Yeah, nice fucking commas, douche. Commas are for liberal, over-educated, and stupid liberals

[Edited on May 7, 2012 at 2:43 PM. Reason : ]

5/7/2012 2:40:58 PM

The people he's attempting to deride didn't run off to France 17 years ago, so why should they now?

5/7/2012 2:54:06 PM

Quote :

"nice commas these past two posts."

Nice capitalization! you really fit the stereotype, dontcha?

[Edited on May 7, 2012 at 4:05 PM. Reason : commas are just another way for linguists to get more grant money!!!!!!111]

5/7/2012 4:04:13 PM

lol

5/7/2012 5:51:00 PM

17 years ago it was 1995...


FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

5/9/2012 2:04:36 AM

I was 17 years old in 1995...


FUUUUUUUUUUUU

5/10/2012 4:45:34 PM

In Defense of Chris Hayes
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/in-defense-of-chris-hayes/257744/

Quote :

"A lot of Hayes' critics have said that, no matter if he's right or wrong on the merits, he shouldn't have been so insensitive as to raise this subject on Memorial Day Weekend, when it might upset people who've lost loved ones and are trying to focus on honoring them as, yes, fallen heroes. Whatever you think of that argument, know this: With no disrespect to Hayes, he spoke on an obscure show that aired early in the morning during a holiday weekend on a liberal cable network. Had his musings been permitted to drift off into the ether, vanishingly few family members of deceased veterans would've heard them; even fewer would've been offended."

5/29/2012 9:02:59 PM

The man had/has a point though.

5/29/2012 9:49:04 PM

I've never watched Chris Hayes (i really don't watch cable "news" shows).
Is he really "liberal"? Or is he just not a "conservative"? (what's the definition of "liberal" itt?)

5/29/2012 9:53:27 PM

He's filled in for Rachel occasionally and it's safe to say that he's pretty liberal, but not Al Sharpton/mouth drooling liberal.

5/29/2012 10:18:58 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Tillman#Religious_and_political_beliefs
Far-left moonbat

5/29/2012 11:12:31 PM

lol@ "is Chris Hayes a liberal?"

He's an editor for the Nation.

5/30/2012 9:01:00 AM

^as I kinda mentioned, I'd never heard of the guy before.

^^dang, I didn't know they let liberals like Tillman into the Army.

5/30/2012 9:55:44 AM

I watched that Memorial Day segment on Sunday curiously enough and I thought it was deeply respectful of our soldiers. He spent most of the time shit talking America for spending Memorial Day barbecuing instead of honoring our dead.

5/30/2012 10:14:31 AM

Quote :

"http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/in-defense-of-chris-hayes/257744/"

Quote :

"I suppose the problem I have with Hayes's comments, and with the comments of those who have been defending him online today, is that the objection to describing those who have died in service to their country as heroes isn't based so much in a concern that it diminishes the true acts of heroism that have occurred, and will continue to occur in wartime as it is in the fear that acknowledging the sacrifices that these men, and women, have made would somehow be a political statement. That strikes me as a deeply myopic, politically-obsessed, view of the world. Disagreeing with the political decision to go to war should never, I would submit, be a reason to either denigrate or ignore the sacrifices that those who served in that war have made, which seems to be the clear implication of what Hayes and his fellow panelists were saying in this segment. Individual soldiers are not responsible for the decisions of those who sent them into battle, and it strikes me as incredibly callous to dismiss the sacrifices made by those who died in such endeavors."

The decision to go to war is a moral issue. This is what I will never be able to understand about the political culture in the United States. This isn't just "politics as usual". People fucking die when old white men decide to launch these allegedly humanitarian interventions.

It's absolutely true that there were Nazi soldiers who acted with courage and bravery. They fought even when directly confronted when the possibility of death or dismemberment. Would we call those Nazi soldiers heroes? If not, why not? If we're not supposed to account for the morality of the cause they're fighting for, then aren't Nazi soldiers roughly as deserving of memorial?

If your position is that preemptive initiation of force is wrong, which suggests that current U.S. foreign policy is wrong, why in the world would you honor the people that voluntarily carry out the unjust wars? If soldiers didn't sign up for service, there wouldn't be anyone to fight the wars.

We can easily look at past injustices and say, "My god, how did those evil governments find people to support their cause?" I'll tell you why: because of the same types of people that jumped on Chris Hayes about this totally incontrovertible, non-offensive segment. Because there are people that glorify the atrocities and shout down anyone that identifies the killing as actual killing. You get no credit for waving a flag and supporting the cause handed down by your government. You're in the same company with the millions of people in the past that didn't have clarity of mind when their government was out of bounds.

