The fact that this person and Hank Johnson are both in the majority in the House of Representatives should bother you. It should bother anyone who is worried about the policies being made in this country today.
The Words “Criminally Stupid” Come to Mind…
July 16, 2010 by Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere
51 Responses
Speak, thou apparition!
Meta
Your Host, Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere, a/k/a Blackiswhite, Imperial Agent Provocateur.Recent Comments
- Ellery on More Fun And Games With Government Snoops
- Jihawg Ammo: Pork-Infused Bullets to Deter Terrorists and Weekend Links! on The Questions I’m Not Hearing
- Alfie on The Questions I’m Not Hearing
- Stinky's Dad on More Fun And Games With Government Snoops
- The Curious NSA Leaks and Weekend Links! on More Fun And Games With Government Snoops
Top Clicks
Top Posts
Pages
Archives
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
The Reading List
Twitter Updates
- The Questions I'm Not Hearing wp.me/psCdu-Gj 1 week ago
- In a class on the marijuana law. "Interesting." Doesn't do it justice. 1 week ago
- More Fun And Games With Government Snoops wp.me/psCdu-Gd 1 week ago
- At least we now know who the "Can you hear me now?" was directed to. #thanksverizon #canweimpeachhimnow #tcot 1 week ago
- A lot of government spouses are relieved today. They thought the secret email accounts were for cheating on THEM! #transparency #tcot 2 weeks ago
-
Give it a minute and that douchebag troll, graybitch the wonder shit will be over to defend her.
Hey greybitch! You apologize to BiW yet? Huh, boy? Speak up!
I think Alvin Greene will make this a nice trio.
In addition to being factually wrong, I have no idea what point Lee was trying to make. That was really bizarre.
Hank Johnson? Isn’t he the guy that worried that Guam would “tip over and capsize” if we do a military buildup there? Johnson made a credible case that he was joking about Guam, and that the right-wing blogs didn’t get the joke. They aren’t exactly famous for their sense of humor.
But there is no way to make sense of what Lee said. No way at all. Early-onset Alzheimer’s?
Hank Johnson? Isn’t he the guy that worried that Guam would “tip over and capsize” if we do a military buildup there? Johnson made a credible case that he was joking about Guam, and that the right-wing blogs didn’t get the joke. They aren’t exactly famous for their sense of humor.
I don’t see uh how uh he could uh possibly uh make uh a credible uh case uh for uh his statement uh issued in deadpan uh could uh be uh a joke uh and uh the admiral uh who was testifying uh before him uh obviously didn’t uh get it uh either.
http://threesurethingsoflife.wordpress.com/2010/04/02/what-does-it-say/
But then Hank lost credibility with me before that shortly after Congressman Wilson expressed his displeasure with being lied to:
http://threesurethingsoflife.wordpress.com/2010/04/02/what-does-it-say/
However, I could give the Congressman the benefit of the doubt and say that he had some really big clown shoes to fill when he succeeded Cynthia McKinney and was elected to that seat.
Sheila Jackson Lee almost rivals VP Joe Biden when it comes to stupid remarks and an out-of-this-universe persona.
Then again, Congress and other assorted politicians from both sides of the aisle can be depended upon to cheapen ( or clarify?) the public image of our “leadership” on a regular basis.
And yet their constituents continue to elect them and the rest of us to suffer from their incompetence and ignorance.
Sheila Jackson Lee.
Hank Johnson.
Alvin Greene.
Cynthia McKinney.
Those are the names mentioned here so far. The only names.
With so many “criminally stupid” Congresscritters and candidates to choose from, why do these stand out?
Because they proudly proclaim their ignorance when the film is rolling?
I’m pretty sure that the smarterest man in the room, Joe F***ing Biden, would tell you that its a “Big F****ing Deal.”
My mistake. Maine mentioned Joe Biden.
Yeah, we aren’t racists (which I have no doubt you were aiming for with your comment). We included a white guy.
It’s always smart to include at least one white guy when you are cherry-picking blacks out of the target-rich population of really stupid politicians. That way no one could EVER suspect any racist motives.
