Open Thread

Because I care what you think.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit






37 replies
  1. 1
    Punchy says:

    Sy Hersch says “war, bitches”.
    Bring on The Rugs.

  2. 2
    Zifnab says:

    I want my pony, damnit!

  3. 3

    But, but… Iran is interfering with our occupation of Iraq!

  4. 4
    Rome Again says:

    But, but… Iran is interfering with our occupation of Iraq!

    But our occupation of Iraq is interfering with the proper way to treat the rest of humanity, and it is creating a problem in the area of trusting American intervention for populations which are part of the rest of the world.

  5. 5
    Punchy says:

    Wow. Hersch wrote/said some just unreal stuff. Check out this:

    Hersh says the U.S. has been “pumping money, a great deal of money, without congressional authority, without any congressional oversight” for covert operations in the Middle East where it wants to “stop the Shiite spread or the Shiite influence.” Hersh says these funds have ended up in the hands of “three Sunni jihadist groups” who are “connected to al Qaeda” but “want to take on Hezbollah.”

    I’m quite certain the 9 billion “lost” in I-wreck is funding all this, so “congressional oversight” isn’t possible. But giving money to the Sunnis, some who seem indirectly connected to AQ, seems damn impeachable…

  6. 6
    Dug Jay says:

    Sy Hersh, one of Greenwald’s former “bitches,” still gets a lot of ink for God only knows why. He’s been proven to be not only wrong on most occasions, but so wrong that only The New Yorker will publish his crap these days. He currently resides in a very nice condo, all paid for by the fruits of his treacherous behavior during the Vietnam era.

  7. 7
    Walker says:

    In response to the Hersh piece: rumors of mutiny by top generals if we attack Iran (h/t Sullivan).

  8. 8
    Hyperion says:

    Hersh says the U.S. has been “pumping money, a great deal of money, without congressional authority, without any congressional oversight” for covert operations in the Middle East where it wants to “stop the Shiite spread or the Shiite influence.”

    last weekend i saw the author of “Arabic for Dummies” on CSPAN. he mentioned something that i had been wondering about and this excerpt reminds me of it. he said that the adjective form of Shia is Shia, not Shiite, that there is no such word.
    so why does it get used so often by publications that actually care about language details (yes, the new yorker)?

  9. 9
    RSA says:

    Given that the White House hasn’t made any mistakes in Iraq, what makes anyone think that they’d get us involved in a quagmire in Iran? Oh, right. . .

    For the U.S. to get involved militarily in determining the outcome of the struggle over who’s going to govern in Iraq strikes me as a classic definition of a quagmire. –Dick Cheney, 1991

    Well, I stand by what I said in ‘91. –Dick Cheney, 2006

    Okay, we’re fucked. Someone who has the judgment to deliberately get us involved in a quagmire in Iraq isn’t going to have much hesitation about going into Iran. I foresee ponies falling like dominoes.

  10. 10
    Newport 9 says:

    It turns out Wikipedia also has a well-known liberal bias.

    The solution? Conservapedia!

  11. 11
    Newport 9 says:

    Whoops! Looks like Tim F. got there ahead of me. And they have temporarily (?) put a freeze on new accounts, so for the moment we don’t have to worry about libruls signing on and vandalizing articles. What a relief!

  12. 12
    Punchy says:

    In response to the Hersh piece: rumors of mutiny by top generals if when we attack Iran

    Fixed.

  13. 13
    Elvis Elvisberg says:

    The interesting thing will be to watch what happens to “Petraeus’ guys.” They have been right about lots of stuff in Iraq all along, and they’re the ones who I’m hoping prove me wrong about the surge, which I think is 3 years late and a few doen thousand troops short.

    They include HR McMaster, who wrote “Dereliction of Duty.”

  14. 14
    Zifnab says:

    And they have temporarily (?) put a freeze on new accounts, so for the moment we don’t have to worry about libruls signing on and vandalizing articles.

    Oh, thank god. New accounts have a well-known liberal bias. They’d have ruined everything.

  15. 15
    Andrew says:

    I hope the Conservapedians don’t stop dropping gems like:

    World History is a different story: over 5000 years, much of it non-Christian.

  16. 16
    RSA says:

    One of Yglesias’s commentators flagged an article about homeschooling, which described homeschooling as producing “a disproportionate number of high achievers” (how would they know?), with examples. My favorite? Jesus.

  17. 17
    Zifnab says:

    # 02:14, 23 February 2007, Aschlafly (Talk) blocked Burke (contribs) (expires 02:14, 2 March 2007, account creation blocked) (unsupported anti-Christian claims)
    # 01:49, 23 February 2007, Aschlafly (Talk) blocked Daplanedaplane (contribs) (expires 01:49, 9 March 2007, account creation blocked) (inappropriate entries)
    # 01:46, 23 February 2007, Aschlafly (Talk) blocked Longcat (contribs) (expires 01:46, 2 March 2007, account creation blocked) (anti-Christian remark, unjustified claims)

    Bust’n out the ban-stick. A staple of the conservative community. Classic.

  18. 18
    Zifnab says:

    Big Oil

    Big Oil is a term some use to describe the major petroleum companies such as ExxonMobil, ChevronTexxaco, British Petroleum and more. Democrats often attempt to position themselves against Big Oil despite accepting over $48,000,000 in donations from oil companies [1]. Republicans embrace Big Oil because they know that the companies define the very essence of capitalism — success at business[2] while helping the American citizen. Without Big Oil, we would have no gasoline, heating oil or plastics.

