Recently in Democrat Wrath Category
I'm tired of remodeling and I have pre-election anxiety so I figured I'd waste 10 minutes so as to relieve stress. What better way then to pick on Zippo (my affectionate name whose gender is unknown to me). Zippo is the champion of liberal lunacy. There is not a statement made that Zippo can't misconstrue. S/he's as bad as my ex-wife. Not only do I think that he mis-understands everything, I feel he is also mis-understood. If you were to invite Zippo to a brain-storming session it would end in loss of any cognitive thought and create a vaccum that would rival outerspace.
I believed at the beginning of my dealings with Zippo that s/he cared until I realized what s/he was about. There is no subject that is blogged that can't be tied in one way or the other to two main subjects; race and homosexuality. The guy/girl is amazing! I just can't fathom how s/he does it! And s/he has guts, too! Why s/he even told us that his/her wife was ugly.
Now s/he has been called ridiculous, an idiot, condescending, socialist, liberal, gadfly, lunatic, radical and much more. I think by this resume that s/he has worked up, that s/he was a very important person. Maybe SpinMeister for the Bubba Billy administration. Heck, s/he might be working for the Hilly camp in the same capacity! S/he certainly has the credentials for it.
You realize that this is all in fun to break up the horror of the collapse of Americanism as we use to know it. Yes, Zippo, you are helping to tear down our borders and throw out our sovereignty. Fighter for anything goes and the oppressed illegals. What would we ever blog about without you. You bring such a darkness to every conversation. I could never really say I hate you. May think about it on occasion but I would never really say it.
Another example of pitiable Democrat wrath:
There is a local liberal Web site called Loudoun Force (sorry, losers, you will not get a link from here) whose "admin" just deleted one of my comments with the rationale
Comment from Joe Budzinski from the Help Save Loudoun organization has been unapproved because it violated the Service Discussion Guidelines.
My comment took David Weintraub and Laura Valle to task for their inane comments made in a thread there. I would have saved a copy of the comment if I had any idea the proprietors were high school sophomores, but since I did not I will have to recount from memory.
David and Laura stated that, in essence, the problems citizens of eastern Loudoun attributed to illegal aliens were bogus. I replied that David and Laura should refrain from holding forth on such matters when the two of them live quite nicely distanced from Sterling. I also advised Laura Valle that the more she speaks out in contempt of Sterling's citizens, the more her organization will be front and center in the debate.
I suggested to Laura that this has not been working out well for La Voz because the citizens of Sterling do not appreciate a western Loudoun elitist telling them they do not know what is happening in Sterling. I also advised Laura Valle that it seems every time she pipes up (or her buddy David pipes up for her), she burnishes her credentials as an antagonist to Loudoun's citizens. I opined that, as the single paid employee of a taxpayer-funded non-profit in Loudoun County, Laura is not acting wisely to continue to position herself as an antagonist to those who are paying her salary.
Two lessons: One - Loudoun Force is a farce. If the above opinion is considered beyond the scope of acceptable debate, the Web site is a joke and a waste of time.
Two - It is high time the citizens of Loudoun County speak up about whether an individual who holds them in such contempt should be funded from the public till. Write to the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors at firstname.lastname@example.org and tell our supervisors how you feel about paying Laura Valle's salary.
What is ironic is the idiots who run the site did not gather that the suggestion in my comment was actually very good, objective advice for Laura Valle. I am guessing they took down my comment before she got to read it. Too bad for Laura.
UPDATE: Well, okay then! Someone from Loudoun Farce just stopped by to leave a copy of my comment that they deleted last night (when they also edited something Dan wrote and kicked him and Greg out of the site.)
I appreciate that, and as a result I am going to give LF exactly one link, right here.
I encourage our NVTH readers to make exactly one visit to LF by clicking on that link. Read Laura Valle's original post there and the remaining comments. Then come back here, shake the dust off your sandals, and scroll down to the LF reprinting of my comment posted Sept 23, 1:31 pm. Read the section titled "Mr. Budzinski's Post".
