Banter Voices

History Lesson For A Fox News Guy

By Oliver Willis · July 11,2012

| 2316 Views | Media and Entertainment Politics

Todd Starnes is a commentator on Fox News Radio, one of the people behind the offensively racist and factually challenged Fox Nation, and an occasional pundit on Fox News Channel. He’s also kind of dumb.

Starnes’ gimmick is that he’s a “traditional values” guy from mythical small town America, who is just bewildered at all these liberals who are trying to include all these gays, blacks, and latinos in his world. He wants none of it!

In a recent radio commentary for Fox News Radio, Starnes was very very upset at Vice President Biden:

VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN SPEAKING AT A SEATTLE FUNDRAISER LAST NIGHT

ATTACKED AMERICAN VALUES.

ACCUSED REPUBLICANS

OF HAVING A SOCIAL POLICY RIGHT OUT OF THE FIFTIES.

SO WHY IS THAT SUCH A BAD THING, MISTER VICE PRESIDENT?

IT WAS A TIME WHEN RIGHT WAS RIGHT AND WRONG WAS WRONG.

IT WAS A TIME WHEN BOYS AND GIRLS COULD PRAY IN SCHOOL.

IT WAS A TIME WHEN MEN WERE MEN AND WOMEN WERE WOMEN.

IT WAS A TIME WHEN PLANNED PARENTHOOD MEANT WAITING UNTIL YOU GOT MARRIED TO START A FAMILY.

IT WAS A TIME WHEN THE LIFE OF AN UNBORN CHILD WAS TREASURED, NOT ABORTED.

IT WAS A TIME WHEN CHILDREN RESPECTED THEIR ELDERS

IT WAS A TIME WHEN FAMILY MEALS WERE SHARED AT THE TABLE.

IT WAS A TIME WHEN AMERICAN INGENUITY WAS CELEBRATED.

THOSE WERE THE VALUES OF THE NINETEEN FIFTIES, MISTER VICE PRESIDENT

AND THOSE DAYS ARE LONG GONE.

I’M TODD STARNES

Like many conservatives, Todd Starnes believes that the TV version of the 1950s was the real thing. Todd Starnes exists in a reality where Mayberry and Ward Cleaver’s home were real things.

Todd Starnes simply can’t conceive that for many Americans, this was the 1950s (and ’40s and ’60s):

For a lot of conservatives like Starnes the longing for an idyllic America that never existed comes out of absolute ignorance. They can’t conceive of an American experience for anyone other than an upper middle class white male. They can’t even take for a second to imagine what the past in America was like for someone who doesn’t look like them.

They’re blissfully ignorant that the world is more than them, and they strike out and snarl against anyone who makes the indisputable point — as Vice President Biden did (an upper class white male who actually lived through the ’50s and ’60s himself, by the way) — that we don’t want to go back to that world.

It is the height of stupidity, and standard issue for the right.

M2

i thought you’d want to know about your fellow traveler. Welcome.
- Justanotherrighty
  
  I had no idea who he was until Oliver made him “famous”. You guys watch more FOX News than I do.
M2

Not that anyone is still here, but Todd Starnes’ twitter feed regarding the tragedy is beyond disgusting. What a piece of shit.
- Justanotherrighty
  
  Thanks for sharing …
Justanotherrighty

Exactly. HOV lanes work on persons & so when you make persons from conception you therefore have two people riding in the car. QED
Not
HOV lanes work on the premise that if you give people a ride, they are not driving their own cars .. You are not being rewarded with faster lane because you have extra people in the car, per se

3) Teach all grades in school about medicine and first aid, preventive medicine, anatomy and physiology; and human biology.
Agreed but didn’t you just ask me to cite authority that preventive medicine is less expensive that curative?
200 years ago, Benjamin Franklin reminded us that “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” He didn’t mean in dollars and cents.
Everyone wishes they had healthier habits so they could avoid illnesses. However, this is not evidence that the cost of prevention is less than the cost of cure.

4) Make the FDA speed up drug approvals and also approvals of nutritional supplements
Are you old enough to have heard of thalidomide? Short version for those under 50: it was a wonder drug of the late 1940s that was supposed to ease “morning sickness” in women. Caused serious birth defects. Generally contained to Europe as the US FDA did not rush approvals.
Thalidomide was virtually a unique case, because it skipped a generation, not because it wasn’t thoroughly tested.
It was the thalidomide case that slowed down the authorization process [I paraphrase Milton Friedman , from Free To Choice]

Imagine you work for the FDA and a new drug is on your desk for approval. If you approve it, and something goes wrong, your career, maybe even your life, will be ruined. If you disapprove it, it will never hit the market, and no one will ever know anything about it.
Which way, in most cases, would you be inclined to act on a drug?

Another example :

My understanding (correct me if I am wrong) was that the Delaney Amendment has not been thrown out but has been superceded by new federal legislation. The new regulatory laws require manufacturers to determine the effects of *combinations* of chemicals (food additives, solvents etc…) [rather than as] an individual basis … The new legislation actually makes the FDA and EPA approval processes much more rigorous, so much so
that currently many registration applications are “backed up” since federal regulatory agencies affected by the new federal guidelines have not yet formulated plans for implementation of the new laws.

LINK

1) Slow down the stream of people into Medicaid and Medicare
How?
Raising age eligibility
Reviewing cases where the health conditions are subject to change.
Including income from all sources in determining income eligibility
oi ly

Since you never obliged me my request for some nice pictures of the good old days, here’s a little ditty that reinforces just how good those days really were –

http://vimeo.com/26192930
db

Frank,

From 9:00 last night.

“Airplanes sell seats; that’s why morbidly obese people sometimes have to buy two. Your argument doesn’t work.
Yeah, but they don’t consider the person buttocks another person. So your argument doesn’t work, and mine does. The airlines are selling space , not seats per person … ”

Exactly. HOV lanes work on persons & so when you make persons from conception you therefore have two people riding in the car. QED

“3) Teach all grades in school about medicine and first aid, preventive medicine, anatomy and physiology; and human biology.”

Agreed but didn’t you just ask me to cite authority that preventive medicine is less expensive that curative?

