Banner ad

Thursday, February 14, 2013

Cruising the Web

Why are we sending $700 million to the Palestinian Authority? Couldn't that money be better spent?

Why do some liberals express admiration for murderer Chris Dorner? Even the New York Times seems to buy wholesale Dorner's allegations against LAPD without checking them out. What could possess these people? Is that they're just too young to have gotten into the whole Free Mumia excitement?

Raising the minimum wage would do nothing to help those in poverty, but actually increase unemployment among those people. In fact, if Obama were truly interested in helping those folks rather than just demagoguing the issue, he'd press for raising the Earned Income Tax Credit instead.

Now you can buy the Marco Rubio water bottle. Who wants such things? But I admire the entrepreneurship. But why did the media go crazy over that sip? Is it that they had nothing else about his speech to criticize?

Matt Lewis asks if sex scandals are the only scandals that Americans care about these days. It rather seems that way sometimes.

Now the Washington Post is hiring a Democratic lobbyist for writing commentary. Aren't there any other writers out there who don't have Hilary Rosen's bio?

Young conservatives bemoan the mistakes of the older generation of Republicans who have no real idea of how to appeal to their generation. They see the current Republican Party playing checkers with the Democrats playing chess. That has to change.

Now a student, a daughter of a professor even, is suing for damages because of getting a C+ in a class. Can you imagine if this became an accepted route for disappointed students?

Explaining how the Obama administration inflates their numbers on deportation.

32 comments:

Joanna said...

Funny how right before I made my daily visit to your site, I had just on a whim ordered the water bottle from his site after seeing the story about it at the Weekly Standard blog.
I'm loving Marco Rubio and was happy to get a little something for my donation. As an ardent "exerciser", it will be fun to use my new water bottle! Love your blog!!

Chris said...

RE: The whiny student kvetching about a C+ grade. If the course were "on a curve" that would mean slightly above average.

How insulting!! Someone's dear little Sunshine is NOT recognized as superlatively way beyond average? Oh me oh my, I'm about to faint...

In my USAF days I knew some U.S. Naval Academy graduates who told of the "culture shock" of going from being heralded (rightly so) as examples-of-excellence in High School to their first days at the Naval Academy where THAT high standard was nothing more than routine just Joe-Average. The humbling realization was rather hard for some to apprehend.

To quote from the movie "The Incredibles" -- "Once everyone's super, no one will be."

Rick Caird said...

It is astonishing to me how economically illiterate the ideological left is when basic economics and common sense conflict with their emotional view of the how the world should work.

These guys will go into a store and if the price of an article is too high, thy will walk out. But, the same concept eludes them when it comes to hiring people. If the cost is too high, people do not get hired. This is not hard to understand for most people.

equitus said...

Rick, I think emotion and hate/fear is the fall back to thinking through the economical consequences of a minimum wage is.

To the ideological left, the problem is the "greed" of the employer, which must be legislated away.

Skay said...

Isn't just about everyone who writes for the Washington Post already a Democrat lobbyist in one way or another?

mark said...

Skay,
Excellent point. I've always thought that about Charles Krauthammer and Jennifer Rubin.

Sure, the media has jumped all over the Rubio "big-gulp:. They also jumped all over Michael Dukakis' tank photo. We all love to mock the gaffes, especially when it's the opposing party. People here are still bringing up Obama's "57-state gaffe".
Rubio has risen in the party almost solely due to his race and repub's political desperation. He's already got ethics problems, and lied about his family history. He'll need to sharpen his game if he's going to compete with Hillary.

Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

Yeah, you're right, she's a much better liar than Rubio. No wonder you can't wait to join the media tongue bath!

You kind of dropped off that last thread with a whimper. Have you decided to grace us with your history of supporting third party candidates or was that a lie?

How's Bob Menendez? I hear he gulps a lot of water when he's having sex with underage prostitutes.

Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

Almost forgot to add in with Hillary's massive foreign policy success. I can't believe she doesn't want to talk about Benghazi. I'm mean, it's not like she'd have to embellish like she did with her "sniper" fire tale from the past or explain her most recent failure as Secretary of State, I mean, at this point, what does it matter?

mark said...

