My Photo

From the
Fascist's Mouth

What I'm Reading


« Christofascist Coulter Spewing Hate Again | Main | Bush's Daylight Savings Crime »



*If* I was writing the sentiment that I assume you are trying to express, I would have written (but didn't) that "America is the embodiment of evil in the modern world". - filth

Got that, Intellectual Conservative? Not ONLY did it confirm what you wrote but it was too lazy to reach for a dictionary and explore the meaning of "focus".


TT/irish/Dude/bren essentially whine: I REJECT YOUR OBJECTIVE REALITY AND SUBSTITUTE MY OWN. We don't believe in absolute truth ... but our "truth" is Bush equals Hitler, GITMO equals Gulag, and the war on terror equals imperialism. Every argument conservatives make is absolutely wrong because we progressyves have the absolute truth. Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah (with hands clasped over ears and heads shoved up their arses).

irish-moron/Dude ... ya dimbulbs still don't get it do ya? You bet the Guardian is a biased source, but that doesn't mean its always wrong. Even blind squirrels find acorns. When a lefty cites the Guardian, then it becomes a suspect source because the Guardian itself lefty. Now is that too hard to understand?

But when a conservative cites the Guardian, CNN/CBS/ABC/NBC/NPR/MSNBC or the thousands of other left-wing "news" rags in the world to prove a point, its because he/she recognizes that the nature of the story being reported by the news media must be so well-documented that it is beyond debate ... otherwise why would the leftist news outlets be forced to publish something which actually helps the conservative cause, a cause 85% of journalists despise?

Now the lefty media has also been known to spin truth because it knows it can't get away with an outright lie because of the evidence which supports the story, but apparently its a spin you leftists are incapable of seeing because the media spin merely reflects the worldview you liberals are predisposed to believe in any way! For example, let's say lefties believe 2+2=5, there is a study which documents 2+2=4, the media reports "there is a study that claims 2+2=4 but there are other experts who reject this analysis because in their experience 2+2=5." The lefty news consumer then says to himself, "Those damn right-wingers and their bogus studies are at it again. They're always trying to confuse progressive-minded people like with their "facts". I already know 2+2=5 because that's what my professors and parents taught me. Add to this fact that the media reported other qualified experts say 2+2=5 and the media itself also seems pretty convinced that 2+2=5 ... so of course 2+2=5! Stupid neanderthal conservatives, just who do they think they're fooling!"

Conservatives read the story and say, "Of course 2+2=4 and now amount of spin will change that reality."

You see, liberals are at a real disadvantage when it comes to an honest assessment of what they believe because they are invariably trapped in the echo chamber of a liberal media which is often their major source for information on just about any issue. In this day and age, it's far better to be a conservative who is skeptical of the liberal media and who is more than willing to check out alternative news sources and then make an informed decision on what constitues real information and what constitutes media bullshit. The media is good at reporting raw statistics, like sports box scores, but when it comes to fairly reporting political or moral issues, IT SUCKS. And you, my trollish miscreants, are nothing more lemmings sucking down the media kool-aid day in and day out every day of your pathetic lives.

Naturally there wells up within people like you the desire to simply ignore what I've just said otherwise that would mean you have to question all the deeply held media lies that you've accepted as true for most of your adult life. It's like living in a cult, in your case the cult of lying liberalism. So what leftards like you generally do is up the ante by trying to turn the argument around and then claim the media is actually right-wing, not left-wing. Or even more subtly you might advance the notion the media is actually centrist. Of course the latter response is pure bunk since it can be demonstrated that far more liberals blindly believe what the news media reports and far more conservatives are skeptical of that same news media. If the media were truly centrist, equal numbers of liberals and conservatives would believe this to be the actual state of affairs.

Now to prove my point I'm going to link to the UCLA Study titled "A Measure of Media Bias". It documents the overwhelming leftist leaning of the lamestream media. That's not to say they are all kook leftist outlets like Ted Kennedy or Dennis Kucinch but rather the overwhelming majority of news outlets are leftist because, according to other studies, over 85% of journalists qualify for borderline moonbat status ... that is they are extremely liberal and vote Democratic.