White racism hasn’t existed since at least 1967. It’s only black-on-white racism now. The New Black Panthers. The NAACP. Am I right?
You’re right. Cynthia McKinney should have been considered weapons grade crazee, not criminally stupid. And since she is no longer sitting in Congress, it might be fair to dismiss her from the conversation. I’m willing to toss Alan Grayson in the ring, although to be fair, I consider him to be a braying jackass rather than criminally stupid. Something about him reminds me of the kid we all knew growing up. The one who was a little too fascinated with fire, or made females too unconfortable to be left alone with…I’m sure you know the type, even in Oklahoma, Chin.
First, we’d have had to have been cognisent that we were listing only blacks.
I was not until you asked what they all have in common.
“Am I right?”
No, you’re not right. Nor has anyone here or other blogs we frequent said as much.
Now would you like to deny that the NAACP and NBPP are racists, or are you waiting for JournoList to prompt you on that one?
Steve King?
Michelle Bachmann?
Michelle Bachmann…the Left’s hatred of smart, conservative women continues.
Remember, this from the editing blog jackass whose first observation was “where’s all the women?” After noticing none, the graying jackass’ second observation was our conservative chauvinism driving them away (snicker).
If you want to really get down to brass tacks, I dare the editing jackass to find one Michelle Bachmann retort anywhere near as stupid as Maxine Waters many imbecilic statements like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrA9zj94NuU
Smart conservative women?
I thought we were talking about Michelle Bachmann.
BIC, you might find this site interesting. You won’t like it, but you might find it interesting.
http://theusconstitution.org/blog.history/?p=1808
I wouldn’t say I found it interesting. I tend to find arguments meant to justify an unjustifiable expansion in federal power uncompelling. But at least it shyed away from directly asserting that the Tea Party and associates are racist.
I tend to find arguments meant to justify an unjustifiable expansion in federal power uncompelling.
I suppose you might find any argument “uncompelling” when you have already have dug in to a position on the opposing side of the argument. Nevertheless, I still read and even consider arguments with which I disagree. Your blog, for example. You should try it some time.
But at least it shyed away from directly asserting that the Tea Party and associates are racist.
With good reason. The meaning of the Constitution, and the racist signs (ones that make no assertions about the Constitution’s meaning) carried at Tea Party events, are two different subjects.
I suppose you might find any argument “uncompelling” when you have already have dug in to a position on the opposing side of the argument. Nevertheless, I still read and even consider arguments with which I disagree. Your blog, for example. You should try it some time.
Do you find your omnipotence tiring? I know I do, but at least you provide constant and consistant proof of the ASSUME principal. And you do demonstrate an agility that is fun to watch. I wouldn’t normally think it is possible for someone of you age to make all the wild-assed leaps you do without hurting yourself. I wouldn’t be effective at my job if I was not capable of “considering” (and disecting) arguments with which I disagree. Finding an argument uncompelling is not the same as not having read it or considered it.
English. The linguistic coin ‘o the realm. You might try comprehending it sometime.
With good reason. The meaning of the Constitution, and the racist signs (ones that make no assertions about the Constitution’s meaning) carried at Tea Party events, are two different subjects.
Of course, there was still the indirect assertion, which caused the article to injure its own credibility with a self-inflicted wound, but seeing as it no doubt matched your own prejudices, perhaps you failed to pick up on it?
“Nevertheless, I still read and even consider arguments with which I disagree. Your blog, for example. You should try it some time.”
Time to engage brain, Graychin.
But since we are talking about something written more than 200 hundred years ago, have you ever spent time getting inside the minds of that era? Have you read the Federalist Papers, Chin? The Antifederalist Papers?
The writings of Madison? Jefferson? Franklin? Adams?
Are you familiar with the works that influenced the Founders and the Framers? Could you name one of them? Two? Five?
Really, is there any expectation that he would read these?
He’s too busy calling you a racist.
I wouldn’t be effective at my job if I was not capable of “considering” (and disecting) arguments with which I disagree.