“4) Make the FDA speed up drug approvals and also approvals of nutritional supplements”

Are you old enough to have heard of thalidomide? Short version for those under 50: it was a wonder drug of the late 1940s that was supposed to ease “morning sickness” in women. Caused serious birth defects. Generally contained to Europe as the US FDA did not rush approvals.

“1) Slow down the stream of people into Medicaid and Medicare”

How?

& I’m not sure how #2 would work, but I’m not necessarily opposed to increased co-pays based on income.
Zython

It isn’t

Then why are you demanding that it have “consequences”?

You know why children like you should respect their elders? Because, you hapless moron, they have lived longer

So they should be respected because they were born earlier and managed to avoid dying?

When will you ever exhibit any maturity?

What the hell did I do? All I said was that elders shouldn’t be respected based solely on their age. If they’re good, hard-working people, then by all means, I respect that. But if I’ve learned anything from poligics, especially from conservatives, it’s that wisdom and knowledge don’t come from age. Children can be wise, and the elderly can be immature. “Respect your elders” is an incredibly simplified, myopic worldview. Understandable why you would latch onto it.
- Justanotherrighty
  
  Children can be wise, and the elderly can be immature.
  Spoken like a true child. Hardly any children are wise, and mostly all the elderly have wisdom, even if they do have their immature moments ….
  
  Then why are you demanding that it have “consequences”?
  You are confusing “consequences” and punishment. Consequences are the outcomes of behavior, both negative and positive. Maybe you’ve taken Intro to Psych and learned about the Behaviorists Watson and Skinner.
  Then you should be aware of ” A B C ” Antecedent Behavior Consequences
  
  Pregnancy is not the punishment for having sex, anymore than abortion is the cure for pregnancy …
  
  Understandable why you would latch onto it.
  I have two children , Zython. Take it from me, I know a hell of a lot more about you than you do about me.
  - Zython
    
    Spoken like a true child. Hardly any children are wise, and mostly all the elderly have wisdom, even if they do have their immature moments ….
    
    If your life has taught us anything, its that adults can be even more petty and self-centered than children.
    
    You are confusing “consequences” and punishment.
    
    Why should these “consequences” be held sacrosanct when there are tools to get by them? Are you also going to object to hard hats at constructions sites, as they allow the workers to ignore the “consequences” of their actions?
    
    Also, going to ignore that whole ‘Psych 101″ lesson, as your economic beliefs show you don’t know anything about the basic psychology.
    - Justanotherrighty
      
      If your life has taught us anything
      It is clear that my life, just like your life, has taught you nothing.
      
      Your second statement is ignorant gibberish
      
      And you are ignoring what I said about antecedents, behavior and consequences, because you can’t find anything about in Wikipedia.
      - Zython
        
        Your second statement is ignorant gibberish
        
        Thanks for proving that abstinance-only education is a bad idea.
        
        You see, there’s these things called “birth control” and “contraception”. They allow for women to have sex without becoming pregnant. I know this concept enrages you, but it’s true.
Justanotherrighty

Again, how is women having sex a bad thing?
It isn’t , you witless horror. The bad part comes when the woman becomes pregnant, and ends the pregnancy . But it would require far more intellect , and empathy, than you possess to come even close to what’s wrong.

He fails to explain why elders should be respected for the oh so noble feat of being born earlier.
You know why children like you should respect their elders? Because, you hapless moron, they have lived longer and if they were parents they have already spent a sizable portion of their lives , and nearly all of yours cleaning up your messes – literally and figuratively – you ungrateful whelp.
When will you ever exhibit any maturity? You are exasperating! You have been following this blog for years, and you have not changed an iota. You have learned nothing!
Which is yet another argument for the correctness of his observations. Even my sons, who are in their twenties, have observed that most of their peers are like you : self-centered, arrogant , preening punks …
Zython

Ok, Plunket, rather than point out why you’re wrong, let’s try something else. Show me in Oliver’s post where he claimed Starnes supported Jim Crow laws. And no “copypastaing”.

Nobody’s talking about “going” backwards.

Well, except the people that support stripping labor protections, voter suppression, restricted access to abortion and contraception, and recriminalization of homosexuality.

there were some good things happening in the 50′s , and it’s too bad they changed.

Let’s see what he claims was so good.

“IT WAS A TIME WHEN BOYS AND GIRLS COULD PRAY IN SCHOOL.”

Students can pray however they like. He’s just upset that public schools can’t force non-Christians to pray to Jesus.

“IT WAS A TIME WHEN MEN WERE MEN AND WOMEN WERE WOMEN.”

Using, of course, completely arbitrary definitions of “masculine” and “feminine”. Don’t see how redefining gender roles to be more inclusive is a bad thing.

“IT WAS A TIME WHEN PLANNED PARENTHOOD MEANT WAITING UNTIL YOU GOT MARRIED TO START A FAMILY.”

Here, he’s upset that women are having sex and not being punished for it. Again, how is women having sex a bad thing?

“IT WAS A TIME WHEN CHILDREN RESPECTED THEIR ELDERS”

He fails to explain why elders should be respected for the oh so noble feat of being born earlier. If anything, elders should respect children. They’re going to have to clean up their messes.

“IT WAS A TIME WHEN AMERICAN INGENUITY WAS CELEBRATED.”

What ingenuity does he think we’re failing to celebrate?
The Dark Avenger

You’re completely dependent on copy and paste, aren’t you, C+P? It’s not necessary, I know what Oliver wrote, and what he wrote is exactly what I was talking about, a dubious link to claim racism.

Nope, it was the Fox News guy’s dubious claim that the 50s were a wonderful paradise for every American citizen of the time, and that he overlooks or chooses to ignore, that if you were a woman or a member of a minority group, it wasn’t such a hot time.

Thanks for your concern, FlunkedIt/Dennis.
The Dark Avenger

Yet Oliver takes a wild leap into implying Starnes would’ve been in favor of the images of racism from the 50′s. That’s nothing but a dog-whistle in it’s own right from Oliver.

They can’t conceive of an American experience for anyone other than an upper middle class white male. They can’t even take for a second to imagine what the past in America was like for someone who doesn’t look like them.

Massive fail, FlunkedIt.
- Plunket
  
  You’re completely dependent on copy and paste, aren’t you, C+P? It’s not necessary, I know what Oliver wrote, and what he wrote is exactly what I was talking about, a dubious link to claim racism.
  
