Comments on: Nutroots city limits: the ‘good news is bad news’ fallacy and general thoughts on their negativity

By: Severian

Severian — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:52:12 +0000

Wonder if Murtha will wear his “I survived ABSCAM!” t-shirt for the committee meetings?

Murtha – Semper Infidelis

By: Big Bang Hunter

Big Bang Hunter — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:44:02 +0000

- Pelosi is pandering to the nutroots, forming up her battle lines against the group of incoming BlueDog Democrats. Pelosi and Murtha with his bitterness hanging out everyday at news conferences, and in front of partisan witch hunts. Oh yeh. That has hands across the aisle, bi-partisan friendleness written all over it. If this is the tone she is hoping to set, the Dems can kiss any meaningful legislation goodbye. Two years of watching the hard lefts antics, and turning the whole effort in Iraq into a bloodbath mess, should just about do it for the Dems in ‘08. More, faster please.

- Bang

By: Baklava

Baklava — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 14:35:33 +0000

HA!

tom wrote, “Yeah, they were correct, were they not?”

If not killing Ted Bundy was portrayed as ‘no bid deal’ because there are other serial killers out there was correct kind of way. SURE!

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 13:48:27 +0000

I’m glad you couldn’t “bear to go on” tom, because I couldn’t bear to continue reading your nonsense, but it did prove my point right about how negative the Nutroots like to spin positive events. You guys consistently prove me correct. Thank you.

By: tom

tom — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 04:35:40 +0000

At the very least, they poohpooh anything positive as "no big deal" - at their worst, they actually paint those successes as bad news. ST then goes on with a few examples of these successes. 1&2. Saddam statue pulled down. This WAS staged. Hardly a big positive for the war, espescially with some marine putting the US flag on the statues head. Real smart. That'll win em over. 3. Bush's "staged", "phony", "flamboyant showmanship" photo-op. What else was this if not a staged photo-op? Do you think Bush just dropped in unexpectedly to give the boys a pat on the back? 4. Reps. Waxman's and Conyers's complaints about the COST of the aircraft carrier landing. This is a war that we were told would cost under $50 B and is now costing over $300 billion now. I think our congressman have the right to question costs associated with this war. I thought conservatives were for fiscal responsibility? I guess we can pay for it with tax cuts... 5. Bush visits the troops on Turkey Day and tells them "Today, I have come to not only thank you, but to look Prime Minister Maliki in the eyes -- to determine whether or not he is as dedicated to a free Iraq as you are, and I believe he is." Is the same eye-gazing, soul reading thing he did with Putin? I gotta learn how to do that. Once again - I'm sure it's all money well spent. 6. Supposedly, 35% of our country (Liberals I assume) go into depression when Saddam is found. Interesting, I didn't see anything in the linked article that mentioned anything about this countries reaction to Saddam's capture. I read it fast, so I may have missed something. 7. Kerry comments on Meet the Press regarding the legitimacy of the Iraqi vote: Allow me to include the full response to Russerts question. MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe this election will be seen by the world community as legitimate? SEN. KERRY: A kind of legitimacy--I mean, it's hard to say that something is legitimate when a whole portion of the country can't vote and doesn't vote. I think this election was important. I was for the election taking place. You may recall that back in--well, there's no reason you would--but back in Fulton, Missouri, during the campaign, I laid out four steps, and I said at the time, "This may be the president's last chance to get it right." Read the entire transcript yourself. 8. The killing of Zarqawi was portrayed by the far left as â€˜no big deal'. Yeah, they were correct, were they not? 9.10.11. I can't bear to go on....

By: Baklava

Baklava — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 03:35:50 +0000

John Ryan without perspective wrote, “Iraq has been the worst debacle for American foreign policy since Vietnam and perhaps the worst ever.”

There has been 4 week periods in both Vietnam and WW2 not to mention other wars where we lost more of our men than the 3+ years in Iraq and John Ryan without perspective (maybe he got it from the drive-by legacy media) says one of the worst comments perhaps ever…..

Just being humorous John since I know you probably are trying to be…

By: John Ryan

John Ryan — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 22:59:50 +0000

uhh gee has anyone bothered to figure out why the democrats the party of cut and tun and traitors etc received about 56% of the popular vote in the Senate races ?
Iraq has been the worst debacle for American foreign policy since Vietnam and perhaps the worst ever.
Bush has gotten us into a war that we cannot win militarily and no one seems to have figured out a way to exit either.

By: Neo

Neo — Mon, 18 Sep 2006 16:08:23 +0000

I'm sure they wouldn't think this is good news.

By: Phil

Phil — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 05:15:03 +0000

Even Lieberman is too liberal to suit me, so when the left keeps going further to the left they will find them selves past the main stream and over their heads and floundering in the deep and then eventually sink.

By: gahrie

gahrie — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 03:53:57 +0000

Sanity:

When the Democrats blow it in 2006 and 2008, something similar to that will happen. However the moonbats will refuse to surrender the name Democrats, so the Democratic Party will move even further to the left. The Republican Party will remain complacent. The moderate/sane Democrats will be forced to form a new party. Maybe they will try to reclaim the “progressives” title, or simply call themselves the Moderates. It will draw moderates from the left and the right, and eventually (By 2020 or so) replace the Democratic Party.

By: sanity

sanity — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 02:36:21 +0000

Funny thing is, with Lieberman switching to Independent, this will make him radioactive to the Democrats.

They will try and ignore him if he wins.

I had a weird thought though, if Lieberman represents what the Democrat party USED to be, and he move to Independent, perhaps they need ot rename the parties…

Republican
Democrat – Lieberman
Liberal – Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, Dean, Clinton…ect

The 3 party system, let the liberals have their own party and remake the Democrat party into what it used to be my splitting off and becoming the real Democrat party and leave and rename the other the liberal party.

By: Karl

Karl — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 02:32:21 +0000

mind if i repost this? It is a nice piece.

By: Drewsmom

Drewsmom — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 02:28:47 +0000

Ah, the Dems, the brain is the first organ to go.

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 02:13:36 +0000

Sev, that’s why I said they presented a candidate they perceived would make them look strong on fighting terror, and noted that it backfired I probably should have expanded on the point a little better though. I don’t blame them for trying, but obviously a majority of the American people (rightly) saw it as an image that didn’t match reality, thankfully.

By: Severian

Severian — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 01:34:33 +0000

Just once, just freaking once, don’t you wish the Democrats, in trying to prove that they are strong on defense, would do it by actually being stronger and more aggressive than the Republicans, rather than trying to cut the legs out from under our troops and our war efforts?

And I have to disagree with you a bit about Kerry. To me, that wasn’t a valid thing to do, it was a cynical, dishonest ploy to make them appear strong while not having to alter their weak willed and weak kneed approach to security at all. They knew full well the mettle of the man they nominated, his record is long and well documented, from his stabbing his comrades in the back in the Winter Soldier days to the present. They just didn’t think that anyone else, all us stuuuupid fly over country folks, would be smart enough to figure it out, what with their control of the MSM’s message to cover up his warts. They didn’t count on the New Media to shine a bright light on Senator Kerry, who by the way served in Vietnam and has the hat to prove it! In a way, it proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have absolutely no understanding of security, the military, or of honor and duty. They thought, once again, such things are all about image only, not character and honor.