the house are more interested in their dogmatic hatred of the president than they are in serving their constituents.
    Votes in the house on:
    Repeal Healthcare law: 33
    Job creation: 0

    I think that sums it up.

  70. B. Daniel Blatt says

    August 11, 2012 at 10:32 pm - August 11, 2012

    Sorry, Kevin, you’re reciting Democratic talking points. House has passed about 30 job creation bills, nearly all of which the Democratic Senate has refused to take up.

    As to deficits, well, they were declining under a Republican president and a Republican Congress and only started increasing again with the election of a Democratic Congress in 2007 — and accelerating with the election of a Democratic Congress and Democratic Congress.

    As to the notion of a Congress unwilling to negotiate, how can the Republican House negotiate with a Democratic Senate that hasn’t passed a budget in 1,200 days.

    So, if the president did have a plan to lower the deficit, how come his own budget doesn’t present the kind of reduction he promised?

  71. North Dallas Thirty says

    August 12, 2012 at 1:06 am - August 12, 2012

    Funny how you always ignore that at least the defect has grown at a much lower rate than under the last president.

    Comment by Kevin — August 11, 2012 @ 9:41 pm – August 11, 2012

    That’s because your fantasies are easy to ignore, Kevin.

    Especially when the facts say exactly the opposite.

    The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.

    The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.

    The latest posting from the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department shows the National Debt now stands at $15.566 trillion. It was $10.626 trillion on President Bush’s last day in office, which coincided with President Obama’s first day.

    You continue to lie, Kevin, and we refute you with facts. That’s all you and your Obama have — lies. You are unable to deal with facts or truth; you merely spew Obama propaganda.

  72. Cinesnatch says

    August 12, 2012 at 2:22 am - August 12, 2012

    As to deficits, well, they were declining under a Republican president and a Republican Congress

    No, Dan, they began increasing once Bush stepped in. And they began increasing even more when the Dems took over Congress.

  73. B. Daniel Blatt says

    August 12, 2012 at 3:04 am - August 12, 2012

    Cinesnatch, check the image at this link. The deficits declined for three successive fiscal years, FY2004 to 2005, FY 2005 to 2006, FY 2006 to 2007, then jumped from FY 2007 to 2008, being the first Fiscal Year with a budget passed by the Pelosi-Reid Congress.

  74. heliotrope says

    August 12, 2012 at 12:07 pm - August 12, 2012

    Vince,

    You might wish to read this:

    Which exactly is the decade of spiraling deficits? The last one, or the one we’re beginning now?

    * Bush average: 2.7% (including the 8.3% for FY 2009 when President Bush left office in January);

    * Obama average (projected for two terms spanning nine fiscal years): 6.35%

    The issue is the actual deficit in dollars. Each deficit dollar eats away at the per cent of GDP that is consumed and the interest rate eats away at the amount of government income that goes to servicing the deficit at the expense of maintaining entitlements and the cost of government and infrastructure maintenance, defense, education, etc.

  75. Cinesnatch says

    August 12, 2012 at 5:33 pm - August 12, 2012

    As to deficits, well, they were declining under a Republican president

    Dan,
    Deficit went up when Bush took over after Clinton.

    Can’t spin it any other way, Dan.

  76. heliotrope says

    August 12, 2012 at 8:17 pm - August 12, 2012

    Vince,

    The deficit has gone up under every President in my life time.

    Even the “Clinton surplus” does not include social security indebtedness. If you add in the amount Clinton spent by “borrowing” from social security, every year of his presidency was in deficit.

    Really, we should all refrain from quoting half-lies and partisan shading. My wife came home from the clothing store today after spending $34.15 and “saving” $148.56. Under the government type of accounting, she “made” $114.41.

Categories

Archives