And I'm willing to bet because you are preconditioned to reject anything that doesn't fit into your liberal socialist worldview you will either a) reject the study out of hand before seriously examining it with an open mind or b) say its biased and is pure bunk, c) immediately begin Googling kook left-wing blogs and see what pathetic ammo they might have to "disprove" the UCLA study. Also, if you read carefully, the study also references three other studies that have come to similar conclusions about the leftist leanings of the news media using different means of evaluation.

And to start blowing your lefty infested mind, here's an analysis of one of the conclusions by UCLA's own news organ:

The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found.

"If viewers spent an equal amount of time watching Fox's 'Special Report' as ABC's 'World News' or NBC's 'Nightly News,' then they would receive a nearly perfectly balanced version of the news," said Milyo, an associate professor of economics and public affairs at the University of Missouri at Columbia.

Obviously you leftards don't spend equal amounts of time watching FOX's "Special Report" and ABC's "World News" so there is no way you could possibly have a balanced view of truth or what constitutes real news fit to be reported. In fact you spend most of your time villifying FOX News as being far right. Once again you're found to be liars with only a lefty perspective on reality. It's time for you people to be deprogrammed, or you can simply beam up to your mothership and be with your own kind. Maybe you'll be happier.



This is very, very simple, stick with me here: the left thinks the media's 'left lean' is fine, but don't see it AS a 'lean' at all ~ as the left isn't an angle, it's the 'truth' ~ plain and simple. And what's wrong with 85% of the media being obsessed with the 'truth'? Don't you get it!? It should be 100% plus or plus 100%!!

THIS is why 'Faux' Snooze has to go, it's impeding on the 'truth'.


Somebody who isn't even important enough to rate a name wrote:

*If* I was writing the sentiment that I assume you are trying to express, I would have written (but didn't) that "America is the embodiment of evil in the modern world".

Wow kiddo, Nice strawman. So now we're going to focus on semantics, are we? Nice job, 5,000 bonus carbon footprint (or whatever) points for you.

Intellectual Conservative

He wasn't focusing on a strawman .. he was quoting you. And your statement about America being the embodiment of evil is interchangable with America being the focus.

Nice redirection, there.

Son of the South (c)


Stop with the darned Western linear thought crap, already . . . it's soooo oppresive!

Life should be about feelings! And more funds for schools! And puppies, too!



I do frequently catch the nightly news, but I do try to listen carefully.

Brian Williams says "V.P. Cheney LASHED OUT at his critics today..."

The field reporter then said ...Cheney RESPONDED to his critics..."

As a progressyve lybral I much prefer Williams' choice of words. I picture the Veep getting angry, swearing, turning red, losing it.

Unfortunately Cheney didn't "lash out" at all. He was quite restrained in his response. Gee, I wonder why Brian Williams chose that expression?

Maybe Brian doesn't like Dick Cheney.

Intellectual Conservative

Donkey .... :gasp: .... Are you saying the mainstream media is .............. BIASED?!?!?!?!?!?!!!


Cheney is used to "lashing out" because his daughter is a lesbian. That's why Brian Williams was justified in his inflammatory "lashed out" comment.


And thanks for the UCLA report link libmeister. I've read Bernie Goldbergs "Bias", the NYTimes ombudsman's comments on the subject, etc.

The newspapers aside, if you listen carefully to the choice of words and the choice of subjects on the nightly, you do indeed get an idea that they lean left. Left = good, Right = bad.

My being a progressyve lybral socialist pinko commie fag, I'm all for that.


Sheehag, of course you're right ... and I'm right and the rest of the progressives are right in light of the LIES told to us by kkkonservatives who can never know or tell the truth (whatever that truth may be from day to day).

If I might get Confusian here: Liberals are like small birds flying with the wind. Because of the small effort it takes to fly with the wind and because they do not feel the wind since they are going the same speed, small birds would conclude: The world is at equilibrium, all is good and I'm stationary to the world. I am a centrist.