    *snicker*

  19. 19
    Punchy says:

    Can we rename the war on terror, and call it The War Against Terror? The acronym is infinitely more funny.

  20. 20
    Zifnab says:

    FOX News

    Fox News was started in 1996 in response to the other cable news channels which all had obvious liberal biases. Because of this, Rupert Murdoch decided to start a real new channel which would tell the truth. The success of Fox news over every other news channel is because it is fair and balanced. [1] It has many people on it who work to spread truth such as Sean Hannity who is a great American.

    haha. This stuff is fantastic.

  21. 21
    Zifnab says:

    Judicial Activism

    There are two major types of judicial activism practiced in the United States’ court system:

    1. Liberal judges striking down laws that uphold core conservative American values
    2. Liberal judges refusing to strike down laws that subvert core conservative American values

    Sooooo good.

  22. 22
    Punchy says:

    The spoofers are already all over the site. The Bill Clinton entry starts out with the typical negative shit, but then comes this towards the end:

    Bill Clinton managed to serve two terms without botching the prosecution of two wars, manipulating intelligence, engaging in a systematic program of torture, or mishandling the federal response to flooding of a major American city. Obviously, he is the devil incarnate. Clinton also attempted to use the American military to kill Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, an action which was properly seen as a mere attempt to distract the nation from the Monica Lewisnky scandal.

  23. 23

    RSA… It appears to me that the easiest way to deal with those incorrect statements from the past, is simply scrub the Whitehouse website and pretend like they never existed.

  24. 24
    lard lad says:

    Hey, where’s Paul L’s inevitable-as-the-sun-rising open thread entry, where he spouts fundamentalist dribble about stem cell research? About how all those folks hoping for medical progress made from the use of embryonic stem cells are deluding themselves straight into eternal hellfire, while them scientists who stick with good Christian adult stem cells get a pony and a wet kiss from Jesus?
    WheretheheckAREya, Paul?

    Oh. Never mind.

  25. 25
    ThymeZone says:

    Clinton also attempted to use the American military to kill Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, an action which was properly seen portrayed by Republicans as a mere attempt to distract the nation from the Monica Lewisnky scandal.

    That’s what actually happened.

  26. 26
    Paul L. says:

    Hey, where’s Paul L’s inevitable-as-the-sun-rising open thread entry, … WheretheheckAREya, Paul?

    Today’s Paul L. open thread entry is about Balloon Juice commenters favorite feminazi and martyr of the left blogosphere Amanda Marcotte who debates by deleting comments critical of her view on the Duke rape case.

    The Duke Three: No angels = rapists?

    The true beauty of her response is that she uses a email written by a Duke Lacrosse player who was not charged in the case to prove her point.

    Peace out.

  27. 27
    Zifnab says:

    I agree Paul. None of this would have happened if Amanda Marcotte had only kept her big feminist mouth shut. When will these fascist women learn that by having blogs and stating their own opinions, they are undermining the American Judicial System as we know it? Feminists are a greater threat to our nation than Al-Qaeda, France, and stem-cell-cloned-Hitler combined.

  28. 28
    grumpy realist says:

    And then men who spew terms like “feminazi” wonder why women with a sense of self-respect don’t want to date them….

    The self-delusion of some humans is unbelievable.

  29. 29
    Zifnab says:

    Mistrail?

    The jury foreperson sent the Judge a note this morning, saying that one of the jurors in this panel had contact with news coverage of this case and used that information as part of the jury deliberations with others. In other words, this outside news coverage seeped into deliberations despite the Judge adamantly demanding that jurors not watch any news coverage, that they judge this case strictly on what is presented in court.

    Well… god damnit.

  30. 30
    Paul L. says:

    Shorter Zifnab
    I want to defend Amanda Marcotte. But I can’t so I’ll change the subject.

    grumpy realist
    I called Amanda Marcotte a feminazi not all women. Is Feminazi is a forbidden word like the N-word?

    Is it like Womyn (Amanda Marcotte) who call all men “rapists” and wonder why men do not want to have a relationship with them?

  31. 31
    ThymeZone says:

    The self-delusion of some humans is unbelievable.

    Are you saying that Phyllis Schafly and Anne Coulter aren’t big turn-ons??

  32. 32
    ThymeZone says:

    Womyn (Amanda Marcotte) who call all men “rapists” and wonder why some men do not want to have a relationship with them?

    Adjusted.

  33. 33
    Zifnab says:

    Shorter Zifnab
    I want to defend Amanda Marcotte. But I can’t so I’ll change the subject.

    I’ve never before met a man who could write but couldn’t read.

  34. 34
    Rome Again says:

    Are you saying that Phyllis Schafly and Anne Coulter aren’t big turn-ons??

    Careful TZ, you might leave the impression with someone who doesn’t know better that you’d like that sort of thing!

    ::snickers::

  35. 35
    ThymeZone says:

    you’d like that sort of thing

    Egads! Those two? Shoot me first.

  36. 36
    demimondian says:

    For what it’s worth, Paul, the line is that “all men are POTENTIAL rapists”. Given the frequency of relationship abuse — almost all of it directed at women — that has come to appear to be reasonable caution, not mysandry.

  37. 37
    Zifnab says:

    the line is that “all men are POTENTIAL rapists”

    Yeah, and what about the actual rapists? She didn’t even consider them, did she? Freak’n moonbat.

Comments are closed.