Quote :

"I greatly enjoy watching progressives seethe as they are forced, for the sake of appearances, to pretend to support our troops. You know it's killing them. But it's the progressives' own doing -- their sickening performance following the Vietnam War, when they figuratively and literally spit on our troops -- so disgusted decent Americans of all political stripes that to do anything but treat our troops with the utmost respect is to draw near-universal contempt and scorn from across the mainstream political spectrum. So, the real problem for Chris Hayes is that he actually said what he thinks. He thinks our soldiers are suckers and fools at best, brutal sociopaths at worst. At a minimum, he feels that honoring those who died for this country might encourage people to see that actually defending our country is a good thing. He's not quite ready to make that leap; after all, most progressives are ambivalent about this whole "America" concept, if not actively opposed to it."

There are very good explanations for why pro-war advocates are so vocal about issues like this. They'll feign outrage, they'll talk about being disgusted, shocked, or whatever.

It's projection. Of course, they're not actually shocked. They've heard much worse. What disgusts them is the mere utterance of the dirty, shameful truth that haunts the U.S. - men were sent to die for an unjust cause. Blood was spilled and treasure was lost for very stupid reasons. This national disgrace has to be pushed down far, far below the surface. It cannot see light. If it is allowed to be spoken freely, the societal and moral decay of the United States will become painfully evident.

[Edited on May 30, 2012 at 1:20 PM. Reason : ]

5/30/2012 1:09:33 PM

^ I actually agree with a lot of that post.

I have to add something to this, though:

Quote :

"We can easily look at past injustices and say, "My god, how did those evil governments find people to support their cause?" I'll tell you why: because of the same types of people that jumped on Chris Hayes about this totally incontrovertible, non-offensive segment. Because there are people that glorify the atrocities and shout down anyone that identifies the killing as actual killing. You get no credit for waving a flag and supporting the cause handed down by your government. You're in the same company with the millions of people in the past that didn't have clarity of mind when their government was out of bounds."

It's not that simple, in my opinion. Sure, you have your blowhards and get-r-done types who will support anything that's for the home team. But you also need to look into the background of the people who sign up for service. In a lot of instances, people sign up for service because they're poor. This has been the case for all of human existence. The poorest fight the battles for the wealthy. It's often the only way they can escape poverty.

And it's the wealthy war-profiteers who enable the attitude of shouting down dissenters. Keep 'em poor, keep 'em stupid, and keep on telling them they're fighting for a just cause, and label anyone who disagrees as a god-damn traitor.

War is a racket. And as long as you have people who think they're "defending the constitution" or "protecting the motherland" or "saving the queen" or "spreading christianity" instead of critically examining the causes they are fighting for, it will continue to reap huge rewards for those at the top.

5/30/2012 4:30:24 PM

The military is essentially welfare. It puts people through college and provides intense and expensive training. Its a government job that is easy to get and pays well. I think everyone wants to feel fulfilled by their job and for better or worse the military does that for alot of people. I am not sure if the help the military provides for people offsets the fact that it results in death. But people underwater weld and get paid a ton and I am sure the mortality rate for that is through the roof.

also I wouldn't exist without the Navy as my parents met on a military base.

5/31/2012 10:30:32 AM

I wouldn't call the military welfare, but it is definitely a "make-work" job in many ways.

5/31/2012 12:53:27 PM

^you do know theres a difference between a job and welfare, right? The military gets paid to perform tasks, complete objectives, ect...

5/31/2012 12:53:53 PM

this is going in two threads, shameful:

https://store.barackobama.com/collections/runway-to-win.html?limit=9999

5/31/2012 12:59:05 PM

care to explain why you think that's shameful?

5/31/2012 1:01:15 PM

honestly i shouldnt have to, but let me visit http://www.store.anyotherpresident.com and see if i can find a snarky t-shirt / handbag that will answer your question on a level you can understand.

[Edited on May 31, 2012 at 1:08 PM. Reason : -]

5/31/2012 1:06:42 PM

nope, that didn't do it for me

5/31/2012 1:21:53 PM

(he's a hack)

5/31/2012 1:25:42 PM

Do you think this is "snarky"?



the nerve!

[Edited on May 31, 2012 at 1:52 PM. Reason : ]

5/31/2012 1:52:38 PM

It's just a nice way of saying "FUCK THE POORS / BOOTSTRAPS"

5/31/2012 5:30:03 PM

romney shouldnt have a store either, especially if he wins the election.

is that just the new thing?

presidents with store.coms... god fucking dammit.

its disgusting and i figured you "forward looking liberals" and "anti capitalists" would have agreed with me on this one.