However, an external observer (the conservative)who sees the larger reality is in position to not only measure the velocity (speed and direction) of the wind but also the velocity of the small birds relative to the wind. Of course the little birdies are quite ignorant of the fact they are traveling 0 mph with respect to the wind which itself is moving 20 mph, so whatever wind-measuring instruments they may have with them are quite useless too because they aren't stationary relative to the wind and therefore will show a result near zero when indeed the real ground speed is 20mph. So the small birds need a different set of instruments to measure their flight relative to the larger reality but they aren't interested in more complicated instruments. Of course it's only when the birds look beyond the wind and see the true nature of the world which exists outside the boundary of their wind-aided flight are they able to see there is something else outside their formerly utopian and simplistic world of wind-aided flight. But they won't because it's all a Bu$Hitler conspiracy to ruin their utopian existence in a pristine world. Plus, their little bird brains tell them, Halliburton would only gouge them for a mass spectrometer, doppler radar or a GPS unit.

Ergo, liberal birdies are stuck on stupid.

Is this explanation existential enough to pass progressyve muster?

Oh GOD I am so impressed.
Wow. Just ... wow.


G'night now

Intellectual Conservative

And do you notice we STILL have yet to hear an intelligent, well thought out reply, which has zero redirection, zero denials, zero not-quoting of a reputable source .. even though I myself presented direct evidence of the type of posting those on the far Left (and Irish / TT / other names) do?

How about some verifiable, provable facts, lefties?

Funny how you can actually quote what someone actually SAID .. and it's called a strawman.

I'll up the wager to $30.

Fist of Etiquette

There are those who say that the strawman is a valid debate tactic.

I know the president said after 9/11 we were all supposed to go on with our lives, but this is ridiculous. We're all going on as if right now Carl the janitor isn't lying in front of his locker, possibly DEAD.



Barney Frank has anal sex



The Exorcist

"Is this explanation existential enough to pass progressyve muster?"-Frank Bullitt

Libs, that was so well put you've caused bird-brain to crawl back into Rush's anal cyst for comfort.


Intellectual Conservative, don't fret, the return call of the mothership always takes precedence over disputing the opposition's argument in a reasoned and logical manner. Notice how irish just cashed out.

Also note "progressive" moonbats don't want to honestly deal with the discovery of 500 WMD in Iraq over the last three years which were in clear violation of UN Resolution 1441. Instead they take their cue from some anonymous voice from the Defense Department (some left-wing symp) which coyly suggested the 500 WMD weren't really WMD because they were manufactured before 1991 and they true operational status was questionable. Of course UN Resolution 1441 contains absolutely no exclusionary language regarding year of manufacture and operational status - a WMD is simply a WMD. Also Resolution 1441 was far more liberal in that it also contained provisions which outlines what would constitute "material violations", a condition in which Saddam's regime found itself relative to 16 different UN Resolutions with respect to any number of illegal weapons programs as duly noted by the Duelfer/Kay Report and Charles Duelfer's testimony before Congress:

It has now been six weeks since I (Charles Duelfer) arrived in Baghdad as the DCI’s Special Advisor for WMD in Iraq. In that time I have begun my examination of the efforts of the Group, its accomplishments, and capabilities. Certainly, General Dayton and the ISG operation he has run for the past year have achieved many major accomplishments in difficult circumstances. Much data related to Iraq’s WMD programs has been gathered. It is clear that Iraq was in material violation of UN Resolutions, including UNSCR 1441.

Foreign technology and technical assistance were critical to the progress made by Iraqi engineers and designers. Foreign missile experts worked in Iraq in violation of UN sanctions from 1998 until just before the start of OIF. They undertook a complete review of the al-Samoud surface-to-surface missile system, which exceeded UN range limits.

But despite all this and despite the fact there are reasonable suspicions that Saddam's regime, aided by the Russians, moved most of his other WMD into Syria in civilian airliners converted to be cargo carriers ... BUSH LIED!

