Jump to content

The Republican Thread


Rex Kickass

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 13.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • StrangeSox

    1498

  • Balta1701

    1480

  • southsider2k5

    1432

  • mr_genius

    991

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 28, 2012 -> 10:10 AM)
Seriously, that is bizarre casting. But equally bizarre (though not as potentially offensive), they are saying John Cusack to play Richard Nixon. WTF?

 

It seems like purposeful miscasting for political and "hey, look at us" reasons to pop an easy/quick rating in both cases. Neither reason a very good one...other than a short term rating pop or some cheap advertising, it'll probably end up falling flat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Santorum, the anti-pink bowling ball candidate

By MAGGIE HABERMAN | 3/28/12 7:44 PM EDT From Ginger Gibson, on the trail at the latest bowling alley with Rick Santorum in Wisconsin:

 

Santorum stopped a college student in Onalaska, WI from using a pink bowling ball.

 

The student was part of a group of college Republicans who had gone to bowl with Santorum. When he went to use the neon pink bowling ball, Santorum and an aide stopped him. A nearby reporter led in, "Friends don't let friends...?"

 

"Friends don't let friends use pink balls," Santorum replied.

 

Got that?

 

politico.com

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Mar 28, 2012 -> 09:17 PM)
Santorum, the anti-pink bowling ball candidate

By MAGGIE HABERMAN | 3/28/12 7:44 PM EDT From Ginger Gibson, on the trail at the latest bowling alley with Rick Santorum in Wisconsin:

 

Santorum stopped a college student in Onalaska, WI from using a pink bowling ball.

 

The student was part of a group of college Republicans who had gone to bowl with Santorum. When he went to use the neon pink bowling ball, Santorum and an aide stopped him. A nearby reporter led in, "Friends don't let friends...?"

 

"Friends don't let friends use pink balls," Santorum replied.

 

Got that?

 

politico.com

 

no one cares

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a couple of weeks ago, Nicholas Kristof at the New York Times claimed he'd interviewed a former underaged prostitute. She said she'd been pimped when she was 16, often via ads her pimp placed in "Backpage.com." Backpage.com is owned by Village Voice Media -- yes, publishers of the venerable, lefty Village Voice. Backpage.com seems to have a lot of ads for escorts. It's franchised in a few cities.

 

Village Voice countercharged that Kristof had "concocted" the story, because the girl in question was not 16 when Backpage.com existed -- that is, it simply did not exist in 2003 when this girl was 16. It later existed, when she was older, but was only published in a few cities, none of which she lived in.

 

Kristof rebuts "I didn't know there would be any math" in this journalistic career, and also claims she was pimped up and down the east coast, and worked in a few places where Backpage.com was published. A little later than 16 years old, but who cares about such details? (Answer: I do. The fact that she was 16 is what makes this a child sex-trafficking story. Without that, it may be a sex trafficking story, but it's not a child sex trafficking story.)

 

So, shock: Leftist media is involved, hypocritically, in the exploitation of women; another member of the leftist media cooks a story and juices it up and then, when the facts come out, claims the facts don't really matter. It's a gestalt thing or something.

 

Now, here's where it gets biased (as opposed to merely dishonest and shoddy).

 

Goldman Sachs, until recently, owned a stake in Village Voice Media. They decided to sell this off recently. Whether this is about the Kristof cooked story, I don't know.

 

Ann Romney has a blind trust with Goldman Sachs.

 

A blind trust. Meaning she has no idea what they're investing in.

 

Further, of course, it's Goldman Sachs itself which owned the stake-- not their investors. The firm owns things on its own account.

 

So what are the headlines?

 

Ann Romney trust invested in fund that exited sex-site firm (reuters)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/03/...E83201V20120403

 

Mitt and Ann Romney? Sex Traffickers? (The Examiner)

http://www.examiner.com/liberal-in-baltimo...sex-traffickers

 

 

Anyone still think they are 'lazy'? The contortions needed to come up with those headlines are amazing. Could have easily been 'Obama White House staff filled with Ex-Child traffickers' since he has so many former Sachs people working for him. Hell, they could have NAMED Goldman Sachs and Village Voice somewhere where the most people see it, but that would be taking too much away from the hype. If two arch-liberal organizations were involved, how can a passive conservative blind-trust investor be blamed for the actions of liberals? And why is she the focus here, rather than the actual active participants? Oh yeah, politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 01:24 PM)
Ok, yeah, so I'm posting this here to see if any of the Republicans literally break their computers. Please tell us on your new computer when you do so.

 

Meh. Just another piece of Hollywood s*** that I'll skip.

 

Reasons to root for the Naval Academy...when a plebe shouts, "Good night, Jane Fonda!", the entire company responds, "Good night, b****!"

 

I bet the Queen of c***s doesn't do many commencement speeches in Annapolis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (God Loves The Infantry @ Apr 26, 2012 -> 12:51 AM)
Meh. Just another piece of Hollywood s*** that I'll skip.

 

Reasons to root for the Naval Academy...when a plebe shouts, "Good night, Jane Fonda!", the entire company responds, "Good night, b****!"

 

I bet the Queen of c***s doesn't do many commencement speeches in Annapolis.

GMAFB man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 26, 2012 -> 09:22 AM)
What exactly did you expect when you posted that in the Republican thread? Yeesh is right.

Sarcastic responses making fun of how dumb the studio/casting director was? Maybe a good laugh out of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 26, 2012 -> 08:25 AM)
Sarcastic responses making fun of how dumb the studio/casting director was? Maybe a good laugh out of it?

 

Its not like we have more than one military or ex-military people here who remember he hanging out and giving comfort and support to the VC in Vietnam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 26, 2012 -> 07:25 AM)
Sarcastic responses making fun of how dumb the studio/casting director was? Maybe a good laugh out of it?

 

Allow me to explain.

 

If this were, say, George Clooney being cast as the Gipper, I'd do exactly what you expected. Laugh and make fun of the director. Clooney's a goof who I totally disagree with, but I can put up with him. Heck, I'll even watch his movies. His liberalism isn't anything unforgivable.

 

But Hanoi Jane is not that. She's not just some annoying, outspoken liberal. She is a traitorous b**** and I fully believe that in giving support to the VC, she cost many of my brothers and sisters their lives. If you disagree, fine, and if non-vet Repubs only hate her for her views, then whatever. For me, this is very personal. This feud will end when she's dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New poll, not sure of the source, has Dick Lugar trailing his Tea Party challenger by 5 in the primary for the Indiana Senate race.

 

If Lugar loses in the primary then I'm voting for Joe Donnelly, and I'm far from alone. If the right wing of the party wants to lose a Senate seat in order to send a message, then that looks like what you're about to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 11:57 AM)
If Lugar loses in the primary then I'm voting for Joe Donnelly, and I'm far from alone. If the right wing of the party wants to lose a Senate seat in order to send a message, then that looks like what you're about to do.

If I were in Indiana I'd probably cross over to vote for him. Totally honest. The Senate is a better, more functional place with him on the foreign policy committee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 10:49 AM)
Now I can't vote for Lugar.

I realize you're joking here but it's sad that there are so many people out there from both ends of the spectrum that would seriously react this way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 12:59 PM)
I realize you're joking here but it's sad that there are so many people out there from both ends of the spectrum that would seriously react this way.

 

It's not even funny how true this is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...