This is what got us all kicked out of LF. I believe the Loudoun Farce rep left it here to shame us, but I am not sure it accomplishes that goal.
Now that my note has been resurrected, I do hope Laura reads it, because it was written with her best interests in mind.
Ok, joke's over: This is what I really meant to say.
...I do not blame Mr. Weintraub for his confusion about the illegal migration conundrum, and I truly thank him for making it public, because it is a crazy situation.
But I really had you going for a while there, Jonathan and David, didn't I?
UPDATE: The letter that initiated the discussion has fallen off the Times-Mirror front page, so here is the link again for those who have not read it. There is a fascinating discussion going on in the comments.
There is a story in the new testament of a man who lived in the tombs of the dead, in caves in a cliff side. The man was not in his right mind. It begins thus â€¦
From Mathew, Ch5:1-2
1They came to the other side of the sea, to the country of the Gerasenes. 2And when Jesus had stepped out of the boat, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit.
The conversation in which Jesus cured the madman was â€¦
From Mathew, Ch5:8-12
8For he [Jesus] was saying to him, "Come out of the man, you unclean spirit!" 9And Jesus asked him, "What is your name?" He replied, "My name is Legion, for we are many." 10And he begged him earnestly not to send them out of the country. 11Now a great herd of pigs was feeding there on the hillside, 12and they begged him, saying, "Send us to the pigs; let us enter them."
Many here get down right huffy when it is implied that liberalism is a mental disorder. However, we apparently have one liberal who is many.
The Petraeus hearings were a disgrace. The man was called a liar and a puppet before he ever uttered a word. Can this country have a political discourse under such conditions? When the moveOn.org message is indiscernible from the Senators' in the committee hearing room, there is a problem in our government. It means a foreign-born Hungarian socialist has hijacked the Democrat Party, for pennies on the dollar.
Why have the committee meet under such poisonous conditions? Aside from the political theater, was there any point to the exercise? We as a Nation still need to listen to each other. The only alternative is violence. To assume your political adversary is always lying is to end dialog.
When Reid proclaimed the war lost last April, the Democrat party announced publicly its investment in losing the war in Iraq in order to win the election in 2008 here in the US. It is this investment that set the stage for the Petraeus Report fiasco. With politics at home trumping the war abroad, do we really remember those who were killed on 9/11? Is this honoring their memory?
OK boys, girls and Legionaries (Tom, Realist et al). Petraeus actually did provide a report. Instead of rehashing what we have been chewing on for over a year now, lets get a copy of it, I will open a new thread if needed. There is plenty of passion here, but lets put some fresher meat on the table than "should we go to war in Iraq". Your vote in a comment would be appreciated. BTW, using the NIE and other sources is most definitely fair game etc. But the TOPIC is the current situation and Petraeus' veracity.
Since our President is 100 percent on board with granting blanket amnesty to illegal aliens, destroying the idea of American citizenship and basically selling our country down the river, where is the liberal pep rally?
Seems like George W. Bush would be a hero of the left. How's about a little intellectual consistency, boys?
No one jet pooled, no one took commercial flights to save money, fuel or emissions.
Here's what you do next time someone starts talking to you about how we need to make massive changes in our lifestyles and economy in order to ward off the warming of the Earth: Punch them in the nose. After enough punches in the nose, they will all shut up.
If you're not the punchin' type, just laugh in their face and take the keys to their car, saying "I get the car, you go get a bicycle. You don't deserve a car."
For Wednesday - the bridge between the beginning and end of the week - here is an attempt to build bridges.
At least it's a starting point. Tomorrow we shall discuss some even more effective ideas for healing our nation's fractured soul.
Inside this little treat that showed up in the mail today from the Aquaculture Development and Seafood Marketing Program of Maryland are 7 recipes for Striped Bass, 4 recipes for Perch, and 1 recipe for Oyster Dressing. If I can figure out how to edit posts without deleting them, I'll list them all. For now, though, find the Free State Baked Stuffed Rockfish below the fold:
I don't know about you, but when our family went about the college search for our young'uns, we always kept a wary eye out for nefarious influences around campus: dope dealing, graffiti, toy dog clubs, and anything at all that reeked of Christianity.