And despite the fact that Joe Wilson himself lied about Niger yellowcake and his finding in fact led some to conclude within the CIA that Saddam's regime had in fact sought yellowcake in Niger as documented by the British intelligence. Even the left-leaning Washington Post had to acknowledge that the Senate Select Committee Intelligence report nailed Joe Wilson for his multiple lies with which he snookered the hate-Bush crowd and the lamestream media ... but BUSH LIED!

And then there is the little matter of the bipartisan October 2002 Joint Congressional Resolution for Use of American Force in Iraq which listed no less than 8 separate reasons to go to war with Saddam's regime, not the least of these was the liberation of Iraq's oppressed civilians population and the recognition that Iraqi military forces firing upon Coalition aircraft in the agreed upon No-Fly zone represented a continued violation of the peace provisions of the 1991 Peace Treaty which meant for all practical purposes Iraqi was already in a state of war against American and Coalition armed forces during those eleven years! ... but BUSH LIED!

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

Which all conclusively proves, LEFT-WING MOONBATS CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH! They have to substitute their own lying "reality".

Intellectual Conservative

If only Winston Churchill had taken that line of reasoning ... we wouldnt have people like Irish/his other names to pester us here ... and I am starting to suspect that isn't entirely a bad thing :)

Over 500 posts on here on this topic alone and not so much as one intelligently formed argument on his / its part either

Some of us, Irish / Dude / TT / whatever other name you want to use, actually have the balls to stand up and fight.

Unlike you.


It doesn't take balls to stand up, as Hillary will prove in 2008! I don't know what that means, but it sounded good to me for a moment...


"Funny how you can actually quote what someone actually SAID .. and it's called a strawman."


Please read the comments properly. I have never once used the word "strawman" on this "forum".

If you check I think you'll find that you, yourself, responded to a comment which was clearly posted by "stoorat", who wrote, and I quote:

"Wow kiddo, Nice strawman. So now we're going to focus on semantics, are we? Nice job, 5,000 bonus carbon footprint (or whatever) points for you."

(Posted by stoorat, March 12, 2007 at 04:40 PM)

If you're going to attempt to interact here, for god's sake have some gumption about who you're replying to, when it's clearly written there for you.


"I'll up the wager to $30."

If you think I'm going to waste my time re-posting all the arguments I've made here since sometime in 2005 -

[ which appears to be when Dude's Ghost/Momto10/mrsevilneocon/Blogtroll Monitor/Trophymaster/assorted names referring to socks/JannyMae first wrote: "Irish has proven without a doubt, that he/she/it is not worth bothering with" -- but of course she's rarely shut up about him since ]

- you must be BARKING. And I'm assuming, again, that you're trying to be "funny" about your $$$. I don't do wagers and I'm not remotely interested in your $30. Offer me 3 million, send it through a bank, and I'll give it to

Now run along and look after your company - something I assume you do better than you manage here. And drop the "intellectual" bit. You're making a laughing stock of yourself.

'Have a nice day'.


"Some of us, Irish / Dude / TT / whatever other name you want to use, actually have the balls to stand up and fight. Unlike you."

One more time: I'm Irish. Dude is American, from what I can gather. I have no idea who he is, or where he is. And he has no idea who I am or where I am. Only that I post here.

But I do find it pretty disgusting for you to impugn what Dude has or hasn't done, since you clearly couldn't have the faintest knowledge of it, his background, his recent past, or what he's doing now.
Any more than you do about me.

But am I surprised?? Of course not. The ethos here is plain for all to see.



'Right or wrong, the war is lost.'



Thank God irish and Dude weren't around during World War II. Their "war is lost" mantra would have made it possible for them to roll out of bed to the sound of German martial music followed by a quick Sig Heil! Bunch of surrender monkeys. When the going gets tough these fair weather "heroes" run like hell the other way.

I wonder what they would look like in burqas?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Fair Trade
Gift Shop

  • fairtradelogo.jpg

Sites I'm Banned From