Equitus,
I'll give you credit for audacity. To falsely accuse me of dishonesty after being caught lying (see below) takes some gall.
I've mentioned several times here that I have voted for third party candidates often, including in '96 when I was too disgusted by Clinton to vote for him. If you don't believe that, no problem.

Last, First, MI said...
Mark,
Identities? Identify ANY Democrat that has demanded that Bob Menendez, child prostitute customer and Democratic Party Senator from New Jersey, step aside and cooperate fully with the current FBI investigation.10:37 AM

equitus said...

My question, again: Identify ANY Democrat that has demanded that Bob Menendez, child prostitute customer and Democratic Party Senator from New Jersey, step aside and cooperate fully with the current FBI investigation.
1:31 AM
equitus said...
mark, it's only in your head that I've created a new identity.

Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

1. You're paranoid.

2. You lied about your third party penchant when you used it to shirk culpability for being a useful idiot for this regime. You have also failed repeatedly to say who you voted for in that "third" party. So, sorry, no cigar.

3. Finally, you're inability to debate issues leaves you with nothing but personal attacks - character assassinations directed at opposition candidates. You're just tedious.

If you want to back either Obama or Hillary, you need to explain why you think they have been successful. Furthermore, someone that backs either one of those sounds pretty ridiculous when it comes to complaints about liars! You need to up your game.


mark said...

equitus,
Paranoid? Nope. I simply exposed your dishonesty: Creating a new identity to back up your original drivel, and then lying about it.
I simply re-posted your own words.
Your pathetic cover-up, in which you called your posts "eloquent and sharp" was very entertaining. So thanks for that.

Last week you called me a "toadie" for the dem party, and then criticized me for saying I'm not a dem because of corruption in the party. Makes perfect sense.

Fortunately for you, the code here seems to be to ignore the idiocy of fellow conservatives. The last criticism I've seen here of another conservative was when several people scolded Betsy for her lack of knowledge of the Constitution. That was prompted by her writing that she was open to limiting magazine clips (in other words, fascism). Lesson learned, I guess.


equitus said...

Wow. mark certainly clings to his delusions with a kind of desperate tenacity. It put all his other commentary in perspective, not in a good way.

Please, mark. Use just a little bit of critical thinking. It'll put you on a good, positive path. It's a sad down slide you're on right now.

mark said...

So, the guy who throws around charges of fascism, anti-semitism, pedophilia and rape now calls for critical-thinking. Working on a third identity for yourself, equitus?

Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

What do you call a man that has sex with children? I would call him a pedophile and a rapist. You call him Senator Menendez. I guess that's how we're different.

As long as you're back on the thread and rolling around in the midst of your conspiracy theory, maybe you'd like to discuss the whole human trafficking story that Betsy linked to her in Friday post. I had asked you to discuss your views on Hillary and Obama's "foreign policy success". I'm not surprised that you could not offer up anything but I wonder how you count the fallout from Libya now that we've had still more evidence of the damage done at the hands of Tuaregs unleashed?

I guess you could say it is hard to separate Obama's foreign policy from his domestic policy when the overall outcome is greater numbers of people living under one form of slavery or another!

mark said...

equitus,
You do realize you're mixing up your identities again. Right?

Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

And you realize that you cannot defend the destructive policies of the Obama administration and the hypocrisy of the left. It's disturbing that you do not seem to care but that is the life of a toady, isn't it?

I don't speak for Equitus though I'm happy to have him advance any question or comment of mine that might suit his interest.

I know that leftist ideologues and their dupes cannot accept that anyone can have the temerity - let alone the independent thought necessary - to go against the party line but the idea that there are multiples of such individuals just drives you bat-shit crazy! So I guess that you've attempted to convince yourself that you're being spoofed. You're only fooling yourself but not very well. You seem rattled, unable to form an argument to support the actions and inaction of the Obama administration, and just plain unhinged.