So I had no small amount of sympathy for the College of William and Mary's brave decision to remove the terrible, anachronistic, 18-INCH Wren Cross from the property. Our children did not end up attending the school, but the wife and I occasionally enjoy a visit to the historic town. And heaven help me if I'm going to allow the missus to set foot in a place with actual CROSSES out in public display - and 18-inchers, no less!
And if I did have a kid enrolled in William and Mary, I sure as heck wouldn't want to mosey down there for the weekend expecting a nice ongoing tete-a-tete with the local reenactors, perhaps a spicy sex show or three, these types of things - and suddenly walk around a corner to have a friggin' cross arm poke us in the eyes. GHAA! Can you even imagine?
The College of William and Mary's removal of a cross from a campus chapel has won the Virginia school this year's "Campus Outrage Award" from a conservative student group...
William and Mary President Gene R. Nichol said he asked for the 18-inch cross to be taken from Wren Chapel in October because of concerns about offending non-Christians, and that he had received complaints about it. The removal of the cross -- to make the chapel "equally open and relevant to all," Mr. Nichol said -- made headlines and stirred protests by students, faculty and alumni of William and Mary, the nation's second-oldest college after Harvard.
An online petition to reinstate the cross garnered 18,000 signatures. Threats by an unnamed donor to withdraw $12,000 of funding from the college forced Mr. Nichol to change his decision on March 7. Mr. Nichol has established a committee to study the role of religion at public universities.
Just goes to show: money talks, even though our children's very souls hang in the balance.
May Morgan have mercy on them all.
The Ann Coulter remarks from Friday have created quite a to-do and resulted in some unfortunate confusion which I herewith intend to clear up.
Here is the exact quote from Ms. Coulter's address at CPAC:
I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards, but it turns out that you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot.' So I'm kind of at an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards, so I think I'll just conclude here and take your questions.
First, some initial points that need to be made:
Let me state for the record that I do not recommend anyone use the word "faggot" under any circumstances. It upsets people such as the folks at Equality Loudoun, who became quite agitated and unwittingly added to the confusion by making a number of misinformed claims - such as that this was Ms. Coulter's biggest applause line of the afternoon, when in reality it was about 5th. Furthermore, "faggot" is inarguably a pointed epithet which can evoke strong negative emotions from listeners and, as a general rule, for the sake of one's well-being, it is prudent to avoid doing this in the course of everyday life. It is also goes without saying it is a VERY rude thing to say in reference to gay people, in the same class as the n-word, although as will be noted I think such usage is about as common as the n-word nowadays.
Also, it is important to note that Ms. Coulter did not call John Edwards a faggot. The sentence structure is a combination of the pluperfect and future subjunctive forms and yields a hypothetical statement regarding both Mr. Edwards and the term in question. There is no reason to assume she did not choose her words carefully, because regardless of whatever else one might say about Ann Coulter few accuse her of being a poor writer. Her actual statement concerned what happens if you use a particular word. Considering that the public response to her statement has precisely confirmed what she said, there is a simple factual accuracy to the remark. In addition, as John Hawkins observes in the course of denouncing the remark, she was without doubt referencing an incident several weeks ago in which an actor went into rehab after publicly using the word 'faggot'. Ms. Coulter simply took a joke that was already half-made and plugged herself and Mr. Edwards into it.
Finally, before the false idea that Ms. Coulter's remark was representative of the outlook of "conservatives" in any degree goes any further, it must be noted that the universal "conservative" reaction has been negative. As noted in both the New York Times and Washington Post, the major Republican candidates have denounced it. In addition to Hawkins, every major right-of-center blogger I've found to have commented on the remark has denounced it: See Michelle Malkin, Ace, Captain's Quarters, American Mind, Right Wing Nuthouse, American Spectator, The Corner. I spoke with several bloggers at the conference and to a person they also denounced it.