  Oliver has a theory without a fact, which was inconvenient for him. What you highlighted was his dishonest way of getting around it.
oi ly

Okay Dennis, from now on, only nice pictures from the good old days. Got any?
- Justanotherrighty
  
  Yeah, so from now on, on 9/11 , we’ll see people running for their lives from toxic smoke and dust; and see people leaping from the towers rather than dying in the flames, instead of hearing about how 9/11 should remind is to hug a fireman. OK ?
db

Frank,

From much earlier.

Airplanes sell seats; that’s why morbidly obese people sometimes have to buy two. Your argument doesn’t work.

“Actually, it’s Democrats who often think abortions should be allowed even when the baby is in the birth canal.”

Only in EXTREME circumstances which I am not medically qualified to speak to. If I remember right these circumstances exist barely a handful of times per year.

“But Republicans (I am not one) and others struggle with the idea of how to provide healthcare for people who can’t afford it.”

You are not one what? A Republican? A Republican who cares about providing healthcare?

You hit my objection exactly. The goal is to provide adequate health care to all. The problem is to allocate the expense & to manage the cost. The current system allocates the cost to Hospital Emergency Rooms. You don’t like “Obamacare” Got it.

What do you favor? How do you solve the problem?
- Justanotherrighty
  
  Airplanes sell seats; that’s why morbidly obese people sometimes have to buy two. Your argument doesn’t work.
  Yeah, but they don’t consider the person buttocks another person. So your argument doesn’t work, and mine does. The airlines are selling space , not seats per person …
  
  I am not a Republican, but I do realize that we have two healthcare problems in the United States, not one.
  The first is that the cost of healthcare is rising, and that includes the cost of providing healthcare to Medicaid and Medicare recipients.
  Second, there are too many who have no provision for healthcare, and that is placing a burden on emergency services (a burden that was imposed upon every ER in the nation by the Federal government, I might add.)
  What to do about it? 1) Slow down the stream of people into Medicaid and Medicare; 2) Slowly increase the co-pays based on all types of income. 3) Teach all grades in school about medicine and first aid, preventive medicine, anatomy and physiology; and human biology.
  4) Make the FDA speed up drug approvals and also approvals of nutritional supplements .
  I’m no expert, but that’s a start.
Zython

Crap, didn’t realize I was put in moderation. Let’s try again.

If this link works, there’s an interesting history lesson here

My problem with Romney isn’t his racial views. Frankly, I don’t think he’s any more racist than the avarage American (for good or for bad). My problem is that he’s a pathological liar.

So, the average American didn’t wake up each morning, and say, “I wonder how the Negroes are doing today.”

African American population is now 13.1%. So is there some magic threshold between 11 & 13% where the majority starts caring about a minority, or do they still not care?

Remember this ?

Why should I care? The Declaration of Independance has absolutely no legal backing.

F*cking can lead to pregnancy, and pregnancy leads to children. You don’t get the freedom to f*ck and then pass on the soon to be living consequences.

1. Why is it that men don’t have any consequences of having sex?

2. Why is it so important that sex have “consequences”? What about it is so vile that it needs to be punished?
- Plunket
  
  Worst. Thread. Ever.
  
  All built on a false premise. Todd Starnes didn’t sat anything racist in his commentary that Oliver posted. In Oliver’s link to Media Matters, Starnes didn’t say anything racist toward African Americans, either. Yet Oliver takes a wild leap into implying Starnes would’ve been in favor of the images of racism from the 50′s. That’s nothing but a dog-whistle in it’s own right from Oliver. He claims racism, then posts links from MMfA, then links it to Starnes, when there is nothing there.
  
  Four Pinnochios.
  
  And shameful as all get-out.
  
  Four more solid months of this, I suppose. All you have to do is call it a dog-whistle in order to pretend it’s not totally dishonest, when it is.
  - The Dark Avenger
    
    I agree with you, Plunket/Dennis. Between Frank’s continual stupidity here, his anger at commentators who can’t understand his confused thinking, and you showing up, it is definitely the worse thread that has ever appeared on Ollie’s site.
oi ly

Even Palin doesn’t want us to go backwards!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeaM4t2Ycgk
- Justanotherrighty
  
  Nobody’s talking about “going” backwards. The original point Starnes was making was not, “I really wish it was 1950 again!”
  His point was (using a reasonable – as opposed to a loaded, lefty, “let’s see what political juice we can soak out of this casual statement” approach) there were some good things happening in the 50′s , and it’s too bad they changed. You can disagree with that, but remember, he wasn’t writing a book, and Biden was blowing the lefty dog whistle that YOU ALL HEARD …
oi ly

“Bullshit! If he’s using a “dog whistle” , he’s a racist. Either he is a racist, or he is not using a dog whistle.”

Not necessarily. Could be a war room strategy.

Anybody know what came first, the photo of Mitt’s Dad marching for Civil Rights or Mitt’s tarnished, but recently buffed up, dog whistle. Amazing what a little Silvo can do!
M2

Romney’s “Free Stuff” Speech Is a New Low

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/romneys-free-stuff-speech-is-a-new-low-20120713
- Justanotherrighty
  
  If the political pundits at Rolling Stone (even their judgement on music is confused, so where do you think they’re at politically? ) say it, it must be true?
  Like I said, it’s a dog whistle only liberals can hear.
  Here’s another slant on it :: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kathleen-parker-romneys-critics-say-the-silliest-things/2012/07/13/gJQAXMNoiW_story.html
  - M2
    
    If the oft fired hack who is Kathleen Parker says it, it must be true? That’s your big counter argument? Only liberals hear the dog whistle because you and Kathy say it, but me posting Matt Taibbi gets the ” fucking hippies” routine? You’re such a lazy docuhebag. And, Parker’s piece doesn’t even mention Mittens’ “free stuff ” comment. Wonder why?
    
    But I do agree that Mitt didn’t plan anything to stir up his white racist base share. He doesn’t have to and clearly he’s not smart enough to strategize that sinisterly -for now, anyway. But as for white republicans getting their anti- NAACP boners up, all you and Kath has to do is turn on Fox News to see the ragegasm.
    