Let's get you back on topic: What do you think of Obama's foreign policy success in Libya and the genie it let out of the bottle?

equitus said...

mark is rattled, alright. He clings to this made up distraction to avoid any rational, factual debate.

I want to apologize to Betsy for this silliness, as I feel a bit responsible for messing with mark last week - repeating LFM's question to mark regarding Menendez. I didn't expect it would send mark over the edge like this. I should be more careful.

This distraction is also a disservice to LFM, who I guess is new here and whose comments and arguments are worth taking seriously. So apologies also to LFM.

I've been loyally commenting here for many years now, and Betsy knows my real identity. I've never felt the need or desire to post as an alternate identity to equitus, let alone to spoof the likes of mark. It makes no sense, except as an excuse for mark to avoid thinking about any real issues (which actually makes a lot of sense).

Anyway, out of respect to our host, I won't take the bait of mark's personal assaults on me, and I won't comment any more on his paranoid fantasies. Let him live with those delusions. I will, however, continue to push back on his relevant comments here, such as they are, and try to keep mark on topic.

- equitus (the one and only)

mark said...

Personal assaults? Seriously?
Equitus, you called me a fascist and implied I was anti-semitic. And you continue to embarrass yourself with your (off-topic) obsession of Menendez. I clearly stated that IF he exploited children, he deserves the harshest punishment possible. Any yet you call me a "friend" to pedophiles and rapists. And now you complain about personal assaults?

Your words have exposed you as a hypocrite, a fool and a liar. And now you want to pretend it's all just a bunch of "silliness". Very convenient. Sometimes we know people are lying and we can't prove it. You provided the evidence. So thanks!

BTW: Even your lie of cutting and pasting flm's post is inaccurate. You added the words: "My question again". Why would you claim it as YOUR question?



Last, First, MI said...
Mark,
Identities? Identify ANY Democrat that has demanded that Bob Menendez, child prostitute customer and Democratic Party Senator from New Jersey, step aside and cooperate fully with the current FBI investigation.10:37 AM

equitus said...

My question, again: Identify ANY Democrat that has demanded that Bob Menendez, child prostitute customer and Democratic Party Senator from New Jersey, step aside and cooperate fully with the current FBI investigation.
1:31 AM
equitus said...
mark, it's only in your head that I've created a new identity.

Last, First, MI said...

Equitus,

You hit the nail on the head when you said, "mark is rattled, alright. He clings to this made up distraction to avoid any rational, factual debate."

[By the way, I hope Mark will allow me to quote you.]

Also, you owe no apologies to me. I've watched Mark troll here for long enough to recognize that he will not debate when he can engage in character assassination. He will not dare speak of creeps on the left as he would those on the right because he is a dishonest man both intellectually and morally.

Bob Menendez has engaged in the exploitation of child prostitutes and Mark throws down the "if" card. I don't think he was so impartial when it was Harry Reid accusing Mitt Romney of tax fraud. Nope, Mark when right along with that character assassination meme. Well Mark, I guess since Harry Reid is backing Menendez, your conscience is clear and it certainly says everything we need to know about the Democrats. Let's hope Harry doesn't take any "anonymous" calls or he might find out that Bob's campaign donor flew the NJ pervert down to the DR many more times than the Dem Sen is admitting, which is a crime in itself, even if you're OK with raping little girls.

There is a sad linkage, a context to Menendez' crimes, that brings Mark full circle with his unquestioning and unprincipled support for Barrack Obama and his apparent eagerness for a Hillary administration. Betsy's link to the article on the human trafficking and slavery resurgence in Mali spells it all out. Maybe Mark could read that article and then provide substantive comments. I would really like that but I doubt he would risk it.

Mark is more than happy to turn a blind eye on the damage done by those he thinks will someday accomplish the goals of left wing fantasists. Some day he will realize how wrong he was about these people and eventually he may even come to the truth about his leftist ideology. Until then the damage goes on and on and Mark would prefer to avert a critical eye preferring to engage in chasing ghosts under his bed.

mark said...

equitus,
Why would I jump through the hoops you set up? Again, whining about "character assassination" when you called me a fascist is just a bit ironic. I've proved you are a liar by posting your own words. So please go ahead and present your "evidence" that I'm a fascist.

