Left Wing Politics

Comment

Comment by Snagg on January 25, 2012 at 6:17am

Until it's actually born, that is. After that, it's just another welfare-sucking burden on the Great American People.

Comment by Snagg on December 17, 2011 at 9:50am

I'm beginning to wonder if the grandest side effect of the 60's and 70's drives towards freedom, civil liberties, scientific factualism and an equal, open  society, really will be the death of semi-organized superstition, AKA "religion".

In the sense that, fundamentalist religious devotion, in the last twenty years or so, has been SO extreme and reactionary, so flat-out wack-a-ding-hoy, that it almost feels like a nation-sized case of "Give 'em enough rope" was handed to  the "traditionalists", bigots and talisman-waving mystics. They've made such COLOSSAL idiots of themselves, that the essential silliness at the core of their irrational beliefs has been laid bare for anyone who bothers to look.

The internet, as well, has had an ENORMOUS effect on the stripping away of much of the rhetoric and hate, to reveal that, while their faiths may have  different details, the people who practice them are much more alike than they'd been led to believe. And that the dire threats of divine retribution and instantaneous punishment for committing the sin of simply opening one's mind have not come to pass.

Here's to Hope.

R.I.P., Christopher Hitchens.

Comment by Snagg on November 23, 2011 at 9:39am

I'm posting this on the WTP thread,, too. Just for fun.

 

Maybe Newt Gingrich doesn't really want the presidency that much.

I'm beginning to suspect that he fosters this charade of running for office as a way of drawing attention to himself, which is when he gets to fulfill his true kink: Showing off his affairs in public, being perceived as a dirty, dirty boy, and getting away with contemptible behavior that the rest of us would never even consider in the first place. "Ooooh, Look at ME! I'm an ADULTERER and a RANDY HYPOCRITE! And it feels so GOOOOOD!!!", and then he scuttles back to his special "Private Area" on the campaign bus and doesn't come out for ten minutes. A sick game of sexual exhibitionism and moral depravity, passed off as a political campaign.

Newt Gingrich doesn't want your VOTE. He wants your SKEEVED-OUT LOATHING. It's what REALLY gets him off. Eww.

Please, America, don't enable this pervert anymore. It's not the electorate's duty to indulge a deviant's uncontrollable impulses. Ignore him, and he'll go away. Or at least he will, as soon as he can find a filthy, tattered raincoat.

 

 

Comment by Scott Free on October 25, 2011 at 8:34pm

Comment by Snagg on October 10, 2011 at 7:04am

I think it's not so much that his ideas were indefensible, so much as he was incapable of defending them. Bates constantly stole other people's ideas and re-posted them, and generally was unaware that he himself didn't fully comprehend what he was spreading around or how obvious that was to everybody else. He's very much a fan of trying to simply overwhelm an opponent with tons of propaganda (while calling the blizzard of evidence-free bushwah "facts") and blatantly grasping at diversionary tactics whenever the bullshit didn't stick.

Most of all, he's QUITE convinced that he's a clever and canny opponent, and it bewilders and peeves him whenever it becomes unavoidably obvious that he's neither. That much became evident by the way he'd get get miffed and disappear every time he was losing an argument. Like all group-thinkers, he'd simply scurry off and come back with a fresh armload of manure, instead of actually considering the flaws and impossibilities of the pinheaded ignorance  to which he's so attracted - Because, as we all know, the more you believe and repeat the lie, the truer it becomes. In the Bates debate hall, blind, stubborn faith trumps calm, rational reality every time.

Larry's also a big devotee of Rovian tactics - Namely, deliberately muddying the waters, ignoring and avoiding questions that led to arguments that he knew he wouldn't win, flat-out lying through his teeth, "straw-manning" his opponents and then blustering and gloating and declaring himself the "winner". VERY third-grade behavior, but that's what pulled his trigger.

I still think it's still possible that he may have a reading defect - But that's no excuse for his know-it-all over-confidence, smug condescension and constant skulking off when he wasn't getting his way.

Comment by Snagg on September 16, 2011 at 4:24am

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/AlzheimersCommunity/pat-robertson-alzh...

 

But, Bates shouldn't be worried about this - He'll simply claim that Robertson isn't a "REAL" christian, so who cares what he says.

 

Yeah - Because the rest of the world only pays attention to the words of REAL christians, like Larry. Christ on a bike, what an ego.

 

Who here wants to bet that Robertson's wife has Alzheimers, and the randy, loathsome old freak is looking for an excuse to bang her nurse?

Comment by Snagg on September 14, 2011 at 6:33pm

"How old were you when you decided that the church you were in, was wrong about God, as proved by the suffering that exists in the world, Snagg?"

 

Oh...About the time I realized that god doesn't exist, and that religions are chasing a fairy tale. And that since a non-existent god can't responsible for the atrocities that so bothered me, then the religious dingbats and their petty divisions and dogmas probably were. 

Howzabout YOU, Captain America?

Comment by Snagg on September 14, 2011 at 6:29pm

Being as how religious dingbats tend to pick faiths that reflect their own specific character flaws, I'd bet that you're one of those apologists who dismisses every single complaint about your god's total lack of involvement with his children's problems (I.E., ignoring little kids with cancer, allowing natural disasters to kill legions of innocent people, doing nothing about terrorists who are performing atrocities in his name, etc, etc) not with a thoughtful, reasoned defense or an honest "I Don't Know Why He Allows Horrible Things To Happen", but with a by-now thoroughly-ingrained shrug and a callous "It's not for a sinner like YOU to question the KING OF THE UNIVERSE! How DARE you!"