The contention of this essay is that Ms. Coulter's remark is undeserving of the degree of opprobrium that has been heaped upon it and that conservatives, such as they are, do not need to be sprinting away from Ms. Coulter with such knee-jerk haste. In order to prove this point, we will focus on the word in question, Mr. Edwards, Ms. Coulter, and the context in which the word was used.
(Oh, yeah, we need to cut Al some slack, because he had to be like - what, 45 - in this picture?)
Al Franken, he of the meteoric career (meteors don't necessarily go "up" you realize), is running for Senate in two years.
Undoubtedly he will be identified as "comedian" Al Franken in the press, but he's not very funny anymore. For a good year or so we had the rare treat of the video of his Air America show on the Sundance Channel every night, and I could not get enough of it to be perfectly honest. Apart from the pre-recorded bits, it was the proverbial car crash in slow motion, night after night.
And the operative word here is ... slow. As in, dragging.
Al's thing is he is not particularly comfortable in his own skin, and he telegraphs that like a beacon. You want to talk about dead air? Al creates dead air every time he exhales. If you had a drinking game to do shots whenever Al left an uncomfortable silence on his show, you'd be blitzed and puking within 15 minutes.
If you added bonus shots on top of that for every time he whined, the drinking game would be outlawed on the basis of mass alcohol poisoning.
He may be a clever man at the keyboard or delivering the prepared speech, but quick on his feet he is not. I think Norm Coleman would want to demand debates on a pretty much daily basis. After a week of sheer frustration Al would be goaded into attempting a half-nelson and that would be the end of that.
UPDATE: Vivian has now not only banned Jack but also closed comments on the post he sullied with his presence. It's a slippery slope, friends, a very slippery slope.
On a related note, I want to point out that if anyone, anywhere, at any time gets the notion to refer to MY party as the "Repub" Party, or gets the twisted idea of referring to me as a "Repub," I will not take it lying down. I will pursue that man or woman to the end of the Earth even though it take until the end of time and I WILL SEE JUSTICE SERVED. You will cry out to be banned from this blog after you find out what's in store for you. So don't even think about it.
UPDATE II: Charles notes
BTW, while Bush apologized for his mistake in the SOTU, I would note that he did not make a mistake.
In his speech he congratulated the winners for the "Democrat Majority". He was not saying the name of their party. He was expressing who was in the majority. IT was DEMOCRATS that were in the majority, not DEMOCRATICS. So it was a DEMOCRAT majority, not a DEMOCRATIC majority.
It would be the Democratic Party majority, except that the party cannot be a majority, there is only one of it.
The time has come to officially establish the "Democrat Wrath" category here, upon receiving word that the term "Democrat" is now utterly toxic to real-life Democrats.
Like kryptonite to the man from Krypton, that of which they were borne has become that which now threatens their very existence.
I don't need to rehash the issue, I'm sure. One example is our man Jack getting banned from the otherwise sensible Vivian Page's blog for daring to use the aforesaid offensive terminology.
I am envisioning the day when Democrats rule the world, yet are bedeviled by opponents who line the parade routes chanting "Democrat, Democrat, Democrat, Democrat, Democrat ..." prior to being rounded up and hauled off for slaughter.
"How darest thou label us 'Democrats'", sayest the Democrats. "Nevermore, nevermore!"
In all fairness, Democrats do consent quite often to being called "Democrats" with nobody getting sent off to the gulag as a result. For this we can thank their liberalism.
On the other hand, improper pronunciation of the phrase "Democrat Party" is now deemed hate speech, punishable by prison time ... or is it "Democratic Party ...?" I guess I'll never get that one straight now.
Our very astute local professor, the Marshmallow Man, observed:
o cours you righ, bu wha ca yo expec fro a publican?!
... and how true it is that just two letters can make all the difference in the world.
I can only imagine if people were to begin calling me "Budzins".
It would be traumatic.
My immediate response to the horror follows:
I got banned for calling them the DEMOCRAT PARTY!!
I love it!!