"Unquestioning support" for Obama? Hardly. I have criticized him many times here: For stonewalling and covering up Benghazi, his failed leadership on the deficit (as I've said, he should have supported Bowles-Simpson, or something very similar). I've also criticized his support for continuing the insane, wasteful "war on drugs", especially when it comes to marijuana.
So yet another lie exposed.



Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

So you hold Obama responsible for a total failure of leadership with Benghazi? Yet you voted for him anyway.

Do you hold him responsible for the other collateral damage that is still raining down from his unilateral decision to take our country to war against Libya? Now that slavery is on the upswing in Mali, do you hold this administration responsible for its many failures to follow-up after taking down Qaddafi, just as you did with Bush? Of course not!

You admit that Obama has been an absolute disaster for the economy. National unemployment figures are as high as when he took office, millions have left the work force and no longer seek employment, millions more have gone on food stamps, and black unemployment is higher now than during the Bush administration. And you voted for this guy?

Now we hear that you are finally admitting that it upset you that Obama had Holder arm the drug cartels in Mexico. I guess that's your position because as long as those guys are fighting it out in Mexico, you're not getting a better price on weed. Damn that war on drugs! You should be jamming the White House switchboard right now.

I know you're still chasing your tail over Equitus and your belief that we are one in the same, but we're not and I've never called you a fascist. It's a thin line when the government gets to pick "winners" - be it ghastly failures like Solyndra or financial successes like Facebook - but I'd rather point to the hypocrisy of his administration, its cronyism, and you, a useful idiot that follows along with a dependable vote.

Again, which third party candidate did you support?

mark said...

equitus,
lfm is getting tiresome. Would you please make him more interesting? Oh, yeah, and please answer this:
Why would someone who cut-and-pasted someone else's writing precede it with "My question, again:"? The word "my" generally denotes possession. Why put it there when it wasn't in the original? Just curious.

And as show of good faith, I'll name two third-party candidates for whom I've voted: Ralph Nader, Mike Munger.
I'm guessing that was anti-climatic. Sorry.
OK. Your turn.

Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

It's been like pulling teeth but after two weeks, we've finally got a response on third party candidates!

I think I can see why you've been so hesitant. Nader thinks Obama is guilty of war crimes and should be impeached for Libya. He has a lot of nasty things to say about the guy you supported. Nader called Hillary a "panderer" when she ran in 2008. Do you agree? Was he on the ballot in NC in 2008 and did you vote for him over Obama? I think we know the answer to that. You know he has not been on NC's ballot this century, so were you one of the 2,108 votes he garnered in 1996 as an independent? Was that a protest vote against Bill Clinton? Good for you if it was but why didn't you vote against Obama in protest? Sounds like your vote has been taken for granted for quite a while now.

That leaves us with Munger, a Libertarian that wants smaller government and lower taxes. He wants more charter schools! He's pro nuclear power! He wants free market solutions for medical care, not a single payer solution! But you voted for Obama - for MORE and BIGGER GOVERNMENT! Are you conflicted or what?! How can you vote for a man that espouses a political and economic philosophy that is so far apart from Obama's? Unless it's about weed. Yeah, Munger might go for legal weed. Finally found a core belief for you Mark, but as far as I can tell Obama is opposed to you on that too.

I suppose it's easy to understand your penchant to run after your "Equitus=LFMI" delusion rather than face those real conflicts. I'm also starting to understand that the weed might be behind the paranoia.

So, once again:

Do you hold Obama responsible for a total failure of leadership with Benghazi?

Do you hold him responsible for the other collateral damage that is still raining down from his unilateral decision to take our country to war against Libya? Do you hold him responsible for the conditions that lead to the death of Americans, among others, in Algeria? Now that slavery is on the upswing in Mali, do you hold this administration responsible for its many failures to follow-up after taking down Qaddafi, just as you did with Bush?