5/31/2012 6:35:02 PM

i think it's pretty silly, and it's even sillier that people will buy that shit.
all i was saying was that obama isn't the only one is all i was saying.

5/31/2012 9:56:28 PM

http://www.salon.com/2012/06/01/urban_outfitters_loves_mitt/singleton/

6/2/2012 12:05:48 AM

Only because he was shat upon in another thread:

Glenn Greenwald shitting on President Obama with regard to civil liberties and national defense:

http://wearemany.org/v/2011/07/civil-liberties-under-obama

6/6/2012 12:37:01 AM

Following the failed Walker recall, some liberals tweeted death threats to Walker.

To date, Obama has yet to refudiate these tweets.

6/7/2012 2:08:25 PM

well then, only logical conclusion is that he must agree with them.

6/7/2012 2:44:09 PM

Mr. Obama, TEAR DOWN THIS HASHTAG

6/7/2012 3:14:17 PM

Clearly, Barack Hussein is worse than the Nazis, Mongols, and the alien overlords that control us combined.

6/7/2012 4:21:08 PM

^^ Surely you conservatives who complain about big government wouldn't want Obama to tell people what they can and cannot tweet

[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 10:39 AM. Reason : .]

6/8/2012 10:39:31 AM

Actually there's nothing more like-a-conservative than responding to a condemnation or criticism with "HOW DARE YOU ATTACK MY FREE SPEECH"

6/8/2012 10:46:11 AM

"hai, some of u shold move 2 france, LOL"

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/35a28e78-c5c8-11e1-a5d5-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1zgzFwGAI

7/4/2012 5:44:50 PM

Harry Reid is a buffoon

/obvious

but still

7/31/2012 7:47:21 PM

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/10/time-magazine-to-examine-plagiarism-accusation-against-zakaria/

haha, what a stupid dick.

good riddance.

8/11/2012 1:23:11 PM

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/08/12/national-reviews-rich-lowry-destroys-msnbcs-rachel-maddow-meet-press#ixzz23LfPVrnA

pretty pitiful performance if you ask me.

cant wait to see obama pull something similar in the debates.

8/12/2012 5:49:31 PM

I can't wait to see Obama slay Romney in the debates.

8/12/2012 6:02:33 PM

^^ All it was was the conservative guy going "come on, answer it, answer it, come on, why won't you answer?" And never actually giving her a chance to respond. But I suppose that type of interrogation appeals to conservatives who can't process multi-syllabic responses....

8/13/2012 1:04:17 AM

^this

8/13/2012 1:38:01 AM

Oh okay, thanks for clearing that up.

Well, moving right along...

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/08/13/soledad-obrien-caught-reading-liberal-blog-during-heated-debate-romne

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/03/08/Soledad-Pollak-Wikipedia

This is just flat out embarrassing! At least I have a little bit of respect for Maddow because she occasionally portrays herself as being educated / informed (even if I hardly ever agree with anything she says), and kudos to her for at least portraying poor Ron Paul in an accurate light.

But Jesus Christ, I got nothing for this woman. I've always despised her and the quicker she Fareed Zakarias herself the better (yep I went there, fuck him too).

He has already been discussed in at least one other thread though...

8/14/2012 12:44:32 PM

It really says something about the quality of a network when an ANCHOR gets her "talking points" from a super-left liberal blog.

She doesn't do the work herself, she just lets someone else think for her.

(and yes, I believe Fox News does it too...they can at least hide it well)

8/14/2012 9:39:49 PM

Fox News gets their talking points directly from the RNC.

8/14/2012 11:42:52 PM

^^, ^^^

She was using a factual quote and factual information to point out the Romney representative's blatant misinformation.

And you're using Brietbart and Newsbusters (sites that pride themselves on the ability to misinform) to ignore the actual content of the interview.

8/14/2012 11:52:10 PM

"They are going to put y’all back in chains.”

- Joe Biden to a room with a bunch of black folk.

Racism and stupidity abound!

[Edited on August 15, 2012 at 8:43 AM. Reason : .]

8/15/2012 8:43:29 AM

Yes that is totally racist

8/15/2012 9:10:27 AM

Yeah, he was telling all those blacks at Institute for Advanced Learning and Research in Danville, Virginia that they were going to work on plantations again... you realize you're the one that's bringing the racism and stupidity? (Biden bringing the stupidity too, he always says stupid shit. that's kind of his thing)

8/15/2012 9:21:05 AM