    So lazy.
- Justanotherrighty
  
  Lemme try this r-e-a-l slow ::
  
  What I said was : “And, for the record, I have never heard or read about anyone – EVER – saying anything like , ” … universal health care isn’t necessary because it is just a scam for people who are looking to get “free stuff.”
  
  Read it again … That goes for you, too , D A
  
  Now, what I want to know is , not where someone else said it was a dog whistle . I want to know where someone said or wrote that ” … universal health care isn’t necessary because it is just a scam for people who are looking to get “free stuff.”
  Got it …
  - The Dark Avenger
    
    Frank,
    
    tl,dr.
Justanotherrighty

And, for the record, I have never heard or read about anyone – EVER – saying anything like , ” … universal health care isn’t necessary because it is just a scam for people who are looking to get “free stuff.”
- The Dark Avenger
  
  That just demonstrates you can’t read for sh*t, Frank, nothing new there.
  - Justanotherrighty
    
    D A, save it for the peanut gallery, Mr Cut and paste … Surely, if anyone actually said or wrote that they thought what that idiot said, you would would paste it here…
    So, go fetch, boy!
    - The Dark Avenger
      
      Not even the most foul cur would be worthy to be your knave, Frank.
Justanotherrighty

It’s also blatantly obvious that you are using the photo to somehow show that Mitt can’t possibly be a racist because his father marched for Civil Rights so many years ago.
That’s why you didn’t answer my question. You’d like the world to give Mitt a pass on any racist bullshit, based on his father’s moral stance against black oppression.
Wrong.
It is simply using the race card on His Majestyness – you know, they guy who claimed he was born because of the March on Selma, that took place FOUR YEARS AFTER HE WAS BORN !

I’m not saying Mitt is a racist, but he does like his new dog whistle.
Bullshit! If he’s using a “dog whistle” , he’s a racist. Either he is a racist, or he is not using a dog whistle. I would suggest the dog whistle he is using can only be heard by liberals, like the numbskulls who actually think he set up the speech at the NAACP so he would be booed to please his anti-black base.
I’ll bet there are a few people who believe that B S who post here regularly.

And, finally, you know good and well that you would love it if there were proof positive that Romney was a racist …
- The Dark Avenger
  
  Anytime someone talks about African-Americans and “free stuff”, it’s a dog whistle to racists :
  
  “If you’re looking for free stuff you don’t have to pay for? Vote for the other guy, that’s what he’s all about, okay? That’s not, that’s not what I’m about.”
  
  “Free stuff.” Suddenly, that seemed to become the new message on “Obamacare” from Romney: legislation to provide a means to obtain health care by those who are currently uninsured is the equivalent of giving people “free stuff,” that is, a “handout.” This is insulting to millions of Americans whose health is at risk because they cannot afford the high costs of private health insurance.
  
  But it is especially insulting to African Americans given the cynical way the Romney camp apparently got this new messaging out. Health care as “free stuff” wanted by African Americans is roughly equivalent, in its racial undertones, to Ronald Reagan’s “welfare queens” messaging from his 1976 presidential campaign.
  
  That 1976 presidential campaign was a terrible time in American politics as it set the template for using racially coded language to justify cutting the social safety net. This has had enormously negative consequences over more than three decades as it has served to cut the nerve of ethical effort to eliminate both poverty and racism. It gives people an excuse not to care about the poor because the poor ‘don’t deserve it,’ and it stereotypes the poor as all African American when that is completely inaccurate. People are tempted to believe that universal health care isn’t necessary because it is just a scam for people who are looking to get “free stuff.”
  - Justanotherrighty
    
    From my comment above :: “I would suggest the dog whistle he is using can only be heard by liberals, like the numbskulls who actually think he set up the speech at the NAACP so he would be booed to please his anti-black base.
    I’ll bet there are a few people who believe that B S who post here regularly. ”
    And we have just heard from one of the numbskulls, quoting one of the other numbskulls.
    And here’s why she, and you, are numbskulls:
    Answer this multiple choice question: Assuming Mitt Romney carefully chose his words to solicit boos ( a remarkable feat in itself ) in order to energize his “anti-black base”, answer me this: If Mitt Romney had not gone to the NAACP Convention, and had not made that speech, would the “anti-black base” faced with a match up between Barack Obama and any other white man in America, have voted:
    1) For Obama
    2) For the white guy
    3) For the man in the moon.
    
    Face it D A, without the right click , you’d have nothing to say…
oi ly

“But before I said anything, I would be thinking, “I notice oi ly didn’t deny the truth of what I said, now did he? “”

I didn’t deny the truth of what you said because it’s very obvious how a hypothetical racist photo of Mitt’s father could be used by the pro Obama camp in an election year. It doesn’t take a genius to figure that out.

It’s also blatantly obvious that you are using the photo to somehow show that Mitt can’t possibly be a racist because his father marched for Civil Rights so many years ago.

That’s why you didn’t answer my question. You’d like the world to give Mitt a pass on any racist bullshit, based on his father’s moral stance against black oppression.

I’m not saying Mitt is a racist, but he does like his new dog whistle. If he keeps using it, well then, we’ll know that virtue is not necessarily past from father to son. I hope I’m wrong.
oi ly

If his dad was aiming a fire hose at a crowd of black demonstrators, what would you be saying now?
- Justanotherrighty
  
  I would be saying, “I know this is going to be all over television, and in all the headlines and all over the Internet, because it will make Romney look terrible, and help Obama win the election.”
  
  But before I said anything, I would be thinking, “I notice oi ly didn’t deny the truth of what I said, now did he? “
oi ly

I’m asking you.
- Justanotherrighty
  
  The caption of the photograph is correct . Draw from it whatever meaning you wish.
  
  But I am sure that if Romney’s Dad were aiming a fire hose at a crowd of demonstrators, you wouldn’t be asking that question at all …
- db
  
  Oi,
  
  Jumping into this. (Fools rush in…)
  
  “Does a generation intrinsically inherit the values of the previous generation?”
  
  No, we can take the best of what out parents left us & try to improve on what needs improvement. Our parents did the best they could with the light that God gave them. We can do no better, we must not do less.
  