My point exactly. That is your consistent habit of thought. Your only consideration of information that blocks your predetermined goal is to dismember it so that it can be dismissed. I don’t think that you are likely to say to your clients, “I have read the arguments of the guy who is suing you, and I agree with him.” You have become just as unlikely to say to any liberal, “that’s a good point.”
Yes, I have read the Federalist and Antifederalist papers, Jefferson and Adams, but admittedly not for a long time. So what? We’ve had this conversation before, so you already know that I think you are full of poop.
The Constitution means what it says, and trying to amend its meaning – and even its plain language – by dragging in the individual opinions of persons who contributed to the larger debate so very long ago is dishonest at best. The final product (the Constitution) was language with which all the diverse interests who composed the Constitution could compromise and agree.
You have no credibility when you try to tell us that although the “due process” clause of the 14th Amendment uses the word “person, they MEANT to say “citizen.” Not even Tex Taylor can top that assertion for sheer “black is white” nonsense.
“The Constitution means what it says….”
So can we assume that you are a strict constructionalist and are against the idea of judicial activism?
Or do you waver depending on the topic at the time?
The Constitution means what it says,
If this were a true leftist position, then I find it very curious that we had the inquiry we did into the meaning of “militia” in the Second Amendment in the Heller.
The Constitution means what it says, and trying to amend its meaning – and even its plain language – by dragging in the individual opinions of persons who contributed to the larger debate so very long ago is dishonest at best. The final product (the Constitution) was language with which all the diverse interests who composed the Constitution could compromise and agree.
And I find the sophistry of trying to claim that the aprehension and understanding of the people who had to draft the language that was the result of the compromises and that would be presented to the people themselves as somehow unworthy because they are somehow “only their individual opinions breathtaking in its size and scope. Madison, probably more than anyone, exactly understood what was meant by the final language that had been negotiated by the delegates, as he was keeping painstaking notes of the proceedings, in direct contravention of the President of the Convention, George Washington’s express orders that no notes be retained. Hamilton, and Jay, both of whom differed from Madison on some points, had every opportunity to contest and argue for different interpretations in their own submissions to the Federalist Papers, and other venues had they been denied that venue, and yet, it didn’t happen.
My point exactly. That is your consistent habit of thought. Your only consideration of information that blocks your predetermined goal is to dismember it so that it can be dismissed. I don’t think that you are likely to say to your clients, “I have read the arguments of the guy who is suing you, and I agree with him.” You have become just as unlikely to say to any liberal, “that’s a good point.”
Once again, you presume you know about me, how I conduct my avocation, and how it affects everything I do.
If I am advising a client and I know what the adversary will argue, and there is a good point or argument, I have to tell my client, so that they can better understand the merits of the case against them, as well as their own case, so that they can make good decisions. But a good point on my side or on their side does not end the inquiry. I have to measure the balance. Do they have only one good point? Does that point overshadow all of my client’s points? Are there factors other than what the law says that can influence the ultimate disposition of the case? Is it cost effective for the client to continue?
Understanding is much more than what you describe here, Chin.
You have no credibility when you try to tell us that although the “due process” clause of the 14th Amendment uses the word “person, they MEANT to say “citizen.”
Remarkably, I can respond to this claim from you that I have “no credibility” without laughing.
I’ve already explained how rules of interpretation and drafting say otherwise. I’ve touched on the procedural history, I’ve domestrated how it wasn’t true in actual practice, and how this was reflected in the law itself for more than one hundred years. There really isn’t more to say on this.
Back on topic – Tex and I were discussing “smart conservative women’ …..
I guess that you all read about the new English word coined by Sarah Palin – “refudiate.”
She was so proud of this Bushian malapropism that she compared her word-coinage to that of Shakespeare!
But now, still another new word has entered our vocabulary in response:
Palindrone: prose that make as much sense backwards as it does forwards.
You betcha!
Ah yes, let’s make fun of Sarah Palin’s fuckup while we ignore a president who thinks he is leading 56 states.
Let’s not ignore it – let’s watch the tape.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws
*Please remove the “http://” before posting the link so it doesn’t embed in the thread and slow it down.-BiW
And you didn’t even bring up that I am listing another idiot black person.