I'm paraphrasing my earlier questions that you avoided - am I allowed to do that? Or should I ask Equitus first?

mark said...

equitus,
So now, on top of being a fascist and anti-semite, I'm a stoner because I believe that pot should be legal?
I support the Dream Act. Perhaps I'm a young Hispanic as well. Is this an example of the "sharp and eloquent" posts you were bragging about?

How about backing up any of your charges?
I have proven that you created lfm and lied about it. I'm sure you've heard that the cover-up is worse than the original wrong-doing. You're pretty much in that territory now.
Please, continue to throw out your absurd charges. If it bothered me, I wouldn't be here. I'll continue to refute you by showing your own posts proving you're a liar and a fool.

Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

Wipe the flecks of spittle off of your chin, it's unbecoming.

Try refuting me, or anyone, including Equitus, with a cogent, fact based argument. Just once. Can you do that?

Make a case for the "success" of the Obama-Clinton foreign policy.
[Helpful hint: Don't use the term "foreign relations", as you know I'll just bring up Dem Sen pervert Menendez, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee]

mark said...

equitus,
Yes, I know all about your obsession with Menendez. Just one of the many things you share with lfm.
Keep digging. Please.

Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

Maybe if I dig deep enough we'll find your argument supporting the triumphal Obama-Clinton foreign policy. Where to start?

1. Islamic Brotherhood holds power in Egypt.

2. Libya is awash in weapons, militants, AQ subsidiaries, and they are all seeking new uses now that America has been chased out like a scalded dog.

3. Many are headed to Syria where the civilian body count exceeds 65,000 while Iran helps Assad kill more. I remember Obama crowing about how we needed to bomb Libya to save lives!

4. Algeria and Mali face renewed threats, the latter an invasion spawned in Libya and the former, a bloody terrorist attack from the same animals that killed our ambassador.

5. Iran is making overtures in Egypt and Sudan is facilitating weapons shipments into Gaza.

6. Slavery is back in style in Mali and human trafficking is booming.

7. Hillary says, "What difference does it make?!"

8. Nobody knows where Obama was for hours and hours while Americans died in Benghazi. Maybe you can pull him off the golf course this weekend and get him to make another triumphal speech in Cairo because that worked so well before.

9. Wait, the combined genius of Hagel and Kerry should be enough to take care of all of that...well they've got to be better than Clinton, right?

10. Blame a video on YouTube for administrative ineptitude, negligence and dereliction of duty then send Rice out to brief the policy analysts on The View.

Which will it be? Now you can keep whining about Equitus or you can take a stand for your man and the lady in the pantsuit. Really mark, your inability to discern between people that think your ideas are nothing but crap shouldn't stop you from posting them here anyway!

mark said...

equitus,
Who's whining?
Not me.
Your outrage is as phony as your new identity.
By all means, please continue. You're doing your fellow conservatives proud.

Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

I'm really not Equitus but by your failure to rise to the challenge to defend your idols Hillary and Obama, you've once again proven who you are, Mark, and what you are.

Further, your pathetic excuse that you voted for Ralph Nader last century as some sort of proof that you're nothing more than a Democrat toady, well, it was good for a laugh.

Feel free to pick from any of the topics listed in the previous posting in regard to Obama's foreign policy and we can discuss it at length. Unless you're still not up to the task and only came here to lob in a baseless slur about Rubio.

mark said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mark said...

equitus,
Why would you want to have a discussion with someone you consider a fascist, anti-semite and stoner?
Lonely?
Thanks, but I'll continue to simply post your own words proving you to be a liar. Easier and more-effective.

Last, First, MI said...

Mark,

"Easier and more-effective"

Did it really take 16 full minutes [the span between your first attempt at an answer and what passes for your best effort of the two] for you to conclude that you are ineffective and lazy?

I could have saved you the time.

I don't know if you are a fascist, and anti-semite, or a stoner, but I'll play along if you like.

Now put your big boy pants on and take a stab and joining a real debate on a matter of substance.

I'll serve: "A President that hides for seven or more hours while an American consulate is under attack and still has not told us what he did during that time - over five months later! Good or bad?"