  Frank,
  
  George Romney was no segregationist. You’re old enough to know that.
oi ly

Does a son intrinsically inherit the virtues of a father? Just wondering.
- M2
  
  Well, his dad did run a shitty csmpaign, too.
  - M2
    
    Campaign – sorry
- Justanotherrighty
  
  Does a son intrinsically inherit the virtues of a father? Just wondering.
  Does a generation intrinsically inherit the values of the previous generation? Ask Oliver.
Justanotherrighty

If this link works, there’s an interesting history lesson here :: http://snipurl.com/24achzb
Christopher Foxx

OW: They’re blissfully ignorant that the world is more than them

“With one trifling exception, the entire world is made up of other people.” A concept modern “conservatives” just do not get.
M2

“I wish we lived in a place more like the America of yesteryear that only exists in the brains of us Republicans.” –Ned Flanders
- Justanotherrighty
  
  Sorry, M2, I don’t know of any left wing cartoon characters to quote …
  - M2
    
    Your views are already cartoonish. No worries.
    - Justanotherrighty
      
      Oooh ! Burn!
      You dolt …
      - M2
        
        I see you’re still living in the ’50s since you’re using Dobie Gillis’ slams.
      - Justanotherrighty
        
        I guess you’re living in the 15th Century because you’re using words like “view.”
        Dolt “1540s, perhaps a variant of dold “dull, foolish,” influenced by dulte, dolte”
      - M2
        
        Conservatives and comedy: never the twain shall meet.
Justanotherrighty

Dumb Ass, let me explain this so that even a Delinquent Anencephalic like you can understand it.
Remember this ?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Now I realize that you may not find it in Wikipedia, but if you look around the Internet, you’ll find it.
Now here’s how it goes: You can not exercise your right to life, if you are not allowed to be born.
Women have the right to smoke cigarettes all day, you see, but they don’t have the “right” to ‘pass’ on the cancer when it comes. Women have the right to drink all day, don’t they? But they don’t have the “right” to ‘pass’ on the cirrhosis or the seizures when they come, do they?
See, actions have consequences. F*cking can lead to pregnancy, and pregnancy leads to children. You don’t get the freedom to f*ck and then pass on the soon to be living consequences.

But it does sicken me to think that you find abortions funny, but of course that’s not all you liberals do that sickens me.

It’s peculiar that you can cherry pick and edit my comments for your petty, pitiful and pathetic blog, but you can’t do that here. I guess that’s part of that personality disorder you’re suffering from.
- The Dark Avenger
  
  F*cking can lead to pregnancy, and pregnancy leads to children.
  
  So, if a woman is raped, or is a victim of incest, she should bear children even though she didn’t consent to the f*cking in the first place?
  
  By your standards, Frank, nobody should have any medical treatment for conditions they brought on themselves, including drinking like a fish, or smoking like a chimney.
  
  But it does sicken me to think that you find abortions funny, but of course that’s not all you liberals do that sickens me.
  
  I didn’t imply that, but I do find your outrage at women f*cking and not getting pregnant, or getting pregnant and exercising bodily autonomy mighty amusing.
  
  It’s peculiar that you can cherry pick and edit my comments for your petty, pitiful and pathetic blog, but you can’t do that here. I guess that’s part of that personality disorder you’re suffering from.
  
  I always provide a link to your comments that I quote from Frank DiShallow, so that they can be seen for all their disgusting glory.
  
  I only started editing the comments you left at my site after you write stuff like this:
  
  That’s the White House spin , proving once again that Obama could shit in your mouth and you’d call it oatmeal …
  Oh, and f*ck you, asshole !
  
  So, it’s okay to accuse me of coprophagia, but posting your idiot comments is indecent and horrible.
  
  BTW, f*ck you in the asshole all the way to your tonsils.
  - Justanotherrighty
    
    So, if a woman is raped, or is a victim of incest, she should bear children even though she didn’t consent to the f*cking in the first place?
    Ooooh, one of those trick questions, where I’m trapped now!
    Let me answer it like a politician: My personal religious belief is that yes, if you become pregnant by incest or rape, you should bear the child, but politically , I will set that aside and say, “No, she can have an abortion.”
    Since, if you add up all the women who might be pregnant because of rape or incest, and add to that, women whose giving birth would actually endanger their lives, you get much less than 7% of pregnancies, I would only ask that the other 93+% carry their babies to term.
    Next.
    
    By your standards, Frank, nobody should have any medical treatment for conditions they brought on themselves, including drinking like a fish, or smoking like a chimney
    I said no such thing. I said they must endure the consequences of their actions. No one mentioned getting or not getting medical attention.
    By your logic – and every other dingbat leftwinger’s – abortion is a “solution” to pregnancy, which is like saying that you can cure a smoker’s lung cancer ny killing her. After all, she won’t have cancer anymore, right?
    Next.
    
    So, it’s okay to accuse me of coprophagia, but posting your idiot comments is indecent and horrible.
    I don’t care what you post in your POS blog, moron, and FYI, you have said many. many, many horrible things about me, too, right here in this weblog, so save the righteous indignation for the Democratic Convention, where it passes for currency.
    What I have said , and I will continue to say is this: You have created a blog – a website – to insult a private person, not a celebrity. This site has one or two occasional readers, including yourself, and consists primarily of quoting the comments I make here on this weblog – often, redacted, and very often, completely out of context. You tell lies about me, and imply that I do and say things that I do not do.
    All of this activity is directed at a person you have never met, never spoken to, or never even seen. I think that is creepy, pathological , and in a word, f*cking nuts !
    
    BTW, that’s not the first homoerotic reference you have made about me – are we getting an insight into your motivation?
    - The Dark Avenger
      
      I said they must endure the consequences of their actions. No one mentioned getting or not getting medical attention.
      
      I would argue that having an alcoholic denied a liver transplant would be making them ‘endure the consequences of their actions’.
      
      By your logic – and every other dingbat leftwinger’s – abortion is a “solution” to pregnancy, which is like saying that you can cure a smoker’s lung cancer ny killing her. After all, she won’t have cancer anymore, right?
      Next.
      
      Nope, the fetus isn’t an independent life because it’s dependent on the mother for nutrition and protection, just as is true of the cancer in your hideous example.
      