There might be hope, yet.
Sorry about the imbed. I’ll remember your tip.
“Back on topic – Tex and I were discussing “smart conservative women’”
And if you want to go “back on topic” then you need to be discussing the intelligence of liberals, not conservatives. Because that was the original topic.
Let’s not ignore it – let’s watch the tape.
I have no idea how this adds to your argument. I just see the “Mr. Spock” of Presidents saying something that any first-grader could tell him was wrong.
But let’s go there for a minute…
More video here: http://tinyurl.com/37m7sjs
Let’s take a minute and look past the fact that the Smarterest President EVAR can’t even properly identify the name of the dictionary, despite having heard it only a few seconds before.
I have never before heard a scholar, a “law professor”, a lawyer ever say with a straight face that applying the definition of a thing to that thing declare that calling something what it is “is reaching”.
The only “reach” was this ham-fisted denial, which is now in direct contravention to the government’s arguments to establish and maintain the constitutionality of the health care take over. It represents a disingenuity with the governed which is “unprecedented” and “historic”, and could cause millions of gobsmacked Americans to reach for their “inhilators”. Maybe we can send some spendulous cash to the 147th Congressional district of Wyoming to investigate this further, thus “saving or creating” more jobs? Lying is second nature to him, but then when you are never expected to tell the truth, and you have a cadre of journalists and academics willing to lie and deflect to cover for you, it doesn’t appear to be a problem any more.
The reason that watching the tape of Obama saying that he had visited 57 states is that it gives context – something that doesn’t matter to Huck, and apparently not to you either.
Exactly what context did that clip give that I was lacking?
Context. Like I said, it’s something you wouldn’t understand.
“Context. Like I said, it’s something you wouldn’t understand.”
Judging from the latest offering from your blog, I think you have little room to be judging anyone’s level of understanding context.
I went to Graychin’s blog to challenge him and his co-blogger on this.
I posted 2 comments which are now gone. Comments asking where my comments went won’t go through.
Context…..
“…because, uh, it is just wonderful to be back in Oregon, and over the last 15 months we’ve travelled to every corner of the United States. Uh, I’ve now been in fifty [pause] seven states; I think one left to go. Uh, one left to go, uh, Alaska and Hawaii I was not allowed to go to, even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not, uh, justify it.”
Again, where is the context I was lacking?
Now had he corrected his “fifty” and actually uttered the word “forty” in there, then you might have a defense.
But he didn’t. And you don’t.
And let’s not forget these gems…
“One such translator was an American of Haitian descent, representative of the extraordinary work that our men and women in uniform do all around the world — Navy Corpse-Man Christian Brossard.”
“The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries.”
“Let me introduce to you the next President — the next Vice President of the United States of America, Joe Biden.”
“Just this past week, we passed out of the out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee — which is my committee [but he was never on that committee]– a bill to call for divestment from Iran as way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don’t obtain a nuclear weapon.”
“Let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s.”
“On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes — and I see many of them in the audience here today — our sense of patriotism is particularly strong.”
And on and on and on they go….
Context. Like I said, it’s something you wouldn’t understand.
And what context might that be?
That he was tired? He’s the guy campaigning for the job that ages every person who successfully campaigns for it. If he can’t be certain of how many states he’s been to in the campaign, I can’t trust him to say the right thing when he gets that three AM phone call either, can I?
On the other hand, given all the time that he spends on the links or on vacation, I guess we’re only in trouble when he actually has to do some work, and shows his testiness when that happens.
“Can’t I just eat my waffle?”
What a tool.
He can’t give us an answer because there is no missing context.
I think we just can’t see the context. We don’t have the secret decoder ring from the New York Times…you know the one…the one that makes you hear words that weren’t said, like the “Boy” some of them heard on the end of Joe Wilson’s “You Lie!”.
Graybitch, two things.
One: When did you get the drive thru cashier gig at Mickey Dee’s.
Two: You apologize to BiW yet for shitting on his webpage?