How old were you when you decided that the church you were in, was wrong about God, as proved by the suffering that exists in the world, Snagg?

 

Lawrence, if you have any documentation (other than your extremist web sites self-serving conjectures that is), then why don't you post it.

That’s a pretty good deal Pac.  Any source of documentation that disagrees with your own mindset is automatically an “extremist web site”.  Sorry, but that only works over there in Lefthandia, where you live, not here in the real world.

 

You on the other hand want me to prove a negative.

Whether you choose to prove a negative or choose not to, is entirely up to you, Pac.  You must work within your limitations.

http://departments.bloomu.edu/philosophy/pages/content/hales/articl...

Now follow your usual pattern and run him down.

 

BTW, the reason no one is responding to your idiotic stories about a professional fundraiser, is that: so what? does it somehow implicate the DNC? Has this person been elected to office?

Not my story(singular), the OC Register published it, and, in case you haven’t realized it yet, you just responded to it.  Not bad, since you represent 50% of the possible responders on this site since I posted the story.

 

This man makes an excellent point:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/07/my-take-muslims-should-sto...

Yep, Snagg, CNN’s always the source I go to for religious thought.

 

I've always said that the rank and file of the tea party, though they claim that the Constitution is their Holy Book, can only recite the Second amendment, the first is they're cornered. Lawarence said that they have the right to build the Mosque, but that was an insensitive act.

Yep, Right, directly out of the second amendment, Pac

 

What cracks me up is that WND is run by a Christian-Arab, who's carrying a mega-chip on his shoulder, blah blah, blah,………

What cracks me up is that WND is such a burr under the left’s saddle, having reach and influence that Huffpo and your other favorites, can only wish they had.

 

 

...Blah blah blah....Hey, Larry - How EXACTLY did you drive away Westboro scum from a place they'd never actually been?

 

I'm betting you pedaled your Big Wheel around the block a few times while wearing your Red Ryder six-shooter and real imitation gunbelt - But I'm just guessing. Your absolute refusal to tell me how you gloriously defeated the Westboro shitstains (without violating their constitutional rights) is a CLOSELY GUARDED MILITARY SECRET - Yeah, THAT's the real story.

Comment by Lawrence Bates on September 14, 2011 at 5:43pm

Being as how religious dingbats tend to pick faiths that reflect their own specific character flaws, I'd bet that you're one of those apologists who dismisses every single complaint about your god's total lack of involvement with his children's problems (I.E., ignoring little kids with cancer, allowing natural disasters to kill legions of innocent people, doing nothing about terrorists who are performing atrocities in his name, etc, etc) not with a thoughtful, reasoned defense or an honest "I Don't Know Why He Allows Horrible Things To Happen", but with a by-now thoroughly-ingrained shrug and a callous "It's not for a sinner like YOU to question the KING OF THE UNIVERSE! How DARE you!"

How old were you when you decided that the church you were in, was wrong about God, as proved by the suffering that exists in the world, Snagg?

 

Lawrence, if you have any documentation (other than your extremist web sites self-serving conjectures that is), then why don't you post it.

That’s a pretty good deal Pac.  Any source of documentation that disagrees with your own mindset is automatically an “extremist web site”.  Sorry, but that only works over there in Lefthandia, where you live, not here in the real world.

 

You on the other hand want me to prove a negative.

Whether you choose to prove a negative or choose not to, is entirely up to you, Pac.  You must work within your limitations.

http://departments.bloomu.edu/philosophy/pages/content/hales/articl...

Now follow your usual pattern and run him down.

 

BTW, the reason no one is responding to your idiotic stories about a professional fundraiser, is that: so what? does it somehow implicate the DNC? Has this person been elected to office?

Not my story(singular), the OC Register published it, and, in case you haven’t realized it yet, you just responded to it.  Not bad, since you represent 50% of the possible responders on this site since I posted the story.

 

This man makes an excellent point:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/07/my-take-muslims-should-sto...

Yep, Snagg, CNN’s always the source I go to for religious thought.

 

I've always said that the rank and file of the tea party, though they claim that the Constitution is their Holy Book, can only recite the Second amendment, the first is they're cornered. Lawarence said that they have the right to build the Mosque, but that was an insensitive act.

Yep, Right, directly out of the second amendment, Pac

 

What cracks me up is that WND is run by a Christian-Arab, who's carrying a mega-chip on his shoulder, blah blah, blah,………

What cracks me up is that WND is such a burr under the left’s saddle, having reach and influence that Huffpo and your other favorites, can only wish they had.

Comment by Snagg on September 9, 2011 at 5:43pm

Ah, but you have to factor in that you're talking about a guy with far more ego than integrity. A guy who feels that his opinion is greater than any fact. That if he does nothing more than declare himself right and infallible about whichever topic he feels like paying attention to, then he automatically is right and infallible about that topic.

 

I'm talking about Joseph Farah - But we all know that Larry's ego required him to believe that I was talking about him, and not JF. Not, admittedly, that there's really that much difference between the two. Both would insist that the sun sets in the east rather than admit that they were facing the wrong direction.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• …
• 35
• Next ›
• Page