      I don’t care what you post in your POS blog, moron, and FYI, you have said many. many, many horrible things about me, too, right here in this weblog, so save the righteous indignation for the Democratic Convention, where it passes for currency.
      
      You’re the moron, Frank, posting as “Renfro Swoop” while your ISP was being logged, and bitching about being moderated when you have a potty-mouth approach to politics in the first place.
      
      What I have said , and I will continue to say is this: You have created a blog – a website – to insult a private person, not a celebrity.
      
      You’ve never heard of the site Instaputz, or do you thing Glenn Reynolds is a celebrity?
      
      Keep nattering on, Frank.
      
      This site has one or two occasional readers, including yourself, and consists primarily of quoting the comments I make here on this weblog – often, redacted, and very often, completely out of context.
      
      Along with a link to the comment and the thread it’s contained in, so that people can see if, indeed, I have taken your comment “completely out of context”. It’s a concept known as “Documentation.”
      
      Like when you linked to a story about Steve Jobs leaving Apple when he was terminally ill, and you called him a quitter.
      
      If such a bile towards a dying man resides in your soul, a ‘celebrity’ whom you never met, nor had reason to be hostile towards, it deserves to be brought out in the open.
      
      All of this activity is directed at a person you have never met, never spoken to, or never even seen. I think that is creepy, pathological , and in a word, f*cking nuts !
      
      I agree, when are you going to start working on that problem with Olllie?
      - Justanotherrighty
        
        You’ve never heard of the site Instaputz, or do you think Glenn Reynolds is a celebrity?
        Are you putting yourself in the category of Instaputz, or are you putting me in a class with Glenn Reynolds? Do you really think Glenn Reynolds and I are equally well known?
        Frank DiSalle 56,600 hits on Google
        Glenn Reynolds 2,490,000 hits on Google
        
        That’s a long way around to justify being creepy, but you’re still creepy. Your site has absolutely no reason to exist except in your sick, twisted imagination.
        All these things you claim I’ve done , didn’t happen until after you drew my attention to your screwy blog.
        
        You … Are … A … Mental … Case … !!!
      - The Dark Avenger
        
        Glenn Reynolds 2,490,000 hits on Google
        
        Hits on Google do not a celebrity make, Frank.
        
        That’s a long way around to justify being creepy, but you’re still creepy. Your site has absolutely no reason to exist except in your sick, twisted imagination.
        All these things you claim I’ve done , didn’t happen until after you drew my attention to your screwy blog.
        
        I started quoting you from the very beginning of my blog, so your statement doesn’t make sense.
        
        You … Are … A … Mental … Case … !!!
        
        No…………I………….Am……………….Not……..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      - Justanotherrighty
        
        You’re an idiot …
        You are trying to make it look like I incited you to make up that blog, but, as you just said, the things you quoted were after you started the blog.
        So why did you start the blog ?
- db
  
  I would certainly never argue against Mr. Jefferson’e writings that you quoted. And only a pedant would point out that neither women, nor children, nor slaves, nor indentured servants were included in his definition.
  
  I would instead argue, who is entitled to life? Those alive. Life & the rights thereto belong to those alive. Those not alive are not alive & thus accrue no rights. Live then begins at birth. A Mother who unfortunately misscarries is not then guilty of murder. A woman who smokes, drinks, uses drugs, to the detriment or injury of a child is not liable for damages. A pregnant woman is not entitled to use the HOV-2 lanes.
  - Justanotherrighty
    
    I would instead argue, who is entitled to life? Those alive.
    First you have to get there, db …
    Have you ever heard of Hobson’s Choice ?
    Consider this “Mommy’s Choice”. We give rights to those who live. Mommy chooses who lives, therefore, Mommy confers rights to the living.
    
    A Mother who unfortunately miscarries is not then guilty of murder.
    In what way could a woman who miscarries possibly be guilty of murder ? In what way?
    
    A woman who smokes, drinks, uses drugs, to the detriment or injury of a child is not liable for damages.
    There is a body of law regarding those issues that was in existence long before abortion was ever legal in the US, with regard to termination of parental rights because of neglect and abuse.
    
    A pregnant woman is not entitled to use the HOV-2 lanes.
    Haha … And a pregnant woman doesn’t pay two admissions to the movies.
    But, guess what? When a woman is 5 months pregnant, she and the child are entitled to Medicaid …
    - db
      
      Frank,
      
      “Mommy confers rights to the living.”
      
      Right.
      
      “the HOV-2 lanes. Haha”
      
      An obvious ramification of the “personhood laws” I’ve read of. If a person is a person from conception he thus is entitled to all rights of personhood. He is a person thus HOV2. Laugh all you want. Show me I’m wrong.
      
      “In what way could a woman who miscarries possibly be guilty of murder”
      
      Ditto above. In the world of Voter Picture ID & “papers please traffic stops”; you’ll give me the fact that it is incumbent on the Government to know who is a person/citizen. Therefore all pregnancies will need to be reported. Therefore when a pregnancy terminates; the Government will need to be informed. The Government , knowing the dangers of illegal abortions; will need to investigate the circumstances. How will a woman prove the miscarriage was natural and not an illegal abortion? Nancy Grace wants to know.
      
      “When a woman is 5 months pregnant, she and the child are entitled to Medicaid …:
      
      Good. The Government has (rightly) decided there is a benefit to providing a safe & smooth entrance into the world. Mazeltov. I’m not sure you can separate the health care of the one from the other at that point; but I will gladly defer to those more experienced than I in this matter. But do you add the obvious extension that there is a benefit to providing a safe voyage through this life as well as just getting here? Or do Republicans believe that protecting life begins at conception & ends at birth?
      - Justanotherrighty
        
        “Mommy confers rights to the living.”
        
        Right.
        
        So, we only thought that the inalienable right to life , that we fought the greatest empire on earth for, was endowed to us by our Creator. That was an error made by Jefferson , and corrected by Roe v Wade, is that what your saying?
        Your satisfied with the notion that any menstruating female with a working womb can determine who lives or dies?
        