Remember, the smartest guy on the “internet” like Paul “Graychin” Bunyan want us to believe Obama is the smartest and most talented guy in the room. Let’s consider just a part of the 1st year of our “POST RACIAL” President.
If George W. Bush had given Prime Minister Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Prime Minister Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would Graychin have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would Graychin have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would Graychin have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent “Austrian language,” would Graychin have brushed it off as a minor slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current on their income taxes, would Graychin have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to Cinco de Cuatro in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would Graychin have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word “advice” would Graychin have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and ‘potatoe’ as proof of what a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would Graychin have concluded he’s a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush’s administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan, causing widespread panic, would Graychin have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference in front of 6th graders, would Graychin have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans, would Graychin want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bus h had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would Graychin have approved?
If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would Graychin have approved?
If George W.. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would Graychin have approved?
If George W. Bush had asked for $862 billion as stimulus with a promise that the jobless rate would not exceed 8.0%, only to rise to over 10.0% anyway, would Graychin have lent his support?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plans holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would Graychin have approved?
If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would Graychin have approved?
If George Bush had pronounced corpsman “corpse man” three times in a speech, would Graychin have considered him an imbecile?
Perhaps you level headed people can see why I consider Graychin a buffoon and hypocrite.
Tex,
Very nice. That’s as an exhaustive a list of his faux pas as I’ve ever seen. And as you say if a conservative had done any one of those things they would have been banished to the island of misfit toys.
She was obviously over animated and misspoke combining “refute” and “repudiate” which also as it happens have similar definitions and usage.
I looked up Merriam’s Dictionary, no just jerking your chain I looked up both words in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary to make sure.
refute: 2) to deny the truth or accuracy of
repudiate:3)…b : to reject as untrue or unjust
Obviously not exactly the same but close enough that you could get caught between the two if you’re in a hurry. While I understand why she has to strike back when the left picks on every small thing to try and diminish her as a “lightweight” I think maybe the best thing would’ve been for her to give the explanation I just did. She got excited and was caught between similar words.
The left can’t answer her argument except with the same old tired tropes of racism and class warfare along with ad hominems and petty quibbles.
Just as an aside if George had done what Barack has suggested and looked up “Merriam’s Dictionary” the definition would have been thus: “a large comprehensive reference work that contains spellings, definitions and usage of words and phrases of the English language”.
So again tell me how brilliant Barack is with out his teleprompter.Not so much. With out his Cyrano’s feeding him his lines he is just another middling intellect with an over active ambition gland. And I’m being kind when I say that.
An one more thing and the good counselor knows this too well. FDR used this same bait and switch with Social Security. He sold it to the American people as “insurance” and defended it in court as a tax.
Just another reason not to trust insurance salesmen.
Definition of Racist: A person winning an arguement against a liberal.
You know BIC. Sometimes, I think we make too much of trying to understand the thought process of liberals, or progressives, or whatever name they are using today to hide their utter failures.
When we have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, it must be the truth.
They’re stupid.
Huck, here you’ve gone and misspoke twice in one post.
First, these are more “technical problems” Graychin is experiencing. You know, missing content that for whatever reason only happens on a Conservative guest’s posts?
Second, Dawg doesn’t rate as co-blogger at the ‘Two Tools Blog’, as he doesn’t rate as “challenge.” More like inanimate object.
I’m not going to accuse him outright of deleting stuff because similar things have happened elsewhere.
But I will say that they have not occurred elsewhere anywhere close to the extent that they seem to occur there. I’ll bet at least 50% of what I have tried to post there never made it or has been deleted.
I feel like kicking myself every time I go back.
Huck,
You may not, but I damn sure will. When I used to frequent the Two Tools Blog, somehow the word “Troll” got inserted into my posts, when and if they appeared. Now isn’t that magical? And then lied about it when challenged.
Fuck Graybitch,
I’ve asked BiW on a couple of occasions to ban his lying ass because the only thing he wants to do is stir up shit, get links to his sorry page, and outright lie about the Constitution.
Graybitch, you’re a coward and a liar.