        “the HOV-2 lanes. Haha”
        
        An obvious ramification of the “personhood laws” I’ve read of. If a person is a person from conception he thus is entitled to all rights of personhood. He is a person thus HOV2. Laugh all you want. Show me I’m wrong.
        Of course you’re wrong … It is by no means an obvious ramification of “personhood”. Who said it was? You?
        How many airplane tickets does a pregnant woman buy?
        If life begins at conception , is it an “obvious ramification” of that idea that she should pay two fares ? Of course not.
        
        “Persons” , “adults”, “children”. “males”, “females” are already defined in different ways in different sections of law, within the same state.
        “If life begins at conception , does that mean every gamete is a child?” is glib, but it has no place in law.
        If you don’t believe me, go to your local law library, find your State laws, and look in the section entitled “Definitions”. It’s usually very early in the first volume …
        
        How will a woman prove the miscarriage was natural and not an illegal abortion?
        It won’t be because the notion that you are innocent until proven guilty will be suspended in the case of miscarriages.
        Once again, you are pretending that principles of law will change if abortion is illegal.
        
        But do you add the obvious extension that there is a benefit to providing a safe voyage through this life as well as just getting here?
        Would it matter if I did? Think about it… [and again with the "obvious" - what's up with that?]
        
        Or do Republicans believe that protecting life begins at conception & ends at birth?
        Actually, it’s Democrats who often think abortions should be allowed even when the baby is in the birth canal.
        But Republicans (I am not one) and others struggle with the idea of how to provide healthcare for people who can’t afford it. They do not see a trillion dollar price tag as an optimum solution, and hope to repeal Obamacare, when Romney is elected , and devise something better.
- Christopher Foxx
  
  justanotherrighty: Women have the right to smoke cigarettes all day, you see, but they don’t have the “right” to ‘pass’ on the cancer when it comes. Women have the right to drink all day, don’t they? But they don’t have the “right” to ‘pass’ on the cirrhosis or the seizures when they come, do they?
  
  So, as someone who claims to be a proponent of individual liberty, who wants the government to stop interfering in our lives, you’re in favor of making it illegal for pregnant women to smoke or drink.
  
  Got it.
  - Justanotherrighty
    
    Yeah, that’s just what I said …
    You know, sometimes you act like a jerk …
    - Christopher Foxx
      
      So clarify for me then. How do they exercise their right to smoke or drink without risking passing on cancer and cirrhosis?
      
      How does that not imply that they’ll be in trouble for smoking? “Sure, you have a right to smoke, but you’re in trouble if you get any carcinogens into your body.” While not outlawing smoking for pregnant women, isn’t the actual effect to do just that?
      - Justanotherrighty
        
        “Sure, you have a right to smoke, but you’re in trouble if you get any carcinogens into your body.”
        Who said that? Who implied that? Who even entered the orbit of that notion?
        
        How do they exercise their right to smoke or drink without risking passing on cancer and cirrhosis?
        That isn’t even what I said, you idiot. When I said a woman can’t pass on cirrhosis I meant she can’t just pretend there is no risk, or make it go away.
        When I said a woman can’t pass on cancer I meant she can’t just pretend there is no risk, or make it go away.
        No that you know what I meant, would you like to change your remarks ?
        Or do you want to continue to be a jackass?
      - Christopher Foxx
        
        Who said that? Who implied that? Who even entered the orbit of that notion?
        
        You did, Frank.
      - Christopher Foxx
        
        No that you know what I meant, would you like to change your remarks ?
        
        Now that you know what you meant to say, you want to go back and change your remarks? Or do you find it feeds your victimhood better to be unclear about what you mean and then complain about it when folks respond to what you actually did write?
Justanotherrighty

So?
So, the average American didn’t wake up each morning, and say, “I wonder how the Negroes are doing today.”

So?
Racism existed everywhere. It was just especially concentrated in the South.
There was far less institutionalized racism in the North, and that’s not the revisionist history you learn in school, that’s a fact …

Yeah. It’s hard to imagine that we once had a news media that reported on injustices instead of just playing stenographer or discussing politics like it was a horse race.
Yeah, and that by 1968 , they would all be carrying water for the left wing of the Democratic Party

You can’t blame Republicans for the delay, because the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the Democrats.

Well, you’re right there. It was the southern democrats who fought hard against the Civil Rights Act.
That’s right.

It was a plan by the GOP to bring disaffected racists over to their party in response to the Civil Rights Act. And it worked brilliantly. Hence why the South is a GOP stronghold to this day.
And, thus, we smear every one in the South as racist, because it’s not possible that they became ideologically estranged from a (Democratic) party that pissed on everything they held dear – individual autonomy, patriotism, religion in everyday life, etc.
- The Dark Avenger
  
  You’re against abortion, but you hold ‘individual autonomy’ dear, Justanotherrrighty?
  
  Thanks for the early AM laughs.
- Christopher Foxx
  
  justanotherrighty: So, the average American didn’t wake up each morning, and say, “I wonder how the Negroes are doing today.”
  
  Nor are they doing that today. So what’s your point?
  
  Yeah, and that by 1968 , they would all be carrying water for the left wing of the Democratic Party
  
  Yeah, yeah. We know. The entire media establishment has been in the pocket of the left for forty years. Conservative views haven’t been able to be heard since before Nixon was elected.
  
  And Elvis is alive, aliens from Mars made the crop circles and a Nigerian prince is going to make you rich.
  - Justanotherrighty
    
    The entire media establishment has been in the pocket of the left for forty years.
    Yeah, and the entire South is a racist Republican redoubt, Alger Hiss was innocent, and Bush fixed the 200 Election, so he could arrange to have the WTC blown up to get us into Iraq…
    - Christopher Foxx
      
      Wow. The speed with which Frank can say something, and then turn around and agree with you that it’s bunk is truly amazing.
      
      That he’s utterly unaware that his just disagreed with himself would be similarly amazing were it not so commonplace.
      - Justanotherrighty
        
        Foxx, you don’t act like a jerk – you are a jerk! Stop being a child. You pretended the first time not to get my point – something you do quite often – and now you’re doing it again.
        If you’re smarter than a Fifth grader , you can understand this.
        These were all myths that I mentioned
        Must I go over them?
        BUT, these are myths believed by the Left.
        However, what I said was not a myth. It was a generalization. Like saying, “Back then, we had a press that was neutral.”
        Granted, it was confusing, and for that I have no excuse.
        What’s your excuse for acting like a jackass ?
      - Christopher Foxx
        
        you are a jerk! Stop being a child. You pretended the first time not to get my point
        There’s Frank for ya. Point out what he said doesn’t make sense and he’ll claim he never meant what he clearly wrote, that you misunderstood it.
        
        Granted, it was confusing, and for that I have no excuse.
        What’s your excuse for acting like a jackass ?
        
        Ah, I see. So trying to make sense of your inexcusably confused writings makes me a jackass. Got it.
        
        (And didja notice there, folks, how he complained about my not getting his point and then admits that it was confusing. That’s right, it’s my fault Frank is confused.)
db

IT WAS A TIME SCHOOLCHILDREN HID UNDER THEIR DESKS PRACTICING WHAT TO DO UNDER ATOMIC ATTACK.

IT WAS A TIME THE YANKEES RULED BASEBALL.

But I certainly agree wholeheartedly with Stearns, those times are long gone.

There were no computers, i-pods, or cable TV. Wait, no cable? No Fox “News”?

IT WAS A GOLDEN AGE!
enlightened liberal

It was also a time when union membership was at its highest. These Fox screeds don’t mention that though do they? It’s a lot easier to keep the nuclear family together when fair wages are paid.

“IT WAS A TIME WHEN RIGHT WAS RIGHT AND WRONG WAS WRONG.”

Like marginalizing 11% of the population, not to mention women and gays.

“IT WAS A TIME WHEN BOYS AND GIRLS COULD PRAY IN SCHOOL.”

Like now. No law prevents children from praying in school.

“IT WAS A TIME WHEN MEN WERE MEN AND WOMEN WERE WOMEN.”

“and women were in the kitchen and their husbands were in the closet.”

IT WAS A TIME WHEN PLANNED PARENTHOOD MEANT WAITING UNTIL YOU GOT MARRIED TO START A FAMILY.

and since there was no birth control pill, if you did get pregnant you were forced to get married, or live life in shame.

IT WAS A TIME WHEN THE LIFE OF AN UNBORN CHILD WAS TREASURED, NOT ABORTED.

Not different today. Except women don’t die now if they need to terminate a dangerous or unwanted pregnancy.

IT WAS A TIME WHEN CHILDREN RESPECTED THEIR ELDERS

Or were beaten within an inch of their life.

IT WAS A TIME WHEN FAMILY MEALS WERE SHARED AT THE TABLE.

Because union rules required an 8 hour workday, not salaried servitude. Not many needed 2 jobs to keep food on the table, either.

IT WAS A TIME WHEN AMERICAN INGENUITY WAS CELEBRATED.

I agree with this- now conservatives only respect the ingenuity to screw millions out of their savings through financial schemes. They don’t want to invest in school and government to prime the pump of innovation.
- Bruce Henry
  
  That was brilliant, E.L.
  - Justanotherrighty
    
    You were being sarcastic, right, Bruce ?
    Heh.
- Justanotherrighty
  
  If you don’t want to go back to that time, then don’t. But please allow me, and millions of other Americans, to choose their own future.
  That is , if it’s OK with His Majestyness…
  - M2
    
    Only in the conservative mind does going back 60 years equate to a bold step into the future.
    - Justanotherrighty
      
      Only in the liberal mind does condemning people for what they didn’t do in the past have any relevance. Only in the liberal mind, do we pretend that abortion and birth control pills have done nothing to affect illegitimate births, teen pregnancies and the haphazard state of modern day marriage.
      - M2
        
        Ha! Rev up that DeLorean, professor. You can still save America from the evils of a woman being in control of her uterus.
Justanotherrighty

Just a little footnote to your “Fractured Fairy Tales” 1) The percentage of blacks in America back then was about 11%. They all did not live in the South. 2) It was the news broadcasts on television that made it graphically clear what was happening in the South, and in just a few years, there were two Civil Rights Acts passed.
You can’t blame Republicans for the delay, because the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the Democrats.
And before you even think about the “Southern Strategy,” Kevin Phillips didn’t write The Emerging Republican Majority until 1969
- thad
  
  You make an excellent point, Righty. The Civil Rights Acts were held up by Democrats.
  
  Democrats like Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms.
  
  Say, whatever happened to those guys after that, anyway?
  - Zython
    
    They died?
    - Justanotherrighty
      
      Shouldn’t you be playing WoW, or something?
- DC Wilson
  
  “1) The percentage of blacks in America back then was about 11%.”
  
  So?
  
  “They all did not live in the South.”
  
  So?
  
  Racism existed everywhere. It was just especially concentrated in the South.
  
  “2) It was the news broadcasts on television that made it graphically clear what was happening in the South, and in just a few years, there were two Civil Rights Acts passed.”
  
  Yeah. It’s hard to imagine that we once had a news media that reported on injustices instead of just playing stenographer or discussing politics like it was a horse race.
  
  “You can’t blame Republicans for the delay, because the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the Democrats.”
  
  Well, you’re right there. It was the southern democrats who fought hard against the Civil Rights Act. And when it was finally passed, they responded by switching to republicans, because by the late sixties, Nixon was welcoming racists into the GOP with open arms.
  
  “And before you even think about the “Southern Strategy,” Kevin Phillips didn’t write The Emerging Republican Majority until 1969″
  
  I think you’re confused. The southern strategy wasn’t a plot to derail the Civil Rights Act. It was a plan by the GOP to bring disaffected racists over to their party in response to the Civil Rights Act. And it worked brilliantly. Hence why the South is a GOP stronghold to this day.
- Christopher Foxx
  
  justanotherrighty: The percentage of blacks in America back then was about 11%. They all did not live in the South.
  
  To echo DC Wilson’s question, what does that have to do with anything? That the number of blacks in America was a certain amount and that they were all over the country means…. what? That Oliver isn’t correct when he says the 1950′s weren’t the Pleasantville that Starnes and his ilk believe it was?
  
  And while it was the Democrats of the day who opposed civil rights legislation, thad is quite right in his observation (which you studiously ignore). The Dems (and Repubs) of the 1950′s-60′s are quite different than they are today. The parties have changed in the intervening six decades.

Banter Voices

History Lesson For A Fox News Guy

Most Read Articles Today: